PLAAF vs. USAF

[roach]

The evidence has been poisoned, shot, shot again, burnt, shot again and then buried six feet deep, and then nuked. And, all journalists living within a square mile shot for good measure.
You're right, there is no evidence.
Except for refugees.

 

[KS]

And the evidence is @ where?

and the evidence for PLA being the best fighting unit in the world..?

Dude running tanks over un armed students dont classify exactly as bravery on the battle field..

 

[Jazzbot]

is this thread has anything to do with indians?? lol

 

[below_freezing]

Yeah, everyone loves their army.
Hope we get to see Chinese soldiers do something braver than shoot Buddhist Tibetian monks!

and indians have the audacity to say chinese are trolls?

no, you're right, we are the weakest army in the world, except india, because we destroyed/captured almost all of india's forces and weapons.

 

[AViet]

During Vietnam war, some North Vietnamese pilots managed to shot down 8-10 enemy fighters. At that time, they flew Mig-15, Mig-17 to fight against US fighters. Several thousand US fighters were shot down in North Vietnam air, either by missile, rifles or dog-fighting with MIGs. And I do not think that MIGs were much superior than US fighters at that times.
The lessons: Having many more fighters and advanced weapons do not guarantee a victory during a war. The decisive factors which are who's war, where, when, must be taken into account.

 

[JonAsad]

is this thread has anything to do with indians?? lol

Indians think they are representing USAF..

They are doing wot they do best.. Derailing, troll.

 

[ptldM3]

our army is already superior to the US army. don't be confused by USAF superiority. their air force being 20 years ahead far makes up for their ground forces being worse.

Superior is a very strong word, one can never underestimate the US army.

 

[gambit]

During Vietnam war, some North Vietnamese pilots managed to shot down 8-10 enemy fighters. At that time, they flew Mig-15, Mig-17 to fight against US fighters. Several thousand US fighters were shot down in North Vietnam air, either by missile, rifles or dog-fighting with MIGs. And I do not think that MIGs were much superior than US fighters at that times.

The MIGs may not have been much more 'advanced' than US fighters at that time, but it is axiomatic in war that one should attack the enemy at his weak or weakest points. The US fielded a wide variety of aircrafts in the Vietnam War, from the heavy B-52 to the heavy fighter-bomber F-105 to the versatile F-4 to the light and agile prop job OV-10. The North's MIGs usually conduct hit-and-run operations against heavier and less maneuverable F-105 fighter-bombers. Operation Bolo showed that when MIG-21s are faced against F-4s with the -21 the superior maneuverable one, training, tactics and doctrines prevailed. Operation Bolo pretty much shut down the -21s over North Vietnamese airspace for a few months.

The lessons: Having many more fighters and advanced weapons do not guarantee a victory during a war. The decisive factors which are who's war, where, when, must be taken into account.

Sounds nice but vague enough. I would like to see at least a couple of credible sources that show a couple of armies who shunned access to weapons more advanced than what they were fielding.

 

[gambit]

our army is already superior to the US army. don't be confused by USAF superiority. their air force being 20 years ahead far makes up for their ground forces being worse.

Baghdad Bob...!!! Is that you...???

 

[below_freezing]

Superior is a very strong word, one can never underestimate the US army.

in our track experience the US Army was not a threat. most of our casualties in wars against the US were caused by USAF and USN bombers. currently the US Army has less tanks, less manpower, less and inferior artillery and less and inferior missiles. we've already beaten the US Army on the ground quite handily when we were at our relative weakest.

all that doesn't matter of course since the USAF is 20 years ahead.

 

[Emperor Palpatine]

oh dear...fantasy at its best.. PLA may be good..i wont deny that..but don't stretch it saying its better than US army...

US army is far better than PLA..About Vietnam the redflag excersice was developed during the Vietnam war bcoz of high USAF causalities.They got the best pilots and the best technology right now..

 

[ao333]

The MIGs may not have been much more 'advanced' than US fighters at that time, but it is axiomatic in war that one should attack the enemy at his weak or weakest points. The US fielded a wide variety of aircrafts in the Vietnam War, from the heavy B-52 to the heavy fighter-bomber F-105 to the versatile F-4 to the light and agile prop job OV-10. The North's MIGs usually conduct hit-and-run operations against heavier and less maneuverable F-105 fighter-bombers. Operation Bolo showed that when MIG-21s are faced against F-4s with the -21 the superior maneuverable one, training, tactics and doctrines prevailed. Operation Bolo pretty much shut down the -21s over North Vietnamese airspace for a few months.


Sounds nice but vague enough. I would like to see at least a couple of credible sources that show a couple of armies who shunned access to weapons more advanced than what they were fielding.

History says the United States has failed to capture any state that China has backed. It simply goes to show that the American army is defunct. American generals were captured alive during China's confrontation against the United Nations Security Council in Korea. The Chinese trained the Viets so well in guerrilla warfare, that it rendered conventional weapons obsolete.

I would say that the army is the closest thing the Chinese' got, but by no means better. Both the Russians and the Americans have more advanced tanks+artillery and are much more mechanized (still see Chinese soldiers march on foot). I recall that during the Chinese earthquake, you guys had to import airlifts from Russia, which was just humiliating.

 

[JonAsad]

oh dear...fantasy at its best.. PLA may be good..i wont deny that..but don't stretch it saying its better than US army...

US army is far better than PLA..About Vietnam the redflag excersice was developed during the Vietnam war bcoz of high USAF causalities.They got the best pilots and the best technology right now..

Congratulation keep supporting US and you will get you Green Card very soon.

On topic, this thread dont relate both of us, so lets and do the talking.

 

[Emperor Palpatine]

Congratulation keep supporting US and you will get you Green Card very soon.

On topic, this thread dont relate both of us, so lets and do the talking.

Am only stating facts here.....doesn,t matter what you think...but facts are facts

BTW..We have all rights to talk here considering we stick to the topic.

 

[gambit]

The Chinese trained the Viets so well in guerrilla warfare, that it rendered conventional weapon obsolete.

Guerrilla warfare is what the PLA knows best. In Vietnam, even against the French, the same French that Ho INVITED back in with the Ho-Sainteny Agreement, whenever Giap decided to conduct conventional warfare, aka 'set piece' battles, Giap lost his @$$. If guerrilla warfare is so efficient against conventional warfare and forces, then why did Giap bothered to try conventional warfare tactics against French forces, the 1968 Tet Offensive, and the 1972 Easter Offensive? All of them Giap lost. And for 1972 Easter Offensive, Giap lost against SVN forces because the US was beginning to withdraw from SE Asia.