F-16.net

Probably many of us have seen the article called "Russian fighters for USN" or something like that... of course the idea of buying russian jets to applicate them into US military will never happen and its been discussed on these forums a long time ago... But heres a one strange pic that was attached to that article

And i wonder where and when and how was this taken? These flankers have Strike Fighter Squadron 22 markings which is stationed at Lemoore NAS but it was never reported USN bought any flankers or did i miss something? does anyone have any info on this pic and who flies these flankers now?

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Elite Joined: Jun 11, 2004 Posts: 2888 Status: Offline

Trust me when I say we'd have heard about it by now if it were real Wink

. Great photoshop job, though Very Happy

!

ToOk the words right outta my mouth parrothead. I was just gonna sum it up by saying one word.
PHOTOSHOP.

Elite Joined: Jun 11, 2004 Posts: 2888 Status: Offline

Yep, photoshop it is. That said, I still think we should buy some of these. They're not too expensive and the training just can't be beat. Ain't nothin' like the real thing...

Well yea photoshop was the first thought i had in my mind when i saw this, and besides wouldnt they have primarily assigned these to the Nellis Aggressors squadron instead of repainted Eagles... thats why it cant be real Very Happy

And also 27s dont have hooks so the carrier ops are impossible and thats the second reason it cant be real... And the third one is these are Flankers and USN would never buy them nor would russians ever sell them... But still i got some kinda hope Very Happy

Elite Joined: Jun 29, 2005 Posts: 780 Status: Offline

Well being as the US Navy operate F-16s Wink

the carrier argument is out of the question.

I do remember rumours of a few Belarous Su-27s being purchased by the US but I thought they were non-flyers.

Andy

Elite Joined: Jun 29, 2004 Posts: 960 Status: Offline

parrothead wrote:

Yep, photoshop it is. That said, I still think we should buy some of these. They're not too expensive and the training just can't be beat. Ain't nothin' like the real thing...

Planes may not be that expensive but the logistics tail will be brutal.

Elite Joined: Jun 21, 2005 Posts: 757 Status: Offline

Plain and simple: that shot ain't real.

Elite Joined: Jun 11, 2004 Posts: 2888 Status: Offline

Roscoe,

You're probably right there Wink

. I honestly don't know, so I'll ask - would it be possible to buy a whole spares package to reduce the logistics trail?

Roscoe wrote:

Planes may not be that expensive but the logistics tail will be brutal.

If the Iranians can make it work for 25+ years with the US on it's back I have confidence our defese industry could make it work too. Given that we have more resources than Iran and given that the Flanker is much more widely available than the F-14 ever was.

Elite Joined: Jun 19, 2004 Posts: 1089

PhillyGuy wrote:

Roscoe wrote:

Planes may not be that expensive but the logistics tail will be brutal.

If the Iranians can make it work for 25+ years with the US on it's back I have confidence our defese industry could make it work too. Given that we have more resources than Iran and given that the Flanker is much more widely available than the F-14 ever was.

You're thinking a bit one-dimensionally. The main reasons the US wouldn't field a foreign combat aircraft design are 1) there's no reason to rely on foreign technology and industry with such a vast national military industrial complex and 2) it's not in a superpower's strategic or even tactical interests to field an aircraft designed by one of its only major strategic threats. Besides, if you think it's wise for the US to support foreign defense contractors over domestic ones, you don't fully appreciate the consequences and implications such a policy shift would have.

By the way, comparing the US to Iran in this context is completely ridiculous. You would need to compare the US to China or Russia (former USSR makes for an even better comparison). Now tell me... does China or Russia purchase American-made combat aircraft? Hell no... it doesn't make sense to field combat aircraft designed by a potential strategic enemy. It's not the same as a world power selling arms to a third world country that might, one day, turn against its arms dealer. Nor is it like a third world country purchasing arms from a super power nation. And believe me... if Iran or any other third world nation could supply itself with all its military hardware wants and needs, it would. Ideally, you never want to rely on another country for your own national defense... either directly or indirectly. Just ask Israel. If it wasn't for foreign military hardware and logistics, it would not exist today. Do you think even Israel wants to rely on the US? You do realize that the US hasn't always supported Israel with military arms and materiel, right? They fought their first war for existence with French piston-engined aircraft if I'm not mistaken.

Elite Joined: Jun 11, 2004 Posts: 2888 Status: Offline

I think what Philly Guy was saying was that we could make it work with foreign jets just like Iran if we wanted to for training. As I've said, it would be great for training. Just google "Constant Peg."

F-16.net

Forum: Other Military Aircraft

Lemoore Flankers