[skysurfer808]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Good stuff, however:
- It was COPE INDIA, not COPE THUNDER.
FVD

My mistake, thanks for the correction.

Skysurfer808

[planenutsfrog]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Planenutsfrog, the problem with the Rafale against the Mirage 2000-5 in initial encounters had to do with radar range. My understanding from what I read and what I heard from French pilots in person is that early RBE-2s (the passive electronically scanned radar in the Rafale) had disappointing range, but apparently that has been improved through software changes in the last few years. How much I don't know. Rafales have had the same problems when facing F-18s in training fights over the Indian Ocean. However, when they get into a turning dogfight, it's pretty one-sided in favor of the Rafale (either against the M2000-5 of F-18, one-on-one). The Rafale has also done very well in turning fights (and overall) in their first Tactical Leadership Program participation recently, even NATO F-16 pilots had to admit they couldn't quite match the Rafale in a close fight. They would never admit that against the Mirage 2000.

As far as your last comment (about the F-22), you're right.

FVD

I just forgot the subject has been "dogfight", not "air superiority".

[Aircrafty]

It's amusing that despite all the advances in aviation a Zero would still win most dogfights against current jet fighters

[STARMAN 352ND]

Originally Posted by Aircrafty

It's amusing that despite all the advances in aviation a Zero would still win most dogfights against current jet fighters

Your kidding right ??
This i have to see.
JP

[chiefs70]

Originally Posted by STARMAN 352ND

Your kidding right ??
This i have to see.
JP

I took this as Aircrafty being Aircrafty.

However, if he IS being serious he has finally, after many, many posts gone off the deep end since jetwash could take out a Zero IMHO.

My money is on sarcasm.

[flyXwire]

Originally Posted by chiefs70

I took this as Aircrafty being Aircrafty.

However, if he IS being serious he has finally, after many, many posts gone off the deep end since jetwash could take out a Zero IMHO.

My money is on sarcasm.

An incident clearly demonstrated in the movie "The Final Countdown" when two Jolly Roger Tomcats started 'thumping' the two meatballs!

[Gunslinger]

Originally Posted by flyXwire

An incident clearly demonstrated in the movie "The Final Countdown" when two Jolly Roger Tomcats started 'thumping' the two meatballs!

for the record, those were not Zeros but replicas that flew at half the speed of Zeros.... but still.

If your definition of Dogfight is to turn inside a enemy fighter and achieve a gun solution then yes a zero would still do well today.

for the the first one or two turns anyway.........

After that, squashed like a bug.

[flyXwire]

Originally Posted by Gunslinger

for the record, those were not Zeros but replicas that flew at half the speed of Zeros.... but still.

If your definition of Dogfight is to turn inside a enemy fighter and achieve a gun solution then yes a zero would still do well today.

for the the first one or two turns anyway.........

After that, squashed like a bug.

Say whaaaaaaaat??? Hmmmm...I'll have to sleep on that one.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Aircrafty

It's amusing that despite all the advances in aviation a Zero would still win most dogfights against current jet fighters

Yet another example of Aircrafty's lack of aviation knowledge...

Typical, though. If Aircrafty says something, your best bet to be right is to say the exact opposite. Probably works 99% of the time.

FVD

[mustangdriver]

If the Zero was so good, how come they lost the bloody war? The wake from a current jet figter would splash a Zero alone. Besides are we talking actual turn and burn dogfight with guns only, or does the modern aircraft have a stand off missle?