MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: Which Air-Force is Best II  (Read 21343 times)

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #24 on: October 25, 2007, 03:44:17 PM »
Guys, if two members start a discussion and then close it saying it's going off topic, why are you opening it up again.

If you would like to read about the RNLAF, pls go here : http://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf.htm and http://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his.htm for the history.

I've written it once, not want to do it twice. I'll just do some bragging here:  ;D
  • WWI - were not in it, but captured 107 aircraft  ;D Best way to start an air force, free planes!
  • WWII - 1940 - Germans attack with 1000 aircraft - Dutch kill ratio 350 vs 94 in five days. No Hurricanes/Spitfires, only ageing Fokkers, mostly still wood and linen. It now comes out, this German mistake was one of the reasons why the Germans could not win the Battle of Britain or at least didn't have enough transports to launch an invasion.
  • WWII post-1940 - more fighter against the Germans as RAF squadron
  • 1948 - First jet aircraft - Meteor
  • Cold War - F-84, F-86, F-104, NF-5 and 213 F-16s. and USAF fighters from F-100 up to F-15A based in the country. Nuclear arsenal at Volkel.
  • Modern era - reforms, F-16 upgrades, bigger transports, air refuelling aircraft and new helicopter fleet for air mobile infantry, Cougars, Chinooks and Apaches, ready for the new tasks
  • 1999 - the Serbian MiG-29 kill
  • 2003-2004 - Chinooks/Cougars to Iraq
  • Since 2002, deployment to Afghanistan, F-16s, Apaches, Cougar/Chinooks

Not air force, but something you might find interesting: The Netherlands had an aircraft carrier! Karel Doorman, sold off to Argentina. The Navy also had P-3 Orions until recently...sold to Germany/Portugal.

Let me know if you want to know more.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 03:56:04 PM by Webmaster »
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #25 on: October 26, 2007, 03:29:51 AM »
Yep, that's the carrier that we had (rename 25 de Mayo here) until it was sent as junk to Southafrica, where it is still,  I believe, a disco. It was carried by other ship, didn't even function on itself. :-X
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #26 on: October 26, 2007, 07:47:08 AM »
if the luftwaffe was that good then they should have still won, no matter how many planes were being used AGAINST them


Offline alyster

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
  • Country: ee
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #27 on: October 26, 2007, 09:04:07 AM »
No one is saying Luftwaffe was some supernatural air force. But soviet air force was just way worse. Like I said soviets out numbered Germans 5 to 1, Germans had to battle the RAF at the same time and pretty soon the USAAF also. Anglo-American forces were able to put up more heavy bombers against Germany than Luftwaffe was able to put up fighters in operation Barbarossa. The fact that Soviet Union won the war had little to do with their air force.

Like I said Luftwaffe wasn't only one fighting sucesfully against soviets, but also finnic air force. With little over 500 planes which weren't always the top of their class, they scored over 1600 kills while losing bit over 200 planes themselves and while succeeding at their primary goal - keeping air supiriority above Finland. With old F2A Buffalos they managed to achive 32 to 1 kill ratio against the soviets. [I'm talking of the Continuation war not Winter war here]

BTW it's really impossible for an air force to win a war if the army fails.

I understand you may have issues with it, because Luftwaffe was serving a nazi regime. I don't like the regime neither, but the air force deserves some credit. Although Luftwaffe and Soviet Air Force both served horrible terror regimes, allied air forces were more hostile to civilians. In Europe alone they killed 300 0001-500 000 cvilians, in Japan they killed in one night alone 100 000 civilians.

1 - Strategic Bombing survey - Europe.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2007, 11:14:54 PM by alyster »
Si Hoc Legere Scis Nimium Eruditionis Habes

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #28 on: October 27, 2007, 10:35:37 AM »
I see. Hm. Ok. Now which air force do we pit at each other first? ;D

jkjk. On the RSAF. We started out with a bunch of cessnas. Trainers actually.

The history is basically pretty boring, but there are some really funny anecdotes, such as one in which a pilot got a coconut tree stuck on his Hunter's wing while flying low.
He was ordered to eject. He ignored and tried to land.
And he landed with the entire plane, coconut tree and pilot intact.
Unfortunately, he was court-martialled. ;D

There's another one where one of our pilots crashed in Taiwan or Thailand. Can't remember.
Anyway, the USA tried to get it out. Brought a bunch of chainsaws there.
Tried to saw off the Hunter's wings. Unfortunately, the chainsaws broke down before they could make much of a proper dent. ;D

In the end, the sawed down all the trees around it to drag it out. ;D

That says more about the maker than the air force, but still, it happened here. *shrug* ;D
-JCLim

Offline Sergei

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: by
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #29 on: October 28, 2007, 10:40:23 PM »
Strange... I thought, this theme is devoted to Air Forces of the various countries of the world, and it turns out, that here discuss opposition VVS RKKA with Luftwaffe.

Let's finish with this discussion. Start up everyone remains at the opinion. I shall tell so: Soviet Union has won, and the Third Reich has lost. The communistic authority is opposite to me, but it does not mean, that I should underestimate merits RKKA as it's done by many modern historians.

As to Rezuna - that he the traitor, and he in every possible way deformed historical the facts (about what to speak if rough imagination Rezuna has invented one million Soviet parachuters). Another matter Mark Solonin. Нe the statements supports all sources and references. I suggest to close this theme.

Raptor, how the Singapore fighting planes are located on such small territory as Singapore? Always it was interesting to me.
Жыве Беларусь!

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #30 on: October 29, 2007, 03:17:40 PM »
Hm. I had no idea about that, Sergei...

About the fighting planes being based in Singapore. We have a considerable number of F-16C/D/D+s;F-5S/Ts, etc. It surprises me that we already have ammased so many aircraft to be on-station in Singapore for most of the time, but we apparently have many many more sitting in the USA for training, or whatever.

The most ironic thing is that we have probably more tanks than enough to conquer our neighbours, somewhere 'underground' here, and our aircraft are scattered all over the world.
-JCLim

Offline Sergei

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: by
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #31 on: November 11, 2007, 08:33:20 PM »
Yes, with the area of territory at you obvious problems... But Air Forces of Singapore, certainly, are very strong. Anyway, more strongly, than at Indonesia and Malaysia. However, it's temporary, but all.
Жыве Беларусь!

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2007, 10:59:41 AM »
Thank you, Segei. Btw, from what i can see you're probably using an online translator to read and post. My father discovered a way to make translation extremely accurate. If you're interested, drop me an e-mail or PM me. It's not very complex. but for topic's sake, i won't deviate.
-JCLim

Offline Sergei

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: by
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #33 on: December 20, 2007, 12:48:57 AM »
All greetings! Very long ago I here didn't happen...
Raptor, I use the translator (Promt 7) only for translation some separate words and terms. My level of English allows me to communicate tolerably more or less at English-speaking forums. Excuse, if I incorrectly write something. :-[
Жыве Беларусь!

Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #34 on: December 20, 2007, 01:41:57 AM »
Sergei, you English is better then Terminator's, and hes from the USA

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Which Air-Force is Best II
« Reply #35 on: December 22, 2007, 01:19:47 PM »
Haha yes i agree with Gripen on that. Extremely intelligible, but it does have a slight transliteration look. Don't worry i'm from Singapore. You're an english scholar compared to them. The people here don't even speak english! It's called Singlish. And i must say it sounds horrible.
-JCLim

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA