LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 01-13-2007, 12:26 AM   #21
XinordiX

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
449
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by Asher

You heard me. Your planes suck. Compared to the might of the Canaidian aircraft industry

XinordiX is offline


Old 01-15-2007, 12:27 PM   #22
lalpphilalk

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
440
Senior Member
Default
Drake, I've noticed a disturbing trend - when did you become Canadian?
lalpphilalk is offline


Old 01-15-2007, 12:42 PM   #23
italertb

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
419
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Avro Arrow, mother****er...

Bombardier's planes are cool too. Certainly better than the Airbus POS that can't design inflatable slides properly.
italertb is offline


Old 01-15-2007, 02:08 PM   #24
Grapappytek

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
395
Senior Member
Default
The Harrier is a piece of ****.
Grapappytek is offline


Old 01-15-2007, 03:57 PM   #25
casinochniks

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
416
Senior Member
Default
They use all kinds of terrible equipment. Just look at the APC they're using in Iraq. Or the Osprey.
casinochniks is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 09:58 AM   #26
huylibizonoff

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
572
Senior Member
Default
We already discussed Canadian "planes".
huylibizonoff is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 10:09 AM   #27
SweetCaroline

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
450
Senior Member
Default
I know why they think they need it. Having a reason to want it doesn't make it any less of a piece of ****, though.
SweetCaroline is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 02:50 PM   #28
bromgeksan

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
374
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by TheStinger
Harrier jump jet anyone The only use that airplane has was in filming True Lies.
bromgeksan is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 03:12 PM   #29
diemeareendup

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
410
Senior Member
Default
It would outperform any Canadian designed combat plane
diemeareendup is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 03:15 PM   #30
Smalmslobby

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
403
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by TheStinger
It would outperform any Canadian designed combat plane For political reasons, Canada has not done that since designing the premiere fighter plane of the 60s.

Until it came up against fighters My point exactly. Thanks.
Smalmslobby is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 03:32 PM   #31
Twendypreency

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
471
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by TheStinger
In the only example of combat with fighters the Harrier was a spectacular victor You blew up planes from long range with an American missile. That says nothing about the plane itself.
Twendypreency is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 03:45 PM   #32
wrardymar

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
423
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by Asher

You blew up planes from long range with an American missile. That says nothing about the plane itself. So what! it's a grous attack aircraft taking on and destroying a superior force of air superiority fighters.

If you equiped tiger moths with sidewinders I don't think they would be very succesful
wrardymar is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 04:18 PM   #33
Indian Butt Magic

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
439
Senior Member
Default
So its rubbish despite the fact that the only time it was really tested in combat operations it performed way above expectations
Indian Butt Magic is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 04:32 PM   #34
SantaClaus

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
704
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by Asher
It's Rubbish because it's ugly, slow, and doesn't carry much armament. Also not stealth. And it's British, so it's unreliable. Its not made by apple you know
SantaClaus is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 04:44 PM   #35
newwebstar

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
491
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by TheStinger
so why do the USMC use them The USMC didn't. They used the Harrier AV/8B. An aircraft based on the original design, but pretty much totally upgraded by McDonnell Douglas engineers. It was a far superior aircraft to the original. They corrected all the problems from the original design and made it a serviceable aircraft
newwebstar is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 06:10 PM   #36
baxodrom

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
351
Senior Member
Default
Considering the fact the Harrier was designed in the early 60's and introduced in 1969 I'd agree it needs upgrading...comparing it to modern fighters is a good troll though Asher

Ming, the AV/8B wasn't around until 1985...
baxodrom is offline


Old 01-16-2007, 06:51 PM   #37
flueftArete

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
437
Senior Member
Default
Ashers' head > Jupiter
flueftArete is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:52 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity