the whole point of the thread was about the capability of sonar and a typical secular answer from the us contingent was that nobodies sonar could match thiers i begged to differ with the 19 years tactical submarine xp that i have my reply was to the fact that if you consider everyone elses equipment inferior to yours it is a dangerous thing to do ( a spear is better than a rock but if the rock is used by and expert with years of experience it to can be deadly) and no matter what cash you have the quality of the people using the equipment with make the difference norman schwazkoff said" if the equipment had been reversed in the first gulf war the allies would still have won" i agree the quality of the iraqi army was at best meduim and worst vv poor and the quality gap between the russian sonars and the wests sonars may not be as large as many people think along with many other items and units pertaining to the submarine and naval world. if you think like that in comabt situations you get surprised and battles and armys dont like surprises neither do submarine captains thats why i would bet every naval commander on whatever unit would treat the enemy as if they were on par or better than themselves that way you can never underestimate their capability

Wow, micky1up you should really use some . for your sentences.
Reading that single sentence can asphyxiate you.:rotfl:

Hmm. Have a read, specifically about the Mirage and Super-Etendard. French kit is good, and combat-proven.

Yannick Vallet in the Mirage 2000 at Fairford was a sight to behold last year.

sorry gold will try better :oops: what did you think about the statement?

No.
http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/ar...rticle_022.pdf

Right...he opens with the line:

...and I'm supposed to be all civilised. Give me a break...if you can't take it...don;t dish it out...simple.

And let's face it...French weapons are nearly never combat tested...except maybe in African civil wars when the Hutus and Tutsis massacre each others villages. But come on...you call a plane a "Mirage" because you never expect to see it in combat, but when you do...it's not really there...it's just a mirage.

j/k :lol:

p.s. Some people need a sense of humour...

Saw the Mirage 2000 at Farnborough...twice. Nothing special...:down:

French technology is combat proven : U.S.S. Stark was hit by an Iraqi Exocet launched by a Mirage F1. HMS Sheffield was sunk by an Exocet launched by a Super-Etendard during Flaklands war. Israelis Mirage, Vautour and Mystère successfully fought. An Angolan Mig was killed by a SAAF Mirage F1...

but it is not the topic.

in fact, I don't know much on French sonar, but according to my sources, French SSN a quieter than US and UK ones (this comes from a sonar operator involved in international naval exercises). Now that they have been upgraded with pumpjets, they will be even more quiet.

i dont think the french ssn is quieter maybe as quiet but not better than

Sorry micky1up but I don't think, I know. Of course, compared to 688 and Trafalgar... not Seawolf. but they are designed for coastal patrols, due to their size, and can carry less weapons than UK and US SSNs. Thay are better just from an acoustic point of view.

Right, so two exocets were fired (one I may add was fired by an ALLY...you know...USS Stark...so was totally unexpected and NOT in a combat situation) :roll:. And yes...you had the Super-Entertard which had to runaway from the Harriers and would lose on a 1-1. :roll: And yes, the Israeli Mirage...superseded by the F16. ;) And well done for shooting down an Angolan Mig...if the Mirage waited 5 more minutes, it would've probably fallen down on it's own or crashed into a mountain. Angolan Mig.:lol:

What a combat pedigree!:rotfl:

you are right Kurushio. An Angolan Mig kill is not a great pedigree :D .
in simulated air2air combat, 2 Mirage 2000-5 killed 6 fighters (F-16, Tornado) without they knew they were fired on. The final score of this exercise was 40-1 for the Mirage2000...

Only problem was...monkeys were flying the other planes. :roll: Listen, the Mirage 2000 is equivalent to a Eurofighter (if you're lucky). Nothing more. The F16...yeah right, OK. How about the F22? How about the SU-35?

The Mirage 2000 doesn't need to be good, it'll never be combat tested just like all the other "world-beating" French fighters. In my opnion, the Mirage is just a mirage and is in actual fact made of balsa-wood and every photo you see of a Mirage in flight is photoshopped. The Mirage 2000 I saw at Farnborough was in actual fact a disguised SAAB Griffen...

...give it up...nobody takes French fighters seriously...

edit: actually scrap that. The Mirage 2000 is nowhere near as good as the Eurofighter. It's a piece of crap derived from a 1970s plane. Not only could it not beat an F16, I think I could shoot it down with a Cessna 172 and stones flung at it through the windows. Yes...such a good plane it's used by the premier airforces: Egypt, Greece, India, Peru (hey...those Llamas can be dangerous), Qatar and Taiwan.

lol...

maybe it is better not to take them seriously when they will be needed in a crisis...

but Mirage don't have sonars.

Kurushio, you really have issues with your angry self. too much coffee?