Post your thoughts on the coolest and best (not necesarilly(sic) mutually exclusive) in the following categories:
Air
Land
Sea (surface)
Sea (sub-surface)

Missiles should be classified from where they are launched

My persolal favs:
Air - coolest: Su-47 (previously the S-37 technology demonstrator)
best: borderline between F22 and Su-30
Land - coolest: MLRS
best: Leopard II MBT
Sea - coolest: Ekranoplane (Soviet surface-effect flying boat)
best: the Carrier
Sub - coolest: Shikval (super-cavitation torpedo, developed by Russian Navy)
best: Akula II or the new USN hunter-killers

owning a stun-gun, now that would b cool

coolest weapon ever hey?

hrm

Air weapon: Paveway bomb, Durandal (durandal is a runway killer, basically)

Land weapon: M1A2 Abrams tank, ooo yeah baby, nothing better than a Main Battle Tank.

Sea based, hrm: I'd have to go with an aircraft carrier, as it can sail, fly, and attack things!

Sub based: Dont have one.

for all of the above id answer:

me

fire up Tung! :D

Air: Sorry, but id have to go with the F-22 or B-2 atm (though the SU-31 is quite impressive)
Air Weapon: A-A: AIM-120 AMRAAM (the slammer!)
A-G: HARM Anti-radiation missile
Ground: Abrams!
Sea: Carriers are hard to beat, but AEGIS platforms are extremely effective
Sub-Sea: Dunno, USN 688(1)

And for games: the rail driver in Red Faction. j0r!

ahah Tung has studied the secret arts of TUNGFU, be afraid...very afraid :p

oh yeah and weapon....NUKE
WOOOT

steyr scout?

TUNG FU

the lost martial art of using the webal barb in equal amounts as the hands and feet.

FJEAR THE ART OF TUNG FU

(pronounced toong fu)

M16 Rifle with grenade launcher 032 tube.

David = TOOL!

TOOOOL FU!

phear his gheyness!

mmmmm.............Hydro Bomb

id have to say the coolest weapon would be some sorta ice gun.....

or a spoon.

A chop stick with a used band-aid on the end!!

*poke*, *poke* YYYAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!!!!! BAM!

The coolest would be that shrinking gun from Duke Nuken

A Wet Towel

phear mr wippy !!!!!!!

coolest tank: LAV
coolest rifle: AK-74
coolest handgun: H&K Mark-23 SOCOM (usp look-a-like)


but what I want is a LR 300, or a TAC-ORD M4 with the swat kit provided(silencer, lam, open sight, rear adjustable butt piece) :D

the coolest gun i've ever used, the q2 chain, i dunno sutn about hot it hummms that turns me ORN.

Air: X-32 (soon to be F-32) or Euro JSF (Joint Strike Fighter)

Land: Meh...? MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System)

Sea: Any Missile Destroyer with 'Aegis' attack radar...

Sub-surface: RN 'Traflagar' class SSK

Will go get pictures of all :)

Quake CTF grappling hook or a sock full of coins.

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mlrs/images/mlrs1.jpg

MLRS

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mlrs/images/mlrs18.jpg

Iraquis called the MLRS "Steel Rain" :) bloody drama queens, the Iraquis, eh?

playing brandy with a wet tennis ball.

a sock full of coins.

if i let u hit me with them coins, can i then have the coins ?

http://www.jast.mil/Gallery/Images/Boeing/Roll Out/boe_ro_1.jpg
X32

http://www.jast.mil/Gallery/Images/Lockheed/In Flight/loc_if_2.jpg
X35

a sock full of coins.

or the upgraded version, a reinforced stocking full of brick.

but im a fan of the old skool wood with a nail in it.

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/astute/images/astute2s.jpg

"TRAFALGAR" class SSK

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/astute/images/astute6s.jpg

Sub-surface launched "Harpoon" Anti-shipping missile...

http://www.hazegray.org/news/ddg81visit01.jpg

USS "Winston Churchill" (Aegis class)

(the one with the US flag is the Churchill :) )

I wanna biggetr piece of wood with TWO nails in it

"so they'll create bigger sticks, with bigger nails! and one day they'll make one so big it will destroy them all!! YA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAA!!"

- Kodos, The Simpsons

:D thats the s***

air: F111 fighter plane or this one.
sub: Colins Class Sub
land: any of this 1337 stuff
sea: whatever our army uses, the gay navy site didn't have any equipment links cept this image
http://www.navy.gov.au/rantitleimage4.jpg

stick all ur fancy american, russian equipments up ur fancy asses


our army is 1337

F111 is fast strike, imbecile. It couldnt shoot down a Pelican.

larf, person taking me serious:)
umm, what should it have been then, I mean whats our air force use?

i bet its dam good:)

FA 18A... upgrading weapons and avionics system now, soon will be looking at replacing them...

Options include:

FA 18E "Super Hornet" (50% bigger, faster, more weapons etc...)

F-22 "Lightning" (Stealth, Fast, Thrust vectoring... we'd be the only nation apart from the US to have them)

Wait for the F-32 or F-35 JSFs... (These things are bound to kick some arse :) )

cool, ta

u know if the navy still uses the colins class subs - a bit of drama on the news about them a while back - what was all that about?

The Collins are the navys new SSKs, (submarine killers) the fuss has been about whether they are actually any good, coz there have been heaps of bugs in thier development. Once its all sorted out, theyve got the potential to be some of the best SSKs in the world...

ta again:)

awesome, i wish the world would buy more weapons, coz we dont have enough killings.

and the best way to start with a 15megaton nuke!
http://ls.ausgamers.com/bravo.gif

My pummy.

"I'm an absolute Moron" - Girrississesssessss .sig

nothing beats an MP5SD and a f***ing desert eagle .50.

except for a big dirty nuke

HAHAH, sif Australia will ever get F-22s. They cost a s***load, and havent even finished R&D in the US yet. I remember reading (possibly in a Tom Clancy book) how the SPY radars on the AEGIS platforms are so powerful that it concentrated in a small area (say, an enemy fighter) it can actually damage the electronics and cause permanent injury to the pilot. I think the quote was 'dont piss off an AEGIS, or you could start popping out two-headed children'

Bah. RL in Q1
Splash damage rocks :-)

HAHAH, sif Australia will ever get F-22s. They cost a s***load, and havent even finished R&D in the US yet. I remember reading (possibly in a Tom Clancy book) how the SPY radars on the AEGIS platforms are so powerful that it concentrated in a small area (say, an enemy fighter) it can actually damage the electronics and cause permanent injury to the pilot. I think the quote was 'dont piss off an AEGIS, or you could start popping out two-headed children'

Incorrect, my overly-enthusiastic young friend. The F-22 is now officialy a production model. It is no longer the X-22 or Y-22, 'tis the F-22. F for fighter :)

We have been offered it, and are considering it, we have $206 billion allocated as a seed fund for replacing the F-18s, and are also looking at the future replacement for the F-111s... Also we have replaced the old Iriquois ground suppression gunships seen here:
9 sqn. "Bushrangers" (love the music :) )

With the "Aussie Tiger" (ie Euro Tiger made for us:) )

ROCK ON!!!!


PS, yah the attack radars on the Aegis are truly nasty, its called... Ah, I forget, but it acts like an EMP on avionics systems.

What about stuff for the Army eh?
I'm joining at the end of the year, will I have some new toys to play with?

The new Aussie Tiger will be nice for you.

The F-22 is WAAAYYYY too expensive. We would be able to scrap our fleet of 70-odd -18's and get four or five F-22's. Pffft. And the -18E isn't much chop, just ask the USN. Our -18"s latest upgrade will bring them up to par in every area with the -18E's except size. A better bet would be one of the new Su-'s that are coming out of Russian factories, but the chances of even having them consided are remote to say the least (politics). The Collins is the most advanced desil sub in the world, and once the software is fixed (please, not MS) it will prove it. In two excercises, two seperate subs have already `sunk' a Carrier, three landing ships and somthing like five escorts without being detected.
StopShootingMe: little known fact, but one version of the F-111 (never built, but a trifle to modify to) is a long range interceptor, carrying up to 15 missiles. And yes, the F-22 is now a production model, all of ten have been approved, and at a fantasticaly expensive price tag.
The AEGIS radar system is powerful engough to give an nearby cruise ship a tan. That's why they never radiate at full power within 100Km of land of other ships (warship excluded).
As for decommissioning the -111's at the end of their service life, there are some interesting way around that. Even id we do buy a new plane to replace it, we have the following problems: Lack of range compared to -111. Lack of `on time' compared. Lack of weapons capacity. Slower.

I know. The F111 is perfect for our stategic position. Alos its great when we finally kit some of them out for Electronic Warfare... Apparently they'll be like ,twice as capable as the EW F4s and Grummans the US uses...

As for the F22s, we'll prolly get them or the JSF, even though it'll cost an arm and a leg. What im interested in is whether we'll keep the -18s? Theyre still a good fighter, 'specially with improved avionics and weapons systems... BTW the F-18Es also carry twice the ordnance of our A models, thats quite an improvement. But I hope they dont buy any, if were upgrading, may as well go the whole hog :)

Yeah, even with the bigger weapons load, it's still like a whole new aircraft, so why not buy something newer, like a Rafale, Typhoon, or Su-? Have a squizz at the Aug and Sept editions of Australian Aerospace. They have a series on keeping the pigs for a lot longer than anticipated.

the f-111 was designed as a fighter. it had aim-9 sidewinders an a 6-barrel gatling gun in the internal weapons rack..but it was to big an was turned into a bomber..that was during the veitnam war believe.

i dont see the point of f-22 i mean its not like ANY of the south-east asian nations have the capabilities to detect most low flying aircraft....stealth would be a waste

besides indonesians in biplanes arent very scary

also draffa i thought the collins class only 'hit' the carriers..i mean u gotta use at least 6+ torps to have even a remote chance of sinking one

air : f-19 (skunk works planes ownz me)
land: PanzerKampfWagen V Panther (sif u can beat that WW2 s***)
sea : LA class attack subs

the f-111 was designed as a fighter

Hence the F- designation... There was also a FB-111, but we called it the F-111C, I believe, and the Yanks went along with it.

stealth would be a waste

We, however, have the ability to detect B2's and F-117's as far out as Malaysia:D

indonesians in biplanes arent very scary

They are trying to purchase 20 Su-30's atm, and the have a few F-16 hanger queens...

i thought the collins class only 'hit' the carriers

In war games, one hit is usually counted as a kill...
but yes, the Blackbird is very cool.

sifnt the martyr's from dark reign =)

but i think mp5-n's look incredibly cool

err the sr-71 is the blackbird

the f-19 is something else
even if they get new sukhois it doesnt mean they can fight

The SR-71 Blackbird came from the Skumk Works too. Nyarrr:P
The Sukhoi's are whipping the arse off the yanks. The USAF managed to get hold of a few and trained a couple of polit on them. The Su-'s whipp the -15's, -18's and -14's 9 times out of ten. Malaysia's MiG-29's cam shoot our -18's down before we even get into firing range. Even though Indo probably wouldn't use them foe anything more than airshows (like the -16's), I would feel uncomfortable if I lived in Darwin...

ummm the electronics are far more important

russian planes fire russian weapons which to say the least are technological dinosaurs, add to that the fact that the pilots of these planes are the brightest fellows..or they would have been poached to richer nations

also in the gulf war iraq had 29's an lost all of them save the ones that flew into iran to evade DEATH.

as far as i can see...practical beats theory anyday

it doesnt matter how well these planes can fly.....the US airforce an our for that matter are far better trained then any opponents we are likely to face

besides im sure we could modify our 18's to carry phoenix missiles (aim-54 afaik) which out range any other missile in existence (A-A).

Im always happy to stand corrected SSM,but id be more inclined to wait until it happens before I put any faith the the Australian Defence Budget. Ive got a book with figures on how much F-22s costs (I think they are going with the name 'Rapier' arent they, after the DoD rejected Lockheed's preference, Lighning 2. They other one ive heard was 'Raptor'. Dunno), but someone is borrowing it. :(

the wrench out of the back of my camry.

can kick anyones ass with it.

also draffa i thought the collins class only 'hit' the carriers..i mean u gotta use at least 6+ torps to have even a remote chance of sinking one...

WRONG! MK84 torps will f*** up pretty much anything, including a Nimitz-class carrier. Even if it doesnt sink it, the hull damage will in all likelihood slow the carrier to the point where air ops are near impossible. ESPECIALLY if it (the Carrier) develops a significant list as a result of the hull breach...

russian planes fire russian weapons which to say the least are technological dinosaurs, add to that the fact that the pilots of these planes are the brightest fellows..or they would have been poached to richer nations...

WRONG AGAIN, TOSSPOT!!!! A GREAT many US weapons were made from plans "borrowed" from the former USSR... If the USA has a certain weapon, you can bet your life the other has an equivalent.

i dont see the point of f-22 i mean its not like ANY of the south-east asian nations have the capabilities to detect most low flying aircraft....stealth would be a waste...

WRONG, WRONG, WRROONNGGGGG!!!!!! Most SE Asian nations have already, or are in the process of aquiring AWACS, which have nary a problem in the world picking out stealth aircraft.

Inquisitive, if you dont have anything at least remotely factual to say: shut the f*** up. :)

Draffa: Yah man, how cool is the Jindalee system? :) I heard something abut the construction of a second installation in QLD, resulting in coverage of a 3000 km arc across all northern Australia. Heard anything about that???

phhh id love to know how u think a torp can sink a carrier thats 334m long...significant hull breach..do u knw what watertight bulkheads are for..they stop this thing from happening

also wasnt it USSR weapons made from US weapons....in any case US weaponary is far more advanced atm than any other nation....if weapons from USSR (now Russia) are so GOOD then why the f*** is the ENTIRE pacific navy rusty away in Russian ports

take for exapmle the SA-7 Grail...if fire less then 30 degrees from the sun it will automatically lock onto the sun an fly towareds it until it runs out of fuel
Care to comment on that one.

now most nations purchasing Russian equipment do so because its cheap as chips and rather rugged...htis means that the majority of equipment they purchse will be older models and have major technological flaws associated. The Russian economy is in shambles i would love for u to prove to me exactly how a country that has had an economic breakdown will be able to produce equipment on par with the most technologically militaristic nation ever in the world.

AWACS are nice as long as the plane is not ground hugging where the plane is lost in ground clutter....which is what ALL australian aitcraft would do in times of war...for example the terrain hugging radar installed on f-111s. This means it is FAR harder to find low flying craft, although ground radars are still looking up an have a higher chance of detection.

anyway as it stand NO country within striking distance of Australia has the capabilities to launch a major attack, be it sea or air.

i mean wtf are they gonna do..send all their troops in rubber rafts...dont make me laugh. also noone has tankers, which if u know your mathematics are essential if the aircraft wished to make the return journey. this exact reason is why indonesia had a huge cry when australia went to purchase some surplus US tankers.

also u reackon mk84 will f*** up ANYTHING...hmmm let me think ..ahh yes..Iowa class battleship..it would have no chance against one of them...an armoured belt that stretches the entire length of the ship is far more then some pussy little torpedo designed to destroy subs an light armoured destroyers and cruisers

take for exapmle the SA-7 Grail...if fire less then 30 degrees from the sun it will automatically lock onto the sun an fly towareds it until it runs out of fuel
Care to comment on that one.

*sigh* Hence the introduction of the SA-10 "Grumble" and its friends... phhh, really...

also u reackon mk84 will f*** up ANYTHING...hmmm let me think ..ahh yes..Iowa class battleship..it would have no chance against one of them...an armoured belt that stretches the entire length of the ship is far more then some pussy little torpedo designed to destroy subs an light armoured destroyers and cruisers...

Do you ever tire of being wrong? Seriously?

The above might have been the case donkeys years back, but newer shaped charged dual-pulse torps will break even the newer destroyers clean in two, and like I said, you dont need to sink a Carrier to make it useless, if it cant reach a certain speed, nothing except helicopters, stol and vtol aircraft will be getting off the ground. Certainly not your piss-heavy F-14s and Super Hornets... Also as I said, try landing anything on a deck at a 20 degree tilt :)

BTW, I agree with your statement about our defensive capabilites, I doubt even the US could do much to us short of a massed ICBM bombardment, since they dont have anything to satge from locally 'cept us and New Zealand :) Maybe Okinawa, but nah...

russian weapons which to say the least are technological dinosaurs

Haerd about the lates R-73 missiles ans the Shikval Torpedo?

iraq had 29's an lost all of them

Yep, Bit I don't think i could call Iraq a front-line fighting force, even before the War. Russia has two levels of equipment. Their own, and everyone elses. Iraq's aircraft were basically, wings, engines, and a stick. Very little in the vay of advance technology.

modify our 18's to carry phoenix missiles

the USN is deleting Pheonix from their inventory. The missile propellabt has a tendancy to crack.

A Nimitz carrier has four propellors mounted on four seperate shafts for fail-safe. If two of the propellors or shafts are put out of commission, the carrier cannot attain enough forward veloicty to lets a jet takeoff, except totally unloaded. This is effictivly the same a sinking it, and forces the rest of the battlegroup into a fully defensive posture to protect the carrier. No offensive capabilities save cruise missiles will be available. Simply track a few torps into the ships baffles and stike the props. Instant `kill'.
Yes the Jindalee is way cool.

hrmmm let me think me want a nuke
cowboy hat
birthday suit

or a EMP

This is all very interesting for everyone in the NAVY or AIRFORCE.

What about the ARMY eh?!?!?!

Are they gonna get any new shiznitz to play with?

stinkbomb
orr yeah

G36

What about the ARMY eh

You get some nice new `recon' choppers (armed to the teeth, but they call em recon...) in 2004...

Fantastic.
But that still sorta AirForce.
It wouldn't be bad if we got G36's to replace the Steyers. :)

Not really. It's the Air Arm of the Army, like we used to have the Naval Air Arm.

FFS.
Let me spell it out for you.
WHAT NEW f***ING TOYS WILL THE INFANTRY GET TO PLAY WITH???

I DON"T EFFING KNOW
:)

WELL WHAT f***ING GOOD ARE YA THEN, EH!?!?!
;)

NOT MUCH!

Hang on...

HEY!

the russians have a torpedo, as mentioned before, that puts a gaseous boundary around the torpedo as it goes thru the water, allowing it to go as very high speeds. thats cool tech.(conspiracy theorists say this is what caused the kursk to sink, it blew up when they were test firing)

the f22 is leaps and bounds above _anything_, fact. the russian sukhois look pretty, and do nice tricks, but the fact is, the f22 would kill it, along with anything else without even being detected, such as its design philosphy went, and has been executed. avionics is probly the single most important factor in war planes, and the f22 has the best going around.(russians are still using cockpits in their sukhois that are similar to ones used in american planes from the 70s)

the JSF are an f16/harrier replacement. nothing special, slightly stealthy, and able to carry out what the f16 does now.. would get its ass kicked by an f22

f111's are good, but VERY maintenance intensive, about 1/2 the fleet is undergoing maintenant (i know someone who works at boeing)

B2's arent stealthy in adverse weather conditions, the poli's wont admit that

depleted uranium rox ass

and m1a1 tanks rock, they got a turbine engine in it, much like an aircraft, hence they haul.

javelinmissle.mpeg rox too

Heh, yeah, B-2s do own. And I have to agree with SSM on the carrier issue, I remember reading something along those lines a while back. Its funny with B-2s, they cost US$500 million each, and yet are useless in bad weather or daytime. I suppose they make up for it though, considering they have the radar cross section of a sparrow.

someone needs to design a phase shift aircraft..thats true invisibility

the russians have a torpedo, as mentioned before, that puts a gaseous boundary around the torpedo as it goes thru the water, allowing it to go as very high speeds. thats cool tech.(conspiracy theorists say this is what caused the kursk to sink, it blew up when they were test firing)

I remember a doco on abc (I think) that was talking about that sorta tech except they were trying to use it on subs. If it made a big enough 'bubble' it could actually use rockets... apparently.

common guys u all know the butchers knife is 1337

i thought the F-22 had been designated "Raptor" but i could be wrong. another thing about the F-22 which makes it so awesome, is it's supercruise capability. which is the ability to go over the speed of sound (over mach 1) without the use of afterburners, so there goes the fuel wastage that normally comes with putting burners on to reach high speeds. of course it still has afterburners but it doesn't need them to get to speeds that most aircraft go. this and the fact that it has a radar cross signature equal to or less than a B2 :)

tyhe coolest wepon evr wood have to b the one that blows teh heds off all u lame tryhrard fukstix

Thanks mp, we'll take that into consideration. I thought the f-22 was called 'raptor' as well, but I read somewhere that the new designation was 'rapier'. Who knows whether they are right or wrong. It has sure confused the game designers, ive seen about 5 different games, all with different names for the aircraft! Crazy DoD.

Funky: Yeah, the supercruise is a nifty innovation. Still uses a lot of fuel, but waayy less than afterburners.

sukhois look pretty, and do nice tricks, but the fact is, the f22 would kill it

but only at a three to one ratio, tops according to the lates data from both sides, and there are a lot more Su's than F-22's... I'm sure a lot of fighter pilots in Europe would contest your post, but since there arn't likley to be any chances to see in reality one way of the other, i'll guess we'll just have to pick a side and stick with it. (go the SU-s). Seen the S-37/Su-47? That is a radical plane!
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/gallery/971105.jpg
This is from a test day several years ago. The `S', as opposed to `Su' designation denotes that this is a prototype.

http://images.janes.com/aerospace/military/gallery/maks/images/su_47.jpg
This is from the recent MAKS air and trade show.
Quote from Janes':

Just
as during MAKS'1999 two years ago, this year the Sukhoi Su-47 (formerly
known as the S-37 Berkut) was not shown at close range, performing only
some air demonstrations. However, unlike its past performance, this year
the aircraft demonstrated a much more dynamic flight display. The result of considerable progress during testing, this appears to confirm the opinion
of its designers regarding the excellent manoeuvrability of forward-swept-wing
aircraft.

russians have a torpedo, as mentioned before, that puts a gaseous boundary around the torpedo as it goes thru the water, allowing it to go as very high speeds

Yeah, that's the Shikval.

Bob the Fruit: here are a couple of links you may like. The Army is getting the rough end of the stick atm. The navy and AF are getting most of the spending and updates, because of the opinion in Canberra that the Army is becomming a peace keeper, rather than an army as such...

Aussie Tiger
and another about the Tiger.

and here is a nice pic. We are replacing our old Rapeir B1 SAM systems with the newer and more capable B1M's.
http://images.janes.com/defence/land_forces/gallery/010725.jpg

the question is can it hit anything

consodering how backward most russian systems are i dont think their concept of electroincs is great enough to overcome any 'skunk works' planes.

here is a nice thing to think of....where do all the RICH countries buy there armaments from?...and where do all the third world dictators buy there armaments from? sukhois may be able to out-maneuver US fighters but i dont see them being able to out-maneuver a missle.

YAY mp is posting again...

backward most russian systems are

Last I recall, I don't remember the Yanks being able to put a Shuttle into orbit and bring it down again UNPILOTED. Neither have they launched a space fighter (MiG-Uran and BOR-9) at any time. Just because they use dials instead of LED's doesn't mean the planes are inferior. Germany still uses their Mig's alongside American F-16's and -15's, and in war games, the Russian planes routinly whip the Yanks arses for them.

Uragan MLRS
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/uragan/images/uragan1.jpg

But the Smerch is better
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/smerch/images/smerch5.jpg

Shkval Torpedo
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/Shkval-2.jpg

And an article on the Shkval

if the russians are so good at designing weapons why did it take them a phenomenal amount of troops to overcome some Chechan rebels...or perhaps Afganistan rebels
anyways..even IF they design a good weapon whats the chance it will reach full scale production.....ZERO..because Russia is broke, they still owe money to WW2 veterans and take MASSIVE monetary loans each year to pay for food and electroic equipment purchased from NATO countries.

i just read that shkval thing.....230mph is fukin fast and rather impressive, but at high speeds i bet it has to lose some of its maneuverability....but that speed is damn impressive still...err hang on its 27 feet long....thats fukin HUGE.

how on earth do they fit that into the sub....would have to a real bitch to try an put in...

I dont think you realise how big say, an Akula class sub is :)

108m long
at least i think...the site was in russian an fuked if i could understand it

13.m diameter..thast still gonna be a bitch to put a torp in thats 9m long

also have to take into account the russian fascination of double hulls

Just get guys in scuba gear to swim out and attack the russian subs with can openers.
That'll f*** em.

I WANT MY G36's!!!!

I AMS TEH EXPURT HEER PLZ TEH GLOCK FORM CS SI BESTESTEST RIFFLE EVA

ADN TEH BESTEST FLYIGN PLANE IZ HANGGGLIDER!!!1

and mental rox.

wasn't the americans protoype of a space fighter called the X-38? and it was launched off the back of a 747, and it used special zero gravity AMRAAM missles?
or is that just my vivid imagination?

According to
Lockheed Martin, the designation for the F-22 is 'Raptor', so I guess I was wrong on that score. Ppl with cable modems might want to check it out, there are some (huge) videos of F-22 missile launch tests on there. However, I was NOT wrong on whether the F-22 has entered production yet, it has not. Check out the
Boeing site:

As of August 2001, F-22 pilots at the Combined Test Force, Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., have logged 1,300 hours and 577 flights in the program's six test F-22s.

There is plenty of details on the Boeing site, check it out if youre interested.

sifnt Colt baby, M4A1 baby

bob..unlesss u have a can opener that can defeat titanium double hulls, id say u will be at it for a while

also cycosis, the glock is a pistol not a rifle...