|
Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-18 18:28:19 |
|
Hi there, first off, I’d like everyone to know that information in the previous poll about the wing gundam was inaccurate. This poll will NOT pit a specific gundam, mobile suit, or mobile armor against the f-14. Since f-14s are a mass-produced, I will pit it against the average mobile suit (ams). I’m sure sooner or later desert will post the specs of the f-14 here, and he is welcome to do so, but I would like you to read what’s here and see for yourself which is better. Multi-Environment: The ams can fight in any environment, be it space, air, land, or sea, and some can enter and reenter the atmosphere. F-14s at best in this field is fight on land and in the air. They’re only designed for aerial combat, but if someone was desperate, they could fire weapons from the ground. They are not all-terrain and they could run around at very slow speeds across flat surfaces. In the air, they’re really only effective while they’re in the air as they were intended to be. Other than that, the f-14 cannot fight in space or under water. Battle Zone: The ams has some huge problems in this area. They’re meant for catching the enemy off guard and ending the battle quickly. This will usually happen with enemies that only have ma and warships. When there are other ms, then the battle becomes a fight to see who attack better while dodging. In the air, the ams is pretty much a sitting duck. Usually, the only reason its up there in the first place is because its being air dropped or its entering the atmosphere. When they do either of which, they stay close and rely on strength in numbers. When on the ground, they need some kind of cover. MS designed for the ground are made to blend in with their environment and lay on their backs or front side without damaging themselves. In the sea, they have to be adapted to the water. They’re at their worst in the water, they’re at their slowest, their weapons strength is reduced, especially if they have beam guns, and it isn’t easy for them to dodge attacks. MS can’t hide in the clouds, but get them in the ground and they’ll shoot down an f-14 down easy. However, the f-14 is just about as pathetic. It’s a sitting duck when it’s on the ground, and the only cover you can hope to find in the sky is some clouds. If there aren’t any, speed is your best bet, which is why they focus on making the fastest jet. See, when it comes down to it between jets, you’re still just playing a dodge and shot game. The f-14 has a very low chance of survival if attacked from directly above or below, as ms are famous for doing. If an ms is hiding, the f-14 can only find it if its flying at low altitude, and if you do spot it before it spots you, that’s the only good shot you’ll get at it. Function: The ams is designed for close combat and surprise attacks. The ams is capable of shooting down ma and warships, but it’s more or so preferred to go after other mobile suits. The ams carries powerful artillery and could easily shoot down an f-14 flying by, but it wouldn’t be easy to surprise unless it was on the ground. The f-14 can take out ground and air targets with ease and it is mainly meant for combating other fighters. Deployment: The ams can launch on its own just about anywhere, be it in space, land, or sea. It can’t rest in the air, but it get up there pretty fast. If the f-14 is in the area before the ams can get up there, then the f-14 does have the high-ground advantage so to speak. The f-14 can launch off a short runway (with help) meaning it can launch from a navel carrier. Its response is slower in getting on the move, but once launched, then it has the upper hand. Pilots: Average humans can pilot the ams, but there are also newtypes and coordinators. All a newtype has to do is clime into any kind of machine, and he or she will know how to operate it, down to the smallest function. Fledgling and mature newtypes can see an attack in the enemies mind no matter how far away their opponent is. Advanced newtypes can not only see the attack, but stop it either by deflecting it or they can generate shields to protect themselves. Coordinators are skilled, but a smart pilot still has a chance, plus coordinators have to have training like everyone else, however, it easier for them to learn than others. F-14 pilots have to go through years of training, study, and endure extreme physical courses to qualify to become a pilot. Even then, that pilot would have to take additional educational courses to understand the entire workings of his or her own craft. Just as a newtype would in only a matter of minutes. Speed: The ams is not aerodynamic, nor does it need to be for its regular combat zone. Mobile armors are still faster in space, but they don’t have the same close-combat effectiveness the ams has, and the air is no exception. The ams only has enough thrust to keep it air born and move around, and some aren’t even capable of that. However, it is the fastest all-terrain mech and doesn’t need a flattened surface to fight on. The f-14 is much faster than the ams, but even with that kind of speed, once that ms would get a lock, the show’s over. Speed will only do an f- 14 good if it was running away. Durability: The ams has a distinct advantage here. First, it has a stronger construction and they’re usually made with titanium/ceramic hybrid alloy, Luna 2 titanium, or some kind of titanium hybrid that’s easy to produce. Second, most ms carry shields that are made of a better metal than the rest of their bodies. Third, since the whole body is made of the armor, this includes the cockpit section. That is not the case with the f-14 with its cockpit covering that only cheap-ass guntanks used in the One Year War. The rest of the body is solid titanium, which does about as much good as guarding yourself with paper in a sword fight. (Comparing ms to f-14s… just wanted to make that point clear) Weapons: The average mobile suit definitely has much more better weapons. Heavy machine-guns, cannons, plasma cannons, particle cannons, positron cannons, beam rifles, beam sabers, not to mention all the stuff the ams has built in. Even if the f-14 had the same technology at its disposal, the mobile suit would still be able to carry more powerful versions of those weapons than the f-14 ever could. Range: Depending on the weapon, the range can be from a few hundred meters to a few hundred miles. Weapon’s range and function is limited because of mynofsky particles, forcing the unit to use an optical targeting camera. First off, the mynofsky particle would render the f-14 useless. The equipment to protect the f-14’s circuits from scrambling would reduce its speed and hamper with its aerodynamic design, and any kind of guided missile would be useless in this field. However, the missile are very powerful, if the f-14 ever got a lucky hit, the ms wouldn’t stand a chance, but you’d have to be pretty darn lucky, and that’s only if it’s a human pilot you’re dealing with. That leaves the rotary gun, which has to be used at a close range in order to work. The kind of range a ms has. And last, but not least, even if the f-14 had the same level of advancement, the ms could use more powerful versions of that weapon than the f-14 ever could. Endurance: The ams has either a ultra-compact nuclear reactor or a mynofsky fusion reactor. With either of which, the ams could last for a lot longer than an f-14 that would eventually run out of fuel. The ams uses helium 3 for its propulsion. A teaspoon of this stuff could take a hummer from one side of the US to the other seven times. It’s theorized to exist in the atmosphere of planets further away from the sun and outside the asteroid belt. I’m not sure how long an f-14 can last in the air, but it will run out of fuel long before a mobile suit is ready to quit. The f-14 can be refueled in the air, but if a mobile suit is in the area, it will shoot down the f-14 and the plane fueling it. Ammunition: The ams surpasses the f-14 by far in this field. It is able to carry ammo clips, batteries, and so forth. If it has any energy weapons built into its body, it has infinite ammo. The f-14 can put up got competition with it’s missiles and I’m sure it has quite a few bullets for its gun, but it has to run out of ammo sooner or later, and that ms will still have plenty of fighting strength in it. Adaptability: The ams can interchange its weapons very quickly. Depending on how much it can carry, it can switch to a long-range beam or projectile sniper rifle, to a machine-gun, or to a beam saber in a matter of seconds. Even if the ms had to stay air born, a supply vessel could take the risk and supply the unit in the air, but it have just as good a chance as the f-14’s tanker getting shot down. The f-14 only has rockets and machine-guns, and if you wanted to change the kind of missiles you were carrying, you would have to return to base and take several minutes to change them. Well, I’ve stated my case. Wither or not you guys pick ms to better than f-14s or not, desert probably won’t change his mind about f-14s. You can believe what you want too, but I’m showing ya the bear facts here, the f-14 just doesn’t cut it against a mobile suit. I rest my case.  |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-18 19:11:15 |
f-14 > mobile suit 
|
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-18 19:58:50 |
F-14  |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-18 20:05:12 |
|
Hey critic just to let you know i'm sitting here looking at the official technical manual to gundam. Now I'm going to give you an advantage by going with the RX-79(G). Multi Enviroment: The gundams require special equipment ot operate in even desert conditions, without these and I quote "the sand would cause rapid corrosion" rendering the joints inoperable. An F-14 dosn't even need to be near its target deployment area. An aircraft carrier 2000 miles away from the target could deploy a F-14, with in-air refuleing its range is vertually unlimited. Also 90% of any ms cannot, I repeat cannot go under water for extended periods of time. they aren't water proof, their wepons aren't rated for underwater usage, essentially making a ms a humaniod negativly boiant barrel of lunar titanium. The f-14 can be equipped with a pallet of anti-ship/anti-submarine weapons, making it very effective at against anything in, under or on the sea. With ranger's supped up phoenix missle space is deffinatly no safe place either. Battle zone: Fisrtly I would like to personally se a gundam attack a f-14 when it's at 17000m, You can't get above it without being in space. Acording to atnospheric entry laws your ms couldn't get within 10km of the f-14 without burning up in re-entry. Your all powerful beam riffle can barely go 2km, so hardly a match at 17 and 10. Add in the ability for a ms sensor range of 5900m it couldn't even target it let alone see it. The f-14 has a weapons range of over 200km, it could see you shoot you and leave without you even knowing it. function: the primary function of the f-14 is an intercept and defesive roll. The idea being that it will lauch to intercept and destroy any incoming threat, and destroy that threat befroe it can cause any damage. The ms is designed for little more than being a walking tank. Its minimal sensor range, weapons range, mobility means it has to be deployed at the action or very close to it. Unless you are transporting by way of an active transport(the ms is cpapble of attack during transport) it is no more than a piece of lunar titanium in a cargo hold. Deployment: I agree with your statement exept for one part. The f-14 can be ready to launch, provided already armed, in minutes, hence the intercept role. The ms would have to cover over 141km to even get inside the strike range of the ms, while being targeted by the f-14. so unless they were placed very close to their targets they would be useless. Pilots: as you clearly stated f-14 pilots go though years of training, why, so they don't panic while in the cockpit. Every newtype in any ms has and always will be inferrior to a trained pilot. Children and war don't mix. Even the gundam series say this. Also newtypes go though just as much training, newtypes may be born with the knowhow to pilot a ms, but without training under stressful situations they will lose focus. A newtype may have the uperhand in ability but with out controll all the ability in the world won't help you. speed: thrust/weight ratio, gundam: ~1.015 thrust/weight ratio, f-14: ~1.778 F-14 faster than an ms and has a better thrust/weight ratio than an ms. At a speed of 1470km/h (top speed at sea level)it would clear the range of an ms from intial contact to exiting range at the full diameter would be under 30 seconds. how many rounds can you get out in 30 seconds. It takes 1 second for you to realize it, ~10 seconds to target= > 20 seconds to fire. Lets not even mention the blistering speed of 2517km/h less than 20 seconds period. Durablity: I'll give the ms the edge on this but think about it. The f-14 can shoot farther, go faster, and out-perform an ms. You can't damage what you can't hit. Weapons: I qoute "The first weapons of ms's were little more than cannons off a tank." Your machine guns/cannons have a range of just over a km, beam riffle/plasma rifle 2 mabey 3km at best, beam saber please. The range of a current day AIM-9 is 9km. The phoenix has a range of over 200km. Not to mention cruise missle launch capability. The f-14 is even nuclear cappable. your most vaunted wepon the beam rifle barly out-classes the 20mm vulcan on the f-14. Range: If the guidance systems were interrupted then the heat seeking portion of the aims could easily lock on to the gundam. The mynofsky particles are only effective when used in high concentrations. It takes millions of particles per cubic km to even dirupt radar, tens-of-millions to disrupt electronics. The generation of these particles also requires the use of large scale generators, an ms can not mount these projectors. Also the deployment of these particles in a gravitated enviorment would result in the settleing of the feild in a matter of hours. Endurance: With a max range of 3200km the f-14 has the range to do just about anything. Simply place the refuler or better yet a carrier at 1500km and the f-14 could run in shoot and rturn on one tank, rinse repeat, with a max range of under 6km an air base 7 km away would mean the f-14 would have over 3186km to fly cirlces around the gundam. ammuntion: sorry to dissapoint but the ms DOES NOT have unlimited ammunition. The average beam riffle carries ~20 shots depending on charge strengh. Your machine gun carries ~400 rounds. The f-14 carries 675 rounds of 20mm rounds, 4 aim-7/aim-54, 2 aim-9/ 1 aim-9 + aim7/aim54, plus an observation pod. It could also carry up to 6577kg of bombs. The bulky equiment on the ms prevents amunition storage on the ms. The use of an external pack can increase the amunition storage by 200% but still much less destructive potential than an f-14. Adaptability: The ms may be able to carry more weapons initially, but the several miuntes it takes to swap out would not matter as the f-14 could reequipp faster than an ms. Even at 1500km it would take ~1 hour to fly there while the ms would take days. in short if the situation demanded a change the ms better have the stuff it need imdeatly or else it would not be able to adapt to the situation. The f-14 however could return to base and return in under 2.5 hours. The time the pilot would need to gather his wits after being pounded from outside thier range. In short your facts are twisted to support your needs. The truth will set you free, and lies will falter you opinions. It would also appear that other agree. |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-18 20:28:57 |
|
Thank you Ninja, *hugs and kisses* This is the first time I have seen Ranger laugh in days. He is very pleased with your dissertation, his comment being, "Critic just got hosed" |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-18 20:46:15 |
|
Hey I got a game we can all play. It's called: "The longer the post, the more you think you know, but it doesn't make you right." ... I lose. ^_^ |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 05:16:40 |
|
Wow, you guys are blowing this way out of proportion, and you're killing one of my favorite discussions ranger and a select other few. First of all, the F-14 ranger was describing was FAKE, in other words, WE MADE IT UP! It was just for FUN to see if a super-overpowered fighter jet (that COULD go into space) would stand a chance against a gundam. Secondly, the argument was a GUNDAM vs. an F-14, not an MS, although that's okay so long as you remember. Then some people came and got out of hand pairing it against crazy stuff like the dark gundam, etc. If you guys want to continue this, then sure, but at least get the facts right, don't lie about looking things up in the gundam technical manuals (I have all of them and *you know who you are*'s information is a bit off, so don't say others are liars when you're not entirely honest yourself) If you're going to pit a Standard Issue aircraft against a Mobile Suit, CHOOSE A STANDARD ISSUE MOBILE SUIT TOO THEN!! don't say "the average ms". You might as well compare it to the "average jet fighter"!! I recommend comparing it to one of these four, 1)the classic RX-78, 2)the classic Zaku II, 3)a standard issue mobile suit Aeries(Gundam Wing), or -if you want to pick a newer model that still is mass-produced, the Astrays (their specks are almost identical to the Strike gundam). I'm going to compare them using the Aeries. Now for my role in this crazy house. Sure, although some of your specs are off, but heck, lets say the F-14 is better in speed and it outclasses an MS in ranged-weapons. There is still the issue of close-maneuverability. I've said it several times before and I'll say it again, a mobile suit can turn on a dime compared to ANY fighter jet, and continue to go in a totally different direction. (you said it yourself, "can't hurt what you can't hit") Two: Beam particle cannons have an "average" magazine of 40 rounds, the exception being the Strike's beam cannon. An "average" (like the ones equipped by the Zakus and Aeries) beam particle cannon's maximum range is 12km, more than enough considering you only have to hit a plane ONCE with one of those to destroy it. Three: Mobile Suits CAN FLY TOO!!!! If you really DID have the technical manuals you would AT LEAST know THAT!!!!! It wouldn't take days to reload/refuel,etc., it would take about the same time as the F-14 depending on the range for an Aeries to resupply. Four: Underwater? In the desert? An F-14 can't go underwater either! and these supposed "Average Mobile Suits", recieve standard issue desert equipment if necessary. I don't have time right now to argue against biased fools, so I'll post the rest later.
Beware the quiet people,
You don't know their intentions
(small signatures are sooo much cooler since they don't annoy people trying to read through posts!) |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 05:30:14 (edited 2006-01-19 05:30:30)
|
|
RangerThe only thing I'm gonna say is gop bhack and look at my original specs. They are from there real world. At that time all we did for scifi was add the antimatter warhead and point singularity engine to the AIM 54 and added a pair of water mass fusion reactors for power. An F-14 stcok off the caried deck can kill a gundam faster thn a gundam can get off the ground like Ninja said. |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 06:32:24 |
|
I figured that… And by the way Lady Rin, you can tell desert I got a good laugh out of ninja’s post too. First off, when I mentioned the issue of fuel, I meant if those two were stuck in a battle they couldn’t get out of, the ms would have the upper hand. As for sensor range, the f-14 does have that advantage, but the ms can also shoot down enemy fire with ease. As to regards of inf. ammo. The ms DOES have unlimited ammo, and if you took the time to read the whole thing, then you would have seen say that if it has those weapons built into the body. Almost every ms is built a Minovsky fusion generator, and almost all of those suits have a particle cannon built into their bodies. You don’t have to be a kid to be a fledgling newtype. Some soldiers begin to realize their potential. If you stick a infantry guy in an f- 14 and a newtype with the same training in a mobile suit, no matter how much time it takes that ms to get to the carrier or wherever, once he gets there, its over. A newtype can even understand how to fly THAT thing! Some ms can be outfitted for entry and reentry, and then there’s always the option of attacking from below… As for Minovsky particles, a ms needs a support ship to generate that kind of field and keep it up as well, but a few hard-wiring tricks and you can rig the core to vent some of its energy. About the gravity, when Minovsky particles are fused like that, they can’t permeate the ground, or the atmosphere, so they stay put. Oh, and fyi, the Apsolus I, II, and III have generators built into them. As for multi-environment… It does not take a lot of work to rig a suit for desert combat, that’s why ms are adaptable. You have CUSTOM units that are better suited, but you can use a regular suit out there. As for water, a regular suit would be as you say in water, no argument there, btw, I did mention that. However, amphibious ms are very fast underwater even though they are next to useless. ZAFT had the right idea about how to use them, they were only meant for attack enemies in open sea or sneaking up on an enemy near the water. They’re also very good at dodging anti-sub missiles. As for your nuke capabilities, a ms or gundam can take out a nuke with a saber, please. And I didn’t twist these facts. If anyone’s twisting the facts here, its you. The fact is that people will things whatever way they want see them, and I don’t care, I’m giving you the facts. You’re either going to accept them or not. |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 12:13:53 |
|
Critic,The Apsolus was massive, it had to built inside a mountain, hardly gundam size. Also were all guilty of only stating what we want to be seen. No report can be truely without some biased, or have any portion of the truth removed. To say that my post is perfect would be like saying that I'm perfect. I'm not, i have no intention of being perfect, because frankly being perfect isn't all it's cracked out to be. Sory if I don't adress any of the things you bring up in your most recent post extensivly, I'm at school now and have 10min. to type all this no time to lolly-gag around the rosemary bush, so-to-speak. h4xor dude, I did give the thrust to weight ratio for the rx-78(unloaded)to the f-14(fully loaded). They can fly, but not well. Your Aeries is also designed for aerospace combat, not ground warfare. In fact look at the name of the series, gundam wing, obviously they can fly. In the original moble suit gundam, thier beam rifles were not as advanced as those in gundam wing. A f-14 has no need to submerge, it can strike underwater foes with the aid of sonar bouyies, and low-altitude scanning. I do admit that I am biased, we all are. If you can't admit that you're an idiot. (by you're I mean a generalzation not you inparticular) |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 14:13:00 |
|
First I'd like to apologize to ranger, in the first line of my last post I mistyped a line since I was in a hurry at my 700AM class. I said: "and you're killing one of my favorite discussions ranger and a select other few." I meant to say: "and you're killing one of my favorite discussions BETWEEN ranger and a select other few." sorry I mistyped and didn't notice. Now, umm....I have to agree with dirtyninja on the whole apsolus thing. Who brought THAT up? It's not even really a mobile suit let alone.....practical. But I digress. When I was talking about the beam rifles earlier, I was NOT talking about the ones from Gundam Wing, if I was, I think even you guys would agree the overpowered Twin-buster-rifle would blast ANYTHING out of the sky, let alone a little jet. The data I stated there was combined from the beam cannons in the 08th MS team series and the original Mobile Suit Gundam series technical manuals and I basically said the average between the two (08MST ones have slightly less stats strangely than the original). Honestly I don't have much specific data on the Aeries standard issue weapons, but I do for the Leos and they have a similar weapon set. The only series I can think of that the Mobile Suits didn't have some sort of standard air variation or at least air transport (that they showed) were 08th MS team and 0080. @dirtyninja: A gundam/MS doesn't need to submerge either, and if we're talking about standard MSs than you can't forget the aerospace type. (I can totally understand though the whole time limit while at school thing!) @critic: Just because the weapons are stored inside doesn't mean they have unlimited ammo. You apparently haven't finished watching ANY gundam series if you think that, because at 2 parts at least in almost every gundam series somebody (normally the good guys) run out of ammo and causes a problem. And virtually NO STANDARD mobile suits have minovsky particle generators built in except for about 3 particular Zeon mobile suits. (and please stop using wierd mobile suits for examples-like the apsolus) @ranger's last comment: it's HIGHLY unlikely. Yeah, everyone is biased at least to some degree, but that doesn't mean people can twist around facts and tell falsehoods because of it. All particular statistics I present are facts (except maybe whatever determines an "average" something, I just try to calculate other information to as close to that as I think is possible), I just put my comments and opinions around them, that's all. I'm just suprised none of you F-14 fans have started getting at the primary weaknesses of MSs, you guys still haven't hit the main one yet..... One last thing, dirtyninja, if you're such a gundam fan that you have the technical manuals, then why are you supporting the F-14 side of the argument judging the information you know?....UNLESS YOU'RE NOT REALLY A FAN!!!HAHAHA! (just kidding) (no offense meant to the other F14 fans)
Beware the quiet people,
You don't know their intentions
(small signatures are sooo much cooler since they don't annoy people trying to read through posts!) |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 14:15:57 (edited 2006-01-19 14:26:27)
|
|
Man, you sound just like O'rielly, *rolls eyes* of course I know that, The Apsolus three is the largest, and yes, it is huge. The sucker also took out a very healthy chunck of a large mountain. The Apsolus 2 has a little less, and it is about five times the size of a gundam, but its the best arial weapon gundam has to offer, and since ms are made for fighting in the air, I'd use this thing in a match. The F-14 wouldn't last a second. And something else I forgot to mention, when you're dealing with a newtype, and that newtype can sense from far off, they can also shoot at you beyond the range of the weapon's scope, and they're usually hit their mark. And you haven't kept up on old school weapons. List of ms with built-in Minovsky cannons: Dom Z-Gok Z-Gok custom Zock Goog Yagd Doga Sazabi Fedi suits don't use it, but I thought they sucked even though they won. Zeon suits were more versital, their gov was just screwed up. List of gundams with built-in energy weapons, (these weapons were disabled by enemies most of the time) Epyon Talgeese III Nataku G-F91 Aegis (limited by batteries) Blitze (limited by batteries) Freedom Justice Providence (just it's beam saber) |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 17:47:56 |
|
The truth is that I'm a huge gundam fan it's just I'm also an engineer, and i simply can not see a gundam winning a battle with a f-14. The devils in the details, f-14s are faster, have a longer fire range, can see farther, carry more weapons, carry more ammo for those weapons, carry better wepons, and over all are just better. As far as why I think the way I do I've been a navy fan for years, 14 to be exact, but only a gundam fan for ~5. I have 4 technical manules for gundam, the art work of gundam wing, 3 figures, I've seen just about every gundam series, in cluding the one where all the gundams were little(forget the name). I also have 3 books on world aircraft, 1 book on modern military weapons detailing every thing used by any military since WW2, 2 cross sections books detainilg other military weapons, 3 books on guns, 4 books on special forces, and all current Barnes and nobles' series on their respective histroical foundations(8 total). So as you can see I'm pretty well informed when it comes to warfare. And before you ask yes I have read them ALL. Seriously, ask me about any weapon system used either today or in the last 60 years and I'll find it. Considering all that is, has, and will be posted I would definatlly without a doubt chose the yf-22 raptor as my bird of choice. Unfortunatly I don't have the specs. but I know they are insame. Something like mach 2.74 top speed, insane cornering, stealth, only problem is lack of loadout(religated to small internal bays, and small outer hard-points). Either that or the new euro-fighter, just as good but better loadout. As far as this threads concered the f-14 will always be my choice. Even if you could mount a "portable" Minovsky generator, and mount onbord/built-in Minovsky cannons, what do you notice about the ms you named. Most were destroyed, badly dammaged, or lost in battle. As any good enginner knows, if you overspecilize you will die. Simple, plain and Trew. (I should use that as my sig) |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-19 20:04:01 |
|
All right, faster- sure, longer range fire, assuming an MS isn't equipped with the same types of missiles- I guess longer sight range- I'm beginning to doubt your ownership of the technical manuals because in plain lettering by the original Zaku in the 08th MS team tech. book and the Original MSGundam tech. book it says the maximum detection range of radar and active sensors is well over 35km. Add a satellite linkup and you've got basically an infinite range of detection, and besides, any more than 35km and it doesn't make much a difference anyway since that's more than enough time to launch an AntiAirMissile/AntiMissileMissile (I forgot the technical acronym). carry more weapons- NO FRIGGIN WAY. carry more ammunition for the weapons- Not a chance in hell. carry "better" weapons- What the heck are you saying????? ONE, just ONE beam cannon shot could easily decimate an F-14, armor and all. It would take at least two sidewinder missiles to do significant damage to an MS. (just so you know, the art work books are different from teh technical manuals, and *I* am notting talking about an MS using Minovsky particles since I know they're not widely used in the MS world) And as I've said before, the mobility/maneuverability of an MS is such to the point that unless you fire a QAAM (Quick Maneuver Air-to-Air Missile) then you wouldn't stand a chance of hitting it unless you use a sheer barrage of missiles in such quantity that no plan could launch fast enough (none of the powerful enough missiles at least), and even if it could, it could still shoot them down. (I have the Jane's Almanacs and Encyclopedias from 1988 to current (my dad is a retired Navy Captain)) I must agree with you that the F-22 Raptor would stand a much better chance than the F-14 or the Navy's F-18s. The stealth ability combined with it's increased mobility and turning would be much more useful against a gundam than the F-14's loadout. Although the F-22s small payload might be its downfall in that fight if it goes on,(although depending on the pilot it may just run out of fuel before it runs out of firepower).
Beware the quiet people,
You don't know their intentions
(small signatures are sooo much cooler since they don't annoy people trying to read through posts!) |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by desertranger
on 2006-01-20 06:35:29 (edited 2006-01-20 08:28:45)
|
|
Nice to see this is still going. I'm also an engineer been one for over 25 years. I also flew in the AF as well as fly te 2 top rated flightsims out thee, XPlane and Falcon4 with upgrades. Let me state unequivocally: A Gundam dies under the firepower of a stock F-14D. Still let me put a a ground crew to work on my plane and see what I can do. *calls over his crew chief* a man wearing a brown shirt. Yessir, well see what we can do. *A colorfully garbed 20 man ground crew apears" Click for a guide to jersey colors Plane handlers move the F-14 to the hangar deck as ordis disarm our Tomcat, "The Lady Rin" *8 hours later* The titanium skin has been plated in gold and polished with McGuire’s motorcycle and chrome polish, don't look the reflected sunlight could damage your eyes. The purpose to; reflect the energy and radiation from Gundam particle beam weapons. this works in the real world against the current particle beams weapons in use by the USAF. The short range AIM-7s and 9s have been removed and replaced with 8 AIM-54G Phoenix each armed with a 2.5KT tactical fusion warhead. the TacNuke warhead has always been a feature of the AIM-54. Still have 2 hard point left and I have a few thousand pounds of gross weight left. Let's add HellFire missiles and tie them into the F-14s FLIR/laser targeting system. Put them on a DER double Ejection Rack, cant use a triple, now at max takeoff weight even from a runway. The standard 20mm gatling gun ammunition has been replaced with depleted uranium ammunition and the same powder load used in the A-10 warthog. Higher velocity, more weight and armor piercing, this stuff will go through 2in/5cm of high tensile steel armor plate. A new version is coming out with a small rocket engine in each round. Still in development, not available. Use JP7 fuel instead of JP4, hotter burning=more thrust=higher acceleration and higher top speed. Don't need to change the fire control system, it can still see a Gundam at 200nm/~120km and I don't need it anyway with Aegis/AgSat system. There is also a missile available for the F-15 that is an Air-Space LEO SatKiller. However we don't have any and they don't fit an F-14s rack.    Some people go overboard in Flite sims. This is an older photo The pit has been  upgraded since with more controls and a much larger monitor. Now want a 32in wide screen Of course those are actual screenshots.  |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-20 08:10:18 |
|
This is getting old. I have already stated my case, laid down the facts, I have a bar to run, so I'm gettin out of this. Believe what you want, but I proved to you an f-14 or any other plane has a snowball's chance in hell of winning against an ms. I'm gone, I've got a bar to run. |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-20 17:05:50 |
|
Ok, You can doubt my owning all you want, I own them and I don't care weather you belive me or not. As far as the 35KM sensor range goes, unless you suck at metric conversions the range of the zaku's sensors is only 2900m = 2.9km. Tell exactly were you got 35km and I'll belive you. Your precious ms carry a cannon, a machine gun, possibly a beam rifle, rockets/missles (not a lot), some sort of close weapon, or some other special weapon. 8 TacNukes is just a little bit more weapon power, just a tad. I'm not comparing them, I'm just saying I own it. Just like the histroical books, they contain very little specs on anything, they just describe the history of that military branch. Just for the record, I could take out a gundam with a screw driver or a knife. Just stick it in the magazine of a beam rifle or convetional launcher of any type and boom no more gundam. Or at the least no more arm. I may die in the process and you could do it to a f-14 too, but still every giant has a weakness. |
|
Re: Yes, it has been dug up again, New Poll: MS v F-14
Link |
by
on 2006-01-20 19:21:30 (edited 2006-01-20 19:22:29)
|
|
2900m is the PASSIVE sensor range of the Zaku. The ACTIVE sensor range (which combines radar, and even satellite linkup if available) is 35km. This is according to the Mobile Suit Gundam the 08th MS team Technical manual. Yes, I know how to convert metrics. I'd appreciate it if people didn't use personally directed offensive remarks. My other point with the weapons was 1) it can carry a more diverse assortment, and 2) it can carry more of each type. Plus if you want to talk about nuclear missiles, you can put the same ones on a mobile suit too if you needed to. I can almost guaruntee you could get a few to fire from at least one of the different types of missile launcher attachments for MSs. But that's beside the point. My main point of that is EVERY weapon an MS carries is more than capable of doing enough damage to OBLITERATE nearly ANY type of plane, whereas (although there are a number) not all the weapons are capable of heavily damaging an MS let alone destroying one. I totally understand what you guys have said for about the last 18 times about the nukes and stuff, but apparently you guys haven't understood that it doesn't matter how powerful a missile is if 1) it's destroyed prematurely by an AMS or high spread beam shot,etc. from an MSs weapons or 2) if it can't HIT the MS because of its incedible range of mobility and incredible capabilities to turn on a dime, as I've said for 10 posts which apparently still hasn't sunk in. The hellfire missiles might stand a chance of hitting by the sheer numbers that can be fired in quick succession, but I doubt you can say the same about a tac-nuke. As for the better fuel/better ammunition, it still won't help much more, since the F-14 already has the speed advantage (which as I've said many times before, doesn't make *much* of difference considering other factors) Now as for the reflective armor you mentioned ranger, honestly I don't know much about that or the supposed "particle beam weapons" the government has tested on them, but recalling what I've learned from my science classes, a mirror (I think that's the most reflective surface possible) only reflects 95% of the light that hits it. Now as you might already know, even a mirror can be destroyed by a laser if it's given enough power on a small point since the remaining 5% is absorbed by the surface of the mirror. I think you might also agree with me in saying that whatever "particle beam weapons" the government has been using for these tests aren't anywhere near the power of one weilded by a 62foot giant mech from at least 50 years in the future. And with that train of thought I think you might agree that an MSs beam weapons would still pack more than enough punch. (I'm saying this from the limited knowledge I've presented here, and so I do not know if there are other factors involved with this armor you mentioned. I'm only guessing you might agree assuming the facts I just presented are the only factors involved in this case, if not, then I apologize for my assumption. Regardless, I would be appreciative if you could give a little more information regarding the science behind this armor you mentioned. I haven't heard much about it before. Thank you.) On a slightly less related note, I've been working on a short video covering the main points so far in out debates (it's sort of an AMV (actually more like an AV), although it's just for fun,and not all the points are necessarily valid, considering some of the points in it are situational, like the Minovsky particle generators for example). I'll post a link to it once I've finished it. It's somewhat funny too, so I think even you F-14 supporters would at least be amused by it or get a good laugh.
Beware the quiet people,
You don't know their intentions
(small signatures are sooo much cooler since they don't annoy people trying to read through posts!) |