The Silent Eagle might actually see the light of day. Would be nice if the deal went through.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/israel-requests-extra-squadron-of-f-15s-418487/
>>27778970
Israel is not going to get aircraft that are not even in production as part of the Iran deal.
>>27778970
this is sad, even the jews themselves are not buying the very plane that they were pushing, the F35, that just tells you how big of a shit it is
gtfo boeing, your shit costs more than an F-35
>>27779845
Are you retarded?
>Other systems being requested by Israel in order to maintain its operational edge include Bell Boeing V-22 tiltrotors, Boeing KC-46A tankers, additional Lockheed Martin F-35s and bunker-busting bombs that have until now not been exported by the USA.
>>27779940
>Boeing KC-46A tankers
RIP Israel AF
>>27779867
It's still a big, complex aircraft and prices aren't going to come down just because a gorillion F35s are being produced
>Selling Israel anything anywhere near cutting-edge
Silent Eagle sounds good.
>>27779974
Thats exactly what happens, actually.
Like, precisely the exact mechanism that drives unit cost down, and has done so already by more than 50%.
>>27779983
That was worded badly, I mean the F15 can't really be discounted, which makes it less and less desirable as the F35 price drops and it becomes more capable.
>>27778970
>US make a diplomatic move that Israel doesn't like
>Immedialty request a "compensation package"
Nice congress you got there
>>27780025
Reminder that most presidential candidates want to increase aid
>>27780025
>pay Israel off so they will shut up about the Iran deal
Be quiet, adults are speaking.
>>27780043
Good luck with that.
>>27780048
>caring about Israel opening its mouth
Makes little to no sense, they're getting F35s,
In an alternate universe where it was the US that lost the Cold War and canceled the F-22/35 completely this thing would be made instead of the T-50 D:
>>27780080
>unintentionally admitting the T-50 is shit
>>27779940
are you the one that's actually retarded?
read the list of countries that has the "first rights" to buy them and the jew land is on the list, even their flag was printed on the F35 PR plane during the PR shoot
>>27780043
Why would they not? Israel has a nuclear triad, ABM tech, and is in striking distance of Europe, Asia, and Africa. Whoever has access to that wins the global equation. It's literally one of the most strategic locations on this planet.
>>27780068
They're all pissy that they're not getting a full tech transfer. Coupled with the Iran deal, they're asking for all this equipment as "compensation."
>>27781737
Then what is your point? You said earlier that they won't buy it, which is wrong, and now you are saying they will?
>>27779845
>>27779940
>>27781737
>>27781903
Israel is definitely buying the F-35. They just want an interceptor to go along with it. They wanted to buy the F-22, but Congress wouldn't let them. The F-15SE is probably the next best thing.
Remember that the F-35 is primarily a strike aircraft. It can perform air defense, but that's not the focus of its design.
>>27781796
>Whoever has access to that wins the global equation.
jew, pls.
>>27781991
>Y-you dirty J-j-jew!
>>27782036
Well, its just nobody could be so stupid as to think that Israel is some magical force projection location
When Germany acts just fine in this regard along with the UK for Europe, as there is a reason the US pays for 11 CBGs.
>>27782119
Perhaps I was being somewhat hyperbolic, but you're a fool if you don't see the use in having Israel as an ally. You describe the picture of our world, East against West. Europe on one side, the Pacific on the other, with China and Russia sandwiched between. When you introduce Israeli airbases, protected by its own nuclear triad and ABM systems, the ability to strike at Russia and China from the south as well is an axe in the hole that can't be ignored.
If you don't see how this works, nothing can be done for you.
>>27781932
so wouldn't they be interested in an air superiority fighter instead of an interceptor along with the F-35?
>>27782371
>air superiority fighter
>interceptor
There isn't any significant difference nowadays unless you're talking about fighters like the MiG-31.
>>27782416
well air superiority fighters defend airborne strategic assets from other fighters, an interceptor is specifically built to intercept high speed/altitude reconnaissance planes or bombers. I know there hasn't been much use for interceptors since ICBMs started to replace strategic bombers but the nomenclature shouldn't be confused with fighters of completely different roles.
>>27782490
Modern air superiority fighters basically fulfill the air defense role of interceptors in addition to maintaining air superiority over enemy air space. Thanks to their flexibility, they can handle both roles. F-15s and F-16s have been intercepting Russian bombers practically since they were first introduced.
>>27782229
>Backpedaling from "literally one of the most strategic locations on this planet." to "useful"
yeah, okay kid.
Can't strike Russia from Germany at all, nevermind the fact that it is closer to all its major capitals and military bases
Can't strike China from the floating aircraft Carrier known as Japan, no fuck it we're going to fly 6,970km+ from Israel to actual useful locations in China rather than the ~2000km from Tokyo.
HURRRRRR
>>27782490
>air superiority fighters defend airborne strategic assets from other fighters
Russia uses Foxhounds to escort strategic bombers because of their high speed and long range. Does that make the MiG-31 an air superiority fighter?
My point is that the difference is largely semantic nowadays. Back when you had planes like the F-104, there was a pretty clear distinction between interceptors and other types of fighter aircraft. Now, the difference is largely semantic.
>>27782546
>does that make it an air superiority fighter
That just means Russia is poor.
>>27782546
You've been sperging out about this for two weeks straight.
Go outside you fucking turbo austist.
>>27782586
No doubt, but the point still stands. In the modern world, most fighters are multirole enough that can fill the role of an interceptor without being explicitly designed as one, and vice versa. If Israel is planning to use the F-15SE primarily for air defense, then for them, it is an interceptor. The distinction isn't important enough to be worth arguing about it. I'm not sure why it makes people so upset.
>>27782610
There is no difference between "fighter" and "interceptor" at all. It's a meaningless distinction. The terms are interchangeable.
>>27782635
well then should they not be designated as multi roll fighters then? and leave the terming of an interceptor for referring to the jets specifically designed to intercept strategic bombers and recon planes?if a multi roll fighter is used as a designated interceptor it doesn't make it any more an interceptor and any less a multi roll.
>>27782964
Honestly, why does it matter?
>Interceptor: plane designed to shoot down other planes.
>Fighter: plane designed to shoot down other planes.
There is so much convergence between the two terms that I don't see the point in trying to classify between one or the other.
>>27782921
>>27783037
Fighter is a generic term for small combat aircraft, interceptor is a specific mission profile.
>>27783037
it matters because it will cause confusion between designated multirole fighters and previous exclusively interceptor and exclusively air superiority fighters. missiles go boom just like rockets but you can't take down a plane with a bomb,clips hold rounds just like a magazine, why make a distinction? terminology matters.
>>27782541
You're both tip toeing around the fact that Israel, as much of a tempermental bitch as they are, are our only solid foot in the door to the middle east that we have left. That is, excluding the asskissers we are to gain the Saudi's "support".
>>27783275
I agree, except that it leads to stupid arguments about what is an interceptor and what isn't. I once tried to make a detailed list of different types of aircraft in excel but I found it almost impossible to distinguish between interceptors and air superiority fighters in any coherent, objective way.
>>27783321
well you don't have to with modern fighters, because like you said, they are becoming more and more multirole and mission profiles converge allot more. but where you can send one plane as an interceptor and the same one as an air superiority fighter, you could't do that 50 years ago, you built planes which could quickly take down strategic bombers by strapping as much thrust and fuel to it as possible, whereas an air superiority fighter was built to be more agile and such (stupid dumbing down I know).
>>27783321
you are mixing up mission profiles with plane designation. you can tell the pilot of a hawker hunter to intercept a bomber all you like, he wont get there in time and the mission doesn't make the fighter anymore an interceptor than the electric lightning is a fighter bomber
>>27783604
>>27783671
I get what you're saying, but it just isn't worth it to go down that road. It's just much easier to accept that "fighter" and "interceptor" are nearly interchangeable terms.
>>27783671
>doesn't make the fighter anymore an interceptor than the electric lightning is a fighter bomber
But it was a fighter bomber.
>>27783317
>That is, excluding the asskissers we are to gain the Saudi's "support".
As opposed to Israel's "support", which is bought through billions of dollars? The people that sold US technology to the Chinese?
Who gives a shit about a foothold in the middle east? It can always be regained within a few days from Cyprus, Germany, or anywhere in Europe. Its a shithole.
>>27783722
Reminds me of the Jaguar
>>27778970
this reads like a game of sid meier's civilization
>>27780000
The wonders of building a 70's airframe, now with the extra cost of layering RCS reducing elements over a distinctly chunky 4th gen plane.
>Silent Eagle
Looks like an F-15 with FAST packs stuck permanently onto it. What else is different?
>>27786019
Internal weapon bays, RAM coating and a couple other changes that they probably don't want to be sharing with the world. My understanding is that it has absolutely no advantage to the F-35, thus the lack of buyers. More expensive, less versatile, smaller internal bays, larger RCS and it's still an F-15 in 2015.
>>27781737
Love Dilbert
>>27781932
>They wanted to buy the F-22, but Congress wouldn't let them.
This is why I only ironically buy into the whole "Jews control the world" shit.
>>27786083
There's also the fact that in order to put in those internal bays, they had to take out he conformal fuel tanks, so the Silent Eagle has even less range than a regular Strike Eagle
>>27783317
>Israel only solid foot in the ME
What about Jordan? UAE? Qatar?
