Why do foreigners cling to the fantasy that dogfighting still happens? All air combat is done with missiles now.
why do you spend so much money making plane to bomb muslim wedding in al'awsat?
>>72264034
Because of Tom Cruise
>>72264034
Tell that to the Phantom pilots over Vietnam.
![closeup1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/6cdlV3d.jpg "closeup1[1].jpg")
Eurofighter Typhoon says hi
You see in joint excercises the typhoons manage to close in on F22 raptors and once in close quarters the typhoons BTFO them
pic is proof
>>72264567
Those same raptors that had radar magnifying devices so the Typhoon could even see it?
The same typhoon that had a procurement process more fucked up than the F-35?
The same typhoon that STILL can't do A2G?
>>72264319
>>72264319
>Vietnam
That was like 100 years ago, right?
>>72264034
Lasers when?
>>72264837
Now, adjust for AIM-7 kills @ BVR.
>>72265238
Why?
>>72264034
because they are stupid, it may be over budget behind schedule, but there is nothing that beats that aircraft.
>>72264034
>Why do foreigners cling to the fantasy that dogfighting still happens? All air combat is done with missiles now.
And that is EXACTLY why the F-35 is the wrong plane for the wrong time with the wrong price tag.
What America needs is a cheap plane with cheap operating costs with expensive, highly sophisticated long distance missiles.
Essentially a cheap variety of the F-16 and F-18.
>>72265101
Yes all the Fokkers and Spads were commonly using just missiles over Vietnam in 1916.
>>72265474
>because they are stupid, it may be over budget behind schedule, but there is nothing that beats that aircraft.
Except for every single sophisticated long-range missile.
https://warisboring.com/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd#.8kiu4uvrc
Can the F-35 really engage, shoot and kill its enemy from long distances? There are reasons to believe it can’t. The stealth fighter lacks the sensors, weapons and speed that allow a warplane to reliably detect and shoot down other planes in combat. Especially when those planes are shooting back.
In short—the F-35 isn’t much of a dogfighter. And it’s probably not very good at long-range aerial combat, either.
>>72264202
Because its fucking hilarious for nikah guests to run around on fire and the groom's long awaited shot at some sex goes up in flames
>>72264837
ATOLL missile was GOAT as well alot of Vietnamese aces got their kills using them.
>>72265238
Because the only real argument people use for the F-35 is its ability to win at BVR.
Once it's merged it doesn't matter much if the missile is BVR capable or not-- it matters that the F-35 can outmaneuver its opponent to allow itself an opportunity for a missile shot.
The Vietnam BVR missile kill rate is atrocious. I'm sure things have improved since the Vietnam era sparrow, but certainly not to the point where you can assume every engagement with the F35 [or even most of them] will not ultimately result in a merge.
>>72265433
see
>>72265761
Derp.
>>72265509
You don't understand the future of combat. Think each F-35 controlling a fleet of drones as though the drones were a active combat component of the F-35. The F-35 is more than a fighter/bomber/interceptor.
>>72264319
>Afghanistan has a modern air force supported by the USSR
While maneuverability is still vital for air superiority fighters the need to have the most advanced air superiority fighter is nonexistent. All we need to be able to do is shoot down the Syrian or Iraqi or Iranian air force, you don't need a $150 million stealth air superiority fighter for that.
Its a lot like tanks, the US, Germany, and even Switzerland have all managed to put 140 mm guns onto testbed Abrams and Leopard 2 variants, the thing is that we have no need for those big guns. Without the USSR we just need to defeat 40 year old tanks and planes.
>>72265704
>https://warisboring.com/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd#.8kiu4uvrc
>War is boring
Great source, totally unbiased.
>While the specific details remain secret, Kopp estimates the APG-81 can detect an aircraft with a radar cross-section of three square meters—a MiG-29, for example—just over 100 miles away. Russian radar-maker Tikhomirov claims the Su-35’s Irbis-E can spot a similar-size target at greater than twice that distance.
this is great stuff.
>>72265917
>Think each F-35 controlling a fleet of drones as though the drones were a active combat component of the F-35.
And why should I "think" such BS non-existing stupid Lookheed propaganda?
You don't control drones via the F-35, there are various other ways to control them. Not to mention that the next gen of air tech drones will be partially and then fully autonomous with mission objectives and creative thinking and no one to directly control them.
>>72265761
But the F-35 has an amazing instant turn rate, and doesn't actually need to get nose on, or even close, to fire an AIM-9X.
>>72264034
Holy shit that's like 30 pounds of bondo
>>72266172
>this is great stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8K0sW8GX-4
>>72266217
Before we have a complete take over of AI, the man in the middle is vital component. The drones are simply a weapon under the control of the man in the middle, the F-35 pilot.
>iBomb Pro, Retina Display
>includes the Ogulus Rip augmented reality helmet
>>72266327
A last ditch maneuver that puts you squarely in the category of 'completely fucked' if your opponent is competent in the least is not something I'd call amazing.
I am glad to see the AIM9 catching up to the R73, but it's odd they'd put so much time into an old missile like the sidewinder right as the age of the dogfight is at its absolute end, isn't it?
>>72264034
Overpriced, overly complex, delayed toy for Pentagon. Not to mention good cover for black projects. F-35 fundamental flaw is that they tried to develop all-around plane, it fails miserably in that field. In the long term and with indefinite resources as always the project is salvageable. Honestly a huge dissapointment.
>>72264034
Air Combat is not about missiles, the future lies with drones.
Remote fighters will be the norm soon
There's always a need for fighter jets.
>>72266458
KEK
>>72266746
>will sometime crash so you need to restart it
>in combat
>>72264034
The F-35s worst enemy isn´t even another plane, its the S3-400.
>>72267021
>Honestly a huge dissapointment.
This. What a disgusting waste of taxpayer dollars. Training up to fight the goddamn Soviets in 2016.
>>72264034
Doesn't matter, it literally cost a trillion dollars. It could have been a lot cheaper.
>>72267003
AIM-9X is a BVR weapon at this point, as the AMRAAM becomes less medium range and more long range, the AIM-9X moves out to medium range.
>>72267588
>>72265761
The F-35 can lock onto and fire a missile at a jet regardless of where it is, including behind it.
So maneuverability isn't that big of a deal no
Frankly every pilot from around the world thinks the thing is revolutionary, I don't understand why people who will never even lay eyes on one in real like tries to act like its bad.
>>72267690
I don't think a weapon that can reach out and touch you at 30km is strictly a dogfighting weapon.
>>72267921
I don't think an AIM9 has ever touched anyone at 30km.
>>72265706
t.Edgelord
Anybody got good reading material to understand American planes, and their history?
>>72264034
i agree, as a 5th generation fighter the F-35 is designed to be an important gear in the whole networked digital battlefield. It don't need to dogfight if it can see you from miles away and blow you out of the sky with a missile.
Actually, OP, you're wrong. But that never stopped anyone on 4chan from spouting off before.
Fighter jets are the first line of air defense. You can't just shoot a missile at anything that violates your perimeter - unless you're Russia of course.
We need fighter jets, and we need them to be superior to everyone else's fighter jets.
Think of fighter jets as beat cops of the sky. Normally the police don't send in the SWAT team to manage a situation immediately. If they get a call about some domestic violence or something, first they're going to send a couple of uniforms around to check it out.
If those uniforms then discover a hostage situation, you're gonna get more beat cops, some detectives, maybe a hostage negotiator. If the situation escalates, then you get the SWAT team. Or if the thing REALLY escalates, you get the Feds with what basically equals a domestic armored tank division.
tl;dr - STFU OP
>>72267728
Once you ignore the reports of pilots that say anything negative about it, including the notion that it's at a constant energy disadvantage, you're right. Every pilot in the world thinks its revolutionary.
Two Circle Fight w/ Countermeasures claimed, but no countermeasures visible.
>>72264034
That like saying why do we teach soldiers hand to hand combat is done with guns
>>72268192
>i agree, as a 5th generation fighter the F-35 is designed to be an important gear in the whole networked digital battlefield.
America uses the freaking OV-10 Bronco introduced in 1969 as a turboprop attack aircraft against ISIS. Why? Because it is what is needed.
The F-35 can never replace the BRRRRTTTT or the OV-10. It is a flying laptop. Too expensive to handle, to shitty to fly and ISIS is laughing themselves to oblivion when the F-35 has to call 17 generals to do some super guided missile firing which can be diverted by a few electric specialists jamming its electronics packaged powered by Windows 10.
>>72268410
Post them?
>>72268023
AIM-9X will, at altitude and speed.
also dumping webums
>>72264034
>Why do foreigners cling to the fantasy that dogfighting still happens?
Watching Top Gun over, and over, and over again.
>>72268637
>>72268700
>>72268499
all these memes how will the F-35 compensate
>>72268499
Not for ISIS for sure. This baby is for the Chinese and Russian air forces. Frankly, we are decades further then the Russians, and of course the Chinese are just copy cats.
>>72268581
Yeah, and the AIM-120 can hit at 120km, and the AIM-54 at 180... in theory.
That doesn't mean they do in practice.
Can the seeker of an AIM-9 even lock targets at 30km?
>>72268543
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=f-35+energy+disadvantage
>>72268855
>This baby is for the Chinese and Russian air forces.
Ahmmm, why would there ever be a fight against China (America is China's export bitch) or Russia (America is Russia's chicken export bitch).
>>72264034
>Thinking dogfighting is only with guns
It's a dogfight when it is within visual range. That includes missiles.
The thing is, BVR has yet to happen. Every time we think BVR is the way of the future it seems that missiles aren't as deadly as we thought they were. Even the much vaunted AIM-120 has had a pretty shitty record in BVR combat.
Now the question is if this is because radar seekers are a bit meh and so IR seekers on BVR are a good way to go? Or is it because the missiles run out of thrust and need to rely on kinetic energy only?
We don't know. Not enough BVR combat takes place to take notes. But enough has happened to showcase that it is not something one should rely on.
The Russian approach has been rather pragmatic in that regard. Carry a lot of missiles so you increase your chance of a kill by shooting in salvos. But have the plane able to actually fight up close.
>>72264034
>All air combat is done with missiles now
51%, mebbe.
Still, the US has missed out on not having mobile missile trailers like Russia, China and even Best Korea. Esp. since Wyoming's missle complex is starting to decay @ Detroit-type levels [source:60 minutes/ CBS]
>>72268499
Actually, it is testing two "OV-10 broncos" and considering producing them as cheap CAS with a long loiter time.
I use quotation marks because these aren't just OV-10 broncos brought out of mothballs, they were made from scratch only a few years ago and fitted with a lot of tech.
Bitchin planes tho
>to shitty to fly
The F-35 flies great though thanks to its lifting body design.
> super guided missile firing which can be diverted by a few electric specialists jamming its electronics packaged powered by Windows 10.
you play too many video games
Hey, faggots what are some books on military airplanes, where do read this stuff?
>>72268865
>“The F-35 was at a distinct energy disadvantage,” the unnamed pilot wrote in a scathing five-page brief that War Is Boring has obtained. The brief is unclassified but is labeled “for official use only.”
>unnamed pilot
>Literally no sources cited
oh yeah this is real
Meanwhile all the Scandinavian pilots think its the best shit ever.
>>72269033
our economy is based on having the most dominant force out there. That is why we spend so much of our GDP on military.
fuck your piece of shit.
>>72269351
TR series of space craft is best series of space craft.
>>72266700
why. what possible reason could you have to distract the pilot with a task some fuck back on the base/aircraft carrier could do.
>>72268637
Why is the tail of the drome blurred out at the end? Is there something top secret on it?
>>72269574
>>72269332
Kinda want to see aftemach of that webm
>>72269738
They are the flares, as to why I don't know.
>>72269845
That's a pretty fucking classy rig right there. You should see this shit we have in Bombardier.
>>72264034
MFW your fighting wrong if you can see the enemy plane at any point in time, even when the missile detonates
>>72269351
I want to believe
Its been a bit of work but I feel I am coming close to accomplishing my purely human non backwards engineered craft.
>It would look extraterrestrial to all of you and be classified by airforce as ExtraTerrestrial too since its not Government Craft.
But its being pieced together in a Garage on Earth.
>>72264034
Why are we putting pilots in there when the same enemies who can't counteract stealth (shadow radar systems etc) can't counteract UAVs either.
Ground based jamming is ineffective against UAVs with well designed directive antennas pointing at a skyward satellite ...
It's not like we need the low latency control to dogfight right?
>>72269332
What kind of bomb is that it just penetrates but doesn't explode much
>>72270245
It exists, the propulsion/power generation was solved in the 50s/60s
>>72269351
Nice shoop.
That landing gear belongs to the F-117 though.
>>72270395
one filled with cement
just a training dummy
>>72270414
I have worked out the power generation and am on the cusp of rigging the propulsion and tying it into Navigation.
>>72270658
tying it into navigation still eludes me.
>>72270658
>I have worked out the power generation
Oh do tell my Australian friend.
Who here actually /aerospace/ industry?
otherwise just an [REDACTED FOR REASONS] emitting hull.
Why arent we funding this?
>>72270820
I work in a related field.
>>72270395
Maybe it was a dud? Or simply the kinetic energy is enough to take out tank without a warhead? Latter seems improbable to me though.
>>72270791
f=1/t
>>72270866
because we are funding this
>>72269738
Possibility of there being an IR laser on the drone trying to blind the seekerhead.
>>72267003
Nose-pointing is how the F-18 dogfights. Do you even know what a one-circle or two-circle fight is?
>>72265761
>
Retard spouting shit they saw on History channel. Navy F-4s had a much higher K:D than USAF F-4s... yet Navy F-4s were NEVER given a gun. They just learned how to employ their system better.
Do you oft have discourse with other species?
Or are you still fighting in the under ground tunnel networks?
>>72267728
>posting a test where the other guy wasn't even shooting back
>>72269630
It won't be the responsibility of a fighter pilot, you're right, but it will be the responsibility of a host aircraft during any force projection missions, as opposed to defensive missions, in order to reduce latency.
>>72271079
Alright, so what are you doing then, what are you using and how are you applying it?
>>72269332
>Meanwhile all the Scandinavian pilots think its the best shit ever.
Except the Swedes, or the Finns. Neither of which are buying the F-35.
>>72271416
Norwegians and dutch > finns and swedes when it comes to war anon.
>>72271416
Ahh, Aruba. The most irrelevant colony in the most irrelevant place on earth. Funny you should talk shit, my guy.
>>72269982
Wanna know the hilarious thing? The F-35 took so long to produce that those sensors are already outdated. The latest sensor pods offer higher resolution images and have low power lasers for target confirmation with friendlies. They also have the possibility of sharing data with other aircraft or troops on the ground.
Still not as bad as the F-22 taking so long to build that Intel actually stopped making the chips that were needed for it's computers. So the USAF bought the last batches so they'd have spares.
>>72264034
My uncle designed the f-35.
>>72268768
What is supposed to be so impressive about this? It's not flying. It's falling.
With style.
>>72271675
>They also have the possibility of sharing data with other aircraft or troops on the ground.
you mean that thing it does already
>>72271728
It's impressive because it is controllable at those low airspeeds without even needing thrust vectoring.
>>72271716
Tell him he's a cunt.
>>72271594
>Dutch
>Scandinavia
Kek
Stay dumb burger
>>72270866
who the fuck designed that, it looks retarded.
>>72271323
Closed system, Mobile Home Style and not sure if I should use fibre optics or zinc copper, Probably both I am still experimenting to be honest getting the required things to put it together.
Are you guys still using Mercury? If so I kinda moved past it.
>Too dangerous although the biproduct alone would be worth it ;) not that I would really need it after all.
I intend to live in it.
>>72271922
>>72271922
RARE
A
R
E
>>72270993
Training bombs don't explode.
>>72271995
>Are you guys still using Mercury?
For what?
You still havent said a single thing to make me think you arent schizophrenic.
>>72271922
RARE AS FUCK
>>72271716
Cool. Mine works for Nintendo.
>>72271807
>you mean that thing it does already
That's radar data, and it can only work between two planes currently, not more. They are working on the code.
I'm talking about IR sensors. The F-35 doesn't have the capability of sharing that data because that wasn't even something people thought about back when it first got designed. And since it's a closed architecture design, they can't just change the sensors because the F-35 has limited processing power, cooling power and power generation in general.
>>72271922
Unless its the UK, Russia, Germany, or france, the rest of Europe really kind of blends together for me
CBA
Point is, sweden not buying it is proof enough that its good.
>>72272155
why because I don't use dinosaur juice?
Its using Controlled Gravity.
>Mercury : for a high rpm spin and electrolysis into plasma.
Dogfighting would probably happen in a war against two large powers.
>>72272416
>he doesnt know what the mercury isotope is used for
It is used primary for density actually. Unless you have liquid helium though you are out of luck with your plans for your homemade gravity wave generator.
that'll be a poignant thought for you to have had once eastern europe goes hot and an f-35 pilot first gets to witness (through his instruments) a sukhoi outmaneuvering a BVR missile before needing to eject once it lights him up, head-on.
only time will tell, though.
>>72272333
Germany and France aint buying it either.
Notice how the only people buying it are the nations that got deals to produce parts for it.
It's almost like the only reason why it gets bought is because it creates jobs or something.
Not one nation has yet to buy the F-35 and not get a production contract for some part for it. It's the ultimate shill plane.
>>72271881
Hilariously his life sucks, he married his first girlfriend who turned into a total fat bitch and had a kid with her and his life sucks but he spends most of his free time going on cross country backpacking trips. Hes one of those dumb geniuses, but i did ask him about the f-35 and he said it was designed to be a stealth recon plane. I hope that settles this.
>>72264567
>/pol/ follows theaviationist.com
Noice
>>72272203
Cool dude tell him pls stop pandering to 5-10 year olds
>>72272731
No they just bought the boondoggle that is the Eurofighter
Or in france's case the Rafale, which gets beaten by 50 year old american planes
>>72264034
Are we still buying a hundred of these? Our current jets are ancient and the F35 keeps getting delayed.
>>72272543
you can use a TT in a vaccume instead of helium can even magneticallly bear it.
The Density I am doing another way which I won't mention here because you guys probably still have it as top secret, The other stuff is well known by now and I know you know what I mean by TT The Man should be one of your Idols after all then again you guys are far more advanced than the public remember I am doing this on my own I don't have a fancy lab or research teams I am doing it out of pocket on my time.
>>72272883
>>72264567
You're really dumb if you think raptors lose on even terms. They routinely train 4-ship vs 30-40 aircraft, running out of missiles and just doing guns and tactics against the rest. They do 30-40 aircraft by having 20 or so and having "respawn airfields" where a jet will go to, turn around, and get back in the fight. The raptors usually win.
It's pretty fucking gay to have fake kills painted on a jet, btw. People make fun of that.
>>72273045
>Ignoring the entire point.
Keep shilling LockMart
USN pilot here, I won't comment on the F-35 beyond my preference for the F-22 over the F-35. I don't like over complicated aircraft and the supposed new age of air warfare is boring. All of these fancy gadgets and yet US Army A-10 is sufficient for blowing up brown people.
>>72273324
I prefer Northropp grumman desu, but the F-35 is pretty great.
Pierre sprey go home
>>72273253
>I know you know what I mean by TT The Man should be one of your Idols
I have no idea what you mean.
>>72273186
The Libs HATE our military. They aren't buying them shit. They'd rather spend billions on chugs and other welfare.
Another big problem is the F-35 isn't a great plane for Canada... and neither are any of the alternatives. Even worse, we haven't the ability to manufacture our own because our aerospace industry was absolutely gutted in the 60s/70s. Almost all of our expertise moved south. We're fucked.
people would crash into shit and make 911 look like a joke...
>>72273045
Can I just say that painting fake kills on a fighter jet is fucking lame? Why is this bullshit allowed?
>>72273434
>US Army A-10
Armchair pilot detected
>>72273486
I don't think the F-35 is shit. I just think it is way too expensive for what it brings to the table.
It should have been 2 projects.
1) A non-stealth STOVL fighter to replace Harrier.
2) A carrier capable stealth optional fighter to be shared between both Air Force and Navy.
They could have shared avionics, landing gear and some major engine components to save costs. But the same airframe, no. That saddled two competing requirements against one another.
But hey that's hindsight for you.
>>72273671
Actually the current things in use are more closely related to the overall geometry of CERN and the like.
>>72273936
The air force doesn't exist.
>>72264034
>the best defense for the modern fighter is to face the enemy
>this goes for both sides
>move towards each other
>doesnt end up in a dogfight
To be expected from that flag.
>>72265917
Lockheed Martin pls go.
>>72273784
>Another big problem is the F-35 isn't a great plane for Canada
I'm tired of Canadians walking into the plane threads and mouthing off about how no plane is good enough for them except MUH ARROW.
The F-35 is more than adequate for what Canada does. And frankly any plane on the market is better than those ancient CF-18's. If it seems like I'm exploding on you, then you're right. I see this on every website. Canadians, who barely have and air force, come in and start talking about how no plane fits their needs. It's outrageous. It's obscene. It's contemptible.
Besides, you're not actually going to buy new planes anyway. Epic Marijuana Dude is going to outlaw planes on the grounds that the jet noise triggers refugees. Look in your heart you know this to be true.
>>72264034
>All air combat is done with missiles now.
So dog-fighting missiles, guided by aborted fetus brains then?
>>72264034
Usaf munitions tech, 12 years exp, worked for every muniton capable airframe in Usaf plus f18 and f14.
The standoff missile and air to air thrust vectoring missle shit is the direction we've been headed. I'll be honest, though, a naval style of combat (like ww2) is the best. Surround a few fully air to air and air to ground capable bombers (yes, load b-series with huge racks of air to air to decimate enemy squadrons) and give them a few squadrons for cover.
Then it's a numbers/countermeasures game.
Until the advent of reliable combat lasers.
>>72274108
Thanks, I really do get the reason for the secrecy honestly.
as I stated in the post people would crash em and forget their throttle and blow up a bunch of shit.
can't underestimate the stupidity of our species, I just need to get out there, Call me a Carpet Bagger if you like but I would love to actually work along side some of the Tech Companies but probably got most of the shit I could suggest already in the works or already done.
>would atleast like friendly relations not for you guys to worry about what I am gunna do with certain "gadgets" I frankly just want to Live in my Mobile Home.
>>72273852
Well if they were done in an exercise and it's clearly noted as one, why the fuss?
>>72274831
If you have an understanding of tensor mathematics, and you should, read the works of Gabriel Kron (only the first editions) and if you can get a hold of them the Paperclip files via FOIA about Ronald Richter.
>>72267329
>S3-400
Wow, who knew?
S-300/400?
>>72274320
>muh arrow
is literally the worst meme jet in history. They'll go on to tell you it was cancelled because of American political reasons when it was really cancelled for being late to the party and riddled with communist spies. Then they'll go on to say they should restart the production line and invest in it when the jet was getting dated when it was in its own age. Retards.
>>72274948
Because usually the kills of inferior aircraft against superior aircraft (ef2000 vs f-22, f-4 vs rafale) is done when the superior aircraft was at a hugely distinct disadvantage.
>>72274320
There are two planes out there on the market that are good for Canada.
One is the F-15 and the other is the Su-30.
Reason being. Canada is fucking huge, but has a very small population located in a small area. They got a lot of airspace to cover for their defence and so they need a plane that is big, carries a lot of fuel and goes very far.
The F-35 is an upgrade over the CF-18 in that regard. But it is still worse than options that already exist.
Same shit goes for the land of shitposters too.
>>72264034
I don't turkey hunt but I still own a shotgun
>>72270993
A tank that gets hit with a 155mm artillery shell is also one that now has a dead crew, whether it penetrates or not. Weapons designed to defeat armour don't do much exploding, at least not in the way an HE would, since most of the explosive potential is there is used to pierce the armour anyway, with the non-shaped charge usually being smaller and only really meant to set off the explodey bits inside the tank anyway. The point of the demo was to show the F-35 being accurate enough to pull that off.
>>72275092
Indeed, Appreciate the Reference, I will have to find a way to repay the kindness.
>>72269332
God I got scared there... Can't stand to see M60-chan get violated from the air.
>>72275183
F-35s have a fucking huge combat radius on internal fuel alone. What the fuck are you on about? If they really need to go across the country to kill bombers, external fuel tanks can be added on. Not like any other fighter will be able to reach it from Russia, so stealth doesn't matter then. And it's not like they need to cover the entire airspace of Canada since like you say, the population is only in a small part of it. Who cares if a bear bomber goes halfway across your country when that half way has literally nothing?
>>72274320
>MUH ARROW
Fuck the arrow. Not only is it 50 years old, it was DOA. Coulda woulda shoulda.
>The F-35 is more than adequate for what Canada does.
For what we do? Yeah. For what we SHOULD be doing? No.
Look the F-35 is a fine bit of technology but it's in the wrong goddamn plane for us.
We need something that can actually fly from one end of the country to the other without stopping, because unlike the US we don't have a million flying gas stations and a dozen carriers.
We need something with big fucking wings and robust landing gear so that it can operate out of shitty improvised airfields up north (the CF-18 is based on the Navy F-18 for a reason). By comparison the F-35 is practically a trailer queen with MUH STOVL that's absolutely useless on any runway that isn't scrubbed with a toothbrush hourly.
We need something with good fucking speed so that it can actually intercept anything moving faster than a weather balloon - Canada is fucking huge and the Ruskies love to come poke at our borders knowing that we can't mount a timely response.
We need something that can operate independently because it's going to be deployed two at a time in the middle of butt-fuck nowhere up north - all this bullshit about being a drone controller/mini-AWAC is fantastic for the US but is Canada ever going to use it? Hell no.
And as for dropping bombs on people in mud huts as a part of a coalition? Just buy a couple Super Hornets. Shit, buy a couple *actual* bomb trucks for that job. Fuck, go tell Bombardier to figure out how to strap bombs and a LANTIRN pod (or whatever) to some of their commercial shit. We fly the wings off our CF-18s because we don't have anything else that can hit the broad side of a barn from that high up.
It's the wrong goddamn plane for us. So is the Gripen, Rafagle, and any of the other shit that's been proposed.
>Besides, you're not actually going to buy new planes anyway.
On this point I agree with you completely. DUDE WEED hates the military.
>>72276184
See my post >>72275896
The F-35 can easily go from one side of your country to the other. Even then, there is no fucking reason it needs to do that. Your population is extremely localized. Just because a Tu-95 crossed the border at a super northern area of the country doesn't mean you need to intercept it right there. There's tons of miles of nothing to give every other jet out there time to kill it. It is probably passing Alaska anyway and being killed by raptors before it has to have Canada do anything anyway.
>>72276658
>your country
Forgot to turn off your proxy?
But honestly the ideas that we should just hand over the north to the Russians because it's not worth defending, and that we should continue to be entirely dependent on Uncle Sam to defend us... just don't sail with me. Despite what /pol/ claims we're not some shithole third-world nation - we should be able to at least mount a reasonable defense of our own territory, even as big as it is.
>>72264034
you aint neighboring like 30 countries who all have similar tech though...
>>72276184
why not custom Order say from Boeing they are the most fuel efficient designers for planes it seems.
>That and its your Neighbors that way it eases tensions and gives both Nations A Long Range Fighter.
Unless Dude Weed is willing to sacrifice his nation for his own ego...
Taking the whole Ghandi make love not war friendly boxing only route.
>>72277277
Canada's just not big enough to really custom order shit. If we go with the F-35 we'd get an F-35A but with the F-35C's refueling probe (since our tankers are all probe + drogue like the US Navy) and the C's tougher landing gear bolted on. Oh and maybe an instruction manual or two in french, if we're lucky.
>>72277129
>Forgot to turn off your proxy?
Nah, I live in Oklahoma but for some reason 4chan gave me a cuck flag. I have to explain this a lot because having a cuck flag destroys your credibility.
For the rest of your post, you aren't giving anything up in the north. It's not like a Tu-95 is bombing blank landscape and saying "THIS IS OURS!" they are going to populated areas and fighting us, with heavy US support. Hell, if anyone is attacking you, it is because they are attacking us. And like I already said, F-35 has an insane range on internal fuel, add some tanks for long range bomber intercepts which you don't need stealth for and you're gold. F-35 is best multi-role around, would be retarded now to get it.
>>72277761
>would be retarded now to get it.
Meant "not* to get it"
>>72266085
Yeah, until we fight it out with Chinese or Russian proxies or perhaps those countries themselves. Go ahead, say it'll never happen senpai.
>>72277737
>>72277761
Well there you go F-35A with some Select C parts and then Retrofit it to suit your needs.
>now its up to Dude Weed.
>>72275896
Bigger than some legacy aircraft yes. But still significantly less than the F-15 which has a combat radius over 1000 nautical, while carrying external stores and that is even without the conformal fuel tanks.
And yes Canada does need the range to defend it's arctic wastes and ocean frontiers. Because you have to protect all of your national airspace. Especially now that air launched cruise missiles are a thing.
However as you mention, stealth isn't really important for Canada because fighters don't have the range to attack you.
Hence the F-15 is your best aircraft to get. It's got a longer range than any other competitor. It carries more missiles than it's competitors too. It has two engines, which is honestly a really nice safety feature for Canadian operations. But best of all. You can buy it right now, for a fraction of the cost of an F-35 and retire your expensive to fly CF-18s.
>>72267728
Not if the enemy deploys flares, turn behind the fat piece of shit and shoot it down with 20mm Vulcan.
>>72277926
It will never Happen due to M.A.D.
> lets make a plane that can hover because surely it wont be easier to shoot down, and the project cost shouldnt be too much
>maneuverable
I don't know what DOD kool-aid you people have been drinking, but the F-35 is a fat plane with tiny wings and poor aerodynamics. The only reason it's even supersonic is due to new engine design.
The navy needs a plane with high payload and good range. The marines need close air support so an efficient plane with a big gas tank. The air force isn't needed by anyone.
The F-35 is a turkey which isn't even stealthy because anti-stealth has already caught up. All the dreams of fighting beyond visual range has been debunked countless times. You can't determine FOF without taking a closer look. Fighting beyond visual range is only going to make MH-117 a daily occurrence. It already happened with TWA Flight 800 but nobody will admit the Navy shot it down by accident.
There is only one thing the F-35 does well and that is fleecing taxpayers around the world of their money for a turkey which has no mission.
>>72278176
All the range figures you're looking at for the F-15 are 3 externals bullshit. That doesn't happen in the real world. F-35 range numbers are on internal only, which is larger than super hornets equipped with drop tanks.
>Because you have to protect all of your national airspace. Especially now that air launched cruise missiles are a thing.
There's nothing stopped enemy bombers from launching cruise missiles from outside of borders. Still, you don't need that huge of range.
>F-15 is your best aircraft to get. It's got a longer range than any other competitor. It carries more missiles than it's competitors too. It has two engines, which is honestly a really nice safety feature for Canadian operations
Sweden has been using single engine for awhile now without any real issue. Fighter-types actually are more reliable statistically with single engine than multi, because multi engine means if one has a problem it is going to kill the other since it is so close to the other.
>>72276184
>Look the F-35 is a fine bit of technology but it's in the wrong goddamn plane for us.
Take a dart-board, write down the names of newish fighters on it, and throw a dart at it. No matter what it lands on, it will still be a huge upgrade. The CF-18 is fucking ancient and it belongs in a Museum. My only explanation for why they haven't crashed yet is because they must not begetting flown much in the first place.
>>72278246
Nukes are no win weapons now, theyre basically money pits of extreme liability and risk
>>72277761
>Nah, I live in Oklahoma but for some reason 4chan gave me a cuck flag. I have to explain this a lot because having a cuck flag destroys your credibility.
Owch.
>you aren't giving anything up in the north
The risk is that once the north west passage really opens up and becomes a major shipping lane, Russia (or the US - since you guys don't believe that it's our internal waters) can come police it at will and we don't get to have a say in what sails through there. And without the ability to even patrol the north regularly, pretty much anyone could come sail in and set up shop without us knowing. It wouldn't be so funny when Tu-95's are landing and refueling up there. What would we do then, attack Russia? This is the kind of shit Putin would do just to prove he could get away with it.
>add some tanks
I don't think external fuel tanks exist for the F-35 yet. Last I heard, Israel was looking at paying some company some insane amount of money to adapt the F-22 pods for the F-35. Regardless, external fuel tanks kill one of the F-35's big selling points of stealth, so if we have to use them regularly why bother with a stealthy plane in the first place?
>>72278110
Dude weed HATES the F-35. One of his election promises was literally "we're not buying it" just because it positioned him directly opposite of his competition (the Conservative party) who basically said "We're buying the F-35 without holding a competition because we like the taste of USA's jizz hitting the back of our throats"
>>72276658
>The F-35 can easily go from one side of your country to the other
Uhm nope. It's not even got enough legs in ferry range to travel straight across country, let alone in a combat configuration. Heck not even the F-15 has the combat radius to do a mission from the south to the north. Canada is fucking huge.
Boeing needs to really get off of it's fat ass and start marketing the F-15 up north.
>>72264319
Vietnam was first gen shit. Shut up.
>>72264034
You see we tried this in Vietnam. It didn't go well. In future of course it will be with drones.
>>72271818
Being controllable at low airspeeds is for stunt pilots and mud movers, being slow in Air to air combat is death.
>>72278514
>F-35 is a fat plane with tiny wings and poor aerodynamics
And has better high-AoA capabilities than almost everything else in the world.
>The navy needs a plane with high payload and good range
Yup, F-35C has better payload and range than another the US Navy has right now. Good point
>The marines need close air support so an efficient plane with a big gas tank
More efficient than their legacy hornets
>The air force isn't needed by anyone.
Tell that to the pilots who are doing 99% of everything in Syria
>he F-35 is a turkey which isn't even stealthy because anti-stealth has already caught up
L-Band radars can't actually launch missiles at F-35s, they can only tell other fighters general locations of jets that are going to kill them.
>All the dreams of fighting beyond visual range has been debunked countless times
Source?
>Fighting beyond visual range is only going to make MH-117 a daily occurrence
That isn't a situation that needs to happen often. BVR is for total war type of situations. Intercepting 1 large aorcraft that has questionable intentions will obviously be done within visual range. Even then, F-35 and F-22 radars can ID the threat from very fucking far away with radar only, F-35 even more accurately because of targeting pod.
>>72278667
exactly and we are learning much more about the dangers of radiation but if such a land is threatened you can bet your ass they will use em.
>Just as you would.
>>72278666
>The CF-18 is fucking ancient and it belongs in a Museum.
Yeah we've spent the last decade talking about how we should be replacing it instead of actually replacing it. And Dude Weed has basically said he's pushing off procurement until at least 2020. Our CF-18s will literally have to start falling out of the fucking sky before we replace them, just like the Sea King scandal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Sea_King_replacement) where it took us over 20 fucking years to replace the things, and only really happened because they started crashing.
>>72264034
>>72278737
The F-35 could fly from Curaco to Jamacia and back on just internal fuel. The F-35 has a 700 mile internal fuel combat radius. (or 600 nautical miles if you prefer that)
>>72269084
RARE FLAG
A
R
E
F
L
A
G
>>72278737
It very much has the ferry range when adding external tanks.
>>72278672
I don't think they are fitted yet but will be. Remember that F-35 is far from FOC. As far as the stealth thing goes, it is a better aircraft with sensors alone than the Rafale or Eurofighter. Stealth is an option that they can use or not. Either way, F-35 is cheaper than Rafale or Eurofighter with better EW and sensors.
>>72278988
Being controllable at low airspeeds means something now because of missiles. Boom and zoom tactics aren't a thing anymore. Nose-pointing is all. 1-circle fight tactics are making even the F-16 obsolete unless it is guns only or they have a helmet mounted sight.
>>72279127
>>72279445
>>72264034
1 is F-35A
2 is JAS-39
3 is EF-2000
4 is Su-35
5 is Rafale
6 is Super Hornet
7 is Silent Eagle
8 is Super Tucano
9 is MiG-35
0 is nothing
Roll to determine what fighter Canada buys
>>72278514
JW what if you could have drones find and confirm signals
>>72279092
I disagree
The reprisal against the civilian population of a nation that uses them would be atrocious. Especially if defeat was guaranteed, and that wouldnt help that governments case and draw condemnation from the international community as well as the civilian population. They are no use weapons, and dangerous ones. Add dictatorships, terrorist groups/rebels, and the black markets...
Proliferation was a bad idea for an exorbitant amount of reasons.
>>72264567
you got your slow moving vehicle sing on upside down.
>>72280189
The thing about nukes is that even if you fire them purely at military targets, you're still going to kill millions of civilians.
>>72280344
Depending on your enemies countermeasures they could your people.
I get what they were thinking back in the day, but making nukes is retarded as fuck
Considering resource expenditure alone.
Money, material, entire units dedicated to every part of the nuclear process..
>>72278608
>There's nothing stopped enemy bombers from launching cruise missiles from outside of borders. Still, you don't need that huge of range.
That's why you need range. So you can intercept them before they get into range to launch their attacks. Why is this so hard to comprehend?
>Sweden has been using single engine for awhile now without any real issue. Fighter-types actually are more reliable statistically with single engine than multi, because multi engine means if one has a problem it is going to kill the other since it is so close to the other.
Considering 99% of flights are in peace time. That is what I focus on when it comes to twin engines giving insurance. The ability to limp a plane back home when you have a problem with 1 of 2 engines, saves a lot of money (no crashed plane). And also tends to make for much happier pilots.
A fair few Harriers, F-16s and the like have been written off due to engine failures in flight. Not much of an issue for the US, but for other nations it is. If the Netherlands for example loses a single F-35 that is 2.7% of their entire fleet gone. And the Netherlands had to reduce their fleet of 87 F-16s down to 37 F-35s due to the cost of the F-35. How is Canada going to fare with it's fleet of 73 CF-18s? They can't afford a 1-to-1 replacement. Are they going to have just 40 F-35s to patrol 3.855 million square miles of land? That is excluding territorial waters and airspace as well mind you.
America can afford to buy insanely expensive shit. But the rest of the world is not America. And they need to weigh cost to capability a lot more.
>>72279058
>has better high-AoA capabilities than almost everything else in the world. etc. etc.
>believing this shit
Next you'll believe the PowerMac G4 is a supercomputer.
We've been through this before, like when German airmen flew Typhoons against the F22 and basically whooped 'em.
As for BIV, how the hell can you determine friend from foe? IFF has been spoofed for decades. There will always be commercial planes in the air. There is no way to know what a plane is, not even it's size or shape, via radar alone. The dream of the useless Air Farce has been to basically eliminate skill so they can dump any flunky in a cockpit and basically treat him like a drone—but it hasn't materialized.
>Tell that to the pilots who are doing 99% of everything in Syria
LOL, you mean bombing Assad's forces? You can't win only by bombing, anyway. The Air Farce has always tired to define their mission as something wholly abstract especially since ICBMs obliterated their previous mission. The last thing they want is to be a support role for ground troops, which is the only thing that matters short of thermonuclear war. They're just a bunch of overgrown boys with expensive toys.
>Even then, F-35 and F-22 radars can ID the threat from very fucking far away with radar only
BUUUUUULSHIIIIIIIIIIIT
>>72279227
Did I talk about my shitty island? No. I talked about fucking Canada. Go stick a pin in Vancouver and draw a 700 mile radius around it. See how lacking it is.
>>72267208
>FPS drops down to 7 when swarmed by too many enemies
>>72280602
It's an absolutely enormous expense, I agree. The upcoming program to replace the Ohio-class ballistic nuclear missile submarines is going to make the F-35's cost look like a cupcake.
But consider the implications if you phase out nukes and other countries don't. Suddenly you are in a position where your entire military is useless. Fighter jets. Tanks. Battleships. None of that matters if the other side has nukes and you don't.
And if you don't have nukes, then you better at least have a friend that has them, and for a lot of countries, America IS that friend.
>>72280863
Jesus dude, I just explained why single engine aircraft have a lower accident rate. Two engines close together means close to twice the rate of failure because one engine fails will destroy the other.
And on range, I'm not going to explain it for the 3rd fucking time. Fuck off with that and admit defeat.
>>72281035
Typhoons have never EVER "whooped" Raptors. WTF are you talking about? When raptors put on luneberg lenses so EF-2000s could see them? When the raptor was out of missiles doing a gunfight? Literally only way raptor could lose was in gunfight against a rookie pilot who didn't know that 2-circle was the proper fighter to choose. i'm sure you don't even know what that means though.
>>72268198
Unless of course there's a war. Which is what these planes are made for. You're analogy is also piss poor. If fighters are beat cops, an airburst W83 must be SWAT.
>>72281046
The Canadian Air Force (if such an organization truly exists) doesn't need to defend the entire country, just the population centers.
>>72280189
no thats what I am saying its an expensive insurance policy.
What we know now about them only increases the danger and especially on the points you bring up un-uniformed belligerants or terrorists.
In agree-ance with you but I am saying the Threat of MAD is enough its a heavy hit in brinksmanship.
>and they should only be used in brinksmanship not how they where used on Japan.
>>72278514
>The navy needs a plane with high payload and good range.
>F-14 combat radius: 500nmi
>F-35C combat radius: 630 nmi
>F-14 max payload: 14,500 lb
>F-35C max payload: 15,000-17,000 lb
Eat a dick and also get fucked by this guy >>72278514
>>72282621
meant get fucked by >>72279058
>>72281195
Sure, but along with the big country that little country will face reprisal.
Also, it seems people forget about the russian deadhand. That alone makes nukes too risky to use.
Youre right my friend, but phasing out doesnt mean complete disarmament. In fact, if a suitable low number was agreed upon by all nations it would make security easier as well as free up tremendous resources.
I can comfortably say that we do not need thousands of nuclear devices. Especially considering thay interception of a ballistic carrier isnt hard - its just another missile.
In place of extra nukes other needs would be better met.
For example, space based communication and interception network designed to not only identity any aircraft and possibly shoot it down - but any airborne objects and an active data/intelligence catalogue to them.
>>72281489
Yes because a mechanical fault in one engine magically effects another engine that has freaking walls between it.
I would have accepted that single engine fighters have a higher readiness state because twin engines don't go out when one engine is broken. But you didn't go there.
As for the range, again internal fuel only for the F-15 is still greater than the F-35. With fuel tanks it's again still more and with conformal fuel tanks it's significantly more.
>>72271279
And why would that the Job of a f-35 and a single Pilot who is budy flying instead of picture related ?
Drones wont need some babysitter near them, especially not the next generation.
Just admit it, the F-35 is just a US Military/Industrial complex scam.
>>72282087
The thousands of airborne, air-traffic and engineers thank you for your disinterest in the northernmost frontiers and for basically helping the +100,000 combat troops to walk off the planes/helos/naval craft before any reasonable response can be mounted
>>72283193
And here is the F35 range. See how it is less than the F-15. Odd thing that. Who would have thunk it that I have not been talking out my ass all this time.
Now fuck off.
>>72264034
why are airplane factories like 8 stories tall when all the production is on the floor?
The Unites States has craft than can outrun any missile and use particle beam cannons as primary weapon.
I like to play a game of "autistic or veteran?" with each serious post whenever I see these types of threads.
>>72283756
Autistic. It's always autistic. The only vets worth listening to are the autistic vets who actually cared to learn shit and keep up with stuff rather than the bare minimum.
>>72283372
for the automated moving arms and conveyers and such
>>72264034
As someone who has worked on this plane, dogfighting is done, the F-35 can seek out and destroy any air target
>>72269332
I know the pilot who wrote it and it was a flight sciences plane so anything on it was not related to actual combat
>>72264034
Still butthurted because we are better than amerifats in dogfight ? :3
https://youtu.be/oGuWadoTgkE?t=137
>>72264034
If you had t*rkroachistan as your neighboring country you would know
>>72273253
elon pls go
>>72285736
Rafale, isn't that the plane that got destroyed by F4 phantoms? Lol that shit is like 70 years old.
>>72286051
elon is ruining Tesla's name and legacy I will use his skull to line my bidet.
>>72264034
Why do ameritards think air combat is still a thing this century?
Get into the real world, there is literally no way to avoid modern AA systems.
Unless you want to bomb goatfuckers with that, its useless.
>>72286930
Hahaha oh wow
Rafale BTFO!!
>>72271204
Navy improved it's K:D significantly once they correctly identified the problem-- which was an ingrained belief that dogfighting was a thing of the past.
Lo and behold here we are some years later with the same idiots parroting the same tired nonsense that will result in the same outcome.
>I don't need to know how to fly the fucking plane, the missile can shoot behind me
>I don't need to know how to fly the fucking plane, I push a button and daddy makes the bad man disappear
>I don't need to know how to fly the fucking plane because pretty soon they'll all be drones anyways
>I don't need to know how to fly the fucking plane because our enemies will never know or exploit the weaknesses of our aircraft and tactics
The list goes on and on.
>F-22 and F-35
I wish people would stop posting about these shit-tier jet fighters, especially the latter
>>72288183
>the missile can shoot behind me
That's basically true now though.
>>72288347
Then I guess we'll just see what we see.
>>72286930
As I often keep saying, the quality of your aircraft is less important than the quality of your pilots.
The only way to get better quality pilots is to let them fly more. The more hours in the air they spend the better they get. Especially in simulated combat scenarios that get as close to actual combat without risking lives.
That is the entire purpose behind such schools as top Gun and exercises like Red Flag. And it shows here. Rafale got some kills, but F-22 did as well. Considering F-22 seats are only given to veteran pilots, you can rest assured that these were some of the better pilots of their respective air forces competing against one another.
This is part of the reason Spey was obsessed (a bit too much IMHO) about having a dirt cheap fighter. So that you could have absolutely hundreds if not thousands of pilots in service, and the best and most experienced of those would get to move on and fly the big expensive F-15 which would be fielded in rather small numbers.
they wanted to make the best airplane and its only a waste a scam F-35 is shitty project bad busniess... Pak-Fa its just superior and economic and first of all its a reallity
>>72288259
The F-22 is anything but shit-tier. It's a fucking thoroughbred god-eater of a fighter that can decimate any air force in the world. All the memes about it being shit are part of a deliberate obfuscation campaign by the USAF and associates to downplay how OP it is. To get an idea of how far ahead the Raptor really is, just look at what the other major military powers which spend a lot on spying on America are doing. China and Russia both panicked and started coming up with their own designs for something comparable as soon as they realized how dangerous it was. The T-50 and J-20 are flying proof that the Raptor's design is the best in the world.
f-32 fly very well but it doenst matter if you have f-32 raptor or f-35 of f-500000000 when you have chocke with one of this
>>72289464
Well they need answers to a modern fighter flown by their opposition.
America makes great aircraft i don't give a shit what anyone else says but i think the F-35 is over priced with very little competition in the market compared to how things were run during the cold war.
>>72264034
That's a lot of wasted money in that picture...
>>72288796
FUCKING RARE
>>72289820
Production lines sitting idle ... sums up the entire project imo glad we are buying cheap CAS instead.
>>72289712
Can't hit what you can't see breh
>inb4 L-band radar
Good luck trying to hit something without angular accuracy and hauling an antenna wider than your moms ass tend to be a bad thing when you could get HARMed at any given moment.
>>72269084
HOLY FUCKING RARE
Does the village elder know you're shit posting on the village computer?
>>72290157
>you have all S-400 specs
F-117 being """"invisble"""" was shot down by S-125 which was first produced 1961
>>72289192
LOL
>>72290880
By locking onto open weapon bays as it flew straight above them.
Stealth is not an on/off switch. Had the F-117 not flew the same path the same time at every night for weeks in a row it would have been impossible to find it.
>>72289192
>It's real
>posts rendered image
>>72289464
>All the memes about it being shit are part of a deliberate obfuscation campaign by the USAF and associates to downplay how OP it is
Dat damage control.
If the USAF is so eager to create a narrative that it is shit. Then why did it release the talk of that F-22 pilot from Red Flag talking about how the F-22 is so much better than the Su-30MKI India had? And how thrust vectoring is a useless bit of tech (despite the F-22 having it too).
The F-22 is a good plane. but it's not as good as you make it out to be. Nor is it as bad as others make it out to be. The one thing though, is that for the flyaway cost of an F-22 you got a much better deal than the F-35.
>>72291153
>Bays were open
Uhm, they were shot. You might want to listen to the pilot who got shot down about it. He is best buds with the commander of the anti-aircraft battery that shot him down now. Pretty cool story.
