US may resume production of the top-tier air superiority fighter F-22, which is way better than the retarded flying lemon F-35, which can't do anything well, has bankrupted our nation and our allies, and will ensure that we get raped by the Chinese 40 years from now.
http://www.businessinsider.com/air-force-might-restart-f-22-2016-5
/pol/ will probably oppose this
>>75266552
I'd rather have F-14s back
>>75266552
Very rightly so. Clearly better plane.
>>75266552
>bankrupting other nations that bought into the jew
>suddenly making them pay for military defense
>all bankrupt nations are left-wing cuck nations
>white nationalism rises because left-wing cuck governments are broke
suddenly the picture is all so clear
>>75266672
this is not nam
why focus on planes when we could be focusing on greater surface to air protection
seems way cheaper
The fact that the F-22 is now bombing ISIS as a strike fighter is the final nail in coffin for the F-35, the F-22 does everything better.
>>75266552
The F-35 was made because America didn't want to share the F-22 and rightfully so
Simple as that
>>75266932
the payload is pretty shit desu
it doesn't make a very good strike fighter at all
>>75266931
That only works if you're on the defensive and besides darpa is working on lasers to shoot down missiles which would be cheaper in the long run
![landing_by_abiator-d37olwh[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/A0Mp4P8.jpg "landing_by_abiator-d37olwh[1].jpg")
FUCK why didn't we just make more F22s??? They ended up being cheaper overall, they're a monster when it comes to the all around stealth, avionics, navigation, maneuverability, etc
At least the Marines won't get their hands on it.
LOCKHEED NEW JETS NOW PLS, THE MIG41 IS GONNA WRECK US IN 15 YEARS IF YOU DONT
>>75267084
get caught in a war with Islamic cavemen without having the most efficient strike fighter, no big deal.
get caught in a war with russia or china without an efficient air superiority fighter, you're absolutely fucked.
>>75266827
>Implying that the enemy combatants in the ME are more technologically advanced than those in Nam.
WEW
E
W
>>75267381
it's not about the enemies in the ME, it's about having a viable counter to russian or chinese fighters
>>75266931
Because it's about attacking others, not defending.
I thought that with the advent of the drones the fighter jets would have been rendered almost obsolete. Why all this effort for that flying wreck?
>>75267084
We are better off using the F-22, and updating the F-15 and A-10, than using the F-35. It's much much cheaper to do this too.
>>75267613
The drones are not good enough for all missions. We need the F-22, F-15, A-10, LRB, and Drones for Sam sites or light bombing. The F-35 is worthless.
>>75267934
no we need one single plane that can (theoretically) be used for every mission, because...uh...because reasons. We can't have a multi-plane fleet because it triggers the Jews' OCD.
>>75267613
Drones may eventually make jets obsolete, but that's many years into the future (I'd say probably 30-50 years, but I don't keep tabs on military tech too much so my opinion is pretty much worthless). Jets are still controlled directly by humans with none of the lag issues that drones face, making human judgements very valuable still.
>>75268811
Really, we should combine the Air Force, Navy, and Marine flight programs into one big fleet. Using the F/B-22, F-15SE, F-35, F-18, A-10, LRB, various drones, and cargo/AWACS aircraft. Everything else should be scrapped.
>>75267228
>>75266552
the F35 is basically an F22 that can be launched from an aircraft carrier.
>>75269035
No they won't. Drones are more likely to go away as satellite, and cruise missile technology gets better.
>>75269180
No it's not. Fighter aircraft are classified by maneuver envelope.
>>75269180
can the Air Force variant of the F-35 even be launched from a carrier?
>>75269174
>scrap the B1 Lancer
>scrap the B52
>scrap the hospital planes
>scrap the AC130s
Also, Naval Aviation is a total different animal than Air Force aviation. Naval Aviation has an entirely different cultural because every procedure they have is entirely different from the Air Force's. Even their planes are different to suit their environment.
Merging the programs is the exact opposite of what should happen and what would be beneficial.
Quite frankly the Army should get the A10s, the Air Force should keep its current fleet as should the Navy, and the Marine Non-Rotary Air Wing should be transferred to the Navy.
>>75267613
Until UCAVs can make value judgements, on the spot decisions, and adapt to changing situations, then there will always be a need for manned combat aircraft. Drones have their place in warfare. But not as a replacement for manned vehicles.
>>75267587
the best defense is a good offense
>>75269517
>can the Air Force variant of the F-35 even be launched from a carrier?
Our variant can . . . .. . We are relying in it!!
just fucking wow...
smells almost planned to just get shekels.
Damn, glad I wasn't on any of the engineering teams...
>>75266552
the f-22 was always better
f-35 can't even fight in the rain what a waste of money
>investing in the F-35 and not new rifles and body armor
fucking obama
>>75269833
That's why the F35 won't be cut. Other countries are in on the program. But that doesn't mean the USAF can't get new Raptors. The F35 was originally intended to compliment the F22 in American service, not replace it.
Killing the Raptor's production was a bad political move.
>>75269833
Lockheed Martin: Oh yeah britbong, remember when we told you the F-35s you bought for hundreds of billions of dollars can be launched from a carrier? About that.......oh and they blow up if they fly close to rain clouds too.
>>75266552
>cuck f-35
Well no shit, air superiority fighter cucks multipurpose strike fighter
>>75270053
How do you think we feel about losing the Harrier?
It was bloody criminal.
>>75267034
F-35 is cheaper
>>75269439
>F-35 has the most powerful jet engine ever made
>Still shit power
how
>>75269580
The AC130 is awesome though. Fabulous at raining death and destruction on towelheads.
>B52
one of the most economical planes we have. The thing can hold something like 70 1 ton bombs at the same damn time. If you have SF on the ground laser designating targets, that's a shitload of precision firepower, or a city block or two gone in one dumb bombing run.
>>75270116
The F-35 has no purpose, other than to lessen the size of aircraft carriers, but as we have seen, the planes cost more than building a larger aircraft carrier. In other words the military spent $1 trillion to save $50 billion. Sounds like a government operation to me.
>>75270195
I bet you feel pretty bad about losing the plane that raped the Argies. That shit is important to you
>>75270195
>THAT HORRIBLE, GUT WRENCHING FEEL WHEN I WAS OLD ENOUGH TO KNOW HOW BASED THE HARRIER WAS WHEN IT WAS CUT
when I was a kid I wanted to grow up to fly Harriers for the RAF, thats how based they were
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgOTG9WU6Pw
>>75266552
Of course the F-22 is better. It's battle tested, and has been used for many years. It's more expensive to maintain, but they can complete 30-40% more sorties per month.
The F-35 requires 18 hours of maintenance per hours of flight time. This is crippling when it comes to how many sorties they can do per month.
>>75270327
The F-22 has two engines, the F-35 has one engine. F22 has 52,000lbs dry thrust, F-35 has 28,000lbs.
>>75270506
AF's selling point is that F-35 maintenance is more streamlined and requires less training. Yeah right
>>75270402
I hope Finland won´t buy F-35 in the future.. It is in our fighter competition but IMO way too expensive, not aerodynamically capable enough (?) and not really the most suitable fighter for small countries and their missions (fighter interception).
>>75266552
>The F-22 is just too expensive to make! So, I have a better idea!
>Oh yeah? What's that?
>Let's spend hundreds of billions of dollars just to DEVELOP another plane so that we can spend many MORE billions to build them afterwards!
>Great idea!
>I know, right?!
>>75270195
Agreed. The Harrier was always an important asset to the Fleet Air Arm, since socialist cucks gutted the Royal Navy back in the late 60's/early 1970's.
>>75270383
I thought you said YOU wanted to scrap them and was making fun of the fact, not saying to do it.
And yeah especially with the new arsenal planes coming out the B52 is probably gonna be around EVEN LONGER now. I've read stories of 3 generations of families working on B52's by now.
>>75266552
LoL , get out of here with your Ameripoor trash.
Su-35 MasterRace present :https://youtu.be/xgLKFlclOz4?t=298
How can ameripoor's even compete?
>>75270694
Yes, the F-35 will wind up with a higher unit cost than the F-22 when all is said and done. What a mistake.
F-35 was a mistake, X-32 would have been much better.
>>75270826
>High_Quality_FSB_Propaganda.avi
>>75270826
I could take a shotgun to that thing.
>>75270826
Lightweight b8, m8.
The SU-35, while a damned good fighter, isn't on the same level as the Raptor.
>>75270901
That hilarious looking aircraft never ceases to amuse.
>>75270999
>isn't on the same level as the Raptor
Well, it has better maneuverability, but lacks stealth. Otherwise they are almost identical.
>>75270901
d'aww it looks so happy
>>75270901
that shit's ugly tho
>>75271144
The stealth is what's gonna get it though. 4/5 times the Raptor's gonna get a lock before it even knows it's there.
I mean yeah that 1/5 time when they actually fight it'll be nuts though
>>75271144
f-22 has better avionics
Thank Christ. The AF wanted the F-22... 500 of them to augment the aging Strike Eagle fleet and Obama said, "The F-35 is fine. You get those."
They're not even the same role. ASF are for an AS role and the F-35 can't compete.
We could also make the new F-22 lighter, more powerful with two F-35 engines, and give it a new updated suite of avionics from the F-35.
>>75271300
The F-22 pulled up next to an Iranian F-4 before they noticed and then only when the F-22 called to the Iranian to tell him "You should really go home."
>>75271377
>>f-22 has better avionics
Had , their getting AESA aswell and the new R-77 K's have bigger range than the AIM120's
Build a handful of YF-23's, if you're going to waste money you might as well do something cool with it.
Or build a modern version of the SR-71 :/
>>75271614
You posted a video of an RC plane.
>>75271724
>modern version of the SR-71
The SB-3 Ghoul?
>>75270901
>getting bombed by the happiest plane ever made
Brown people are really missing out.
>>75271595
Love that story.
The best thing about the F22 is it's precision stealth bomber ability. two JDAM's on hardpoints and it can just scoot by, never show up on radar and their HQ blows up two seconds later.
ITT: People who don't know shit about military aviation.
It's not about how many fucking loops your jet can do, it's how far and how fast it can acquire a missile lock on the target, whether it's on the ground or in the air.
The F-35 carries a lot of new tech that results in superior remote sensing. When you have a fleet of F-35's they can provide very detailed Intel of the ground along with being able to replace AWACS in a lot of situations in the air.
The F-22 is a superior air-to-air, probably the best in the world. A fleet of F-35's will be an insanely effective strike force, especially against conventional targets like Tanks, AAVs and APCs etc.
>>75271724
>implying the U.S. doesn't have some insane Mach X plane that's classified at the moment.
SR71 went Mach 3.2 in the 19fucking60s. Imagine what they cooked up at the Skunk Works by now.
>>75272255
Such a great plane. I'd even settle for the Silent Eagle in the fleet though if we could tool & produce them for a reasonable price.
>>75267613
>Why all this effort for that flying wreck?
Its a showcase plane meant to cover the money they were trickling off to other classified projects.
![DSCN8364_[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/3JGc2yY.jpg "DSCN8364_[1].jpg")
>>75272431
>Silent Eagle
MUH DICK
>we will never get a Naval F22
why go on
>>75272344
This would be true if the F35 was at it's original projected cost. If it was TRULY a cheaper plane then it could it's intended "swarm" tactic and just constantly put down fire will doing the AWAC thing like you said.
Problem is you could swarm F22's for the same price now, which since it's a superior plane at literally everything the F35 does it would make more sense.
Also, it would be a lot cheaper to EW stuff into the F22 than just build more F35's.
Also there's no way the F35 has better remote sensors than the F22.
Secretary Carter Opposes Restarting F-22 Production
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2181
>>75273127
well if Trump wins we'll have a new SecDef so hopefully that sorts it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HrKnF0dwqQ
>>75272850
>>75272255
>>75270694
This
>>75272000
well, your trips tell me you're about to get a visit from men in suits.
>>75272425
nothing, because there's no money in manned hypersonics. It's all about the drones nowadays.
>>75270058
More like Cuckheed Martin, amirite? Glad my country pulled out of that mess, hopefully we'll order some superhornets and shit.
>>75273649
Where will you station them? All your base are belong to refugees.
>>75266552
It didn't have to end this way.
>>75266552
I read that you are planning to replace the A-10 with the F 35, how the fuck are they even remotely similar? The A-10 is a badass chain gun merchant of doom and the F-35 is a toy plane for queers…
>Tfw as president Trump would have demanded a refund
>>75266552
Do americans really believe that plane is invisible? like hurr where's our F-22 I no see it on my new military radar that came last week?
>>75273936
>the F-35 is a toy plane for queers
14 year olds expressing their knowledge is this way >> https://www.youtube.com/
F-22 is old
But and F-22 with an F-35 software and electronics update would be the best air superiority hands down.
F-35 is a better multirole fighter.
>>75266552
Good! This plane is just so damn sexy.
HHHNNNNGGGG
>>75274220
Only retards say stealth is invisible.
But even if it's not, it makes it much harder to detect and is nowadays a crucial feature
>>75274220
It's invisible enough to not be spotted on the old Soviet radar sets most of the places we would bomb have, and any portable radars you'd bring in during your invasion of the Baltic states.
>>75272850
F-22's price is much higher than F-35's. Last time I heard, it would have been at almost $200 million or so in today's dollars
F-35's projected price back in the late 90's was at around $40 million.
With inflation calculated when it enters full rate production in 2019, it will meet this requirement at $85 million.
F-22's hardware is old compared to what they have managed to research and put into the F-35. An update to the F-22 incorporating these features, including the improved stealth coating, would make it the GOAT air superiority fighter again
>>75267934
were better off passing out mother fucking slingshots than using the f35.
>>75269035
the only combat role having a human pilot in the cockpit is superior to a drone at is CAS.
>>75271724
>meme YF-23
No
>SR-71
They have had good enough satellites and drones for a while now, you know?
>>75270901
memes aside, it was fucking garbage compared to XF-35
Couldn't even meet the STVOL requirements without discarding a shitton of stuff on it lmao
>>75267158
Lasers are a meme weapon. Something as simple as a paint that turns into large amounts of dust once heated up and the lasers are rendered completely useless.
>>75274608
More correct would be to say that it's really hard to identify and detect at longer ranges for Russia and China's low frequency radars
They will be able to identify and detect it if they are close enough, but due to the inverse square law, they can use their passive sensors to geolocate the location of where the radar emits its waves. In a SEAD operation, the enemy would shit their pants when MALDs and GPS guided missiles are coming their way
>>75274608
>old Soviet radar sets
91H6E is not soviet, and definetily not old. But this is all speculation since stelth aircraft never met our anti-air defences and vice versa.
>>75274608
These S-400 radars won't be good enough?
>>75266552
>wanting an NES over a playstation 4
>>75266552
They serve totally different purposes you dense cunt.
>>75266552
F-22 cant fly in the rain. How is it the best ?
>>75275705
>since stelth aircraft never met our anti-air defences
Actually The Serbs used old Soviets Radar and shot down an American Stealth Aircraft.
American denied it for ages until footage of kids waving pieces of it was aired on TV . . .then the Americans said it was a mechanical fault????
All to do with wavelengths dear boy!
>>75276311
Saw a video with serb officer that did it. Said they'd put a working microwave in a field and americans would bomb it hoping to destroy their S-75. Dunno if true.
>>75276306
That's a myth.
>>75276311
Jesus christ. Why don't you actually read about what fucking happened? The F-117 flew the EXACT same route over and over again, allowing the ground radar to piece together bits of data over the course of weeks. The day it got shot down it opened its bomb bay door, which made it light up like a fucking Christmas tree on radar. Oh, and that level of stealth was created in the mid-1970s.
>>75276311
F-117 was a mistake. That's why it's no longer operational.
>>75276311
More like lazy airforce kept running the same route for a month. The f-117 had its doors open dramatically increasing its cross section and nobody thought to include warning systems into the plane to tell the pilot it was locked on. Also I think the serbs specifically programmed the missile for the specific plane as it flew its repeated flight path.
Still embarrassing as fuck.
>>75276660
It wasn't a mistake at all. It was just old.
>>75276612
Is there a video of it flying in rain ? I'm not denying that it could be a myth, just want to be sure.
>>75276504
It's quite possible.
I live near an Ordnance factory that made explosives ( PE4 (British version of semtex) , RDX, TNT, etc) and during the last war, German bombers used to regularly bomb Moorlands about 10 Miles North . . .. . The Brits put little lamps on the Moors and the Germans thought it was the factory.
>>75276612
Damage control. Thank heavens for Jewpedia to rewrite history.
>>75276612
Don't forget that the Serb battery that shot it down had intel on its routes, a shitton of visual observers, and spent most of the time finding new places to relocated.
They got a few seconds of information on where the F-117 was located, and used it to determine where it would go next.
They fired a missile unguided in the general direction, with only its active seekers enabled. Had there been a real SEAD mission(Growlers and Wild Weasels were absent), the SAM battery would have gotten fucking roasted.
>>75276504
>Said they'd put a working microwave in a field and americans would bomb it hoping to destroy their S-75.
It's highly exaggerated.
I remember it had some truth, but it was far from common
>>75276822
F-117:
>Introduction - October 1983
>Retired - 22 April 2008
F-16
>Introduction - 17 August 1978
>Still in service
>>75275919
U.S military power is only good against third world countries that we can bully, first world technology has counters for all of this and vise versa.
>>75277008
That literally what happened you goat-fuckin Pakistani.
>>75277195
Because the technological differences between the F-16 platform of 1978 and of today are not massively different. The technological differences between stealth aircraft in 1983 and today are much bigger.
>>75277006
It's a myth and misunderstanding that the F-22's radar signature will be slightly increased from rain.
This makes it more visible for onboard radars on jets, but low frequency radars for SAM's would have a hard time detecting anything in a cloudy environment
>>75277008
Nigel, kill yourself
>>75269517
No. The air force variant does not have stovl to make room for more bombs. Also, the navy's version has wingtips that can be folded up to have more room. These features are useless to the air force because they have air strips everywhere and a lot of kc-135/kc-10s. The air force is all about bombs.
>>75277382
>Because the technological differences between the F-16 platform of 1978 and of today are not massively different
Actually, Block 60/61 F-16's are almost new planes compared to the ones from 1978
But the F-117 was withdrawn due to budget cuts and the fact that it was considered obsolete compared to what the F-22, B-2 and the upcoming F-35 as they had superior stealth airframes and could delivery precision ordinance even better than the F-117
>>75277226
>first world technology has counters for all of this and vise versa.
Well said mate, this applies to UK stuff to.
We (UK) recently had Submarine Naval exercises with the USA , we used Astute Class submarines (under commission) and they blew the Americans into the weeds, due to it's stealth . .. .the American Navy was VERY impressed.
But if you think for one moment that America hasn't developed a counter measure by now, it would be most foolish.
>>75277382
> you goat-fuckin Pakistani.
Fuck off kid.
>>75277399
>Nigel, kill yourself
see above comment.
>>75276660
The F117 wasn't shot down with radar, it was shot down with 1950's tech first generation SAM technology, even worse really.
>>75277399
oh I see. thanks
>>75277716
The Navy version got CATOBAR ability, which requires some redesigns of the airframe to be able to withstand the immense stress of being operating on an aircraft carrier, which includes being launched with cataputlt, and catch the arrestor gear with the tailhooks.
Can't wait.
>>75277876
>a fucking ski jump
You can't make this shit up
>>75277897
See
>>75277092
>>75276668
>>75276612
You could shoot down anything with 50's radar and missile tech if you know the enemy's path and where they will go
>>75278134
OK you are now changing the subject . .. . . .I've lost count of how many times women do this during a debate.
What's your point Sven?
>>75274794
100 times this
The F22 was designed in the 1990s. If they gutted the avionics and put current tech in it it'd be even insaner than it is now.
>>75278134
>>75273882
still alive?
>>75277897
If you fly at low altitude into an area where there are unknown SAM sites, without the assistance of an electronic warfare aircraft, you risk being shot down.
>it's an ignorant-faggots-talk-about-aircraft thread.
>>75277733
The F-16 being an updated airframe doesn't make it technologically that much different. Again, the gap is much smaller compared to the gaps between each successive stealth aircraft.
>>75278134
Come on Sven you were quick to post a silly meme along with fatboy here >>75278450
But you can't seem to answer why? . . . .. . . do you need more time to find more memes? . . .. or are you desperately searching Jewtube for more 'Facts' ??
>>75278868
I know more about aviation than anyone in this thread, 15+ years as a profession pilot, and major airline pilot.
The F-35 is a jobs program, not a revolutionary strike fighter.
>>75278450
tbf our carriers are fucking useless. They only worked because we had the Harrier which had STOVL capability in the 1970s (!)
Our ski ramp design is a terrible meme that needs to die. Carriers need to be the size of US carriers or it's not worth building them.
Oh and the best part: despite the Elizabeth-class carriers entering service by 2020, we won't have ANY FUCKING JETS TO USE WITH THEM BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT HASN'T BOUGHT ANY F35s YET.
>Britannia rules the waves
Not anymore, it doesn't. It hurts being from a country that once curbstomped every other seafaring nation's fleets on a regular basis.
>>75279279
It's highly evolutionary though. And each version is better and more capable overall than what it was designed to replace:
A > F-16
B > Harrier II
C > F/A-18 A/B/C/D
>>75266552
>lol stay mad faggots
>>75279425
We wanted to build one with you and use glorious Rafales on it. Why did you had to refuse?
>>75279279
>>75279425
Brilliant
see the bottom line of my comment here >>75274275
>>75279279
I'm an amateur pilot and an aerospace engineer who has worked on military aircraft and I'd say you are wrong.
>>75279601
Because France (rightly) wanted it to be nuclear and have catapults, but the Brits didn't want to pay for it.
>>75279683
Sort of.
Nuclear was expensive and we avoided it, so I will give you that.
Catapults have draw backs and it's not just a cost issue.
>>75267228
I would tell Lockheed to fuck right off. What they have done with the F-35 for the money they have spent on it should be criminal.
The F-35 is LM's retirement plan. Just give them a few more trillion and they will try to make it work.
>>75280116
Too bad, nuclear is basically the perfect power source for a large ship.
>>75267613
Lag
>75278378
>75279257
You're not going to get any (You)'s with your shitposting, just stop Nigel
>>75280116
>Too bad, nuclear is basically the perfect power source for a large ship.
How can can I argue mate? ... it was down to cost though.
>>75279174
Unlike the F-117, the F-16 still had a role as a light multirole fighter.
F-22 and B-2 could do the strike missions just fine, and much better than the F-117
>>75267613
>Implying that drones could defeat the F-35
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtXPQNW2HqE
>>75279279
A 5th gen multirole with the low observability stealth, all the sensor fusioning and data-linking abilities, that are alos superior to the planes its replacing is surely revolutionary
>>75270327
Power to weight & drag ratio.
It might have the most powerful engine of its size.. but it's still underpowered.
>>75279673
No, the procurement process in this country is severely broken.
>>75280454
F16 and the F18 series are probably the best multiuse planes the US has ever developed. I hope we keep flying them well into the future.
>>75280704
Almost verbatim from Wikipedia . . .. . . .fuck off!
>>75280579
It'd take a few more decades untill we can make drones that have the situational awareness of a figther pilot, and cope with the latency issues
Honestly, if they update the computer systems for the F-22, it would pretty much be unmatched by any slav/chink shit for a good 30 years, it's just the avionics in it are dated as fuck, which is why the F-35 is being pushed so hard.
>>75280781
Well, can't deny that, but it is more a problem for the Army than for the Air Force.
>Spending 5 billion dollars to create the world's least effective camo, which is also ugly as shit
BRAVO ARMY
>>75280728
It's only ~10% less that 4th gen single engine fighters.
>>75280835
We have Super Hornet, and the F-35A is going to be a better multirole than the F-16, as it has superior payload, range, and loiter time, and comparable maneuverability.
I'm happy (super)Hornet will still stay in the skies for a decade or so.
>>75266552
It seems a lot of people think this planes sucks, maybe rightfully so, but at least there probably has been a lot of new technology that will be used on other military tech in the future.
>>75280896
Sven reappears after refusing to support their earlier meme shit posting.
Fuck off kid . . .. . . .and take your Jewpedia knowledge with you.
>75280888
>Nigel is asshurt, but still wants to farm for (You)'s with his shit tier baits
Just stick with your shitty Harriers on your ski jump carriers
![Reaper[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/0yqJbKK.jpg "Reaper[1].jpg")
>>75266552
The F-22 is a replacement for the F-15
The F-35 is a replacement for the F-16
They server two different roles.
Doesn't matter, most of the F-35's roles will be supplanted by drones anyway.
>>75281070
I thought that was just for Marines
Oh I am laffin
>75281201
Thank you for the free (You)'s service.
>>75281218
Come on spastic boy . . . .. you refuse to confront me directly.
You manage to reference other posters but why do you hide from me?
>>75280704
>5th gen
>no supercruise
>>75281218
>he even made it rhyme
love Norge
since the F35 looks like a cover story I wonder what they're really working on.
>>75281250
F-35A is a replacement for the F-16, though
B is for Harrier and C is for Hornet
A-10 is shit, and doesn't need replacement. Even a B-1 is better at CAS missions
>>75281675
Ignore this shit . . .. . . he has done nothing but spout wikipedia throughout this thread . . .. even quoting verbatim.
I guess he must be coming up to his 15th birthday.
>>75281484
But it can maintain over Mach 1 without afterburners for 150 miles. And this was an unintentional side effect
>>75266552
>Sell other countries gimped versions of a bad plane
>Keep the good planes for ourselves
kek
>75281888
>babby's first trole post
Damn this bongtard is trying so fucking hard
>>75281627
Considering the tech in the F-35 is largely from the late 1990s, whatever r&d is working on now is 15-20 years more advanced. And that's not even counting Skunkworks or Phantomworks.
>>75281627
>since the F35 looks like a cover story I wonder what they're really working on.
Some of my mates are in America at Eglin AFB.
There is nothing mysterious going on, except frustration from all corners.
>>75281888
You haven't had a single valid point or argument this entire thread, nigger.
>>75282200
Who fucking cares about Elgin? That's not where secret shit goes on.
>>75281073
Just goes to show its not in the 5th gen category.
P to W ratio needs to be higher.
However, I'd rather get the F-35A or F/A-18ASH over the other options.
>>75282200
I consulted for a corporation making major structural components of the F35 a few years ago.
Holy fuck it's a wonder those things aren't falling from the skies left and right. Zero QC on critical metal processing steps.
I'd give specifics but I'd get sued.
![961839-a10[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/cIkvTr5.jpg "961839-a10[1].jpg")
>>75281675
A-10 works great in Durka Durka wars where you have 100% air superiority and your biggest threats are the occasional MANPADS Against an actual air defense system and anything more sophisticated than sand niggers spray and praying with AK's to the sky, the A-10 is toast.
I still think it should be kept, because those are the most common battles we fight in the last 45 years, but don't get too lofty on the a-10
Also VSTOL / STOL is a joke, its never proven to be needed, it adds huge complexity to the aircraft. The F-35B and Harriers are worthless.
>>75282266
>You haven't had a single valid point or argument this entire thread
I did call you out for being a little kid with no understanding . . . . . I think that counts.
it also explains your butt-hurt.
>>75282409
It is universally considered 5th gen. Period.
>>75282483
> says everyone else has no understanding
> hasn't made a single point the entire time
KIll yourself for the good of humanity.
>>75282200
If what we were looking for was a highly advanced weapons delivery platform, then yes the F-35 will work. However, what was the point of designing it into a fighter aircraft if it can't fight? Why not just update the F-15 or F-22, which can deliver more weapons, and fight?
>>75282449
>I'd give specifics but I'd get sued.
No you wouldn't.
If you are who you say you are, then you would know, - that development is never a walk in the park.
>>75282454
>Also VSTOL / STOL is a joke, its never proven to be needed
the whole point is that accurate cruise missile technology has proliferated and continues to proliferate
the first thing that's going to happen in a real conflict is that major airfields get targeted with anti-runway cruise missiles and all conventional aircraft will either be grounded or prevented from landing
>>75282449
Oh yeah? Well I'm the President of the fucking United States, and from what I've heard from my friends at the Pentagon, the F35 is a great aircraft and you're a domestic terrorist.
Of course, I can't prove this because it wouldn't be diplomatic for a President.
>>75282968
>Why not just update the F-15 or F-22, which can deliver more weapons, and fight?
How on earth do you expect me to answer?
I don't make any decisions regarding this, it was a procurement issue made well above my head but the fact is, it has to work, too much has been invested.
>>75266552
its a plane thats sop great it wont be used in any military conflict. we dont want any missiles that hit the flares to skuff the paint
instead we will be using drones for all bombing operations and dog fighting isnt a thing any more
thank got we spent more than a tril on its development
>>75267228
Wait, what the fuck is on your picture?
>>75283381
>it has to work
No it doesn't, cancel the program, and restart the F-22 and F-15 silent programs.
>>75283548
mythical concept art made by a random guy
>>75282454
>Also VSTOL / STOL is a joke, its never proven to be needed.
The Harrier actually has a downright phenomenal war record, both for the USMC and the Royal Navy. Everywhere they've ever been used, they've kicked ass. Therefore, creating a next-generation harrier in the form of the F-35B makes a lot of sense. Besides, you must admit this is cool.
>>75270383
>Not the B36
Feels bad man
>>75283165
Great but all those aircraft need aerial refueling to be effective, if the tankers are grounded unless the target is in a 500 mile radius, VSTOL / STOL's are also grounded.
>>75283681
The F-15 "Silent Eagle" was an internal project by Boeing. The US government didn't put any money towards it. Also, nobody actually bought the thing.
>>75283280
>>75282986
let's just say there are reasons why the bulkheads cracked in testing.
>>75282266
Don't give him (You)'d
Nigel just got out of the 'tism cage
>>75283966
Yeah okay buddy boy
Let's say there's a reason you're getting a big FBI maglite up your ass in 30 minutes
>>75283833
VSTOL can't be used anywhere but on controlled surfaces that are free and clear of all FOD.
>>75284151
That never stopped us before. Or the Brits.
>This triggers the argie
>>75283681
Mate . .. . look at my flag . . F-22 and F15 means nothing to me.
I am not in a position to influence ANY aircraft development.
Why are you asking me this?
>>75283833
This picture triggers russians.
>>75282454
But Broncos and Super Tucanos could do the job just as good, but at a much lower price
Harriers worked fine under desert storm, giving air support to the Marines without requiring a super carrier, and having a strike/attack aircraft that can land on short improvised air strips.
Their only problem is that they are slow, sluggish, and are so old that they keep
Also, their 4 tilting noozle system is infinitely inferior to the F-35B's fan.
If you design an entire plane around STOVL in the 21st century, you are doing something wrong though. But fortunately the F-35 is not that
Wait, I just realized this thread is on /pol/, that's why this discussion is full of retarded meme spewers and europoors that don't know what they're talking about. Whoops.
>>75284492
Fucking Manlets trigger Russians.
>>75266552
I'd rather see them admit we don't need to police the world and therefore don't need anywhere near as large and expensive a military as we have, but I'd still rather see our pilots flying good planes when they go into combat than not. So I can't say I oppose it.
>>75266672
Dude, you gotta be trolling. It was a good old plane retired before it's time but it's waaaay too old to bring back. The F-22 fills the same role and it's just way better in almost every way.
>>75266710
For some values of 'better' at least. Ideally you have both working together in the right proportions for the job.
>>75267084
Payload is good, but so is a computer that doesn't require reboots due to faulty logic.
>>75270195
Yes, yes, the Harrier was such a bad aircraft it probably was criminal.
>>75281250
>>75281675
>>75281201
He's right though.
>>75266552
F-35 is just a platform that at the very least should have higher ceiling of upgrading than F-22.
Still, there's no point in buying an F-35 if the upgrades are not available yet.
>>75266552
>which can't do anything well
Anyone who's actually in the air force knows that you just made arguably the most inaccurate statement in a plane a person can make.
Lightning II is the best fighter plane ever created and it's hilarious hoe much press it's being allowed to have when our tech is supposed to be fucking secret not bare for any cunt on the planet to see.
Fuck I hate journalism
>>75284756
>computer rebooting maymay
Also
>that fucking chart
I swear to god, end your fucking life. You've overdosed on War is Boring.
>>75284814
>Still, there's no point in buying an F-35 if the upgrades are not available yet.
Wrong. You want to buy now so you can begin the long process of training pilots to actually fly the aircraft. Countries like Australia have already bought 1 or 2 F-35's so they already have pilots training at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona. So when the rest of the orders are filled, they'll already have a group of pilots who know how to use the aircraft who can serve as instructors for new recruits.
Learning to fly a new plane is a lengthy process. You want to get started now.
>>75284671
Mate every possible discussion about military anything that isn't the Nazis or European history based warfare Europoors are completely retarded about.
Thats why luggage lad invented /k/
>>75284814
>Finland
Thinking we'd sell the Lightning II to a non-NATO nation.
>>75284767
The Norway guy is a Jewpedia hound.
If you believe whta he says then bigger fool you . . .. these kids are all over You-tube and their average age is 15.
>>75285178
I take it you're not a fan of the F-35? What specifically about it irks you, man?
>>75285283
>I take it you're not a fan of the F-35?
Read the thread mate.
You are wrong . .. . I want the F-35 to work, Britain needs the F-35 to work.
>>75285283
It appears the Brits already built the infrastructure for the plane, so for them it has to work. For us, it is clearly a mistake to keep developing the non VSTOL versions when we have better options.
>>75266931
>Why focus on fighter jets when we can make jet bombers?
Said no one.... wait, Hitler did, and he's dead now.
>>75285649
Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin are also dead. Guess Hitler won in the end.
Does it still melt carrier decks?
>>75285483
>>75285569
But Britain is getting the VSTOL versions and the A variant might be on the table if the B variant doesn't fit there needs. So far its turning out to be a great aircraft, with most of the bugs being fixed and the public being more informed about the aircraft and it's capabilities.
We could have had the F-22 bomber.
>>75285898
Does surströmming taste like shit?
>>75285898
that was a myth that someone started and the media ran with it. Once videos of the F-35 operation from carriers and amphibious ships appeared they said it was faked or something.
>>75286395
Has popular science ever been right about anything?
>>75286981
There was that issue where they talked about the Earth being round.
So, no.
>>75287318
You would be surprised by the number of people who accuse me of being part of the flat Earth conspiracy as an airline pilot. It's mostly black people too.
>>75287731
IDWTLOTPA.
>>75266552
pls sell to us
>>75287731
What?
>>75270901
I loved the development documentary.
>Boeing develops a plane that carries out all 3 rolls it will be assigned with a single prototype.
>Boeing plane looks like a flying happy face.
>Lockheed delivers 3 different prototypes for the different tests.
>VTOL version needs all the guns/armour stripped out or its too heavy.
>Lockhead promise the finished article will be good. The plane however looks like a missile dressed as a top end prostitute, it's a visual mix of sex and violence.
>Boeing BTFO
>>75270402
You are a dumbfuck. The $1 trillion pricetag is OVER 50 FUCKING YEARS!!!!!! HOW DO YOU RETARDS HAVE SUCH ABYSMAL READING COMPREHENSION??????
>>75266672
the f-14 is cool as fucking shit
>>75278525
Galm one reporting!
>>75274311
Not at anything any older multirole accomplishes.
We could build stealth F-18s and come out ahead over the F-35.
It's a jobs program, and a total waste of taxpayer money.
>>75288971
The price tag is at $1.5 trillion right now for the entire program over the lifespan, but those costs are likely to rise to over $2 trillion. The total development costs will be near $1 trillion.
>>75275939
That's a horrible analogy. In terms of Age the F-22 is more like the PS3, and the F-35 the PS4, except... in this instance, the PS3 is actually a gaming PC from the time period of the PS3, meaning it still outperforms the PS4.
>>75270327
>most powerfu jet engine ever made?
fucking leafs
115,000 lb vs 35,000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_GE90
>>75285898
Yes, they can't VTOL from anything that hasn't been specially reinforced just for them, and even then maintenance is a bitch.
On the plus side ski jumps are preferable over VTOL any day and they do fine for that. VTOL was always an impressive trick but when it comes at the cost of reduced loadout, and ski jumps are easy to do.
