Why doesn't your country have the worlds most advanced combat aircraft?
Yea, you should buy Rafales !
I like european jets
>>52037150
Because our government doesn't think we need any military.
>>52037206
Rafale is basically just a very expensive Gripen NG.
>>52037150
They're haram
>>52037300
This
but we do
>>52037150
Because we don't need them to win wars.
>>52037206
not even Brasil would buy those with bribes on top lel
What do you think about F-16s? They look old and useless 2bh. Uncle Sam gib new toys pls
>>52037274
Why?
>>52037375
BUY IT, CUNTS
>>52037397
Because they're fucking idiots that would rather have lots of mudslime immigrants than prioritize actually being able to defend the country.
>>52037393
Good enough to kill russians.
>>52037336
I am not kidding bro, pig gelatin was used in their construction. Some of the plant workers ate ham sandwiches which helped them build it.
>>52037471
Well, the Gripen deal that our cunts made were pretty big. Not only the gripen but i read somewhere that KC-390's and even some super tucanos for training are in the deal.
http://www.opex360.com/2013/06/18/un-f-22-raptor-en-mauvaise-posture-face-a-un-rafale/
Top kek
>>52037346
>le stealth mene
No denying it's advanced, but it's not worth the price anyway.
>>52038261
It's so we can deny bombing muslims 2bh
can't blame us if you can't see us
>>52038261
>most advanced
>more expensive
What's the problem here again? The thread isn't about the most cost effective combat jet, its about the most advanced. In this case, the F22 clearly wins.
>>52038716
swedekek btfo
>>52037150
it's fucking shit and breaks down all the time desu
>>52037274
>Rafale is basically just a very expensive Gripen NG.
hahahahaha
>>52040372
Our pilots prefer flying the hornet.
Le yurofighter is not very reliable. The germans must have pulled some of their classic creative fucked up engineering on them, like they do with VWs and Mercedes.
>>52037150
>Why doesn't your country have the worlds most advanced combat aircraft?
Because we are pacifist and we concluded that modernized F-16 is pretty enough against Russia.
>>52045248
>implying it wasn't the italian made parts
This one isn't on us, I swear.
We have flying doomsday bringers.
>>52037150
Because we are developing ourself a new stealth jet that will outperformed even F-22.
>>52037150
ᛒᛖᚲᚨᚢᛋᛖ ᛇᛟᚢ ᛏᛟᚢᚲᚺ ᛇᛟᚢᚱᛋᛖᛚᚠ ᚨᛏ ᚾᛁᚷᚺᛏ ᚠᚨᚷᚷᛟᛏ.
>>52045314
>modernized F-16 is pretty enough
I liked the old silhouette better. It was much more sleek and fit the name "Viper".
Drop the "pretty" and you're good.
>>52045566
Sure
>>52045665
>No T-50
Shitty comics.
>>52045566
looks like you mated the front of one of our trailers to the back of an F-22.
>>52045665
>reading left to right
>>52045566
Godzilla will have those for breakfast sempai
>>52045611
and an ooga booga um bongo to you too, my coloured friend
Typhoon + F-35 master race
>>52046156
>that alphabet is literally more white than you can comprehend.
step up your bants.
>>52045566
It's too late.
It was always too late.
It's not the aircraft that matters, but the anti-aircraft
>>52037484
Who aren't looking.
Even Saudis could do that.
Waiting for the Gripens
>>52037150
US wont sell f22
>>52037150
Too poor to buy them
>>52046576
You overestimate the Saudis.
That said, F-16s are still sweet.
>>52037393
we are buying f-35s and developing our own jet.
>>52046820
>Di Maria
lel, what a flop
>>52037150
We don't even have the less advanced combat aircraft..
>>52037150
We do.
Pic not related OP?
>>52047714
>f35
>our own jet
>own
>implying not buying blue prints from older model jet
>>52048152
shhhh, threat of imminent Argie invasion is the only reason we get to have nice things.
>>52048235
desu it depends on how you define advanced, the F-22s stealth is certainly capable but actually some 20 years old, 'advanced' is a retarded subjective term that can apply to so many aspects of an aircraft it's meaningless.
Either way, EF is certainly not the most advanced. Maybe when it gets it's new radar it'll be decent.
>>52048446
Tranche 3 Eurofighters with meteor etc look tasty
I think the most advanced fighter is the F-35 as it has the latest technology compared to others
>>52047511
>You overestimate the Saudis.
>2000 saudis dead in yemen
>4000 more wounded
>400+ vehicles destroyed
>>52037150
You mean the T-50?
>>52048655
>someone doesn't understand the word overestimate
because we're too fat to fly
>>52048692
When it's not suffering an engine fire or compromising its stealth with exposed turbine blades?
>>52048692
>>52048692
I'd take the other T-50 at this point over that thing.
>>52037150
But we do
>>52048655
you are thinking of underestimate my friend
>>52048932
Check this out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mssD0tw1xgA&feature=youtu.be
Pretty cool. F-35Bs operating from austere forward-bases supporting Royal Marines and Paras SOON
>>52049157
Can't believe we're giving these to T*rks
>>52049330
They're getting As not Bs.
I'm pretty sure they won't know how to use them right regardless.
>>52049330
>giving
SELLING
And you're not. The Turks are buying the conventional version, F-35A. They can't do this >>52049157 because they need a full length runway to land/take off
>>52049382
I wasn't referring the the version, I just meant in general.
>mudslimes having stealth fighters
This will backfire.
>>52049412
Needs an update after le dude weed man.
>It was so advanced that there was literally no reason to manufacture it as no other jet was good enough to compete, so we downgraded to the F-35
>>52049476
C O M E O N
O
M
E
O
N
>>52049530
>downgraded
The F-35 and F-22 have entirely different roles. The F-35 is exceptional in those roles it is tasked with.
>>52049603
Maybe downgrade was the wrong term, yeah.
>>52049382
we have an option to buy Bs too. we are commissioning an amphibious assault ship. and our pilots are pretty good.
>>52049476
>tfw Canada already paid shitloads of money to America for F-35 development
>tfw they're just going to buy the Super Hornet and give us loads of money all over again
>>52049645
I've always thought more countries would start ordering the B-variant after it was proven. Dat flexibility from the short take off. I'm expecting Japan to get some at least.
>>52049771
They'd be perfect for Finland desu.
>>52049771
See, it doesn't even need a ramp. At this point it's just a stylistical choice.
>>52049645
>we are commissioning an amphibious assault ship
Where the fuck did you get an assault ship?
>>52049876
It doesn't, our Muhreens' assault ships don't have ramps. The ramp allows it to carry more ordnance though as well as potentially disable enemies from laughter.
>>52049804
I thought the Gripen was basically made for Swedish (also Finnish) conditions, while it can't do short take-offs it can do austere environments. Where the STOVL fighter shines is expeditionary use, either on carriers/amphibious ships or supporting troops from forward positions with no runways.
>>52049876
The ramp lets it carry more fuel and/or weapons, and the ramp also allows the carrier to launch fighters in rougher sea states, as the fighter is pointing up when it leaves the carrier.
>>52050028
Finland doesn't use Gripens, which is understandable because they have a shit payload.
And they do have a "shortish" takeoff requirement because they use their roads as airfields in a shtf scenario. Right now they use Hornets.
Naval aircraft are always going to have shorter takeoff distances than aircragt designed for land and with the extra payload either the B or C makes the most sense for them.
>>52045806
thgir ot tfel gnidaer<
>>52049885
They're license-building a Juan Carlos I believe.
>>52050106
It may have a shit payload but the Gripen is low maintenance. If you have Russia right next door, surely you want the largest useful airforce for your money, because you have a real mass problem.
I understand what you're saying about the short take off requirement in Finland but given their budget they won't be able to afford many of the B or C variants, as they're more expensive than the As.
I'd do it if I had the budge though
>>52050340
>if I had the budge
budget
>>52050340
Hornets are more maintenance-friendly than much pretty anything though.
>>52050340
>>52050106
>implying Finland shouldn't buy Rafales
guys please
>>52052811
No one wants to buy Rafales when it can only carry French A2A ordinance.
>>52052974
I don't see why foreign ordinance could't be integrated on request, the Rafale complies with NATO standards
>>52053127
I'm sure it could, but it's another hurdle to jump through (which would also cost money), when other available aircraft have already gone through all the flight testing needed.
>>52052811
In reality it's either the F35 or the Super Hornet, the rest are on the list just for show.
>>52037150
We elected the weedman for love, not war.
>>52053226
>not wanting to buy European equipment
finland pls
>>52053332
Make your own fixed-wing carrier AEW then.
>>52038716
this
how can you even compete with the F22? that's right you can't because they're not even exported
>>52053332
We already have these french radars n shiet.
>>52053906
Good
>>52053395
>designing an airplane to build 3 or 4 of them
Come on now
>>52053127
No one wants to replace to replace all their munitions for a more expensive and inferior fighter.
What's incredible is that we're arguing about only the top aircraft known publicly. Who knows what's in development or even flying over our skies today?
>>52053484
>how can you even compete with the F22? that's right you can't because they're not even exported
It's an over-designed piece of crap that keeps strangling it's own pilots due to a poorly designed oxygen system. Sure it looks cool, but the chairforce doesn't call it "the flying turkey" for nothing.
