Su-35 > F-35
- Home
- Board: /k/ - Weapons
- Reading: Su-35 > F-35
>F-35 Service ceiling
>50,000 feet
>Su-35 service ceiling
>60,000+ feet
So in order for the F-35 to even engage the Su-35, it has to shoot a missile upwards 10,000 feet. During that distance, the missile will lose most of its velocity, making it easy for the Su-35 to dodge. Meanwhile, the Su-35 can easily shoot missiles downward at the F-35.
Yeah.
>>29729502
Retardation at its finest.
>>29729502
>48 Su-35's
lmao
baiting hard i see
go away please this thread contributes nothing.
Sage and kill
Do we need to post the F-35 bingo chart again?
>>29729519
>>29729525
>>29729529
>>29729546
>>29729570
How is this NOT a legitimate issue?
bingo chart is up.
>>29729585
You don't know the service ceiling of either aircraft.
>>29729502
>all that lost energy
Nice airshow trick, though.
I hate the F-35 for being a smug little fuck that replaces cooler (if weaker performing) aircraft.
I wouldn't mind it if it was operated alongside, but no, reality has to step in and fuck everything up.
I wish I could bring myself to believe it's actually a worse plane, but I can't delude myself. The end result is that I know my preferences are irrational, but they aren't going away.
>>29729502
>F-35 Service ceiling
>50,000 feet
>Su-35 service ceiling
>60,000+ feet
I feel it's worth noting that both of these are afterburner-only. Also that flying high in a legacy fighter like the SU-35 is just asking to have an HOJ missile shoved in your vagina.
>>29729609
>Hurr muh military seekritz
>>>/x/
>>29729754
I sense a tingle in your anus because you know I am right.
>>29729792
>believing anything a Russian says at face value
Mate, whatever number a Vatnik gives, divide by two and plus minus 10 percent for bullshit. Seriously.
>>29729792
Not in the slightest because I understand how this shit actually works. What dictates the performance and limitations of an aircraft and why. And mostly, I know that your superstitions stem from ignorance, nothing more.
>>29730079
>Service ceiling of Su-35 is 27,000 feet
Su-35 of Indonesia can easily defeat F-35 of Ausfalia
Holy shit, thread about best fighter in the world. Contributing what I can.
>>29732089
>best fighter in the world.
So why'd you post slavshit doing an airshow maneuver?
>>29732124
You see comrade, you must have engines of maximum power to perform dances like fairy.
>During that distance, the missile will lose most of its velocity, making it easy for the Su-35 to dodge.
No need to bother when you have air-to-air missiles that can engage BVR missiles, and ground based radar that can track F-35's with air-based radar on the way.
>>29733563
Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel
>>29733563
Ahhh, so we've reached the fantasy section of the thread.
>>29729502
So, basically, you're saying that Su-35's only need to pack some smart bombs and Lightning's BTFO ...
>>29733615
>Assuming the Su-35 can see the F-35 at all
>Assuming it can get a lock if it does
>Assuming it doesn't get wasted because it's blasting EM all over the sky trying to find the F-35
>Assuming OP's not a faggot and he has some mystical insight into both planes' performance envelopes
>>29729609
>This is what dumbfuckistanian clapburger amerilards actually believe
>>29729502
False equivalency nigger. Do mankind a favor and kill yourself.
>>29733662
>Vatniks being this mad about the truth
The service ceiling of the F-35 is indeed lower than of other fighters.
The F-35 is a strike fighter (JSF hint hint) so yes the Su-35 has complete air superiority over the F-35 if both sides have visuals on each other. USA still has more F-22s than than Russia has Su-35s so air dominance will not be a problem for USA.
>>29730112
You wrote a lot of words to say you do not know what the service ceilings of the Su-35 and F-35 are.
>>29734479
>an aircrafts performance is driven by its name
>>29734685
Are you implying that you have secret knowledge that nobody else does?
>>29734701
Do you think The F-35 is meant to replace the F-22 in air superiority? The F-35 is designed to be a strike fighter first and air superiority second. It's plain as day that a Su-35 will absolutely dominate the F-35 in an air to air configuration. Luckily, nobody is retarded enough to let an F-35 go unaccompanied in an air to air mission.
>>29733078
i see engines of maximum power produce a lot of black exhaust smoke
i guess then i shouldnt mock my neighbors 97 buick lesabre because of the smoke it produces when the engine is revved because he has a russian fighter quality engine in it
>vatnik logic
>>29734714
You are the one claiming knowledge that is not public information.
>>29734753
>It's plain as day that a Su-35 will absolutely dominate the F-35 in an air to air configuration.
Only if the F-35 is flying stupid and not working primarily on passive and idiotically closing to dogfight range.
>>29729502
BVR.
>it's an F-35 thread
Hello darkness, my old friend.
>>29733078
>>29732089
>best fighter
>>29729502
I don't understand why thrust vectoring wasn't included in the F-35. That would be an easy way to compensate for its lack of maneuverability.
>>29736242
Thrust vectoring generally adds a ton or two of weight.
>>29733563
Fucking vatnik fantasies
>it's a clappers vs russians bread
Nah
>>29736242
Extra weight for airshow maneuvers, especially since what they learned from the F-22 is that sensor-shooter stealth platforms mostly make dogfighting irrelevant.
>>29729595
You know they could just as easily make a super carrier out of a cargo ship. Current carriers are in the billions but scientific facts show that a cargo carrier could easily be built for less than 400 million .
>>29736638
That has nothing to do with science Jamal.
>Engaging in air to air at anywhere near your service ceiling.
WAKE ME UP
>half the cost
>quarter the maintenance
>rugged (can take off anywhere)
>no extra training
>faster
>more maneuverable
Meme 35's are not meant for war, they're just high tech toys and their gimmick will be over soon.
>>29737077
Must be why a bunch of countries are actively pursuing similar platforms...
>>29736242
Thrust vectoring is not the only way to have high maneuverability.
>>29737077
>Meme 35's
An interesting way to spell Su-35.
.>>29737077
These plastic glocks aren't mentioned for war they are just range toys metal guns are sticking around for good and these glock memes aren't going anywhere
>48 built
We'll just launch 50 F-15C supported by AWACS and 30 F/A 18 and laugh at ruskies losing their heavily upgraded SU 27s
>>29737077
Even if it's bait, "muh half cost" is wrong, as their price on Wikipedia is wrong and actually cost up to $80 million nowadays
>>29732031
>Su-35 of Indonesia can easily defeat F-35 of Ausfalia
>only buy 4
LOL Indon
>>29737077
>quarter the maintenance
Needing four spare engines with three total lifetime overhauls each is a quarter the maintenance of the US's typical one engine/one overhaul?
![thumb-up-terminator+pablo+M+R[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/OCISuXB.jpg "thumb-up-terminator+pablo+M+R[1]")
