I can't tell if F-35 is great or shit.
At the moment it's less shit than it was. This fighter will take a couple models to be perfected. Not all fighters are as perfect as the F22 which only took one model to perfect after leaving its prototype.
>>55192864
its like the iPhone.
its pretty good, but way too overpriced
>>55192947
did obama stop the F-22 program because he hates america or because it was actually a good idea to phase out
did obama fund the F35 because he wants to bankrupt america and make a weak america, or because it was actually good ?
it's weird, as soon as it was released and immense amount of bad press was released
>>55192864
Here watch these, and make up your own mind
Part1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtZNBkKdO5U
Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyHlp7tJrxY
>>55193019
Obama had this dream of a single fighter that did everything. It would be cheaper than the F22, shared between branches, and sold to allies. Little did he know that such a plane would be extremely hard to develop. At this point we're in too deep to get out.
>>55193173
Except the F-35 is in all likelihood the best multirole fighter ever produced.
All I know is we pawned a bunch of them off on Norway the other month and caused some complaint about their "NATO obligations."
>>55193254
we need to make them benjamins
>>55193173
blaming obama after fucking up with unlimited budget.
>>55192864
Well, when your pilots are being given lessons on how to say nice things about it you know its a bag of Aids
>>55192864
I have two big issues with the F-35:
1. I think it will get us involved in more dumb wars.
2. I think it should be called the Intruder II rather than the Lightning II.
That's about it. The plane itself is amazing.
>>55193225
PIDF detected
>>55192864
Too much ambition, too many roles to fill, too complex to be a workhorse.
It will end like the B-1 Lancer, the F-111, the Convair B-36 Peacemaker or the F-22: in service, but only in small numbers and greatly reduced mission spectrum.
>>55192864
The 35 is fucking amazing.
The Chinese components are questionable.
The price we paid for that is shit.
Coming in hot with some Bill Whittle.
The f-35 is shit. irrefutably
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HrKnF0dwqQ
>>55193173
That's not why the F35 was developed at all you fucking retard
>>55195537
And yet, if you read anything written by people who have actual experience with the aircraft, it is very well-received.
>>55195620
No pilot in history ever said anything bad about his plane.
They are proud to have their wings and are like parents that would never dream about calling their child ugly, no matter what.
>>55195456
It doesn't fill any more roles than the the Hornet did.
>>55192864
The problem with this flying pile of shit is the massive cost of it. Despite all reasoning it keeps getting rammed down our throats due to politics.
>>55195620
>it is very well-received.
No it's not. Pentagon hates it.
Idk if it is good or not but it is sure making my local area wealthier thanks to all the testing that it brought here. Money money everywhere thanks to all you fags.
>>55195774
They're mad about the delays, not the plane itself. Really standard stuff, actually. You're just hearing about it more because of the internet.
>>55195878
It has a similar stealth problem like the one they used as an excuse to cut the F22.
It can't turn.
It lost it's simulations to an F16.
Delays aside, they can't afford to buy enough of them to actually do a shit.
Engine burns holes on runway surfaces, fuel needs to be kept cool, etc.
>>55192864
It's a great jet, anybody who disagrees has no clue what they're talking about. It's just way too expensive.
>>55195717
This plane has been stuck in development hell for 20 years, Anon. Maybe it will be okay, in the end.
But I claim the right to remain sceptical about how it turns out.
>>55192864
>Seeing threads with real discussion of military hardware
Do you guys read trade journals or something? I've literally never met anyone in real life that knows anything about this stuff.
>>55195620
Nigger did you even do your research (or watch the video for that mater)? The F-35 has a FAR inferior energy-state than scores of older, cheaper, better aircraft.
>>55195691
This. I wouldn't be surprised in the current administration if many direct critique is being specifically and individually supressed.
>>55192864
It's not bad at all, but its price is far too high for what if offers. Basically, it's cost:efficiency ratio is shit, even though the plane itself is not.
>>55196136
It's a common interest. What else should they talk about? Who's got the gayest haircut in politics?
>>55192864
It's trash in every single test they put it through. Pilots say it trash. It's just trash. It tried to do too many things at once, so it ended up being bad at all of them.
>$1.3 trillion
>>55195717
The F-35 is meant to replace the A-10, F-16 and Harrier.
>>55196387
I'm not saying you shouldn't be interested in it. I'm just wondering how people got into it, since I've never met anyone who is interested in it, except on 4chan.
F22 was sexier desu.
>>55195969
>It lost it's simulations to an F16.
The F-35 has won every single simulated combat mission against the F-16. The test you're thinking of was just something to refine the flight programming. It was never intended as a serious combat test. Sensationalist blogs pounced on it anyway.
>>55196188
It has a lower thrust/weight ratio, I will give you that. The question is whether or not that even matters.
>>55196539
Really? Maybe you're talking to the wrong people.
>>55192864
>Farnborough 2012: "Yesterday we had Raptor salad for lunch" Typhoon pilot said after dogfighting with the F-22 at Red Flag Alaska
http://theaviationist.com/2012/07/13/fia12-typhoon-raptor/
>>55196944
You realize that the US intentionally stacks any exercise involving the F-22 against the F-22 just so that Raptor pilots can get meaningful experience, right? If they didn't do this, every drill would just be:
>Alright, let's get started
>And its over, Raptor killed everything. Again.
>>55196944
Does anybody have an idea how many BVR kills where actually made in history?
For example I can only find two kills, yes just two, for the whole of the 1991 gulf war.
>>55192864
It's adequate at several roles, but great at none of them.
Its also too expensive of a project.
>>55197192
You realize, that the european defense haven't been sitting on their hands for the last 20 years, either?
The Typhoon is quite well designed and equiped to fulfill its mission spectrum.
And it even has a working gun.
>>55197487
Yep, the Typhoon is a good plane. The only bad things I've ever heard about is that it had a troubled development and it is very maintenance intensive. And that describes most fighter planes.
People really overrate planes.
The f35 is a weapons platform. Whats important is what you put on it and how you network with other forces.
In my opinion, the B is the only one worth it. It's a huge step up from the Harrier and is much more flexible to the Marines.
The C variant shouldn't fucking exist, the Hornet is already a fantastic multirole. The Navy should be getting an air superiority fighter with long range to fill the gap made when the F-14 was retired.
I don't know what to make of the Air Force's F-35. It seems okay, but not great. I wish the Air Force had 400 F-22s and a roughly equal number of F-15SEs supplemented by the F-35.
One thing to remember is that the greatest multiroles of all time- F-15E and F-16- were originally dedicated air superiority platforms that were developed into multirole bombtrucks.
That's just my .02
>>55193074
Beatutiful carrier
>>55197581
>Typhoon
>very maintenance intensive
The F-22 needs something like 30 hours per flight hour.
>>55197854
>The F-22 needs something like 30 hours per flight hour.
True.
>>55196944
> eurofighter
> fighter that's inferior to f16 and f15
> sold to stupid euro economies to stupid to see their politicians accepting bribes for it
Granted the same thing is happening with the f35 but you Morons would've been better with Russian birds
>>55197581
You are right. The Typhoon had its fair share of problems. And yes, even gun problems.
It is not even that much cheaper, in fact it has a quite hefty price tag attachted.
But at least it has left its teething problems behind and has a future as an actually relieable workhorse ahead of it.
I am really curious how the future version with thrust vectoring engines will perform.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFsmixykLxY
>>55197192
>>55197314
>>55197930
>>55198098
Topkek
>>55195456
F-111 was great in the end though. Honestly could see that being a perfect analog to the F-35.
>Complete disaster in development
>Greatly hobbled by Navy's requirements
>Navy doesn't even adopt it in the end
>Critics shit all over it non-stop in its early years due to the development issues
>Gets a few tweaks/revisions
>Goes on to be one of the best performing tactical bombers of its era with over 30 years of service
The F-35 looked great on paper, the problem is VSTOL is a meme, so the F-35 would always be cuucked. What they should have done is develop the avionics, then put those into proven fighters, e.g. the F-18 ASH.
Just my opinion that the F-35 program was the greatest SCAM ever created to make people believe they put so much money and into a failed aircraft. WHEN in reality all the money they spent went into development and research of Drones. Because 30 years ago they knew drones were the future.
Why the fuck we have pilots still in the sky today is beyond me. How do they expect pilots to handle the G forces that a Drone could or even the longevity of a mission.
>>55199797
Drones don't question the orders. That's why Obama uses them to bomb school children.
>>55199878
All UCAVs in the US arsenal require a human operator to launch its weapons.
>>55192864
>Only the F-35A has an internal gun.
>Let's use the fuel to liquid cool hot components. What can possibly go wrong?
>F-35B burns through asphalt and carrier decks when used in VTOL mode
It doesn't look like the visor can be pulled up, do you need to change it if you want to fly at night or what?
Fuck expensive manned fighters.
They won't do fuck all when a Chinese surface to surface missile blows up the giant, easy to spot carrier it is on.
They should make giant submersible drone carriers and airborne drone carriers.
They should work like Protoss carriers.
Also I want a sub that shoots out like 100 tiny drones at once that are near impossible to track with tactical nukes on them. Say good bye to your coast China.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noH-dsRzmr0
>>55192864
>I can't tell if F-35 is great or shit.
That's because your a brain-washed American.
>>55200484
Hey any real Muricans despise this thing teanigger
Honestly, this was a scam from Lockeed so they could get free money for other black projects. Greys are indeed a lie too, flying saucer and triangles are man made like twinkies.
Its an engineering marvel.
Oh, you intend to use this thing for wars? Fucking fools.
>>55192864
>I can't tell if F-35 is great or shit.
It`s a multirole.
And for that job, it`s perfect.
But they need to come up with legit A-10 replacement.
They cant add extra hours on that airframe by doing CAS on mudslimes or some other bushfire wars.
>>55200283
its actually not expensive the cost of it is for its total lifetime all the way up to 2065, thats why it seems like its overpriced but in reality its cheaper than any other fighter in the market.
uh carriers can withstand nukes , surface to surface isnt going to do shit.
submersible drones are actually in the works
>>55192864
Both.
It's great shit.
>>55201233
It`s RAM skin is very durable. You couldn`t have done pic related on F-117 and B-2.
>>55201158
>carriers can withstand nukes
>>55193173
Are you retarded?
The JSF program started before even Bush was in office
Its great desu senpai
>>55199797
because you can jam fucking drones, iran captured one.
>>55192864
not raptor = shit
>>55201333
Trips of truth.
>>55201279
>>55201373
It's shit.
>>55200240
where the fuck did your ignorant ass read this? New carriers will be built to withstand it, the damage from the heat from vtol would take decades before it really did anything noticeable which by then the carrier would be replaced.
>>55201333
Can't jam self contained AI killbots bruh
baka desu senpai
>>55201414
>>55201461
>>55201528
Whoops, it`s B variant.
>>55201562
>>55201451
Electronic warfare would fuck it up, not to mention making self contained will severely restrict and limit it. To which i ask what would be the difference between it and a human piloting a jet.
>>55201528
That's an RAF F-35B, too bad we didn't accept the offer from the USAF to have the F-22.
>>55201880
The F-22 is permanently banned from export, you got no such offer. Besides you need the F-35B for your ski-jump carriers.
>>55192864
There are statistics on how much the US military spends on propaganda.
For all you know, the SU-35 might be better than it, just like the early Migs were against the Sabres
>>55193225
>Every American's face when they realise how much they have spent on such junk
>>55201854
Size and weight.
Putting a human in a flying can is still insanely expensive, compared to Drones which can fit in a garage.
Drones are good for when you have air superiority or doing long range recon. Afghanistan and Columbia are perfect places for it, but you need a decision maker when fighting other humans.
I know some of those parts are insanely expensive. It might get to the point where an AI plane costs more to build and maintain than just shoving a person in it.
>>55201158
Haha survive nukes? no, not happening. Even an airburst over the carrier would destroy it. If somehow, through extreme circumstances it survived, the rolling sea from the explosion would easily tear it apart.
>>55192864
It's a trillion+ dollars for a fighter that, with its current pace of development, will be obsolete by the time it's actually finished.
You could have built a moon colony for the price of the F-35, America.
You fucked up.
>>55202072
>Wrong pic
>>55202234
It's surprising to me (and it really shouldn't be) that people are shocked.... SHOCKED!... that the US Air Force needs new fighters, new bombers, new this or new that. I love it when they write it off as corporate wellfare to the military industrial complex, or something else as ridiculous as that.
Instead, they should look at your car. You buy your Chevy. First month... first year, runs great. After 3 years, not to bad. 10 years? It's aging for sure. 15 years and 200,000 miles? Probably in pretty bad shape. The bottom is pretty rusted. Who knows how many times it's been into the body shop. Lots of small things break all the time.
Any technology, any vehicle is the exact same. Army tanks, Navy boats, Air Force jets. You drive a thing, fly a thing, sail a thing through tough conditions and high stress, and things age.
With regards to Aircraft this is interesting and relevant because there was a time the Air Force expected to keep the venerable F-16 through 2035. Now they're looking to get them all out of inventory by 2025 because a decade and change of doing orbits over Iraq and Afghanistan - something they were never intended for - took about 10 years off their safely usable lives.
>>55202241
>mfw two whole carriers being built
>filled with f-35s
Just fuck my budget up family
>>55201958
We got the offer, there are British pilots flying the F-22 on placement in the States.
It might of been after BAE tracked it with a Rapier at RAF Farnborough the other year...
>>55202152
Size and weight is irrelevant, its about the appliance of the tech it uses, which is why the f35 is so great, it can link up to the entire us defence network. With a closed system you can't do that. The cost of a drone is barely any cheaper, so thats not an incentive to make that change.
>>55201158
>its actually not expensive the cost of it is for its total lifetime all the way up to 2065
The cost also assumes there will be no further costs added onto this at any point, ever, and only covers the CONTRACTOR costs. Not the costs for everything unrelated to the contractors.
The full actual cost is already going around 3 trillion over its lifetime and it'll probably rise to some point between 5 and 10 trillion at the rate it's going.
What a fucking shitshow.
>>55202234
except that trillion dollars is for its entire lifespan, aka 2065. Jesus christ do you even bother studying what you spew. All jet programs are expensive the f35 is the only one that actually published its costs. f35 is cheaper than all other airframes out there
>>55202234
Guess you guys will just stick with your flying museum pieces.
>>55202407
>it can link up to the entire us defence network.
To be fair, the entire air wing is supposed to do it.
LRSB is a part of that.
F-22 and F-15 Talon HATE pod upgrade is a part of that.
>>55202367
Don't forget that the cost of the F-35 program is less than the projected cost of refitting the F-15s,16,18s to "similar" capability
>>55202423
No the costs also include all further improvements and possible upgrades. Your full of shit
Its also 1.1 trillion dollars not 3 trillion, 3 trillion is how much it would cost to update and maintain all our other jets
1 trillion dollars for 2400 jets. By the end of their life time the US will have generated more than a quadrillion dollars then it would compared to refitting and maintaining our current ones.
>>55202512
Yes but it can do all the by itself.
>>55202508
>abandon thread.webm
>>55202508
The super hornet is a great multirole. It's outdated, but it's reliable and cheap to maintain.
>>55202687
To be fair, that only accounts for all projected improvements and upgrades. Like say sometime before 2065 we invent some radical new engine system that could be integrated into the F-35, that would push the cost of the program up beyond the current planned figure.
It seems pretty likely to me that upgrades will end up costing far more than currently planned, given the lifespan we are talking about here.
>>55202886
the f35 is cheaper
>>55202904
F-35 will host the first generation of new ADVENT engine that is supposed to be ready by mid to late 2020`s.
Greater range, fuel efficiency and lower IR signature.
Then F-A/F-X replacement will probably the first true aircraft designed for and around it ( late 2020`s, early to mid 2030`s).
>>55192864
The F-35 is kind of a lemon. It's so incredibly complicated that shit goes wrong all the time.
It will probably end up being like our Seaking helicopters. For every hour of flight they require 24 hours of maintenance.
>>55203030
It`s not. It`s way cheaper than Super Hornet.
Hell, even Advanced Super Hornet would be cheaper than A variant, nevermind C variant which costs 20 more millions on top of A variants price.
>>55203108
So this is Obama's initiative to make a greener fighter jet.
>>55203108
>6th Generation fighters already in the pipeline
>Before a single 5th Gen fighter even saw real combat
>No other country even has a 5th Gen fighter yet
What will be the defining thing for the 6th Gen anyway?
>>55203314
Kickbacks no smaller than $1 billion.
>>55192864
f22 is better
f35 has a lower top speed than f22 and is less maneuverable
>>55203185
Nothing to do with Obama but a logical evolution with jet engines.
They wanted to have it ready for F-35 in 00`s but realized it`s simply unrealistic, considering all the new technology that needs to be made, invented to have reliable ADVENT engine.
The problem with current engines is that they function in pretty much the same way no matter how you fly.
ADVENT will adress it.
>>55197192
hah yanks and their Top Gun make believe reality. You cant handle the truth. 80's doctrine stealth crap has been made obsolete with modern radar tech such as AESA. "Stealth" is lockmart speak for "you have to buy our overpriced cashgrab shit".
INB4: M-muh luneberg lens
>>55203314
No one really knows but we know as a matter of fact they have already moved STOVL/VTOL type of requirement out of it considering how much B variant sabotaged F-35 in every aspect imaginable.
Probably:
-high energy lasers (first ones will deploy by the end of this decade on USN destroyers/Zumwalts)
-advanced stealth
-advanced engines
Can`t even imagine the rest but probably something game-breaking. Last manned fighter nonetheless.
>>55201288
>>55202225
Modern carriers are able to survive ballistic missile attacks, to the point where the navy considers the threat to be minor. This coming from report from lexington institute
>>55202378
Don''t worry mate they can just magical make more money appear, it's just numbers on a screen, all they need to do is to add a few more zeros on the end
>>55203388
speed is meaningless when you fighter 100km away from each other. The moment you get your lock on and shoot, the fight will be over. F35 avionics are way more advanced then any other aircraft so speed and maneuverability wont mean shit when you don't even detect the missile till it hits you
>>55203764
I wouldn`t be soconfident in the BVR concept.
Sure, the probability of dogfighting now and in the future is low but you never know what can and as it usually does, go wrong.
The real weakness is the lack of long-range, modern A-A weapons.
>>55203764
Speed and maneuverability is useful when the enemy bypasses your stealth and starts shooting at you from 110 km away.
>>55203925
No because you would still be using missiles, you don't understand how far away modern jets would be fighting from each other, it all about getting the first shot in, and the f35 does that as no other jet can challenge its systems atm.
Nothing out their at the moment can compete with the f35 so your hypothetical scenario is meangless until something that can challenge comes up.
>>55203879
Those are weapon problems not the jets. I do agree we need some new missile tech however. Still no one possesses anything that can challenge it at the moment so the BVR concept is solid till then
>>55201429
>where the fuck did your ignorant ass read this?
The US Naval Institute
http://news.usni.org/2014/01/15/sna-2014-heat-f-35-mv-22-continue-plague-big-deck-amphibs
>>55201145
They don't need a new A-10, they need more gunships.
>>55203666
nice try satan...
>hurr, we survive 800Kg scud warhead
then comes 80KT (over 9000 more powerful) nuke vaporizing the bridge and tearing ship into irradiated scrap.
gl with that
>>55203666
even if the carrier can survive it, the crew won't.
And there's no way a carrier can survive it desu
>>55192864
It's okay, actually.
>>55205035
It's a ship, not a bunker. It doesn't need to survive a nuclear attack.
>>55205035
If it escalates to Nukes then nothing matters anymore, its MAD time.
>>55196039
>This plane has been stuck in development hell for 20 years
Its development period has been as long as the Eurofighters.
![tumblr_mh3h30b7JC1riyvejo1_500[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/1ZRxssU.gif "tumblr_mh3h30b7JC1riyvejo1_500[1].gif")
>>55203754
>mfw that's true
>>55196432
Sorry Swedebro, the Gripen being inferior does not mean its ok to lie about the F-35.
>>55192864
All the marines say the f-35 is their preference. While others are clearly superior in a dog fight the f-35 stealth and sensors are much more superior. The F-35 will lock in and shoot you down before you come close to locking in on it.
>>55192864
I like how it is like a transformer.
>Autobots roll-out!
>>55192864
It's shit. Even based Trump confirmed it.
>>55202072
>Every American's face when they realise how much they have spent on such junk
About $50 billion total spread over the last 15 years.
Oh, you were dumb enough to think a trillion has already been spent.
>>55206059
I wonder what poor Seaman gets to repair the massive hole on the ship deck.
>>55206017
>While others are clearly superior in a dog fight
If you are basing this on the F-16 dogfight that never happened, you might want to visit /k/ more often.
>>55206017
Literally every encounter with enemy aircraft will result in a dog fight, that's why the F22 will be running support for the F35. http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/politics/us-aircraft-carrier-russian-plane-encounter/index.html
>>55206278
>Literally every encounter with enemy aircraft will result in a dog fight
Dogfights have rarely occurred in the last 40 years.
Lol.nigers. s500 will bring to earth this murican plane.
>>55201854
you can fly a drone for up to 36 hours, you cant keep a manned aircraft up that long
>>55206328
Yes because we are not at war with a country that has an actual airforce that isn't meme planes. No pilot will fire off missiles from miles away when the enemy aircraft isn't engaging them.
>>55206091
Trump gets his shit from War is Boring.
Literally the same points he raises about defense is in there.
its shit tier. it beats out the f15?18 but it has nothing on the f22 or russia and chinas new superfighters. it will be of great help but up against anyone it would matter agains it will just get chewed up and us marines will pay the fucking price. 20 years for bullshit. all that money could buy a new fleet of worth while f22
isn't the thing loaded with British tech?
>>55206422
>the US is the only country in the last 40 years to see air to air combat
>>55206541
>falklands
>>55206017
Even if it were true that an F-16 beat an F-35 in a dogfight (it isn't true, it is just sensationalist headlining) it would still be retarded to judge based on a sample of 1. The Air Force has said that the F-35 has won literally every other time they've been put up against each other.
>>55206344
That's probably true. But the F-35 will still be more SAM-resistant than any other fighter. Stop thinking in terms of absolutes and start thinking in terms of percentages. Having stealth improves the odds that you'll be able to detect the SAM before it detects you. A lot of the F-35's sensors are geared toward detecting sources of radar so it can either strike first or run away if it encounters something that could threaten it.
>>55206505
The drive shaft from the engine to the lift fan is made by Rolls Royce. Pentagon tried to brush them off and give it to an American firm after they designed it, but it seems your engineering is kekworthy by comparison.
Still...teeth, eh?
russian fighters are cooler tho
>>55206494
The J-20 might be breddy gud, but don't get your hopes up on the T-50.
>>55192864
Its good, just not $trillions good.
>>55206632
Yes, I was pointing out that there have been many wars with air combat that did not feature a super power.
>>55206691
how dare you question the pak fa
>>55206017
thats assuming its just a 1v1, if your E3 or equivalent has already spotted it from 300 miles away it wont matter much
>>55206059
Damn, the F-35B looks futuristic as fuck.
A multirole plane is something you make if your military is so small that it cannot afford the R&D and upkeep for a full set of specialist aircraft.
The USA has goofed on a ridiculous level with the F-35, spending so much on trying to make it do everything as good as a specialist aircraft (which is impossible.)
>>55206778
>Yes, I was pointing out that there have been many wars with air combat that did not feature a super power.
Sorry, missread your post
Got me thinking of the Iraqi Iran war tough, need to dig up info on how the air war was
>>55206678
>>55206783
Fancy maneuvering like this is entirely pointless in combat, you can't outmaneuver modern missile systems.
>>55206645
>Dat French SAM
>On German Marder IFV chassis
>Sporting the Slovenian flag
>Prolly somewhere on a Greek firing range
My mind can only go so far...
>>55206146
Try 1.3 Trillion dick face
>>55206653
There's just something about Brits and engines.
>>55207191
Is it 2065 already?
John Oliver would be shocked.
>>55205946
not the same sweden here, but Gripen is a guerilla style multirole developed to do air defense and everything also, but anti air is the core. An aircraft that was able to fight russia even when half of the country was under red army control.
The F-35 was not intended for air defense, but for strikes against defended ground targets. The F-35 will have sub par performance per price against aircraft made to fill the air defense role. The F-22 is slimmer, faster and turns tighter because it's a focused design against other aircraft.
it would probably have been smarter if the US had looked at the F-16 concept and made a new aircraft design based on those ideas but with modern tech. It's easier to put heavy bombs on a fighter than turn a fat bodied sluggish strike bomber into a fast agile fighter.
>>55207191
$1.5 trillion is the estimated cost of the ENTIRE PROGRAM, including maintenance, upgrades, unit costs, procurement, and development, spread out over 50 years.
>>55206783
12 airframes by 2020.
That constitutes a program in comatose state.
Sure, maybe they`ll get 150 or so airframes by 2025. But at that point it`ll be facing the real scenario of having to share airspace with 6th generaton US fighter that should be online by 2030.
As for Chinese shit.. well... urgh.
>>55206783
And that isnt PAK-FA.
This is.
>>55207366
>All that smoke coming out of the exhaust
Looks like it is going to crash.
>>55206247
>>55206278
>>55206645
>>55206785
>The official Air Force comment on the story from Maj. Gen. Jeffrey L. Harrigian, head of the Air Force’s F-35 Integration Office simply says: “It is too soon to draw any final conclusions on the maneuverability of the aircraft. The F-35 is designed to be comparable to current tactical fighters in terms of maneuverability, but the design is optimized for stealth. This will allow it to operate in threat environments where the F-16 could not survive.” Hostage said virtually the same thing about the F-16 and the F-35 in our interview last year. The reasonable conclusion of all this: the F-35 is not a top dogfighting aircraft because it wasn’t designed to be one. And it wasn’t designed to be one because it is better to kill the enemy from a distance before the enemy can target you.
>>55207435
Nah, that's pretty normal for Chinese engines.
>>55207435
Nah, just good old Mig-29 engines... in ''5th gen'' aircraft.
Chinks cant in to jet engines.
They have tried multiple times to steal data on it.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/industry/2015/10/27/china-accused-trying-acquire-fighter-engines-uav/74676946/
>>55207497
> Not knowing it uses engines from the soviet era (RD-33)
Oh, this isn't /k...
>>55207566
Some of them use WS-10s.
>>55207448
Let's logically think through this. You are in you F35 carrying two bombs and 2 AIM missiles. You drop your bombs, and suddenly enemy aircraft appear, yet they don't see you. You have two opinions, run and leave it up to the F22, or fire your missiles, give away your position and hope they hit, if they don't hit you are dead because the F35 can't out run anything nor dog fight.
>>55207779
>because the F35 can't out run anything nor dog fight.
[Citation Needed]
I don't know how we came to live in a world where 1900 km/h is considered slow.
>>55207149
>A multirole plane is something you make if your military is so small that it cannot afford the R&D and upkeep for a full set of specialist aircraft.
Which is why the US flies ~2000 Vipers and Hornets, oh wait.
>>55207779
Firing missiles does not give away your position, in fact missiles like the AIM-120 can be passively guided all the way to their target.
>>55192864
It's good, hating on the F-35 is just a meme.
>>55207534
i hope that we've set up honeypots with flawed designs that are engineered to blow the fuck up after a short service life
>>55208050
>Australian flag
Your whole country is a meme into le trash it goes
>>55207296
The Gripen is less agile than an F-35, the fat and slow meme is a lie thats is fed by ignorance and nationalism.
>>55208131
I'm serious, people who denounce the F-35 have no fucking clue how modern air combat actually works, they still think dog fighting is relevant.
>>55207914
>I don't know how we came to live in a world where 1900 km/h is considered slow.
Are you for real? We're living in a world where Muslims who are talking about murdering people because they have an opposing view, then the governments of these countries they want to murder people from are unironically paying the Muslims money to live there. We're living in a world where chopping your dick off automatically qualifies you as a woman and adding an inflatable sausage to a woman makes her a man, a world where these kind of decisions are being made by children as young as 3. A world where Indians are unironically shitting in designated streets. A world where the most powerful person in the free world is a Kenyan. And you're asking why 1900kmh is slow? It's fucking 2015 people COME ON!
>>55208228
>He just won't stop the shit posting
Fair play Ozfag
>>55209175
It is curious to see an Aussie making logical posts while a Bong is shitposting.
Every fighter jet development finalized after the mid 90's turns out to be a disaster, the flyaway cost of the typhoon is about the same as F-35.
seems like the idea of f-35 is to get up somewhere fast, plugged in and networked as fuck, and let loose missles from far range and get back
>>55209601
The idea of the F-35 is to act as a super-duper-mega upgraded Hornet.
>>55197487
>>55196944
yurope pls
no
the f-18 which was designed in the 60's can take on the typhoon
the typhoon itself looks like a shitty f-18 anyways
>>55192950
that post.
nothing else expected from a shitskin untermensch.
>>55199740
>the problem is VSTOL is a meme
Meanwhile in the real world, Norman Schwarzkopf said that the AV-8B was one of the most important weapons of Desert Storm. But armchair generals know better, right?
>The f-16 is shit, muh tax paya dallas
>the f22 is shit, muh tax paya dallas
>The apache is shit, muh tax paya dallas
>the v22 is shit, muh tax paya dallas
>every military project ever
obligatory
>>55192947
Will those two new models both take another gazillion dollars to build?
>>55202072
We bought it too retard, and we bought the wort variant of it.
>>55209360
>goy is this keked about the plane he needs to defend australian shitposting
>>55210820
>We bought the only version that we can actually use because our carriers are too small for non-V/STOL aircraft.
Fixed it.
>>55210921
why do we need carriers? we dont fight 20000 miles away from our country
>>55210921
You don't know what you're talking about. HMS QE2 is more than big enough to have catapults.
>>55210860
You are probably the Dutch anon who gets triggered by /k/ having positive opinions of American equipment.
>>55211033
Its the anon who makes bong/burger bait threads.
>>55203599
>last manned fighter
not happening until we figure out quantum communication or sentient human-like AI
fighters aren't like cars, you can't just program them to do something
they need to have a human making the decisions
a totally unmanned fighter would have to be able to operate (as in kill) autonomously, otherwise the controller signal could just be jammed and you'd have a bunch of fancy R/C planes putting around (hence quantum communication which theoretically can't be interfered with)
there are obvious moral issues here, for example
>get bad intel on enemy encampment
>dispatch autonomous drone
>lose connection with it about halfway to its destination due to hostile ECM
>it flies off, bombs the right coordinates, comes back
>as you're reviewing camera footage you realize that it's not a military encampment but a civilian town
>suddenly you're the most famous person on the planet
A human in this situation would've been able to make that determination, find a communication window and ask for confirmation
It has the potential to be an extremely effective weapon but the risks are way too high
>>55211323
Literally the only benefit of a human over an AI is that they can take the blame and be put in prison if something goes wrong.
>>55193074
Text to speech programs have advanced quite a bit.
>>55211077
burger please. I dont even visit /K/ but I already know the board visitors are mainly usa posters
>>55192864
>great
>shit
>great shit
I'm split. You always hear a shit ton about the failures of it, but I'm not sure if those are just exaggerated by competitors who the next contract to go to them and not Lockhead, and/or from anti-Burger sources just to list the weaknesses of the West for funz.
Part of me says that all of those NATO and allied countries who buy it affirm that it's a good aircraft and all of those reported faults are subjective or relative. But yet again, the Military Defense complex has shown it-self to be very influential in getting Governments to buy their over-priced shit. But then I think: don't the foreign-buyers (like the UK) have their own domestic Military Defense complex, that is more influential with their own government, that would try to prevent them from ordering them?
It seems like these threads always have people talking out of their asses who do-so just to pass time.
>>55193019
>did obama stop the F-22 program because he hates america or because it was actually a good idea to phase out
Given our current fetish for bombing the living shit out of third world countries for 60 years now, its "impractical" to have a whole bunch of dedicated air to air fighters on hand.
>>55213112
That's why we need a hot war with, say, Germany and France. Then we'll be able to see if our stuff is worthwhile.
I'd say Russia but it would be very counterproductive to have a fun fight against a white nation right now.
>>55192864
Honestly before they would ever have a chance to shine, they will be obsolete because of drones and other technology. The US and the west only fights 3rd world shitholes so any fighter or bomber will do.
>>55196944
>Because fighter pilots certainly aren't cocky shitheads prone to dramatization.
https://vimeo.com/80490410
>>55215554
>>superbug for 30M$
Where do I get one?
>>55192950
Why DZ the abbreviation for Algeria?
>>55200257
It like an occulus rift they "see" thru the entire cock pit.
>>55195691
Tell that to the Osprey pilots tbqhwy.
Shit has literally killed more soldiers just crashing from it fucking up than from enemy fire, yet they built 200 anyway
>>55218494
I dont care things are fucking cool, the base im on has them and i love them.
>>55216584
Nowhere, given they go for ~$65 mil currently.
>>55218494
>best safety record of any rotorcraft for the last decade
