/k/ - Weapons

Ok, dumb I only care about small arms question: what ever happened to the F22?

>>571896

No money after the Cold War ended, production line was shut down.

>>571896

It actually works and doesn't urgently need any upgrades, so production was immediately halted and all the tooling """""disappeared""""" shortly before the chinks unveiled their new stealth fighter.

>>571896

It was twice superior to F-35 and about the same cost, but the factories and tools needed to make it were melted into scrap metal. The F-22 was the only airplane Russia was concerned about because they could wreck F-117, B-2 and F-35 all day. Some say the brits had something to do with it, as in F-22 was too advanced for them and incompatible with their carriers, and it made no sense for america to be vastly superior to allies it would be working with.

Basically it was a victim of its own success, it gave too much value to the military for the same amount of money, ergo.. wasn't worth it. F-35 is less value, effort and resources for the same price (or more in some cases).

Wait, there's still work being or pretending to be done on the F-35? I thought it was just in limbo where it wasn't making progress even on paper. I sort of assumed it had been declared "finished enough" already and nobody had cared enough to put them into service. I figured they were so certain that the shekels would continue to flow that they had stopped bothering to keep up the illusion it was a legitimate project.

>>571908

Software still isn't done. The gun fires off center of the aiming reticule, the countermeasures don't work, and the maintenance tracking is a disaster.

>>571907

>Some say the brits had something to do with it, as in F-22 was too advanced for them and incompatible with their carriers

You've got planes mixed up. F-22 never had a Navy variant, it's always been a USAF exclusive plane. Many of the problems surrounding F-35 have been attributed to britbongs demanding that it be made to work with their shitty carriers, but I'm not sure what the truth of that is.

>>571896

SecDef Robert Gates bought into the multirole meme.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180310105943/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/16/AR2009071603872.html

> For Gates, the Lockheed Martin F-22, which has been in development for almost three decades, has become a potent symbol of why the Pentagon needs to change the way it prepares for future wars. The high-tech aircraft was designed to counter Soviet jets in the waning days of the Cold War. Today, no U.S. adversaries have a plane in development that can match it or the F-35, which the Pentagon plans to deploy over the next decade.

>China will not be able to field a similar plane until about 2025, when the United States will have more than 1,700 F-35s, Gates said.

While I was looking into this, I found a curiosity.

https://www.wired.com/2009/04/ask-bob-gates-a/

This article has a dead link to a transcript of a speech Gates gave to the Air War College on April 14, 2009 and I can't find the speech anywhere. Not even the US DOD archive has it listed:

http://archive.defense.gov/speeches/default.aspx?mo=4&yr=2009

Even though it has a speech of his at the Naval War College two days later, where he said

>Finally, I concluded we needed to shift away from the 99 percent “exquisite” service-centric platforms that are so costly and so complex that they take forever to build, and only then, and deployed in very limited quantities. With the pace of technological and geopolitical change, and the range of possible contingencies, we must look more to the 80 percent multi-service solution that can be produced on time, on budget, and in significant numbers. As Stalin once said, “Quantity has a quality all of its own.”

If someone could find this speech, I'd be very interested in reading it because that Wired article makes it sound important.

>>571921

>bought into the multirole meme.

But the multirole isn't a meme.

A F-14, a Rafale B/M, a F-15E, tandem seat Su-27, etc… are perfectly fine multirole fighters, they have the range, the payload and the performance to do both things appropriately.

The F-35 just isn't one of them…

I mean there isn't even a two seats version!

>>571929

The day we completely retire the F-15 is the day America will be invaded. We should push for the F-15 to get it's final upgrade with that stealth package so we can justify keeping it around till 2030.

>>571909

What the actual fucking hell.

>>571940

Gee xi, your peasants let you have two engines?

>>571936

Thats an issue with the pod guns on C and B. The aiming reticule is about the fixed gun on the A.

>>571946

Aaaaahhhhh

I want Caproni and his crazy ideas back too.

>>571956

>based

For what i knew it was a joint operation between Aermacchi and Yak. Only that Yak bailed out or wasn't putting funds on it or something else, and they separated making each their own plane with the deal that Aermacchi will sell to the West and Yak to the East.

>>571930

Fusion of F-15SMT/D with F-15SE would be all that America needs.

>>571896

We won't produce them because it's more convenient to produce the 35 than to deal with Israel who sold a lot of military technology to China such as the Patriot missile twice.

>>571973

You do realize that only non-US operational F-35 squadron is Israeli right?

Everyone else only has test sample so far with most of the further deliveries being pushed back for 2019 or later.

In fact being a point defense light fighter-bomber it's almost as if it was meant to be operated as the sole aircraft of a small country that need good penetration/stealth on all it's aircraft because it's surrounded by legacy soviet/Russian air defense. Rather than a long range air/superiority fighter bomber that the US need to cover their vast airspace, let alone their empire…

>>571883

Oh and BTW the pentagon has ceased to take in deliveries of F-35 for the third time.

https://archive.is/bU2QM

After the fuel liners that were faulty, the panels that were corroded now Lockheeb want to bill the repairs of the faulty planes barely out…

>>571993

Cost.

If F-35 cost <$50 million as originally promised no one would be complaining, the shortcomings of the program would be outweighed by the benefits.

However Canada is paying $9 billion for 65 aircraft not counting the sunk-cost in development, or maintenance cost while for this money we could buy forty frigates, ten destroyers and three cruisers, giving us:

>Task force North: 1x destroyer, 2x frigate (plus x8 current frigate)

>Pacific fleet: 1x cruiser, 3x destroyer and 6x frigate (plus x2 current frigate)

>Atlantic fleet: 1x cruiser, 3x destroyer and 6x frigate (plus x2 current frigate)

>Expeditionary fleet: 1x cruiser, 3x destroyer and 6x frigate

Putting Canada in the top ten naval powers in the world and finally giving us control over our own fucking coast.

One has to weigh that in the balance between getting a third rate air force.

>>571963

Yak-UTS design started in 1990 and was complete in 1993. In 1993 Yakovlev needed cash and formed a deal with Aermacchi to help with developing the design into a saleable product. Aermacchi wanted full control and Yakovlev wouldn't hand it over, so the two companies split. Aermacchi paid about $77 million for the design of the airplane, and claimed they invented it. Kind of the same thing that happened between Yakovlev and Lockheed for the invention of the first supersonic VTOL.

Yakovlev basically gets shit on by everyone.

>>571993

>What are the main problems of the F-35?

Money.

The F-35 is supposed to replace the F-16 fleet, initially at 1:1.

Now a F-16 is around $20M which is why it allows even small countries like Belgium or Danemark, or Norway, etc… to have a small but credible fleet of around 40 aircraft standing (and around 60 in total). That's the main great advantage of the F-16. It's a good plane at a dirt cheap cost, which allowed NATO to develop it's total air supremacy model, because the USAF is gigantic but if you add all the US allies F-16 fleet you get a silly result.

Despite their initial claim nobody trusted Lockheeb to actually deliver "a F-16 version of the F-22" at the same price but people believed them when they then said it would 3 times the cost of a F-16 with hope to reduce it in time with production gains. A 1:3 is acceptable ,sure the small air-force would suffer a drastic reduction of numbers but, if the plane were to be so much superior to a F-16 in tech and in design to it's foreign counterpart that it wouldn't much of a problem.

Already people were extremely dubious, SAAB, EADS and especially Dassault yelled bullshit that Lockheeb would never deliver a meta-material and hi-tech at that cost, no matter how much they make.

Today we see the results the price per plane is certainly not $20M. It's not 60M. It's almost $140M per.

Meaning if you operated around 60 F-16. On the same budget you can operate 9 F-35.

And while dubious, it might have been possible for 20 to do the job of 60, 9 planes will never do the job of 60 no matter how good they are.

Worse $140M per is the high ballpark of a Rafale/Eurofighter that all the countries client of the F-16 and now F-35 always swore not to buy because those were far too costly for them.

It's reported problems and performance issues are just the cherry on top.

If they really cost that much money it is a failure because even if it doesn't break the USAF, it will break NATO back.

>>572025

How are these companies funded? Not just aircraft, but private defence companies in general. Most of them don't seem to sell any of the products they developed, yet you don't hear about them crashing all the time. Are they relying on other sources of income?

>>572037

Aerimacchi makes mostly parts (Eurofighter, C27, Tornado).

Lots of aircraft companies still exist as part providers, giant companies (Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier) are doing the assembly.

For example Morane-Saulnier and Latécoère still exist in France, one has changed name and the other just makes fuselage sections and doors, etc…

>>572025

Nope, design was complete a few years before Aermacchi entered the picture. Yakovlev does have pretty low ability to construct military aircraft, so some parts might have been sourced from Aermacchi. I mean Yak-130 isn't being made at a Yakovlev plant, it's being made at SOKOL which is owned by MiG.

Thats what I mean by "based" on a Yakovlev design, the final result is a mixture of technologies.

>>572037

Some companies are mostly design bureaus, with limited production capacity. A thousand college interns with AutoCAD, a prototype mould, and a wind tunnel aren't that expensive to run in the large scheme of things, especially since most equipment is a commie-era relic and costs them nothing. At one point in the 90s Yakovlev made and restored old WWII aircraft and sold them to private buyers for millions apiece, kept their doors open when the Russian economy was garbage. Even the pittance of $77 million can keep Yakovlevs lights on for fifty years.

As for others like Aermacchi, they make weapon systems, rockets, parts, and sell service packages depending on company. Also they always dip a toe in the commercial industry which provides a steady income stream.

The large numbers that are often quoted as costs to develop an aircraft are often spread out over ten or twenty years and include all kinds of investment sources or even literal bank based business credits.

>>571896

Basically: it got kiked

>>571896

Similar "I only know small arms" question, why didn't the F-22 ever get a USN variant for carriers?

>>572068

Same as the F-15.

The USN was already deploying multi-role light fighter/bombers with the Harriers and Hornets (which only have a fraction of the plane they replaced but hey).

>>571963

>I want Caproni and his crazy ideas back too

What kind of crazy ideas Caproni had?

>>571996

>while for this money we could buy forty frigates, ten destroyers and three cruisers

Another nation could buy forty frigates, ten destroyers, and three cruisers for $9 billion. Canada could buy six frigates and a used icebreaker.

>>572183

Yeah but for 9 billions $US the USN can only buy 5 ships armed with a 57mm and 11 RIM-116.

>the F-fourtee-nyaa is dead

>F-22 gao~ is dying

What's the point in living this life anymore?

>>571883

Can't they build the cheap plane and just tape the bombs on them to crash-pilot it by remote control?

>>572441

FB-22 died for the same reason F-22A died.

That's because F-35 would be a more bottomless dollar sinkhole for Lockheeb.

>>572468

>life support for pilot

kek

Protip the giant satellite dish it uses to communicate with the base weighs way more than even a burger pilot.

>>571944

>Focke-Wulf got eaten by Airbus

>Heinkel got eaten by Airbus

>Messerschmidt got eaten by Airbus

>Blohm&Voß (HFB) got eaten by Airbus

>Bölkow got eaten by Airbus

>Arado got killed by commies

>Junkers got eaten by Airbus

>Fokker was betrayed by Daimler

>Dornier cut up and eaten by Airbus

>Henschel dropped aircraft manufacturing and only has one factory left in Kassel producing locomotives

>Klemm got eaten by Bölkow

>Bölkow got eaten by Airbus

>Rhein-Flugzeugbau stopped producing aircraft and are now whoring out their ultra-lightweight design/production to anyone who asks

…

>panavia is partially owned by Airbus

>panavia now celebrates "managing" the Tornado for 40 years on their own website

I shit you not. It says "managing"

Airbus was a mistake.

>>572472

Thank taxation.

Corporate taxes basically ruin small businesses, so in order to survive ruinous taxation practices in the west they have to conglomerate into larger megacorps.

Eventually, due to taxes in every nation, there will be just one corporation on earth controlling everything, building every product, owning every farm and water source…. Only economy outside it will be flea markets and a smattering of one-man plumbers and electricians providing services to poor people.

Then this corporation will just unilaterally abolish all governments, and the leftist utopia of a corporatist socialist state will be realized.

>>572468

>To be frank I have no idea why they still make fighter jets with pilots in them.

Maybe they need the skills to operate the spaceships in the distant future?

>>572481

Why do the Marines need be their own branch,and not the equivalent of paratroopers for the navy?

Why do the marines need VTOL when they have the navy and airforce?

>>572483

They really don't. Neither does the Air Force for that matter, they should be reintegrated as the Army Air Corps.

>>572483

>Paratroopers for the navy

Didn't the US Marines have their own paratroopers as well?

And also it's just a special snowflake Burger thing for how the US Marines are treated. Everyone else integrates them into their Navy or Army pretty much.

>>572502

US would see if they could finally weaponize autistic screeching.

>>572502

He'd get some minor praise over on /k/ from autists who get a stiffy over better logistics handling before continuing to get shit on for being a cuck on bumpfire stocks and becoming progressively more neocon. The Marines would have a spastic fit because they lost their special snowflake status, and with any luck that rage could be harvested for use against the enemy. Chair force would grumble a bit but probably wouldn't care too much as supporting the Army is 99% of their job anyways.

>>572504

>Chair force would grumble a bit but probably wouldn't care too much as supporting the Army is 99% of their job anyways.

Ayy yo hol up. That would mean the airforce won't get to wear their speshul snow flake blue tiger stripe uniforms though.

>>572483

Marines aren't their own branch, they're part of the Navy. They just get special treatment because the Navy essentially selected the dumbest bastards they had, and made them into an expendable meat shield for sailors. That way no one else in USN need ever enter any danger.

Marines are basically the Navys little military force, existing to protect the Navy as if USN were a country.

>>572517

Eh, yes and no. The USMC fall under the purview of the Secretary of the Navy but they are considered a separate branch of the armed forces.

>>572519

I take the opposite view to >>572488 the Marines should be fully separate. In fact considering American soil is protected by 400k Reservists, 300k National Guard and 100m gun owners, there isn't any point to your Army or Air force. The only reason these two branches survived the last 80 years is because America thought these branches could be used to defend Europe in case of Soviet invasion. That hasn't been an issue for awhile.

Step 1: Split the Marines off into their own branch. This will give you a rough ratio of

USN - 138k people, 2500 aircraft, 11 supercarriers

USM - 182k people, 1200 aircraft, 9 light carriers

Step 2: About a third of resources and personnel of the air force should be merged with the Navy, remainder should be established as a space force. The space force would be in charge of most ballistic missiles and high altitute to orbital control. This will also add numbers to the navy and give you a rough ratio of

USN - 256k people, 4600 aircraft, 20 supercarriers

ASF - 150k people, 800 SSTO shuttles, 400 satellites, 10 orbital battlestations

Step 3: All of the budget and resources of the Army should be merged with the Marine force, increasing the total marine strength to:

USM - 575k troops, 6000 aircraft, 30 light carriers

Step 4: Merge 400k reservists with 300k National Guard to make a 700k strong territorial defense force. Allow them to operate state-by-state IADS systems, artillery, and finally build their own aircraft such as the Blitzfighter. This will make them useful in occupation, just transport them to other countries if you need a larger force, kind of like the Army is now.

>>572468

What makes you think current day robots will be able to handle WVR air combat when Raytheon's state of the art AIM-9X can't help but submit to its soviet flare fetish?

Air superiority drones aren't necessarily a bad idea, but we'll need more advancements in AI and such to make them viable.

>>571919

> Many of the problems surrounding F-35 have been attributed to britbongs demanding that it be made to work with their shitty carriers, but I'm not sure what the truth of that is.

Nani? First I've heard of this.

>>572907

Engagements are limited to WVR anyway, at least in most situations. Fights in instrument only ranges are dangerous because the enemy can easily pretend to be one of your aircraft, your allies aircraft, or even a civilian aircraft. Any air force worth anything would close to WVR to confirm before firing. The only time BVR becomes possible is if the enemy isn't spoofing, or if your radar shows four jumbo jets coming at you in fighter formation.

The problem is that "visual range" is based on obsolete measurement of how far a pilot can see, but that was established 70 years ago (160 years ago if you count naval "visual range"). As far as I'm concerned modern sighting tools have expanded WVR combat to >60km, because that's how far we can actually visually confirm a target nowadays.

>>572945

Sorry if stupid question but why aren't cameras of greater performance than the human eye used for visual/optic confirmation?

>>572993

The human eye can't make out a fighter-sized object at 60km you know

>>572993

That's kind of what I meant. Visual confirmation doesn't mean human eye, it can be a camera plus magnification equipment. Technically even infrared might make it under visual confirmation, as long as its multicolor infrared and the shape of the aircraft can be seen (its not just a blot on a screen).

>>572945

>IRST extends WVR to 60+km range

>only real way to guide A2A missiles at long range without acquiring radar lock

<F-22 doesn't have it

What did they mean by this?

>>573003

<>MUH LOW PROBABILITY OF INTERCEPT AESA

most likely.

>>573270

It's a dumb philosophy, when you're all on your own surrounded by thousands of kilometers cubed of air, you need every advantage possible.

>>572335

To bear witness to the end of a civilization

>>573309

>Sort of like an Aircraft version of a Q Ship.

Just for reference, here's the point of a Q Ship.

>Be German U-Boot captain.

>'Oh look, an unarmed merchantman, what an easy target.'

>'Imma surface and get close so I can use my deck guns instead of wasting precious torpedoes.'

<'OH FUCK IT'S SHOOTING AT US GOD WHY'

So to complete this analogy, you'd have to have a situation where the enemy was already shooting down cargo jets, and prefers to close to gun range for whatever reason. (escort out of airspace, escort to allied airfield for capture, not waste precious missiles)

I could see this working against interceptors enforcing a no-fly zone, at least until they get wise and decide to shoot first and ask questions never.

>>573362

>>573385

/k/, why is my wee-wee so stiff and feels funny?

>>573469

Wne an airplan and a man love each other very bery much, the y come together to make a bebe.

>>573385

>forcing the adversary to shoot down every doubledecker airliner in vicinity

Why not just use a C-5 airframe?

>deliver defective planes

>Pentagon tells you to fix them

>"k but pay me"

Fucking Lockheed. This plane is way too over-engineered and will be outdated in less than a decade.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-18/lockheed-digs-in-on-119-million-in-fixes-for-406-billion-f-35

>>571907

>Some say the brits had something to do with it, as in F-22 was too advanced for them and incompatible with their carriers

Gotta love based Britain and our (((special relationship))), they've been like a pair of brick shoes in a swimming pool since WW1.

>>573896

They actually got almost a billion dollars FREE BUX to develop a hypersonic missile.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-awards-lockheed-martin-928-million-contract-fo-447826/

Boeing already developed the Waverider, and applied for the same contract, but for (((some reason))) lockmart got the truckload of cash.

>>573952

Why not use conventional Pershing 2 missiles instead? 1000 mile range, Mach 8 vs mach 5 cruise missile?

>>574052

At that point it's like a satellite reentering atmosphere. It will burn up in a few seconds.

>>574092

Apparently it does get quite hot.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-killer-mach-20-avangard-hypersonic-weapon-about-24884

>“The Avangard system that the president [Vladimir Putin] mentioned is well tested,” Borisov told Krasnaya Zvezda—or Red Star in English.

>“It came about through considerable effort, because temperatures on the surface of a combat unit reach up to 2000 degrees [Celsius]. It really does go through the air surrounded by plasma. Thus, the challenges involved in controlling and defending the system were considerable, but did eventually find resolution. Practical tests have confirmed the chosen approach’s feasibility. In fact, we have secured a contract for mass production of these systems. So this is no bluff, but a serious undertaking.”

>>573996

>MACH 20 Missile

So when do we get footage of it launching and more importantly, when do we get the orgasmic edit of it?

>>574102

>He doesn't regularly check youtube epic-est channel.

>A.K.A. the Russian MoD official channel.

What are you, gay?

Careful, Кинжал (Kinzal) means "dagger" so it's probably extremely illegal to watch something like that in the UK.

>>574092

Still,a reentry vehicle must be able to survive terminal velocity,otherwise there is no point to such weapon system.

>>574109

Makes you wonder what would be adequate defense against something like that.

or Topol-M with mach 22 speed

>>573270

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-to-win-in-a-dogfight-stories-from-a-pilot-who-flew-1682723379

>One sensor that got a lot of discussion from Intel analysts was the infrared search-and-track system (IRSTS). Most postulated that the MiG-29 could use the passive IRSTS to run a silent intercept and not alert anyone to its presence by transmitting with its radar. The IRSTS turned out to be next to useless and could have been left off the MiG-29 with negligible impact on its combat capability. After a couple of attempts at playing around with the IRSTS I dropped it from my bag of tricks

>>574122

>1980s MiG-29 irst

This is basically a cooled sensor like on an Strela missile. It's before CCDs were used, and since then we've also started using QWIPs. That's like going from propeller, to jet, to pulse detonation engine.

We can detect an aircraft from the front at 50km and from the back at 90km today, no afterburners.

Do the Russians have the technology to shoot down stealth aircraft? Why did the west have to use cruise missiles to bomb sytira?

>>574128

>Do the Russians have the technology to shoot down stealth aircraft?

They have passive radar so yes

>Why did the west have to use cruise missiles to bomb sytira?

Cruise missiles are (for some reason) considered less "aggressive" than sending jets over.

>>574128

The US technically isn't allowed to send troops into Syria, but the rules don't say anything about shooting over the border.

>>574153

What would had happen if they shot down a b2?

Would Russia make a lot of sales?

>>574128

The serbs managed to find one with absurdly outdated equipment and hit it too.

>>574174

So aircraft counts as troops but troops on the ground count as military advisors? I have no wish to continue existing on this clownworld.

>>574210

That was an F-117, a totally different animal bruh. (((Some people))) even said it was never all that stealthy anyway. I'm a brainlet but I read that B-2 is stealthier also because it's so big… have to do with radar wave length, weirdly a smaller thing is easier to see on long wave radars or sum shit. I also read some conspiracy theories that B-2 may have some radio wave cancellator generator thing on the huge forward edges of its wings. But that may be bullshit.

>>574174

Then who are those US troops who killed those Russian mercenaries?

>>574247

You're right about the B-2. The size of the B-2 lets it cancel out L-band radar, and it has active suppression technology. But it's a hell of a lot hotter than a F-117…

You're wrong on F-117, it is stealthier than F-35, so it's definitely a stealth aircraft. We stole that design from the Germans so you know its good.

Japan apparently wants to make a F-22 and F-35 hybrid plane and it's going to be "superior to both". What do you guys think?

http://archive.is/b1cuA

>>574328

It's still being done by Lockheed so they'll manage to fuck it up somehow.

>>574328

Good luck J–

>>574330

well fuck

>>574328

>"superior to both"

In what, draining shekels?

>>574330

>>574328

>>574341

It reads like Lockheed will transfer all their stealth tech for Mitsubishi F-3 program (and have nothing to do with the design or even the on-board tech, just the materials and expertise), same as they did for the F-2 (the much better Japanese not-F-16).

Frankly it looks like a bit of a desperate move from Lockheed, the Japanese stealth fighter program is happening, with or without them, better have some of the shekels (and direct insight and technology from foreign concurrents) than none.

It's even funnier when you realize Japan F-35 are in evaluation and they just added another order of 20 last month, it's like a bone thrown to a dog.

Because this means this is their final F-35 order, putting them at 60 F-35 to replace their 60 Phantoms (which ok, the F-35 is certainly better than a F-4 II). When Lockheed hoped to have the F-35 replace the F-4 and the F-15 and ultimately the F-2s (300 planes + any extra for the navy, growth of the JASDF)…

It also means the bulk of the JASDF will indeed be the F-3s replacing the F-15 making the F-2s and F-3s most of the inventory and the JASDF largely US-gear free.

(P3 are being replaced by Kawasaki P-1, C-130 by Kawasaki C-2, etc…)

Evelything is fine, Bulgel-kun, don't wolly about it.

>>574230

>but troops on the ground count as military advisors?

what is vietnam.

>>571883

is the f14 still viable in combat?

>>574410

I ask because of this:

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/f-14-tomcat-the-navy-fighter-it-wishes-it-could-bring-back-24045

>>572007

>all this hand-wringing over money

Our government should have nationalized all defense industry. Instead we get kiked by kikes.

>>574417

All that would have accomplished is nationalizing the kikes, while removing the few checks that existed on their kikery.

>>574410

Of course it is! Only a heretic will tell you otherwise. It will be one of those things that continues being a viable combat option no matter how the battlefields change. Even in a distant future where our battles will be melee with mechas launched from space-carriers in far reaches of outer space, there will always be a place for F-Fourtee-nyaa. Exept that in CY (and moreso distant future) the technological advancements and increased military budgets will allow us to actually maintain and fly them at a reasonable coast and rate by significantly decresing both their maintenance per flight hour (due to technological advances) and maintenance cost and I do pity the maintenance crew who don't get to touch her sexy body (at least as much) because robots have taken over their role, the only somewhat-legit complaints about her. We'll give her a new powerhouse and continue churning out more of her so we don't have to deal with maintaining old aircraft.

I mean, she's one of the few jet fighters out there who actually manages to be multirole. Meaning she's good at everything: fighting, sports, dancing, cooking, arts, and she's studious to a T. She's even good with children. And you know what? Unlike anything, say, Lockheeb, puts out these days she's actually fought and proved herself in actual combat! She downed at least 160 Iraqi aircraft, only suffering 12-14 losses, and half of them were due to incompetent grownd crew not taking good care of her. Why, she's truly waifu-material. I mean, your own post >>574412 is a testament to her status as a true idol. And she's not a puny little thing small enough to drown in a puddle in a mild rain, unlike most modern fighter aircraft. I mean, if she doesn't make your eyes well up with tears, you have no heart.

I mean, read about her! I mean, at least bother to read the kikipedia article about her, and come and tell me you wouldn't be proud to be even killed by her. Listen to what >>574436 says.

Now go question the viability of somone else's plane-fu before I crush your head between her magestic sweeping wings.

>>574450

>checks that existed on their kikery

what's holding the kikes at lockheeb in check?

>>574489

In general, contracting private firms is better because of the possibility of competition and the firm's requirement to remain solvent. It's still pretty fucking bad because any company whose chief client is the government (like lockheed) just ends up as a money-hemorrhaging welfare queen. But if you nationalized Lockheed it would be even fucking worse, they wouldn't even have to pretend to outcompete Boeing, or Northtop Grumman, or any other firm.

>>574490

Why doesn't our government just tell Lockheeb to fuck off and go with Grumann instead?

>>574492

>he doesn't know about the Northrop curse

>>572199

"Defense". Nobody is invading in an open assault. India and Africa just take commercial flights and breed like rabbits to replace the existing population and culture.

>>574492

Grumman doesn't provide our Congressmen with hookers and blow.

>>572472

Serves you right for losing the war.

>>574492

>Why doesn't our government just tell Lockheeb to fuck off and go with Grumann instead?

Your government is corrupt. If your government is autocratic and ruthless then maybe this problem wouldn't exist.

>>574492

Son, Lockheeb [i]is[/i] the government.

>>574516

I have made a complete ass out of myself and I am unable to delete my post. Please kill me.

>>574516

>Son, Lockheeb [i]is[/i] the government.

Son, Lockheeb is the government.

>>574530

>looks a lot like a stealthy F/A-18 to me.

It's a jap F-15SE.

Also in other good news for the F-35 Merkel has fired the chief of the Luftwaffe that wanted to buy some to replace the Tornado.

Rumor down the tubes is we're going for a joint program Dassault/Airbus with Dassault being master contractor and Airbus just system supplier (as they are already on the Rafale).

Some caution remain to be exercised but if it comes true it means there might be a future for a fighter industry in Europe.

Before wehrboos come crying, it would appear that it is the actual payment in exchange of Germany getting Nexter for free.

>>574563

>The F-35 Merkel

I know that it wasn't intentional but that's the new name of the Joint Shekel Finder.

>>574363

>(which ok, the F-35 is certainly better than a F-4 II

Not for high speed recon. :^)

>>574410

>>574436

>>574458

START A FUCKING WHITE HOUSE PETITION ALREADY!

>>574564

*Jewish Shekel Finder

>>574602

Ah but JAST actually cost as much as F-16 and didn't have a VTOL version.

>>574602

>>574615

JAST FUCK MY BUDGET UP FAM

>>574615

>X 5th gen fighter actually cost as much as F-16

Unless it would be of even shittier performance than the F-35 I really doubt it's possible with existing or foreseeable future tech to make a fully stealth fighter cheaper than the F-16 or any single-engined non-stealth fighter in existence for that matter with the possible exception of the Mitsubishi F-2 that was Japan's F-35 equivalent budget-wise.

>>574637

>Su-57 is $50 mil

Doubtful RT-tier claim, especially when its nearly identical non-stealth, non-AESA, closer to the mass produced Su-27/30 baseline, with a less derived engine introductory version, the Su-35, is evaluated at between $55-75 million. Also not a really fitting comparison since Russians always produce considerably cheaper planes for the same effort due to much lower labour costs even if we were not to take in account than the PAK-FA is not a white-sheet design but an on the spot stealthification of the Su-27.

>>574516

>>574517

Lurk moar you fucking faggot.

>>574643

>Su-35

Are you sure you're not quoting the export price? Su-57 export price is almost double.

>>573362

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_XF-85_Goblin

>>574658

A modern engine would be half the diameter and length for same thrust, check out TFE731.

So that ride would be a lot slimmer…

An engine that size would give like 50-80kN.

<Why Does the Public Have Trouble Understanding the F-35?

>Envision a similar, hardened “smart” networking capability flying into a heavily defended airspace, collecting information about ever-changing defenses and defeating them while remaining nearly impossible to detect, finding and automatically prioritizing multiple targets in the air and on the ground even as they change, securely sharing that information with other weapons systems and even employing their weapons against multiple targets, all while going up to Mach 1.5+.

>In the F-35, there’s an app for that.

S-see /k/, you just don't understand! It's gonna be great!

http://archive.is/7GdhD

<Why Does the Public Have Trouble Understanding the F-35?

>Envision a similar, hardened “smart” networking capability flying into a heavily defended airspace, collecting information about ever-changing defenses and defeating them while remaining nearly impossible to detect, finding and automatically prioritizing multiple targets in the air and on the ground even as they change, securely sharing that information with other weapons systems and even employing their weapons against multiple targets, all while going up to Mach 1.5+.

>In the F-35, there’s an app for that.

S-see /k/, you just don't understand! It's gonna be great!

http://archive.is/7GdhD

>>574743

>>574742

>post get's stuck at 100%

>refresh thread

>no post

>try posting again

>original post appears

Okay

>>574743

>>574742

I'm particularly fond of this juicy bit:

>Commensurate with the massive costs associated with F-35, the program has changed nearly every aspect of the modern battlefield, from gender integration to insurgent tactics.

Also

>S-see, citizen-kun, it'd be great if it works

<But it doesn't work

>Yeah, but wouldn't it be great if it worked?

<but does. Not. work Mr. Blattberg!

>but wouldn't it be a dream if it did?

>look, it's like a smartphone. You don't understand… now pay shekels

I love how they throw out that 'smartphone' analogy every time they want to worm their way out.

>>574745

Guess codedonkey's fucked something up again! I had trouble loading threads/ boards myself about an hour ago (like yesterday when a server crashed).

>>574754

Worse what they're speaking of is networked detection plane by plane, which is something the MiG-31 was the first to be equipped with.

The F-22 also had something similar. It's basically the just AWACS technology, but instead of having a big node network, you have a peer to peer network.

Currently ALL NATO assets are networked through link 16 (so does russian and chinese, etc…).

If you take out "while remaining nearly impossible to detect" which everyone knows is bullshit (nothing is impossible to detect), you're just describing a F-16 block 50/52 (or any F-16 that has gone through CCIP) or any plane built since 2000.

>>574765

>you will start to screech austically about why the hell wasn't the YF-23 chosen instead?

The way I understood (or "misread" if you will) the F-22's history was that they wanted the ultimate killer of Su-27's and MiG-29's, and all their "projected" future versions. So I believe the YF-22 was chosen because it looked like it could kill Su-27 and MiG-29 at any range including gun dogfight. In contrast the YF-23 looks like it could lose a gun fight against a MiG-35 with fancy thrust vectoring.

It would be nice if we had some declassified inst. and sust. turn rates, max angles of attack, etc. for YF-23, F-22, MiG-35 and Su-35… and why not F-35 just for shits and giggles.

>The F-22 is only stealthy when it shuts everything off and runs passive. As soon as it turns anything on it lights up like a Christmas Tree.

Just a minute there. That's probably bullshit. The enemy would probably know the F-22's are somewhere but it's not like they could pinpoint the exact location just because some comms are detected (probably not even successfully decrypted). Besides, AESA radar, remember?

>>574758

The problem is radar. The one on F-35 is pathetic, in both coverage, resolution, and frequency. And it's IRST can only resolve a fighter at about 5km range, it's incredibly myopic.

The T-50 program does a good job, it has:

1. One large array in the front, for track and target, in the X band.

2. Two half-sized arrays in each cheek, for tracking only, in the X band.

3. One half sized array in the ass, for tracking only, in the X band.

4. Two full arrays, one in each wing, for IFF and stealth tracking, in the L band.

That's six arrays per plane, all active scan phased array.

Integrating a flight of T-50 actually gets you a pretty decent airborne sensor network, especially if they're far enough from one another to actually triangulate and signal process their L-band stuff. Could generate targeting locks on stealth aircraft.

>>574754

> gender integration

LITERAL SEXUAL IDENTIFICATION AS ATTACK AIRCRAFT!

>>574778

Regarding dogfights the YF-22 only had a clear advantage on instantaneous turn rate, which is of secondary importance, and probably only due to thrust vectoring. If YF-23 incorporated TV it would effectively outclass the YF-22.

Is this what the F-35 looked like inside the heads of the men it was sold to?

>>575243

I'm surprised that anyone, much less a Kraut, has actually heard of this awful movie.

>>575561

What's it about? Besides the rogue AI shit I mean.

>>575243

>Is this what the F-35 looked like inside the heads of the men it was sold to?

Yes.

Also note that even in the movie with super stealth magic, they're immediately detected and fired upon entering Russian airspace.

Jewllywood are expert story tellers with way more experience than Lockheeb on the subject, they know there are limits to the suspension of disbelief.

>>575618

> they're immediately detected and fired upon entering Russian airspace

That was actually Best Korean airspace but it was a refreshing point by kikewood standards that they presented latest technology Russian aircraft as an actual threat instead of James Bond henchmen tier action filler.

>>574778

Well unless F-22 was equipped with directional tight beam comms, or was relying on bouncing the radio signals through the upper atmosphere I do not see why on earth it couldn't be located through triangulation from listening stations or sigint-aircraft. Sure it might help if you sent some tight packets like every 20 seconds or so, but even then it could be detected.

>>575243

Thanks for reminding me that piece of shit movie exists.

>>575568

That for all the gorillions of dollars that they spend on super duper special planes Cold War era Slav planes will match them in a dogfight and be able to detect them.

Also the Vic is better apparently than Finger-Four.

>>575243

>russian fighter comes into frame

>georgian choir mixed into music

>expensive super AI fighter jet

>requires a frameless canopy

>super AI fighter somehow creates the same sounds as a rusty V12 diesel engine

>super stealth satellite

>uses visible spectrum light to scan surface to somehow create IR image

and lastly:

>not installing an emergency off switch in your super AI fighter

I loved how it downloaded a bunch of shitty rock music and essentially turned into a bad hacker stereotype. It's probably one of my favorite shitty movies.

>>575568

Basically we make a 7th generation airplane with an AI, it's supposed to work with 6th generation airplanes.

Russians are still using 4th generation (with weapons obsolete in 60s) and they somehow still provide a challenge.

Also we're still using the Nimitz… to launch our 7th generation jet.

It's actually pretty funny for a jet fighter movie.

I'd like to see the same movie where Russians also have AI 6th gen, but done in a fundamentally different way maybe an AI ground station controlling a swarm. That would be actually fun to watch, because the writers would be stretching their understanding to think things through.

please buy the gripen :^)

>>575657

>It's probably one of my favorite shitty movies.

>Not Kung Fury

>>575784

How about you cut the price 4x first.

>>575801

>does it even have AESA radar update yet?

No. Nor Link 16. (I think they finally have like 2 or 3 pre-prod models).

Also since SAAB and Sweden have made the mistake to ally themselves with Lockheeb they have guaranteed that the US will use ITAR regulations to stop them proposing gripen NG to countries might buy F-16V or F-35.

With Dassault questionable decision to stop making Mirages, the market for a good European light fighter is basically empty with a gigantic customer list.

But the Swedes will not profit from it, the US will make damn sure they won't.

How does it make you feel goyim that we get these for free?

>>575993

Please explain, my greatest ally. Also, what are the modifications the IDF is making to it?

>>575785

Kung Fury tried too hard to be shitty but it's soundtrack is pretty good, and I got a good laugh out of the hitler phone scene

>>576014

Φχαριστώ Γιατρέ.

>>576134

There's some truth to what you say, the creator really wanted it to be a meme. "Kung Führer" is what made it for me, tbh

>>576018

To use Lockheeb terminology, they don't want the 'smartphone' part, for one thing.

>>576014

What really makes me bigthink.png is that they're 'opting out' of the smartphone meme.

>>576294

>>576294

>What really makes me bigthink.png is that they're 'opting out' of the smartphone meme.

Why would they want their best goy to watch them bomb Palestinian hatchlings?

>>573897

>muh radar

>muh encryption

>muh computation

It's almost like Yanks are incapable of appreciating anything

>>576018

It's more a case of what it isn't equipped with

>>576331

Don't forget chobham armour for their tanks.

Also, since the most expensive US military program ever yielded 0 useful results or products, they're hiring BAE to make their armoured vehicles not dogshit 3rd world-tier

>>573897

Where were you when fascists invaded the falklands?

just curious

>>575993

>How does it make you feel goyim that we get these for free?

That even your airforce wanted F-15SE instead and got stuck with F-35 anyway.

Not even the safety or Israel will prevent Lockheeb from making it's shekels.

>>576363

Cheering them against the small kike island, you?

>>576368

It's truly a scary world.

>>574647

So what was this about then?

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a19485/china-f-22-raptor-model/

Archive.is is not working for this link btw

>>575993

>How does it make you feel that we get the worst aircraft in the planet unironically?

Pretty good, hopefully your entire air force will be replaced with these and make you effectively useless. Have fun getting BTFO by the superior F-16

>>572007

Why would you ever buy eurocanards over the f35, though?

>>584035

Lower maintenance price higher conventional performance.

A Eurocanard with F-35 avionics would be an objectively better fighter.

>>584035

>Why would you ever buy eurocanards over the f35, though?

Money again.

Same reason the US will NEVER buy a EU plane (we saw it with the A330 MRTT).

Military budget = taxes.

Pumping taxes into foreign industry = subsiding foreign economy.

States should always, as a rule, refrain to put large amount of tax money from their economy, into someone else economy because you're literally draining your economy and filling the other one.

It's a "no alternative" situation, you do it only when absolutely necessary.

Small EU countries should buy much cheaper Gripens to maintain their fleets at a reasonable number of airframes.

Big ones should buy Rafale/EF that cost the same (slightly less even) amount of money and are better on all points besides the stealth gimmick (because that money will generates taxes, and jobs, within the EU).

>>583837

>F-35 development cost: $1.5 trillion

<Su-57 development cost: $10 billion

>F-35 unit cost: $100 million

<Su-57 unit cost: $50 million

>>583837

>>584065

Nah it's:

<Military scientist literally discover the principles behind electromagnetic scattering.

<Brass estimates it's a very limited and expansive gimmick.

<Applies it to some things when it's inexpensive to do so. (Notably in ships, that's the reason why the Kirov-class battle-cruisers have a relatively small radar footprint despite it's size). Not on planes though as a realist application would only create flying bricks.

<Openly publish the results.

>Lockheeb gets it's paws on some Russian math books.

>See how much they're gonna be able to charge for selling flying bricks.

>Starts saying that since the US somehow can't into supersonic bombers and Russia is close to be able to intercept those anyway, stealth is the solution to bring freedom in it's purest High-Explosive form to liberate the people that don't have a democratic banking system.

>Northrop get it's paws on the same book.

>Decide to do what they always wanted, make Horten designs great again, just use it to fine tune shit.

<Russia see new stealth shit coming out, <WTF? Isn't that shit terribly expensive and pretty useless?

<Go grab it's scientists for analysis. Scientists go "well one is indeed a flying brick and the other is too big to actually be stealthy and must cost a fortune, they can't possibly make many of those.

<-What the counter? -Just crank up the power on the radars."

<-Can't be that simple. -Yes, it is." Must be it's a psy-ops, America must continue the works on it's high speed bombers in secret. Let's continue our high altitude high speed interceptor program.

>Pentagon grabs both by the ears and tell them: "one is a flying brick the other is way too big to really be stealthy and cost the GPD of a small country. Also don't think I haven't noticed the Balkenkreuz on them".

>Since fighter bombers and ICBM made bombers obsolete, ask for a fighter, with a bomber variant in option.

>Northrop stick religiously to his German engineering and Russian maths knowledge.

>Lockheeb "innovates" with S-ducks and what not.

>YF-22 and YF-23.

>YF-23 buries the YF-22 on all points, it flies better, is more stealthy, carry more and is cheaper.

>So of course someone yelled "antisemite" and the US picked the F-22.

<"So it would appear they really like that stealth thing, what should we do? -Multiplying the number of bands and looking for anomaly should be enough for air-defense. There is still the problems of fighter engagements but since our country is in ruins it's not like we're gonna actually attack the US anytime soon."

>Lockheed go "HAHAHA see how great our stealth is we won the cold war because of it. -What? -SHUT IT GOY. -Ok, say merchant since you're my greatest ally can you make stealth planes to replace all the old models of planes I have. -Of course goy I shall make the super hyper plane that will replaces all your planes (and not because it's to maximize my profits by getting all the money of all the allied air forces and only making one model with slight variants). -But Merchant is it even possible my air force has completely opposed need? -SHUT IT GOY".

<"Well our economy has recovered. We should make fighters to counter their stealth fighters, how do we go about it? -We told you already just put more radars on them". BTW now meta-metarials are way cheaper now and can easily be mass produced, so we can likely make a stealth plane with a reasonable price tag".

.

.

.

<Makes an YF-23.

>>584125

He's not. He's just restating shit that the Britbong and Magyar used to say.

>>584120

he's right

>>584126

>Britbong

>Magyar

I like how they just copypaste my shit but since I'm invisible they always get credit. Even for the light tank.

>>584125

Because we sank all their ships while the krauts killed all their men. Aircraft and tanks are the only things they had left to be autistic over.

>>584359

>1 plane

What the fuck can you do with 1 plane?

That's worthless

>>584366

oi that piece of shit just put the British military budget in a deficit for the next 5 years show some respect

Can you guys cool it on the antisemitism?

>>584388

>cool it

That would be counterproductive to the ovens' purpose.

>>584359

I always thought they ship them in bigger planes.

>>584413

Those are STOVL it's at least £500M

>>584129

I'm turboautistic when it comes to tanks but froganon is autistic on both and always types whole paragraphs about them

>>584439

I've asked this before with no response, but how? What is the path one must take to proper tank autism? I know kikepedia/infogalactic is decent for getting design details on specific models, but that doesn't teach how to differentiate good design choices from bad, or proven technologies from moneywasting gimmicks. Especially considering that wiki articles tend to be edit-guarded by whoever has the most autistic fascination with the subject matter, so it rarely provides a dispassionate perspective.

>>584448

Books and knowledge gathered via experience with the subject matter.

>>584453

>Books

At risk of asking for spoonfeeds, can you recommend any? There are loads of armchair generals out there who think act like they know shit but really don't, per lindybeige. I know enough about small arms to spot most of these but not in other subjects

>experience with the subject matter

>you will never get to drive a tank without dying for Israel

Why must you tease me in this way anon?

>>584437

And we've bought £23bn worth of them!

>>584456

>can you recommend any

Not particularly, sorry. Tanks, armored vehicles, aren't really the aspect of this all that I'm into, although you might want to check out the murderkube's vehicle section or the pdf thread for supplementary stuff. Rule of thumb about spotting armchair generals a la lindy is whether they give definitive opinions on things without evidence or in-depth details. 'soandso IFV has maintenance issues' vs 'soandso IFV has from-factory quality-control issues with its torsion bar and related assemblies and its suspension regularly has catastrophic issues'

>>584457

Well look on the bright side £23B is only 40-ish planes.

I have serious doubts you will spend 10 times more money than on the entire Queen Elizabeth-class project just to buy planes…

I mean unless there is some major economical boom the most likely scenario is whole FAA is gonna get the axe next time.

So it's a shit show but it will stop the next time the labour is in power, possibly sooner.

>>584645

No, you've ordered 42 and PLAN to order 138 (with only 24 being for active duty). Just like you PLANNED to have 232 Typhoon (reduced to 160 ordered and with only 107 are actually staying in service thanks to the tranche 1 retardation).

£23B is the budget for that first procurement of 42 planes on the 2014-2023 period.

Just the first 14 was £5.6B…

If you want more Lockheeb ain't giving them out for free.

I have a an idea how to make A-35 not suck.

Use them only for SEAD in hi-lo-hi ground-hugging high subsonic low level penetration missions, that would eliminate their problems of transsonic and supersonic acceleration and they would be virtually invincible to long range SAMs' and fighters' lookdown-shootdown radar (stealth might just be a meme against larger more advanced static defenses but it really makes a low flying stealthy aircraft invisible from above due to ground effect even with full external payload given that its loaded on the underside of the aircraft). IMO the only problem with this use is that this single engined aircraft without a flat exhaust nozzle for IR reduction becomes too vulnerable to MANPADs but even then MANPADs have shitty range, so the MANPAD operator should get lucky for the A-35 to fly directly above him, and are mostly vulnerable to flares (except for the javelin that is expensive and needs lots of training and has active targeting that would trigger most modern aircraft's missile warning.)

tl;dr: A-35 should be treated like a TornadoIDS/F-117 hybrid with higher self-defense capabilities, not an F-16C / F/A-18 replacement.

Lockheeb plz gib shekels.

>>584764

tbf given that the F-14 was a direct offshoot of the F-111 program, if ASF-14 or just F-14 Quickstrike were allowed to occur the endeavor would have been successful half century later.

>>572530

None of those 400k Reservists hold a combat MOS and nearly 150k of those 300k Guardsman don't hold a combat MOS, either. Realistically, it's 150k Guardsman and 100M gun owners.

>>585107

iirc they just sorta use all current fighters with EW packages (F-15, F-16, F-22) to do EW while also haveing C-130 EW planes as well.

>>585107

>what does the USAF have

They have a single squadron that flies Growlers; jack shit aside from that. An electronic warfare variant of the B-52 was in development at one time, but who would've guessed it was defunded and cancelled. Then restarted and cancelled again, just for good measure.

>>585156

>>585366

That sounds extremely inadequate, especially considering that both ruskies and chinks seem to brag a bit too much about their offensive EW weaponry and anti-air detection capabilities.

Fuck's shake even goatfuckers could become a considerable threat for ground troops with their backyard drones that could be easily avoided by a dedicated EW aircraft loitering above.

>>585379

>That sounds extremely inadequate

It is.

>>585379

> especially considering that both ruskies and chinks seem to brag a bit too much about their offensive EW weaponry and anti-air detection capabilities.

They have every reason to.

Even if you compare fielded equipment for same use it's ridiculous, an IL-76 PP just isn't in the same league as an EC-130.

>>584670

If it has an A designation pilots chairforce pilots refuse to get in. That's why the F-117 has the F despite not being a goddamn fighter.

>>585414

There are numerous benefits to reinstating the Army Air Corps, but the high-speed low-drag supersonic faggots are reason enough on their own.

>>584065

Don't forget F-35 cost per flight hour is approximately 30k dollars while Su-57 squeaks by with $11,500 dollars and it should be even less with the new engines

Meaning an oil rich nation like Russia is going to be able to afford more training flights than nations that adopt the F-35.

>>586175

It's thinner in the body, which I'm assuming means its a lot lighter (square cube law). And with two EJ200s it will have similar thrust. This translates into better T/W and better performance.

I'm just basing this on a pic though, don't know shit about the TFX

>>586175

>twin EJ200 engines

It gets worse Rosteck proposed twin AL-31FP instead.

If they source a proper AESA radar to go with it, the roaches will take Vienna this time…

>>586192

> Rosteck proposed twin AL-31FP instead.

How are they supposed to fit those in plane smaller than the F-35, and more importantly, how are they going to feed them? AL-31s are notoriously thirsty and the proposed designs don't seem to have much volume for fuel.

>>586203

I don't think they have even decided on the plane layout yet… One look like a F-35 bootleg the other one looks like a chinese J-20/MiG 1.44.

>>571896

The F-35 happened.

>>571896

>>586261

Thanks Obama!

>>586247

>P-47 Thunderbolt

<Long range bomber escort that ended up becoming the premier attack aircraft of the US in the European theater

>A-10 Thunderbolt II

<CAS attack aircraft

>Lockheed P-38 Lightning

<Long range heavy fighter with the capacity to mount bombs&rockets

<Primarily used as a fighter+bomber escort in the Pacific&European theatres, only seeing occasional use as a fighter-bomber

>F-35 Lightning II

<WTFBBQ plane designed to fail at any given role

What did they mean by this?

>>586247

>>586351

Anyone screencapped the aeronautism post of the anon that calculated the P-38's performance if it was made with modern materials and (?)turboprops?

>>586360

>autist anon

That was me, all the figures I got from public sources, and almost half from wikipedia. So anyone can repeat the experiment.

Basically

>using composites reduces empty weight by ~30%

>using turboprops reduces engine weight by 1000kg

>using turoprops increases engine power by 40%

Overall payload was increased to about half of what an A-10 carries. It's pretty decent payload.

>>586379

Two questions for you.

What gun do you suggest?

Should the turboprops have twin supersonically contrarotating propellers for increased performance or should they keep things quiet in honor of the Lightning's reputation as a very silent plane?

>>584670

So I can't directly confirm the following story but it came to me through a friend in the Air Force with a direct interest in the F-35 program.

So now that the F-35 has entered service, they have been taking part in combined arms training exercises out west. I guess the AF was either testing the F-35's capabilities as a low level strike aircraft or was using it to stand in for an A-10 but a grunt with a MANPAD got a confirmed "kill" against an F-35 (it's obviously all simulated but they go a long way to actually account for real world performance in the simulated use of advanced weapons).

I'm 100% sure that guy will be revered for his story about the time he bagged a fighter jet with a rocket launcher for generations to come so the story is still cool even if there are caveats I wasn't informed of. However, if there aren't any caveats which truly debunk this, it's a worrying sign for the future of American Close Air Support and our ability to afford to stay in the fight in any protracted conflict. Let's be serious. Low level CAS missions are dangerous affairs, fly slow enough to make repeated passes at a target in usefully quick succession and any MANPAD can land a hit. Fly fast enough to get out of a MANPAD's effective kill zone in mere seconds and your attack run will be so long (in terms of distance) that a competent team can both predict your approach and build their shot (i.e. get everything as optimal as possible) far ahead of time.

Just think about how easy it could be to down a $100m fighter with a $20k missile if you make that the priority for your mission. All you have to do is bait enemy ground forces into patrolling the right area and "ambush" them when they're in a position that forces their close air support into a certain approach (or at least limit them to only a handful of possible approaches). Have your MANPAD teams concealed and ready to take their best shot and BOOM!, there goes $100m.

>>586388

I forgot to add that we already figured out this problem a long time ago. There are 2 ways to avoid this potential disaster.

You can fly high enough that MANPADs are no longer a threat. The drawback to this approach is that your effectiveness is now determined by the number of individual precision guided munitions you can bring into combat. For a given $ budget, you can either use something like an A-10 that has a million hardpoints and a huge payload capacity or you can use a bunch of cheap, cheap aircraft (preferably drones since pilots are enormously expensive to train, maintain, and replace).

The other option is to use aircraft that are either sturdy enough to survive a MANPAD hit or so cheap that you don't really care if you lose it. Something like an A-10 can take a hit but the chances of losing even such a sturdy aircraft to such a cheap countermeasure are too high to justify (hence why A-10s are obsolete). You can use something super cheap like a Super Tucano or a modernized Bronco but you're still putting millions of dollars at risk in the form of the pilot. Drones are a good solution but you better have complete control over the Electronic Warfare battlespace if they are to be useful (i.e. not signal jammed).

The F-35 is the antithesis of a good CAS aircraft when viewed in this light but there also isn't a good solution in the pipeline either. A bunch of chesp AI controlled drones might be a potential solution but that's something which is so far off in the future as to be a purely speculative proposal.

>>586386

The gun is a supplement to whatever it is you're carrying, and both sets of ordnance are mated to what you're hunting.

I don't know if there's any point to noise reduction. CAS is called in to support a fireteam under enemy attack, if the enemy hears a CAS coming they might rout and generate a victory without a shot fired.

Not like its going to help them aim AAA any better.

>>586393

The point of rear prop is it leaves the nose free for a higher visibility cockpit, radar, and a gun. And is more aerodynamic. And places fuel, engine, and prop behind the pilot so he doesn't die if anything gets hit.

>>586393

The biggest advantage stealth-wise is that the engine is deliberately positioned so that most of its IR emissions are only visible from above or behind, which makes things a lot harder for MANPADS.