/k/ - Weapons

Good goyim.

>>579001

>Nips purchasing Rafale-M for their Hyuga and Izumo class "Helicopter destroyers" when?

Never, they can build their own equivalent and those decks can't handle that type of stress anyway, so they'll need new ships.

Besides, it was the US screwing over its European Allies in the Suez for no damned reason why there's no empires anymore

>>579024

>for no damned reason

Nah, it was because "rooo, fuck colonialism, fuck whitey an shieeeet". It's been the Yankee plan since 1918.

>>579029

>Nah, it was because "rooo, fuck colonialism, fuck whitey an shieeeet". It's been the Yankee plan since 1918.

The most annoying thing about it is that the Seppos held on to Guam, Cuba, and other less than 56% shitholes while preaching fuck colonialism. Then again, same goes for your country and Rhodesia

>>579030

>Americans are massive hypocrites.

That comes with the territory America still (just about) holds. Global superpowers can get away with just about anything they want to do.

>>579001

>F-35B

>knockoff copy of yak141

>bad design causes main engine to drill a hole in the deck on landing

>its not a flaw, its a feature goy! directed energy weapon!

>/quietly paints "S" over the "V" in VTOL/

>>579051

>>bad design causes main engine to drill a hole in the deck on landing

I don't want to defend the F-35 but does not that imply shitty decks instead of shitty plane?

>>579058

If it's good enough for almost everything else, then it's quite fair to assume that F-35 Merkel is at fault here.

>>579058

It destroys decks that Harrier worked fine on, even the Yak-141 had no chance of doing that.

All the ships which once used the Harrier (or were built for it like QE) have to be modified with ceramic/steel mesh landing pads on deck if they want the F-35B to land vertically, at additional cost and dock time. Some aren't going to do it, and will just use the F-35 in STOL mode, it will take off and land normally.

>>579058

>I don't want to defend the F-35 but does not that imply shitty decks instead of shitty plane?

No it's that specific design.

The problem already existed on Yak-141 but since soviet aircraft carriers were "heavy aviation cruiser" they actually had armored decks so they didn't give a fuck, they just put titanium plating everywhere it would get too hot for steel.

In fact it might be worse on the F-35B…

>>579001

>landlocked country

>critiquing another countrys navy

>another country which has beaten them in multiple wars before

lmao

>>579072

In our defense, after the Fall of Rhodesia caused by the peanut farming faggot Carter titanium was pretty unavailable to us to the point that the CIA had to buy it piecemeal from the soviets for the SR-71, plating a carrier with it would be damn near impossible.

>>579024

>those decks can't handle that type of stress anyway, so they'll need new ships.

Can't they strengthen them in some way?

That big, flat flight deck seems oddly suspicious for a helicopter carrier.

>>579072

>The problem already existed on Yak-141

The jet engines on Yak distributed the heat more evenly.

F-35 has its full thrust, which is equivalent to its weight, being generated by a single engine. The waste heat of this engine is then focused at a single nozzle.

The Yak has its thrust generated by 3 engines, the waste heat of which is distributed across 3 nozzles. It's also lighter so needs less overall thrust.

It's just plainly a better design. Only way to improve on the Yak design is to use a single spinal mount engine for forward thrust, and a rack of PETA thrusters for vertical thrust.

>>579077

>germany

>landlocked

Stop making America look bad.

>>579024

Izumos were actually designed with a proper flight deck, they even have provisions for a ski-ramp for when they finally talk the politicians into buying some carrier jets (which will probably happen within the next decade).

>>579077

>Germany

>landlocked

please stop

>>579077

>land locked

>busiest man made canal in the world connecting two seas

>second largest port in Europe

The absolute state of American education

>>579131

In some alternate universe Black Widows and Super Guppies are bombing the shit out of israel right now, but instead we're stuck in this shitshow.

>>579047

Underrated post. We all know Canada has the cunts beat in shitpositng volume, but have they finally beaten the cunts in shitposting quality?

>>579131

That's one way of looking at it, harrier could land on grassland basically, without any damage. The Yak-141 is safe for asphalt, but it would set a prairie on fire if it tried to land.

F-35B? I'm pretty sure it would dig a small crater if it tried to land on loose soil, fall in, and have to be scrapped. It's exhaust temp is over half the temp needed to melt sand.

>>579133

And we built orbital colonies with all the saved cash!

>>579138

And using B52's in their current state to bomb xeno scum.

>>579140

To be fair you don't know that particular strelok wasn't a nigger himself.

Occasionally they do figure out there's more to the internet than YouTube, social media and porn.

In fact one nigger I encountered was intrigued by the fact that one could use the internet to commit a whole new category of criminal activities. Eventually he was arrested for trying hold up a liquor store with a stolen iPhone in one of those stupid pistol shaped phone cases.

Later he was sodomized by a man that turned out to be his father.

Their reunion was short-lived however as his father's prison lover shanked him in a fit of jealous rage, after which his father disowned him for being a faggot.

>>579151

>to be fair you don't know that particular strelok wasn't a nigger himself.

I do, this isn't 4Cuck.

>>579169

>google it

>F-29 Retaliator

>>579174

Never understood why they did that. Was it an obsolete colony?

>>579263

>F-29 Retaliator

Never played the video game, just projecting what the X-29 might had been called instead of F-24 following X-35/F-35 equivalence.

I recall as a kid in the 80s and before the stealth meme caught up with the public the X-29 and FSW in general was the most hyped design as the US next gen fighter.

>>579266

>the only thing that would make a better point defense fighter

I don't think so, see the F-5 was built around the concept of a kind of reverse-monocoque. A solid core (engine, fuel, cockpit) provides structure, and then all of the other parts are tacked onto that, and the skin is just an afterthought *makes it easy to upgrade with composites**. This means everything that needs to be maintained is skin deep, just crack open an access hatch and do your job. Compare that to MiG-29 where a lot of stuff is buried deep into the aircraft, so you have to remove ten things and cut a major structural strut to get to the thing you have to fix.

Northrop Grumman is an excellent company, with probably the best engineers in the world. Sukhoi/MiG is tied for a close second, dassault is a solid third, but Lockheed isn't even in the top five! I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would want Lockheed in charge of weapons development. Even the generals and politicians! They might have short term gain, but their children will likely be riding around in Failure-35 being a missile magnet.

>>579276

>Compare that to MiG-29 where a lot of stuff is buried deep into the aircraft, so you have to remove ten things and cut a major structural strut to get to the thing you have to fix

I was referring more to overall performance like rate of climb, acceleration, high-AoA etc, logistically the F-20 and Gripen would be much better than the Fulcrum for point defense, especially for temporary bases, but the X-29 has the innate disadvantage as a tradeoff for its innate advantage, compared to the similar F-20, of using more exotic airframe materials and being more depended to electronics for even level flight and that would probably close the logistic convenience compared to the MiG-29.

>>579280

I would also intuitively note that the small and light X-29 with TV would make a good carrier fighter since, as F-15SMT/Demonstrated, combination of canards and TV make for some serious reduction of approach speed and landing distance, something that forward swept wings would further decrease while it would simultaneously significantly increase the dramatically decreased take-off payload of carrierborne fighters. What I don't have a clue about though is if wing folding mechanisms would be able to withstand the increased lift and idiosyncratic twisting of FSW.

>>579283

I think they can be lighter, because they don't need a brake list to keep it in place.

No wait, I'm wrong, it's possible but it would impose the same mass penalty.

>>579077

>landlocked

>Germany

How much are the Russians paying you to make us look dumb

>>579306

FSW really needs two engines, because all of its weapons need to fit on a lifting body rather than on the weird wings that sometimes vibrate at high speed.