/k/ - Weapons

He didn't fly so good

>>611699

>one survivor

He must have been a big guy.

Damned cranes.

>>611708

For the F-35B.

>>611709

Would they be cheaper if you could acquire them privately?

>>611714

Of course!

>>611710

The fire rises

>>611709

LRIP IN PEACE

>>611709

Hey /k/ would you rather

1x F35 Super Lightning

Or

50x F5E Freedom Fighters

>>611697

Is it bad I am worried cause the RAF have the F-35B as well?

>>611733

I'd trade the F35 1:1 for fucking P-51's at this point.

>>611734

BAE is going to replace them anyway

>>611734

Aren't you guys replacing the F-35 (like everyone else sans pissrael) with your new Tempest project?

>>611734

The RAF is fine (well in tatters really, but not because of the F-35).

The RN on the other hand basically sacrificed all their surface ships programs to keep the carriers program.

Carriers that can only carry F-35…

>>611748

The carriers themselves have everything they would need except for arrestor wires, which they'll probably get in a mid-life upgrade. The RN is probably hoping to get a navalized variant of the Tempest.

>>611697

Everything the B was meant for, is better accomplished by drones.

>>611760

>mid-life upgrade.

They're not even in service. A carrier mid life upgrade is for it's 20 years anniversary (if not 30).

At least it will give BAe time to develop the Tempest I guess…

>>611754

Do you have any idea what social programs cost? Especially corporate welfare?

A hundred plus years ago America had a 3% income tax and had a 2x larger army (relatively speaking) than it does today.

>experimental machinery is experimental

Wow, I'm shocked.

I-I mean, yeah, those stoopid fuckin' jarheads and the MIC!

>>611802

Mil-industrial complex has taken a cue from video games and is trying out the "early access alpha" model.

>>611813

The Star Citizen of military procurement

>>611740

>>611744

Well I know they are going to be replaced but I don't want to wake up one morning with an F-35 Merkel B sticking out my garden.

>>611748

RN compared to 10 years ago and the state it is in now disgusts me. There was also no reason for the Carriers to not be catapult assisted which is what was meant to happen till certain shekels changed hands

>>611834

An F15-D almost crashed into my house a few years ago tbh

>>611835

Woman pilots I bet. I am just worried in case they start banning assault gardens for colliding with their precious poncy overpriced money laundering scheme.

>Sometimes the ALIS projects delivery of expected spare parts as far as two years out, Defense News has reported.

Why target the F35 when you can fuck everything up by messing with parts suppliers.

You could probably ground the entire fleet by just burning down a few machine shops.

Why did our country get jewed again when we could have operated a bunch of Saabs at a fraction of the cost.

Shills say that this is the first crash after 150 000 hours of flying, and the average attrition rate for military jets is 4-6 planes for every 100 000 hours, so this is much better than anything before. Did they cook the books here?

>>611922

Probably. I'm wondering if these attrition rates are taking age of the airframe into account. Older planes have higher failure rates. How does the failure rate of the F-35 compare to that of its predecessors at the same stage in its use is the question that should be asked.

>>611922

Two others have been written off by fires and a kike-35 was written off by SAM "cranes".

>>611922

Only if they highly specify on the term "crash" to mean uncontrolled impact with ground. Many others failed to get off, burned on the runway, or were barely managed to land.

Also they're probably putting 150k hours of all three variants, because I doubt the B variant has more than 30,000 hours flight time total.

>>611922

>attrition rate for military jets is 4-6 planes for every 100 000 hours

And I bet the cost of those are far lower than operating a single F-35.

>>611922

Even if they literally never had any maintenance issues the money saved would take hundreds of years to actually equal the 115 MILLION being wasted on each one.

>>611922

There hasn't been 150,000 hours of flying. Because of those 150,000 140,000 have been spent in the hangar due to maintenance issues. In short the plane can't crash if it can't fly.

>>612027

That's what they mean? 150,000 hours since it entered service?

>>611922

They're comparing brand-new F-35s with a few hundred flight hours to thirty year old A-10s and F-16s with >20,000 flight hours. They're also deliberately wording the claim to count all write-off incidents for the other jets, while excluding the two F-35s that were written off due to engine fires and all the ground-strikes and hard landings that didn't end in an airframe write-off.

>>612208

Oh good lord can people stop being so fucking retarded.

>le ebin bummers

Not even worth a (You). Cut the projection, you cuckchan niggers are so obvious.

>>612309

Don't worry, it's all about communicating entirely using memes.

>>612312

So you're calling him an underage autist who wants to fit in. Facts, reason, and board culture be damned. Makes sense.

>>612309

I admit "mostly" was an exaggeration, but they are still here on 8ch. I wouldn't be surprised if /qresearch/ is one of the top 5 or 10 by now and the only thing preventing larger leaks is our reputation for being the darkest reaches of the internet™.

Whole movement did get its fair share of international media coverage after all.

>>612309

Can confirm it's mostly boomers, or if not boomers then certainly people who act like 'em. They all call themselves "patriots", shill for democracy, shudder at the thought of saying "the n-word," and respond to shitposting by wagging their fingers and screaming "you damn kids!". Every so often one of them will stumble into another board and provide some laughs for a few hours before scurrying away.

>>612278

I don't think that pic really paints boomers in that negative a light.

And it's the fuel.

Again.

How many times is that, three? Well after changing the fuel additives, painting the refuelers trucks white, building climate control hangars for the refuelers, I'm sure changing the fuel line is gonna do the trick…

>>615560

>Entire F-35 stealth fighter jet fleet grounded by military after crash in September

fuuuuuucking lol

>>611922

"Crash" in the US MIC shill dictionary only refers to planes that collided so fast and so hard with the ground you can find pilot bits over three different states.

I mean they persist to say that the V-22 that keep hitting the ground (and sometime kill people on board in the process) aren't crash because the things aren't totaled.

>>615615

>you will never dogfight third world countries with updated planes from 70+ years ago

Why even fucking live?

>>615560

>The stand down affects more than 200 jets while an "inspection of a fuel tube" in F-35 engines takes place, according to a Pentagon spokesman.

1.5 GORILLION AMERISHEKELS

>>616053

>And so they decided to use jet fuel to cool down electronics.

I refuse to believe that somebody was this retarded

I really hope you are bullshitting us

>>616058

>using jet fuel to cool down electronics

And I thougth that Gipsies are mindless apes.

>>616058

>I really hope you are bullshitting us

It's actually so retarded it's genius.

You see, instead of using fancy pumps to pressurize the fuel for injection, Lockheed saved 10 pounds by routing the fuel through a liquid cooling network for the onboard computers.

As the fuel absorbs heat from the running computers, it expands and self pressurizes!

When the plane is in intense dogfights, the fuel pressure is automatically increased by the increase in processing power necessary to track more targets and manage the control surfaces.

Genius!

>>616062

>saved 10 pounds

It's to save room (which the is problem n°1 of the F-35) not money but I imagine that was the idea yes, but they completely underestimated how bad of an heatsink jet fuel actually is.

>>616053

>>616058

What have other aircraft used?

A quick search seems to indicate it's true that the F-35 uses this method, but a lot of people were also saying many other aircraft do the same thing. I saw plenty of links to documents to back it up, but they had all 404ed.

>>616070

Commercial airliners use the fuel onboard to cool the pumps within the tanks.

>>616070

>What have other aircraft used?

It's not that uncommon on a lot of stuff (not just planes) to use fuel cells as a kind of thermal dampener.

Just neither to that extent nor on fighters.

>>616058

>>616060

>>616053

The funniest part is that this is actually true.

The reason why is because some airliners use oil for the engines to cool certain components (never computers). This works because oil isn't really that flammable and its smoke point is well above the top temperatures of what it cools. F-35 actually immerses the electronics in fuel, it's not a simple cooling rig where the chip is cooled by a heatsink and then fuel reduces the heat in the sink, that would be too heavy. The fuel itself is the heat sink, and its pumped to the electronics and avionics (including radar that overheats beyond 100C) in aluminum tubes to save on weight and because aluminum insulates well until the fuel gets to the radiators in the wings.

As a result, the airplane can never be completely dry of fuel, it always needs about 150 liters of fuel aboard in the radiator even if its just sitting on the tarmac or mothballed in storage. The only reason why it doesn't explode immediately when the radar/computers turn on is because a pump shifts it very rapidly to radiators in wings so it never gets a chance to go critical, but that only works if the wings have constant airflow over them. If for example the airplane simply turns on its avionics and sits on the runway, especially in desert conditions… it will 100% explode. Also if the pipes ever freezes up or malfunctions, or fuel starts leaking and there isn't enough of it to cycle, the airplane will spontaneously combust. The extensive fuel network is under the skin of the airplane, increasing IR signature, and ensuring if shrapnel hit it ANYWHERE they are GUARANTEED to hit fuel.

The engine is also a massive problem, because the fuel is wrapped around it any malfunction at all causes the fire.

>>616070

MiG-29 and Su-27 use water with antifreeze in it. Some 4th gens don't need coolant at all, it can be air cooled because they don't use that much computer power anyway.

Using near-hypergolic fuel is retarded just on the face of it.

>>616367

So in otherwords Lockheed managed to outdo the Zero in the burst into flames category.

>>616368

Lets put it this way, if I was asked to fly an F-35, I would buy flame retardant long johns and face mask.

>>616367

>If for example the airplane simply turns on its avionics and sits on the runway, especially in desert conditions… it will 100% explode.

Just store most of airforce in alaska or other cold usa regions

Problem solved

USA gov where is my paycheck?

Two hundred years ago there would have been hangings meted out for this farce.

>>616409

>fry for Israel

Nice

>>616409

>fry for Israel

gook detected.

>go on YouTube

>type Matsimus

>find latest video

>spam "F-35 is a shit plane that can't even fly"

>enjoy the sperg-out

Who let Spergkraut/Spergook/Spergleaf out of his cage? I see he finally stopped flag hiding and using VPNs, but does he really think people won't recognise his typing? He's kinda cute for a self-hating "American" loser of the genetic lottery, like a dog who was born retarded but you keep him as a pet anyway. I honestly liked him better when he just had no concept of how militaries or weapons worked and constantly suggested the worst possible ideas about everything or argued over how 'pho' is ACKSHUALLY spelled 'phua'. Now he's just insufferable. Should we euthanise him? His 56%posting got old weeks ago.

Why can't we just have a bastard child of a P-38 Lightning and IL-2 Sturmovik to deliver us from this evil?

>>616457

Not very vulnerable at all.

>>616367

You forgot to add that if you're doing combat maneuvers the wings heat up quite a bit from friction. Guess what happens if the radiators that are supposed to cool down the fuel are in the now hot wings?

In one the inquiry they found there is a literal recommendation for flying F-35 that say "stop combat maneuver and reach an colder altitude to cool down the plane".

Yes it's that insane.

>>616463

>>616465

>combat maneuvers

Not even that. F-35s are meant to be multirole stealth jets, with a focus on attacking at range. And that's worse.

F-35s are "designed" to operate in groups at all times, because they're useless by themselves. An F-35 needs not only at least another F-35 escorting it, but also a specialized AWACS, a refueler and fighter escort not too far off, should it get caught (which is not hard all things considered). They need other F-35s so their shared radar network won't go to waste, and they can tell each other of targets they spot and whatnot. That goddamn radar system is guaranteed to overheat to a ridiculous degree, not only for detecting targets, but also uplinking, downlinking and updating information in real time.

Their meme stealth technology is gone to waste because even if the F-35s can't be spotted, their escorts will be. The moment their refueler fucks off or gets shot down is the moment their fate is sealed.

F-35s aren't even good for dogfighting. Not only is it unable to pull any sort of fancy maneuver unless it has under 18600kg of loaded weigh on it, the strain put into its myopic IRST would probably make it spontaneously combust from overheating the fuel. Imagine the amount of shit you have to deploy to cover its ass, let alone more than one.

Seriously though at $115 million each wouldn't it have just been cheaper to spam submarine based cruise missiles at whatever it was you wanted bombed?

>>616463

I didn't find that recommendation, but I did find this bit I hadn't seen before:

>Testing to characterize the thermal environment of the weapons bays demonstrated that temperatures become excessive during ground operations in high ambient temperature conditions and in-flight under conditions of high speed and at altitudes below 25,000 feet. As a result, during ground operations, fleet pilots are restricted from keeping the weapons bay doors closed for more than 10 cumulative minutes prior to take-off when internal stores are loaded and the outside air temperature is above 90 degrees Fahrenheit. In flight, the 10-minute restriction also applies when flying at airspeeds equal to or greater than 500 knots at altitudes below 5,000 feet; 550 knots at altitudes between 5,000 and 15,000 feet; and 600 knots at altitudes between 15,000 and 25,000 feet. Above 25,000 feet, there are no restrictions associated with the weapons bay doors being closed, regardless of temperature. The time limits can be reset by flying 10 minutes outside of the restricted conditions (i.e., slower or at higher altitudes). This will require pilots to develop tactics to work around the restricted envelope; however, threat and/ or weather conditions may make completing the mission difficult or impossible using the work around.

I'm sure it's not a big deal. It's not like having to fly around with the bay doors open will affect that stealth they're so proud of.

>>616496

>How does the F-35B even land vertically without turning itself into fireworks in the process?

It quickly burns all the remaining fuel when landing so it won't blow up, at the inexpensive price of melting the fucking runway.

Only half of that sentence is a joke.

>>616483

>J-20

I don't even know if that fucking thing still exists. It can't fly over the speed of sound without afterburners and it got detected by pooinloos. That's all the info you need to judge it.

Wait, if the fuel trucks need to be kept in special hangars, and the fuel needs constant cooling too, then wouldn't destroying those hangars put the whole airfield out of commission? It's like bombing the runways but much more effective, because they will have to build completely new buildings. And a runway is a rather passive thing, but you could sabotage the hangars and cause who-knows-how-much damage in dollars.

>>616501

This. In terms of raw irradiance averaged over a year of weather, you can get maybe 200 W/m^2. Efficiency of solar cells will drop that by a factor of 3-5. I'd need over 8m of world-record efficiency solar cells just to run my desktop's power supply.

Using solar on a missile isn't feasible even if you had perfect efficiency.

>>616483

>J-20?

China has a recurring engine manufacturing problem. They need to get past it before they can mass produce anything.

They've

>>616499

>I don't even know if that fucking thing still exists.

>This is what the burger actually believes.

They've done a 12 prototypes airframe batch (only 8 of those are flying) then moved on with a pre-prod serie of 20 (they should be done around now, 19 have been done for sure for a total of 27 planes).

If they've fixed their engine problems they can go to full prod', there is no point to move ahead before that.

Currently what stops China to have a stupidly big air fleet is that still have to buy Russian sukhois AND sukhois engines from Russia because their domestic engines aren't anywhere close to the perfs of the Russian ones and the Russian factories are already pretty busy with their own planes.

It's quite questionable whether it's really stealthy but it is definitely very real.

>>616515

That screencap is a little too easy to read; could you try changing your theme to make it less legible?

>>616501

Those cells are 1996 technology, it first flew 1999, and it was destroyed in 2002. That's before cellphones existed, before internet as we know it today. Those cells are basically the kind that existed on early calculators, I used them in school, it's a joke. Airbus Zephyr is more recent using 2009 tech, can stay up about 25 days.

Using 2018 tech? I'm betting it can stay up over a month, with enough payload to make it worth it.

>>616502

Raw irradiance where? Because this thing flies at 21,000m so solar irradiance isn't affected by weather. Also it's not meant to be filling up the batteries to capacity, the batteries start full and for every 5% wasted the solar panels add 1% charge. It's extends the flight time, doesn't make it infinite.

>>616515

Well, things might have changed, though usual ships with wings and shit seem to be more common in steampunk and dieselpunk. Also flying submarine things, they are even more ridiculous. And when it comes to steampunk anything that doesn't come with cogs all over it, especially the surface and not connected to each other is "ok" for the genre so airships only have little wings, propellers and shit if we count stupid things.

>>616511

>because their domestic engines aren't anywhere close to the perfs of the Russian ones

How fucking hard is for them to reverse engineer Slav-tech with a brainpool of one fucking billion?

>>616529

Materials science is hard.

>>616533

Wow, i have alreadu heard this shit about chinese but why do they behave like animals even on interpersonal level, even with no money involved?

By the way, I was curious about just what 10 minutes at 550 knots means operationally.

Assuming exactly zero time turning or over the target, it is 90 seconds less than the time that would be spent in Syrian airspace on a straight-line trip from the F-35I's base (Nevatim) to Damascus and back again.

>>616535

They just fucking are. I've lived with them and they're literally insect-tier creatures. They get by through cheating and have zero standards of hygiene. You could blame communism but people were making these observations long before communism entered the scene.

>>616538

Insects act better than the average chink.

So what does the F-35 need all that computational power for?

I mean even the MiG-31 and Su-30 had networking capabilities like three decades ago and their computers were barely capable to play tetris on.

>>616534

>Reading through the testing results on all three variants

>Each variant is within 1% of it's Do Not Exceed weight

>While FUCKING DRY

>They literally cannot land without stores or any significant amount of fuel

What. In. THE FUCK. Is lockmart doing.

Why did we buy 72 of these things.

Why is this even still in development

>>616633

What? Please clarify.

>>616634

this excerpt from the document the leaf linked from Page 120 onwards:

The program completed the final weight assessment of the

F-35B air vehicle for contract specification compliance in

May 2015 with the weighing of BF-44, a Lot 7 production

aircraft. Actual empty aircraft weight was 32,442 pounds,

only 135 pounds below the planned not-to-exceed weight

of 32,577 pounds and 307 pounds (less than 1 percent)

below the objective vertical lift bring-back not-to-exceed

weight of 32,749 pounds.

This is the B variant, but there's similar passages for each one.

These things are so fat when unladden with stores or fuel loads they're a cunt hair above the weight designed maximum weight, that implies these things can't land with any kind of stores or fuel without causing damage to the air frame.

Now imagine trying to carrier land a B variant with those conditions placed on you.

>>616633

>>616636

I think you're misinterpreting that. My understanding of that passage was that the "not-to-exceed weight" means a predetermined contractual limit, not a design one. As in, the specifications sent to Lockheeb by the government said "make it lighter than X when empty", presumably because of considerations about other equipment (carrier elevators or something?) and Lockheeb went to the absolute limit of that specification.

>>616637

That is a possibility, I interpreted it through what I've been taught about design.

That said considering that an empty weight of near on 15 metric tons is egregious compared to say an F-16 whose empty weight is roughly 8.5 metric tons. Heck that empty weight is heavier than the F-16's loaded weight.

Additionally the weight in question is awfully arbitrary for a contractual limit.

I can't definitively say for sure, but I will assert that that empty weight is beyond a joke for a fighter of its size and that whatever the actual nature of that weight limit is, being within a percentage of it is as the report itself states later one, going to be a hard cap on the growth potential of the platform.

>>616639

>small guys will get their neck broken if they don't fly so good

POTTERY+

>>616639

>future proofing your jets for pilots with realistic dimensions so thicc women don't feel oppressed in the workplace

Lockheed Martin are a truly progressive company.

Jesus fuck. I'd gladly choose to fly in a Zero than this heap of shit.

>>616648

The Zero can at least fire its guns without exploding and isn't figuratively covered in fuel tanks in addition to having a greater operational range than the F-35.

Who the hell let Michael Bay design an aircraft ?

>>612278

Man I love this one.

>>616697

Michael Bay's colleagues probably know more about fighter aircraft design than Lockheeb management these days.

>>616500

Probably. In a actual shooting war kind of thing, you'd probably just need to saturate the airfield, or the area near the hangars with enough shrapnel to damage the AC units. Or make whole lot of holes to the hangar itself, and then just watch all go to shit as things just cascade down the hill from there.

>>616529

China cannot into precision engineering and manufacturing. They just can't. It requires too long chain of people not cheating/scamming/fucking up for them to pull it off with any reasonable timeframe and success-rate.

I read in the book "Great Wall of Debt" that some Chinese minister was lamenting the fact that they can't produce decent ballpoint pens, and that he has to order himself quality ballpoint-pens from Switzerland. You see, it's the ball-bearing that's the reason. They can't get it right consistently enough. If the small dimples in bearing are too big, the ball won't roll. Too small, it won't roll either, or it will roll but it won't pick up and spread the ink consistently.

>>616535

>>616537

I am not a religious man but more I see and read about chinese, more convinced I become that some creator or another ran out of souls when it came to chinese.

>>616640

I suspect that they came up with that weight limit based on carrier stress tolerances. Probably some lifts or catapults might shit the bed if too much weight is placed on them, those carriers were built to carry actual fighter jets, not these overweight abominations pretending to be fighter jets.

>>616786

By that logic every anon on here could set up his own foolproof AA system made out of dollar store laser pointers to defend against Fried 35s.

>>616798

At this point a retard with a pellet rifle could take out the whole fucking airfield by popping a couple of holes in the hangar cooling system.

>>616832

>be apprentice electrician

>join the Air Force reserves

>get sent out to an airbase to work on some hanger's lighting system

>hanger is really chilly for some reason

>need to turn off the breakers for the lights before working on them

>labels are all really faded, not sure which breaker goes to what system

>got it narrowed down to a couple

>decide to take a 50/50 chance

>flip one

>hear A/C system spool down

>oh well, guess I'll just reset it and try the oth-

>horrified "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" sounds from elsewhere in the hanger

>sudden flash of light

>wave of heat is the last thing I feel

>as my spirit rises to heaven, I watch hanger after hanger explode across the base

>the hangers detonating form a maelstrom of fire engulfing the entire base

>burning debris ignites forest fires for miles around

Such is life with F35's in service.

>>616639

>after the latter failure, the PO&S decided to restrict pilots weighing less than 136 pounds from flying any F-35

Is that a poorly concealed export embargo like the F-22's?

>>616497

All airplanes burn off remaining fuel before landing, it's a basic safety precaution.

>>616868

>it's a basic safety precaution.

Too bad it's a fundamentally unsafe procedure in the 35, as per pic 2 of >>616643

>>616868

I don't know what that guy was saying, but no. All aircraft dump any amount of fuel over their maximum landing weight before landing, which usually never happens because they don't load any more fuel than what's needed. You don't see a Cessna dumping fuel, because they're light, and a two person military aircraft with an empty weight of 15 tons & a 100% fueled weight of 35 tons is also light relatively. Military aircraft typically have especially good landing tolerances because their sortie time is never for sure and circling overhead for twenty minutes to dump off fuel is both extremely wasteful and potentially dangerous in an active area. A maximum landing weight of 55% its max fuel weight isn't laughably horrid, but is very not up to spec with the rest.

>>616871

It says later in the report that they somewhat fixed it by putting on a new dump nozzle & adding more sealant, but it still hasn't actually been wholly fixed

>>616639

>probability of death being 23 percent

>probability of neck extension (which will result in some level of injury) being 100 percent

Imagine sitting down to write your report about the fighter aircraft that's undergone testing, the results showing that ejecting from it will kill the pilot roughly one time out of four and is certain to cripple them for life. You type out the concluding line "…the basis for the decision to accept these risks is…". You pause, glancing over at the program cost that's passed the trillion dollar mark years ago.

"…unknown."

Why does the helmet have to so fucking heavy? What use is a helmet that ends up fucking killing or injuring you instead of protecting you? Did those retards fit a fucking laptop into that helmet or something equally retarded?

>>616529

Because the brainpool is one billion and there is simply not anywhere enough good jobs for the guys at the top of the brainpool Chinks HAVE to cheat to get ahead.

It's not so much cultural as an actual necessity that is borderline survival.

You don't cheat? You don't have outstanding results. You're an average guy. You get sent to the rice paddies. You die at 36 from backbreaking work because you didn't want to pay the bribe to the local communist village overseer and he refused you the doctor visit when you got pneumonia.

The end.

So what happens? Smart people cheats since it's the only way. But average people cheat too as they don't want to go to the rice paddies either and will settle for a paper pushing job (hence why the communist party is still so strong in China, nobody believes in communism but they all want cushy jobs in it…).

So the whole country "meritocracy" is based on who can lie, cheat, betray, steal the best BECAUSE of the level competition due to their huge numbers.

Which of course when it comes to complicated industrial processes where the actual skill of the workforce is necessary… is where the whole thing explode because everyone involved has lied about his actual skill since elementary school.

>>616894

> Currently, the Program Office and the Services have decided to accept this level of risk to pilots in this weight range, although the basis for the decision to accept these risks is unknown.

> basis for the decision to accept these risks is unknown.

I thought you are joking but they literally wrote it!..

>>616989

>The system can simultaneously track thousands of object and detects moving targets,including tanks firing and ballistic missile launchers up to 1300km away.

<Side effects may include spontaneous combustion

>>616989

I had no idea how bad things really were

>>617003

Apparently Israeli F-16 Block 52 pilots liked having the IAS+Altitude being displayed on their helmet sight at all times when visibly tracking targets during maneuvers so Lockheeb decided to put the entire HUD of the F-35 into its HMD based on that.

Only half of that sentence is real but it wouldn't surprise me if that is how it went down anyway.

>>616997

>The F-35 is terrible it not only forces its customers to develop their own 5th gen fighter aircraft in response to its failings, but may even be assigned to penal units to get rid of undesirable men&hardware thus making embed related a distant possibility

This fucking timeline I swear.

>>617010

There's no way that simulator accurately shows the whole cockpit, it's impossibly barren. Where are the communication systems? The thing may not do much but it definitely has a radio. Are there no electrical system controls or breakers? How do you even turn on the external lights? Where are the engine controls besides throttle, like fuel pumps?

Also, not a complaint but a genuine question, how are the MFDs controlled? Something like the F-18 or F-16 has a row of buttons on each edge, but those screens only have physical buttons for brightness/contrast adjustment. Are they touch-screens, or is that what the throttle and stick buttons are for?

>>617010

Source? That can't be the actual cockpit and if it is lots of people are going to die because no MDF = no information at all.

>>617023

>>617027

Honestly I'm not sure, I thought it was some shitty mockup but then I found this.

>>617030

I'm guessing it's just a trainer to get them use to the new MFD system.

>>617031

>no analog anything

That is going to cost lives and airframes, something as simple as a voltage spike will leave pilots unable to land in all but the best conditions.

>>617010

>>617030

>>617031

I'm skeptical. Even if it has a meme touchscreen EICAS & PFD and stuff, it's practically mandatory to have analogue displays hooked up for the basics, i.e inclinometers & airspeed & heading etc. But then again, this is the same plane where using your rudder is risky so what the fuck do I know.

>>617034

A voltage spike would probably take out some sensitive part of the jet fuel cooling circuit so the Pilots may as well eject right away.

I bet most of the F-35s essential systems aren't even triple redundant given how cramped the airframe already is.

This airplane is fractally bad. It's self-similarly bad at every scale.

The weapons bay is useless on an immediate physical scale because it can't stay closed and rattles the weapons to death.

The weapons bay is useless on a tactical scale because the plane is ineffective in combat, and because its stealth is ineffective even when not compromised by opening the doors.

The weapons bay is useless on a strategic scale because the stealth fighter concept is rooted in the idea of having a small number of expensive, advanced aircraft that you cannot afford to lose but are (theoretically) hard to lose, but this idea is fundamentally flawed because any war with a combatant who could have taken down a significant number of previous-gen aircraft will inevitably result in at least a few losses of your new aircraft, which you designed to be irreplaceable.

>>616639

>>616643

>>616670

And Verhoeven thought he was making satire.

Come to think of it, how hard would it be for Iran to sink an aircraft carrier equipped with F-35B or Cs?

All that actively cooled fuel has to be stored somewhere.

>>617072

This touchscreen faggot tree is something I'd expect a drone swarm operator on some futuristic AWACs carrier airship to use for setting up bombing runs and shit, it has no place on a goddamned fighter flown by a single regular ol' human.

>>617064

>>616976

Makes sense, it's kinda similar here too.

>>616997

>2nd vid

That's a much shorter take-off distance than I would expect from a 30-tonnes interceptor.

>>617098

the same people who thought cooling a fighter jet with especially volatile jet fuel was a good idea, probably

>>617072

>Paying that many people when auto loaders for those guns exist since the 60's.

I mean guns breaches opening on their own is WWI technology FFS.

>There is a good reason as to why single pilot attack helicopters are not in great demand.

Only Ka-50 are single seat AFAIK (and a Ka-52 always lead a Ka-50 "team").

And those are more "raid" helicopters than "attack" helicopters in the common use of the term.

>>617060

It really surprises me they managed to fuck up the weapons bay part when its essentially a technology existing since WW2 and when the same company has made the similar sized F-22 that can allegedly shoot AA missiles supersonically without any of said problems.

I think I understand now, it's a kamikaze jet conceived in late 2001 when it became (((official))) that jet fuel can melt steel beams. Hence why it flies like a 747 and pilot survival is a non-issue.

Uncle Oussama would be proud.

>>617114

At last, I truly see.

>>617096

>Makes sense, it's kinda similar here too.

And that's the truly terrifying thing. The entire developed world is becoming more and more like China.

The hook-nosed people are just slightly ahead of the curve, that shit is the direct result of mass administration and mass urbanization without totalitarian ethics and morals (a.k.a. Japan).

>>617106

Better yet, the hot fuel from the coolant system is also used as hydraulic fluid.

>>617054

>>617057

Bombing mudshits isn't the problem, the problem is that we've somehow managed to do it SO INEFFECTIVELY that our entire civilization will collapse if we choose to attack them.

>>617193

While most humans are 78% water, F-35 pilots are genetically engineered to be 78% jet fuel.

>>617157

>The entire developed world is becoming more and more like China

Problem with us is that this has always been the case for our existence as a modern state, just not with complete lack of empathy or honor like in the case of chinks,. Suppose Europe is also kinda doomed to end up like Greece after its 500 years delay of subhuman takeover.

>>617184

So, let me guess, if the pilots actually put any reasonable load on the hydraulics system the heat generated will ignite the fuel? How does a group of people fuck up this bad. It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Is it just a plot to kill off America's experienced fighter pilots? I can't wait until one of these blows a hole in the storage bay of an aircraft carrier and sends six thousand men to the bottom of the ocean.

>>617193

The assorted fluids produced by the now mushed pilot because he tried to turn the aircraft

>>617227

>I can't wait until one of these blows a hole in the storage bay of an aircraft carrier and sends six thousand men to the bottom of the ocean.

Put one of the death traps in a carrier group off the coast of Iran and you have the perfect casus belli.

>>617267

>I remember reading that the main problem or complaints with the KA-50 was that there was too much strain put on the pilot. He just had too much shit to do, hence, KA-52 has been getting preferential treatment in comparison to KA-50. Haven't seen videos of KA-50's being used in Syria, but I've seen KA-52's being used several times.

That's because in between the Russian liked the NATO gunship doctrine.

Initially the Ka-50 should have just made passes like a Su-25/A-10 would.

However they realized that if you give it a modern sensor suite you could a lot more with a gunship (recon, loitering, even SEAD). Problem if you do a lot more… there is a lot more to do (especially for night flights, night flight in a A-10 or Su-25 is one thing, night flying in a gunship that is 10 feet off the ground is way more attention consuming) hence why it needed to become a two-seater, the Ka-52.

The Ka-50 are still employed in their raid role only as a air SF support unit, they're all somewhere around Moscow and don't come out often, when they do they came out as a 4 vehicle teams 3 Ka-50 strikers 1 Ka-52 that act as command/recon.

Basically in Russian service the Ka-50 teams are in the AC-130 tactical slot.

>>617312

>and hydraulic fluid

I think that part was comedic exaggeration. No aeronautics' designer can be THAT retarded.

>>617348

The ejection system literally auto-kills anyone under 136 pounds. We've surpassed anything comedic exaggeration could have dreamed up.

>>617356

>can't use missiles at high speed

>can't deploy countermeasures at high speed

>program discovered 91 different way the plane can kill/maim you

>can't fly or take off within 25 miles of lightning

>can't FUCKING TAXI within 25 miles of lightning

>91 ways to die in the plane updated to 337

>>617023

>How do you even turn on the external lights?

you fool you want to blow us all up?

why the fuck is that thing so big? shouldnt it using one liquid for everything decresee overall weight?

>>617356

I…

I genuinely fucking can't even think of a way of fucking up this bad. I mean, I get they were doing it on purpose, but still, this shit is masterful. It's majestic, wonderful, this is a level of fuck up a man should strive for.

>>617356

>they can't fire the onboard cannon.

They can fire the cannon, the cannon just can't hit anything.

>>617356

Is this a new record? What was the last aircraft that fucked up this bad?

>>617371

Hindenburg?

>>617356

>the speed at which the weapons bay doors can be open in flight (550 knots or 1.2 Mach) is less than the maximum aircraft speed allowable (700 knots or 1.6 Mach)

So you can't fly for longer than 10 minutes above 500-600 knots without opening the bay doors, and you can't fly faster than 550 with the doors open.

The upper 20% of the aircraft's speed range can only be reached for less then ten minutes at a time.

>>617372

Literally a bag of hydrogen painted in thermite with an onboard smoking lounge and still managed to have more hours in operation before catching fire than the F-35. The F-35 is worse than the Hindenburg.

>amermutt incompetence vs chink incompetence

this next world war is going to be interesting

>>617356

>For the F35-A, the airspeed at which countermeasures can be used is also less than the maximum speed allowable

You better be lobbing those missiles from far, far away and praying to god that limitations that are being talked about are just in 5% range, otherwise the return trip will be most exciting all things considered.

Exactly what is the pilot supposed to do if it has the misfortune of being intercepted by some interceptor(s) doing interceptor things? Shoot himself and be done with it?

>>617401

>Shoot himself and be done with it?

That's why he has the helmet.

>>617401

>Exactly what is the pilot supposed to do if it has the misfortune of being intercepted by some interceptor(s) doing interceptor things? Shoot himself and be done with it?

Radio his surrender/defection to the enemy and hope for the best.

>>617405

>Radio his surrender/defection to the enemy and hope for the best.

>They accept his surrender

>Little do they know, he's flying a 115 million dollar suicide bomber

>>617406

>115 million amerishekel suicide bombers

The Israelis better pray to YHWH their Iron Dome can hold out in the next war against a somewhat organized and decently equipped enemy.

>>611697

>The pilot safely ejected from the aircraft and is currently being looked at by medical personnel, Capt. Christopher Harrison, a Marine spokesman, said in a command release.

>safely ejected

>currently being looked at by medical personnel

In case anyone had doubts about the truthfulness of >>616639 .

>>617404

Ah, so the helmet has an automatic suicide feature? I could see it. Maybe it's so bulbous because it's packed with explosives.

>>617417

The helmet is so heavy (5.1 pounds as of 2015) that anybody below around 130 pounds would be instantly killed if they ejected, and any survivors are almost guaranteed to suffer crippling spinal injuries.

>>617423

"Whoops. We'll just have to patch up that issue. $1 billion and we'll reduce the death rate by 2 whole percent and accidentally increase dismemberment rates by 5%. Hey beggars can't be choosers, amirite? :^)

Seriously, though. Relying on kamikaze tactics is usually the sign your empire is going tits up.

>>617356

At this point the first paragraph is almost a redeeming value. At least it can shoot while supersonic.

>>617363

You don't get ordinary everyday fuckups for 2.1 trillion, fam.

>>611710

>>611697

The F35 b is a stupid, trash concept. Everything you might want it for is better done by drones or the A/C. Any country too poor to afford a proper carrier is too weak to need one.

>>617434

>At least it can shoot while supersonic.

But it can't, because none of our F-35 fleet can actually go supersonic in the first place.

It used to be the case that the time it takes to train a pilot and the expense of it made him the most valuable part of the aircraft.

I think this plane is so expensive that it officially reverses that. The pilot is now less valuable than a helmet.

>>616475

Or drones. Literally piss away drones because you have more drones than the enemy has high altitude SAM launchers.

How do you argue against people defending the F-35 saying

>All of this is program hickups!

>The F-16 isn't as good as the f35!

>it hasn't killed as many people as the V-22!

blah blah blah.

>>616989

Why would you put all that shit IN THE HELMET?! All the helmet needs is display.

I bet its the fucking Bradley again, where Goyslaves get the shit product while Israel got to customize theirs.

>>617371

>>The F-16 isn't as good as the f35!

It's nearly as good, faster and costs 1/3 of F-35's both purchase and maintenance price.

>>617455

>All of this is program hickups!

For a program that's run years longer than it was supposed to, has cost countless billions more than it was supposed to, and has delivered a thoroughly sub-standard product. Shit, it's lost a dog fight to a 57-year old surplus "Stork"-125. No, the F-35 is just shit and this is buyer's remorse by proxy.

>The F-16 isn't as good as the f35!

In nearly every key area that can be used to judge a jet, it's comparable, despite being much cheaper to purchase and maintain. You'd have to be a fucking mongoloid (or mutt) to favor the memejet that spontaneously combusts if it doesn't get bedtime stories in a padded white cell over a tried-and-true product.

>it hasn't killed as many people as the V-22!

That's because the V-22 has been around for nearly three decades and has been sent to numerous battlefields. That said, the V-22 is still a horrid piece of shit that doesn't deserve to exist whatsoever, just like the F-35.

>>617494

Cant wait for Hamas to steal one of them.

>>617494

>pic

All the customization in the world can't protect it from 60's Soviet AA though.

>>617371

F-104

>Deliveries started in January 1962 and before the end of the month, the first of no fewer than 262 German F-104s had crashed.

>In June 1962 four F-104s crashed on the same day.

>116 German pilots died during peacetime between 25 January 1962 and 11 December 1984.

>Grieving widows sued Lockheed from 1969, and by 1975 more than thirty of them had received 3 million DMs each.

>Hence the F-104 became known as Witwenmacher ("The Widowmaker") in West Germany.

>>617643

To be fair, wasn't that in large part the result of using the aircraft in exactly the opposite role of what it was meant for?

>>617694

The moment Lockheeb started giving out $5M (2018) checks to pilot's widows as hush money is the moment people should have stopped defending that plane.

>>617494

>WWIII looming in the distance

>Only pissrael can fix their F-35s and make them usable, other countries are forced to use broken pieces of shit they're replacing their planes with

Oh I wonder why they're doing this…

>>617692

The X-32 got the last laugh.

>>617643

Good example but the F-104 could surpass mach 2, broke a couple of records in terms of performance, could at least do the job it was intended to before lockheed tried to shill it as a close support fighter to the Germans and most importantly it was rather cheap.

The most valid points of crticism against it as a point defense interceptor was that its wing loading was so high it almost took it more time and space to take off than from being airborne to 3kms in altitude, making rocket-assisted takeoffs necessary in Cold War scenaria, and it needed a time zone for a 360^ when its primary armament was a gun and sidewinders.

>>617704

>Karánsebes

And there are still many people in my country who want to restore the inbreds monarchy…

>>617704

No we won't.

South Korea and Japan AKA the two countries that desperately need decent air fleet are of the F-35 ride.

They're buying the minimum of them to replace old as fuck F-4s, while they reverse engineer the materials for their domestic not-F-22 (KAI KF-X/Mitsubishi X-2) to replace their F-15s while cranking up their domestic production of not-f16 (KAI T-50/Mitsubishi F-2) to replace F-5/F-1 light fighters.

Both are moving from a 90% US fleet to a 90% domestic fleet.

>>617721

A really retarded decision when taking off was F-104 weakest point.

>>617423

When friendly death rates with that aircraft are running in triple digits I suppose. At this point, it's probably going to take a major incident for F35 program to die. Like a F-35 or two exploding on a aircraft carrier or something similar.

Where the fuck is McCain junior when you need him?

>>617748

>Where the fuck is McCain junior when you need him?

Imagine. If McCain had been flying the F-35 he might have just died when he ejected over Vietnam, and spared us all the trouble he caused for decades after. No songbird, no politics. Just a historical footnote whose only point of interest is that he crashed an astronomical amount of money in airplanes, and definitely had nothing to do with the Forrestal fire, trust us, his daddy said so.

>>617751

>aircraft carriers

>small

They're amongst the biggest ships out there.

Also you need to remember that the french CdG is a CATAOBAR Nuclear propulsed but is about the 2/3 of a Nimitz sized wise and over 50% lighter.

Yet it use full fledged Rafale (M version do lose a hardpoint compared to regulars for arrestor gear).

Also Kitty Hawk-class where smaller and had no issue using F-14… and C-130 could land and take off from them UNASSISTED.

The problem is what the fuck we're doing with current airplanes designs and current carriers designs not making the carriers even bigger…

>>617756

The US Marine Corps hits so far above its weight when it comes to capability demands, it's ridiculous. The Harrier was a lemon, and instead of somebody putting the foot down, they let the Marines through a tantrum and scream "BUT MUH VTOL!" until it got what it wanted. It's not the only reason the F-35 is so godawful, but it dictated changes in design principle and airframe management that threw fuel on the fire. The next time the Marines scream about VTOL, big daddy Navy needs to slap that peepee, and tell them they have some helicopters in their warehouse they can borrow.

>>617756

I've actually been on the USS Kitty Hawk when it docked in Hong Kong and there were longer cargo and oil ships nearby. There are 15 cruise ships that are longer than it. There's no reason why their aircraft carriers can't be made gigantic as they're powered by nuclear reactors.

I don't follow the F-35 that much but I was under the impression that the navy required it to have a very short take off and landing distance because of their aircraft carriers. They have their own version yes but there's no doubt that it influenced the overall design of the project as they're a big customer.

>>617132

this post was too good for you fucking cowards

>>617773

>wah no updoots for me!

Oh my bad m'fellow redditeur. Let me updank and gild your post for you.

>>617777

Well, the digits don't lie. Even your fellow leaf thinks your "le ebin zoomer maymay" shitposting is wretched.

>>617759

>making carriers bigger in the age of anti-ship missiles

It's not like AShM are gonna miss the current ones, if anything making them bigger might grant them a bit more survivability.

But really if full fledged twin-engines like the Rafales (which are pretty small but still) or the F-14s have no problems taking off SMALLER carriers the problem is clearly not the size of the carriers.

>>616534

It's an old-ass report though

>>617788

Same engine and no weight, wing-loading or drag/thrust ratio decrease, so no reason to think it's outdated.

>>617785

The idea is to build as small as possible, around the size of America class but design it for actual aircraft.

>>617815

>around the size of America class

>but design it for actual aircraft.

The CdG deck is only 4 meters longer than an America-class and is lighter.

Rafales are just stupidly well designed.

>>617834

Why not just make the canals bigger?

>>617838

Wikipedia calls it "One of the largest and most difficult engineering projects ever undertaken" more than once. If we can't even build a fighter jet you can play Fortnite on without it spontaneously combusting and breaking the pilot's neck every ten seconds, I don't think it's doable. Not to mention major construction on it would shut down half of global trade for years on end, causing total economic collapse.

>>617840

I fail to see the problem with this plan. Dream big, strelok.

>>617838

We tried that, nine years and five billion dollars later our carriers are still too wide and too tall.

>>617792

Newer reports don't mention the same issues.

>>617834

>You can't make them any bigger

Oh sure you can. Just make two smaller ones and attach them to each other once they've forced their way through some canal, making a one big carrier. Sure you will end up with a small scale civil war happening every time two halves are joined together, and administrators are going to throw a shitfit every time it happens, but surely it's worth it making a thing that is stuck eternally in dry dock undergoing repairs.

>>617862

Reread my post. There should be some radical changes in the aerodynamics or/and weight distribution for those issues to be solved. If such changes are not mentioned occam's razor dictates previously noted problems remain.

>>617862

Reread my post. There should be some radical changes in the aerodynamics or/and weight distribution for those issues to be solved. If such changes are not mentioned occam's razor dictates previously noted problems remain.

For all we know wingspan, wing angle, wing area and engine remain the same while weight and most likely also frontal area have slightly increased. These point towards the opposite of the issues being solved.

>>617938

I'm not even halfway through this shit.

>>617938

>there are so many issues that we are just going to skip them and pretend that they don't exist

>>618142

>>618143

To recap:

>gun software is fixed but not really, gun itself is still mechanically incapable of firing without destroying the airframe

>Sidewinder and AMRAAM software is fucked, and even if it worked the F-35 is unable to go supersonic with external missiles

>flight computer is ten different kinds of fucked

>rudder rips itself from its fitting after 500 hours, elevators melt if you go supersonic

>all models have horrible high-g handling

>fuel lines are dissolved by fuel

>arrestor gear fails after less than 15 landings

>carrier model has such a ridiculously stiff suspension that it's basically uncontrollable on the ground

>flying low causes the plane to rapidly overheat due to a malfunctioning cooling system

>flying high causes the plane to freeze due to a nonfunctional de-icer

>VTOL model's dry weight is currently within around 300 pounds of its maximum vertical landing weight

>270+ serious problems identified, including 72 show-stoppers

And I only got up to page 25 of 62, I can't imagine it gets any better.

>>617938

>Part of the weight reduction to the Gen III Lite HMDS involved removing one of the two installed visors (one dark, one clear). As a result, pilots that will need to use both visors during a mission (e.g., during transitions from daytime to nighttime) will have to store the second visor in the cockpit. However, there currently is not enough storage space in the cockpit for the spare visor, so the program is working a solution to address this problem.

This is just so fucking mundane a problem it's hilarious. There's nowhere for the pilot to put his sunglasses.

>>617862

>Newer reports don't mention the same issues.

Newest report (june 2018) mention that the newer report had downgraded or expunged issues giving no justification nor reporting any fixes purely from arbitrary decisions.

https://my.mixtape.moe/wjotih.pdf

>>611697

So over the years American taxpayers have already wasted ~$400 000 000 000 on the F-35 program and ~$150 000 000 000 worth of Israeli aid?

>>618163

Meanwhile I just helped someone develop the world's smallest oscillator in approximately 1 month of lab time the other day, and we got it right on like the 11th try.

>>617938

>the F-35B and F-35C each use a gun pod. Differences in mounting make the gun pods unique to a specific variant, i.e., a gun pod designated for an F-35B cannot be mounted on an F-35C aircraft.

>airborne firing for the F-35B and F-35C has yet to be accomplished

>Vibrations induced by the gun during firing are excessive and caused the 270 volts DC battery to fail. The program began qualification testing of a redesigned battery in 2015, but cracks in the casing discovered after the first series of testing required additional redesigning of the battery. Requalification of a newly designed battery has not yet occurred as of the writing of this report.

>An Air Force F-35A aircraft assigned to Luke AFB, Arizona, experienced a tailpipe fire during engine start while deployed to Mountain Home AFB, Idaho in September 2016, causing significant damage to the aircraft.

>the program has disabled EIPS and is changing the technical orders to require pilots to shut down the aircraft if icing conditions are encountered on the ground.

>Flight testing of structural loads with the AIM-9X air-to-air missile, which will be carried on external pylons outboard of the wing fold in the F-35C, shows exceedances above the wing structural design limit during flight in regions of aircraft buffet (increased angle-of-attack) and during landings. To address these deficiencies, the program is developing a more robust outer wing design

>Overheating of the Electro-Hydraulic Actuator System (EHAS) occurs under normal maneuvering in the F-35C. Pilots are alerted in the cockpit of an overheat condition and must then minimize maneuvering and attempt to cool the EHAS by climbing, if practical, to an altitude with lower temperatures to enhance cooling. Recovery and landing must be completed as soon as possible, terminating the mission.

>>618151 gotta correct you on

<arrestor gear fails after less than 15 landings

>In fact, the hook point has required replacement after only one engagement in some instances; the longest a hook point has lasted to date is five arrestments.

Why is it so shit.

>>616997

>Atleast you can recycle the fucking helmet

I know you're being sarcastic, but the F-35 hilarity is recursive here: the helmets cost several hundred thousand dollars each and are custom built for each pilot.

>>618155

Only because you won't be forced to buy them.

>>618308

Welp this is what happens when a military falls for the virtual reality meme.

>>617836

I was talking length more than weight, CDG, America, whatever else falls in that category is the future of carriers. The only downside to CDG is air defense and the fact that there aren't five of them.

The reason why America is heavier is because of its unnecessary fuel storage facilities, Americans are paranoid and like to layer all their vehicles in fuel.

This is the perfect aircraft carrier:

Height minimum 40m radar mast, plus AEW aerostat

Displacement <50,000 tonnes

Complement 1000 crew, pilots and marines automation can cut down on total

Aircraft 1 squadron of interceptors, 1 squadron of bombers (or helicopters)

Air defenses 10 long range (400/30km), 20 medium range (40/20km), 200 short range (10/5km) missiles, 4 CIWS platforms

Minimum two carriers in any single task force, minimum five per fleet.

>Rafales are just stupidly well designed.

Rafales are adequately designed, every other naval aircraft is absolute shit. Raise your standards….

>>617494

Its life imitating art

DER PANTYGON WHORES

>>617720

Btw, Japan actually has every bit of technology required to produce their own fighters that are superior to the f22 in every way. We actually sourced quite a lot from them during development and production.

>>617766

Its really sad, because drones do everything the VTOL would ever be useful for.

VTOL for a fast mover was always stupid.

>>617834

>The F-35 needed STOVL because of the marines wasp class amphibious assault ships that have flat decks with no catapults or arresting wires as they were built for helicopters. You can launch and receive just about anything on a carrier as long as its got landing gear strong enough to take the punishment

Convert those to drones and helicopters, and split the difference between those and more superhornets.

>>617915

Lol. The world gets mad, America just goes bigger and more powerful.

>>618308

The problem is, is that this sint early cold war. You can take an aircraft designed to be an ASF, and then slightky modify it to drop bombs.

F16 proved that.

You can also design a naval aircraft that is good at everything, like the F18 Superhornet.

Point is, for a fast mover, there isnt much reason to not have the design be an ASF. In fact, one of the earliest public things about the F22, was that it was already capable of dropping JDAMs from its bay.

….so the F35 is designed poorly on purpose.

>>618475

>reddit spacing

Git fucked nigger

>>618478

shoo boomer shoo

>>618485

It must be awfully nice knowing that all of your weapon systems just might go offline randomly and without explanation.

>>618237

Isn't the F-35's cannon misaligned anyway?

>>618185

If you divide it by 300 million it doesn't seem worse than average kickstarter scam (^:

>>618657

I wonder how successful an actual kickstarter by the US Military for a new weapons system designed to protect Israel from filthy Iranians would be in CY+3.

>>617938

>>618151

>>618237

>OCP is real, and it just made a flying ED-209 / suicide booth

CONCURRENT DEVELOPMENT-TESTING-PRODUCTION

>>618657

Maybe, but I don't have to give money to kickstarter.

>>618638

A) The cannon itself isn't misaligned, the software just doesn't put the reticule where the bullets go. This is due to BOTH a software glitch and a sensor interface failure that is still unfixed as of spring 2018.

B) The hardware actually has to be aligned after every use. Most other aircraft could go a lifetime without alignment and still see very little drift. There are foreign F-5 which were never aligned and still made good training runs on targets.

>>618661

>putting real bullets into a video game AI prototype

Oh by the way they still want to replace the A-10 with it.

They killed the Thunderhog project this month. No more stormriding A-10.

>>618485

It’s like that they designed it on the purpose so they cannot win the war easily.

>>617374

>The upper 20% of the aircraft's speed range can only be reached for less then ten minutes at a time.

sounds like a game of warthunder tbh desu

How do I downitall on 8ch? It's downloading 4 copies plus 1 thumbnail instead of just one image.

>>621780

>It's like you wanna lose all of your nuggets to a burst missile launched from the Scinfaxi-class submarine your trying to sink

How is it my fault those nuggets can't climb in a jet fighter?

>>623397

>How is it my fault those nuggets can't climb in a jet fighter?

because it isn't a Grumman F-14D Super Tomcat jet fighter

>>618159

404

>>623419

https://8ch.net/pdfs/res/1335.html#q10534

>>623475

>>623475 (You)

Plane doesn't signal the pilot ejected.

>Yeah but it's so great it's, never gonna happen so why fix it?

Pilots can't read JDAM feedback.

>Who cares, the plane work!

Arrestor gear still don't work.

>Oh come on now they do work sometimes!

Plane can't tell how much fuel it has.

>This is a tiny issue.

>>611697

>Crashed in South Carolina the next day due to a fuel leak, right after taking off

sounds like the pilot and crew chief flubbed the inspection and preflight.

https://web.archive.org/web/20181120201643/https://amp.businessinsider.com/f-35-elephant-walk-chinas-j-20-or-russias-su-57-cant-come-close-to-2018-11

New shilling article by (((businessinsider)))

>Impressive demonstration

<They flew in formation

>Russian planes are untested because they have only bombed sandniggers

<Unlike the USAF or that jid F-35 lost to (((birdstrike)))

>F-35 pilots have had years of practice

<At choking like retards in a dysfunctional plane

>In total, the US has ordered more than 2,000 F-35s

<I guess it's time to go long in lockheeb

What do you guys think? Has the F-35 finally shown its superiority?

>>626879

Thanks magyaranon I just got aids from how much raw unadulterated syphilus ridden soy swilling fudge packing cock that article hoovers.

Leave it to retard MSM outlets to construe a demonstration of a large number of planes taking off in sequence to be a show of strength.

How much do you reckon Lockheebs paying these fools.

>>626887

>Leave it to retard MSM outlets to construe a demonstration of a large number of planes taking off in sequence to be a show of strength.

For the F-35 it is. That's the whole reason to make such photo op.

From what comes out of official reports it's a miracle to have that many available at the same time and none of them exploding while taking off.

>>621717

external gunpod != internal gun