So how outdated is the F-22 now that other nations are pushing

F-22 is still more advance than anything the Chinks and Slavs can come up with.

>>28558242
Raptor was outdated very quickly after it first came out, what with it being most 80's and 90's R&D. The thing runs on ADA.

Fucking ADA

>>28558242
It's impossible to make a reasonable statement about the state of technolgies of stealth fighters.

>f22
>outdated

Why do Europeans even post here, you people are an embarassment with how little you know lmao.

>>28558283
You'd rather have your avionics run on C++?

>>28558321

Why do you assume he's euro? He could be a slavboo for all we know.

>>28558321
Eurofags just hates America, and if they have to suck Mudslime cock to piss us off then they will gladly swallow the snackload. Also the Eurofighter is absolute shit, so much so that everyone is starting to cancel their orders and/or changing them to the F-35 or RAFALE.

When will the air superiority version of the F-35 be produced?

Do they really need 2 engines?
Is super cruise relevant?

>>28558362

There is no difference to me :^[]

>>28558249
To be fair, the "Slavs" use other technology. The Czechs use Saab JAS 39 Gripen, and the Slovaks have signed an agreement with the Czechs to share tech; they'll be replacing their MiG-29 Fulcrum fleet with Gripen.

Speaking of the MiG, the Poles use them; the East German Air Force used them (and continued to use them after reunification), but by 2004, all of their MiGs were sold to the Poles for 1 Euro apiece. The Slovaks currently use the Fulcrum, and so do the Russians themselves (also, the ground assault improved MiG-35).

The MiG-29 was designed to be superior to the F-16, and by many measures, it does so.

The F-22 is a dead program at this point, anyway. The JSF/F-35 program is the 5th generation fighter platform of choice… though I think air superiority is going to go the way of close air support and theater surveillance—drones.

>>28558391

Fuck off tripfag, go suck off comrade sanders at the breadline and KYS.

File: 4.5 Gen takes 5th Gen.webm (3MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x480px

It's a 90's stealth fighter that depends on it's "stealth" to survive because it can't dog fight.

That should be enough to tell you how outdated it is.

>>28558369
Super cruise is relevant if you need to cover a large amount of airspace with a small amount of aircraft. However, it is still more economical to cruise below the speed of sound because physics are, well, physics.

>>28558403
that was a kill

>>28558411
Thats what I mean, would the next air superiority fighter have super cruise? Probably not.

>>28558369
You've got it backwards, the F-35 is the low to the F-22's high

>>28558455
Yes and no, next gen will have variable cycle engines so they'll probably have super cruise as a result, although I'm not sure if that would be a specific goal they're setting out to achieve

>>28558403
>using cherrypicked training footage

You say this as if the F-22 couldn't do the exact same thing to any 4.5 gen if it got behind them (which it has a greater chance of, because you know, stealth).

>>28558242
Really, the only things the F-22 lacks right now is IRST and HMD. The lack of HMD will most likely be solved in a future upgrade cycle, but I'm not sure how they'd incorporate IRST. Other than that, the Raptor probably has the best non-IRST passive sensor suite next to the F-35.

>>28558242
You seem to think that this functions where each plane is at a concrete level of functionality and only by making new planes is that level increased. Already upgrade programs are being put together for the F-22 that will allowing it retain superiority or parity with other platforms. In turn, those other nations' fighters will receive their own upgrade packages so that they might retain parity with the USA. Except for Russia who can't afford it.

>>28558530

The lack of IRST makes it practically useless against IRST-equipped platforms

File: PAKFA SHARK.jpg (1MB, 1200x797px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x797px

Pure Sex

>>28558403
>>28554821
Did you post this here because you ran away like a little bitch when you got blown the fuck out in the other thread?

>>28558242
Despite it's age the Raptor still defines the state of the art and is unmatched by any other craft.

No other nation's 5th generation aircraft program has produced a workable stealth craft yet, and the cost and complexity of doing so is prohibitive. The engines are especially difficult, with neither China nor Russia able to produce anything remotely comparable.

Lessons learned in the F-22 program are being applied to the F-35 program. While never intended to match the F-22, the F-35 has diverse and useful capabilities.

>>28558600
Do you have the wrong thread?

>>28558576
>Lessons learned in the F-22 program are being applied to the F-35 program
as in, make it so overpriced that you can only afford a handful?

it's nice that you are bragging about f-22 being the best, but by far the most of your planes are old f-16 and f-15

>>28558545
>IRST
>A game changer

It has radar and missiles effective at far longer ranges then IRST. Unless IRST somehow makes you invulnerable to exploding when hit by an air to air missile, it doesn't counter the F-22 very well.

File: T-50-damaged.jpg (34KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x426px

>>28558554
Pure shit.

File: fark_FKROTsxQvr1S0i8QV5IUe7yOgZI.jpg (22KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 600x600px

>>28558616

>>28558628
>radar
>stealth
pick one and only one.
(yes, i know about LPI mode on AN/APG-77. doesn't work that well against modern radars)

>>28558623
Which are still superior to anything else anyone has

BTFO
T
F
O

It speaks volumes about other countries aviation industries when out of the the only two other nations that have tried to build 5th gen fighters, one's goal was to have an RCS of a Superbug and the other has to shill on /k/ about how great it totally is.

File: image022.jpg (18KB, 533x269px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 533x269px

>>28558642
eh?

>>28558623

>Old F-15

Yeah, it sucks being over here having a thousand of the second best air superiority platform in the world.

>The fucking viper

Not the greatest at anything, but goddamn, there are a million of these little fuckers.

File: Su-35.jpg (239KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1280x853px

>>28558682
>second best air superiority platform in the world.

Not even close.

Besides, even the Americans don't have the best F-15's, the South Korean's Slam Eagles blow the originals out the fucking water.

>>28558663
>>28558682
>f-15
>the second best
this is what amerifats actually believe

>>28558663
if they are so superior why are you spending billions on replacing them?

>>28558682
How is the F-15 better than the F-35 in air 2 air?

>>28558707

Please go back to your containment board at >>>/int/ you no guns peon your kind isnt welcome here.

File: tyrone laughing.jpg (21KB, 620x670px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 620x670px

>>28558715
If they weren't superior, why is the rest of the world spending billions just to keep up with them

nothing can deal with a quick in & out missile spam at supercruise speeds

>>28558658

>Bogeies detected by AN/APY-2
>Explodes

It's almost like the Raptor is made to operate as part of the US fleet and not all alone forever.

File: AeIlc.png (482KB, 1034x831px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 1034x831px

what people don't realizes is it's not WWII

you don't just troll around and get into dogfights with whomever you happen accross

the network of support from air refueling to carriers to airborne radar and satellite intel are actually FAR more important than which aircraft can turn slightly faster or some shit like that

they are part of a whole package now, not lone planes

and in that regard the USA pwns all without question

Actually the fact that the F-22 is older means it's better. More time to work out kinks, coding issues, etc.

Don't believe for a second that China and Russia don't have issues with their fighters. Their defense industry is controlled by the state though, so you'll never hear a peep.

It's why US planes have been BTFOing slavshit on a constant basis for the past 30 years.

>>28558699
>Observe the rare sight of an Su-35 in the air before it's engines fail and it sits rusting Siberia.

>>28558756
russians are building their new doctrine around killing high value airborne assets like AWACS and JSTARS

>>28558799
>russians are building their new doctrine around killing high value airborne assets like AWACS and JSTARS

good luck with that

File: Su-35S Flanker-E “Super Flanker”.jpg (166KB, 1280x928px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1280x928px

>>28558785

The fear in your post is palpable over the internet.

>>28558799
Not gonna happen.

>>28558799
Are you saying they're just now getting around to figuring that out?

File: AWACS-Killer-3A.png (88KB, 768x523px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 768x523px

>>28558799
>>28558839

>>28558899
>AWACS spots inbound missile
>turns off radar
>missile misses


hm

>>28558799
The same doctrine their navy used. Just spam a lot of missiles from afar and hope you carry the day.

Essentially admitting they can't go toe to toe

>>28558457
Hi/lo is just a meme
The F-22 is a pretty old plane now. But maybe the F-35 is good enough at air to air that they don't need anything else.

>>28558924
>Essentially admitting they can't go toe to toe
war isn't supposed to be "fair". you use whatever works.
russia needs a counter against american air force. but that doesn't mean they need a plane that can win 1v1 fights with f-22. there are cheaper ways to do this.

>>28558976
Rolling for strategist.

>>28558899
> missile gets detected
> AWACS just flips the switch for radar
> missile misses because lolradarguided

> AWACS now lights up the plane that launched the missile
> Fighters or SAM blows up plane

That sure made the AWACS a killer, but the plane that launched the missile is kill.

>>28558976
cmon inquisitor!

>>28559023
>missile gets detected
how?
what do you think is a head-on RCS of a missile in L-band?

>>28559033
At high altitudes distinguishable enough for L-band to track anyway.

>>28559033
I'm pretty sure an aircraft designed form the ground up to detect, track, and manage air-based threats can effectively track a missile.

>>28558907
>>28559023
>Guidance is by inertial navigation until the missile is close enough to the target to use active radar for terminal homing.
>It has a lock-on range of 40 km (22 nmi)
I'm afraid turning off the radar wont help

>>28558283
>The thing runs on ADA.
>Fucking ADA
So fucking what. How does that make any difference whatsoever?

>>28558976
Gimme

>>28558976
paladin/templar/inquisitor please

>>28559080
>Believing russian claims about its missiles

Yes and they totally didn't have some of their fucktardedly located SSM's in the Caspian sea accidentally crash in Iran.

>>28559105

It's the code that the Russian and Chinese have been practicing on fucking with for years

And you want to run your goddamn networked air-superiority fighter on it

>>28559213
you know nothing about anything. stop posting.

>>28558242
The US is ahead of Russia and China in airborne radar, IRSTs, stealth, engines and in avionics.

Platform specifically though, the F-22 is still ahead in radar, stealth and engines, but unfortunately carries no IRST at the moment. The Raptor also hasn't yet received a helmet mounted sight; not even even JHMCS.

>>28558899
>215nmi

>yfw thats within Meteor range, even if you shot back from the AWACs and not the fighers 100nmi closer

Russians in charge of standoff capability

>>28558363
>Also the Eurofighter is absolute shit, so much so that everyone is starting to cancel their orders and/or changing them to the F-35 or RAFALE.

citation motherfucker, the typhoon is markedly superior to the rafale (which has suffered some significant cancellations)

>>28558369
>Is super cruise relevant?
Only if it's REALLY high supercruise (a la F-22 or Concorde). Anything less than M1.5 simply isn't worth the additional fuel burn.

>>28558811

The Su-35 is a completely unproven platform, while the F-15 is the most successful fighter in history going by K/D in actual battles. Kill yourself, slavaboo.

>>28560419
>Only if it's REALLY high supercruise (a la F-22 or Concorde). Anything less than M1.5 simply isn't worth the additional fuel burn.

Why post if you don't understand what supercruise is?

>>28560448
Eurocucks insist that their mediocre M1.2ish non-afterburner speed still counts as supercruise. I know that the USAF does not.

>>28558242

A well-designed fighter generally has a long career. The F-22 will be upgraded as time goes on and it will stay very relevant for at least a decade from now.

>>28560431
>muh Pugachev's cobra
>watch how quickly my fighter can lose airspeed in a dogfight
>why are Americans shooting us down
>where is the vodka?

>>28560479
Only 184 exist now and they are already massively inferior to the F-35
No more will ever be built
And it's doubtful they will last another 20 years.

>>28560431
F-22 is a completely unproven platform
F-35 is a completely unproven platform

>>28558976
rollan

>>28561040
Technically the F-22 does have some A2G kills under it's belt, unlike the Su-35.

Also
>implying exercises like Red Flag mean nothing

>>28558362
A slavboo would have posted a picture of a PAK-FA.

File: rafale raptor.jpg (153KB, 749x541px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 749x541px

>>28558403

>>28558976
Roll!

>>28558976
roll baby roll

>>28558976
roll baby

File: 1422226591693.png (64KB, 209x319px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 209x319px

>>28558976
rolly polly!

>>28558363

Why are you ameritards always so angry and defensive? You act like petulant little children.

>>28560559
22s are still faster and more maneuverable than a 35.

The chinese jet has shit engines and the PAK-FA is cancelled.

>>28563147
>insults and namecalling
>why are you defensive?

>>28558976
Rawlin

>>28558242
It's a plane that uses tech that first flew 1988, it was already outdated

>>28559033
http://www.northropgrumman.com/capabilities/awacsapy2/documents/awacs.pdf
> Detection and tracking of an expanded
variety of target types, including slow or
maneuvering targets, helicopters, and
high speed targets such as missiles
And to answer your question, probably -10 dBsm or so.

>>28558899
>Implying non-stealth planes would get anywhere near close enough for that
>Implying the SU-35s in that scenario wouldn't be dead without knowing what happened

>>28558347
Well... yeah.

>>28558976
So long as everyone else is shitting up the thread.

>>28560378
Yeah, the Russian plan sort of falls apart when it detects the Russian 400 miles away and at 300 miles away from the E-3 an obsolete F-16 shoots the Russian down with an AIM 120.

File: qsYglVP.jpg (218KB, 1200x809px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1200x809px

>>28558242
>how outdated is the F-22 now that other nations are pushing ahead with their own 5th gen programs?
F-22 was build as ULTIMATE Flanker killer. As a god of air superiority. Other nations build steals multirole fighters. In air to air engagements F-22 can have his superiority or at least he will be equal to his competitors. In any other missions new planes will be better. Problem that F-22 is not for sale. And chances for him to see real fight (and pay off his price) are lower and lower.

File: piechart.jpg (73KB, 790x517px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 790x517px

>>28558242
>So how outdated is the F-22
>US has had 4 flavors of operational stealth aircraft starting back in the 80s
>2016
>everyone else: still 0

>>28563954
Depends
The jews & eternal anglo started 2 world wars to stop a growing Germany.

Mabye they'll start WW3 to stop a growing china.

>>28564948
>WWI
>Literally a conflict between Austrians and Serbs whose alliance networks went insane

>WWII
>The jews & eternal anglo started 2 world wars to stop a growing Germany.
>Literally started by German aggression and Lebensraum, Soviet expansionism, and Japanese Militaristic interservice rivalry constantly intensifying the conflict


>Hurr everyone but the actual aggressors to blame

>>28558411
Not really. Remember the blackbird? It consumes less fuel the faster it goes.

>>28565009
>Literally started by German aggression and Lebensraum
you aren't worth debating with if you think WW2 and WW1 aren't extremely intertwined.

To say WW2 was started when the krauts started taking soil is just so fucking stupid.

>>28565212
Oh, the economic environment that created the rise of the Nazi party was definitely the result of the Treaty of Versailles and its reparation conditions, but it was still the acts of said party using extreme nationalism to build up to that.

>>28565226
>but it was still the acts of said party using extreme nationalism to build up to that.
"black and white etc" just doesn't have the impact I need right now.

yes, ultimately you can reduce WW2 to being on the krauts since they technically threw the first physical punch

>>28565049
It didn't consume less fuel, it consumed less per nautical mile travelled - more efficient for cruise, but not more efficient for staying in the air as long as possible.

>>28565228
They didn't need to start conquering their neighbors. Under the Nazi government they had major economic reform fixing the hyperinflation rapidly, huge infrastructure upgrades, and an overall rapid recovery from the Great Depression. It was rhetoric about Lebensraum that lead to the annexations and invasions.

>>28565009
>>28565226
>completely ignoring any and all things that the allies did, despite the fact Germany would have given them white peace at any time throughout both world wars

It was the ALLIES who wanted the world wars
Not Germany

>>28565264
Riiiiggghhhhttttt. Because Britain didn't try every single thing they could to prevent the war before Churchill. It's great how much you're stretching to defend your point without actually presenting any proof of it.

>>28565276
>We totally weren't giving Poland a guarrentee of independence that we had no intention of upholding
>We totally weren't telling Poland to start a war, we'll give them more land from Germany

The idea of the west trying to "prevent war" is blatant historical revisionism

>>28561749
>Technically the F-22 does have some A2G kills under it's belt, unlike the Su-35.
you mean training kills? you think that russians do not have trainings?

>>28565322
you best be joking nigger

>>28563688
>200nmi
>close
not really. AIM-120D range is 100nmi, a against maneuvering fighter maybe half that.
how many fighters do you want to tie up for AWACS escort?

File: 1377995638988.gif (1MB, 349x254px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 349x254px

>>28565276
>Riiiiggghhhhttttt. Because Britain didn't try every single thing they could to prevent the war before Churchill.
they literally didn't

the west had no intention of allowing germany to survive intact. when they came up with an economic system that bypasses western theory entirely, you have a major problem.

>>28565338
No I mean the F-22 has dropped live bombs on targets in Syria.

http://theaviationist.com/2015/08/15/f-22-kinetic-situational-awareness/

>>28565355
Try being less ignorant about how the world works
By any objective viewpoint, the west are in fact the bad guys.

It's impossible to ignore that the soviets defaulted as allies to the west while they were invading finland/baltics
While Germany is the bad guys for reclaiming land they lost in ww1
?

>>28565363
>how many fighters do you want to tie up for AWACS escort?

>tie up
AWACs support fighters. They're a strategic element to air superiority that is pretty much a pre-requisite of you winning.

>>28565395
>By any objective viewpoint, the west are in fact the bad guys.

Kek. Well between the choice of being russian or chinese vs usa, ill choose to be an american.

>>28558976
Roll .@&$

>>28565373
Do you even history?
The policy of "appeasment" was adopted when Germany started invading other countries. Britian literally said "we dont want war so let them take what they want till they are happy." It wasn't till France was invaded and the British mainland was under threat that the Brits even considered war.

>>28565412
>Kek. Well between the choice of being russian or chinese vs usa, ill choose to be an american.
Did you know the US had around 100,000 Wehrmacht troops ready to be reactivated at the conclusion of WW2 incase there was a conflict with the soviets?

That's how fucking stupid the west was with regards to its geopolitical aims in WW2, and reflective as a whole on western geopolitics during the time period.

>>28565419
>begin mobilizing but need more time to prepare for war
>We're totally "appeasing" them guys xd, we totally want peace guys
>then they declare war

>>28565412
Whats that supposed to mean?

The US starts the whole vietnam war, and after 10 years of war, abandon their allies to be genocided by communists
Who's the "good guys" there? Retard?

What does the living standards of the west have to do with the morality of their actions?

>>28565395
What in the fuck are you smoking? With an objective view point the West is the good guys.
>No death camps
>No ethnic cleansing
>No mass rapes
And thats just post WWII I am talking about.

>>28565437
And before the retard even replies with muh gulf of tonkin, hear this:

MACV SOG intentionally started shit in the gulf (literal shelling of islands) before that bullshit went down. US Army SF started the war.

>>28565445
>No death camps
The US Army didn't find any, either. kek

>>28565363
>>28565408
What he said. The job of the E-3 is to detect shit and say "hey guys, go blow that shit up".

It's not 'escorting' it if going where it tells them to kill the shit it finds is their job.

>>28565427
The policy was litterally called appeasement. They LITTERALLY repeatedly negotiated with Germany that they could keep what they had already invaded if they stopped. It wasnt buying time, it was hoping they would stop on thier own.

>>28565445
>No death camps
neither did Germany
>No ethnic cleansing
Perhaps you failed history class
>No mass rapes
Which is why they had to censor the media of the occupied countries to cover up rapes & robberies & murders right?

It was the allies who invented the "strategic" mass murder of civilians through bombing.
The morgenthau plan for Germany WAS in fact mass genocide of germans
And the Soviets were the buddies of FDR, who engaged in all those things.

>>28565420
>Fighting the USSR
>Stupid

Do you have any understanding of history? Everyone knew that the division of Europe might fall apart and turn into war at any time.

>>28565437
>Whats that supposed to mean?

Russia and china are literal shitholes. The worst places in the US is average living conditions for both.

>>28565475
>do the WW2 thing, kneecap germany
>war ends, spend the next half century preparing to fight the slavs
yes, it's fucking stupid.

In hindsight we shoulda just fucking rolled east with the krauts side by side and saved eastern europe from 50 years of misery

>>28565453
The Tonkin resolution was an excuse yes. But the French were in the war first, people tend to forget that Vietnam was at war from 1950-1975 with US involvement starting in 59.

What war are we talking about? In WWII US troops found death camps. In several other wars since we did as well,

>>28565487
>Britain and America have good living conditions
>this means its moral to bomb cities or ships filled with refugees

>>28565488
In hindsight, things happened exactly as planned.
Soviets were given the bomb by communists like oppenheimer
Then they had the duo-polar new world order that they wanted.
Was there ever a communist country that the US didn't fund/aid?

>>28565453
Gee, maybe if the fucking French could handle their own shit USA Senpai wouldn't have to have tried to clean up their mess in Vietnam.

>>28565437
Ahh yes, there is a reason half of Europe joined the "bad" guys en mads after the fall of the USSR like rape victims.

They were all clearly evil too.

>>28565437
Dunno, maybe the guys doing the genocide?

>>28565491
>In WWII US troops found death camps.
Thats factually untrue and even mainstream historians will admit that
Try glancing at wikipedia maybe.

>>28565498
A: If its real it had not even started when the US entered the war
B: who gives a fuck
C: They supported plenty of genocidal sorts in the years before or after

File: 1400309814007.jpg (22KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 700x467px

>>28565494
>>28565491
>it's okay to make excuses when the americans do it

also, the US Army investigators visited 10 camps I believe and none were determined to be death camps, the only time allegations of death camps arose was during the post war trials. From the slavs.

>>28565499
Are you from /pol/ or Iran, by any chance?

>>28565499
>try glancing at wikipedia maybe

Ok

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camp

>>28565508
And which one of those were inspected by US troops or any westerner
Take your time, this is a tough one

>>28565493
Are you saying the soviets did not bomb citys or kill refugees?

>>28565503
>They supported plenty of genocidal sorts in the years before or after

like?

Since the end of the war about 3,000,000 people, mostly women and children and overaged men, have been killed in eastern Germany and south-eastern Europe; about 15,000,000 people have been deported or had to flee from their homesteads and are on the road. About 25 per cent of these people, over 3,000,000 have perished. About 4,000,000 men and women have been deported to eastern Europe and Russia as slaves. It seems that the elimination of the German population of eastern Europe - at least 15,000,000 people - was planned in accordance with decisions made at Yalta. Churchill had said to Mikolajczyk when the latter protested during the negotiations at Moscow against forcing Poland to incorporate eastern Germany Don't mind the five or more million Germans. Stalin will see to them. You will have no trouble with them they will cease to exist.
Quoted by Sen. Homer Capehart in speech before U.S. Senate, Feb. 5, 1946.

“Germany is becoming too strong. We must crush her.” To American General Robert E. Wood, in November 1936. Quoted in Peter H. Nicoll, Englands Krieg gegen Deutschland, p. 83.

“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Churchill to Lord Robert Boothby, as quoted in Sidney Rogerson, Propaganda in the Next War (Foreword to the second edition 2001), originally published in 1938.

“I do not want suggestions as to how we can disable the economy and the machinery of war; what I want are suggestions as to how we can roast the German refugees on their escape from Breslau.” Quoted in Juan Maler, Die Unvollendete, p. 27.

>>28565524
albanians
commie blacks in africa
turks
communist chinese

>>28565531
#wrekt

>people actually proclaiming russia and china to be the "good" guys.

Thats why, after the fall of the iron curtain, pretty much every country ran to the west.

Because the west was the bad guys.

Makes perfect sense.

Vatniks, not even once.

File: 1438302201262.jpg (846KB, 3840x1080px) Image search: [Google]

846KB, 3840x1080px

>>28565585
>acknowledging that the western powers have more than dipped their feet into the pool of evil fuckery means russia and china are the good guys
that's quite the leap you've made

File: only-a-sith.gif (503KB, 400x171px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 400x171px

>>28565437

The USA isn't a perfect moral actor. The point still stands that being a US ally helped all the best countries to live in today. Japan, S. Korea, Germany, etc etc. Even Vietnam is currently one of the most pro American countries in the world.

>>28565593
See
>>28565395

Thats the arguement at hand.

>>28565602
And I simply refer you to my previous post once more.
>>28565593

>>28565604
Ooohkay, so you are essentially agreeing with me, because i am argueing against the east being the "good guy", which is the arguement.

The arguement is not the moral piety of the western nations, its the relativity to the east thats the question.

File: 1397020882695.gif (3MB, 360x288px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 360x288px

>This thread

>>28558391
>The MiG-29 was designed to be superior to the F-16, and by many measures, it does so.

HHAHAHHHAHHHAH

Only thing it had over contemporary western aircraft was helmet mounted sight for IR-AAM's. It had shit radar, smoky as fuck engines, obsolete avionics...

>>28558976
Roland

>>28565499
>>28565504
You must be trolling. Just about every US military command found death camps. This is very well known and there are litterally thousands of photos of these camps as they were liberated.

>>28563391
S
E
C O N T R O L
A
F
R
U
S

>>28565491
>In WWII US troops found death camps.

Nope. All extermination camps were in the east. Kulmhof, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, Auschwitz, Majdanek and Trostenets were all in Poland and weren't liberated by US forces.

>>28565504
The first major camp, Majdanek, was discovered by the advancing Soviets on July 23, 1944. Auschwitz was liberated, also by the Soviets, on January 27, 1945; Buchenwald by the Americans on April 11; Bergen-Belsen by the British on April 15; Dachau by the Americans on April 29; Ravensbrück by the Soviets on the same day; Mauthausen by the Americans on May 5; and Theresienstadt by the Soviets on May 8.[33] Treblinka, Sobibór, and Bełżec were never liberated, but were destroyed by the Nazis in 1943. Colonel William W. Quinn of the U.S. 7th Army said of Dachau: "There our troops found sights, sounds, and stenches horrible beyond belief, cruelties so enormous as to be incomprehensible to the normal mind."[34][35]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camps

>>28565805
See
>>28565807
Tldr you are fucking wrong.

>be me
>be inna Ft Bragg
>Visit 82nd Div Museam
>Entire wing dedicated to the 82nd finding death camps during WWII

>>28565724

Don't forget a lawnmower fuel tank. Shit had worse range than a F-16

>>28565823

Camps US forces ran into were only regular forced labor camps.

>>28558347
>You'd rather have your avionics run on C++?

Are you retarded?

Computers and software are major issue for F-22. While plane itself is still the besf fighter in the world... many of it's subsystems are seriously obsolete. Development of plane took so long that people that wrote the software for it retired before plane entered service. It's pretty hard find people that know old shit like ADA.

>>28565885
Why are you trolling this? You are wrong and you know you are wrong.

>>28558976
Roll

>>28565855

The tanks on mig-29 are ok big, but RD-33 sucks almost as much gas as P-100 while only delivering 66% as much thrust.

>>28565460
>>28565408
fighters can't just teleport from airstrip to the location where AWACS detected a threat.

In a typical wartime scenario you'd have some fighters dedicated to flying CAP around the AWACS, to prevent it from getting killed.

With long range anti-AWACS missiles in the picture, the area that these fighters need to cover becomes much larger. so you need more of them to cover the gaps. this ties up resources that could have been used elsewhere. It may become more practical to leave AWACS at home and accept the risk of reduced situational awareness.

>>28565804
How significant is it to have all those all-moving surfaces?

>>28565974
ADA is still widely used in aerospace, but there just aren't enough software engineers in aerospace.

>>28566311
3 things mainly:

1. You don't have to deflect them as much, meaning you're less likely to reflect radar back to something (your signature is more predictable).

2. You can potentially make those surfaces translucent to radar, because you don't have to worry about hiding rudder actuators, etc. Doesn't mean the whole thing will be translucent, but it means you can have more of it translucent.

3. You can maneuver better (mainly in yaw in this case) at supersonic speeds. Generally not important for rudders, but rudders can contribute to pitch and roll a bit.

The big negative to all-moving surfaces is that they're more maintenance hungry due to the extra forces at play and the size of their actuators (the size of which adds to the weight of the aircraft). You also forgo any opportunity to make your vertical stabilisers into fuel tanks (which the F-22 and F-35 do) and you make it harder / more maintenance heavy to have electronics (antennas, etc) in them.

File: PAK-FA-3.jpg (734KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 1280x853px

>>28566311
very. less drag, more control authority, more stealth.

>>28566291
>It may become more practical to leave AWACS at home and accept the risk of reduced situational awareness.

You're a moron

>AT missiles exist, better leave the tank at home

>>28566344

Here, we see the PAK-FA covering its exposed engine blades in shame...

>>28558642
>>28558673
>T-50 prototype burn
>minor damge
>F-22 prototype bur
>trash the whole thing

>>28566344
>>28566338

More control surfaces that break the plane of the air frame in relation to the radar is not more stealthy, its less so.

>>28558899
Is it just me or does it look like the ruskies are shooting down a civilian airliner in that image

>>28565496
Are you retarded?

They weren't evil for "siding" with the USSR, they were wholesale conquered and had communist governments imposed on them by the Soviet Union. Literally puppet states.

Hence why when the Soviet Union weakened they all tossed aside their communist governments.

>>28566875
Ok friend, try reading his post real slow like.

>>28565754
Technically the "death camps" were
Sobibor, treblinka, and belzec. All were in the eastern part, and were rapidly destroyed and demolished to hide evidence.

The rest were concentration camps. Technically the /pol/ poster is right if semantics are important.

>>28565823
Come on you retard.
No US inspected camp has had any facilities for "Extermination" but all Soviet camps had.
A most striking example is the camp of Auschwitz. The chimney of it's supposed gas chamber was constructed almost two years later. This is readily admitted by the staff manning the camp now. However when we take a look at the room they say was the "real" gas chamber. it seems to fall short on some logical things as well. The supposed holes in which the zyklon B pellets were thrown are all plugged seamlessly, they have been located apparently but no evidence of this exists. It is also located right next to the former SS hospital on a distance of ~75m. A rather strange place for a room where millions of bodies are brought in and out and which needs to vent thousands of kg in poison gas. In fact this place fits the description of an emergency shelter much more than a supposed gas chamber. http://www.hdot.org/en/learning/myth-fact/gaschambers.html Take a look at the "debunking" arguments. All of them are reliant on stupid assumptions and soviet provided evidence. Now obviously who to trust better than the "holodomor the ukies and rape the germans" soviets.

>everyone outpaces Russia in the stealth fighter developement

RIP

>>28567029
>everyone
At least they have been flying prototypes for years unlike the other so called stealth fighter programs that haven't even gotten their first flights.

>>28558242
You know aircraft get updated with new tech, right?
Even the F-16 is on like Block 50 something.

>>28561816
So the f22 was fitted with some handicapping device and not allowed to engage at bvr (what it supposedly excels at) and still managed to defeat the Rafale? That's pretty fucking crazy.

>>28565049
It also takes less fuel to fly through the air at 85000 feet than it does at 0-60000 feet, comparitively.

>>28566665
what? a single-piece vertical stabilizer has obviously less RCS than a two-piece one

File: F_22_Raptor_Tail.jpg (615KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

615KB, 1080x1080px

>>28567389
forgot pic

>>28566344
How is the PAK-FA even stealthy?

>>28565453
>The US Army didn't find any, either. kek
Holy fuck stop talking you revisionist piece of shit.

>>28566789
Could be a crude depiction of JSTARS?

File: ducts.jpg (224KB, 1280x842px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1280x842px

>>28566630
eh?

>>28567441
how is it not?

>>28567471
Wouldn't be the first time.

>>28566911
And every concentration camp had to engage in mass murder, obscenely horrific starvation practices, and theft of everything of worth the interred carried or had, including dental work and hair. You're not helping your case here.

>>28567018
I've been to Buchenwald. They specifically had facilities for killing and burning a lot of bodies there. Stop getting your history from Stormfront and /pol/.

>>28567441
It's not, even Russian estimates put it around the eurocanard range.

some points:

1) the F-22 production was halted around 184 due to budget restraints. Production could be restarted if needed. Note that the US currently only has around 250 active service F-15's, with around 150 of those being National Guard. So having 184 Raptor's is a significant number.

2) the F-22 is faster and more maneuverable than pretty much every other fighter jet out there. Maybe the Su-35 is a bit more agile, but it's not nearly as fast. Typhoon and Rafale are decent, comparable maneuverability, but again, not in speed.

3) don't underestimate stealth capability. No, stealth is not invincible and infallible, but it's better than not having stealth. Detection is everything in modern warfare, and the F-22 has a huge advantage over other 4.5/5th gen aircraft in that department

4) yes, it lacks IRST and HMCS, but they are planned upgrades. They are planned upgrades (particularly the HMCS) for even the F-15, F-16, etc.

5) a close-range dogfight is literally the only situation where a fighter like a Rafale or Typhoon could compete. That oft-posted video clip of a Rafale getting a missile lock on an F-22 doesn't prove anything. Just because the F-22 isn't invincible, doesn't mean it's not still the best.

6) the main advantages of the F-22 aren't even the speed and maneuverability. The main advantages are its communications and detection. It acts as a force multiplier for allied aircraft.

7) the F-35 is going to come in at around half the cost of an F-22, with more capability in the sensors, command&control, communications, and avionics department. It sacrifices a bit in raw speed and maneuverability.

8) the F-35 isn't intended as a pure air superiority fighter like the F-22 is. So no, it's not as good at dogfighting. But It has better stealth, and a huge improvement in sensors and comms.

9) the F-35 has a marked increase in versatility and reliability.

File: living in nazi germoney.jpg (774KB, 1899x1168px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 1899x1168px

>>28567518
Oh fuck off you retard. There were very few deaths in the beginning of the war and everyone and I mean EVERYONE died of starvation and disease in the later years. Besides how much are youg going to value anecdotal reports ? http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v10/v10p161_Brech.html Are the murricans just as worse then ? OR ever worse because they did have the food readily available to feed these people. Also if you actually think they stole hair instead of trying to curb typhoid and what not by combating lice you might want to gas yourself buddy.
>>28567532
No they had not you fucking dipshit. They did some gruesome experiments there yes, but almost everyone who died there starved or died from disease. Even the inherently biased wikipedia page doesn't list it as a deathcamp. In fact I want to see your face when you read up on the Nurenberg trials, how the prosecutors there didn't need to provide evidence (actually stated in chapter 12 IIRC) and how those who followed orders are responsible as well (as opposed to their superiours, which is customary in all law). Then you can watch the clip of Göring I think in which he explains there was no Endlösung but a Gesamtlösung and the Madagascar solution and the Hess peace offer and suddenly those Nazis don't seem like bad guys.

>>28567550
>Production could be restarted
nope all the tooling was destroyed. it would take years and millions of dollars to restart
>the F-22 is faster
mach 2 is not that fast. many 3rd gen fighters can do that.
>there are planned upgrades
cancelled, no money
>the F-35 isn't intended as a pure air superiority fighter
but it will have to fill that role once all the f-15 rust away

>>28567665
[citations needed]
[source linked biased stormfronter site]

>>28567665
Oh wait! You're serious.

Let me laugh even harder

>>28567803
I like posting about things without sourcing them too.

>>28567803
I'm impressed at how much bs you managed to cram into one post.

>>28567863
i can see that since your post had no sources either

File: SmartSelectImage_2016-01-16-13-17-56.png (246KB, 1415x1968px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1415x1968px

>>28567550
This one?
>>28567892
That wasn't me, pic related, If I'd have known I would have replied to him too.

>>28567441
>0.1 frontal RCS

It's not.

>>28568008
As compared to what?

>>28558403
dat cluttered simbology

>>28568032

0.001 for F-35

0.0001 for F-22

0.25 for Rafale with SPECTRA.

Mind that 0.1 RCS is the goal. And since there were no propaganda articles about it you can safely assume that goal was not met yet.

>>28558391
Go fuck yourself with a stick. The MiG-29 was never deployed by the Luftwaffe. Strictly sandbox evaluations.

>>28568074
it's still a couple of orders of magnitude less RCS than any 4th gen fighter
>SPECTRA
destructive interference does not work against AESA radars

>>28568111
It's on par with 4.5 gen, which nobody considers stealth.

>>28568074
Says who? I sense communist lies, it's obviously 0.0000000000001 for F-22 and 0.0000000000000000000000001 for F-35.

File: pak-fa.jpg (113KB, 807x605px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 807x605px

>>28568074
>you can safely assume that goal was not met yet.
according to this leak the RCS goal was met.
since other posted numbers look reasonably realistic i'd say it's legit. mind you, this is with interim engines.

File: rcs.jpg (110KB, 654x710px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 654x710px

>>28568074
>posting meaningless numbers
the airplane is not a steel ball.
RCS is highly dependent on direction and frequency

File: 1452714458432.jpg (100KB, 854x640px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 854x640px

>>28567478
>Photo taken so that shadow covers up the blades. Guess that means they're hidden! (Unless for whatever reason the aircraft turns towards the sun).

>>28568662
>The walls of the inlet are clearly visible
>The dimensions and angle of the engine is clearly visible
Nice damage control, but try again.

>>28558242
when was F22 ever even in-date? all it did was brag about how it can do useless things that a F15 can't do because why ever

>>28568839
>I have trouble using words to make sentences.

>>28568747
>Shadows cast from upper-right rear of photo
>Implying the shadows wouldn't make it near-impossible to see that far back into the intake

>>28569050
>Light clearly falls on the insides of both intakes
Keep trying though.

>>28569291
On the edges, boosting the contrast. It's like you don't know how light and photography works.

>>28568111
>destructive interference does not work against AESA radars
AESA is just an antenna configuration. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

>>28558391
>drones still never used in open combat and will never be used
>muh drones

>>28558242
Enjoy your .50 cents.

Hows the air?, Breathable yet?

>>28565985
>Why are you trolling this?

I'm not trolling. Just stating the fact.

>You are wrong and you know you are wrong.

Concentration camps in Germany proper weren't extermination camps. Yes, people died in forced labor camps too, but not even close to same scale as in extermination camps.

>>28566315
>ADA is still widely used in aerospace, but there just aren't enough software engineers in aerospace.

ADA remains in use in aerospace and it's pretty much only industry using it. Finding programmers fluent in ADA is the problem as nobody outside of aerospace is using it.

>>28567018

Fuck off back to /pol/ with your holocaust denialism.

>>28567251
>Even the F-16 is on like Block 50 something.

Block 60 actually. Block numbers are rolling in ten at the time... but by just going by block number you skip Mid Life Upgrades, those are a major thing. Dutch block 20 F-16A's are probably more modern than most of USAF block 30 F-16C's.

>>28567532
>They specifically had facilities for killing and burning a lot of bodies there.

On scale much smaller than actual extermination camps set up entirely for killing people. All concentration camps encountered by western allies were labor camps or detention facilities for political dissidents.

>>28558242
The J-20 is sure a pretty amazing looking aircraft.

Together with the F-22 the best looking stealth fighter, while the T-50 looks like a glorified Su-27 and the F-35 with its fat sinle engine layout is just ugly.

>ADA remains in use in aerospace and it's pretty much only industry using it. Finding programmers fluent in ADA is the problem as nobody outside of aerospace is using it.

>Electrical engineering student
>took a random ADA class just for fun
>got headhunted two months before I finished my master

>>28565823
>>28565807
>see american military propaganda that even they admit is bullshit
>HURR MUST BE TRUE

go fucking read something idiot
Nothing "liberated" by the allies was a "death camp"

They found a number of jews dead of disease, which they piled up, and did some propaganda photos with.
Then they subsequently buried or burned them, because they are fucking disease hazards.

>>28565985
YOU are the one who is wrong
Look at the wikipedia articles for all these camps
All of them will admit that they were not death camps & no mass killing occurred there.

>>28566911
Camps other than aushwitz have VERY flimsy evidence/narratives.

The official story is that they buried a million bodies, then dug them up, and burnt them all in open pits... yet there is zero forensic evidence of any of that occuring.

They even produced a documentary about treblinka recently that was entirely a sham.

Why thats necessary if its a real thing, I don't know.

>>28570017
>Implying the Nazis didn't keep meticulous records of who was sent where, when they were killed and how, and what property was taken
>Implying you have any source that isn't a cherry-picking neo-nazi group

>>28570053
Who the fuck is "they"?!

>>28570059
>jews claim meticulous records
>have never produced them

k

>>28570075
British forensic archaeologist, Dr. Caroline Sturdy Colls, from Staffordshire University and her colleagues

>>28570105
And there we are, back "da joos is a evils of da wurld" crap.

>>28570173
>claim meticulous records proving the holocaust
>noone has ever seen them
>resort to shitposting

File: 9f476a1aa049c069264efb07fabc749fa333caa3b079e6b34d635a6d89f0205a.jpg (139KB, 625x538px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 625x538px

>>28570188

>>28570188
https://go.fold3.com/holocaust_records/

>>28567803
>nope all the tooling was destroyed. it would take years and millions of dollars to restart

The only plane this was done to was the F-14 because of Iran.

>mach 2 is not that fast. many 3rd gen fighters can do that.

And how long does it take them to get up to that speed with the drag of an external weapons load?

>cancelled, no money

What a funny way of saying 'currently being upgraded to block 3.2 with future upgrades in the chute'.

>but it will have to fill that role once all the f-15 rust away

That role will be filled by F-22s, which are nearly 1-1 with F-15Cs in numbers. Not that the F-35 would have a hard time doing that job if needed.

>>28570677
>Not that the F-35 would have a hard time doing that job if needed.

They would have a pretty hard time doing that job.

We are talking about a subsonic aircraft that would need to fight against supercruise capable enemies.

>>28567803
>nope all the tooling was destroyed. it would take years and millions of dollars to restart

I've seen this multiple times and I really must ask what sort of tooling does the F-22 require that couldn't be knocked out by a toolmaker in under a month?

>>28570708
Almost nobody can detect the F-35, it'll be able to carry 6 AIM-120Ds in the future, and at least 12 CUDAs once those come about. The question isn't "can the F-35 do air superiority if it needs to?" but "how devastating will it be?"

>>28570787
>Almost nobody can detect the F-35

lol

nice fanfiction by the way.

>>28570916
>People struggle to detect the F-22 in exercises
>The F-35 is even stealthier

>>28570957
>People struggle to detect the F-22 in exercises
>The F-35 is even stealthier

0/2 things right

>>28558242
My uncles aviation Im about to start my life in it.

We literally cannot be touched air wise. Srs. Ahead of all euro cucks, ruskis, chinks, etc.

>No doubt the F-35 will be, when available, a very capable aircraft: its stealth design, extended range, internal carriage of stores and a variety of integrated sensors are definitely the ingredients for success in modern air-to-ground operations.

>However, when time comes for air dominance, some other ingredients like thrust to weight ratio and wing loading tend to regulate the sky. And in that nothing comes close to a Typhoon, except an F-22 which has very similar values. The F-35 thrust to weight ratio is way lower and its energy-manoeuvrability diagrams match those of the F/A-18, which is an excellent result for a single engine aircraft loaded with several thousand pounds of fuel and significant armament.

>But it also means that starting from medium altitude and above, there is no story with a similarly loaded Typhoon.

>Transonic acceleration is excellent in the F-35, as it is for the Typhoon and better than in an F/A-18 or F-16, but mainly due to its low drag characteristics than to its powerplant. That means that immediately after the transonic regime, the F-35 would stop accelerating and struggle forever to reach a non operationally suitable Mach 1.6.

>The Typhoon will continue to accelerate supersonic with an impressive steady pull, giving more range to its BVR (Beyond Visual Range) armament.

>>28570965
1/2 you mean, and only because Luneburg lenses.

>>28570988
>Angle-of-attack is remarkably high in the F-35, as it is for all the twin tailed aircraft, but of course it can not be exploited in the supersonic regime, where the limiting load factor is achieved at low values of AoA.

>Also in the subsonic regime, the angle-of-attack itself doesn’t mean that much, especially if past a modest 12° AoA you are literally going to fall of the sky! Excessive energy bleeding rates would operationally limit the F-35 well before its ultimate AoA is reached.

>Eurofighter superb engine-airframe matching, in combination with it’s High Off-Bore-Sight armament supported by Helmet Cueing, has already and consistently proven winning against any angile fighter.

>Last, the F-35 is capable of supersonic carriage of bombs in the bomb bay, but the fuel penalty becomes almost unaffordable, while delivery is limited to subsonic speeds by the armament itself as is for the Typhoon

> […] it is in the facts that while the Typhoon can do most of the F-35 air-to-ground mission, vice versa the F-35 remains way far from a true swing role capability, and not even talking of regulating the skies.

>>28570965

>The F-35’s cross section is much smaller than the F-22’s, but that does not mean, Hostage concedes, that the F-35 is necessarily superior to the F-22 when we go to war.

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen-mike-hostage-on-the-f-35-no-growlers-needed-when-war-starts/3/

>"I would say that General Hostage … is accurate in his statement about the simple stealthiness of the F-35 [with regard] to other airplanes," Bogdan said in the interview. The statement was accurate for radar cross section, as measured in decibels, and range of detectability, he said, and he scoffed at the notion that anyone can tell how stealthy an aircraft is just by looking at it.

http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2014/December%202014/The-F-35-on-Final-Approach.aspx

>During a flight debriefing, Col. Chris Niemi and Maj. Nash Vickers both said a comparison of the radar-absorbing F-35 to its nimble but less stealthy twin-engine F-22 cousin might not reveal the whole story.

>Niemi has eight years in the cockpit of an F-22 and is one of the few Air Force pilots who is qualified in both the Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II. He said he wanted to set the record straight on the Lightning II, once and for all. “Many have compared the F-22 to the F-35 but that comparison is unfair. With the F-35 Lightning, this fighter sees better, has more range, and is stealthier than any of its predecessors. This airplane, with its fly by wire technology, is super easy to fly and it has a very linear response.”

www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/August/06/F35-Lightning-public-debut-shows-the-right-stuff

>>28570980
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgHNtzxO0y8

>>28570733
For some reason anons think A-10 and F-22 tooling has been destroyed.

>>28570988
>>28570995
>quoting a Eurofighter pilot who has never touched or even seen an F-35 in real life and who has no connection with its development

>>28571051
Nice arguments.

>>28569922
How easy is ADA?
Can you work from home?
I'm (hopefully) going into EE this fall.

>>28570708
Since when was the F-35 subsonic?

>>28571490
Yes I thought they were breddy gud.

>>28570995
>Last, the F-35 is capable of supersonic carriage of bombs in the bomb bay, but the fuel penalty becomes almost unaffordable

wat

>while delivery is limited to subsonic speeds by the armament itself as is for the Typhoon

Is this suggesting JDAMs can't be released at supersonic speeds? Because thats not.. true at all


>However, when time comes for air dominance, some other ingredients like thrust to weight ratio and wing loading tend to regulate the sky
>Eurofighter superb engine-airframe matching, in combination with it’s High Off-Bore-Sight armament supported by Helmet Cueing, has already and consistently proven winning against any agile fighter.

>Talk about wing loading and manouverability
>Mention the one system that mostly invalidates that and how its very important

This whole thing sounds like bullshit

>>28571552
ADA is easier than C++ it is just more strict but writing something with ADA is faser than with anything else.

>>28571708
>wat

F-35 can only reach supersonic with its afterburner which makes supersonic carriage unaffordable

File: IMG_9777.jpg (72KB, 710x532px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 710x532px

>>28567478
eh?

File: f15 and su35 still rule.jpg (39KB, 699x572px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 699x572px

mfw some people still think that 'stealth' is real and the f35 isnt a total failure....

File: 1313518099857_1720400.png (31KB, 420x294px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 420x294px

>>28572055
>mfw some people still think that 'stealth' is real and the f35 isnt a total failure....

>>28572055
>le F-35 is terrible
>ebin................................
Opinion discarded.

>>28571866

Whats the big deal with the blades?

>>28572324
Exposed fan blades have a massive radar return, and it's a major criticism against the idea the PAK-FA is "stealth."

>>28565499
Yes we did, idiot

File: Stealth Coating.jpg (283KB, 920x758px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 920x758px

>>28572055

I really wish that "F-35" rhymed with something so we could have a meme like "Can't stupify the F-35."

>>28572650
Don't argue with him, his basis for it is a bunch of stormfronter sites he'll link if pressed for citation.

>>28572733
No, these kids need to told how stupid they are. Especially ones that reject parts of history because of their wacky hatred of certain people(s)

>>28561040
In what sense do you mean the F-22 is unproven? Sure, it's not got any real shoot down kills, but it's participated in every Red Flag since it went active and we've learned a lot about the platform, as well as how it deals with it's enemies. Knowing your aircraft's maneuvering capabilities is essential in a toe to toe, although not the first step to winning the fight. When our F22 went up against India's SU-27M's we found, they are doing quite well.

The SU-27M/30M's are just a hair above the F-15's/16's in the Block50 config. Even Russia, China, and etc's 5th Gen fighters are still quite the work in progress and aren't up to snuf yet with the F-22. Even so, what F-22's we have are already starting to see software and hardware upgrades. It isn't a static design. I can't discuss them for obvious reasons but even F-35 tech is working it's way into the F-22. The B model F-22 will incorporate quite a bit of cool features that would blow your mind.

>>28572768
Or the fact that most of these people don't really know what they are talking about.

I don't get how people are even calling designs like the F-22 old. Folk's need to learn how long the design process takes for any fighter. It's not a "hey we need a fighter" and pop one out in 2 years. The average is 10-15 years, and it's been getting longer as technology has become more design intensive. A 3rd gen fighter doesn't need half the design work, T&E, R&D that a 4th, 4.5 or 5th gen fighter needs.

>>28570995
JDAM are rated and tested for release at super sonic speed. The F-22 has released JDAM high and fast enough to hit a target 39 kilometers away.

>>28573087
>Glide bomb on a target 39km away

>Fly out, check target. Release weapon.
>Fly home.
>Get changed, showered, go to the O club
>Phone buzzes
What's that?
>It's a text from my bomb! Looks like it hit.

>>28572675
Can't screw the Lightning II

>>28570988
>>28570995

>Anonymous Eurofighter pilot
>Knowing anything about the F-35

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-lockheed-claims-f-35-kinematics-better-than-or-equal-to-typhoon-or-super-hornet-382078/

Here's a piece where an F-35 test pilot says the F-35 is a better plane than the Typhoon. Are we even now?

File: TailCRE4PV[1].jpg (145KB, 1520x888px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1520x888px

>>28572675
A-10 Thunderbolt II doesn't rhyme very well either, which is why the rhymes come from it's nickname.

Because the F-35's new it doesn't have a universal nickname like Viper or Mudhen or Rhino or Warthog, but so far VFA-101 (USN F-35C training squadron) have been calling it the Reaper.

http://defensetech.org/2014/03/11/f-35-nickname-controversy-brewing-with-reaper/

I can't think of anything that rhymes with that either, but it would at least go with proverbs like 'can't cheat the Reaper'.

>>28570995
>the F-35 is capable of supersonic carriage of bombs in the bomb bay, but the fuel penalty becomes almost unaffordable, while delivery is limited to subsonic speeds by the armament itself as is for the Typhoon

It can drop bombs supersonic, the F-22 can do this as well

File: predator-b-drone-mq-9-reaper.jpg (23KB, 794x487px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 794x487px

>>28575003
There's already a plane officially called Reaper, though.

Somewhat unrelated but also somewhat related.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2637329&postcount=70

Q&A with a retired pilot that flew both the A-10 and F-35.

And no, there is no condensed version/transcription so don't ask.

>>28573087
What is your point?

No one claimed that JDAM can't be released at supersonic speed. In fact that's one of the main selling points of supercruise capable aircraft like the F-22 or Eurofighter.

>>28571866
Nice photoshop, too bad the actual engine body looks at different direction.

>>28574114
>game-changer

I love how that term is used every fucking time when the USA introduces something new.

>>28575150
Which is why the name of that article is "F-35 nickname controversy brewing with Reaper".

>>28575152
Minor note, but he only flew early F-35 simulators.

File: 12-years-a-slav_c_2928051[1].jpg (35KB, 500x709px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x709px

>>28576403
>Slav'ing this hard

File: Untitled.png (873KB, 727x750px) Image search: [Google]

873KB, 727x750px

>>28566344

The hell is that wrinkle?

>>28576432
It's sensor wires. It's a prototype, ya know. Got to measure shit. You can see them all over the airframe.

File: 2017-03.jpg (468KB, 1600x1050px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 1600x1050px

>>28558242
The J-20 is sure a fucking cool looking aircraft.

>>28559213
this nigger..

jesus dude just lie down before you hurt yourself.

>>28571845
>F-35 can only reach supersonic with its afterburner which makes supersonic carriage unaffordable

Just like every other plane in service, except the F-22, while carrying a combat load.

>>28572650
>>28572733
None of the camps liberated by the allies in the West were the 'death' camps of fame, all of those were in the Eastern front.

It has nothing to do with Stormfront, but that makes a convenient handwave for you doesn't it.

File: CUVWKnFUsAAMr_p.jpg large.jpg (89KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 900x600px

>>28572055
>mfw when people who don't even hack high school physics come to tell us about stealth and how it is a fraud

>>28576613
That's wrong, though.

The European canard aircraft are all supercruise capable.

>>28576697
Not while carrying a combat load.

>>28576714
Wguke carrying a combat load.

Eurofighter and F-22 were designed with the same requirements in that regard.

>>28576724
Which is a lie, as one carries its load internally.

>>28576733
>lie

how desperate

>>28576733
Supercruise has existed since the 50s, it's not that surprising that the Eurofighter and the Gripen would be capable of it even with an external payload. It's obviously not going to be ass efficient as the F-22 with an internal payload but it's still definitely possible.

>>28573001
read the post i was responding to.

>>28574114
>Here's a piece where an F-35 test pilot says the F-35 is a better plane than the Typhoon.
no. he says the f-35 can go to edge of it's flight envelope with full internal load.
typhoon can't do that, but what he does not mention is that typhoon has a much larger flight envelope.

>>28577118
Except in angle of attack.

File: 1452966981333.webm (869KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

869KB, 640x480px

Can F-35 do this?

File: highalpha.webm (693KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

693KB, 1280x720px

>>28577134
Pretty sure any jet with a T:W of ~1:1 can.

Can Typhoon do this?

>>28577134
Yes, but probably not as impressively.
>>28576697
>M1.3
>Useful supercruise
Riiight.

The merit of supercruise is already questionable enough when you can do it at mach 1.7, given that it involves TWICE the fuel burn. If you can't even manage supercruise at mach 1.5, the number of realistic scenarios in which it might actually be useful drops from few to zero. The USAF discovered this decades ago with the F-106 (which was capable of marginal supercruise similarly to the modern Eurocanards), that's why they required the ATF to display near-Concorde-tier supercruise instead of just getting a cunthair past the sound barrier.

IMO it's all a waste of time, though. Even with the F-22's massive internal fuel capacity and impressive M1.8 supercruise, I STILL doubt they're going to be able to justify using the capability to any significant degree in practice.

>>28565384

Su-32s are used in Syria, and the Su-35 is a superior platform.

>>28577199

Edit:

Su-30*

>>28577178
>talking out his ass

>>28565276
>Hess flies to Britain with peace treaty
>lolno

File: F-35 STOVL.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>28577134
What's so impressive about that? He lit his cans and started climbing at a high subsonic mach. Big fucking woop, any 4th gen and beyond can do that.

Can your eurocanard take off from gator-tops and share all its data with allied flights and operate in non-permissive environments?

>>28577632
>Thrust-to-weight ratio
Typhoon 1.64
F-22 1.58
F-35 1.44

>>28577632
F-35 is a twin-tail design which selling point is a high theoretical AoA in subsonic regime.

But the faster you are the center of mass moves more and more to the end of the aircraft aka the lever gets shorter and shorter.

The incredible maneuverability in transonic and supersonic regime is why people are designing aircraft with canards.

>>28577632
sensorfusion is a thing for 20 years now.

File: bgoh.gif (980KB, 307x230px) Image search: [Google]

980KB, 307x230px

>>28577749
So no then?

>>28577853
both rafale and typhoon have sensor fusion and datalinks.

the only really novel thing on f-35 is the distributed aperture IR.
but it's not like other aircraft can't be upgraded with it, if it turns out to be a killer feature.

PAK-FA will have a similar system but with two rotating apertures instead of six fixed ones

>>28577455
>What is appeasement for 200 Alex?

>>28578462
>both rafale and typhoon have sensor fusion and datalinks.

If I had a Model T I could say I had a automobile as well.

>>28579476
in that case F-35 is model T with chrome wheels and flame decals.