F-35 Query

>>28650989
It can bomb the shit out of muzzies and have kick ass gadgets for $32,000 a flight hour

File: Smug Pepe.jpg (7KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 225x225px

>overpriced

File: eodas2.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

Detect, target and kill enemies in any direction.

>>28651013
Not above.

>not trusting our glorious American military defense industry to make the best shit ever.

traitor faggot detected.
ELIMINATE

>>28651035
Yes above - there's a camera in front of the cockpit and behind it that have overlapping vertical vision.

>>28651039
>Acknowledges wasteful spending.
>traitor faggot detected.

kek

>>28651057
So how exactly does that equate to a kill, mouthbreather?

It was too big to fail

>>28651092
Those cameras obtain target coordinates, feed those to a missile, missile launches, turns vertically and kills the target, autismo.

>>28651092
>>28651082
Same(dumbass)fag

>>28651124
I wasn't aware of the AIM-9X being able to target incoming aircraft from directly above after a launch solely on "target coordinates".

>>28651198
Isn't the point of the F-35's fancy ass sensors that its supposed to kill you BEFORE you get an opportunity to dive on it?

Why are you moving the goalposts just so you can go "HAH I TOLD YOU IT WAS SHIT"

>>28651231
Ok, I'll humor you, dick. How is an F-35 going to prevent such a kill from an F-22?

Hint: It won't.

>>28651198
The AIM-9X Block II upgrade gives it LOAL.

>>28651198
Then you aren't aware of really anything, are you Captain Puzzlenugget?

Seriously. Ridiculously off bore targeting capability is the main upgrade in the AIM-9X seeker/targeting systems.

Maybe if you knew fuck all about jack shit, you wouldn't have to spend your life making shitty bait threads on /k/.

Costing twice as much money with half the range :3

That said, it's still going to be an awesome fighter.

>>28651261
It had it in block I. Block II just allows for longer LOAL ranges.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/aim-9x-block-ii-performing-better-than-expected-381569/

>>28651274
*twice the combat radius

>>28651268
Don't be a shithead. Either way, the F-22 can still engage targets in the same manner.

>>28651274
It has almost double the range of every fighter it's replacing on internal fuel alone.

Combat radius:
>F-35A/C 600nm internal tanks only
>F-16 295nmi, two bags A2G (4x1,000lbs bombs)
>F-18 400nmi, two bags A2A (light load)

>F-35B 450nmi internal tanks only
>AV-8B 300nmi with bags

>>28651306
It can't though, because the F-22 doesn't have helmet mounted cueing.

>>28650989
The f-35 is in a death spiral
I assure you.

>>28651306
>Don't be a shithead
Ah, so you can dish it but you can't take it.

Also, why the fuck should it be strange that the DEDICATED AIR SUPERIORITY FIGHTER might be better at A2A than the multirole? It's fucking designed that way, you autistic sack of shit.

>>28651323
So what? The F-15E can still pound harder and just as far.

>>28651347
In permissive airspace.

Whereas the F-35 can roll back the IADS in extremely unfriendly skies. Shit, the F-35 will be guiding munitions in for the F-15Es while they launch from maximum standoff. With the F-35, the F-15E is nothing more than a bomb and missile truck in the back ranks when it comes to non-permissive airspace.

>>28651347
>Goalposts on wheels

>>28651340
Da komrad; LRIP 9 and 10 are capitalist lies

>>28651347
And costs just as much, if the F-15Ks are anything to go by, for less capability in every single metric save raw kinematics (even then it has a lower AoA limit). Oh, and the RCS and IR signatures of a flying fucking whale.

>>28651335
By 2020 it will.

>>28651345
No need to yell fucktard. The F-16 and F-18 can hold their own in air combat. The F-35 can't.

>>28651397
The F-35 is more maneuverable than the F/A-18 and can dogfight better than an F-16 if it doesn't drop everything.

>>28651387

F-15SE.

>>28651323

Hmm....

I guess I'll take that back.

The numbers in my head were off, confusing combat radius with max range.

>>28651404
Proof you're a fucking idiot:

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-military-reform-project/weapons/2015/leaked-f-35-report-confirms-deficiencies.html

>>28651364
Welcome to every F-35 shill thread. The only thing they love more than moving the goalposts is when the DOD does it.

They also love to mix and match statistics in between the different versions and from different points in time (like before they restricted the airframe to max 4Gs because the larger compressor wheel they swapped in to meet thrust requirements was banging into the inside of the housing).

>>28651426
>Using POGO as a source, which uses War Is Boring as a source

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31oJIo8EVwY

>>28651397
>No need to yell fucktard. The F-16 and F-18 can hold their own in air combat. The F-35 can't.

The F-35 has a higher AoA limit than an F-18 and better kinematics with an actual combat load than a similarly loaded F-16.

In short, if knowing shit were like being a badass in the prison yard, you'd be the bitch getting your teeth knocked out so you can give better head in the eight times a day you put out.

>>28651408
Costs MORE than the F-35, even at LRIP prices, and still has an RCS a couple orders of magnitude larger.

Why are you so ignorant?

>>28651426
watch >>28651435
then watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxK6O5--9Z0
GTFO and don't fucking come back until you know at least the most basic shit

>>28651432
Wat? I was saying that the guy saying that the F-15E pounds harder was moving goalposts, because he was talking about range up until that point.

Also, the F-35 hasn't been restricted to 4Gs for quite a while now.

>>28651432
Maybe it's just the fact that the United States has wasted so much money on a flying shithole that makes them act that way.

>>28651460
It's because shitheads want to scrap the good stuff like the F-35 and replace it with shitty stuff like upgraded F-15s or Eurofag planes.

>>28651340

>hahahahahahahahaha


No it's not

>>28651474
Or maybe they just want to scrap the F-35 program in total, write it off as the fucking failure it is, salvage the tech for use on the F-22, and build more F-22s? Huh, no. That would only make total fucking sense.

>>28651477
I think you missed the years old meme

>>28651460
Australian shitposter detected.

Just because literally every single animal on your continent is venomous, toxic or a walking biohazard and every single one is perma-menstruating and only your death can satisfy it does NOT mean you need to be a fuckhead constantly.

>>28651487
Except for the part where porting that tag would add another $30+ million to the pricetag of the F-22 and make it impractical to field in sufficient numbers.

>>28651495
And as this guy >>28651435 and an Australian, I'm proof that >>28651460 can pick up his game.

>>28651500
Explain

>>28651487
>buy old aircraft with jury rigged upgrades
>which costs three times as much
>and requires three times the maintenance hours
>instead of the cheaper, excellent multi role which is better at every single mission except the primary A2A mission of the F-22

Also, what the fuck are you, a luddite? We don't need to go back in time to the F-22. We got 6th gen shit spinning up within the decade.

File: P-47_Thunderbolt_42-25068_2012_(7977124689).jpg (3MB, 3872x2592px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3872x2592px

They even want to use it for close air support. We have a dedicated CAS platform that can fly low & slow and absolutely decimate everyone we fight these days. Our boys have always cheered when it comes in to put lead on target.
Why would anyone want to replace an airframe that just does its job so well?

>>28651517
You didn't even use Luddite correctly.

>>28651524
Exactly. Hence why the A-10 program should be continued

>>28651509
good on ya, mate.

By the way, I fucking love the wildlife and nature in Australia, and Aussie girls were the most fun loving of all the study abroad girls I met living in Russia. I have no idea why aussie shitposters are so perma-assblasted.

You guys are like Jekyl and Hyde - worst shitposters ever over here and totally cool, knowledgeable dudes over there. No middle ground.

>>28651542
The A10 is high-tech hogwash that costs way too much money. Do you know how many P47s you can buy for the cost of ONE A10? Besides, the P47 can out-turn it easily.

>>28651532
>Luddite
>a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).

Obviously I was being facetious, but I was absolutely using it correctly for this tech advancement hating can't understand the future is coming fucktard.

>>28651544
It's because they're still salty about the buried F-111s.

>>28651553
Luddite should be capitalized, retard.

Anyways, I proposed upgrading the F-22 to modern standards.

>>28651532
Uh. Yeah, he pretty much did.

Not only do you suck at knowing anything about modern fighters, threat environments and necessary capabilities, you can't use the English language or even use google properly.

It's time to self-cleanse.

>>28651563
Not him but

>I can't refute his points so I'll just insult his lack of capitalization

>>28651563
Why not put out a new block of F15s with a new avionics package as well as features from the F15 ACTIVE and Silent Eagle programs?
It'd be cheaper.

And retarded.

>>28651563
Holy shit. We all know you had no fucking clue what a Luddite was, and we all know this grammar nazi bullshit is a smokescreen for that fact.

Grow the fuck up.

>Anyways, I proposed upgrading the F-22 to modern standards.
It already cost three times the F-35 at obsolete mid-2000s standards. What the fuck do you even want?

>>28651306
F-22's do not have;

>AIM-9X
>helmet mounted cuing
>EODAS

They are being upgraded with the first two.

>>28651515
The F-22 was about $150 million in today's dollars at it's cheapest and costs roughly twice as much to operate per flight hour. To port the tech from the F-35 over would also require a ton of extra development and integration testing, because things as subtle as changing the position of a camera or antenna practically makes the half of the F-35's integration efforts and all of it's calibration efforts meaningless.

It also ignores the requirements of the Navy and Marines; a Navalised Raptor was explored, but would've been ridiculously expensive and having no replacement for the Harrier leaves the Marines with ~10 mini-carriers that are now half useless.

So now you'd be able to afford perhaps 500 "F-22C's" for the USAF and leave the USN / USMC with their F-35B/Cs. So now how are those 500 Raptors going to cover the day-to-day bombing tasks that ~1500 F-16s were doing, for an acceptable cost?

File: solomon bob.jpg (73KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 400x300px

>>28651477
whooshing sound

>>28651591
>Too bad they lose the information battle before the energy battle even begins.
Don't even concede the point like that. The F-35 performs better kinematically with a combat load than either.

>>28651580
Exactly. So go ahead and stop shitposting. It's past your bedtime.

>>28651397
>The F-16 and F-18 can hold their own in air combat. The F-35 can't.

Too bad they lose the information battle before the energy battle even begins.

It's not about who wins the dogfight, it's about the most efficient way to kill enemy fighters. The more fighters you kill, the better off you are. Efficiency is the name of the game, and information fighters win this game hands down.

Merging with your target and winning the dogfight is the *least* efficient way to kill enemy fighters.

The F-35 is superior at airfield destruction, and superior at BVR air combat, both of which are way more efficient than WVR combat.

Fourth gen energy fighters swerve.

>>28651580
For what purpose though? The F-15E fleet isn't going anywhere for a while, nor is the F-22 fleet. The F-35s are coming in and will be cheaper than F-15s, etc.

>>28651592
Well thank you for explaining that. I now understand. I have no idea why everyone was going ham on me.

>>28651591
>It's not about who wins the dogfight

Although the F-35 could handle it well if needed.

>>28651614
Depends. An F-22 would likely tear it a new asshole.

File: AH-64 night rockets.png (1MB, 1024x671px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x671px

>>28651524
>We have a dedicated CAS platform that can fly low & slow and absolutely decimate everyone we fight these days.
The Apache?

>>28651612
>couldn't be fucked to spend five minutes on google
>screaming his head off about his ignorant opinion anyway
>can't understand why everyone is swatting the shit out of him

Autism, ladies and gentlemen.

>>28651622
I wouldn't put my money on that until the F-22 gets good IRST in the next block upgrades

File: Die Strafe.jpg (23KB, 481x390px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 481x390px

>>28651625
Overpriced, over-engineered horse shit. The solution is more Jugs.

File: 22040338631_e9139727fa_o.jpg (141KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1600x1067px

>>28651625
nice pic

have an option with more range

>>28651524
>low and slow

In any kind of non-permissive environment this is "Crash and Burn"

A10 is adequate at killing muslim fucktards hiding in caves. It doesn't have a purpose on an actual modern battlefield.

>>28651258
>only country to field F22 is America
I see no problem with this

>>28651676
So like when we bombed the Serb's, lost two F-16s, an F-117 and no A-10s :^)

File: 3697f4e6-5e3a-11df-820d-00127992bc8b.image.jpg (53KB, 450x305px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 450x305px

>>28651676
We haven't fought on a "modern battlefield" in a long time, son. We have everything we need right here. What force are we facing that eight .50 cal machine guns plus additional rockets can't handle?

>>28651706
Are you the same bumblefuck that started this thread?

>>28651676
>modern battlefield
>gulf war
>highway of death
>Iraqi zealots mercilessly curbstomped day and night by A-10s

makes sense

File: what bullshit.jpg (256KB, 1000x980px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1000x980px

>>28651716
Are you a moron who bought into the F-35 vs A-10 propaganda?

>>28651720
Twice as many A-10s were lost as F-16s, despite the F-16s doing the fighting in hotter areas and doing more sorties.

>>28651714
One with Strela-3s
>>28651706
Le Straw Man :^)
>>28651720
All the A-10s destroyed or damaged beyond repair in the Gulf War were done so by MANPADS

>>28651735
>Le Straw Man :^)

As in, what you were doing :^)

>>28651735
Do your history, you fucking autistic mouthbreather. One was shot down by AAA.

Serial Number : 78-0722

>>28651735
>SA-13
>MANPAD

File: 6afc0a5155408e7e17fb2278d2b042ab.jpg (27KB, 540x298px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 540x298px

>>28651735
>One with Strela-3s
Bro, the P47 has an ARMORED BATHTUB and can land after taking severe damage. I'd like to see your F35 do that.

>>28651735
SA-13 isn't a fucking MANPAD. Holy fuck, your ignorance astounds even me.

>>28651781
It'll be interesting to see how well the F-35 stands up to heavy damage - overall it should be pretty tough, being rated for 9Gs and 8000EFHs, having independent controls (meaning it can't lose hydraulic pressure), and having fly-by-wire.

One A-10 crash in Iraq happened because he lost hydraulics after being shot up and had to rely on mechanical controls. The weather wasn't great at the airbase and so he couldn't control the aircraft (too much pressure on the control surfaces), causing him to strike a wingtip, cartwheel the A-10 and land upside down, before he died from being stuck and burned alive.

The good and bad thing though is that it has a ton of fuel - it's bad because internal fuel leaks can flood hot areas and cause fires, but it's also good in that if you don't get hit excessively, the fuel slows down missile fragments, etc. There's something like 9 different fuel tanks as well so if one or a couple get penetrated, you can move fuel to other tanks to get you to a tanker or home.

File: 1439428286907.jpg (435KB, 1154x1020px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 1154x1020px

>>28651753
>>28651776
>>28651777
>>28651781
>>28651785
thanks for the (You)s boys

>>28651836
What's wrong with War Is Boring?

>>28651851
The writers are Sprey tier and engage in some serious yellow journalism to push their narrative

>>28651851
David Axe (to grind) in particular has a grudge against the F-35. Some of that rubs off onto a couple of the other authors on the blog. He's done stupid things in the past as well like talked about classified anti-IED jammers while they were still in use in the field.

>>28651880
Meaning he is credible.

>>28651883
No, meaning he's charismatic. The "F-35 vs F-16 dogfight report" for example that he released was heavily misconstrued by him. Because he released the article / document though, he had a hundred other blogs and websites copy-paste his story. If you actually read the report and have an understanding of aerospace engineering though, it's not at all what he's described.

File: p47-4.jpg (122KB, 1302x833px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1302x833px

Fucking hell.
I keep making P47 posts to mock the A10 fags and you cocksuckers keep taking me seriously. I can't even do this anymore. There's no sport.

Still fuckin' love my Jug, though.

>>28651664
>Warthog
>Low and slow
Lol. It has higher wing loading than an F-4 Phantom.

>>28650989
Carrier based stealth strike.

>>28651851
Is that a serious question?

File: 1452718504473.gif (1017KB, 500x260px) Image search: [Google]

1017KB, 500x260px

>>28650989

>overpriced
>implying that freedom is ever overpriced

>>28651932

I want Thunderbolt IIs and Lightning IIs.

>>28650989
It can make nice lemonade

File: image.png (1MB, 497x576px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 497x576px

>>28650989
>What can this piece of overpriced trash accomplish that no other existing aircraft in the United States inventory can't already do?
>Query

Fuck off

>>28651258
>Ok, I'll humor you, dick. How is an F-35 going to prevent such a kill from an F-22?

If your country has off-brand F-22s, America will send real F-22s to deal with them before sending in the F-35s.

If your country doesn't even have off-brand F-22s, then F-35s are more than enough plane to push your shit in.