What's your country's excuse for still not having

>>67055155
No enemies.

Money.

Nowhere to park it.

>>67055155
is that a ramp..?

Defeated country
Constitution Article 9

Lack of money and infrastructure. Our army is in rather shitty condition. Navy has like 10 ships, some from 1970s.

File: Milestones.jpg (126KB, 1218x914px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1218x914px

>>67055155
>Chakri Naruebet has been deployed on several disaster relief operations, including in the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, and in response to separate flooding incidents in late 2010 and early 2011. Other than disaster relief, the carrier's few other departures from port are for a single training day per month, and transportation of the Royal Family of Thailand, leading to claims by some naval commentators that the ship is merely an oversized royal yacht.[1][2]

File: 5544.jpg (3MB, 3063x2031px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3063x2031px

>>67055155
We will build one soon.

>>67055155
Power projection is not a part of our military doctrine.

>>67055395
Looks nice

cause we are allies with america and those dumb fucks probably have like 50 of them so if we need one we can just borrow one of theirs

>>67055155
no money

We don't need one. We're literally right next door to our only potential enemy.
Our navy is tiny. It is not meant for high seas or force projection.
There's some mine layers/sweepers, a few missile boats, a couple of landing craft and pollution control vessels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Finnish_Navy_ships

>>67055388
>F35
Having aircraft carriers is nice, but quite useless if you don't have usable aircrafts to carry.

>>67055395
Fuck off you can afford that

File: f-35b launch.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>67055712
>Having aircraft carriers is nice, but quite useless if you don't have usable aircrafts to carry.

I agree, which is why we're getting aircraft that can be used. What's your point about the F-35?

>>67055712
>F35
>usable aircraft

Pick one

>>67055744
Yes we can

>>67055155
We have 10 in service, 2 under construction and 1 in planning

File: 1476188057811.png (144KB, 520x390px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 520x390px

Whats your excuse for still not having any nuke, Thai? With intercontinental warheads, we dont even need any aircraft carrier.

>>67055818
>nukes
>Thailand

Don't feed ladyboys with weird ideas, you truly want a global meltdown?

>>67055782
Going back on the old soviet budget are we?

File: 1474062370135.gif (308KB, 255x235px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 255x235px

>>67055880
>implying that only fact of nuke's existence causes global meltdown

We sold ours to Argentina to fight against the UK.

>>67055942
>The ship previously served in the Royal Navy as HMS Venerable and the Royal Netherlands Navy as HNLMS Karel Doorman. She was deployed south during the Beagle Crisis in 1978 and in the first weeks of the Falklands War, where her aircraft were deployed against the Royal Navy task force
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Veinticinco_de_Mayo_(V-2)

>>67055744

There's going to be a massive military budget cut for so we'll have to see, but I do hope their funding allows it.

>>67055928
No, not at all, in fact Russia and US didn't caused anything so far...it's nukes + Thailand, chances greatly increase

but we have two

File: smol carrier.jpg (207KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 1280x853px

Manlet carrier for manlet people

>>67055155
why America and Germany tend to name battleships after famous or historical individuals?

it is fucking lame and uncool.

our allies have them

File: 797893b3b061474c8f75e88f1259df12.jpg (186KB, 1000x664px)

186KB, 1000x664px

>His country doesn't have an AEGIS scort for its carrier

>>67055155
Didn't Spain sold you that pos? It does still float?

>>67056476
>memegis
Sure

no sea

>>67056870
it can't be an excuse!

File: untitled.jpg (30KB, 351x295px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 351x295px

>>67055155
He think he slick.... he DABBIN!!

>>67055362
Japan has aircraft carriers though

>>67055155
US has plenty as well as China.

File: 757a1a69_1278747652530.jpg (207KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 960x720px

>>67057052
you mean USS Japan?

>>67057124
I mean the """Helicopter""" carriers

>>67057124
Helicopters are aircraft too, my JP friend. You have the Izumo, Kaga, Hyūga, and Ise.

what the fuck why do we have 20 air craft carriers and 16 more planned

>>67057287
Because we can.

>>67057287

Because old carriers must be retired and replaced with new.

>muh holy 13

File: dream or nightmare.jpg (96KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1280x720px

We have one, but it's somewhat useless. We're too friendly to use it anyway

>>67055395
>The cost of the supercarrier is estimated as being between $1.8 billion and $5.63 billion (at August 2015 exchange rates), with development expected to take ten years
>In July 2016, a Russian official confirmed that a delegation visiting India in early July had offered the design for India to purchase.
Kek

We are landlocked.

>>67055395
Is it nuclear?

>>67057755
>ramp

Probably can't afford a reactor.

>>67057755
Yes
>>67057785
Ramp+cat

File: GDP_of_Russia_since_1989.svg.png (205KB, 2000x1149px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 2000x1149px

>>67055395

The Russians have been talking about this for years.
Why is it that years after it was announced, it still hasnt gotten beyond being a miniature mockup at defense shows?

pic possibly related

>>67059720
>For years
It was announced in 2013

>>67055773
Why is the f-35 so gay? It even looks gay taking off.

>>67059880
it's pretty small, curvy and compact, regarding other fighters

F-35 would be a "she" in any anime

Well, Ahmet and Jamal need new IPhones, ain't got no money for shit like carriers.

>>67056354
we don't any more. we now call them after our federal states, which is even more lame.

File: 090.jpg (138KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1600x1067px

>>67059880
SU50 is gayest

>>67059971
It depends.

USS Missouri sounds cool
USS South Dakota doesn't

Japan is busy making excuses for having its military.

>>67060139
I was talking about Germany.

They are called Saxony, Hamburg, Baden-Württemberg etc.

>>67055155
Baltic Sea is too small for an aircraft carrier.

>>67060294
I know. I was pointing out that if the state has a cool sounding name, it will [spoiler]sink[/spoiler] well on a ship.

>>67060294
Isn't Germany a bit too small to have states?

>>67060612
Why would a country need to be large to be a federation? Are you suggesting that diversity is a function of size?

>>67060612
Well, they developed over thousands of years.
For example Bavaria started as a small kingdom 1500 years ago. Why change such grown system?
The allies did a bit after WW2, tho. Prussia gone and some new artificial states...

>>67057755
steam powered of course

>>67055155
A FUCKING RAMP

>>67059975
noice

>>67055155

We are going to build one soon.

>>67057755

Yes.

File: russia strong death to the west.jpg (86KB, 582x429px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 582x429px

>>67055893

Yes, spending 80% of GDP on military like in old good times.

>>67059971
>we now call them after our federal states, which is even more lame.
no,the battleships with name of old province or regions sounds very mystic and traditional.

on the other hand, if I hear the name of the battleship Bismarck, I always come to mind only the conservative politician with beard.

>>67055155
We have one, it just doesn't works. As long the Brazilian flag appears in the aircraft carrier lists, it's all that matters.

no money

>>67061327
That looks like a ton of food for one person so you guys cant be doing too bad

>>67062599
No honey

>>67062742
it's just bread and a few oatmeals on a plate

File: russia.jpg (33KB, 617x368px)

33KB, 617x368px

>>67059720

File: queen elizabeth aircraft carrier2.jpg (1MB, 4000x1618px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x1618px

>>67055155
We'll have 2 soon enough, with qt and sperior ramps too.

>>67063646
It's buckwheat actually.

>>67063736
a few buckwheats

>>67055155
>>67055155
Too expensive for us.

>>67055155
>21st century naval warfare
>aircraft carrier
i bet polish stealth tanks are more useful

>>67064194
I know you're not Japanese but
>japan in charge of naval warfare involving the US

File: 564px-Sweden_Gotland_location_map_modified.svg.png (93KB, 564x1024px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 564x1024px

>>67055155
we already have the world largest one

Think.

File: ea148260474c8c95c064ebf89fe22ed5.jpg (317KB, 1600x1012px)

317KB, 1600x1012px

>>67055155
Not only do we have plenty, we also have these qt LHDs.>>67055155

>>67057028
lmfao

Because only Russia, China or USA could use it for their geo-politics. For any other country it is just wasted tax money.

>>67065329
Hell yeah...

>>67065329
Hahahaha

We don't need one, we don't want one.

>>67055395
>ramp

>>67055179
You mean you live next to us and weve got both aircraft carriers and a treaty that requires us to come to you aid?

>>67055395
You have one heading for syria. The only working one on yalls team.

>>67055614
Your welcome

>>67065864
>+cat

Not a warmonger.

>>67056354
We have one called uss we kicked the japs asses in ww2. Not as catchy as a state name buy hey.

File: west-81 strategic military exercise.png (655KB, 838x462px)

655KB, 838x462px

>>67061327
>spending 80% of GDP on military

At first i was like picrelated, but then:

lenta.ru/russia/1999/09/29/food_aid/

>>67055155
Because our american brothers will help us in case of war with russians. And if russia ever dares to attack us they will be destroyed by America and they know it. So we don't even need one.

>>67059842
And it's now 2016, and I don't think a keel has been laid down yet.

Three years (nearly four) is more than one year, Russia, so the "for years" thing is still true.

>>67066858
what do you think of the aircraft carrier WASP?

>>67067621
>And it's now 2016, and I don't think a keel has been laid down yet.

The design work began only 2 years ago, not even all the blueprints of the carrier are ready for this moment. The construction will start in 2018-2019 at best.

File: 1447641031423.jpg (4KB, 125x122px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 125x122px

>>67055155
>a ramp

>>67055155
too poor
gib money pls thailad

File: 1465244864714.jpg (36KB, 600x445px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 600x445px

>>67055395
bit small isn't it?

>>67055614
but Australia has carriers

File: 20120704-2224.jpg (127KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 960x640px

>>67068167
Keep buying our design Australia, we love you <3

File: 1471197390975.jpg (15KB, 480x243px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 480x243px

>tfw everyone gets carriers but us because we need to spend money on refugees and diversity instead

File: NAedocado.jpg (188KB, 1024x768px)

188KB, 1024x768px

>>67057526

It's coming back in 2019 according to the Navy.

It's nice but at the same time useless, they should invest on more frigates and corvettes.

>>67068583
That's nearly a 90 degree angle

>>67068879
It's actually 12º, it must be the perspective

>>67057052
>>67057176
>>67057207
[Citation needed]

Aircraft carriers require fixed-wing aircraft by definition.

If it did not, then every ship with a helicopter on it is an aircraft carrier.

>>67055155
>Ski-jump
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: ISISPickUpHitByMissile.webm (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>67068728
How hard has our boy Justin cut your mil?

Having access only to Baltic puddle

>>67069072
They are aircraft carriers. Even if you define an aircraft carrier as needing to carry airplanes, well, one look at Japanese "totally not aircraft carriers" carriers and you can easily see they can carry planes no problem if they were needed to do so. They were very obviously designed with that potential in mind, but of course they're only "defensive" now so they only carry copters.

>>67068868
It's probably never leaving the docks. The catapult, engines and electronics don't work and there is no money to replace them.

>>67069174
>one look at Japanese "totally not aircraft carriers" carriers and you can easily see they can carry planes no problem if they were needed to do so.
[Citation needed]

>hurdur just look at it!

>They were very obviously designed with that potential in mind,
[Citation needed]

1. The elevators cannot lift any known modern plane.
2. The deck cannot handle any known modern airplane engine's heat.

>but of course they're only "defensive" now so they only carry copters.
Nowhere is it stated that they are defensive. They simply are not designed to attack other nations (hence the ASW helicoptere).

>>67069252

>he doesn't know the Navy likes to spend all their money on "pharaonic" stuff.

http://www.naval.com.br/blog/2016/09/28/segundo-comandante-da-marinha-porta-avioes-sao-paulo-sera-modernizado/

They're doing it, it's on Santos already being worked on.

>>67069351
You're retarded, Kaga's design spec literally includes the potential to support fixed wing aircraft, specifically the F35 which Japan has already shown interest in purchasing. Sure it's only supporting Helicopters now, but Japan could, and totally would, in a war scenario easily outfit it to serve fighter planes

The proof is in the fucking pudding, you don't need Japan to confirm it (and they won't because they're not supposed to have offensive military equipment whatever that means)

>>67069409
You're aware this thing spent more time docked than sailing right? It was 10 months docked under repairs for every two months of sailing. The aircraft carrier São Paulo is just like the bullet train between São Paulo-Rio de Janeiro or the João Candido oil tanker: empty promises that never became a reality or lived up to the expectations.

Even if this thing worked, it still would be the worst aircraft carrier in service in the world, today.

>>67055155
why would Thailand need aircraft carriers?

They are all somewhere in the north sea

>>67070135

Yes i know, that's why i said the navy likes to dream with their stuff.

The Army and Air-Force still manages to be decent because of that, but the Navy loves to spend money on useless stuff instead of focusing on their problems.

Even though it doesn't work, it's still used for Dickwaving.

very poor

>>67070178
I dont know, as far as i know they are cool with China and Japan and russia and dont have problems with arabs or americans. They have more problems with their own people lmao

>>67055155
Give me six reasons

S I CS

why I shouldn't buy an aircraft carrier.

Have this

File: Vikram.jpg (762KB, 2048x1613px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 2048x1613px

>>67070714
>image

File: INS_Viraat_(R22)_Malabar_07.jpg (606KB, 2500x1674px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 2500x1674px

Retired this

File: Blue_Marlin_transporting_sea-based_X-band_radar.jpg (1MB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2100x1500px

What's your country's excuse for still not having an a 50,000k floating x-band radar?

Also retired this

>>67070892

50k ton
116 meter

I don't know. I don't think we have the budget for it. Everytime the military wants to buy some new stuff the hippies always go "M-muh poor and needy, war is bad so why are we buying airplanes". Nevermind we are part of NATO and have to live up to certain requirements military wise.

File: vik.jpg (163KB, 1300x581px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1300x581px

>>67070956
fuck.

File: Indian carrier.jpg (1MB, 2048x1613px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1613px

>>67070773
Is that a literal poop deck?

File: Vik2.jpg (107KB, 940x580px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 940x580px

Building this

>>67055155
idk if we have any
i heard our navy sucks but our army is good

>>67056550

Aegis just shot down over 6 Chinese anti ship missiles off Yemen.

>>67071049
Kek

>>67070178
I think they made it for prestige...power projection in the gulf might be a point, but definitely they wouldn't need a carrier for that

File: poland america friends.jpg (28KB, 450x310px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 450x310px

>>67067540
This is true.

>>67055155
There's no point in having one unless you want to go bomb people. It's an offensive weapon.

File: charles_de_gaulle_reuters.jpg (89KB, 1000x520px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1000x520px

Somewhere in mediterranean sea to bombs sandniggers in Syria and Irak with glorious Rafales and GBU/SCALP.

>>67057526
>>67068868
>>67069252
What have you done to our Foch ?

Daddy US wouldn't let us 3:
Even so, why? no country in the south cone has the budget to invade Mexico and the only other country that can do it is either China or the European Union, and sincerely why the would they even do that? If US falls, we fall with him. No need to invade "Rocky Mounties"- the country in order to help with that.

File: CDG.jpg (838KB, 4928x3280px) Image search: [Google]

838KB, 4928x3280px

>>67071596
I found some pics on the USN website a couple weeks ago of the CDG launching aircraft near Syria if you want them.

File: carrier_01.jpg (32KB, 550x339px)

32KB, 550x339px

This is the type of situation that make ramps gay

>>67071596
>no ramp

Truly our greatest ally.

File: CDG-2.jpg (755KB, 4928x3280px) Image search: [Google]

755KB, 4928x3280px

>>67071688

we don't have enemies, the malvinas war was the only war we participated since 1870

File: c-130_hercules-sur-porte-avions.jpg (300KB, 1200x760px)

300KB, 1200x760px

>>67071724

Or this

File: CDG-3.jpg (879KB, 3280x4928px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 3280x4928px

>>67071742

>>67071766

Well, sure is a good thing that USN is going to be using Ospreys for logistics.

File: Rafale-CDG.jpg (81KB, 1024x578px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1024x578px

>>67071782

>>67071688
Not suprising, there is a USA's warship in our battlegroup. It's always a pleasure to see how much our navy work together.
Months ago, for the first time of USA history, a battlegroup with the CDG and one of your aircarrier was leaded by a stranger, and it was a frenchman.

>>67071751

Argentina had a carrier in the Falklands war and they refused to use it

Can't afford one

File: Rafale Med.jpg (854KB, 4928x3280px) Image search: [Google]

854KB, 4928x3280px

>>67071855
>>67071856
Yeah, the pics were taken from the USS Ross.

>>67071855
>>67071856

reeeeee

Stop getting so close.

File: rafalem-20160325.jpg (35KB, 590x405px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 590x405px

>>67072026
Rafale on USS Entreprise

File: 1699750667.jpg (102KB, 628x418px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 628x418px

>>67072040

HMS Kent taking ASW duties for Charles De Gaulle.

File: FA18Hornet-CDG-2_MN.jpg (145KB, 2048x994px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 2048x994px

>>67072026
And F/A-18 on CDG

>>67072026
They're almost french kissing each other

>>67055155
We are dounle land locked. Forgive us Thailand

File: cdg-000170.jpg (179KB, 1024x685px)

179KB, 1024x685px

>>67072026

>>67072125
say what you will, the hornet is a sexy plane

>>67072131

I saw a tv program the other week about a man who travels around Europe, he got a tour and shot one of the 30mm guns on the Orizzonte-class.

>>67072233
>The UK ship has to stay in the back of the shot

>>67072239
It looks like it has the stereotypical jew nose in that pic

File: B-2_Spirit_original.jpg (2MB, 2000x1252px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1252px

>>67072239
Well, you are not as skilled as Dassault Aviation to makes sexy planes, but you're not bad either

>>67056354
I agree. When I was in the Navy I wish I was on a ship called the USS Rampage or the USS Eradicater

File: images.jpg (10KB, 201x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 201x250px

>>67055614
>giving your keys to an australian

File: SR-71 Blackbird.jpg (211KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1920x1080px

>>67072446
What do you think of the Blackbird?

File: FA-18-Super-Hornet-aircraft-1.jpg (25KB, 550x320px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 550x320px

>>67072381
Please no.

File: friends :3.jpg (342KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 2000x1000px

>>67072233
best allies in world history?

File: bonerwhat.png (13KB, 223x200px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 223x200px

>>67072558
It makes my baguette harder.

File: 1475103200658.png (46KB, 680x920px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 680x920px

>>67055155
we have yet to reclaim our shores

File: SR-71 closeup.jpg (60KB, 1203x753px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1203x753px

>>67072606

File: Brazilian_helicopters_conduct_deck_landing_qualifications_aboard_PCU_America_140804-N-LQ799-090.jpg (220KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1280x850px

>>67072040
>>67072125

It's nice to see shit like that.

Our Navy's EC-725 landing on USS America.

File: Vol-dun-Neuron-Falcon-7X-et-Rafale-de-Dassault.jpg (44KB, 610x320px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 610x320px

>>67072558
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwx6PI-G7v0

We used to

Our military is underfunded as fuck. Politicians don't care about it even though they can't stop talking about how much they care about it

File: 18-hornet.jpg (697KB, 1920x1080px)

697KB, 1920x1080px

>>67072578
You don't see it? The big jew nose

>>67072558
Beautiful aircraft tbqh

>>67072758
Neuron looks nice and Falcon looks fun to fly desu

File: SR-71.jpg (2MB, 3300x2550px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3300x2550px

>>67072812

File: rageboner.gif (189KB, 500x316px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 500x316px

>>67072688

File: SR-71 cockpit.jpg (837KB, 1380x908px) Image search: [Google]

837KB, 1380x908px

>>67072899

File: 100%sadness.gif (454KB, 480x270px)

454KB, 480x270px

>>67072897
>Space shuttle
>Blackbird
Damn, I wish we have the same amount of money to spend in awesome programs like USA does.

File: F-35USSAmerica.jpg (3MB, 2400x3000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2400x3000px

>>67072735
That is cool.

They started doing flight ops off the USS America with the F-35 last week I believe.

File: blackbird-old-photo.jpg (369KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 1280x800px

>>67072971
Me too, more competition and varied cool aircraft would be nice
>tfw we will never see what interstellar spacecraft look like

>>67055711
Besides our defensive budget is way too small for a carrier. It's expensive as hell.

>>67073036

I'm waiting for the Cruzex exercises.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_America_air_forces_maneuvers

It's cool because the Air-Force managed to reform their stuff after they got beaten by the frogs.

No money, no global power or influence and we have two Islands in the middle of the atlantic already.

>>67073612
Should not have given up Angolar desu

>>67068167
No they don't. LHDs aren't the same as aircraft carriers, retard.

>>67074853
To be fair, some can operate F-35s and Harriers. The Australian one even has a ramp.

There's no plan to actually use those capabilities though.

>>67074853

"LANDING HELICOPTER DOCK"

Yes they are. LHDs are are form of aircraft carrier.

>>67075052

There's plenty of discussion for it though.

http://www.defence.gov.au/whitepaper/docs/082-Baddams.pdf

https://www.aspi.org.au/publications/strategic-insights-9-is-the-jsf-good-enough/SI_JSF.pdf

America protects us for free. Thanks America.

>>67055155
It costs more than my country itself.

File: image.jpg (11KB, 225x225px)

11KB, 225x225px

we don't have any aircrafts

Because it's useless.

>>67075160
How do we save Guatemala

>>67055773
The f-22 is better.

>>67075293
The F-35 actually has alot of solid advantages on it.

An F-22 with F-35 electronics would be pretty God-tier though.

Can't afford any

>>67075361

Didn't another F-35 got on fire a few months ago?

>>67075397
Yeah, I think it was a tailpipe fire. Doesn't have much to do with what the other anon said though.

>>67075203
El Salvador has the best airforce in Central america right now.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FwjbHp9EMFg

>>67075596

5° Gen fighters seems to be a lot of complications, judging by the F-35 and it's querks.

I don't bealieve for a second that the Russians with the T-50 and Chinks with J-20 have their fighters combat ready either.

>>67055395

But you don't need one to invade Czechoslovakia, Anatoly.

Also, where are you going to park it? It'd be cucked and cockblocked in Murmansk, the Baltic and the Black sea. A bit less in Vladivostok, but still...

>>67075221
Can't be saved

>>67075854
Eh. It's had some problems, but it's broken 50,000 flight hours without a crash yet. That's pretty good.

J-20 looks promising, but we don't know what's under the hood so to speak so it's hard to tell. And I honestly don't know what's going to happen with the T-50. They're supposed to start ramping up production, but the Russian military budget is set to drop 12% by 2018. They could still do it if they take money from other programs they don't need. Pushing back the Velikiy modernization could save them some cash for instance.

>>67076166

F-35 was supposed to be fully operational years ago, right?

For me it's just seems that billions were wasted for a overcomplicated project. Yeah they're basically stepping on new grounds of aviation, but still seems that they wasted a lot of money for something that "doesn't work".

J-20 looks like a cross-breed of a F-22 with a SU-30. Still yet to know what's below the shell.

T-50 we don't know much too and both planes doesn't have the engine that were supposed have yet. Still, they say to be operational next year.

We can basically rely on America for our defence needs

File: 6437811.jpg (686KB, 1920x1046px) Image search: [Google]

686KB, 1920x1046px

We will make it

File: og_og_1469701025238379469.jpg (510KB, 1200x628px) Image search: [Google]

510KB, 1200x628px

In USSR was a prototype!

>>67076428
IOC for the F-35B was originally scheduled for 2010, with IOC for the F-35A scheduled for 2011. Then I believe FOC by 2013 or 2014.

When you look at other modern aircraft programs though, this was never realistic. The F-22 took 8 years from first flight to IOC, then another 2 years to FOC. The Rafale took 15 years to get to IOC, the Typhoon 9 years, the Gripen also 9 years.

Expecting the F-35 to hit IOC 4 years after it's first flight (and only 2 years after the first real production model) was silly. As is it hit IOC in 9 years, which is pretty well average for modern aircraft, and it's kept to the schedule as it's been since 2014.

That's not to say the F-35 hasn't had some problems, but alot of the negative outlook comes from grossly unrealistic expectations.

>>67076931

Yep, they're never ready when the schedule are hit.

Even though it's still a project in progress, it seems that the F-35 needs to fix a lot of it's problems.

Wish they continued with the F-22.

>>67075874
To fight against us.

>>67076796
It's a shame to see those things just rotting away. Very interesting technology imo.

Is there any plans at all to refurbish or reuse them? Even designing or building new ones?

File: 332.jpg (41KB, 480x330px)

41KB, 480x330px

>>67077477
No, that's stupid. Also i have 1 smaller ekranoplan near my house with submarine museum :3

>>67055155
We don't need one to fight narcos. (but we do need anti-sub weapons and missile corvettes for some reason)
>>67055362
Doesn't japan plan to just launch F-35Bs from their helicopter carriers?

File: Imagem-1-e-2-NDM-Bahia-1ªVSA-1.jpg (401KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 800x600px

Assault Ships count?

>>67076796
Isn't that a Ground Effect Vehicle?

As in a vehicle that just glides above water instead of actually flying?

>>67077783
>No, that's stupid.

What? Why? They're fuckin cool man.

>>67066710
No, he means we have no enemies that would require an aircraft carrier.

>>67078001
>Doesn't japan plan to just launch F-35Bs from their helicopter carriers?
I don't think the elevators on the Izumo can lift an F-35.

>>67075293
>The f-22 is better.
The F-22 can't fly off carriers and it's a far inferior strike fighter to the F-35. Just accept the different aircraft are built for different roles.

File: 21_1.jpg (142KB, 640x342px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 640x342px

Yes,
this is a very interesting thing, but now the Russian government have no dreams superpower, their Interso only as to steal money from the remnants of the Soviet Union((

>>67074313
Well that was thanks to you and to those goddamn commies.

>>67071949
Reply with "Thank you merciful America" if webm could, single-handedly, successfully invade your country.

>>67079450
I-I didn't do anything

>>67075847
Leaving aside it is impressive they can still fly those, and in those numbers, didn't Honduras get super tucanos?

>>67075950
Yes it can, same as any mess you'd rather walk out on, sooner or later you're going to just get on with it.

>>67078001
It's extremely minimal capabilities the navy has on those fronts considering contemporary threat scenarios, same as with fighter aircraft, we are far below what would be considered a reasonable minimum for a country our size.

Aircraft carriers are useless, we should build a couple of medium sized hospital ships tho, better to inest in soft power projection and domestic disaster relief.

>>67079558
Yes you did, you armed those terrorists to get a hand in those Diamonds like the Ruskies, and always flaming our methods in the United Nations councils

>>67079757
I wasn't even alive ;_;

File: 1475051513748.jpg (130KB, 554x600px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 554x600px

>>67079757

>>67065864
Muh thrust to weight ratios

>>67079757

>hurr durr i got jewed by america

Shut up, everybody got jewed.

>>67071133
2 of them aren't even real xD

>>67079927
Ever since Getulio Vargas or with Temer.

nah

File: F-35b landing.webm (497KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 1280x720px

>>67055773
f-35 a cute

>>67055155
We cant afford the camera to take pictures of it

File: Jan_Roos_0.jpg (35KB, 620x349px)

35KB, 620x349px

>>67055155
Jan Roos isn't PM yet