So, how's it gonna be? Another pile of cheap shit?

File: f35.jpg (187KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1600x900px

as opposed to pile of overpriced shit?

File: 064356m9swz6rzsrtvdxxx.jpg (163KB, 1238x945px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1238x945px

Hmmmm

File: 064357x20kavn0kg0ncykl.jpg (28KB, 728x627px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 728x627px

>>32208392
Hmmmmmmmmm

really makes you think

chart is from 2012, one year after the first flight of the J-20 in china.

looks like america wanted to copy the J-20

>>32208335
Junk like everything else made in China™

>>32208335
That you posted an artists rendering is one clue.

>>32208439
>LCS
>Ford-class
>Made in China

???

>>32208439
>yfw you use a phone made in china to post this shitpost

File: AEO14uq.jpg (584KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

584KB, 1500x1000px

According to leakers, 11 LRIP J-20s are already handed over to the PLAAF.

Three of them took part during the recent Red Sword excercise.

Kek, if true. China would have more than a third as many 5th gen in service in 2016 as Japan has ordered for 2025 (total of 28). And 100% more than Russia has serviceable T-50s.

>>32208453
PC actually

>>32208450
Those are American.
So expensive shit.

>>32208450
Good thing i'm not American.

>>32208335
It's not going to be highly impressive on its own. But you have two things to consider before shitting all over it.

First, China doesn't only need to compete with the US. If it surpasses the aircraft fielded by Russia, India, and most other regional powers, that's already a huge gain.

Second, China actually learns from it. People here tend to often miss an important aspect of the production capabilities of any country, and that is experience building things. Russia might be failing with their PAK-FA, but the next time they want to build a stealth aircraft, they'll have experience and knowledge to base it on. What happens when there's no such knowledge can be summed up by the huge difficulties experienced today to simply replace the Space Shuttle and all the old systems used to send men and equipment into space. There was a discontinuity in the experience, and it shows.

>>32208397
It doesn't look like that at all m8

File: 74f93520675b836655006ce4ed0057e86225f49f6031c33770d5f2ff4bcb7245_1.jpg (64KB, 800x509px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 800x509px

It has better intake shaping technology than the F-22.

It'll be fine and interrupt the status quo of the USA always having an advantage of at least 1 generation when facing enemies.

>>32208378
Stay mad, Vatnik/Cat Eater.

>>32208453
>yfw you use a phone made in china to post this shitpost

>Pop open my Lumia 950
>Made in Vietnam
Nope, go fuck yourself.

>>32208378
the f35 is sexy as hell tho.

would definitely copulate with said aircraft's air intake.

>>32208466
but but China has ordered Su-35 aircraft!

>not rocking that black painting anymore

>>32208453
>made in china
Taiwan, actually. Which is real china.

No surprise America sucks at making aircraft if that are the aviation experts

>Richard Aboulafia

>Take the J-20 front canards, the elevator-like surfaces ahead of the wing. They’re no good for stealth flight, and they’re likely there to counteract an inherent instability in the design.

https://www.wired.com/2016/11/china-j-20-fighter-jet/

>>32208378

Burnnnn.

>>32209072
>US
>sucks at making aircraft

And that's why China and Russia are so desperate to flood the internet with propaganda about how they're totally catching up to the US, right?

>>32209104
Boing is losing to Airbus at an alarming rate.

It's not even funny. Europe becomes the hot spot of aerospace engineering.

File: Figure-2-Airbus-v-Boeing-MOM.png (303KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1280x720px

>>32209111
dayum

>>32209111
Yeah? And? Boeing is just one company that has failed at modern fighter design, too. Meanwhile half of NATO is buying F-35s.

>>32209111
Not featured, the 777.

>>32209118
why are there no 777's or 747's on there you fuck

is it because Boeing was making 747's BEFORE AIRBUS EVEN EXISTED?

>>32208335
Assuming it has decently low fromtal RCS, it could pose a real threat to our AWACS and tanker aircraft. However it'll have a hard time fighting A2A vs. F22 or F35, but that's not really what its designed to do.

>>32210239
It will be interesting to see if the Chinks can navalize the J-20.

>>32210084
They sold like 8 747's in the past 2 years

>>32210239
>namefag
>has no idea what he talking about

What a surprise

>>32210390

Not that I'm defending namefaggery, but afatoldman doesn't tend to say retarded things. So mind saying what was wrong?

>>32210433
>but afatoldman doesn't tend to say retarded things.

kek

>>32210433
>textbook design of a transsonic rape machine
>not designed for A2A

>>32208504
Wow a coherent non shitpost post

>>32209111
>Boing

>>32209011
>cant supercruise

what is point for life if not go fast?

>>32210084
>>32210323

To be fair, it omits the A800 as well, which is becoming a white elephant.

>>32210323
some youtube commercial aircraft autist said theres a shift to smaller planes for direct flights and big planes are becoming less popular

File: 2015_07_Rafale_Egypte_1280.jpg (53KB, 1280x396px)

53KB, 1280x396px

>>32208378

>overpriced

Expensive, but still a much better value than gen 4.5 Eurocanards

>>32212899
Except it can.

>>32212926
Nope, Rafale can even beat the F22 in dogfight.

>>32213640
You mean that once instance where the F-22 was forced to play by the other team's rules (in literally hundreds of scenarios no less)?

File: phantom pain.jpg (118KB, 450x517px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 450x517px

>>32213640
By that metric we should all be flying Phantoms.

>>32213640
When you take away all the f22s advantages in a mock battle that won't happen in real life, sure.

Do people still think we shoot down fighters with cannons from 1/4mile away?

>>32213640
>>32213782
>>32213822
>>32213846
And they only managed a lock just barely at gun range a couple times out of 14 sorties.

>>32213939
It's the old "X is not totally invulnerable to any and all forms of attack, therefore it is going to die constantly" fallacy.

Yes, there are some situations where you can engineer a squeaker of a loss for the F22, but only if you handicap it severely.

In actual 'realistic' simulated combats, the F22 and F35 utterly dominate everything put against them, every 4th gen aircraft that trains against them just dies, to the point where nobody wants to do training missions against them anymore because there's no training value in just taking off and flying around looking for the enemy until your computer tells you that you're dead from a passive lock AMRAAM.

>>32208453
High tech "Made in chink land" usually means assembled there.

>>32209111
yeah maybe the US should subsidize Boing like the euros do with airbust.

>>32214149
>Boeing not being subsidized.

>>32214149
>>32209111
>>32212859
Guys I know you're making a joke but fucking stop. It's Boeing not Boing

>>32208335
does it have thrust vectoring?

granted pilots can only withstand so many G's, but if it can't out turn the US's fifth gen its not going to be superior.

how about it's radar array, nose seems kind of small. perhaps it works in conjunction with their supposed high freq radar (defeats stealth design and materials) drones.

>>32212902
Whats the A800?

File: A6M3_Zero_N712Z_1.jpg (421KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1600x1067px

>>32216389
>if it can't out turn X its not going to be superior.

nigga this wasn't even true in WWII

>>32208504
Underrated post

>>32216418
lol how many years did the zero dominate before the US finally built something to take it on?

>>32216482

The zero's dominance in the early stages of the war had nothing to do with its turn-rate. The USN was equipped with obsolete planes like the F2A and F4F. The F6F and F4U still didn't outturn the zero yet completely dominated it.

>>32216482

>Wikipedia: "By mid-1942 a combination of new tactics and the introduction of better equipment enabled the Allied pilots to engage the Zero on generally equal terms.[4]"
>source: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC/USMC-C-Aces/index.html

So not even a year.

>>32216389
>thrust vectoring
>turning your aircraft into a brick at subsonic speed

worst idea ever

If you enter an air battle not in transsonic or supersonic regime you are doing it wrong.

There is a reason why most aircraft in the recend decades are Delta-Canard designs.

>nose seems kind of small

kek

quite the opposite.

>>32216418
laughingHartmann.jpg

Dogfighting is a waste of time.

>>32216433
>people don't give my bullshit post enough attention!

If it proves to be successful will it bring back the dogfight?

>two countries stealth fighters looking for each other
>radar and IRST can't see them, they have to wait for visual detection
>missiles won't lock on to stealth planes
>they have to close to gun range

>>32216724
>stealth
>IRST related

heh

>>32216724

You can't hide any plane on infrared to the extent you can to radar. Planes will just shift to spamming IR guided missiles until radar catches up.

>>32216741
The lack of a modern IRST system is the biggest flaw of American aircraft.

File: 20fs0pf.jpg (7KB, 324x217px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 324x217px

F-22 on IRST

>>32216789
Couldn't you like, just look out the window?
>>32216762
The F35 has a brand new IRST system and the F18 has a pretty new one as well.

File: bvr-combat-brief-12-638.jpg (77KB, 638x479px)

77KB, 638x479px

>stealth is a gamechanger

>>32216832

It seems to reduce detection ranges by quite a lot according to your own posts.

>>32216832
>this meme

Go away

>>32216820
>head on detection
>subsonic
>well within range of AMRAAM
>>32216832
Oh this meme again
You fire enough SAMs into the air day after day and you'll hit something

File: bvr-combat-brief-40-638.jpg (92KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 638x479px

>>32216832

>>32216869
0.46 is pretty good friendo. That's probably not the block D either. Hate to spoil your buttmad rage but the AIM 9x is going to become a BVR missile too

File: bvr-combat-brief-57-638.jpg (74KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 638x479px

>>32216884

>>32216884
Oh look, more muh scenario shitposting, this time in powerpoint format! This is going to be good.

>>32216876

I wish we'd make a Meteor equivalent or even just license produce the Meteor so the F-22 and F-35 can truly capitalize on getting the first shot off on most of their potential enemies.

File: bvr-combat-brief-58-638.jpg (63KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 638x479px

>>32216886

File: bvr-combat-brief-73-638.jpg (93KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 638x479px

>>32216892
skipping to the summary

File: 1480911698600.jpg (56KB, 497x750px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 497x750px

Wait so

>stealth is bullshit

So j20 is also bullshit and gen4 fighters will do most of the fighting.

But the USs gen4 fighters are still better, so US still wins anyway.

File: bvr-combat-brief-74-638.jpg (74KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 638x479px

>>32216903

>>32208439
>young folks don't get that China is going through the same stages of economic development that Japan, and more recently Korea and Taiwan went through
first they make cheap junk. Then they make cheap stuff that is fine for the money. Then they make honestly good shit for cheap. Then once they have a solid industrial and high technology research base, they compete with other world powers in the quality of shit they produce

>>32216903
Thank you
Unbelievable it was someone's job to make this shit. I'm glad we don't waste time fantasizing about engagements where we're clearly slated to win based on some batshit crazy assumptions

Good job Trump!

>>32216903

What about the USs f15s?

>>32216892
>>32216914


>PLAAF running 1205 sorties/day
>PLAAF running 1205 sorties/day with no attrition
>PLAAF willing to throw away entire air-force over Taiwan

>USAF only has F-22s and F-35s

>"excessively optimistic"

Time is playing for China.

Any technoly and capacity gap will be reduced with every new aircraft, ship

>>32216938
The problem is that the USA doesn't have enough air bases to operate over Taiwan.

>>32216956

No, but it has enough within range of other parts of China to make trying shit over Taiwan suicide.

>>32216938
This.
>75 SU-27's
>~240+ J-10's
>24 SU-35's
>205 J-11's
>24 J-16's
>73 SU-30MKK's
>120 JH-7's
total of available modern and legacy fighter aircraft is ~771

USAF
>F-16 Fighting Falcon
>In service
>957

Good luck with your le overwhelming numbers mayme

>butthurt Americans

I'm laughing so hard

The joke is that China has already Taiwan invaded and conquered before USA has three carrier strike groups ready.

>>32216986

to be fair the F-16's range is pretty bad and might not be suitable for operating over Taiwan, but as >>32216972 said China wouldn't be able to dedicate that many planes to Taiwan without leaving other parts of China completely open to attack.

>>32216986
Just for memes
>957 F-16's
>192 F-15's
>184 F-22's
>71 F-35A's (1800 planned)

Marine Corps
>55 available F/A-18A's
>119 available F/A-18C's
>38 F-35C's Planned total of 353 F-35Bs and 67 F-35Cs (CTOL)

Navy
>105 EA-18G growlers with 27 more on order
>26 F-16's
>314 F/A-18 Hornets
>342 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets with 23 on order
>12 F-35C's with 369 planned

Total
>983 F-16's
>192 F-15's
>184 F-22's
>121 F-35's
>593 F-18 Hornets
>342 F-18 Super Hornets

Literally 2500 in pure fighter aircraft. Literally the entire size of the PLAAF in pure fighter aircraft. This is not counting the fact that the Chinese have literally no AWACS capacity, hardly any stratotankers or ANY logistics, basically no mine sweeping helicopters, and literally no Ewar capacity beyond small systems on fighter aircraft.

>>32217044
Another point would be that even Chinese second and third row aircraft like the JH-7 or even the J-7 would be good enough for bombing or as flying anti-ship missiles carriers.

>>32217080
Only a fraction can be used in a Taiwan conflict.

While Taiwan is close to the Chinese borders. You aren't even trying anymore in your butthurtness.

>>32217055
It was more of a "le numbers argument" is a fucking terrible argument since it's pretty clear that the USAF has both numbers, quality, and logistics superiority.

Use something with better range then. Just scramble navy Hornets and now you have 935 Hornets to use.

Or F-15's, F-35's and F-22's, now you have the three best planes for BVR and Anti air missions and you have 500 of them.

Obviously the States can't deploy every plane ever but neither can China and it's dumb to even pretend with the home field advantage that the US's logistics wouldn't still allow it to deploy more aircraft than China could field.

>>32217093
>your butthurtness
>comes up with elaborate invasion plan of a small island they lost almost a hundred years ago that enjoys a higher standard of living than the mainland
wew

>>32217093
yfw any fraction of 2500 is still more than China's field-able fraction of 700 fighters.

The U.S would have to be able to field less than 30% of its airforce to get down to a 100% fielded Chinese air force.

>>32217029
It's funny

>>32217044
>>32217082
>>32217093

You're assuming the Chinese would be willing to dedicate an absurd portion of their airforce to attacking Taiwan while also assuming the US would be too stupid or unwilling to exploit this. The US doesn't have to fight over Taiwan when it can fight over China directly.

If China is willing to engage in open warfare against the USN the chances of the US taking off the kid gloves and Dresdening parts of the Chinese mainland are pretty high.

File: 1477927468964.png (109KB, 534x548px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 534x548px

>>32217107
Like vatniks, chinks on /k/ often resort to calling others butthurt when they have little else to shitpost with.

>>32208453
>chinks are mobileposter scum
This explains everything

>Somehow the USA can launch aircraft on non existing airbases

Damn, /k/ is sure the worst place to talk about such stuff

>>32208335
why do they even keep buying these planes? when is the last time a dogfight even happened? 1944?

File: US bases Pacific .jpg (100KB, 567x463px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 567x463px

>>32217135

File: USAF.png (3MB, 3780x2672px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3780x2672px

>>32217080
Damn, chinks fucking BTFO.

File: DCS09-371-5.jpg (447KB, 2100x1374px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 2100x1374px

>>32217135
Go stuff another Bao down your throat Wong.

>>32217152
gonna operate 2500 aircraft from those air bases!

From a military point Taiwan can't be defended. One of the many reasons why Trump is an idiot.

>>32217135

Literally only one person even insinuated this, meanwhile the 50 cents still haven't explained how China can actually defend its airspace when its entire air force is presumably chimping out over Taiwan.

>>32217135
Your English is showing, Vlad.

"Non existent airbases" you mean all the ones in:
>Australia
>Japan
>Taiwan
>South Korea
>Afghanistan
>Iraq
>Guam

Yeah look at all those places that long range interdiction, strikes, and bombers couldn't come from.

>implying Taiwan isn't just a second Ukraine
>many angry written letters
>many crossed red lines

And nothing will happen.

>>32217179

>implying MAD applies to China the same way it does with Russia

>>32217189
This

The Chinese have nowhere near enough nukes for counterforce or meaningful countervalue.
West coast or parts of the Eastcoast, chinks will have to pick opposed to vlad who could just dust the entire States.

>>32217196
lel

Trump here

I'm selling out the entire East Coast to show China who the boss is.

>>32217213
Why wouldn't you fuck over the three West coast states? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Least meaningful population loss, and also West coast lol.

Many in the West believed Russia could be deterred from any military intervention in the Ukraine. But deterrence did not work because Moscow did not believe that Washington cared enough about Ukraine to accept the costs and risks of a military conflict with Russia.

File: awac_1254445302_51315.jpg (32KB, 400x321px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 400x321px

>>32217080
> literally no AWACS capacity
oh fuck off

>>32217152
>all those nanometers

What is this, a map for ants?

>>32217260

Post something that's actually in service and is so in significant numbers.

>>32216789
*flares

>>32217279
it's actually in active service since like 2004 (2002 first one delivered)
there's like eight of them iirc
then there's a few of the smaller KJ-200 (two or three)

China has also large ground radars directed at Taiwan ready to jam everything over it.

>>32217340
>in significant numbers

>>32217363
>ready to be HARM'd and Tomahawked

File: kj-500 (1).jpg (13KB, 453x302px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 453x302px

>>32217371
eight is plenty for covering China Sea (five craft) while also maintaining some semblance of coverage over the Indian border (three craft)
then there are these things, which I have no idea how many of there are

>>32217080
>Chinese have literally no AWACS capacity
KJ-200, KJ-500, KJ-2000 just to name a few

>basically no mine sweeping helicopters
Numerous Z-8s

>literally no Ewar capacity
J-16D

>>32217396
>the entire fleet is active at the same time

Wew. USN has 80 E-2s in service, and those are just watching the carriers.

>>32217164
weak b8 m8

>>32217423
there are exactly four E-2s assigned to each carrier, and they are roughly equivalent to KJ-500 in capability.
KJ-2000 has a much more powerful radar and can fly higher for longer, so can cover more airspace on its own

>>32217164
So asshurt that trump got on the phone with taiwan, huh?

I bet you thought trump was good for china, didnt you?

reminder that MAGA means china will not grow larger

>>32217439
Well there are 5 KJ 2000s and there are 68 E3 sentrys

>>32217439
>there are exactly four E-2s assigned to each carrier.

Well, thats 44 out of a possible 80 airframes, and carrier loadout is fluid as fuck.

>and they are roughly equivalent to KJ-500 in capability.

Wew laddy. One very large asea is equivalent to 3 smaller ones?

>muh KJ-2000

All 5 of them?

Keep in mind you are compareing a strategic awacs to a naval carrier awacs.

>>32208378
At least F35 is a real fighter.

>>32217440
>destroying the own economy

laughingMao.jpg

>>32217399
You named a few, to bad out of those 3 models, there are less than 20 airframes.

>>32217470
> you are compareing a strategic awacs to a naval carrier awacs
no I'm not. KJ-200 and KJ-500 would be the E-2 counterparts, but I have literally no idea how many there are (at least 2 of each tho')
KJ-2000 (8 of them) and KJ-3000 (idk how many) are E-3 equivalents or thereabouts
now, China has exactly one carrier, which can not accomodate the KJ-200 or 500, so it uses a Kamov Ka-31 helo for the purpose

> Well, thats 44 out of a possible 80 airframes, and carrier loadout is fluid as fuck.
it's not that fluid, monkey-boy, there can be at most 5 on at any time
> One very large asea is equivalent to 3 smaller ones?
U wot

>>32210084
>150 to 300
Wow, I wonder why the max 660 passenger boeing 747 is not listed.

>>32208335
Who knows, pla themselves start asking questions about J20.

>>32216832
do these anti stealth shills all work for the kremlin or something?

>>32217550
You mean there is no way to counter X-band optimised stealth?

>>32217521
>U wot

Confirmed for not knowing about the differences between the APY-9 and whatever is on the kj-500.

>KJ-2000 (8 of them)

5 known airframes are active.

>KJ-3000 (idk how many)

Let me help you. 0.

>there can be at most 5 on at any time

Im pretty sure a carrier can AT MOST carry far more than 5.

>>32217584
There is no way to make stealth optimized aircraft detectable at the same ranges you would detect non stealth airframes.

Even with VHF-UHF systems, steath airframes will be detected closer than non stealth.

You can degrade, not eliminate stealths advantages, and with known next gen systems, munitions still outrange detection ranges.

>>32217613
>There is no way to make stealth optimized aircraft detectable at the same ranges you would detect non stealth airframes.

wrong

>Even with VHF-UHF systems, steath airframes will be detected closer than non stealth.

wrong

File: tmp_15792-Rus-Radar-Params-2008-S547110695.png (116KB, 768x452px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 768x452px

>>32217626
>>32217626
100% correct, due to shaping.

The paint is optimized for xband, the shape itself reduces across the spectrum.

I don't get this military posturing actually.

America has the 'better' military and yet they lost Crimea to Russia and lost Philippines to China. And China haven't flexed their military muscle yet. They're the most professional soldiers I know of.

>>32217700
>lost Philippines to China.

Duterte played china for fools.

Not only did he get economic aid from china, he didnt get rid of the defence agreement from the US, and he loves trump.

He got millions for NOTHING.

>>32208335
I don't like America's weapons mentality since the 60's. All about making everything weaker and more "multi capable". What happened to the days when our infantry carried rifles strong enough to blow a hole in an elephant, and our planes were big and heavy but durable and strong, and our main pistol was a browning 1911? This whole pussification of our military is just fucking lame. What's next. They "upgrade" our main assault rifle to a Swiss army knife? Fucking gay. We need to get back to our roots.

This plane is pretty dope, but still. I don't see it being great in a dogfight and I find that worriesome.

>>32217739
This entire post is wrong, wrong to the point that you think a chinese plane is american.

>>32217739
Kys

>>32217739
Then again I don't want to be a proponent of trying to fight the last war.

>>32208335
There are literally 4 images of the j-20 and not many more of other sexy aircraft.

Kuso thread.

>>32217749
It probably is, shit. I mean they've been stealing our intellectual property for the last 15 years.

>>32217764
No probably about it, it is chinese.

>>32208864
Are you drunk?

>>32212902
>>32216409

*A380

>>32217764
Retard

File: J-20_2016e.jpg (144KB, 1200x688px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1200x688px

>>32217810
The divertless supersonic inlets the J-20 uses are simpler, lighter, use no moving parts and provide less of a radar return than the conventional diverter plates the F-22 uses.

File: God Is a Serb AA missle.jpg (122KB, 1024x963px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1024x963px

>>32216832
>IR SAM

First of all how it works is F117 is safe from passive search radar which is usually low ping and frequency for power consumption of a wide and long search radius.
Second, F117 has ECM that could be picked up from ground forces with radar warning receivers.
Third, targeting radar at a SAM battery needs to have a stronger higher frequency so radar waves can be received back to the missile on intercept.
Forth is the fact that the Missles were S-125's or SA-3 radar guided SAM's the ECM resistant successor to the same S-75 missile series that shot down the most aircraft in Vietnam in the 1960's.
Fifth is that anything that need IR targeting is already too close and you are already dead anyway if you are next to a radar site for a SAM network

And that is why we no longer use F117's anymore.

>>32209118
>Airbus slide excerpt
Well it's good to know they cherry pick as much as Boeing does for this thing.

So the MAX 9 is shit and everyone knows it, just like the 737 900 is.

But the A330/787 comparison is cherry picky as fuck, Airbus have 144 A330s on backlog, Boeing have 728 787s on backlog.

>>32217739
Modern aerial battles are won before visual contact friendo. Plus the beauty of smaller ammunition is more to do with economy I believe. Also a .50 was meant to take out engine blocks.
This is bait, but Hitler's tank ideas proved bigger isn't always better

>>32216832
IR SAM? Wait what? The SAM used was command-guided, not IR guided.

>>32218278
Actually, F-117s had zero ECM and no radar warning receivers - it literally had a "stealth mode" where any external antennas, its laser designator, etc all retracted or showed RAM-covered sides.

File: 1480946526578.jpg (530KB, 960x1358px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 960x1358px

>>32217179
>Implying Taiwan won't be razed the second the chinks get too uppity

>>32209061
Fake China

>>32217196
>Assuming the US would fight a nuclear war over an island full of uppity dwarfs

>>32218248
But it starts killing your performance around mach 2, hence why the F-22 went with the plate (which due to its position on the body does not compromise stealth).

The us has been dicking around with DSI from the mid 50s.

>>32218584
>taiwan #1
>japan #2
>worst korea #3
>china #4
>usa #0

>>32218594
>assuming china would fight a nuclear war over an island of uppity dwarfs.

Paranoid American Propaganda at work. The plane works as intended, its just that the Americans have the insatiable need to overhype their products and criticize others. Mainstream media, professional shills on social media or brain washed bandwagoners on message boards are perpetrating the view that America has a better product because they know China has got this in the bag.

>>32218715
Got what in the bag? A plane that carrys only 4 bvr's internally, yet is bigger than an F-15?

>purposely create junk bait tech
>chink weapons suddenly start breaking down
hmmm wouldn't that be a strange coincidence

File: Kit0Igw.jpg (43KB, 1160x600px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1160x600px

>>32218626
>But it starts killing your performance around mach 2
The F-22 barely reaches over Mach 2 on full afterburner. It's irrelevant considering the F-22s supercruise speed is Mach 1.58 and since the J-20 has less powerful engines it certainly won't reach that.

>due to its position on the body does not compromise stealth
Garbage, the F-22s inlets are not blended with the body and have several points of reflection.

>The us has been dicking around with DSI from the mid 50s.
Cool story, China has more aircraft equipped with DSIs than any other country.

>>32218764
>Cool story, China has more aircraft equipped with DSIs than any other country.
Bullshit. There are more F-35s than anything they have with a DSI.

>>32218816
>100 JF-17s
>12 J-20s
>2 J-31s
>9 JL-9s
>124 J-10Bs
247 Chinese aircraft with DSIs.

Versus 180 F-35s.

>>32218917
Yeah, but the difference here is that production is only going to accelerate as time goes on.

>>32218981
Cool, so is J-10B, J-20, J-31, JF-17 and JL-9 production. These are all new aircraft.

The J-10B in particular has an order in progress of another 1600 aircraft.

>>32219114
>2443 F-35s will be in US service
It's cute you think that many Gripen knock-offs would be particularly effective.

>>32219153
Sorry, you're trying to slide the discussion from aircraft equipped to DSIs to combat effectiveness. Really though I admire the resolution, losing one argument and immediately starting another.

I'm not interested, bye.

>>32219172
And here I see that instead of trying to make any argument you give up and try to call it a win.

>>32218764
>The F-22 barely reaches over Mach 2 on full afterburner.

Yes, hence the need for plates.

>Garbage, the F-22s inlets are not blended with the body and have several points of reflection.

The Inlets are rounded all the way around, and are coated.

>Cool story, China has more aircraft equipped with DSIs than any other country.

US has more S ducts than any other country, so who cares.

>>32217264
nautical miles

good bait

>>32218917
>>32219114

Is the JF-17 in PLAAF service? I thought even though it was joint developed, it was mostly for the PAF.

>>32218917
>>100 JF-17s

Nice try. 0 of them are with the Chinese airforce.

>>32219546
No, they are not.

>>32216903
>skipping to the summary

God forbid we get a chance to disprove your delusions

File: 1454263161916.jpg (253KB, 1080x1283px)

253KB, 1080x1283px

>>32216832

didn't the sebs know exactly where and when the F-117 was going to be? and then only turned on their radar when the F-117 was so close no amount of stealth could prevent it from being shot down?

literally due to the USAF getting lazy and complacent

>meanwhile in an proper war with Saddam the F-117 tap dances over bagdad and iraqi air defense gets HARM'd and ACLM'd to oblivion generally

>>32217739
DUDE like the USA should just build the Ratte and the Maus and they'd win like every war ever DOPE AF:^)

>>32219864
And the bomb bay door was open, massively boosting the return.

And they didn't have a Wild Weasel pop a HARM into flight as they were approaching.

>>32219864
The F-117 had been flying the same route for several missions and the Serbian SAM operator only managed a lock when it opened it's bomb bay. Of course this doesn't stop every vatnik or Sprey luddite from acting like the Serbs found one simple trick to defeat stealth forever.

>>32219956

The best part is they only shot missiles at a range of 8 miles!

File: 30 rounds of 545.jpg (207KB, 1382x778px)

207KB, 1382x778px

>>32217739
hits count, misses don't

>>32217739
Yeah, I remember back when our fighting soldiers wore big metal suits of armor, not pansy pieces of pots and expensive plastic shirts.
Why don't we bring back polearms? Get back to our roots.

>>32222395
I remember when our fighting warriors adorn themselves with animals, conditioned to fight barefoot until their soles were as tough as leather, not get stuck in giant fucking tin cans and are so pansy they can't even look at their enemies directly to their eyes, because fucking stew pot encases their entire fucking face.

Why don't we bring back stone tipped spears, rocks and clubs?