>designing stealth into your aircraft You're asking

File: Pierre.png (288KB, 1236x888px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1236x888px

Remember /k/

We can get rid of these fags by ignoring them.

>>32398735
Remember: your cause celebre is the costliest weapons system in history.

It is over cost and has consistently failed to meet schedule.

>>32398694

reminder that the F-16 is a flying kludge avionics-wise.

>>32398773
Yes. I agree with that. But that doesnt mean its bad.

>>32398694
...with additional qualities such as:
>no internal hardpoints -- only fuel & gunfood
>lots of external hardpoints
>even more external surface hardpoints
>additional hardpoints for mounting transonic drones with modular multimission capabilities such as probes & decoys
>wingtip hardpoints
>featherweight coaxial railgun spinally mounted along the entire length of the airframe for precision bvr artillery
>frickin' lasers
>toilet

>>32398694

This.

Jamming technology has already made the F-35 obsolete.

You can hang a pod from a F-16 and get better stealth performance already.

>>32398942
>>32398936
>>32398694
(you)

Pierre Sprey please go and stay go

>>32398958
>xD do I fit in?

>>32398694
>The growth of computers, and thus, radar/satellites will always outpace the development of stealth countermeasures.
it is actually opposite. We have stealth planes with 10000 times less RCS than non stealthy planes. To compensate that we need 10000 times more powerful radars. And this is not happening at all. Stealth won war against radar forever.

>>32399524
>To compensate that we need 10000 times more powerful radars
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

That's not how radars work

I really wish /k/ had mods

>>32398782
It's debatable. The R&D spent on the program and all the technical stuff that came out of it are a good thing and will make futre planes cost less as the engineers knows what to do but the plane itself will be looked on with mixed feelings.

"All that, for this." will most certainly be the general view. "A great/good/decent plane, but still..."

>>32399641
Too busy removing sexually suggestive weeb images.

Or nuclear threads.

>>32399524

How do we know radar won't improve dramatically, when all incentive thanks to "MUH STEALTH!" is now on improving detection.

R&D into the field will skyrocket.

>>32399933

Seriously, we're going to see anti-stealth radar research increase by leaps and bounds.

File: IMG_0098.jpg (21KB, 297x331px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 297x331px

>>32398694
>growth of computers will always outpace the development of stealth
Moore's law is done, famalam. The future is dead, computers will likely only get more efficient, not more powerful, unless a breakthrough in material science is made.

>>32398694
Pierre Sprey plz go

>>32398942
>implying jamming and countermeasures are the same as stealth and radar cross section

>>32399968
>implying we shouldn't bother improving technology because one day someone might invent a counter

>>32400241
Accusing somebody who see the obvious of being Pierre Sprey is foolish.

Energy-maneuverability theory is a well-established, effective method of designing fighters.

>>32400509

true, but it's not the be-all end-all of Boyd and Sprey's day. it's still immensely important in flying your jet the most effectively, something that /k/ doesn't seem to understand, but when i'm not flying BFM or ACM i don't ever see an E-M diagram.

File: 1468697744950.jpg (120KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1600x1200px

>>32398694

If computers are so good then why don't we just use the heat from a bunch of computers on a plane to heat up air to spin the turbines on a jet?

File: F-35 Baitning II.jpg (52KB, 559x314px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 559x314px

>>32400509
>>32400566

>>32400509
Lining up in line of battle formation and exchanging shells at visual range with optical scopes is also a well-established, effective method of designing fighters. So what?

Welp, guess all nations of the world fell into the same 'trap' eh? Thank the internet you are here for when the aliens attack and can only be defeated by F-16 block 40,000s..

File: spreyposting.png (574KB, 934x1976px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 934x1976px

>>32398694
>>32400509
>>32400566
>>32399933
>>32399968
>>32399253
>>32398942
>>32398936

>>32398773
> your cause celebre is the costliest weapons system in history.
Except we're not talking about SLBMs.

>>32400621

The rust makes me want to vomit

>>32400755
>>32401549

sure modern Sprey is a hack, but E-M theory is a good way of quantifying one aspect of fighter performance as well as teaching you how to fly your fighter effectively.

File: 1482373716495.jpg (551KB, 571x1024px) Image search: [Google]

551KB, 571x1024px

>>32401645
i don't give a fuck. you're spewing memes.

>>32401792

how is E-M theory a meme

moreover, how is it false?

>>32401792
>John Boyd is a meme

How about you jump down a deep, dark well for me, chap?

>>32400138
>unless a breakthrough in material science is made.

Intel has plans for non-silicon processors once they reach 7nm

File: 1482217923160.jpg (1MB, 5506x3104px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5506x3104px

>>32401810
>>32401813
>needing to optimize for EM when you have the ability to not be detected, or get in a dogfight, in the first place

i've got a very large meme folder, i can be here all day if you want

>>32401821
>>32400138

they've been talking about commercial III-V semiconductors for a while such as GaAs and InSb, but toxicity and costs and the marginal gains in performance for commercial usages have prevented their adoption over silicon for a long time.

>>32401845

you fucking retard, the point is that you don't needlessly piss away your energy and burn all your gas by selecting max AB the entire time. the whole point of BFM these days is to develop a nuggets-out feel for the performance of the aircraft - this AOA means i'm at an opt turn, which is a "light tickle" feel. i can tighten down to decrease my radius, which corresponds to a moderate buffet, which also means i'm trading away my energy for increased maneuverability. BFM is a performance exercise.

it's literally learning how to fly your jet effectively.

if you think that's irrelevant, you're an idiot.

>>32398694
>More manuverable
>Faster engines
Uh. Modern fighter jets can already knock you out pretty easy. The computer keeps you from pulling enough Gs to kill you, the jet can do more than you can handle.

Future fighters are going to be drones.

File: 1482200487665.jpg (2MB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2100x1500px

>>32401881
completely irrelevant, do you have an argument?

>>32401906
why are large ships like aircraft carriers not catamarans?

>>32401906

/k/ is a bunch of idiots who don't understand why/where John Boyd was right and how it's still relevant today, and conversely the limitations of E-M theory and its applicability to modern aerial warfare.

File: 1481928557021.jpg (28KB, 466x404px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 466x404px

>>32401934
ad hominem, appeal to authority and surreptitious meming

1/10, you need to do more reading you've obviously subscribed to sprey's newsletter

>>32401901

it really depends on your loadout, fuel weight, altitude, how the flight controls

>>32401970

appeal to authority only fails when you're not an authority. which i am since i fly fighters for a living.

E-M theory is important and relevant. it is not the be-all end-all of fighter performance, but it is an important aspect of fighter performance.

File: 1481829158347.jpg (449KB, 1986x2048px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 1986x2048px

>>32401992
flying RC F-16s doesn't count, post timestamp with jet and flight manual + checklists, oh and tell us where you're operating, liar.

>>32401549
Yeah this is fucking stupid... but it does make an interesting point for light, 120mm cannon armed tanks to supplement M1s

File: checklist.png (2MB, 896x1593px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 896x1593px

>>32402010

i'm not going to drive down to the flightline right now since it's nearly 0100, but i fly F-15Es. i leave my -1CL and -34CL at my LFE locker most days, but here's an old photo.

>>32401845
>The dog fight is dead
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKKKK OFFFFFFFFF

File: Untitled.png (677KB, 854x421px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 854x421px

>>32402054

and here's more pubs

>>32401928
It's harder to make tight turns, but more importantly it's a hanger space issue.

File: 1482262489390.jpg (61KB, 375x582px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 375x582px

>>32402054
>>32402064

>he's actually real
well fuck. sorry m8, these convict genes make me shitpost. i thought you were a larper kek.

give me tips on how to trigger fighter pilots. i know where a few RAAF boys hang out.

and weren't you the guy here a few months ago arguing with some guy?

>>32402057
m8 we all know dog fighting is dead, just ask war is boring

https://warisboring.com/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875

it's obvious if the f-35 can't do something it's worthless anyway

>>32399933
>>32399524
>>32399968
Actually Magnetron emitters have been slowly going on the wayside and LPI has become more and more sought after of recent times. It's good for detection/negation of Stealth Assets but is currently not good enough for targeting data.

>>32402110

i argue with dudes all the time because they think the world's more simplistic than it really is.

saying "box", "head", and answering yes/no questions with detailed explanations all irritate us.

>>32402074
Aircraft carriers cant fly moron.

>>32401934
John Boys also claimed it was impossible to fight MiG-17s in BFM against F-4s and win. He managed to spout this utter retardation in front of F-4 pilots who were MiG killers. He also wanted to limit the F-15 to a maximum of 5g cause E-M theory.

File: 1482383447578.jpg (123KB, 750x1024px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 750x1024px

>>32402152
i understand the detailed explanation bits (after all we all know that fighter pilots are just smart enough to fly but just dumb enough to follow orders, if they weren't they'd be in intel), but why the words box and head? why are you bigoted and why are you intelligentophobe?

>>32402177

a tool misapplied doesn't mean the tool's not useful.

>>32402185

because if i wanted your reasoning i'd have asked you for it. if i want to know if you were able to get a point track on a mover, i want to hear "yes" or "no". i'll ask you about it when it's relevant.

also they're forbidden due to us taking PC too far and banning random semi-sexualized words out of spite.

>>32402212
> if i want to know if you were able to get a point track on a mover, i want to hear "yes" or "no". i'll ask you about it when it's relevant.
is that a fancy term for lining your dick up with a girls' snatch in japan?

btw, have you had many experiences with the RAAF? apparently they're shit compared to the USAF.

>also they're forbidden due to us taking PC too far and banning random semi-sexualized words out of spite.
i heard about the Navy, i think, banning job positions terms or something. so if you want to get someone's attention, you can't call out the standard code for their job, you have to call them out by name. i think it got reversed a few days ago.

>be in afghanistan hunting for oil
>see a bunch of children on a beach
>say you see moving assault toddlers equipped with manpads on the beachhead
>when you land get promoted to cleaning toilets because of your sexism

i can understand head, but jesus christ... box? who the fuck calls a woman's snatch a box anymore?

>>32402212
I know cockpit got shamed for us in turboprop country. All flight station now.

>>32402388
>you can't say cockpit anymore
and i thought important people like pilots were mostly immune from this bullshit.

aren't they trying to figure out why basically no pilot will stay in the military for very long? maybe this might be the answer.

>>32402388

we may or may not have called an all-female fighter crew the "box office"

File: article-2449344-189860D800000578-493_634x359.jpg (41KB, 634x359px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 634x359px

>>32402423
ha, we had one detachment where it had most females out of any other det crew (6) and we had two crew patches the official and unofficial one. The unofficial patch was close enough to pic related with "crew X, but you'll attract bears!"

>>32402064
Oh shit the 4th i fugged this dirty slut in your coc. Dirty blonde with a slightly crooked nose dunno her rank because im not a burger

Right, now I know Stealth is actually great and all that shit.

What I want to know is (where's the caveman?) how can I hand-wave stealth out of things if I'm worldbuilding and want muh-ace-combat?

Is there anything more credible than "Well, all the world's nations made a treaty against it" or "Everyone bought the development costs meme" that could render stealth technology inert and leave me with more conventional combat?

>>32402054
>>32402064
>F-15E

Fukin nice.

On a scale of Goose to Mavrick, how bad would you kill chicoms in slavshit? (Yes i know you are a strike fighter)

>>32403117
Go the other way. Stealth on both sides came so effective that the only way to effectively fight is in the merge, pure dogfighting.

>>32403193

Unfortunately, with current HOBS all aspect IR missiles and IRST, the kind of gun-dogfighting people think of as dogfighting is unlikely to make a return. Neither aircraft will be able to make it to the merge.

>>32400755
I don't understand.

E-M is derived from

V - Velocity
T - Thrust
D - Drag
W - Weight

He even specifically mentions the F-35B and Eurofighter, so lets compare them on those four points.

Velocity - Eurofighter wins. Can supercruise, higher max speed.

Thrust - F-35 produces 28,000 lbf / 43,000 lbf (AB) Eurofighter produces 27,000 lbf / 40,500 lbf (AB) so similar, but F-35 edges it out.

Drag - F-35 is going to win this one, but depends entirely on the fit. Eurofighter with A2A flush mounts is extremely low drag.

Weight - F-35B is 32,300 lb empty. Eurofighter is 24,000 lb empty. MASSIVE difference.

I'm not buying it, honestly.

There is a place for developing a high-low approach to military acquisitions.

Something like the HAL Tejas while not high tech for the U.S. would always guarantee at least numerical superiority in the worst case scenario.

>>32398694
>25 years since the first Gulf War
>still falling for the Pierre Sprey meme

I'd be willing to forgive you for your image (which, by the way, includes AIM 7 missiles conveying the very BVR capability that you spreyshitter claim is useless) but it's a shitty resolution anyway so you can go and fuck yourself, pal.

>>32398773
Remember: your cause celebre is a 'light fighter' that's impossible to build, ineffective in combat, and a concept that's been ignored by
any air force worth its salt since the 1970s.

>>32399253
it's not about fitting in. It's about the fact that you fucks and your retarded ideas of air combat get disproven on a bi-daily basis in every fucking thread you start and still you come crawling back to this board spewing your outdated memes

>>32400509
>Energy-maneuverability theory is a well-established, effective method of designing fighters.

So? You realise that the F-35 was designed with that in mind, right (>>32400755)? And you realise that you can have all the energy in the world but that won't stop you getting fucked by a Meteor fired from BVR ranges by an aircraft you don't even realise exists?

>>32403868
EM theory is an equation, not simply a list of attributes. VTDW figures must all be applied to the equation (which is pretty complicated) to properly compare the two birds, something I doubt anyone on this Malayan abstract-expressionist art forum has the capability to do without having some sort of wind tunnel in the garage.

The equation is Ps = V(T-D/W) so if you want to have a go, by all means try

>>32403868
>I don't understand
>that comparison
>I'm not buying it
This is not how it works.

>>32403868

velocity's not an absolute. E-M done right gives you charts compared by turn rate, speed, and available G for a sustained and instantaneous turn rate.

>>32400138
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120219191244.htm

>>32404056
>still advocating for BVR after Vietnam

kek

>>32404327

>still thinking air combat is the same as it was 40 years ago.

>>32400138
You are incorrect, as you said famalam. That means you are from a poor socioeconomic background, while simultaneously being genetically predisposed to a below average intelligence quotient. You are quite certifiably incapable of making a well judged decision, "my nigga".

>>32404116
Right, but you can't overlay a chart of an aircraft with a far lower top speed and call it the same. That alone, across all three A/B/C versions would make me question how on earth the charts can be the same.

>>32404100
Feel free to refute any part of it, I clearly said I don't understand it.

>>32404376

you absolutely can.

>>32404389
>you absolutely can.

wat

one of the axis of an EM chart is literally speed.

If one aircraft goes up to mach 2+, and the other can't (Only even tested to Mach 1.6), the charts can't be the same.

>>32404327
Dude what? Do you realize that even in Vietnam the majority of kills were with missiles, and in modern combat, only 5% of kills are with guns, with the majority being BVR kills?

Come on man. Don't be that way.

File: Psycho Killer (qu'est-ce que c'est?).jpg (34KB, 350x309px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 350x309px

>>32404332
>thinking war...war ever changes

>>32399524
You do understand that radar is already so sensitive we use to measure wind at altitude. It actually does this by sensing bugs, birds, leafs and shit. Even old radar could pick up this stuff easily. Only thing that makes Stealth work is most people run filters on their Radar so they don't see a bunch of unintelligible crap.

Even still it's pretty easy to tune it to find even current stealth aircraft.

>>32404573
Epic filename is epic, going to have to listen to that now

>>32399789
Why nuclear treads? Fuck, watching Oppy beating people on the head with citations is like half the fun of this place

File: d0f708b6fad81d8162fe62a4ecb77c779c4e3f895524c3af42b559f632ee1e8c.jpg (18KB, 409x393px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 409x393px

>>32402423
Fucking hell man you got me.

>>32398694

Also nobody has fixed the Gun Port yet either.

20mm Gatling is OBSOLETE

You need an accurate af 30mm chaingun with a fire rate about the same as the one on the apache.

That greatly increases the leathality of the jet fighter because now they can engage a bunch of ground targets in addition to the bomb and missile payload they're carrying. It has a really nasty effect on enemy morale too and there's alot of damage that can be done to LAVs and technicals.

I wouldnt put it in A-10 tier but its worth saying if they're using the same ammunition, it can fuck up a tank just as good even if it takes a couple flybys to do it.

> 20mm gatling firing 50 round bursts from a 300 drum is deadly but thats like having 6 rockets.

> besides if you want air-to-air fuck-all the 14.5mm has more range and you can carry more ammunition, and dare-I-say a 50cal gatling would probably be even more efficient since 50cal still tears planes to pieces.

> but you only need to hit somebody once or twice with a 30mm, because those rounds explode, the 20mm just ignite

>>32398694
because dogfighting with people that live in mudhuts and their advanced air superiority fighters is such an important aspect to designing war planes nowadays

File: lmao batman.jpg (2KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x125px

>>32402406
>>32402423
>>32404741

> my sides hurt

>>32398694
I just want a literal working IRL Airwolf.

>>32404925
>I wouldnt put it in A-10 tier but its worth saying if they're using the same ammunition, it can fuck up a tank just as good even if it takes a couple flybys to do it.

Are you high or what?

>>32401571
Yeah, but SLBM's actually work

Seriously though, it's mind boggling how expensive and complex the Trident system is

>>32404925
The gun on the F-35 uses new ammo that make it more capable against many targets, and it uses some cool computer assisted targeting stuff that will allow it to engage ground targets from longer range

>>32404925
Guns are to planes what knives are to infantry.

It's a cheap, reliable backup for fringe situations that will never happen. (Side note: hurting enemy morale is what you do when you can't hurt the enemy...and then they catch on, so there's not even morale loss).

Modern jets kill tanks with 250lb or 500lb bombs; or Hellfire/Brimstone if it's fitted for that.

Using a gun is completely retarded because it puts you in golden BB range (if fighting mud huts) or or the SAM/MANPAD NEZ when fighting near-peer.

Use a CLT or pod to drop Hatchet/Pyros if you must, but guns...lol.

>>32401881
Nothing wrong with E-M theory except that it's the last quarter of the OODA loop.

Stealth and networking are the first three quarters.

>>32401645
Sprey had nothing to do with E-M theory. And all the actual work for quantifying E-M theory was done by Boyd's mathematician friend.

>>32401934
John Boyd's only attempt at actual doctrine, the Air Forces 4-ship formation was a failure. His actual track record is not particularly encouraging, and his work in "defense reform" and the Fighter Mafia further tarnishes a not-particularly exceptional record from the perspective of someone that isn't riding his dick.

>new design
>liquid-filled cockpit
>liquid-filled lungs
>oxygen-delivering & CO2-removing systems take place of respiration
>cockpit pressurized
>pilot now capable of pulling 25G+ turns without losing consciousness
>plane designed with extremely reflective exterior to withstand hypersonic thermal issues
>plane operates at Mach 25+
>plane armed with quad hypersonic autocanons
>plane carries no other weapons
>entire plane is kinetic kill vehicle
>leading edges made of folded osmium
>polarizing field run through osmium wingblades
>osmium leading edges are essentially indestructable

>>32407438
>The US can afford to field 1

>>32407526
>you only need one if it can be dominating airspace anywhere in the world only a few minutes after taking off from the center of the country
>we'll still field five or six just to be sure to always have one ready to go at a moment's notice
>it'll only double our debt

>>32407438
Shame it can't fly below 60,000 feet.

File: F-18.jpg (40KB, 632x361px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 632x361px

F-18 or F-35?

>>32408664
Now, Big Don is just memeing. F-18 CAN'T fill in for F-35 no matter how much Trudeau would want us to think so.
One day USAF will have to replace all these Vipers with something. And replacing them with Hornet is like buying Camaro for meter maids.

>>32408247
That would only be for over contiguous US.
even then miltary would just LOL BLOCK FL240-FL600 WE BUSY

>>32408664
Is this for real? I saw it on Reddit somewhere. If it's real he's a fucking retard. First of all, F-35 is already in production and in service. It's too late to just stop it. Second, buying modern superbugs would be just as fucking expensive as F-35s if not more expensive, and with much less capability.

>>32408664

This fucking idiot.

>>32410394

It's true alright

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/812061677160202240

File: 5716932+_60b1afa9b128e7ccefe698553652037e[1].jpg (63KB, 604x550px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 604x550px

>>32404573
>Implying it hasn't

>>32411341
He's actually being really smart by saying this. Lockheed is probably shitting themselves right now, because they know that shareholders will believe Trump and they'll lose stock value. Trump knows it too, so he can put pressure on Lockheed just with a simple tweet.

>>32399665
They'll end up as the b52s of the fighter world.

>>32411452

Lockheed isn't shitting themselves, the F-35 is too entrenched with it's suppliers and jobs in swing states to be cancelled. Even if Trump wants to, the Congressmen who stand to lose thousands of jobs in their district wont.

The shareholders for Lockheed are all investment groups/mutual funds, and they are smart enough to not take anything Trump says at face value. The people panic selling are dumb.

What this does do is create instability in the defense industry, which drives up the cost of everything as companies charge more money to hedge against instability.

>>32403799
what about lazors?

>>32411452
>Implying it's not economic fascism for the POTUS to be trying to have such heavy influence on the market just with random tweets

Fucking bullshit. Can't believe Trump has made the GOP go from being relatively pro free trade to being stupid authoritarians.

>>32399933
>>32399968
because radar is already at maximum technology wise. we can already see a bird flying on radar hundreds of miles away.

the problem with radar now is there is too much white noise. it cant get more specific. stealth pops up on radar but is often ignored as a fluke or natural phenomena because of its small signature