Can Boeing build a Super Hornet comparable to the F-35?

Considering the F-35 will likely be used exclusively as a parade pony and to play bomb truck to blast towel heads? Sure.

>>32417453

Hornet looks cooler. F-35 looks like an economy version of the F-22.

File: ed072cd7-1458-4819-8163-4c5cbbca275b.Full.jpg (2MB, 3360x2238px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3360x2238px

>>32417453
Look up the advanced Super Hornet.

>>32417828
It's just CFTs and a lower RCS weapons bay
Nowhere near a F-35

>VTOL

nope

>>32417453
No, I'm pretty sure Matthias and Flynn have already explained to him what's what in terms of development for the F-35. He's just using weaponized tweets to get better results he feels are owed.

Are we all forgeting that the f-35 loses in dogfights against the f-16? A super hornet would mop the fucking floor with an f-35.

>>32420431
>He's just using weaponized tweets to get better results he feels are owed.
I noticed, he used tweets to knock down both Boeing and LM in the span of a week

>>32420483
Are you forgetting the F-35 isn't yet in full production?
Or that it's a multi-role fighter?
Or that it's logistically hands down better?
Or that our allies buying them will drop the cost per unit?

Ultimately a finished and upgraded unit with ample experience was able to beat a work in progress in a simulation.

And that's a good thing, because the next one will be better and it will keep getting better over it's service life.

>>32417453
Shieeeeeet. Super means better.

>>32420431
He hasn't technically been briefed yet. When the head of the F-35 program was asked about Trump's statements, his response made it very clear that he "looked forwards" to briefing the president-elect.

>>32420483
>I'm retarded
It's ok, anon. You'll fit right in.

>>32417453
No they can't.
Trump just wanted Lockheed to crush in Wall Street and lose money. Good, they have been stealing for years.

Really, we need good dog fighting planes when the aliens attack, like in ID4.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ3ZN-AJ-fg

>>32417453
Yeah, it's called the F-18

>>32419649
>>32417828
>Nowhere near a F-35

cause it's actually flying.

>>32420634
The F-35 is combat ready. No advanced Super Hornet can match a F-35, the ASH is never going to see a working prototype.

>>32420679
>The F-35 is combat ready

And only 5 years behind schedule? Why haven't they been deployed yet?

Whether or not the F-35 is an effective weapon system is entirely irrelevant to the insurmountable cost overruns and delays. Lockheed milked this contract in a way that is criminal, using it to keep themselves alive in a post Cold War environment. At least with Boeing it is invested in the private sector so if it looses a contract they aren't boned for the next decade. Lockheed on the other hand lives on lobbying.

>>32420431
That would require going to briefings

File: 1481012450005.jpg (26KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 540x540px

>Trump talking shit he knows fuckall about
No wonder /k/ sucks his dick so much.

>>32417453
We don't need the F-35, stop talking like a Jew

>>32420702
Expect to see them this summer according to the conference the Air Force secretary gave today.

>>32420711
Which Flynn is giving him when he's visiting Mar-a-lago over the holiday.

File: ExceptionalJack.jpg (18KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x375px

>>32420742

>>32420431
>I have no basis for this but I'm going to believe it anyway
You know if it was an isolated incident, maybe, but you people need to stop apologizing for Trump's mistakes.

>>32420742
wew

>>32421032
Its not "apologizing" for anything, if you don't understand DJT's playbook by now that's pitiful.

File: 1458955597529.jpg (9KB, 250x235px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 250x235px

>>32421063
being completely insane and incompetent to.... Throw people off guard?

The more galling thought is that you actually believe he's a genuine article.

File: 1363210596944.png (68KB, 253x235px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 253x235px

>>32420742
damn

>>32421075
Except it's literally worked for him right into the presidency. Go ahead believe all his little tweets and hold them to truth all you want. It's talk, nothing more or less.

>>32421063
I understand that the average /k/ommando knows more about the F-35 and that's saying something.

File: silent.jpg (50KB, 773x465px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 773x465px

Abso-fucking-lutely. Look up the F-15E 'Silent Eagle'. Thing was a mod proposal that when they tested the trials were just as small of a radar size as the '5th Generation' F-22s. Moreover, those fuckers were proposed as mod-packs, letting pre-existing fighters get outfitted along with newly built models. Add some new engines, and voila. Modern fleet at a fraction of the cost.

The F-18 could sure as fuck do it too, and outperform the F-35's shitty little one engine compromise.

21A here, btw.

>>32421216
Here we go

>>32421233
Oh, no, someone who works on military aircraft for a living is now part of the argument....

>>32421216
>pre-existing fighters

Many of our airframes are getting old shit and they just need to be replaced, a replacement will be necessary and we have something that can replace our F-16's and F-18's that is is already in limited service. We can only take our existing aircraft so far.

>>32421216
>let's keep upgrading high-performance air frames

B52s or heuheus maybe but yank and bankers?

>>32421259
Nah, bitch. That ain't the fucking case.

Most aircraft are perfectly fine, as old aircraft go. What we fucking need are parts, not new planes.

Look at it the way of logic. Are you trying to change a mission, the criteria, or the payload? If you do, then expect a ridiculous cost into research and analysis with 200 prototypes made.

The aircraft in the fleet, despite the AF's OCD with red Xing anything, is in good health. What isn't in good health is spare parts, with only maybe 3-4 spare engines on hand. If they just built up the fucking stockpiles we'd be great.

>>32421281

And what currently is outperforming B-52s in the strategic bomber theater? Tell me any other bomber in existence able to carry 20 nuclear cruise missiles and launch them at any point in the world with only one tank of gas.

>>32421259
On top of that, there isn't one aircraft in the entire armed forces that is less than 85% non-original parts, and that's including the airframe into that equation; without that, it's more like 98%. They aren't playing with 'old aircraft' in that sense.

oh good god does the government just hate the airforce or something? next thing you know they'll get like 15 f18's and those will get canceled for more a10's and everyone in the air force will be saying all they wanted was more f35's to begin with

>>32421427
No, the Republican Party decided they hate the military equally as much as the rest of the government now.

>>32420634
Underrated post

>>32421299
You do realize that while it would be helpful to have more parts current aircraft's service lives are still a problem that we must deal with. Its not a short term issue, but its one we will have to deal with and we'd be better off with a new design rather than just building older models of aircraft with new equipment. That and disrupting development cycles generally isn't a good idea.

>>32421216
F-15SE rcs is comparable to the F-35 only with regards to the frontal aspect, and this comes from Boeing.

Both the F-16 and F-15 are superior to the F-18. Trump picked the F-18 out of a hat simply because it was the last 4th gen fighter thinking it is technologically more advanced which it is not. The F-16 and F-15 both did impressive ground attack duty in the Iraq wars whereas the bomb load of the F-18 is much less. The F-18 does not have as good sustained turning ability as either the F-16 or F-15.

We have to keep F-16s and F-15s and start over with a new fighter project. The USAF would be laughing stock of the world if it had just F-35s and F-22s.

>>32421604
>would be laughing stock of the world if it had just F-35s

Do you realize how many countries are buying F-35s? Also new project would easily take ten more years and hundreds of billions of dollars.

>>32421622
>Do you realize how many countries are buying F-35s?
yes, suprisingly a lot of euopean allies are willing to trade in their F-16s for F-35s. The F-35 did look good on paper, they just assumed that it would be good. It just happened to turn out to be a dud. The fact that EVERYONE misjudged how this plane would turn out doesnt mean we should go ahead with it.

>Also new project would easily take ten more years and hundreds of billions of dollars.
Defence contractors are so used to getting everyone they ask for with cost overruns its almost impossible now to have a realistic weapons program. So we'll see if Trump is seriously up to the job of negotiating a new fighter deal or if he will cave in on the F-35

>>32421299
>What we fucking need are parts, not new planes.
>4th gens falling out of the sky almost weekly now
You're an idiot.

>>32420571
we mega hornet now.

Oh man another thinly veiled Trump thread that will probably get linked on /pol/ so they can flood in and tell us about being retarded is 12d chess and how anyone who disagrees is CTR

>>32421604
>We have to keep F-16s and F-15s and start over with a new fighter project. The USAF would be laughing stock of the world if it had just F-35s and F-22s.
It's amazing how fucking stupid you are. F-15Es are staying in service, and F-22s are -35s are superior to everything they replace.

>>32421299

> Most aircraft are perfectly fine, as old aircraft go. What we fucking need are parts, not new planes.

You dumb motherfucker.

Do you literally not know what frame life is?

Do you know how expensive it is to fix frame fractures? It's so expensive that we never do it unless in extreme situations, like the C-5 wingbox shit.

>>32420679
The B model maybe, the A and C variants are no where near deployable ready. Th B is only where it's at because the Marines rushed it through T&E, expect lots of problems and crashes once more get delivered.

>>32421802
The A has already reached IOC.

>>32421802
The F-35A is in service with the 34th Fighter Squadron. Declared operational last August.

>>32421675
>I HAVE COMPLETELY UNJUSTIFIED OPINIONS EASILY DEBUNKED

>>32421798
>F-22s are -35s are superior to everything they replace.
gee, I wonder why production was stopped on the F-22 only after 200 airframes? Maybe the USAF doesnt want to get stuck with shit defective fighters

>>32421832
It was the first fifth generation fighter that was in service for over ten years before anything comparable was in service with any other country. They couldn't justify the need for it.

>>32417453
If it ain't Boeing I ain't going

>>32421832
You mean the short-sighted need for more MRAPs and a tight budget, right?

>>32420634
kek

Also what the fuck is with all the F35 shills? There is so much butthurt and bitching. "It's great guys, believe me. I'll read off all these facts I've read about it that are still just theory until actually tested" How can you be a fan boy for something that has been being dumped by a handful of your allies and still has done fuck all for you Americans other than suck up funds that could actually be used for bombing durkas?

>>32421800
>>32421773
>>32421525
These fuckin' geniuses trying to tell someone in aircraft maintenance they're retarded for making observations based upon their years of work on them.

Day /k/ in a fucking nutshell.

>>32422238
Who dumped it?

>>32422254
Aircraft maintenance has nothing to do with the development cycles. Also for someone in maintenance he some how managed to fail to recognize the problem that many of our existing aircraft's air frames will have exceeded their projected lifespans within ten to fifteen years. He is correct that in the short term a greater abundance of spare parts would solve many issues regarding the reliability and readiness, but this does not solve the issue that over stressed air frames will ground a great number (if not the majority) of aircraft in the coming decades. Additionally his claim that the F-15SE's rcs was comparable to the F-22 was misleading as Boeing has stated that its rcs is only comparable to fifth generations from the frontal aspect.

>>32422238
>I'll read off all these facts I've read about it that are still just theory until actually tested
We will also see how it does, test results were fairly promising but now we just need to see how it does doing the real thing. It entered full service this August with the 34th FS of the 388 Fighter Wing, we'll just have to see how it does.

Also Canada is the only country that has decided to not purchase the F-35.

>>32422238
How to tell someone isn't a /k/ regular.

>>32422368
>Also Canada is the only country that has decided to not purchase the F-35.
Technically no, the current government made campaign promises to cancel, but has been engaging in damage control to try to make it look like they are redoing the competition.

>>32422368
Yea, dumbfuck, the officer side also deals with the fucking acquisitions of maintenance as well. The frames aren't 'stressed'. The frames are continually refabricated after CPC applications, Corrosion run-throughs, Depot facilities and Phase inspections.There ain't a fucking part we don't inspect and monitor.

And so far, the new generation of aircraft have been sortie nightmares due to shitty facility management that can only apply stealth ram to 10% of the fleet steadily and pissing hydro like a motherfucker. And as radar goes, a fighter really only gives a shit about coming in. By the time they've come out, they've done the mission. I get that rear protection is a thing, but the cost-to-benefit ratio severly leans to renovated fleet rather than replace.

File: 1246405743285.jpg (122KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1024x768px

>>32420634
Top kek. Plus I would like to add that the F-35 is not being utilized to its full potential.

>>32422997
Boeing states an F-15 has a life time of about ~8000 flight hours, I know they low ball it as there are also 10,000 and 12,000 hour projections. The planes aren't meant to be flown indefinitely, look no further than the F-15 break up in '08. I know the navy also conducted a survey regarding cracks in their F-18's and programs to push their maximum amount of flight hours into the 10k range.

As the average age of the current fleet rises problems will follow, double so for fighters. We will reach a point when replacement becomes absolutely necessary.

Isn't it getting to the point you would just be better off with a drone like the x-47 sneaking up on enemy planes while manned planes control it and spam AMRAAMs at long range and have the drone guide them?

Same with CAS the manned aircraft can fly with 5 UCAVs and control them via datalink 50km away using their AESA.

File: 1465449269209.jpg (19KB, 320x323px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 320x323px

>>32417453
does Boeing have cognitive electronic warfare packages?

Nope, so the TLDR is that Boeing can't build a fighter that is in any way comparable to the F-35

>>32423111
Honestly the number of countries that even field modern airforces are almost all friendly to each other.

If we get to a point where modern fighters with competent pilots are going against similar opponents, we're going to be in a real nasty fucking place.

>>32422317
Canada, and there's been talks in Australia about the viability of the F-35, although it seems we're still buying it. I think Britain was starting to have doubts about it as well?

>>32423181
No way the Brits would drop, they'd end up with an aircraft carrier without planes

>>32423129
Even just for more mundane things 4th gen planes mixed with new drones would be better wouldn't they?

If you're bombing ISIS or someone the two seat fighter loiters at high altitude over safe areas, while the guy in the back seat orders the drones around without the lag and limited bandwidth satellite control does. If a drone breaks down and crashes no one cares much.

vs

5 F35s fly over land controlled by ISIS to bomb something, one has a mechanical failure and the pilot is forced to eject and is captured.

>>32423181
we haven't dumped it, what happened is that Stephen Harper had the bright idea of trying to hide the total cost, which created a lot of fuzz. Now the liberals have gone back on their promise to cancel the deal since we're still paying the fees necessary to stay in the program, but we've just had to re-start the new aircraft acquisition process. All signs (in my opinion) point to getting the F-35 since Trudeau has denied all claims that the project has been cancelled and is probably receiving a lot of flak from the Canadian aerospace community, which makes some parts for the aircraft.

TLDR: will most likely get the F-35 but it'll be delayed.

>>32423196
Funny enough, that's exactly what's going on right now, the Brits are gonna have USMC (I think?) F-35's on their ship as a stop gap while they wait for the rest of the fighters to be delivered.

>>32423217
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/09/usmc_will_fly_f35s_on_hms_queen_elizabeth_first_op_deployment/

source to confirm that the HMCS QE will have USMC aircraft

>>32423064
No, absolutely. Based upon the lifespan of the airframe, you are correct. However, we've basically changed out both the guts and skeleton of these aircraft that the 8K of flight hours isn't as measured to the T.

I'm definitely not saying these things don't eventually need replacement, though. This all came from someone scoffing at me mentioning mod-packs for already existent aircraft, even though building new ones was also my main point. I just seriously disagree with new aircraft that have only been a money sink-hole versus modified current airframes that are way more cost-effective and able to be produced in way higher numbers, which is far better for a global effort.
Same reason why I love JDAMs. They take cheaper bombs and apply some relative guidance to them. Unless you're doing a precision strike, that shit is perfect for semi-concentrated heavy bombing.

>>32422254
>One wrench monkey thinks he somehow knows better than the people in charge of aircraft procurement at DoD
Really makes you think, huh..

>>32423440
>One faggot on an internet forum board thinks he somehow knows more than someone who's been part of a Depot board working with the acquisitions functionals that report to the Pentagon.

Really makes you a fucking retard, huh....

>>32423450
Broofs?

>>32423532
No, I'm not going to throw my cac card or fuckin show you pictures or some shit. I don't have to prove that to some randy on the internet to win some stupid fuckin argument.

>>32423541
not him but
>I know more than you I have status and rank!
>but I won't prove it at all so you'll have to take me for my word

Well you based your argument around the fact that you have status, which you're unwilling to let others verify. You might as well not use said status and rank if you're going to rely on it and then not actually use it to it's full potential. Because you just put your back against the wall when it comes to actually comes to having an argument.

>>32423591
Because you're fucking nobody. I'm not going to give information to win some retarded fucking argument. Also, 'putting my back against the wall'? Do you really think the internet is that legit? Are you that lonesome?

21A3, been to Tinker, Minot, Barksdale, Anderson, Al Udeid and Travis AFB. Now you can continue to cry in the corner thinking you won an argument because someone's not retarded enough to throw their military information to win an internet fight.

>>32423591
>Because you just put your back against the wall when it comes to actually comes to having an argument.
I'll take keeping my job thanks

File: 6uUxOn5.png (240KB, 494x270px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 494x270px

>>32423601
>im nobody
welp, ya got me, but so are you if you don't want to prove who you are

bb there's no need to be butthurt. Im just saying that using rank and status then rescinding it when it gets questioned is not the proper way to argue. Im saying that actually engaging in the argument and using your knowledge actually shows how much you know rather than throwing hints that you know but never actually proving anything.

Also, I can use military jargon like cognitive warfare capabilities, AESA radar and read arabic. Again, you have done nothing to further your argument and just sound like you're too frustrated with the discussion to actually provide useful input.

Maybe reddit would be better for you, there you can have a cool username like "don'tquestionmyargumets69" to have people know you mean business.

>>32423612
my point is that he should never have used the fact that he has insider knowledge, it just makes him look weak when he's unwilling to prove it. Im more attacking the way he argues than the fact that he would get into shit for providing classified knowledge.

File: 1472440020447.png (104KB, 276x230px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 276x230px

>>32423601
awe, is mr important rustled because he doesn't have an argument?

>>32420679
>>32420702
The main gun still doesn't work, and isn't expected to be activated on production models for another 2-5 years.

>>32420576
Can't wait until they bring him into that conference room and spend hours explaining him why he's a fucking retard.

Hopefully he can get his head out of his ass at some point.

>>32423681
well does it missing a component mean it isn't combat ready or that it has reduced capabilities when contrasted to what a fully finished product is? Because those are two different things. Regardless of the gun not working, the F-35 is right now, able to be deployed and take part in combat according to the USAF and LM. That doesn't mean that it is finished, but that they "could" use it.

But im willing to hear what you have to say about the gun not working, especially since that's what you use to deem the aircraft not combat ready.

>>32420711
The man is too smart for briefings though

>>32417453

Why do we need all these different subsonic fighters? Why can't we build more F-22s instead?

>>32420634

you're absolutely right, the ASH is a drawing and the F-35 covers the flight line at Nellis and Edwards and Eglin.

>>32423706
I think he's trying to make LM reduce the prices more than anything. Which if that actually happens is amazing. However if it means that he has to get involved in every single deal it might not be too good considering he has a entire country to run. Then again this is just some actions he's taking while not in office.

>>32423723
Shit like that only works once or twice though. Trump is used to always dealing with new businesses, so he can use the same tricks over and over. Heck, he did the exact same thing a week ago to Boeing over the new Air Force One. People are catching on, and catching on quick.

>>32423761
it could work right before he takes office. He's probably picking the last few contracts or deals that he'll negotiate in person before he becomes president. After that he'll have to delegate those tasks to others who might not get as much publicity or influence as him.

>>32423778
After seeing his cabinet picks I'm not feeling too hopeful on that.

Also, wasn't his ability to make deals the whole point of electing him?

>>32417453
>comparable to the F-35?
slow, non-maneuverable, and hogs all the budget? Yes, I think Boeing is capable of doing that as well

>>32424314
Sprey please leave.

>>32424372
Neither SH or 35 is super maneuverable or can supercruise, so only thing Boeing would need to do anymore is start devouring $$$$ and not deliver anything functional on time to make SH comparable to F-35

>>32417453
They can try, which is victory enough in itself. Imagine the fire that's going to light under the collective ass of Lockheed Martin.

>>32423710
And, most importantly, it has integration of the weapons it needs for normal low-intensity ops. Guns are pretty low-priority there.

>>32423761
Trump actually ended up having to pay more on construction projects long-term because everyone he ever dealt with knew he was going to try to fuck them and weasel out of paying what he owed. And the ones who tried to underbid got fucked and joined the ranks.

>>32421241
>>32421216
>>32421233
LOOK AT MY ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE GUIZE LOOK LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK! Yet a fucking gain you shitlords post about things none of you can understand.

>>32423713
True, honestly all the other presidents and world leaders getting briefed on everything is just a sign of stupidity

>>32423790
Yeah, but you're assuming 90% of his platform wasn't bullshit lies

>>32425514
>Yet a fucking gain

I posted before last night. I showed that the aircraft's service lives will be coming to an end in a little over a decade and that the upgrade replacements are poor substitutes for fifth generation aircraft while still costing just as much. All of my information came from the manufacturer.