http://www.nationalreview.com/artic le/443612/f-35-donald-tr

national review is fake news
never post it again

>>32561111
>implying the F-35 will even be used in the 2nd American Civil War

>>32561111
Because hes actually wrong and it's already been paid for. Fuck off.

>nationalreview

reminder, they endorsed !Jeb!

>>32561111
>/pol/

go and stay go

>>32561111
Back to your nazi hugbox

>>32561132
>already been paid for

Then why is LockMart asking for more money to continue the program?

>>32561111
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2017/01/03/mattis-backs-f-35-stealth-fighter-criticized-trump/

Why is a POS like the Donald still allowed to exist?

>>32562872
>Getting payment for each production stage contract is "asking for more money"
Spreyfags, everyone.

>>32561111
>we should just buy the T-50 lol

>>32562890
Don't you realize why he picked Mattis? Because Mattis knows shit that Trump doesn't and Trump knows that Mattis has the balls to tell Trump he's wrong. Trump doesn't want a bunch of spineless Yesmen. Hell, half his cabinet disagrees with him on a lot of things.

>>32563128
>Nearly all of his cabinet picks are alt-right or yes-men
>Hurr no yes-men

If you really believe what you said I have a bridge to sell you.

>>32563197
I like how you didn't actually argue his point.

>>32562890
>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2017/01/03/mattis-backs-f-35-stealth-fighter-criticized-trump/
>Trump proven wrong again
>Trumpfags will pretend this didn't happen because they know Mattis doesn't read 4chan or twitter
>tfw they can't just harass him with shitposting for daring to disagree with their Glorious Leader

>>32563225
Yeah it's practically conservative.

Read in a blog that the F-35C will need to be redesigned for failure on takeoff.

>taxpayers have to pay for a company fucking up and going overtime and overbudget

>>32561111
Checked

>>32561295
No shit? The national review is a publication for conservatives, not neoprotectionist demagogues.

>>32563819
They only want to change the landing gear.

>>32561111
Wow! This thread is a shitshow! I remember before the election when /k/ used to have F35 hate threads nonstop. Now we have to politicize everything huh? I honestly expected more maturity and rationality here

The JSF project should have been nixed years ago. Now we've sunk so much into it that we might as well keep shoveling money into LockMart's bottomless maw. Might as well get something workable for our money right? We've paid for it up until now.

Also, checked. Nice quads

>>32563978
>The JSF project should have been nixed years ago.
>I'm retarded and want everyone to know!
At least you don't have a trip on.

>>32563128
>Trump doesn't want a bunch of spineless Yesmen.
Then why has he staffed every post except SecDef with them?

>>32564014
Start arguing anytime bro

>>32564065
Have something worth arguing against first.

>>32563978
>I remember before the election we use to have F-35 hate threads

Lol no. /k/'s majority switched sides around 2013 when it became apparent that the F-35 would turn into a great aircraft and that all the complaints were merely teething issues.

But it's ok, cry CTR and say it's because we hate Trump. It won't make you any less wrong.

>>32564055
?

>>32564319
For all the money they've spent it was mediocre then & it's still mediocre now.

>>32564319
>But it's ok, cry CTR and say it's because we hate Trump. It won't make you any less wrong.
I never understand this part anyway. I've been called "CTR shillbot" whatever here for saying that some(well, alot) of Trumpy's Tweets are either stupid or wrong, and i fucking voted for the guy.
By that logic, Mike Pence is a CTR shill for being critical of Trump during the whole "grab'em by the pussy"-episode, and he's the fucking VP

>>32564593

except that it's not. talking with my former Weapons Officer who's flying it, he says it's got a lot of promise but awkward HOTAS.

>>32564600
Mattis is also CTR for backing the F-35. What a shill. SAD!

>>32564617
Fucking CTR man. They are everywhere!

>>32563197
>hurr alt-right
Prove it or >>>tumblr you fag

>>32563277
Still not arguing the point. Is that because you're wrong and deflecting like liberals always do?

>>32563819
It's not failing, at light takeoff weights (eg, no weapons, <50% internal fuel), the jet's nose bounces up and down a lot as its being catapulted. The jet doesn't mind, but the majority of pilots are experiencing a 3/5 on a pain scale (some rated 2/5, some rated 4/5, one rated 5/5). That pain and the shaking also causes some disorientation. It's unlikely to effect normal operations, but who knows, maybe they'll need to launch a jet light on fuel for a quick response one day.

They've (for now) ruled out replacing the nose gear and are instead looking at 3 stages of fixes:

1. Short term (next couple of months), write new SOPs that tell pilots to look out for it and how to better brace themselves and lessen any pain.

2. Mid-term (ideally before SDD is finished), they want to make the HMDS have a new mode for launching, so when they catapult, the amount of information displayed is extra-minimal and just focuses on orientation, etc.

3. Long term (by some point in Block 4), they want to adjust the geometry / positioning / release-force of the hold-back bar, which connects to the nose gear and holds the jet from moving until the catapult's steam has enough pressure to yank the nose gear from the hold-back bar. Because the shaking is a matter of oscillation and resonance, changing the starting point of the oscillation can inhibit it.

>>32564604
Being from an aircraft that has more than one operational seat, he'd be unaccustomed to flying side-stick. Guys coming from the F-16 find it familiar.

>>32564799

replicating the F-16 HOTAS is a stupid idea mainly because the F-16 kludges its way into modern avionics. thanks Boyd!

>>32564810
It doesn't replicate it, it just has some similarities, one of which is being side stick. Overall, the majority of pilots that are going to fly the F-35 and have flown fighters before, will have flown F-16s.

>>32564843

not talking about stick position, but "press these combinations of buttons to do this. oh wait, you want to do this which is intuitive and easy in the Strike Eagle? TOO BAD, VIPER DRIVERS." there are much better ways of transferring JDAM coordinates than the Viper's kludge which is apparently still living on in the F-35. with a new jet like this, you should take the parts of each jet's setup that make the most sense. unfortunately the noisy majority of Viper drivers will likely dictate it.

>>32561111
what kind of "Jezebel" article are you reading, OP?

>>32564860
What actions require using combinations on Viper?

>>32561295

They endorsed Ted

>>32564799
Kind of stretching the definition of "not failing" if some pilots are experiencing 5/5 pain and disorientation on takeoff. Kind of a critical period.

I'd call that a failure of design.

>>32565444

it is a design problem but it isn't really an actual problem that would effect flight ops because it only happens in very specific circumstances(taking off with no weapons and very little fuel) that aren't exactly likely to occur in actual service

thinking this means the F35C fails at catapult take-off is like saying the F-14 couldn't do carrier landings just because it would suffer a compressor stall if yaw'd exessively during landings

>>32561125
Fake news is a liberal buzzword that they use when describing conservative news.The article seems more like a journalist giving an extremely opinionated review of events than dishonest news. He explains why he thinks the plane is shit and it all reads like a debate opening.

I'm inclined to agree that the f-35 program is shit. I think everyone knows that. But I also think that we're too far gone and will simply have to live with what we've got instead of starting over. China and Russia will catch up even more if we start again.

The next fighter is going to start development a lot earlier and be a lot more efficiently developed, that's for sure.

>>32561111
>Why is a POS like the F-35 still allowed to exist?
because when you've dumped that much money into it, you absolutely have to get something out of it.

but i guess that concept isnt clear when your income comes from an allowance your parents give you

Fuck the F-35, Trump should adopt the PAK-FA.

>>32565575
Why, the pak-fa is shit teir whos only merit is cost.

>>32565614
It's gonna beat the F-35 in an air to air fight.

Jack of all trades, master of none.

>>32564799
Is there any realistic circumstance were an f-35 would be taking of from a carrier with out full tanks?

>>32565625
The actual quote is "A jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one."

But wouldn't expect you to know that, retard

>>32565687
It's definitely not better in this case.

A multi-role is good for mass-producing concept, but hi-low mix is a better strategy.

>>32565707
>It's definitely not better in this case.

Do tell us why, anon

Be sure to rely on facts

>>32565546
>The next fighter is going to start development a lot earlier and be a lot more efficiently developed, that's for sure.
Gonna need some proof on that boyo

>>32565715
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-300309-1.html

>>32565730
>ausairpower

I said facts, anon.

>>32565730
>ausairpower.net

Might as well just said you didn't know what the fuck you were talking about to begin with, would have saved us all some time

>>32565740
How is that not...fact?

>>32565746
Care to elaborate?

>>32565753
First of all, literally none of it is sourced despite apparently knowing the exact ranges and RCS aircraft and sensors.

Secondly, its written as a "my dad can beat up your dad" piece

Take this:

>The AIM-120D is a fine missile, but the Su-35-1 has finer defences, so the missile kill probabilities are likely to be low.

What an enlightening and conclusive sentence, well thought out, with a conclusion based on evidence and reasoning. Not at all "this is wot i fink"

TL;DR fuck off and never post aus air power shite again

>>32565687
I guess I shouldn't expect you to know that it's a figure of speech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_of_all_trades,_master_of_none

And by the way, you are completely wrong about the origin of the phrase. It started as Johannes factotum ("Johnny do-it-all") and the "master of none" part came later. It's a dismissive phrase, used famously by Robert Greene in his 1592 booklet Greene's Groats-Worth of Wit, in which he dismissively refers to actor-turned-playwright William Shakespeare.

That last part you mention, "...but oftentimes better than a master of one." is a rare and late addition to the phrase that never caught on. When someone merely says "jack of all trades" whether it is positive or negative is dependent on context. It becomes negative automatically when "master of none" is added.

And that is what anon did add. You didn't make yourself look smart with what you just said. You made yourself look like someone searching (and failing) to find a counter argument in a person's fucking grammar.

>>32565798
Oh shit you looked up something on wikipedia, good for you

thats never wrong at all and always accepted in academic papers for that exact reason

>>32562927
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-02/lockheed-s-f-35-said-to-need-500-million-more-for-development

>The Pentagon will need as much as $530 million extra to finish the development phase for Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35, the most expensive U.S. weapons system ever, defense officials said.

>While the added $530 million would be a fraction of what’s already a $55 billion development phase, Frank Kendall, the undersecretary of defense for acquisition, said in an e-mail that he was “disappointed to hear that additional funds would be needed”

>>32565770
[1] Radar Parameters

Radar Cross Sections cited (X-band):
F-22A Front Aspect = 0.0001 m2, Side and Rear Aspect = 0.01 – 0.001 m2 (0.005 used in this analysis);
F-35A Front Aspect = 0.001 m2, Side and Rear Aspect = 0.01 m2;
PAK-FA All Aspect = 0.01 m2;
Su-35-1 Front Aspect= 2 m2.

Radar Range Figures used are:
F-22A APG-77 = published figures (AW&ST - pessimistic);
F-35A APG-81 = published figures (AW&ST - pessimistic);
PAK-FA IRBIS-E N035 Best Case published figures (Tikhomirov NIIP);
Su-35-1 IRBIS-E N035 Worst Case published figures (Tikhomirov NIIP)

[2] Boyd Cook, PIRATE: the IRST for Eurofighter TYPHOON, Proc. SPIE, Vol. 4820, 897 (2003), URL: http://spiedl.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=
PSISDG004820000001000897000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes

[3] Boeing F-15SE ‘Silent Eagle’. This low-signature version of the F-15 Eagle was assessed during the compilation of this NOTAM. Its radar cross section, while claimed to be comparable to the export configuration of the F-35 from nose-on is likely to be substantially inferior from other aspects. Its infrared signature will be similar to the standard F-15 Eagle. Thus, the PAK-FA using radar will detect the Silent Eagle at a range sufficient to launch BVR missiles and at similar or greater ranges to the F-35 for infrared-based engagements. Flying wide sweeps and distributing sensor detections as is done for the legacy Sukhois will enhance radar detections and enable IRST ranging. The advantage the F-15SE Silent Eagle has over the F-35 JSF is that it has the aerodynamic performance and fuel reserves to egress from a dangerous air combat engagement.

>>32565825
"Published Figures" isn't a source, nor is writing something you claim again in the sources section.

Honestly, they should just kill the F-35. Last time we had an acquisition program that was over budget, behind schedule, had foreign cooperation, and was stuffed full of bleeding edge tech, we killed it and things worked out just fine. That program was the MBT-70, and taking what we learned from that gave us the M1, and Germany the Leo.

>>32565873
F-35 is already in service, MBT-70 never left prototype stage.

>>32563965
>Jeb
>conservative

Lel

>>32565889
In service while still in development? Who's bright idea was that?

>>32565857
They list to websites and shieeet dawg.

>>32565915

Wew child. Read a book.

>>32565912
This is the shit that bothers me. By the standards of today Reagan would be a bleeding heart Democrat. How long until people like Scalia or Ted Cruz aren't considered conservative?

>>32561111
>still allowed to exist?
One single reason: L-M awarded at least one major contract in each and every US state, thus getting senators blackmailed to support flying pork.

The rest, like "stealth", is just excuses.

Only the most naive will believe otherwise.

>>32565933
The X-32 was total garbage

>>32565808
>>While the added $530 million would be a fraction of what’s already a $55 billion development phase
Ah yes, the "sunk cost fallacy".

Works every time.

>>32565921
By the standard of today, Reagan would be a fascist nazi for funding all the anti-commie activities in the world and helped the brits in Falklands.

>>32565941
>antigun
>anti nuclear proliferation
>pro amnesty for illegal immigrants

>>32565444
Besides what >>32565538 said, it was only a single pilot on a single launch that experienced the 5/5.

>>32565670
I've asked a USN Rhino driver, but he hasn't gotten back to me yet.

>>32565938
While it's still extra money, it's worth noting that about half the $530m has nothing to do with F-35 testing issues or delays; some of it is due to new testing (like the new F-35 vs A-10 trial, as well as the additional cyber testing requested by Gilmore), and some of it is money that was taken from the test program budget for other programs, but is needed back again.

>>32565825
I'd argue that the F-35's frontal aspect RCS is lower than 0.001m^2, but we're talking about APA anyway...

>>32565962
That's standard for modern conservative too.

>>32566116
>it's worth noting that about half
And such begins most excuses for overruns.

Moreover it does not even have to be true, we only have L-M's word for this. Get GAO to look into it, now.

And more money now after all these years? Totally unlikely they "discovered" this just now.

>>32566192
Better call Trump.

>>32564989

the Strike Eagle's way of attacking ground targets makes a lot of sense compared to the Viper's where you don't transfer in JDAM lat-longs until you hit the pickle button. the Strike Eagle allows you to transfer in coordinates at any time and you can literally edit coordinates inside the weapon.

>>32565444

i've only taken off without being fully fueled up in a military aircraft once in my life, and that was because we had a cross-country situation with specific limitations on our timing which didn't allow us to burn extra fuel via our normal methods (higher throttle settings, lower altitude, etc.)

so a low fuel weight cat shot isn't really relevant except in "the boat is sinking launch the fleet" scenarios... at which point you've got bigger concerns than your neck.

>>32566192
>demand more tests
>dont want to pay for them

Get out.

>>32566211
Mattis already said he is fully behind the F-35.

>>32566192
>we only have L-M's word for this.
We have the Pentagon's word.
>Totally unlikely they "discovered" this just now.
It wasn't and Congress was forewarned of this when they were talking about adding the additional testing.

>>32563197

Trump's picks AREN'T alt-right and certainly aren't yes-men. Jeff Sessions is considered mainstream conservative. SecState is very highly regarded among CEOs and not associated with ideology of any kind, other than being a mainstream Republican. Mattis's biggest qualification is his very high reputation among the troops.

So far among conservatives, the big news is that the cabinet picks don't include any alt-right guys, are all highly regarded mainstream conservatives. Hence why the Ted Cruz faction is lining up behind Trump now (warily).

Very few served in the Bush administration, but that shouldn't surprise anyone.

>>32566246
>compared to the Viper's where you don't transfer in JDAM lat-longs until you hit the pickle button.
I don't know how it works on F-15E, but on F-16A MLU you only need a single steerpoint, which can be preplanned on DTC, or created with radar, targeting pod, HMCS or through datalink. I see no problems here.
>the Strike Eagle allows you to transfer in coordinates at any time and you can literally edit coordinates inside the weapon.
You can also edit steerpoint coordinates or create new steerpoint on F-16.

>>32563128
Are you outside your fucking mind? Trump is notorious for picking yes men. Hell, he might not even stick with Mattis: word is he wanted to choose his own undersecretaries, but they're giving him a bunch of Trump sycophants and golfing buddies.

Trump doesn't want people to argue with him, he wants his minions to fight for his attention by yelling at each other.

>>32566349
Yes, which is why his picks are actually powerful CEOs and generals, leaders of their respective fields.

So much yes-men.

>>32566362
What are you basing that on? We have multiple people who've worked with or for him and they all say the same thing.

>>32566393
Basing on his actual picks?

>We have multiple people who've worked with or for him and they all say the same thing.
Source?

>>32566349
>golfing buddies.
how do you think business gets done in this country? do you think it happens in the boardroom? is that what you think?

>>32566346

not saying you can't drop a JDAM from a Viper, but it's much less elegant than a Strike Eagle. and you can't transfer the coordinates into the bomb itself until you hit the pickle button due to how the Viper is mech'd. it's a kludge.

>>32566431
>you can't transfer the coordinates into the bomb itself until you hit the pickle button due to how the Viper is mech'd.
What is difference in transferring coordinates during release and before that?

>>32566470

1. better systems readbacks during BOC. i've caught errors and fixed them that way.
2. better understanding of BOC/BOT and designation source
3. if it comes down to it, you can edit the coordinates in the bomb more easily
4. you can target multiple DPIs on a single pass
5. you can ensure that a DMPI is serviced with bombs that are spaced around the DMPI, and that all bombs are referenced to the same DMPI but striking different points

>>32566349
>Trump is notorious for picking yes men.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true

How should Lockheed be penalized for exceeding budget?

>>32566564

by eating costs for delays and additional testing that GAO/other oversight agencies say are due to poor developmental practices.

which is pretty much what their contract is right now.

>>32565546
This article was shilled on /xcg/ by some faggot claiming the writer was his friend.

His friend's credentials include an engineering B.S. and a couple of articles that are just as awful, but I digress.

The program's issues can be largely blamed on congress since they kind of pulled the rug out from under people once it became clear we were going to be short a bunch of F-22s and the F-35 would need to fill the gap.

If you want a "more efficiently developed" program, make sure old fucks like McCain never get a say in military affairs again.

>>32565546
>Fake news is a liberal buzzword that they use when describing conservative news.
No, it was referring to made-up shit that swarmed the internet to feed off conservative gullibility for ad cash. You fucks just got offended about it and did a lame "NO YOU'RE FAKE NEWS!" backlash.

>>32565920
>Wew child. Read a book.
Rather than go checking facts.

This has been a public info message from L-M.

>>32566253
>>demand more tests
>>dont want to pay for them
Try reading again. Not all is about test. Test is not development more than peace is not war.

>>32566914
Here's the proper figures, he has a point, but you're correct as well:
>Half of the $530 million sum will help cover unforeseen issues such as the 2014 engine fire and this year’s delay in testing 3F software, both of which added to schedule risk and cost, DellaVedova said. About $165 million will pay for new requirements that cropped up over the past few years, and $100 million will cover funding that was removed from the F-35 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program budget line two years ago.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/f-35-program-office-seeking-an-extra-530m-to-wrap-up-development

File: AIR_F-22A_Fort_Worth_Air_Show_LMCO_lg.jpg (71KB, 1024x731px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1024x731px

We could have built 10,000 F22s for the cost of the F-35 program. It's a little depressing.

Can we post F22s instead?
https://youtu.be/xh49qn2cQNU

File: 5zhyk3.jpg.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>32567018
>Build 3x as many planes that are twice as expensive and do a lot less for the same total cost

>>32567018
>Buy 10,000 F-22s
>Don't have any money left over to even pay someone to fuel one of them

>>32567047
F22s can fight, F35s can't even run away let alone fight.

>>32567018
People like you voting and breeding is the reason western society is crumbling

>>32567018
F-22s are about $60k/hr (from 2012, in 2012 dollars) and have a lifespan of 8000 flight hours.

A fleet of 10,000 F-22s would cost $4.8 trillion to operate over their lifespan, in 2012 dollars. The F-35 fleet in comparison is expected to cost $598 billion to operate in 2012 dollars.

https://fas.org/man/eprint/F35-sar-2016.pdf#page=90

>>32567086
F-35s can target stealth aircraft using IR at BVR ranges and use helmet mounted displays to lock on at any angle. It's also previously demonstrated the ability to jam an F-22's radar.

The F-22 is better against 4th gens no doubt, but put several of each against one another (even better, put an equal $$$ amount of each against one another) and the F-35s will stand a decent change at winning.

>>32564319
>Lol no. /k/'s majority switched sides around 2013 when it became apparent that the F-35 would turn into a great aircraft and that all the complaints were merely teething issues.

/thread

>>32564799
Question: have they tested it on EM yet? It offers a gentler, more controllable launch than steam.

Is it possible that the problem won't even occur on new carriers?

File: complaints.jpg (91KB, 569x629px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 569x629px

>>32561111
You've been spamming this shit on /pol/ for the past week in /ptg/. Knock it off.

>>32566489
The F-35 can't assign multiple bombs to a pattern?

Shouldn't that be a software fix? Could that already be scheduled for a later release?

>>32567482

the Viper can't. maybe because the only carry a few JDAMs nobody bothered to think about doing that.

not sure if the F-35 can, but apparently transferring coordinates is awkward. and it's absolutely a software fix. which is the whole point of this part of testing - end user feedback like that stupid control laws "it lost to a F-16 in a dogfight" bullshit.

>>32567505
Air MRSI is going to become more practical as SDB1/2 become more widespread. I would hope that they are already looking into this.

>>32567119
>F-35s can target stealth aircraft using IR at BVR ranges
Cite, please.

>>32568313
PIRATE can detect aircraft at BVR ranges.

Unless you think EOTS/EODAS can't compete with a system that entered service in 2007.

>>32563921
at this point LM is pretty much a welfare queen that basically receives guaranteed income from the feds whether they actually produce anything or not.
they are merely paid to exist.
if the government ever actually gets anything from them, we'll that costs extra

>>32565546
>.The article seems more like a journalist giving an extremely opinionated review of events
that's all the National Review seems to do, and that's not news, it's an editorial
I can maybe concede an editorial is journalism, but it's not news

>>32568548
nice meme champ

>>32565625
when the fuck are we ever going to have an air-to-air fight?

>>32564600
it's a meme that has gone too far

That thing is a national embarrassment like its sponsor, John McCain. It's nothing but a loud, belching, POS. It won't protect the US from anything.

File: 1478141499540.jpg (7KB, 224x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 224x225px

>>32568660
I know this is bait, but McCain isn't a sponsor.

As a matter of a fact, the only thing the old senile fuck does anymore is complain about the F-35, fuck up other defense projects, and pretend like he's an authority on warfare when he's decades behind the curve.

>>32563921
LM has had to eat any cost overages since LRIP4, dumbass.

>>32568571
Accenture uses the same business strategy and they are doing pretty well.

>>32569138

Is there a comprehensive list of defense projects that have died because of McCain's retardation?

>>32568489
>PIRATE can detect aircraft at BVR ranges.

What happens if it is cloudy though?

>>32568489
In theory. In practice, IR search systems are too slow to be useful and are primarily useful only for tracking targets that have been localized with other sensors.

>>32570163
Sure, the old narrow FOV telescope-based ones. The EO-DAS is a wide FOV constant 360x360 system.

>>32569239
no

File: THE FUCK.jpg (53KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1000x500px

>>32561111
Why does National Review still think anyone reads them, or that Donald Trump should treat that publication with any kind of friendliness or respect?

Literal fucking traitors to the people and to the party. Neocon trash.

>>32571183

EODAS has fairly poor resolution.

It's claimed to be near "20/20", which is only 1 MOA.

That gives a "pixel size" of about 30cm/km, and that size gets eaten up awfully fast.

At 10 km, each pixel would be 3 meters across, and that's not acceptable resolution. A Su-27 is about 15 meters long, so you'd have to do target identification on 15-20 pixels in a best case scenario. 10km is knife-fight range for modern fighters, and detection from that range is way too late.

It's useful as a tool to catch incoming missiles and give the pilots more situational awareness, but I would not expect it to be able to detect and identify enemy aircraft from more than 10km. It might cue the pilot that something might be out there, and let the pilot take a look with the APG-81 or IRST.

>>32573560
And then if the pilot's not actively using the EOTS, it can auto-slew it to improve imagery and targeting.

>>32573560
How did they track a Falcon 9 launch from Alabama, with that little resolution?

File: l0Pu1pm[1].jpg (1MB, 2584x3317px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2584x3317px

>>32573560
Native resolution is even lower than that; it either uses 1k or 4K sensors, which would correspond to 20m or 5m wide pixels at 10km.

As the other guy said though, EOTS has a resolution far better due to it using long range optics and will automatically scan the horizon, etc if it's not being actively tasked. With multi-ship fusion, that also means that in a typical 4-ship, you'd have multiple of these things scanning, all feeding into one virtual computer.

DAS itself also doesn't necessarily need to be able to see the shape of a target; it can determine whether it's looking at a plane or a missile or stationary heat source with a single pixel, and from there, other things like ESM will be able to provide data on whether that pixel is a friendly or enemy aircraft, while DAS continues to provide an azimuth and elevation.

Also, another thing they're doing with the DAS is microscanning, which provides sub-pixel resolution - see pic.

>>32574092
DAS is extremely sensitive.

>>32574213
Isn't the EOTS sensor located on the underside of the nose? Would it mostly be look down/shoot down? How many degrees above the horizon can it scan?

File: eots.webm (1MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x360px

>>32574251
Above the horizon, it's 15 deg IIRC; that may not sound like much, but the F-35's standard operating altitude is around 40,000ft; at 23km, the EOTS will see targets at 60,000ft, at 50km, it'll see targets as high as 84,000ft, at 100km, 128,000ft. More if you account for the curvature of the Earth.

Trump's opposition to the F-35 makes perfect sense, now that we know he's a Manchurian Candidate for the Russians.

It's only natural the Russians want the US military weaker.

>>32574536
we realistically can't get weak enough for the russian military to do anything of worth.

if they stopped ass raping each other and drinking cologne on the other hand

>>32564661
Prove what? You're just going to pull the "well yeah they agree 100% with the positions of self-identified alt-righters, but they never called themselves alt-right so they don't count" meme.

>>32574552
>we realistically can't get weak enough for the russian military to do anything of worth.
The exception here is nuclear policy, and Trump wants us to expand and modernize our nuclear forces.

>>32574629
The term "alt-right" is an invention of the Left and the corporate media, and the primary public figures who identify as "alt-right" are pure controlled opposition. Using the term is an immediate signal to discard your opinion as you're either working in bad faith or from bad information.

>>32574647
Our forces are the most advanced in the whole world and we already have programs in place to replace them when they are phased out. Our capabilities are unmatched.

The "nuke gap" has been used so many times in the past that it is shameful that people still fall for it.

>>32574653
>The term "alt-right" is an invention of the Left and the corporate media
Wrong. The term was created by Richard Spencer, it just didn't enter public awareness until the 2016 election. And yes, that may be partially due to the left emphasizing the term to conflate Trump supporters with neo-Nazis, this is really the first election in which people self-identifying as "alt-right", and expressing views associated with the alt-right.

>>32574647
still though could you imagine a nuclear attack from russia?

>russia launches 100 nukes
>10 catastrophically explode on launch
>70 get lost due to stolen guidance systems
>another 10 hit US soil but fail to detonate because the nuclear packages were sold as scrap (several thousand cases of radiation poisoning were identified)
>9 more were pointed at Turkey by confused russian soldiers
>and the last one made it into dangerously low earth orbit

>russian media depicts the US in flames using stock photos with the "getty images" waterstamp crudely photo shopped out

>a million threads of "america BTFO, how will they recover?" posted here

>>32574695
Russia doesn't even have a complete orbital launch detection system.

>>32561111

Opinion piece by someone unqualified.

Lets cancel it and do next two decades way more obsolete 4th generation fighters.

>>32574657

US nuclear forces have been under invested since end of cold war. Only up to date delivery system is Trident.

Minuteman have been kept with minimal updates. LGM-118 Peacekeeper was retired by naive idiots. AGM-129 was retired.