I have a question /k/ Preferably one that won't inspire

The best

F-35 is so sophisticated that it has IR Jammers and other electronic countermeasures that use lasers to fry the eye of an IR missile. Not only that but it also carry anti IR missile missile, these home onto missiles that uses IR.

China does not have anything to counter it.

>>32700772
MANPADS have a short range. Compared to it's predecessors in the ground attack role, the F-35 can strike accurately from a much larger distance. Other features aside, this gives a great deal of protection.

>>32700772
I don't think manpads are a serious threat to any modern jet.

They DO fuck choppers and any other low flying stuff pretty good though.

File: ThNDR Laser.png (489KB, 1895x1898px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1895x1898px

>>32700772
MANPADS have a range of generally 3-15km and often cannot intercept supersonic targets and/or targets above ~15,000ft. For most western fast-jets using PGMs, MANPADS aren't much of an issue.

As far as IR in general, the F-35 has flares, and it has a skin + coatings that minimise its IR signature (the composite resins insulate and reduce the amount of heat leaking out, the carbon fiber / nanotubes in the composite spread any heat that does form across the skin of the jet, reducing the probability of hot spots.

For defence against improving IR missiles (primarily those carried on other aircraft), they're looking at integrating directed infrared countermeasures (IR lasers for blinding missiles), though such an upgrade hasn't been scheduled yet and may not come for quite some time.

Pic is of a Northrop Grumman self-funded prototype for the F-35.

Otherwise there's also programs like MDSM (Miniature Self Defense Missile), which is a USAF initiative to produce micro-missiles that can be used to take out incoming missiles, as well as other fighters nearby. Such missiles may even be launched from countermeasure bays (from the same place as the flares / chaff, or the decoy-jammer bay), rather than use up dedicated missile hardpoints / rails.

>>32700822
>anti IR missile missiles
Maybe focus on getting something other than a fucking AMRAAM to launch first

>>32700998
>Micro missile swarms for self-defense against missiles and fighters

While this does give me an erection I can't help but imagine the headache of avoiding friendly fire with them.

>>32700998
So, in reference to the Nork thread (>>32700101) would you think that the F35 would have basically complete freedom to operate? The RCS should make fixed radar based SAM sites useless, right?

But Apaches and shit are still fucked?

>>32701033
Assuming they don't receive high-end goodies from their neighbour, that is very likely to be the case.

I'm not sure how Apache's would go - on one hand, they're pretty well networked these days and are pretty lethal machines, but on the other hand, NK is the most tunnelled-under nation on the planet, so getting an accurate fix on where threats are and where they're coming from could be difficult.

Ignoring bad mission planning, the F-35 would face little threats above NK airspace, the RCS of it means that NK long and medium range systems cannot engage it at a meaningful distance.

Situations in which the F35 would be threatened would be flying very low, in MANPADS and AAA range and WVR with a nork fighter, but the 35 has little reason to go low and being ambushed by a nork fighter would be a massive pileup of failures

>>32701062
>WVR with a nork fighter
My understanding of a2a was that different generations of fighters are basically no contest.

The gulf war 1 showed that reasonably well with only Mig25s having much of a chance and even then they didn't score any kills I don't think.

>>32701147
It is practically no contest, and I wouldn't bet money on the coalition taking a single A2A loss, but a nork MiG-29 is still an asset to be taken seriously, of course all the odds are stacked against them but I could see a loss happening due to a pileup of failures which leads to the 35 pilot having poor situational awareness

>>32701223
>'Dumbest Fighter Program Ever Conceived': Why Trump Should Cancel F-35
https://sputniknews.com/military/201701081049374598-f35-fighter-trump/

America's rivals are obviously terrified of F-35, that is why all the attacks on it by trolls.

>>32701223
>I wouldn't bet money on the coalition taking a single A2A loss
Well, not an F35 anyway.

Norks are *worse* than Saddam's airforce was and the USAF is better than it was then but still, some of the non-fighters did take losses, a few ravens were lost. Some F15s were damaged by MiG25s which is reasonable, they're basically the same generation right? I think the Mig25 was built as an F15 killer but just didn't quite do it well enough.

Also, Iraqi MiGs were old export versions and USAF F15s had been upgraded continuously since the MiG25 was built.

>>32701014
>non sequitur
>implied implication that AMRAAM's are bad

File: FakeNews.jpg (50KB, 360x480px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 360x480px

>>32701742
>that is why all the attacks on it by trolls.
And by their asset in the US?

kek related

>>32701754
>Some F15s were damaged by MiG25s which is reasonable, they're basically the same generation right? I think the Mig25 was built as an F15 killer but just didn't quite do it well enough.

Stop posting.

>>32701811
>Stop posting.
Thank you for your contribution to the thread.

If you think I'm wrong, why not say how?

>>32701742
>Why Trump Should Cancel F-35
It's ok, apparently Trump can make an F/A-18 do the same stuff.

>Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

>>32701866
Hillary lost, get over it.

>>32701884
I'm not salty about the election, it's not even my country. But how do you make an F/A-18 into an F35?

>>32701884
>Nobody's allowed to talk shit about the stupid things Il Duce Trump says!

File: 1483426283607.jpg (52KB, 435x439px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 435x439px

>>32701953
>being on /k/
>being a democrat or liberal, both of which hate firearms with a passion

I never understood this cognitive dissonance.

>>32701970
Did it occur to you that calling out Trump's retarded statements doesn't make one a liberal?

>>32701970
Thinking Trump is an idiot (or maybe not but the things he says are idiotic) doesn't mean that you're either democrat or liberal.

It's not an either/or.

For non-USans, it's not even a choice that has to be made. We can think you're all crazy.

And even if we were/are democracts/liberals, which I'm sure many here are, there are lots of policies other than gun laws to make decisions on. You can like progress or regulation in one thing and anarchy in another. People don't have to line up 100% with a party or candidate.


>I never understood this cognitive dissonance.
That's because you don't understand what cognitive dissonance is. This isn't cognitive dissonance, it's complexity.

Cognitive dissonance would be if you supported a candidate in one thing and because you couldn't admit that your choice was flawed in any way, you then supported them in everything else as well despite any evidence that their other policies or opinions were bad for you. As the evidence grew, you would increase your support as a way of proving to yourself that your original choice was not only valid but also worth defending in the face of 'attacks'. The greater the evidence that you made a bad decision, the greater the test of your faith and threat to your initial judgement, so the greater you dig your heels in and proclaim your candidate to be the second coming and the greatest american who ever lived.

That's what cognitive dissonance is.

Also, this is a weapons/military board. Just because I'm interested in an F35's IR defenses doesn't mean I'm going to buy one. I can approve of gun control and still come here to ask what gun I saw in a movie, or I might approve of assault rifle restrictions and still be interested in hunting rifles or CC/OC debates.

The world is a complicated place.

>>32702044
>Cognitive dissonance would be if you supported a candidate in one thing and because you couldn't admit that your choice was flawed in any way, you then supported them in everything else as well despite any evidence that their other policies or opinions were bad for you. As the evidence grew, you would increase your support as a way of proving to yourself that your original choice was not only valid but also worth defending in the face of 'attacks'. The greater the evidence that you made a bad decision, the greater the test of your faith and threat to your initial judgement, so the greater you dig your heels in and proclaim your candidate to be the second coming and the greatest american who ever lived.
Trump voters in a nutshell, really. At least with Clinton we recognized she wasn't a great choice, but that that Trump was a fucking insane alternative.

>>32701970
>being a democrat or liberal, both of which hate firearms with a passion
>Implying wanting systems that improve the lower and middle class' lives has anything to do with whether or not you like guns

>>32702099
>Trump voters in a nutshell, really.
Well, a lot of them anyway and especially the ones in /pol/. Aside from those that adopt the persona as a larping exercise. Sometimes they're probably not sure whether they're larping, trolling or believing.

>At least with Clinton we recognized she wasn't a great choice, but that that Trump was a fucking insane alternative.
Sadly, that was probably a minority of Clinton voters too, the Bernie Sanders voters who had to come over when she beat him and some republicans who had to hold their nose to vote against Trump. Her cvore supporters are pretty passionate too though. Obama himself was undoubtedly in that camp, he pretty clearly supported Bernie but had to suck it up when Clinton did.

The reason why we see it a lot with Trump is because he's not a fact based campaigner, he's not even a spin based campaigner because spin still uses facts. He's a MUH FEELS based campaigner, sort of a PT Barnum figure which is ironic because Barnum was actually a based guy and quite the statesman when he became Mayor and congressman in Connecticut. He lines up with modern Democrats.

Anyway, Trump, coming from "reality TV" and campaigning on FEELS is like a lot of political and religious conmen and wants support and panders to people's button issues and prejudices to get it. This makes those people easy prey for cognitive dissonance because they're conning themselves that they'll get the policy that they want so much. They're greedy for a stupid policy rather than money but it's still about the basic rule of a con. People hang themselves with their own greed, the conmen just has to offer them a little of what they think they want.

>>32701953
>I'm not a shill

File: b4c.png (70KB, 200x309px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 200x309px

>>32702236
>literally quoting Trump makes you a Hillary shill

>>32702330
That's when you know that someone is really their own worst enemy.

>>32702219
>fact based
facts are suspect because people can just make up fake facts and they get globally cited now. The few that do bother to get redacted doesn't matter because the damage is done, nobody reads redaction or corrections, or even the whole article, just headlines.

The majority of voters are idiots, and so of course elections are all about muh feels, but you cant honestly say the left hasn't been 'muh feels' for decades at this point.

Thing you have to realize is you should just ignore those things, trump is gaining support from idiots just like the left has been doing for a long time. Just as killary says a politician has a public and a private position. I await trump to implement glorious capitalist utopia with post-labor UBI solutions and improved healthcare for all.

>>32702189
>Implying wanting systems that improve the lower and middle class

That's objectively false though, the left does not want that, otherwise they would oppose illegal immigration, which is creating a de facto slave class.

>>32702219
There's also the fact that groups will double down if the feel threatened: http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-things-juggalo-culture-teaches-us-about-trump/

>>32702044
>there are lots of policies other than gun laws to make decisions on.

Which has nothing to do with coming to a board dedicated to those weapons. You actively support limiting the rights of citizens having firearms, but at the same time go to a board that vehemently supports those rights.

Says a lot tbhgamalam

>>32702381
So try to help fix the problems that drive them here in the first place instead of attacking the symptom in the most retarded way possible.

>>32702442
>Which has nothing to do with coming to a board dedicated to those weapons. You actively support limiting the rights of citizens having firearms, but at the same time go to a board that vehemently supports those rights.
That's a lot of words to use that just say "hurr durr politics iz simple and u can't support X AND y issues"

>>32702450
The left doesn't try to do that at all though.

>>32702436
>unironically goes to cracked

I wish you rebbitfags would go back and stay there.

>>32702481
Still buttmad that Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million and barely eked in by 100,000 total in three states?

>>32702464
And here we see the rationalization attempt of leftists that exhibit cognitive dissonance.

File: 1478713595204.png (2MB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1680x1050px

>>32702504
I realize this is a tough week for you, what with the inauguration and all, but you need to realize that it's not your fault.

File: Politicians.jpg (365KB, 1500x971px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1500x971px

>>32702378
>facts are suspect because people can just make up fake facts and they get globally cited now
I think it has more to do with anti-intellectualism and people not wanting to think too hard. Trump has turned it up to 11 but Bush started it with his Truthiness.

>Just as killary says a politician has a public and a private position
Well that's certainly true. Pic related.
They're friendly enough when they're not campaigning against each other.

>>32702481
>rebbitfags
lel reddit meme

But credit where it's due, you've yet to call anyone a cuck and I want you to know that I'm both grateful to you and respect you for staying above buzzword insults.

>>32702534
>Trumps and Clintons
Bill was a slut and Hillary at the least didn't care and possibly was in on it and we know that Trump is a swinger.

Do you think they did any swinging together?
This could be the first election where the opponents had previously fucked.

>>32702510
>Hurr u cunt be libruhl AND liek gunz durr!

>>32702519
I know it's not my fault, I voted against the takeover of our government by a crony capitalist.

>>32702330
>spinning a quote doesn't make you a shill

After all, Trump called every Mexican a rapist, right?

>>32702572
Just because he tacked on a weasel phrase at the end doesn't mean he didn't basically call all Mexican migrants murderers and rapists.

>>32701852
Not that anon, but the F-15 was developed as a direct counter to Russia's super fighter that turned out to not be all that great: the Mig25.

>>32702547
So you voted for Trump?

>>32702572
Whats there to spin?

Its a direct quote, in full. He said something terminally stupid, deal with it.

>>32702547
It's not your fault.

>>32700998
>Micro missile swarms

WE MACROSS NAO

>>32702579
Oh wow you are actually doubting down on Hillary's propaganda.

>>32702547
>I voted against the takeover of our government by a crony capitalist.
Did you do a write-in for Sanders?
Because if not anon, I have some bad news for you...

>>32702586
>So you voted for Trump?
Have you paid any attention to his cabinet?
4 are straight up Goldman Sachs execs.
DeVos gave his campaign millions.

Nearly every one of his choices is someone who paid for the spot and/or has a vested personal interest in destroying the powers of that department.

>>32702630
>Sanders

I think you mean Vermin Supreme

>>32702589
>>32702601
>>32702630
>Hurr politics is simple!

>>32702584
>Not that anon, but the F-15 was developed as a direct counter to Russia's super fighter that turned out to not be all that great: the Mig25.
Thanks.

>>32702587
It is less spin and more of cognitive dissonance by Trump haters, they are unable to acknowledge he might have said something smart.

Just look at the Air Force One thing.

>$4 bil budget
>probably will cost $3.5 bil
>"$4 billion? It's too expensive!" - Trump
>"We can probably make it $3.5 billion." - Boeing

And both look good in the end.

>>32702639
It's not your fault.

>>32702645
>F-15
>Mig25

It's interesting that in Gulf War 1, the F15 didn't manage to dominate Iraqi MiG25s. It beat them sometimes but although no F15s died, they took missile hits from the MiG25s and there were a lot of incidences where the MiGs bugged out and the F15s just couldn't catch them.

>>32702652
Lets take a look at how "smart" this comment was then shall we?

First, there is no comparible F/A-18, and there is no way of there being one. So there "threat" of a competitor replacing the F-35 is completely empty.

Secondly, price reductions (we're under $100m/unit already before Trump spoke a single word) were already occuring and have been for years. Its not something they're going to start doing because he said so.

The R&D money spent has already been spent, so the "cost overruns" there are meaningless to try and tackle - only with future projects. As for pricing of the F-35.. they're fucking cheap.

>>32702652
>acknowledge he might have said something smart
About F/A18s being made equal to F35s?

>>32702689
>Trump managed to get libs to defend the F-35

8D Chess

>>32702706
I'm not a liberal, but nice to know you have fuck all comeback.

If you're referring to all the articles posted by mainstream media, the tone is mostly calling Trump out for being a tardlet, not actually praising the F-35.

>>32702706
>managed to get libs to defend the F-35
Is liking the F35 incompatible with being a liberal?

I don't understand your thinking.

What's wrong with high-tech fighters?

>>32702676
Because the F-15 is an energy fighter designed for air superiority while the Mig25 is purely an interceptor. No air superiority energy fighter will be able to catch an interceptor once the interceptor decides to run.

>>32702753
>energy fighter
I think I need to read up on energy management theory.

>>32702044
>i might approve of assault rifle restrictions

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

GET
THE
FUCK
OUT

>>32700772
>How does the F35 do against IR SAMs?
The standard routine is to explode in a major fireball.

>>32700822
What garbage.
Also home on jam.

File: 1449404552121.png (305KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 600x620px

>>32703595
>IR home on jam

>>32703595
>IR
>Home on Jam

>>32703625
>>32703634
It works if you jam with the power of a thousand suns.
Your stealth plane in comparison will be as mysterious as the dark side of the moon.

>>32702044
>i might approve of assault rifle restrictions

>on a board with multiple assault rifle threads each day on how to customize and use them
>b-b-b-but i don't have any cognitive dissonance

k

>>32703642
>It works if you jam with the power of a thousand suns.

No, it doesn't.

Don't understand IR jamming at all, do you. Isn't the same as RF jamming in any way.

>>32702676
never heard of any F15's taking damage from missiles, sauce plz?

>>32703080

I voted for Jason Kander fuckface.

You know, the candidate that actually know how to shoot a gun, vs a fat piece of shit.

Too bad he lost thou.

>>32701754
MIG-25 is only a high-speed, high-altitude interceptor. It's just a fast sled with missiles designed to take out supersonic long-range US bombers. It's not comparable to the F-15.

>>32703643
Not him, but who said he had to go to the assault rifle threads? Being a part of this board doesn't mean somebody has to be involved in every aspect. In fact, some take it as a sign of maturity that they can overlook things that bother them. Like me ignoring the stupid ass /pol/ comments in this thread.

>>32703642
You don't understand how IR jamming works

Jamming and defense against heat seekers is tricky. There are a number of options but no silver bullet. The F-35 isn't even in a finished version yet, so it's hard to be definite what exactly they will use. But if it's used as a CAS and SEAD platform it will need good counters to protect against MANPADS, which can lock onto any heat source in the sky, and will get a strong IR signature off the F-35's rear end. (Similar to how the old REDEYE engaged aircraft.)

>>32702727
Because 'muh MIC'

>>32705675
Except you're not though.

Checkmate atheist.

>>32705763
>But if it's used as a CAS and SEAD platform it will need good counters to protect against MANPADS, which can lock onto any heat source in the sky, and will get a strong IR signature off the F-35's rear end. (Similar to how the old REDEYE engaged aircraft.)
You do know that those are very rarely performed within range of MANPADS, right?

>>32700772
Everything from the coatings to f135 assemblies are designed to counter IR.

It was basically useless against the f22, and it's even more pointless against f35s

>>32701033

It limits the range of weapons, and their effectiveness. Those big SAMs will still kill a modern jet if you wander into range and are a bit unlucky.

That means using stand off weapons. Stand off weapons by their nature are less reliable, and lower yield (pound for pound). Your air support will take longer to show up, and when it does it'll do less.

Helicopters will die in substantial numbers if they're used, so yes, they're fucked. Thousands upon thousands of MANPADs strapped to fucking everything, combined with massive tunnel networks means that circumstances will conspire and shit will happen regardless of what sort of precautions you take.

>>32707105
>if you wander into range
That's pretty hard to do with high-end ESM and stealth significantly reducing their radar range. Serbia's S125s couldn't detect an F-117 until it was essentially WVR.

>>32705161
>Jason Kander
>In 2009, Kander voted against a bill that would extend the Castle Doctrine to renters. The doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against a perceived intruder.

>cognitive dissonance, the post

>>32706147
Uh, CAS and SEAD are

>very rarely performed within range of MANPADS

?

No. No, I did not know that. LOL.

>>32705894
>muh MIC
Well there is that but the F35 is still cool. It's a bit like knowing that I'm spending far too much on a gaymen rig but still enjoying playing JC3 on ultra.

The costs of the F35 are so politicised however that working out how much it costs is a non-trivial task, money can always be counted in different ways. Even in this thread there are wildly divergent opinions on whether it's actually cheap or expensive. It certainly appears to be cheaper than the F22 per unit, though the overall program may or may not be another issue.

I'm OP and I really didn't want to get into an F35 debate thread but I do recognise that that was wishful thinking at best. I suppose the thread has been better than most.

>>32707105
>Helicopters will die in substantial numbers if they're used, so yes, they're fucked
Yeah, I think you're mostly right about that....although...Apaches can engage more-or-less BVR of ground troops. They might be able to snipe effectively, hanging back in secured areas. Though the tunnels are going to make it hard to be certain that places have actually been secured which I guess means that drones (too high to target usually) and fast movers outside MANPAD range are a safer choice for CAS.

If Nork were an infantry war then they'd want to use landmines in significant numbers so that slows shit down.

>>32707788
>very rarely performed within range of MANPADS
The idea is likely that SEAD either using standoff weapons or done at altitude and range and that CAS can be kind of the same. Ground troops can designate targets for PGMs, I believe that's current doctrine since the BRRRT is becoming difficult to field.

>>32707105
>Those big SAMs will still kill a modern jet if you wander into range and are a bit unlucky
Granted and in fact most SAMs have an actual impossible-to-dodge range as well however a modern stealth fighter against old generation SAMs is probably not going to be detectable/targetable. The F35 is also it's own E111.

>>32703701
>Don't understand IR jamming at all, do you. Isn't the same as RF jamming in any way.
Not him but it really isn't that different.

>>32707754
>Kander voted against a bill that would extend the Castle Doctrine to renters
I know shit about this so treat me with contempt if you like but has the castle doctrine not covering renters ever been tested in courts?

I was going to make some crack about republicans wanting guns for rich people and not poor people but then Kander is a dem so whatever. I guess it's more likely just a general opposition to gun proliferation etc anyway.

In anycase, it's somewhat hard to imagine that the court would extend castle doctrine to renters where it currently covers owners. Given that it's a modified form of self-defense, not giving renters the same right to defend themselves in their home (it's their's while they live there) would seem not to be viable. There are general legal principles that usually give renters the right to enjoy the same privileges in their home as if they owned it. Not extensively modifying it of course but usually something like the right to peacefully reside in it without interference, these principles usually let people put nails in walls to hang pictures and shit like that.

The alternative is a really obvious form of class warfare that doesn't seem like it should hold up in court.

>>32707864
>IR jamming isn't that different

IR jamming involves painting the seeker eye with a laser, right?

Not burning it out (though that would work if you could do it) but just ensuring that the seeker eye(s) get strong heat signal no matter whether they're pointed on the jet or not. This means that the missile can't maneuver to intercept the jet because it seems to be everywhere in a large cone.

A missile *designed* for this should still be able to maneuver to roughly face the jet but it wouldn't know where it is inside a really big area so actually hitting it would be next to impossible, it can only prevent itself from actually facing the opposite direction and that's assuming it's a modern IR missile with side and rear IR sight. Older missiles that only see front are fucked as soon as they fail to maneuver to keep the jet centred.

However, whether it can detect the cone that the laser is coming from (eyes away from the jet will not be painted) or not, if it can't centre the jet then it soon loses the jet because it's not maneuvering effectively and the jet is moving fast. Even if it regains aspect somehow, the jet has gained range away from the missile and by their nature, missiles are living on borrowed time.

>>32704959
He's either talking out his ass or mistaking the F/A-18 downed by a MiG-25 for an F-15.

IIRC, the closest the F-15's ever come to a combat loss was in 1982 over the Bekaa Valley, where a couple MiG-21s managed to get into gun range and hit one or two F-15s with a few cannon rounds before being slapped out of the sky.

>>32707832
>I believe that's current doctrine since the BRRRT is becoming difficult to field.
Not just that, but as Desert Storm proved even half-assed defenses can shoot down "muh low and slow gun runs".

>>32709064
>He's either talking out his ass or mistaking the F/A-18 downed by a MiG-25 for an F-15.

Misremembering wikipedia more like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_engagements_of_the_Gulf_War

3x F111s took missiles hits but made it home.

I think I got those confused with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurra_Air_Battle

An F15 took a R-40 hit from a MiG-25. If it had of been more damaging, there would have been 2xMig25s vs 1xF15 and the Iraqis might have won that battle and cleared the route for a mass evacuation of their airforce to Iran, though that would have led to them being impounded for years rather than quickly returned as Saddam allegedly hoped.

As it is, Iraq says they shot down 2xF15s and USA says they made it home with one damaged. Since the pilots survived the war and the F15 is well known to survive even actual impacts from missiles, the USA is probably being truthful.

>>32709251
Not just low and slow - even low-and-fast attacks like the Tornado was designed for were found to be impractical for operations. Coalition Tornadoes suffered some of the highest loss rates of the war because the attack profiles they took on the opening nights of the war left them exposed to low-level air defenses.

I would rather have a x47 doing CAS them a F35

>>32709585
Why, exactly? The F-35 can maintain coverage over a larger area and get into range a lot faster, and its sensors and comms mean it's far more likely to get a good first-shot hit and not risk friendlies.

>>32701022

That isn't really a problem.

In the real world, there are only a tiny handful of aircraft in a given space, so it isn't that crowded to begin with. You're also shooting at targets that you can see from very far away, which are going in a completely different direction and speed than your friends.

This is part of why you can do things like launch missiles and have them hit the enemy instead of friendly aircraft. The other part of it is that missile seekers don't just randomly pick new targets. They tend to go straight towards the target you've aimed it at, without any straying.

It's sort of like worrying that you might accidentally shoot yourself in the foot while taking 1,000+ yard shots with a rifle.

>>32709629
more weapons ready for a longer time while cheaper.
Also think that railgun smart rounds will cover some of the CAS needs

>>32709816
>there are only a tiny handful of aircraft in a given space
This, the sky is really big.
Read the Gulf War Air Campaign article on wikipedia (linked from this article >>32709309), it makes it clear that there were generally only 2 pairs of 2xF15s patrolling the Iran/Iraq border and that was considered a virtual 'wall' of F15s.

Although at least one encounter involved aircraft flying by each other first to visually identify each other before engaging. Lots of engagements occurred within visual range due to a need to ID the aircraft before engaging.

A comms heavy campaign involving F35s would probably be less dependent on that.

>>32711017
>Also think that railgun smart rounds will cover some of the CAS needs
Not any time soon. As it is, railguns cost more than F35s and the ammo is too expensive to fire.

>>32711017
>more weapons ready for a longer time while cheaper.
>2 weapon bays, providing for up to 4,500 lb (2,000 kg) of ordnance
Vs
>6 A2G + 4 A2A points for 18,000lbs +

You're an idiot.

>>32711313
To be fair, anon may have intended that there would be multiple X47s. Which is an intended doctrine actually, a single F35 serving as a forward controller for a wing of drones that engage BVR of the F35 at targets that are BVR of their own optics.

Which is a fuck of a lot of data handling for the pilot so I can see the point of IAF and others that a two-seater F35 is desirable.

>>32707832
The overall F-35 program is/will be more expensive than the F-22 if for no other reason than ~180 aircraft vs ~2500 aircraft.

>>32707788
You do know that the "close"-part in CAS stands for the distance between enemy and friendly, and not how close the aircraft is to the ground? A B-1 can do CAS from 20 000 feet and 10 miles away using decent targeting pods and a good FAC.

>>32711017
This is why we should limit CoD to people 18+, and keep it away from 12-year olds

>>32701910
>>32701866
You don't. Trump is owned by Putin so he is out to destroy America's military capacities.

>>32713240
>Trump is owned by Putin
I don't really believe that but...

>he is out to destroy America's military capacities
He's certainly going about the right way to do that. Cancel the most cutting edge projects and undermine the most important military alliances.

It's all talk though, for now, we'll see what actually happens.

>>32713333
>It's all talk though
But the election is over already, this kind of stupidity is understandable in the run up to an election to appeal to regards who believe every meme they see on facebook but at this point he should be surrounded by people who know what they're talking about and actually listening to them.

I supported Trump but I'm starting to lose faith, I honestly thought he was only pretending to be retarded, now I'm not so sure.

>>32713544
Are you willing to listen now when we tell you the man is a pathological liar who can't even be truthful about small things there's a video record of him saying?

>>32713832
>Are you willing to listen now when we tell you the man is a pathological liar who can't even be truthful about small things there's a video record of him saying?
You hardly need to say it, it's been said.
Anon is clearly considering the matter and questioning, that's really all anyone can ask for and about all we all really need.

>>32713544
>But the election is over already, this kind of stupidity is understandable in the run up to an election to appeal to retards who believe every meme they see on facebook...
Sure, we get that.

I despise him and think it will be a clusterfuck of nepotism and corporate greed but regardless...think of him in terms of Reagans cowboy diplomacy. A reckless, unpredictable lunatic does makes for a tough negotiator and not someone that you enter into brinksmanship with.

I'm not saying that I believe that it's all a posture but it is at least *compatible* with all being a posture.

>>32701754
The F-15 was built as a MiG 25 killer.
The yanks saw it and assumed from the design it was an air superiority fighter, not knowing that the big wings were to keep it in the air because it's made of fucking steel

>>32713929
You would have to be very poorly read to actually believe the groupthink that Reagan was crazy at geopol. The guy clearly had a good cabinet in Cheney and Rumsfeld. Saw that the soviets were overspending to match the US on our military overhaul in the late 70's and had run to the limit of their economy by spending 14% of their GDP on military. And with brilliant oil price manipulation and hard lining he forced Gorbachev into reforms that caused the collapse. Ultimately downrange effect is all that matters especially that carried out behind closed doors. If you can't even analyse geopol at this level you need to re-educate yourself newfriend.

>>32714268
>Reagan was crazy at geopol
No no, you got me all wrong.
I mean that he *acted* crazy. Nixon did the same thing even more so (albeit, possibly was crazy).

>>32714292
What I was attempting to say in >>32713929 was that Trump's bullshit is at least compatible with being posturing to unnerve and confuse observers and rivals.

I was attempting to liken it to the posturing done by Nixon and Reagan, although I'm not that certain that Nixon was just posturing. I'm not suggesting that Reagan believed the cowboy stuff, just that he wanted the soviets to believe it.