Why dose anybody care about the F-35 when the F/A-18 dose ev

>>32745734
F-18 is not low observable and the air frames are getting old.

>>32745734

It isn't that much cheaper.

>>32745755

This, production line for E/F models is still open.

>>32745734
stop lying

Shut up Donald.

>>32746389
Hillary lost, get over it.

>>32746194
I'm not lying tho.
https://youtu.be/qgjHf8zxmlk

F-35 needs to be out of its misery

F-35s have already been purchased by a bunch of countries and the pilots have been in training for a couple years. Not to mention the service contracts have already been signed, foreign land has been leased to America for them, and a bunch of other considerations.

F-35 is basically a global standardisation project, even if the first generation doesn't hold up too well, it will mean a huge amount of cooperation will be possible going forward, as more countries join and the F-35 users expand technology- and infrastructure-standardised projects.

>>32746533
Just because some retard made a video doesn't mean it's true.

>>32746533
>Boeing says Lockheed Martin a shit. More at 11!
Wow, I am so very shocked and alarmed by this unexpected course of events!

>>32746564
>>32746577
There are some good points made in this video tho.

The F-35 is also slower than the Russian jets. That's what you get for only having one engine.

>>32746590
>The F-35 is also slower than the Russian jets.
Mach 1.6 is more than fast enough.

And the F135 has more dry thrust than both RD-33's in a Mig-29 on full afterburner.

>>32745734
When combat loaded, the F-35 flies faster, further, turns better, is orders of magnitude more stealthy, has better sensors, better computer systems, etc.

>>32746590
Are you expecting them to be dogfighting or something?

Aircraft don't sit on top speed anon, just like you don't drive your car at 200km/h

>>32746513
You should kill yourself. Only useful thing you'll ever do in your life.

>>32746692
Do you expect them not to dogfight?

Why do they put a gun on the F-35 if they don't expect dogfights?

>>32746735
>Do you expect them not to dogfight?
No not really.

>Why do they put a gun on the F-35 if they don't expect dogfights?
Because it *might* happen. Like, there's an outside chance, so just put it on there anyway, but it's unlikely.

>>32746735
Congressional interference, mostly. At least the Navy and Marines got away with it being a pod they only put on when mission critical.

>>32746735
>dogfight

We have an air superiority fighter, it's not the F35, it's the F22.

>>32746590
>The F-35 is also slower than the Russian jets.

Same applies to SuperHornet.

>>32746774
The F22 is a great plane that we should definitely be using.

The F-35 however is expensive and not as maneuverable as the F-18.

So unless the F-35 becomes more maneuverable than the F-18 while staying as stealthy as it is now then we're just wasting money. Even still, price would still be an issue as the F-35 is more costly.

>>32746880
No, you're wasting money by buying a less stealthy aircraft that's going to be detected and shot down before it even knows there is another plane targeting it.

>>32746880
F-35 is going to cost a trillion for all 300 or so airframes, over the next 50 years, maintenance, training, and inflation accounted for. That's actually a pretty good deal, plus you have the advantage of being able to train everyone on one airframe, and simplifying supply chains by only needing replacement parts for one type of fighter. You have to look at this long term.

>>32746908
>>32746880
not to mention it's a mature 5th gen airplane, which is something our closest rivals (China and Russia) are attempting to do and not seeing much success

>>32745734
Another good video
https://youtu.be/wIsjrGRj2dw

>>32746908
>F-35 is going to cost a trillion for all 300 or so airframes
2443. Two thousand, four hundred, forty three. Not three hundred.

>>32747005
I knew it was replacing a lot of stuff, just didn't know the exact number, so I lowballed it.

>>32747027
That'd be lowballing either the Navy's Cs or Marine B counts, not the total US purchase.

>>32746880
>The F-35 however is expensive and not as maneuverable as the F-18.
Other way around:

http://web.archive.org/web/20151029000846/http://archive.defensenews.com/article/20110516/DEFSECT01/105160302/F-35-Tests-Proceed-Revealing-F-18-Like-Performance
>Operational pilots should be thrilled with the F-35's performance, Kelly said. The F-35 Energy-Management diagrams, which display an aircraft's energy and maneuvering performance within its airspeed range and for different load factors, are similar to the F/A-18 but the F-35 offers better acceleration at certain points of the flight envelope.
>"The E-M diagrams are very similar between the F-35B, F-35C and the F/A-18. There are some subtle differences in maximum turn rates and some slight differences in where corner airspeeds are exactly," Kelly said.

That's in comparison with the F/A-18C/D (in context of the USMC), which has better kinematics than the Super Hornet.

File: sprey ignore.jpg (202KB, 1236x888px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1236x888px

>>32745734
>dose everything better or as well for a lot cheaper?
The F18 has a vertical landing variant?

F-35 > F-16 > F/A-18

You know its true

>>32748926
You might get as much electricity from the both those single engine fighters.

>>32745734
Apart from the obvious points raised in the thread, there's lobbies pushing congress for replacement, because extending an airframe's capabalities again and again isn't going to keep you aerospace industry alive.

Why dose anybody care about the Abrams when the Patton dose everything better or as well for a lot cheaper?

>>32746713
nevertheless she lost

>>32750918
Why the fuck should that mean Trump's detractors can't call out his shit?

>>32751074
It means his detractors should make actual arguments instead of being asshurt that your safe space was invaded.

>>32751244
Awww, is da poor widdle Trumpfucker mad that this isn't his safe space?

Ah yes, another thread of Hornet-vs-F-35 as a way of talking about Trump.

>>32751244
The arguments have already been made. Repeatedly. By our own military. And in these threads.
Lockheed told him they'd "do better" in the most patronizing of tones.
The AF, Navy, and Marines all facepalmed and made public statements that his suggestion just wasn't happening.
Trump was wrong, and made a public fool of himself. Not for the first time. If you can't accept it, you're in for a long 4 years.

>>32751256
>I know you are but what am I!

Thank you for displaying the maturity of Trump critics.

>>32751311
but muh alternative facts

>>32751311
>The arguments have already been made. Repeatedly. By our own military. And in these threads.

And yet here we are yet again, a thread that wasn't about that hijacked by asshurt Trump critics.

>>32751333
I think that's going to be the master phase these next 4 years.

Assuming he doesn't get impeached in the next 3 months under, at the least, the emoluments clause.

>>32751350
>a thread that wasn't about that
Every single one of these moronic "Hornet is better than the JSF" threads are popping up directly to defend the honor of the Trump.
There have been dozens created, and without fail, the posters most interested in the possibility have the least to contribute, and are majority Drumpfkin. Hence why an innocuous "Shut up Donald" turns into a shitflinging match. Someone dared to besmirch the name of the orange fuhrer!

So stick the pearl-clutching act back in your pocket and try it on the next guy. And above all, stop creating shitty threads.

File: Screenshot_2016-08-11-00-27-50-1.png (320KB, 933x603px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 933x603px

>>32746908
>300 or so airframes,
Try 2,400 F35s

Aerospace welder here
2,400 is the last number Pratt Whitney gave us.

They are 100% serious about making that many.

>>32751350
He said something retarded and we're calling it retarded. If Obama said this we'd be calling him retarded too. You're just too fucking stupid to realize that.

>>32751573
No, if you don't agree with Trump's alternative facts, it makes you a cuck.

Just like how disagreeing with Obama's retarded gun control proposals made us all racist.

>>32751718
>not playing 5D chess
>yfw trump lowers the unit cost of the F35 because lockmart gets scared Orange Potus is dumb and will tank the whole project.
>yfw he purchases more for the same total cost as part of his goal to vastly expand our military

>>32751784
You are reading far to much intelligence into a man who can't be arsed to do any kind of basic research and who spends his time in revenge fantasies.

>>32751784
>trump lowers unit cost
>even though the unit cost was already coming down

Hmm really makes you think

>>32751841
He's smarter than people think, but not for the right reasons - he's a con man, and it's pretty obvious to everyone but Trumpcucks. There was hope that it was just an act, but now it's clear that it's not.