AHAHAHAHA How can Russians get so shit. The F-35 can do these

>>34601709
>The F-35 can do these and eat pancakes at the same time
True. I saw it at the Paris air show and the whole world was speechless.

You got it the wrong way around, Chinese military aviation needs to buy Russian to copy their upgrades.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/china-receives-first-advanced-su-35-flankers-from-russia

>>34601709
F-35 cannot do that.

>>34602611
Butthurt vatnik

I've seen it with my own eyes. I did not have a video though but my word is enough.

>>34602741
This is bait.

There's a bigger version of this but it's more than 3MB, how to post?

File: 14424893657512.jpg (286KB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 2560x1600px

russians were right in going for superior plane characteristics
you can always get better avionics, or straight up buy good ones, but if your plane is a bucket, it'll stay a bucket even if you cram it with high-tech
meanwhile natocucks have to pray a squadron of f-whatevers takes out flankers, before these slavshit niggas get on them, yet the PK% chances haven't really gone up over the years, and slavshits have are getting better and better EW
so what happens if we get to the point, jamming and other such interference start making a proper impact, and the flankers with bigger loadouts and better flight chars. can get onto f's?
recipe for disaster is what happens, I sure would love to see a vid of a flanker doing some cobra-tier stunt and spraying down a as f35 with the 50cal in the middle of a flip

>>34602856
>I sure would love to see a vid of a flanker doing some cobra-tier stunt and spraying down a as f35 with the 50cal in the middle of a flip

THIS IS WHAT SLAVBOOS ACTUALLY BELIEVE

>>34602877
well what can the f35 bucket really do once it launches its payload and the flanker squadron isn't downed
there isn't much left besides taking it up the ass, based russians might as well do it in style

>>34602889

An F-35 doesn't need to launch its own weapons. Sharing targeting information through datalinks, the F-35 can utilise missiles from other platforms, both airborne (other F-35 or legacy fighters) and ground based systems (https://news.usni.org/2016/09/13/video-successful-f-35-sm-6-live-fire-test-points-expansion-networked-naval-warfare). An F-35 could shoot down a squadron of Flankers without firing a shot itself.

File: 1478557034189.jpg (61KB, 600x551px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x551px

>>34602911
Only f35 cuckboys backpedal like this , it really is amazing to watch.
Well guess what, the Su35 was backed up by a division of BUKs, who are now shining up your datalinked fighters
Also your navy is getting mass-cruise missile'd and ASM'd
Also all battlegroups in the open seas got torpedoed to shit
Also russians airdropped MRLS all over and everyone is getting lit up with grads
Also Putin detonated underwater nukes placed all around the US and united states of nigger got swept by a radioactive tsunami
Also your mother stopped getting government benefits for your fat ass, and now you have to move out
Guess the Su35 wins this one, kiddo

>>34602935
Best part about this is that Su-35S shares IFF with T-50 and other land based radars since it has its own L-Band radars. This means it doesn't need visual confirmation like F-35.

>>34602944
>f-35
>needing VISUAL confirmation
Confirmed either bait or extremely uneducated in its capabilities

>>34602935
Why do all low IQ posters use this format?
>Oh yea? Well how can you do X if X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, and of course X all happen to it before it can do it! It's how fucking elementary school arguments play out.

>>34602935
>backed up by a division of BUKs
Russian themselves admitted that their SAMs can't i even detect targets with RCS <0.01 m2 let alone engage them.
http://otvaga2004.ru/armiya-i-vpk/armiya-i-vpk-vzglyad/malorazmernye-bespilotniki/
F-35 nullifies Russian SAM networks, thing that Su-35 type of planes can't do. This is why F-35.

>>34602956
I don't read russian, you cockhole monkey, so please explain to me how a low RCS on a JET is the same as having a low RCS on a DRONE
Are you on actual imbecile or are you just pretending?

>>34602935

Backpedal? One of the key foundations of modern US airpower doctrine is network-centred warfare. Why do you think one of the key technologies of the F-35 was a high bandwidth LPI data link? MADL was designed specifically to enable this kind of warfare without compromising stealth. Slavboos can't seem to comprehend that stealth technology is not an end in itself, but is just one facet of the information advantage that the concept of 5th gen air warfare is based on.

>>34602971
Do you know what RCS is? If yes, you got your answer. Now go back to 2ch, pidorashka.

>>34602977
one of the key foundations of the US "airpower" doctrine is funnelling money from taxpayers using any sort of reasoning, so you can stop right there with your horseshit, buddy
russians didn't mouth off about meme high-tech "doctrines" and they have network-linked cruise missile swarms before you, never mind having their airforce being integrated with ground-based radar since forever, another thing amerilards are only now catching up on, and of course once THEY are doing it, it's hi-tech new shit L M F A O
Know what you guys should do? Start building dual rotor helicopters and putting ERA blocks on your tanks, that shit's HIGH TECH

>>34602994
>"airpower"
First and second largest airforces on the planet, you little vatnik shit, your bait and opinion is invalid. Die in a vodka fire.

>>34603014
and Russians have the best and largest artillery force on the planet, and artillery actually wins ACTUAL wars
checkmate, go wipe your tears on a foodstamp

>>34602994

...And now you abandon all pretence of the Su-35S having a chance against the F-35 GG no re. Looking at how Russian """air-power""" performed in 2008, I'm going to say they are more than a little behind on military networking. Oh, and that you for reminding me of the abject failure that was USSR-style ground controlled interception, I needed a laugh.

File: 14958129452070.jpg (103KB, 831x639px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 831x639px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-BTEh9pSs0

>>34603151
> flying low has no benefits, we can anyways "see" those guys from 10000 miles away, also stealth
> t. burgerlard

>>34603164
Pak-fa refined would make a great follow up fighter.

use the stealth aircraft to hit other stealth aircraft, then use the faster and more manuverable none stealth-aircraft to pursue and kill.

File: f35_vatnik.gif (2MB, 400x168px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x168px

>>34601709

And the relevance of that in modern air combat is what exactly?

>>34603193
> having amazing flight characteristics is not "relevant"
heard it all before, fatass
what happens when russians pop some good avionics on their birds and you're stuck with not-so-hightech-anymore buckets?

>>34601709
Because it's just for the fucking show, it's like a Formula 1 car drifting

>>34603215

>what happens when russians pop some good avionics on their birds

Been waiting for that to happen for decades...

>>34603215

My favourite part of this argument, is the sheer Slav desperation as they try to think up unlikely future scenarios where their one-trick ponies have an advantage over the F-35. They forget they won't be able to afford enough production models from the PAK FA programme (if it happens) to even match its air superiority counterpart the F-22 numerically, before the F-22's successor is developed. Once you remember how many thousands of F-35s there will be, and how much of a lead the USA has in both aviation hardware and software, the desperation gets even more pathetic.

>>34602856
>50cal
What is this, the 40's ?

>>34601709
It's fucking nice to look at to be honest.
I need to go to an airshow some time again.

The Su-35 has to use thrust vectoring just to attempt the F-35's Paris Air Show routine.

>>34603215
>what happens when Russians pop good avionics on their planes
Hell freezes over

>>34601709
An interesting twist on a established flavor of bait. Nice.

>>34602911
This type pf targeting isnt new.

>>34603986
>using a fighter to target a SAM from a ship against an OTH target isn't new
So who has done it before?
Answer must be in format:
>Fighter jet
Not designated targeting aircraft like ka-27 Helix.
>SAM
Not any other kind of missile
>OTH target
The firng platform myst be completely blind to the target itself, not just using the aerial platform to refine the solution.

>>34603022
Ground forces can't do their job if they are getting hit with precision mutions from the air you stupid twat.

>>34603838
And in the process goes into a ballistic uncontrolled spin that lands him 90 degrees off-course and in an unintentional 60 degree bank.

>>34603022
Does russia have any equivalent to the Excalibur and BONUS artillery shells in service?
Good tubes is only half of the equation.

>>34604155
Yeah but only for koalitsiya
also MLRS are artillery too

>Russia buy Chinese

Do you really think that the Russians will ever do this?

>>34604421
Russia already buys / utilises a lot of Chinese (military / industrial) microprocessor tech.

>>34604436
Yeah, but imagine Russia actually deigning to buy Chinese airplanes

>>34604482
>Comac C929
>soon

i wonder when there will be a button pressing which you make the plane do such a maneuver instead of pulling the stick

i mean if it's a useful anti-missile maneuver or something it shouldn't be a trick which only an aerobat can do

File: 1782909_800.jpg (109KB, 800x599px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 800x599px

>>34604436
>Russia
>tech.

>>34604155
>Excalibur
It's a JDAM like add-on called Dinamika, rather expensive for an add-on, costs $1000 to add to a standard artillery shell so it can use GLONASS as guidance. Was used in Ukraine sparingly to take out tanks.

>>34604665

- �The module can be screwed into artillery shells of a caliber of 152mm or more, replacing the fuze. It includes a combined fuze, GLONASS receiver and aerodynamic guidance fins that unfold in flight and correct the shell's trajectory�, - the source told �Izvestia�.

Unlike laser-guided shells, the �Dinamika� module does not depend on weather nor require painting, which allows rapid strikes to be delivered to known point targets. The CEP on the modernized shell is no more than 10 meters, while on ordinary 152mm shells fired to long ranges it can comprise 100 meters or more.

The module will allow for the creation of shells far cheaper than the American 155mm Excalibur GPS-guided shell, which costs $80,000 and is expected to soon fall to a price of $50,000. The Dinamika module costs slightly over $1000 and can be used in existing shells, as our source in the arms industry explained to us.

File: learning_from_the_russian_navy.jpg (142KB, 1500x1005px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1500x1005px

>>34601709
>thread about J-31
>no one posts the plane yet
Anyway, when would the Chinese learn how to make actually good engin...whoops, I mean when the Russians ran out of funding and have to sell their engine tech?

>>34604399
Is there actually any GLONASS rounds in service or are they still under development?
The Koalitsiya itself is pretty new.

>>34604699
>good engines
>Russian tech
Pick one

>>34604665

That's an equivalent of the M1156 PGK, not the full features of Excalibur, though.

>>34604730
So you say the Chinese better wait for more Israeli leak instead?

>>34604776
Nice meme

File: class-snarad.jpg (5KB, 250x154px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x154px

>>34604773
>>34604685
>>34604665

These new guided fuses, do they really add the same capability as the Excalibur?
Excalibur got larger fins as well as fins at the base giving it the ability to glide somewhat.

>>34602856

>you can always get better technology!

oh well if it's that simple

>>34604841
>glide somewhat.
More like "glide nearly double the ballistic range"

>>34604730
There's a chance the entire SU-35 deal is over the AL-41F1S engine they will reverse-engineer
China can't really care about the meager order of 24 airplanes.

>>34605026
>There's a chance the entire SU-35 deal is over the AL-41F1S engine they will reverse-engineer
>China can't really care about the meager order of 24 airplanes
This isn't the first time they've done this. This is why in the past decade the Russians insist on a minimum sale size.

>>34602911
You forgot to add using datalinks means it's selling point (stealth) is gone.
F-35 is a good plane and probably better than anything Russians have, but despite trolling Slavaboo has a point, in real life outside of basic facts it's not as superior as some here think.

>>34605480
>You forgot to add using datalinks means it's selling point (stealth) is gone.
Extremely high gain point to point links you need to be directly in between to detect?

Nice try.

>>34605511
It doesn't work like that unless your planes are flying rather close, which negates the original idea.

>>34605548
You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>34605480
If you think that an F-35's data link can be used by enemy radars for providing targeting data then you're a retard.

The most that would happen is that they're simply aware of its presence in the area, they still can't do anything about it.

>>34605480

Which is exactly why they use MADL instead of Link 16. Don't think you're thinking of something that hasn't already been thought of.

>>34605548
Sweden made a hard to detect, jam proof data link back in the 90s, TIDLS.
The US has had 15 tears and orders of magnitude more funding to develop a stealthy link, it is a safe bet they managed to make something that fits their need.

>>34601709
>The J-31 is a superior analog of the F-35 and has no equal in the world.
50 cents has been deposited to your account, Mr. Chang

>>34602935
>Also your navy is getting mass-cruise missile'd and ASM'd
An anon a while ago did the math a and I can't remember if it was a Tico or an Arliegh he used.. but he did scenerio where every single Tu-22 magicked itself into a firing solution and fired kh-22's.

The single ship with only a half-load ESSM and assuming a Pk .3 actually would have missiles left over after the strike.

I really hope another Anon has a screen cap of it.

>>34602856
>I sure would love to see a vid of a flanker doing some cobra-tier stunt and spraying down a as f35 with the 50cal in the middle of a flip

so much wrong with this. you have to be underage

File: 1493860334888.png (499KB, 944x720px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 944x720px

It's cute when Chinks and Vatniks pretend they're still our rivals.

>>34605951
They don't need to be as powerful as the US to be a threat to US or allies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daiLrGm59o8

>>34606266
This doesn't even come close to OP's video. Stop, you're embarrassing America.

File: 1496289232279.jpg (496KB, 800x720px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 800x720px

>>34605951
God, that show was terrible. Get reaction images from better anime.

ok but rather than do all of this dick waving, how about we team up with the russians and cleanse the world of sandniggers and chinks?
B T F O
T
F
O

>>34606370
>Teaming up with drunken kleptocrats
How about no.

>>34606370
Economic collapse or no, China is the future.

American and Chinese economic success will crush Slav ego without a shot fired.

>>34603022
>Russians have the best and largest artillery force
Largest? yeah. Best? Not a chance. It took them 2 weeks of 5+ fire missions a day with smerches, and hell even a couple of tochkas, to hit a Ukrainian armored battallion that was stationary the whole time! Their FCS, their counter battery radars, their complete lack of precision weapons, their poor kill chains mean Russia is the king of indiscriminate random fire. However as was shown back in the 40's and 50's, Firing a 1000 times to hit once is far worse than firing once to hit once.

>>34602856
>I sure would love to see a vid of a flanker doing some cobra-tier stunt with mission practical fuel load and stores and sinking like a rock while ripping its pylons off in the middle of a flip

>>34603727
This is one of the things that never gets enough appreciation. In the air and naval spaces, there isn't even close to a peer of the US. The us produces 5x more 5gens per year then all other prototypes, from all other countries combined. The US still produces more 4th gen planes then any other country. The US produces more tonnage per year than the next 10 countries combined.

In terms of naval and air supremacy the US stands alone. Yet you'll see all these shitposting threads of "Hey guys we got one 5th gen prototype, US BTFO" or "Hey guys we made one ship that is smaller and not as good as the ships you produce 5 of each year, but your still BTFO" etc.

Hell look at all the studies posted: "The US might not have complete supremacy in a fight on Russia/China's border where they throw their entire military at the contingent the US has on station nearby."

>>34606758
>"The US might not have complete supremacy in a fight on Russia/China's border where they throw their entire military at the contingent the US has on station nearby."
I love how this particular scenario ignores the response time the US has in bringing a world of hurt in response.