F-35 BTFO USA BTFO

2035 is still a long time tho

>could operate without a pilot
I am sure there is no conceivable way that could go wrong.

>>35021095
If half the shit Ruskies said about their gear was true they'd have conquered the world years ago. While lasers that shoot down missiles is pretty rad, I'll believe it when I see it, not until.

>>35021109
It could be 2291 and they still won't have the shekels for it.

>>35021095

Yeah, I bet they will be awsome, all five of them.

>>35021095
>until at least 2035

When did Russian media start giving years as hijra instead of AD?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LjKfs7MjYE

>>35021095
Someone needs to tell the engineers at Mikoyan to lay off the vodka and stop thinking that they're Belkans.

>>35021095
If we're just "technically" speaking their current plane, and ours, can already do that.

>>35021095
>space travel
>operate without a pilot

we have that already you fucking nigger

This is the equivalent of that kid who says he has a magic force field that stops bullets when you pretend to shoot him.

>>35022899
Dubs confirm that Russians are trying to make a drone

This is a great step forward for Russia. At last, they will no longer have pilots with too few flight hours to be qualified for solo daytime flying in the US.

>>35021095
Guys I'm working on a time machine. Should be out within the next 30 years. I'll keep you posted

>>35022987
Guys, it totally worked

>>35022987
>>35022997
lel

>>35022997
Fuck dude, how's the future? Have we glassed best Korea yet?

>>35021095
holy shit i couldnt help but laugh
does it come with force fields and turn invisible too?

>>35023949
I'm so so sorry. Clinton is President

File: Boeing_X-37B_inside_payload_fairing_before_launch.jpg (3MB, 1824x2736px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1824x2736px

>Russia stronk!

The X37 already exists.

>>35023949
Sarkisan won the dad for the presidency, officially making masculinity illegal
There are only varying degrees of females

>>35024734
*race
Sorry, my phone will automatically correct use of trigger words now

>>35021095
>today we unveil our most ambitious vaporware project to date!
why fuck is russia still deluding itself into thinking its still a super power? like im not trying to be an ass or anything but it legitametly worries me, what with them making a lot of the same mistakes in Syria that we did with Afghanistan and Iraq in the 80s and them wasting all of their money on useless military projects that never see the light of day rather then propping up their dying economy. if they collapse again, witch is a real possibility at this rate, theyre going to take everyone around them with them and the whole region will be another middle east

I hope that for once the Vatniks are serious.

File: 1500864084730.jpg (399KB, 1008x960px) Image search: [Google]

399KB, 1008x960px

>Russia in charge of honesty

>>35024824
they're like the petri dish of hackers

>>35024824
clinging to their former military glory is literally the only thing they have

>>35024992
thats not to say they cant reclaim that glory, its just the way things are going now russia is only hurting itself. it needs to focus more on its homeland than military bravado and force projection

>>35021122
Don't forget about the Plasma Stealth.

>>35022068
>Someone needs to tell the engineers at Mikoyan to lay off the vodka and stop thinking that they're Belkans.
kek

>>35021095
>this one guy said in an interview is your source
Wow man, those ruskies really did it again this time. Just like all those other times they've totally been ahead of the west technologically and absolutely never lied about the military tech they "make"

>>35021095
Does it also time travel?

>>35021095
>Jet fighter
>by definition, engine works by compressing air
>space travel

I love you, Russia. Never change.

File: albundy2.jpg (35KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x333px

>>35024992
>tfw you realize russia is Al "four touchdowns in a single game" Bundy

>>35021095
I bet that everytime the Russians announce this the US joint chiefs of staff laugh their asses off

>>35025118
What's Russia's Peg?

>>35025148
Syria

>>35025148
Ukraine

File: 1449337785264.png (65KB, 680x433px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 680x433px

>>35022068
>>35025048
LONG LIVE BELKA

The only good thing about a Hillary timeline would be cold war II electric boogaloo and russo-american techno dick measuring.

File: main-qimg-86e11bdb1618c9588877c7577378627e.png (238KB, 580x255px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 580x255px

>>35021095
Big Deal!
US Aircraft Carriers can fly into space too!
So shut up!

>>35025125
Nope. They love it. It allows them to fear monger and ask Congress to gib mo moneys.

Reminder that russians are losers and we only care about china nowadays.

>>35021095
>skipping straight to sixth gen when they still don't have a working fifth gen

That's an idea alright.

>Russia leading the world in CGI weapons

>>35026244
/k/ used to say that the T-14 was CGI too. Now they had to invent the meme that it will never go into serial production, i wanna see what's gonna be the next meme.

>>35021095
>impying it wont breakdown on the runway and have to be towed back to the hanger like what happened to their new miracle tank the T-14 Armata

>>35026286
see >>35026354

>>35021095
Nice poopiganda

>>35021095

The F-104 was capable of space travel too if a rocket booster was attached. It's how the space shuttle pilots were trained.

This isn't new or difficult.

>>35021095
Yeah when I actually see the thing I will be impressed, this is just words.

>>35021095
Maybe they mean it can climb until it reaches the legally defined altitude of "space". I think the F-15 could do that.

at this point, I'd put more stock into Chinese claims than Russian. Not that China is that much better, but they got a big drive right now to prove something. Whereas Russia just seems sort of stagnant.

>>35028388
Am I wrong but didn't the F-14 do that?

>>35021122
>they'd have conquered the world years ago
Nobody cares about that.
The more new tech /k/ will see the better.

When will the Russians actually have something tangible to show for their 6th gen fighter is a different story though.

>>35024294
It's got no lasers on it though. MiG 41 will shoot it down from orbit

>>35024824
If Russia is on the verge of collapse as Western media keeps on saying then why is America still so scared of them? NATO still exists, US military budget is mostly because of Russia, Americans never dare interfere in any of their invasions.

>>35028940
Cant shoot it down if it dosnt leave the design phase

>>35025810
but muh pak-fa

>>35028388
>>35028458
>F15 can fly into space
What are you smoking? The only plane that ever made it into space was the X-15. Jets can't fly in space because there's no air. Maybe the Russian plane has rocket boosters attached.

>>35022987
>>35022997

You're supposed to flip the order of these posts, you goober.

>>35028955
>>35028955
>scared of them
Media fear mongering for budget reasons. Anyone with half a brain could see that the only thing russia is going to hurt is itself
>why does nato still exist
Because allies are a benifical thing.
>US military budget is due to russia
Because maintaning world power is actuall a costly thing. Also china exists
>why dosnt the US intervine in its invasions
Why the fuck would we want to? Also apperently syria dosnt exist either

>>35028997
He said WORKING anon

>>35029021
Maybe he travelled into the future.

>>35029009
I thought the F-15 had to climb to that altitude for very briefly for that anti satellite missile test then immediately drop back down, but maybe I got the planes mixed up.

I never thought that any jet powered airplane could practically travel at that altitude without boosters.

>>35029141
Yes you got it mixed up with the X-15. That has a rocket engine so can fly into space.

>>35022997
holy shit

>>35025715
>botch a landing
>have to bail right over the 30m turbine

File: 1495420535305.png (89KB, 363x475px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 363x475px

This makes me wonder if anyone would be mad enough to make a nuclear powered aircraft. Like just a giant fucking plane that never lands because landing is for pussies.

I mean, in theory it could work?

>>35021115
They copied the Waymo software.

>>35029271
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto

>>35029271
Look up project pluto. Those engineers we on some shit when they came up with that flying holocost machine

>>35029271
Russia tested one in the 50s i think but it was more for teating the reactor not as much power. But yeah dumb

>>35022715
>technically speaking

If you're going to venture down that rabbit hole, my 74 VW bus is also capable of space travel and pilotless flight. Additionally, it's air droppable and amphibious, if I can get it back out of the water.

File: a51.jpg (39KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x500px

>>35029317
>all tests going extremely well and ahead of schedule
>suddenly cancelled out of nowhere
What kind of ruse cruise is the CIA taking me on?
Also imagine this thing armed with cobalt bombs

>>35029377
It was cancelled because it was literally a doomsday weapon. No one needed that shit.

>>35029377
>>35029389
>literal doomsday weapon is working well and even exceeding expectations
>"cancelled" out of the blue
>hurr gubment decided to be moralist for one day, no one needs a doomsday weapon especially governments why they want that
are you legitimately fucking retarded, please use an ounce of deductive reasoning

>>35029499
It says they didn't want the Soviets to catch wind and make one of their own

>>35029499
>hurr durr we've just made a doomsday weapon
>oh that's great why?
>durrrrrrrrrr
>what if the russians also build their own unstoppable doomsday weapon
>hurrrrrrrrr
There's a reason the Cold War never turned hot and it was down to the fact that people oddly enough didn't want everyone to die.

>>35029503
That still doesn't mean it was actually cancelled, moron. In fact it even supports the theory that they just took it out of the public view

>>35029271
The United States made a prototype jet plane that heated the air in its engines with nuclear reactors. I think it actually flew, but it irradiated the snot out of the interior. Boeing recently filed a patent for fusion jets, but that's just a patent.

>>35025148
More to the point, who's their Kelly?

>>35022987
>>35022997
Big if true.

>>35029513
>>35029499
It wasn't cancelled out of fear of a Russian equivalent. It was cancelled out of fear of a Russian PREEMPTIVE STRIKESHOULD they learn of its existence. They were worried that the weapon was such a massive measure of fucking overkill and spite that the Russians would see no recourse but to nuke the US before it could become operational.

File: good ideas upon good ideas.jpg (50KB, 400x204px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 400x204px

>>35029271
USAF started trying it once.

>>35029141

The best jet engines can't work above ~30,000 m ( 100,000 feets ), some plane ( world record was a modified mig 25 which managed to reach 37,000 m) can go slightly above if they can build up speed and go into a parabolic trajectory ( where the pilot will be weightless ), however such a plane needs a Thrust to weight ratio above 1, many recent fighter planes do have a TWR>1 at sea level,the su-35 having above 1.5, but the thrust of an engine gets lower with altitude (since it can suck less air, so it has less reaction mass), besides assuming that you have a plane that can still have > 1 TWR at 100k feets you still need to have at least 5000 kph (3000 mph) of excess vertical speed to reach 100 km, the official limit of the atmosphere, but now you have another problem, because turbojets can't work above Mach 3, so you need a ramjet (and maybe even a scramjet) to reach Mach 5, and ramjet have a lower TWR (so you need more of them and a lighter fuselage to keep the plane's TWR able 1) as well as being less efficient (so you need more fuel, so your plane is heavier).

It isn't technically impossible, some jet-powered boosters have been designed to help rocket reach space, but it is incredibly hard to do on an unmanned plane with that only goal in mind during conception, you can imagine how hard it would be to make it on a stealthy, manned warplane with a power generation unit to power a laser and with tons of bombs

>>35030291
Good post.

Unrelated tangent:
Jets only work on Earth because, of course, there's air to heat up or use as combustion
If ayys attack us, do you think we'd have a significant advantage over them simply because we have major air arms that specifically only work in our type of atmosphere? And, although assuming they have orbital ships or whatever, their complete lack of CAS would fuck over any ground invasion.

>>35030161
We never actually put a reactor on the plane, or at least never powered the plane with the reactor. That was more of a test bed to see if it was even possible for the plane to fly with the fuck-ton more weight it'd have on board.

>>35025033
>plasma
>extra high temperature gas
>extra high temperature
>stealth
>HIGH TEMPERATURE
>STEALTH
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
When did this happen?

File: Best plane ever so far.jpg (66KB, 768x422px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 768x422px

By 2035 R*ssia will be a thing of the past, fragmented into various different countries, as well as China, the USA will be the only super power well on it's way to dominating the next few centuries as a very young empire. By 2035 the US will be building manned geosynchronous low earth orbit space command platforms capable of raining down rods from god and guiding battles. There will be 3 geosynchronous platforms capable of keeping tabs on the whole surface of the earth. Aircraft carriers slowly phased out as half hour anywhere missiles dominate geopolitical interests.
USA +11
Whole world = still kissing our fat American penises :)

>>35030552
I'm pretty sure those jet engine pairs have a nuclear reactor in each, powering both engines.
>>35030566
Plasma doesn't have to be hot, just ionized, to be plasma. See plasma globes. I don't know what "plasma stealth" is though, sounds like bullshit.

>>35030161
>two turning, two burning, two joking, and two smoking, with two engines not accounted for, but they're all glowing.

>>35030608
>I'm pretty sure those jet engine pairs have a nuclear reactor in each, powering both engines.

No.

>>35030598
>geosynchronous
>low earth orbit

>>35030608
>Even in a "cold" plasma, the electron temperature is still typically several thousand degrees Celsius

>>35030738
my bad but you know what I meant

>>35030781
Rods of god is pretty stupid too.

>>35028388
>I think the F-15 could do that.
Not even close. The MiG-25 holds the zoom climb record and it's not even halfway.
>>35029009
In principle, if you could reach mach 4.5 and then zoom climb, engine running or not, you could reach the Karman line on inertia alone.

>>35030800
my bad you know what I mean. Those metal things that impact at high velocity because they're dropped from space. Works by kinetic energy

>>35030925
I know what they are, they're stupid if you know anything about orbital mechanics. They're going to require a rocket to deorbit them.

Fuck, go pirate ksp and get at least a basic understanding.

>>35021095
>Russians
A bunch of slavs using old AKs that aren't well maintained, drunk on vodka telling sci fi stories about "shit that totally exists my dad works for Putin"

>>35031002
Deorbiting them by using a centrifuge so that there's no recoil and you don't need a rocket to do it.

Now you only have the problem of aiming the rod (their explosive power is low, so you would need an accuracy higher than an ICBM, 50 m is a minimum, and your rod will be big and heavy and won't have all the fancy tech that the ICBM has (or if it has, it will be as expensive as missiles, so that counters the point of kinetic bombardment), and it can't use aerodynamic control surface because that would slow the rod, this lowering its penetrating/explosive power), and actually sending them in orbit ( current best *effective* cost to LEO is 5 millions per tons, with reusable rocket you can lower that but it's still going to be above 500k per ton, and you want these to be quite heavy).

Honestly IRBM/ICBM with conventional warhead aren't terribly more expensive (especially if you take into account the bombing space station's building), already exists, aren't much less effective (10 ton explosive vs 50-200 at most ) and won't freak out other nations as much ( if a single, announced ICBM launch will make everyone angry against you, imagine what an orbital station with dozens of Rods constantly above your enemies' and allies' head, potentially bearing nuclear weapons will do to your coutry's reputation...)

>>35031512
So you deorbit a rod and fling your station into a crazy wide orbit, or even past earths gravity well. Then you have to spend the same amount of energy to reacquire your LEO or geostationary orbit.

Full fucking stupid and there is no way you can beat the cost effectiveness of an icbm.

>>35030552
There was a reactor, but the plane still used its conventional (lel) propulsion.

>>35025118
Al actually did that and his family isn't full of malnurished suicidal drug addicts

File: 1489888219752.png (394KB, 641x425px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 641x425px

>>35021095
>MiG 41

Kek

>>35031869
Russia would be
Union of Soviet Socialist "defeated the nazis" Republics

>>35031561
Did you read my post?

Yes I agree that Icbms are better ( although if you can make your rod from an asteroid it can be argued in favor of the rod), but you can use a centrifuge cannon to deorbit the rod, just spin it very fast on a giant orbital centrifuge and throw it, since centrifuge cannon don't have recoil you don't have to put the station in the right orbit back.

Still dumb tho. And centrifuge cannon aren't as accurate as a high tech rocke guidance system.

>>35031957
"Throwing" something on a centrifuge is still going to cause action/reaction genius.

File: NB-36H_with_B-50,_1955_-_DF-SC-83-09332.jpg (3MB, 3000x2400px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3000x2400px

>>35029271

File: X-47B.webm (2MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 854x480px

Reminder to take it easy when you talk about upcoming military projects for any country, especially the superpowers
There are hundreds of reasons why one project might be cancelled or made secret or unsecreted or even (god forbid) actually go into active service
everyone here is just spitballing and talking out their ass and that's fine but you can't get too upset because you don't know jackshit either

File: peter-sellers-as-dr-strangelove.jpg?w=800.jpg (16KB, 800x459px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 800x459px

>>35029514
>make doomsday device
>don't tell anyone

File: 1407099922108.jpg (127KB, 484x789px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 484x789px

>>35031957
>since centrifuge cannon don't have recoil you don't have to put the station in the right orbit back

File: the madness that lurks beyond.png (137KB, 365x264px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 365x264px

>>35032006
>you will never sail the skies in the Flying Fukushima

File: enterprise.jpg (171KB, 1000x714px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1000x714px

>>35032094
At least we got to sail the seas in the Mobile Chernobyl.

>>35032073
>>35032004

No, it's going to spin the orbital station, the orbit itself won't change, and since it will stay in the orbit it will be much easier to slow down, using a yo-yo despin for example.