plane thread

File: cover-harborbranch.jpg (241KB, 1000x704px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1000x704px

>>15513130

File: Meteor shoots down V1.webm (504KB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 854x480px

>>>/k/
/m/ is slow as fuck why would you want a quasi-off topic thread in here about this?

>>15520052
She was too pure for this world.

File: YF23.jpg (195KB, 1500x948px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1500x948px

>>15520064
Along with teh fact that it was behind on testing, the internal weapon bays seriously compromised the structural integrity of the craft, which probably influenced the USAF's decision to choose the YF-22.
She was pretty sexy though, I agree.
Got my V tail fetish from her.

File: 1452274811183.jpg (681KB, 1800x1184px) Image search: [Google]

681KB, 1800x1184px

t h u d

File: Refueling F-15Es.webm (1MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 854x480px

>>15520095

File: 081112-F-7823A-306.jpg (1003KB, 2400x1597px) Image search: [Google]

1003KB, 2400x1597px

>>15520098
Gotta show the plus sized ladies some love.

File: XF-85 Goblin.jpg (149KB, 1800x981px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1800x981px

>Come on! Come on, Mothership! Let me go! Let me go!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvmwfoyIZLQ

File: american airpower meme.jpg (752KB, 3300x2550px) Image search: [Google]

752KB, 3300x2550px

>>15513130
Time for memes.

>>15520540
Who are they?

File: Dornier Do X Flying Boat.webm (3MB, 622x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 622x480px

>tfw no flying boat.

>>15520098
LEWD

File: Enterprisea.jpg (448KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 1920x1080px

>>15513130
White Base of WWII.

>>15520540
Not about air power, but design.

>>15520675
That's a real life super robot
>The Dornier Do X was the largest, heaviest, and most powerful flying boat in the world
>The Do X was financed by the German Transport Ministry and in order to circumvent conditions of the Treaty of Versailles, which forbade any aircraft exceeding set speed and range limits to be built by Germany after World War I, a specially designed plant was built at Altenrhein, on the Swiss portion of Lake Constance.
>Three Do Xs were constructed in total making them Do X, Do X2 and Do X3

>>15520098
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4pSjzI8BSw

File: F-104 fires a Genie.webm (2MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x480px

>>15520771
I recently found out they made the F-104 capable of firing a Genie nuclear air to air missile.

File: refailing.webm (1MB, 656x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 656x480px

>>15520098

File: Enterprise_Planes_Flying.jpg (696KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

696KB, 1920x1080px

>>15520749

>>15520604
Stalin and Ronald Reagan

>>15521680
w-why am I aroused by this image?

File: 1474834585808.jpg (157KB, 1600x1043px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1600x1043px

>>15523376
Nothing wrong with enjoying a Tomcat.

File: 1482474293331.jpg (1MB, 2550x3509px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2550x3509px

>>15523376
>>15523443
F-14s make me wanna CUM all over my HISTORIAs

>>15522534
I don't remember them looking like that.

>>15520604
guy on the right is Curtis Lemay, firebombed the fuck out of the Japs in WWII, lead the Air Force in the 50's

File: F14 Jolly Rogers.jpg (102KB, 1191x626px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1191x626px

So is this a Macross reference?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC97wdQOmfI
IKE YO FUNNEL

>>15523958
other way around, Macross was referencing these Tomcats of VF-84
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VF-84_(1955-95)

File: Jolly Roger Super Bug.jpg (531KB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 2100x1500px

>>15523971

That's the joke, wonder if they'll do high visibility markings on the F35. Someone said they would, but it would be matte.

File: 153_8979w7.jpg (240KB, 975x650px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 975x650px

Classic.

File: i have control.jpg (24KB, 704x528px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 704x528px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkZGL7RQBVw

>>15525284
R-riakutā merutodaun!!!

>>15525284
didn't know WWII engine actually powerful enough to explode let alone create lava

>>15525671
I think it's a high octane fuel mix doing that. I heard that special mixes used by certain planes destroyed an engine in around ~15 minutes.

File: 9307751124_c8e35bae7a_k.jpg (358KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 2048x1366px

THICC

File: DII_Box.jpg (62KB, 640x407px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 640x407px

>>15526317
That's RIGHT

JETFAGS BTFO, WE /PROP/ NOW
>YFW YWN EXPERIENCE THE WIND ON YOUR SKIN

haha

>>15526504
>YFW YWN EXPERIENCE THE WIND ON YOUR SKIN
It's way easier for you to get to fly a prop than a jet

>>15527065
>Here we see the Draken in its natural habitat

File: 1466950593977.jpg (81KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1200x675px

>>15527065
I wonder how does the designer of the Draken feel about the VF based off the Draken

>>15527335
That plane is pure aesthetics

File: refuel EA-6B.webm (1MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 854x480px

>>15527634
Good post.

File: 1494603993458.jpg (57KB, 540x512px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 540x512px

>>15520067
The crusader family is a weird one

File: HP Victor.jpg (264KB, 1152x780px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1152x780px

If brutalist architecture were a plane.

>>15527335
Dat lightning bolt on the electronics fairing.

File: Albatros.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>15526504
Why the fuck is flying these WWI things so damn comfy. It's unreal.

>>15525671
2,000+ BHP.

File: Aircraft-Aeroplane-Jet-30148.jpg (593KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 1920x1200px

>>15520540

even the ruskies in warthunder knows that the migs are shit, this is why everyone sticks with Sukkoi

Raptor type of nigga here,and i thank that to Novalogic Sims

and id be glade if theres away to play raptor and Lightning 3 with a T1600m FCS

File: Flanker black.jpg (389KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 1400x933px

>>15529014

Suhkois are pretty good, there's 3 4th generation planes with air to air kills with no air to air losses. F-15, Sea Harrier and Su-27. Though the Eagle has over 100 kills, the Sea Harrier has 20 and the Flanker has 6.

File: f-35a-lightning-ii_001.jpg (119KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1200x800px

>>15513130
f35 >>> eurocuck typhoon

File: F-35 is alright.jpg (1MB, 1370x3735px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1370x3735px

>>15529560
Also good post.

>>15529384
VIGILANTE'S WERE BEAUTIFUL

File: 20160421235948_1.jpg (249KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 1920x1080px

>>15528171
I love how "raw" early fighters are.
ROF did a good job of capturing that.

File: 1024px-F-111A_Wing_Sweep_Sequence.jpg (131KB, 1024x806px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 1024x806px

I've always liked this F-111's. Low altitude supersonic bomber, first ever variable wing design. Successful enough to not just be small batch experimental planes, but slowly showed it's limits an in the Cold War arms race.

File: 1444637638887.jpg (334KB, 1417x1121px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1417x1121px

>>15530778
More power!

File: 1485466698134.jpg (1MB, 3028x2364px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3028x2364px

>>15530802
Thrust vectoring rules the skies, Macross Plus style!

File: 1467875575869.jpg (141KB, 1500x1111px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1500x1111px

>>15530801
>tfw you will never know what it's like to dump and burn.

>>15530936
>real life getter 3

>>15527666
>ywn fly on a B-36
Why even keep breathing.

>>15523443
Assuming you've got a bottomless wallet.

>>15523660
Wait'll you see the procurement and maintenance bills. Guaranteed impotence.

While we're on the topic, you always hear about ungodly operating costs of the F-14 owing to its variable sweep wings, but you never hear anything about that regarding the Mirage G or the Panavia Tornado series. Why is that? What did the Euros do that we fcuked up?

>>15530801
A travesty from its very inception.

File: playboy tomcat.jpg (172KB, 1200x811px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1200x811px

>>15535685
It wasn't just the VG wings that made the Tomcat such an expensive bird, it was also the general maintenance required of all Navy birds due to saltwater corrosion and extreme stress in the airframe related to CATOBAR launches and carrier landings.
The Tornado and Mirage G are land based aircraft.

>>15520070
I'd wager the fact that she wasn't manufactured by Schlockheed and the competition was likely had something to do with it as well.

>>15520077
The sound it often made, whether from prematurely dropped ordnance or from plowing into the ground after taking enough 23mm shells.

>>15520084
World's first stealth aircraft.

>>15520162
A developmental waste of time and money countered the moment it entered service.

>>15520507
Whoever thought that was a good idea should've been shot.

>>15520518
The USAF loves its obsolescence.

>>15520540
Lies, damned lies and statistics.

>>15520786
A novelty weapon for a novelty aircraft. See also: polishing a turd.

>>15523962
Speaking of novelty weapons...

>>15525235
Something about the fuselage/tailplane configuration always looked kinda off to me.

>>15526317
Tempest was superior in every aspect.

>>15527146
Another Clarence Johnson novelty aircraft; really shoulda called it Albatross.

>>15527204
I never understood the appeal of canards.

>>15527335
Too bad that last upgrade got shot down in the early '90s, looked like it had a lot of potential.

>>15527634
I wouldn't say that exactly...

>>15527638
The high turtleback on that thing (and other contemporary US designs of the era) really irks me.

>>15527666
Too bad there ain't enough space for me to go into detail about why the vast majority of those sucked.

>>15528014
From the thumbnail I thought that was a P6M.

>>15528999
Another abortion that had no right existing even as a concept.

>>15529326
That boom sticking off the back kinda ruins it for me.

>>15529560
I find that claim highly questionable.

>>15529567
I shudder to think of all the hidden caveats there are in all those claims (assuming they have any merit).

>>15530801
Don't even get me started on that steaming pile.

>>15530886
Nor does anyone who ever flew it (and survived).

>>15534765
>ywn experience nothing of value

I find my country's having even built it to be greater cause to quit breathing.

>>15530621
By "raw" you mean crude?

>>15535693
I always wondered if that's where Kaoru Shintani got the idea for Mickey Simon's fin flash.

File: 1490481022075.jpg (19KB, 198x263px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 198x263px

>>15535757
Oh you.

Why does almost any variable topic thread have someone quote the whole thread for throw-away statements about nothing?

File: 8.jpg (145KB, 1000x777px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1000x777px

>ywn freeze to death during a 9 hour bombing run into Nazi Germany in your crew's B-17

>>15536577
Too many people have opinions on things they know nothing about.
Also, quoting more than 10 people in a single post should be a bannable offence, fuck its obnoxious as hell.

>>15536708
the crippling autism needed to click that many posts is its own punishment

>>15536747
That is the biggest paper airplane I have ever seen

File: 170505-F-PM645-0212.jpg (15KB, 592x394px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 592x394px

:Y

File: missile eyeball.webm (1MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x300px

>>15536759

File: 1410159274554.jpg (384KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 3264x2448px

HNNNNG HUD

File: Heinkell 162.jpg (56KB, 736x532px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 736x532px

>>15513130
Nazi was the true gentle/m/en

>>15536708
Should they just respond in a bunch of consecutive posts?

File: Boeing YF-16 proposal.jpg (43KB, 750x330px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 750x330px

>>15537107
Yeah, they should.

File: Screen Shot 2017-05-17 at 4.00.59 PM.png (958KB, 1476x1080px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 1476x1080px

>>15537161
That sure is a funny looking Sylphid.

File: too smart to hit buildings.jpg (127KB, 1200x746px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1200x746px

>>15513130

File: 1416388862192.jpg (163KB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 2100x1500px

Is the F-16 the ultimate grunt unit?

File: F-15C_2040.png (1MB, 1910x1078px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1910x1078px

>>15537274
The F-15C is.
dat k/d ratio mane

File: Aeronautica_Militare_Piaggio_P-180_Avanti 2.jpg (77KB, 925x643px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 925x643px

AESTHETIC

File: p1hh-zoom1[1].jpg (203KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1600x1000px

>>15537293

File: cri cri and mirage.jpg (376KB, 1024x709px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 1024x709px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAdCt6qgj9k

>>15537274
No, that would be the F-20. Oh wait...

>>15537408
All this time I thought the E.E./B.A.C. Lightning managed to get right what the F-104 sodded up.

File: flight-highschool-ch-47-pic-2.jpg (294KB, 900x2442px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 900x2442px

>>15537884
The Tigershark proved inferior to the Falcon

>>15537940
Only in terms of range and ordnance payload; in every other aspect it was pretty competitive as far as hard stats are concerned.

File: slavshit engines.png (172KB, 772x359px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 772x359px

>>15537925
If you really want to see incompetent aerospace engineering, you have to look at Russian planes.

>>15538071
That's just the engines.

File: 3DTV.webm (1MB, 479x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 479x360px

>>15538222
Engines are a pretty vital part of an airplane, buddy.

>>15538256
The airframes are perfectly fine; don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

File: dude no s-ducts lmao.jpg (190KB, 1279x959px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1279x959px

>>15538652
>The airframes are perfectly fine
wwwwww

>>15537940
Tigershark was never meant to be better than the Falcon. She was meant to be an alternative for people who couldn't buy the fancier F-16 due to export controls. Then Reagan happened and everyone who would have bought the F-20 was allowed to buy the F-16 which destroyed F-20's market.

>>15537297
I saw one of these in the wild once. They're a beautiful sight and its a damn shame that Beechcraft repossessed and scrapped most of them.

File: Textron-AirLand-Scorpion-Jet-13.jpg (279KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1024x768px

>>15537327
fat babby hornet

File: jasdf f-2 blessing.jpg (92KB, 900x489px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 900x489px

>>15537292
But it can't be a grunt unit if its incapable of jobbing

>>15539510
To be fair, I don't think there's a single American fighter jet that's jobbed in the 4th generation and beyond.

>>15539510
Heavy fighters today are like ace MS while light fighters are grunt MS.

File: alenia_t-100_desert.jpg?itok=LbId3i-U&timestamp=1487021086.jpg (153KB, 2200x1080px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 2200x1080px

This thread needs more Trainer Jets

>>15539145
It didn't help that the Pentagon was subsidizing foreign sales of the F-16.

>>15539963
it didn't help that the F-16 was generally far more capable than the F-20 too.

>>15539982
>>15537987

>>15540032
Range and payload are like the most important aspects to consider if your a client state of America that needs a cheap fighter, to be honest.

>>15540052
Not unless you intend to fight an offensive war, and considering the nations we're backing our client states against, it's a pretty safe bet they're not gonna be taking the fight to the enemy.

File: F16_SCANG_InFlight.jpg (969KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 1800x1200px

>>15540145
>unless you intend to fight an offensive war, range and payload aren't important
No.
Especially in modern aerial combat, where manuevrability isn't as important as maintaining speed, and where the missile is expected to do most of the combat manuevers.
Unless your one of those Soviet aerospace engineers that thought giving the Fulcrum a 600 sq. km range on internal tanks only was a good idea.

File: X-37B.jpg (4MB, 3000x2400px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3000x2400px

>>15540446
Space planes huh.

>>15540446
> plane remote control from ground
> no human override function if anything happen
> design seems skeptical to create sufficient lift through flat, horizontal plane runway (imagine adding a longer dildo on Concorde's tail & expect shit fly, like magic carpet or something)
> mach 5 but Concorde only able to reach mach 2.0+ due to metallurgy limitation & possible to make a molten flying cannonball during fly progress, instead of flying solid plane shape

not being hipster or anything because it's a hoax through facts analysis, but I'd give them that for "being innovative on blue plan", if not "try hard"
the engine seems theoretical possible IMO, but that could take more time to do a research & make it work actually IRL, that IF.

>>15540166
>where manuevrability isn't as important as maintaining speed

Mach 2+ isn't fast enough for you?

>where the missile is expected to do most of the combat maneuvers

Missiles are not a guaranteed kill. We learned about their limits the hard way in 'Nam.

>Unless your one of those Soviet aerospace engineers that thought giving the Fulcrum a 600 sq. km range on internal tanks only was a good idea.

Remember 'Nam? Where obsolete monkey model aircraft proved perfectly capable of swatting our cutting-edge top-of-the-line aircraft out of their airspace?

I feel like I'm talking to Robert McNamara.

File: phantom combat record vietnam.png (29KB, 433x458px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 433x458px

>>15541152
>Missiles are not a guaranteed kill. We learned about their limits the hard way in 'Nam
Yeah, still managed to make up the majority of air combat shootdowns.Also the missiles are infinitely more sophisticated and something like the AIM-9X will absolutely fuck most aircraft raw.
>Remember 'Nam? Where obsolete monkey model aircraft proved perfectly capable of swatting our cutting-edge top-of-the-line aircraft out of their airspace?
The MiG-21 was roughly on par with most US aircraft of the era, as well as being the same age. Also, we still maintained superior kill/death ratios over the NV. Most of our aircraft were lost due to the sophisticated air defence network in place in Vietnam, which is why we fucking invented SEAD, Wild Weasel, and (postwar) stealth/VLO shaped aircraft.

>>15541193
Nice statistics, McNamara. Doesn't change the fact that a considerable number of kills went unscored for want of integral guns.

>Also the missiles are infinitely more sophisticated

So are countermeasures. Missiles also tend to be considerably more expensive, and payload tends to be limited by number of hardpoints and weight concerns as they apply to handling and maneuverability, aerodynamics and operational range/fuel economy.

>The MiG-21 was roughly on par with most US aircraft of the era, as well as being the same age.

It also had a short operational range, which didn't make it any less of a threat to our aircraft since they were generally used in an aerial intercept role in their own airspace.

>we still maintained superior kill/death ratios over the NV

Economically, their forces were easier to field and maintain and their losses easier to sustain, and for nations that are not international superpowers that tends to have a significant impact on the ability to fight a war.

>>15535757

Autism

File: 205681d1341437480t-b-1b-air-launched-cruise-missile-pic-b-1b_acm_031_zps42d4df47.png (108KB, 400x164px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 400x164px

B-1R "Arsenal Lancer," aka the Boner.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFsYcK5lWrQ

File: image.jpg (88KB, 709x573px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 709x573px

>>15537940
YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH

File: image.jpg (71KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 960x640px

>>15540052
If you're a country facing the problem of a low defense budget and already operated the F-5 the F-20 made perfect sense. It required less maintenance than the F-20, had a higher sustained sortie rate, could carry just as much in the counter-air mission (2 Sidewinder and 4 AMRAAM as a projection for production standard aircraft) and had air-to-ground built into it's avionics architecture from the beginning. Even after the second crash Morocco and Bahrain still wanted it and so did Taiwan but we wanted to give away F-16As instead and in the case of Taiwan we were trying to place nice with China before Tiannemen Square so they didn't want to sell and license production of a BVR fighter to Taiwan. Also important to Taiwan was F-20s response time, there's no contest that it was much faster off the ground than the F-16.
Picture is a mock-up of the twin-rail AMRAAM pylon. There was also a Sidewinder one.

>>15540166
For Taiwan it would have been a good compromise. It had a better radar than the F-16A and was BVR capable. Plus they weren't expected to operate far from their bases. For that matter the JASDF probably would have been better buying F-20s than going with the F-2.

>>15542303
Eh, the 2A has the whole "carries heavy ASM payloads to tell boats to kindly fuck off" thing going on, though.

The 2A's niche is one that sorta encompasses that of the Strike Eagle, a fat multirole bird that at the end of the day is relied upon for an ability to move certain ordinance that forms the backbone of its mission profile (heavy irons for the Mudhen, ASMs for the Viper Zero)

>>15542317
>mudhen
Is it because it's black, I always wondered what that is. Like is it some sort of radar absorbent material, or did they just want to make it tacticool so they painted it black?

>>15542391
It's a low visibility dark grey, actually. Helps to distinguish from the ghost grey used on the regular Eagle, and more importantly make it difficult for someone to snuff the plane out on visuals alone.

As for the mudhen epithet, hell if I know how the airforce does it, they're turbonerds who come up with the weirdest nicknames.

Actually that describes the entire US armed forces. Fucking geeks everywhere. I hear that some actually nickname the 15E "Rodan."

>>15542391
Doesn't have anything to do with the color. It's called the mudhen because it's a air superiority fighter rebuilt for multirole/ground attack.

The Super Hornet uses the brevity code "Rhino" to differentiate it from the regular Hornet, the latter sometimes using the brevity code "Legacy." IIRC the Growler uses the code "Hooter", which used to be used by the EA-6.

File: 1435950939181.jpg (687KB, 1754x1754px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 1754x1754px

Air combat technology has come a long way since `Nam.

Stealth, sensors and networking is all the game now, not Top Gun airshow bullshit.

>in b4 quality Sukhoi steel folded a dozen times then quenched in vokda will defeat USAF you cyka blat

>>15542625
but but but the Su-27 can rapidly kill it's airspeed and make itself a better gun target!

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

File: 24_L-39_(N-757SF)_Violated_Reno_Air_Race_2014_photo_D_Ramey_Logan.jpg (98KB, 1280x772px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1280x772px

You could own one of these for a quarter of a million.

>>15542625
You see comrade, when Russian economy so bad and fighter jets so worthless the cost of Imperialist missile will exceed cost of Flanker and American pig dog will be forced to do of dogfighting

>>15538222
>just the engines.

Only the most important and expensive component, no big deal.

File: F14 skylight.jpg (291KB, 1024x637px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1024x637px

>>15542420
>>15542540

Strike Eagle also gets the nickname Beagle aka Bomb Eagle, of course there's the whole Falcon/Viper stuff. Legacy makes sense for the Hornet, its been a term to differentiate older generations of vehicles from their modern counterparts. I'd read Rhino for the Super Bug because its heavier than the Legacy Hornets.

File: drone_evoloution_of_capabilities.jpg (135KB, 751x562px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 751x562px

In the grim darkness of the near future there is only killdrones

>>15542625
LEWD.

>>15542672
You say that as though there've never been engine conversions before.

>>15542317
>Mudhen

?

>>15542540
>EA-6

I thought that was called "Queer".

File: North_American_XP-82_Twin_Mustang_44-83887.Color.jpg (208KB, 1200x782px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1200x782px

>>15542908

File: Screen Shot 2017-05-20 at 12.14.32 AM.png (24KB, 593x115px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 593x115px

>>15542853
Engine conversions of airframes built for a specific powerplant are really really really expensive and complicated. Might as well just buy an airplane that comes with competently built engines in the first place, like literally any
European or American jetfighter.
>>15542859
How have you never heard of the Mudhen nickname?

>>15542637
Say what you want to be about the JASDF but their commemorative schemes are pretty awesome, almost as good as some of the Luftwaffe Tiger Meet ones. Is the red F-15J three times as fast?

>>15521569
>>15520749
http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm13795987

>>15543580
>the Luftwaffe Tiger Meet ones

?

>>15537300
and they crashed it already

>>15543771
>handcrafted artseinal recreation of a racing airplane that never flew and is powered by two 'BUSA engines

I mean yes it's tragic but honestly it wasn't unexpected either.

>>15543709
Should have been more specific, Luftwaffe Tornado Tiger Meet schemes.

>>15543966
The reply remains unchanged.

>>15542630
The F-2 is seriously the stupidest thing ever thought of. The Japs should've just bought regular F-16s, same capability at 1/3 the cost

File: image.jpg (35KB, 400x254px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 400x254px

>>15544000

File: F-2.jpg (795KB, 4242x2490px) Image search: [Google]

795KB, 4242x2490px

>>15544034

Just part of their nationalism, they want something domestically made and would prefer a domestic design. Every country wants an indigenous aircraft, that and they wanted something for their super special anti-ship missiles. I like the F-2 personally, its like a fatty F16 like how the Strike Eagle is a fatty F15.

>>15544034
To be fair the F-2A is a pretty different bird than the F-16 very tailored to Japanese requirements. It's an AShM missile truck with an air-combat capability against most Chinese fighters and at that role it performs okay. The cost overruns and fatigue/production problems were made worse by the small production lot, on a larger scale it's production would have been much more practical. Also at the time of it's inception (and if you look at the early drafts for the design) you can see it was influenced by the F-16 CCV in a time when the F-16ES or Israeli Sufa weren't even thought of yet.

>>15544089
That and I'm pretty sure GD/Lockheed tendered a proposal for the FSX contract but part of the stipulation was a big percentage of manufacture had to be done in Ft. Worth and Japan wanted a 'Made in Japan' fighter regardless of their lack of experience in building combat aircraft. Though it was a big step forward in capability to support their new domestic fighter program since the US blocked them on the Raptor.

>>15544115

Think they're going to paint the F35 in that weird ocean camo the F2 has, what about their love of anti-ship missiles they going to try and slap some new one on the F35?

>>15538845
Is that supposed to be a rebuttal?

>>15544122
>paint

Depends on if the RAM paint can take a dye/enamel without problems. I think the Israeli's have already done desert camo on their F-35s. Though I've heard the coating on the F-35 is a lot cheaper and easier to maintain since it's the third generation of stealth, no need for climate-controlled hangers like the B-2 or F-22, and less hazardous for the ground crew to be exposed to.

>ASuW missiles

Probably. The Navy has the Harpoon and SLAM-ER on it's roadmap for the F-35C, and there's a new stealth ASuW missile under development, shouldn't be too hard.

>>15544189
Note the lack of diverterless intakes, they're a vital feature on any low RCS aircraft. Basically a radar can look right down the intakes and see the nice meaty reflection of those spinning fan blades.

File: F-2A.jpg (86KB, 619x517px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 619x517px

>>15544200

Indigenous Japanese anti-ship missiles on F35s, unless they're for external pylons only they're going to have to do something about the length of their anti-ship missiles to use them internally mounted.

File: f-117-2.jpg (93KB, 1200x964px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1200x964px

>>15544367
Oh yeah, internally would never be a option just due to the bay size. ASuW missiles need to be big due to the need for long range and a large warhead. The issue right now is that you're sacrificing the aircraft's radar signature to mount it externally, because what work has been done into "lamprey" attachments, stealth pylons, and/or making the stores themselves LO has been fairly limited, since there hasn't been a need for it.

File: f-117-1.jpg (111KB, 1200x964px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1200x964px

>>15544451

File: image.jpg (61KB, 497x378px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 497x378px

>>15544122
The ASM-3 will most likely go on the JASDF F-35s. I imagine they could design a canister launcher for it to minimize the LO penalty it creates but an F-35 at NOE over the ocean is pretty hard to spot. I've seen more than one CG picture of it in the blue scheme so fairly certain they're going with it, especially considering the Israeli scheme. The reason you can't paint an F-22 like that is because of the optic camo.

>>15513130
All I know about the CF-100 is that one of them crashed into a covenant and killed a bunch of nuns.

File: German Tornado.jpg (2MB, 3072x2048px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x2048px

>>15544748

Happens when your roundel is A FUCKING LEAF

File: miniature hit to kill.jpg (57KB, 752x423px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 752x423px

>>15544830
wow rude
>>15541427
>so are countermeasures
ehh not really, flares are easily defeated by some modern heatseekers that can sort out the shape of an aircrafts thermal signature.
as for missiles being limited by hardpoints, there's been much development into miniaturizing A2A hit to kill missiles, so that you can stuff a dozen into the internal bays of an F-35. plus the limited payload is offset by the much higher hit probability. bullets might be cheap, but aircraft and pilots are far more expensive. that's why almost all A2A kills in the last 30 years have been missile kills.

File: t50.jpg (69KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1280x720px

>tfw the T-50 looks gorgeous from the side, but hideous at any other angle

Why did they make it so fucking wide?

>>15545049
Its a Flanker in a bodykit

File: Su-35 Flanker-E.jpg (150KB, 1280x854px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1280x854px

>>15545097

Flanker isn't stupid wide, it actually has a pleasing silhouette from the top and bottom

File: AIM-9X_2.webm (1MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x360px

>>15545102
Presumably because of lowering RCS reasons.
Despite the memes that some retards push, every nation that is invested in an indigenous 5th gen fighter are all trying desperately to keep the RCS of their designs low because they know its all about who gets the first shot off now.

>>15537188
wat the holy fuck is that

File: su27t510.jpg (59KB, 800x536px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 800x536px

>>15545102
The Flanker is stupid wide, but it's also longer
Also note the engine placement is almost exactly the same on both the PAK FA and Flanker

File: that_word.gif (921KB, 245x217px) Image search: [Google]

921KB, 245x217px

>>15544748
>covenant

>>15544200
>Note the lack of diverterless intakes, they're a vital feature on any low RCS aircraft

I was under the impression we were talking about Russian aircraft in general, not exclusively the stealth gimmick aircraft. Or are you saying all their non-stealth aircraft suck because their stealth aircraft has a design flaw compromising its stealth? Because that wouldn't make sense.

>>15526317
>Tempest
>Good
>Unreliable and complicated engine
>high landing speed
>and britbong sucked Turbo-supercharger
>shotter range

>>15546347
>>15535757

>>15545159
Airbus Beluga, it's the company's means of getting their fuckmassive plane parts from their individual factories in different eurozone nations to the central assembly plant.

The hump is the cargo hold, the front part lifts up.

File: 30C1C1AD7.jpg (75KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1024x768px

>>15546152
It depends. Diverterless intakes aren't a huge issue on older aircraft because they weren't designed for RCS reduction. It's not going to matter much if you put a low RCS door on a radar signature the size of a F-4 Phantom.

But when you start designing your aircraft to be stealthy, either fully or just a bit of RCS reduction to get that extra edge of maybe the enemy's radar sees you at 50km instead of 75km, you're going to want them.

Here's the intakes on the Rafale M to compare. So IMO it's quite telling when the Russians can't figure out how to put them on a stealth fighter when the US, French and Chinese are doing them on regular aircraft like the Rafale and J-10. Not to mention that they cut their order from 200 to 10 airframes.

>>15547126
>Russians can't figure out how

Or perhaps they decided to just forego it to cut costs and ease production.

>Not to mention that they cut their order from 200 to 10 airframes.

Didn't we cut our order for F-22 airframes as well?

>>15546350
Hey, Me 262 pilots respected it, unlike anything WE ever fielded in the war.

>>15547581

Self hating Americans are honestly the worse

>>15547597
I wouldn't hate us so much if we could ever actually NOT screw up.

File: Chuck_Yeager.jpg (3MB, 3300x2550px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3300x2550px

>>15547581
>Hey, Me 262 pilots respected it

"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down"
-C. Yeager

>>15547619
>face value and oversimplification

"The Messerschmitt Me 262's most dangerous opponent was the British Hawker Tempest - extremely fast at low altitudes, highly manoeuvrable and heavily armed."
-Hubert Lange

>>15547788

Not sure what you're trying to argue here?

Why should we care about Me262 pilots when it comes to discussing planes that aren't Me262?

>>15547581
>Hey, Me 262 pilots respected it, unlike anything WE ever fielded in the war.

More Me262's were destroyed by USAAF than the RAF

>>15547576

To like 187, I'm still sure Lockheed is keeping the plants on a sort of "emergency shit out F-22s" standby.

>>15547576
>Or perhaps they decided to just forego it to cut costs and ease production.

But that's the thing. Diverterless intakes are lighter, cheaper and easier to maintain than variable geometry ones, and increase a stealth aircraft's stealthieness. They're something like the Area Rule where once you figure out, there's no real reason not to use it.

>Didn't we cut our order for F-22 airframes as well?

750 was the initial number to replace the entire F-15C air defense fleet. This was reduced to 339, 277 and then finally 183 due to budget cuts and "we're only bombing dirt farmers and China/Russia will never be threats in the future so why do we need air defense fighters?" retardation. (The AF says that the absolute minimum to replace the F-15 fleet would have been 381, which is why the F-35 went from "stealth A-7 with self-escort capabilities" to doing air superiority too.)

But cutting their entire order down to 10 units, barely a single squadron, indicates A) the Russians have no money and B) there are likely serious flaws with the airframe that the Indians haven't been told about yet.

>>15547866
wow, the front part almost looks like YF-19

File: 1457585519277-1.jpg (361KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1200x1600px

>>15547908
Poland wants to make anime real.

>>15547980
the plane looks really short in other views, but looks great at this angle.

>>15547866
>>15547980
Aww, it's like a Baby Morgan.

>>15547980
>wants
Wanted.
Because budget cuts.

>>15535757
>I am wrong on everything the post.

>>15547608
But we screw up less than everybody else. You suffer from the grass is greener on the other side syndrome.

File: ATD-X 1.jpg (4MB, 5700x3208px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5700x3208px

SOON

File: F-35 in afterburners at night.jpg (870KB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

870KB, 2100x1500px

>>15547864
>F-35 went from "stealth A-7 with self-escort capabilities"

What the fuck?

I thought it was supposed to be the "Stealth F-16" to the Raptor's "Stealth F-15"

>>15548480
It still is.

I forget not every country will ok multi-billions in defense spending.

>>15548501
those countries aren't worth talking about.

>>15548501

>Not approving mult-billion dollar defense budget
>""""""country""""""

ahahahahahahahah

>>15547816
that's because the uk's FAST was deployed to counter ROCKETS. v1 and v2's were chased down, overtaken and shot down by mosquitoes, etc.

File: f16148.jpg (47KB, 722x356px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 722x356px

>>15544106
>F-16 CCV

I'm still disappointed they didn't go that route.

File: F-4s Fast and Low.webm (3MB, 854x424px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 854x424px

Why are jets so aesthetic?

I know this is /m/ but fuck me jet combat is so much cooler than mech combat

>>15547816
Yeah, by vulching.

>>15551313
It's the better tactic to destroy jets.

>>15547581
That was because they never found P-47M en masse as it came too late and took sometime to fix their bugs.

>>15551324
Don't forget the P-51H.

>>15548239
Project harder, kid.

>>15548244
That's a pretty brazen (and dubious) claim on both counts. Our military contemporaries - particularly the western national powers - don't seem nearly as plagued as ours is by an ingrained culture of corruption and ineptitude, especially where the defense industry is concerned.

>>15551319
The fact that it was the ONLY viable tactic to destroy jets is cause for shame.

>>15551324
>>15551493
>US incessantly late in keeping up with the curve

Our military history in a nutshell.

>>15551493
>>15551719
They should not halt XP-72 project despite it was flown as soon as feb 1944 for arriving jet age desu. Somehow creating the whole new things are better trying to upgrade the the old.

>>15513130
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4FpZ-zFoaU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4cHOqTGjrU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zl0_4qEeUI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7b8JHAZLc9I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzWc8ES5jl0

>>15548694
>v2's were chased down, overtaken and shot down

wut

>>15554491
I think they meant V1s.

>>15554491
I don't know what he is talking about. V2s were actually diverted somewhere else instead. V1s were shot down.

>>15554529
He did say V1 in his post. Probably just a moron. V2s getting shot down was more luck than anything else.

>>15554534
>V2s getting shot down was more luck than anything else.
>implying it ever happened

>>15523660
God I love Ace Combat

>>15554532
weren't a lot of doodlebugs flipped off course by flipping them with the fighters wing?

>>15548820
When the design shifted to emphasize the support role more than the fighter role (Japan was pretty sure they were getting F-22s for a long time) the manuverability the CCV would have conferred to the airframe was seen as redundant. They opted instead for a larger wing and carrying capability (basically the Super Bug treatment for the F-16). Someone should have mentioned to them how hard it is to make a wing out of composites though if you have pretty limited experience working with them.

>>15551719
>contemporaries
>not plagued by corruption

First of the United States has NO military contemporaries. This isn't even subject to debate. We would curb-stomp anyone that messed with us with systems that are so sophisticated you can't even fathom their capabilities. That's why all of our military programs look like dumpster fires with runaway price tags...you're only seeing the declassified side of the program.

Also, let's look at a contemporary program. Say the Eurofighter. I would hardly call that program an example of finely run program. Same could be said of the Rafale. The SPH-70 was a fiasco for the Europeans, everyone ended up going their own way decades later. Eurocopter seems to expect bid rigging and bribes to be part of the acquisition process. The Australians can't figure out how to build a sub so they make a leap from buying SSKs off of Japan to trying to buy Virginias off of the US. Canada would rather keep flying Hornets with expired airframes than purchase the fighter with the best integrated avionics suite ever made. The list goes on and on.

As for jets in WW2, we should be thankful Germany spent so much resources on them and their development. Every 262 build was that many less Fw-190D or Ta-152H built. Same thing for their Tigers. Keep wasting what little you have on wunderwaffen, conventional weapons beat them fair and square. Also Me-262s tended to be just as dangerous to themselves as being attacked by fighters: the engine was unreliable and the construction work was second rate, both things that work to your disadvantage in air combat.

>>15548989
There goes another village full of civilians...

>>15558275
More like VC sympathizers.

>>15556324
A bunch, since a lot of pilots were wary of shooting at a flying bomb at close range. Iirc, tipping it would cause some valves to cut off the fuel supply to the pulsejet.

The first Gloster Meteor V1 kill was by this method because all its guns jammed.

>>15556993
>Say the Eurofighter. I would hardly call that program an example of finely run program

It's taken the same amount of time to put a single AESA radar on a single EF2000 as the amount of time the entire JSF/F-35 program has existed.

>>15558531
Don't forget how, due to economies of scale, a single Eurofighter costs more than a single F-35.

>>15558275
There is no such thing as civilians in a war.

>>15548466
are the japs actually going to production model this?

please say yes!

>>15558722
The ATD-X is a testbed for various technologies destined for their 5/6th gen indigenous fighter, which is apparently designated as the F-3.
The ATD-X airframe itself is not going to be refined into a combat aircraft.
Try to think of it as the VF-0 to the VF-1 (even though in Macross Zero the VF-0 did see combat, it wasn't actually meant to)

>>15556993
Perhaps you should look up the definition of contemporary before shooting your mouth off.

>We would curb-stomp anyone that messed with us with systems that are so sophisticated you can't even fathom their capabilities.

Just like in Vietnam, right?

>you're only seeing the declassified side of the program

I can only imagine how much more obscene the classified side is.

>that whole second paragraph

Other countries' problems don't excuse our incompetence, and it certainly doesn't excuse the old boy shenanigans on our part.

>Eurocopter seems to expect bid rigging and bribes to be part of the acquisition process

Just like Schlockheed and G(od)D(amn).

>The Australians can't figure out how to build a sub so they make a leap from buying SSKs off of Japan to trying to buy Virginias off of the US

Probably just sell 'em off to the ChiComs like they did their carrier.

>Canada would rather keep flying Hornets with expired airframes than purchase the fighter with the best integrated avionics suite ever made.

Better to go with something cost-effective and proven that's beyond its service life than with a gimmicky novelty platform you can't even afford and is STILL plagued with problems.

>muh WW2

You forget how much executive interference played in the 262 getting jobbed. If it hadn't been held up by an amphetamine addict they may have made more progress and been able to deploy it more effectively before their economy started to REALLY deteriorate.

>conventional weapons beat them fair and square

Completely missing the point.

>Me-262s tended to be just as dangerous to themselves as being attacked by fighters: the engine was unreliable

You seem to have mistaken it for the Komet; an engine dying out prematurely isn't as consistently lethal as an engine that tends to outright explode from temperamental fuel.

>and the construction work was second rate

Not really a problem with design so much as quality control in a rapidly deteriorating situation.

>>15558840
jesus christ just kill yourself

>>15558842
fuck that nigga, I'm winning the post