>after 40 years and $100,000,000,000, the most advanced and powerful aircraft ever created will likely go to its retirement having been deployed in exactly one combat mission, where it shot down a weather balloon
Is this the biggest blue balls in history?
It was merely a prelude to creating the best belly ever made.
Yamato.
Sunk at Battle of Jutland without firing a shot.
This is the truth they're trying to keep from us.
Who says it's going into retirement?
I'm extrapolating to when NGAD goes online, and there's already been repeated funding/maintenance cuts to the F-22 ahead of it
>and there's already been repeated funding/maintenance cuts to the F-22 ahead of it
No there hasn't. Even though the AF wanted to decommission some early Block 20 F-22, congress told them no and funded them. Also, they've been undergoing a multibillion dollar upgrade program for the last 2 years on top of normal funding. Stop being retarded, and making these ill-informed shit threads. Is this really the only way you can get people to talk to you? Pathetic.
> ill-informed shit threads.
Anon pls. The Air Force has officially stated at this point that the NGAD will retire the F-22 as soon as there's a large enough number of them. It's a key part of the 4+1 (now 4) fighter plan they've made for the future.
Please quote these official sources, and a year when they will be retired.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/csaf-f-22-not-in-usafs-long-term-plan/
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/brown-faster-than-expected-a-10-retirements-turning-41-fighter-plan-into-just-4/
Starting at 13:55, Future Air Force structure:
?t=837
General Brown talks about the 4 fighter program, which consists of
>F-16
>F-15EX
>F-35
>F-22
At 15:30 he says the F-22 will be upgraded and maintained in inventory until there's enough NGADs rolled out.
>No they likely wont be
It's the plan to abandon them. Plans of course change, but that's what the people on top are saying.
It's an expensive platform that will be ludicrously outperformed by the NGAD, trying to fill a niche where it simply can't compete with its inevitable replacement. The networking + AI support capabilities in the NGAD will represent just as big a leap, if not a greater one, as going from non-stealth aircraft to stealth.
>until there's enough NGADs rolled out
which means it'll be in service until ~2045-50
Transition is planned for 2030, not the 40s. With the vigor they're pushing for the F-22's retirement, only getting cockblocked by congress on those old airframes, I'm more than willing to believe the F-22 will be dumped sooner than later.
A complement of F-35s and NGADs, + whatever loyal wingmen and other AI hijinks they'll get up to will more than make up for any F-22s in service. It just doesn't have a place in the future structure.
No, entry to service is planned for the 2030s, which will be a handful of units per year in low-rate initial production for the first 5-10 years before ramping up to full-rate production of probably ~20/year at most.
These are planned to be $300m+ aircraft, they will have a long production time scale, and likely can't be scaled up massively to produce a ton at a time quickly.
This means by the time the F-22 is actually fully out of active service it'll be at LEAST 2040, if not 2045.
>No, entry to service is planned for the 2030s,
2030 is when the phase out is planned to begin.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/new-force-design-ngad-needed-soon-f-22-sunset-begins-in-2030/
And the signaling on the plan has been to accelerate the replacement, not let it drag on over decades.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/change-must-continue-air-force-brown/
It's a good chunk of why the brown man named Brown got his role in the first place.
>I'ts almost 2024, you do know that, right?
Are you possibly underage, or why do you see a few years as mattering that much?
The other article is from March 2023 and shows no changes except dumping the flying turd A-10.
>Brown isn't the Chief of the AF anymore.
Kendall himself reiterates the same shit.
>When will this be? 2040 at the very earliest.
2030 is when it's planned to start.
>Even 2030 - the earliest the NGAD will enter LRIP is a LONG time to be talking in absolutes given the history of the Air Force's, and Congress's flip-flopping.
History didn't end, so there's no real room for that anymore. Just because you're living in normalcy bias and assuming things are going on as they have after the Soviet Union collapsed, doesn't mean that's reality.
>Are you possibly underage
No, which is why I know this is going to change 100%.
>or why do you see a few years as mattering that much?
The AF has wanted to retire the A-10 for decades, and Congress told them no. The AF has very little say in what they actually do. Congress changes every 2 years, meaning new people and new thinking.
>The other article is from March 2023 and shows no changes except dumping the flying turd A-10.
So, it changed? Got it.
>Kendall himself reiterates the same shit.
Kendall is a political appointment and won't be there in 2025.
>2030 is when it's planned to start.
Start. So, even by your article's claims, they wouldn't have enough NGAD's to replace the F-22s, and even if Congress lets them retires some, it will be Block 20s and no more than 30 of them.
>History didn't end, so there's no real room for that anymore.
What are you even trying to say?
>Just because you're living in normalcy bias and assuming things are going on as they have after the Soviet Union collapsed, doesn't mean that's reality.
It's been like this since WWII, why is it going to change now, just because you hope it does? You're just arguing to have someone to talk to. Lucky for you, I pity you and will give you your needed attention and dopamine hit.
>Congress changes every 2 years, meaning new people and new thinking.
The party discipline barely disappears. The people change, but it's the same two boots in place.
>Kendall is a political appointment and won't be there in 2025.
What new direction do you purport his replacement will represent? Is there any candidate who would drive down arms production? To not take advantage of modern threats to drive up the MIC?
>What are you even trying to say?
The idea that all the great wars have been fought and that we'll have milquetoast liberal democracy from now on is dead. Attitudes reflecting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man
have been very common in the West and its neglect of military production and capabilities. As modern threats rise, there is a new need to build up capabilities and match enemies and prepare for modern wars. That means the usual slow pace of production in the past decades is no longer viable. China is building up its military with all the speed a socialist state can. That is why the NGAD's production will be accelerate as much as possible.
>It's been like this since WWII, why is it going to change now, just because you hope it does?
Modern production and design capabilities, the clearly stated intent and attempt to accelerate production, the instability of modern civilization as fossil fuel costs rise and our global economy buckles in the face of the future. The decline in US influence and attempt by China to step up to match it.
>You're just arguing to have someone to talk to. Lucky for you, I pity you and will give you your needed attention and dopamine hit.
What exactly is your problem? What compels you to be an asshole?
And all of this assumes the US will have money for NGAD. The way things are going with the Federal budget and the USD, we might end up barely able to afford to keep old aircraft flying.
>will more than make up for any F-22s in service. It just doesn't have a place in the future structure.
Are we sure about that? NGAD is supposed to be some sort of flying wing that carries a tonne of fuel and is suited for the long distances of the pacific. But wouldn’t it be nice to have something like the f-22 that can just rape Russia’s Air Force in Eastern Europe if necessary?
From what I understand, the idea involves planes getting to high altitudes at fast speeds so they can lob missiles with maximum energy while using stealth to prevent the other guy from getting a lock. Using drone wingmen helps protect the pilot and possibly act as missile trucks while the plane functions like a stealthy mini-AWACS. Honestly the stealth is supposed to be the big selling point for NGAD because it's being designed to fly in heavily contested airspace in the case of a peer conflict (coughcoughchinainvadingtaiwancough).
Dogfighting is a meme at this point, supermaneuvrability doesn't really serve a purpose here. BVR is the future.
>https://www.airandspaceforces.com/csaf-f-22-not-in-usafs-long-term-plan/
>2021
Also, Brown isn't the Chief of the AF anymore. I'ts almost 2024, you do know that, right?
>“The F-22 is still undergoing modernization,” USAF spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said. “There are no plans to retire it in the near-term.”
>The F-22 will “eventually” retire from the inventory
So, nothing on when. Also, give something from 2023, not nearly 3-year-old shit.
>https://www.airandspaceforces.com/brown-faster-than-expected-a-10-retirements-turning-41-fighter-plan-into-just-4/
>The service will focus its investments on its newest F-22s and is seeking to retire 32 of the oldest airframes, a move which Congress declined to allow in the fiscal 2023 budget. But the F-22 Block 30/35s will continue to be updated and kept in service until NGAD replaces them, Brown said.
>kept in service until NGAD replaces them
When will this be? 2040 at the very earliest.
>Starting at 13:55, Future Air Force structure:
?t=837
>At 15:30 he says the F-22 will be upgraded and maintained in inventory until there's enough NGADs rolled out.
No shit. I said they were upgrading them, and have they have no idea on an actual retire date. Even 2030 - the earliest the NGAD will enter LRIP is a LONG time to be talking in absolutes given the history of the Air Force's, and Congress's flip-flopping.
Again, you're ill-informed, retarded, and only make these shit threads to have someone talk to you besides your walls.
No. DEM/VAL is scheduled for 2027-2030, LRIP after that, and there won't be any meaningful numbers of NGAD(AF) until 2040-50. If they actually are going with Boeing, make that 2065, and billions over budget.
The Cold War is back, anon.
against who?
China and Russia combined don't even have half the number of aircraft the US has, and most of Russia's aircraft are old airframes that are killing more of their pilots than anything else.
F-15SA is SAUDI ARABIA, and has nothing to do with the US, and the miniscule F-15XX that the US get are replacements for old airframes, nothing more. I don't know what this is supposed to even prove?
F-15EX production is all new airframes
F-15EX is literally the F-15SA, and F-15QA. Which is the only reason the US is even buying the small amount they are. SA and Qatar paid for the design, and production upstart. It's a welfare program for Boeing.
Why are they having so much trouble then?
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2023/11/02/we-missed-our-mark-next-boeing-f-15ex-delivery-coming-in-november/
>Boeing missed that deadline, GAO said, mainly due to a supplier’s quality problems with a critical part in the fighter’s forward fuselage that is necessary for flight safety. GAO addedthat the Defense Contract Management Agency found Boeing mis-drilled holes to install the windscreen on four fighters due to a faulty tool.
Because it's fucking Boeing. They are never on time, or budget. Look at the KC-46 Pegasus as a prime example. Or any of Boeing Defense, Space & Security programs of the last 2 decades.
That number will be closer to 70-80 when it's finally done. They cost $120 million, and only offer marginal gains in max load-out. Mainly on the centerline pylon.
>F-15 design took 5 years to LRIP from the moment the US saw the MiG-25, took 3 years in LRIP and produced over 200 airframes in two years.
It's not 1970, and fighters require much more sophisticated materials, avionics, and hardware. Which is why you don't see this happening in Russia, China, nor the US since 1990. You fucking low IQ retard.
>The EX has a capacity of 29,500 pounds (13,400 kg)
Yes, and it also needs external targeting pods, and EW pods that eat into that weight, and takes up pylons that are now unable to be loaded with munitions.
>compared to the F-35's 18,000 lbs (~8160kg).
No, the F-35A has a max load-out of 22,000lbs. Why are you comparing the 18k capacity of the F-35C to an AF fighter? Stop being a israelite, you utter fucking brainlet. Compare AF to AF.
A cheaper bomb truck
An F-15EX costs $120 million. Which is $42 million more than the F-35A. How is that cheaper? Are you terrible at math?
>F-35s are expensive to fly and are needed in places where the enemy has threats to air.
So are F-15EX's when you add in the maintenance costs of all the external pods it needs to even survive in today's battlefield environment.
Then they need to stop buying them really soon, cause they're planning on 70+ in like 2 years.
They most likely will. Especially with all the problems with parts quality, and Boeing being Boeing.
History says otherwise
if anything they'll double down and we'll end up with 150-250 in total after 10 years.
>It's not 1970, and fighters require much more sophisticated materials, avionics, and hardware.
And their design and production is also much more sophisticated. Modern simulations of materials and avionics is something those guys couldn't even have dreamed of.
>Which is why you don't see this happening in Russia, China, nor the US since 1990.
You sure it's not because the Soviet Union fell?
>You fucking low IQ retard.
Why are you such a cunt? Come on.
>And their design and production is also much more sophisticated. Modern simulations of materials and avionics is something those guys couldn't even have dreamed of.
Hasn't helped them yet. How is that going to help them produce cutting edge electronic, avionics, algorithms, etc?
>You sure it's not because the Soviet Union fell?
Yes. I'm positive.
>Why are you such a cunt? Come on.
Because you're low IQ, and continue to make the same shit thread at least twice a week. Why are you such a fucking retard that never learns anything?
>Because you're low IQ,
Why does someone not being smart drive you into anger? Is this some childhood thing where the only thing you were ever recognized for was your intelligence? Conditional love, so long as you were good in school? Contempt like this isn't normal.
Whatever you say, plarealtalk. Nobody likes stupid people: they only pity them. I don't.
They offer nothing to the AF they don't already have, and cost $43 million more than an F-35A. Not happening.
>Nobody likes stupid people
Dislike should not drive you into anger. It's insecurity that gives rise to feelings of hatred, to motivate you into finding security again. Why are you angry about people being stupid? It clearly riles up something in your psyche.
>they only pity them
Why would you pity someone who doesn't seek it? That's just insulting and egoistic wanking. Again, that points to what I wrote above. Being intelligent seems to be some crucial part of your self-worth, which is why you react to its lack like this.
>Dislike should not drive you into anger.
Who says I'm angry, Sigmund Fraud?
You:
>Why are you such a fucking retard that never learns anything?
>Because you're low IQ
>You fucking low IQ retard.
> Stop being a israelite, you utter fucking brainlet.
Claiming you were merely pretending at this point would be ridiculous.
>Fraud
Have you had bad therapeutic experiences, or are you just making excuses for yourself why you shouldn't seek it?
Calling you a fucking retard doesn't indicate anger, Sigmund Fraud. Only a literal homosexual, tranny, or woman trying to psychoanalyze someone when they get BTFO in an online debate.
>Calling you a fucking retard doesn't indicate anger
Do you genuinely think I'll believe that?
>Only a literal homosexual, tranny, or woman trying to psychoanalyze
Let's say I'm a homosexual then, can you elaborate on:
>when they get BTFO
This. Why do you feel the need to be intelligent and right? Where does this insecurity stem from? Even in an anonymous online discussion the perception of being challenged and not intelligent drives you up the wall. How come?
Go back to /lgbt/ where you belong.
It would do you good to think about what exactly drives your insecurity. Life is much lighter if you release unnecessary burdens and focus on what truly matters to (You) personally, instead of carrying weights placed on your back as a child.
Ah yes, more psychoanalyzing.
Your contempt or fear of others understanding you is notable. If others saw who you really are, they would not hate you as much as you feel they would.
~100 F-15EXs isn't peanuts, that's 3x what Qatar ordered. Though Qatar has the option for 36 more by 2026 if they want which would continue the F-15 production run further.
>I don't know what this is supposed to even prove?
F-15 design took 5 years to LRIP from the moment the US saw the MiG-25, took 3 years in LRIP and produced over 200 airframes in two years.
The EX has a capacity of 29,500 pounds (13,400 kg), compared to the F-35's 18,000 lbs (~8160kg). A cheaper bomb truck that doesn't compromise one of its biggest values (stealth - because it doesn't have it) by loading stuff onto pylons is something the USAF does need. F-35s are expensive to fly and are needed in places where the enemy has threats to air.
No they likely wont be, honestly I wouldn't shocked at all to see them being forward deployed to guam/japan just to fuck with china.
The Air Force says stupid shit all the time but Congress usually keeps them grounded in reality.
Remember the fancy awe-the-thirdies airliner mod?
Secretary of the Air Force.
It's also sensible, since if the NGAD comes online, there's little point in maintaining another, old system in its exact same niche like that, considering flight hour costs and everything.
Dumb fuck. F-35 is going to completely replace F-16. They wouldn't retire it.
The OP pic is the F-22, not the F-35
>F-35 is going to completely replace F-16.
It's not. F-16 is a completely viable low-cost aircraft to supplement the F-35 in lower threat environments and longer lasting operations, with easier maintenance and higher readiness rates. Once the enemy IADS is degraded or non-existent, flights with F-16s are far more economical and numerous compared to F-35 ones.
The F-22 is not a low-cost aircraft. The NGAD completely overtakes its niche as an expensive air-superiority fighter.
I'm pretty sure this anon was trying to use an anology to say "F-35 didn't replace the F-16".
It is likely that the F-16 will get replaced by drones within 20 years. Sometimes the drones will act as NGAD or F-35 wingman and bomb trucks, and in many cases when extra eyes up closer aren't needed or due to drones being cheaper to fly the drones will be used.
F-16V will be kept around for a long time in the ANG.
They're buying 600 F-16V upgrade kits for their F-16Cs.
I did say within 20 years. That's 2043 by the latest.
So yes, F-16 will be kept around for a long time. I'm not disagreeing there.
We usually consider airframe lifetime to be 30-50 years. The F-16V upgrade kits are on existing airframes.
Eventually, they'll be replaced, and likely be drones.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/aero/documents/F-16/22-06570_F-16-Viper-6Panel_Digital.pdf
SLEP is being offered as part of the upgrade program.
I expect we'll still have F-16V's in service with the Air National Guard until 2050 or maybe even later.
>does the exact same with NGAD in 30 years
how about the US stops inventing new fighters until there is an actual reason to need one?
>just don't prepare until it's too late
dumb as fuck
How about no, you third world shit. We are going to keep one upping every pretend aircraft you throw out and screech about once a year, even though we both know it's a paper mache model that you have no intent of ever actually producing.
We will continue to develop and improve our military technology despite being vastly superior to the entire rest of humanity. It is not enough that America can solo fight the entire world to standstill or perhaps even victory without the assistance of our allies. Until the day when America can eradicate all human life outside of our borders without taking a single casualty of our own, it is not enough.
This needs to be expanded to aliens btw (the true purpose of f22 modernization)
> vastly superior to the entire rest of humanity
Afghanistan excluded, I guess.
>nooo America lost, they LOST!
Hey ok bud, do you want to be on the receiving end of that kill death ratio where you have to hide in holes in the ground for 20 years then claim you "won" after your enemy got tired of mercilessly murdering you and left?
>you have to hide in holes in the ground for 20 years then claim you "won" after your enemy got tired of mercilessly murdering you and left?
working pretty well for Ukraine
That's not a totally one sides slaughter with the entire country occupied anon.
>america "wins" afghanistan by spending a trillion dollars and 20 years in some shithole sandbox
>leaves it behind exactly as it was before
>also gifts the enemy a bunch of milsurp
If this is an american victory, I don't want to know what an american loss looks like.
It's not a victory. Answer the question anon, do you want to be on that winning side? Hmm?
as someone who is neither American or Afghani, nor am I really very invested in either side, I will say America won the military aspect of the war in all cases while losing the political/nation building side. This doesn't mean that American equipment is bad at all.
>America loses
>zero affect on American's daily lives
>Taliban wins
>20 years of occupation
>entire leadership structure destroyed
>200,000 people dead...only 2,000 of the enemy killed in 20 years
>position so shaky they're already starting border conflicts with all of their neighbors
lel oh yeah I'm sure the guys who literally got slaughtered 100 to 1 had the better equipment
The Taliban is objectively stronger now than before the U.S. set foot there.
>bbut we killed 200,00-
Their lives are wothless.
Killing every single person there would amount to nothing.
Meanwhile it kicked the U.S. off into a debt spiral it has no hopes of escaping, which is now starting to crack, which you can see by going outside.
It was the second most disastrous event in U.S. history, only next to freeing the naggers.
oh, so you wouldn't want to be on the winning side or using their equipment.
>muh debt spiral
Hilarious. In 20 years when you're still shrieking about how the world is collapsing and now America really, really for reals this time is finished, remember I called you a nagger today.
What is the "winning side"?
The U.S. has absolutely fuckall to show for it beyond giving the Taliban a few billion in new weaponry.
And we already collapsed. The fact you don't know it pleases me, because it means you're ngmi.
The winning side is the Taliban, duh are you fucking retarded? They won, but you are too much of a pussy and a coward to ever accept such a victory.
I doubt you can even go without single meal.
>USA will end up like Sri Lanka
RAJEESH pls youre killing me
>implying it's not already worse
americans love to be in debt. everyone on this board is in debt but they drive a lifted truck and shoot multiple oftentimes redundant firearms for fun
>And we already collapsed.
>we
it'll go into retirement like the 117s went into retirement and keep flying and providing useful service for decades.
I think the US should start a war to give it one last hurrah. She deserves it.
This is the problem with American technology, it is too bloated and useless, like them
The Russian Migs and Chinese fighter bombers are proving themselves to be the exact fit needed in combat and wargames while the F35 is too useless in those situations
There are more F-35s already manufactured and in service right now than the entire Russian Air Force combined
Yep, migpedes btfo
Where do tankies get cope like this. There are enough F35s in service to flatten the entire RuAF via ramming. Not to mention that every time a flankshit trys to merge with the F35 it gets embarrassed
Linguistics, why do you think they rally to Chomsky? They first need to convince themselves from the shit they spit, once the brain is so broken they can say whatever they want at face value.
>f22
>bloated
Go back to the steel mill chang
Hopefully the shift manager uploads him getting fried on /gif/.
This exact mindset led to the US going into precision munitions and the expensive support systems that not only aid the precision munitions, but the capability to get eyes on the battlefield and the rapid communications to lend to quick kill chains.
>Russian jets are better because in all ways except actual real world use, they are superior
hilarious
The K:D ratio really emphasizes the power of technology. While the USA got better at creating and integrating tech into their airframes, soviets fell behind and never managed to recover.
can I get ground-to-air loss version?
hearty chuckle
Stop haunting /k/, Pierre. Halloween is over.
Go get eaten by a lathe.
>turdies seethe over how much the US can afford to waste
You’re retarded if you think we can “afford to waste” as much as we want.
And you're retarded to think that having an unassailable air superiority fighter is a "waste" because all the shitters it kept in check for decades were too chikenshit to start something, ironically the smartest choice they made
>we
brown shitsmeared hands typed this from his shack in delhi
Not all of us support spending our money on military to prop up the corrupt Biden family
Fucking retard
you are retard, you sold out the United States, my brother died in Iraq for MIC profits,and shitstein like you come here and support war. fuck you.
nagger I’m an American citizen how can I be sold out to the United States? Russia can literally leave at any time you absolute retard
>Russia invaded another country to take it over
>this is America’s fault
While we say this to make them seethe (good), privately we should demand more accountability. Yeah some of it went to R&D but a lot went into CEO’s mistress’ beach house’s nee hot tub.
It'll be kept around for aggressor role-playing the role of a chinese 5th gen.
100 billion aint shit, next budget is 800 billion and its being worked into a trillion.
Dude, they planned sr72 like a fighter jet, then a glowies' jet
Why are modern aircraft so ugly?
That’s cool looking
That looks like something from Thomas the Tank Engine
The Fat Controller gestured crossly at Thomas.
"You forgot to practice proper EMCON, Thomas," said the Fat Controller. "As a result, Charlie the EC-37B Compass Call was able to jam your early-warning radar and enable a SEAD mission against Sodor's SAM network. You have caused confusion and delay."
All of Thomas's passengers swarmed out around the crater in the tracks and the crumpled hull of Harold the Helicopter, and they said the Fat Controller ran a very bad railway.
"You really fucked the dog, Thomas," said Harold.
You try strapping the largest AESA money can buy to a plane and have it look good.
Spinny disks are obsolete.
What... what happens to your testicles if you were standing in front of that on the ground and the pilots accidentally switched it on?
Cooked in seconds.
Primarily what you want in any war machine is a machine that does its job as well as it can. If it does it while also looking good then that's just a bonus.
they didnt add teeth yet
Cost of R&D and manufacturing capacity upkeep.
Also a great excuse to spread money around the economy, Europe does the same with gibs but with no industrial capacity to show for it.
T.europoor
>Is this the biggest blue balls in history?
Not even close.
Just having it in our arsenal makes it an effective deterrent.
everyone is afraid and don't want make tryouts, he's done his job better than any aircraft
It's not a waste, war is expensive, you want to avoid war. Deterence
>Make a weapon so absurdly powerful nobody dares face it
>It never gets used
>"LOL WHAT A WASTE DURR HURR"
I just don't see why we need to spend money on replacing it when it so obviously already outclasses anything else, like who can even compete? The Russians have been showing everyone that their planes are old rustbuckets they can barely maintain in the Ukraine war. China has something like 1/6 of the airforce that the US has.
There is no competition.
Main reason is that the raptor is a bitch to maintain and it wasn't designed with certain hardware/software updates in mind.
USAF is increasingly moving towards platforms that can be upgraded with new software or new components fairly easily like the F-35, the F-22 just isn't able to do that well because of it's unique design.
There's no kill like overkill. I want to mog (as the zoomers say) the third world so hard that they can't even look up at night knowing that there's an American flag on the moon. I want some thirdie to stub his toe getting out of bed, or get in a car accident, or rain when they wanted it to be sunny, and immediately think "fucking Americans." I want to live rent free in the heads of every shithole dweller for the rest of time.
i want to mog clownpiece
Isnt she like the epitome of lethal joke character? Just like USA. (And Pomni is contemporary faggy western zoomers).
Well, one of clownpiece's abilities as a 2hu is literally making people seethe. So that fits.
The other is kind of a reverse midas touch, everything turns not into gold but permanently tainted with impurity. Also fits 'murica.
nice fuck turd worlders
>Verification not required.
It's more expensive to maintain than to replace with something with new bells and whistles
The West's doctrine is overmatch, this means that being good enough to win is not enough, you must be so much above that the enemy won't even think about challenging you, because its enemies are retarded and don't mind wasting millions of lives if it could mean even a small chance of victory.
The J20 fighter is a vastly superior steel fighter bombers compared to the shit F35
Unlike the F35 the J20 is already being used in Ukraine and other wars however the J20 is a cheap knock off of the SU-57 the reason why the west makes them appear so rare and useless is because they are afraid of the power and capabilities of these lightweight fighters
They shot down that UFO in Alaska too, don't forget.
>ITT OP reveals his country can't afford 40 years of R&D and a few billion dollary-doos
Saw a video on the people who worked on this, awesome people, like Blizzard at it's peak, all heart, all soul. Fucking kino aircraft.
this is some thirdy cope right here, there are no comparisons to the F-22 anywhere in the world, no other country can even produce anything close to it.
He was there when we needed him most.
The F-22 is the only plane in the arsenal to achieve the honor of "so classified even our masters in Israel aren't allowed access to it"
>make minimum wage
>get robbed and all that shit you said
>still wealthier than 90% of the world
This is the goal of all weapons. This is the supreme art of war. To win without ever having to fight.
test
wow that's so amazing! So why do they leave there and come here whenever they get the chance? Crazy how that works.
>nothing ever matched it
>nothing got close to even engaging it
>everyone knows it's a bad idea to even try and engage it
I say it worked as a good "big fucking stick" to keep people from chimping out.
its life story dramatised would include being bullied by Hurricane Michael
>muh ngad
Do you guys not realize that major defense projects that haven't left the planning stage have a survival rate about on par with ISIS caliphs?
The individual projects maybe, but the concept of a big stealthy plane coordinating swarms of drone wingmen looks like a winner. There's a reason why so many major air forces from different countries are dumping money into similar projects at the same time.
Maybe that will happen but it's not any different functionally from saying "F-22 will be replaced eventually". Yeah probably B-52 will be as well. Who the fuck knows when either will happen but it's clearly at least decades.
ngad has already flown prototypes from 3 contractors. it's very real and will get built. fa/xx is more questionable
F/A-XX might be less public, but it's 100% "real"
> the F/A-XX program had been hiding all along under the Link Plumeria special access program (SAP) code name, which—although classified—ranked as the Pentagon’s fourth-largest research and development program.
> The fiscal 2023-27 $11.5 billion budget for Link Plumeria in the fiscal 2023 request
https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/white-house-connects-secret-code-name-next-navy-fighter
Why the fuck do they bother with code names anymore. All of the security is through cryptographic key anyway, if someone can figure out the key then it doesn't matter what you codename something, they know everything about it.
> overhear a scientist in x field is working on project infect putin's cock with syphilis
Fuck cryptography is keeping me from making heads nor tails of what this means. Codenames would provide no additional value here.
>Don't be a douche they wouldn't talk about the name of the project in public if it was actually relevant to the subject
Oh? So they'd use some sort of unrelated term for it? Like a codename? cool.
People don't talk about this shit in places "they can be overheard" unless you're talking about secure communications, in which case it's just crypto key.
This type of thing is automated, they probably even use AI to look for keywords. You'd be better off naming your stealth fighter program something like xf42689xscaj124lkjadflkjalkj34 through a cypher.
Why wouldn't you just name it a randomly generated word or phrase unrelated to the program. That's literally an unbreakable cypher? Why would instead make it a breakable cypher?
The entire point of a codename is to quickly and easily refer to the projects to the people in a way that can't be understood.
>people don't talk about shit like this in places they can be overheard
People can be overheard anywhere they are talking.
Are you like 8 years old and heard about cryptography or something? Do you have autism? "hey billy i heard you're working on project 2839423894029fjlsdkjfaoidhf9ppofiahjfo;ewia;ofiehja;okjfh aophf aoipsefh aowie faglordljk. How is it?"
fucking christ.
I think pre-dreadnought battleships got cucked harder. The entire latter half of the 19th century was spent building and stockpiling them. Only for them to become woefully obsolete with the launch of one ship. Most of them got scrapped without ever seeing combat. All they got was mobiks getting mobiked at Tsushima and seal clubbing in WW1.
Its just the nature of technological advancement. You make one breakthrough and then things snowball to a point where in just 50 years time you're practically on another planet in terms of advancement.
For me it's that year when every fucking wooden ship on earth became a huge waste of time
That was more of a gradual thing. Steel warships first became a thing in the 1850s, and didn't stop being relevant until the 1870s.
Sorry, iron warships in the 1850s, and wood lost relevance in the 1870s
Not true, they gave out colonial points when Scramble for Africa fires in 1880
It's been used in Syria and other shitholes of your people, you idiot.
What is Afghanistan and Syria? What is bombing wagner?
Don't worry, we'll have plenty of wars going on soon. The next thing you'll be worrying about is if enough countries have prepared themselves with the newest generation aircraft.
The F-22 is a stepping stone. It was the first production LO craft that was made to be maneuverable. Being the first of its kind also telss you what not to do.
>Supersonic capable LO coatings
The new shiny coatings they are experimenting with are much easier to maintain
>Gods eye view displays
Made before big LCDs got cheap, IR CCDs got big, and MEMS gyroscopes got good. Limited resolution, No DAS.
>Overly integrated processors
Open systems architecture is important for longevity
>Supercruise
Pretty neat
I would expect NGAD to not have the albatross of concurrency, vendor lock in, and delicate coatings holding it back. Probably toss in third-stream engine capabilities as an enabler.
>Made before big LCDs got cheap
That has nothing to do with the F-22. Avionics are limited by things like processing power, sensors, communication, stuff like that.
Big high res displays are pretty difficult to drive with an old PowerPC, and the sensors/comms were all in a rather monolithic architecture that's hard as fuck to modify.
>going to retire before the world could see how truly special she was
the day its officially retired someone has to make a send off tribute set to "what ive done" by Linkin Park.
[embed]
>911
its official, kek has blessed my idea for an F-22 send off tribute.
It was just for fun really
>Is this the biggest blue balls in history?
lmfao, 27 years, no fucking helmet, no fucking HOBS, get absolutely fucking real in 2023+
>"muh stealth"
hah, yah
>"hey mom why is this june bug going 800mph next to this swarm of volvos?!?"
Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeextttttttttttttttttt
It's been used, but some should be given to Ukraine to get some more use it.
It can't even dogfight
We don't make these to protect the country or whatever BS you believe. We make them so elite families can embezzle our tax money. Gotta spend it to make some disappear.
two birds, one stone
I'm demoralized, now I understand that having the means to protect our sovereignty is unnecessary.
Last I heard CENTCOM was using them to shoo away russkies in the region. Which seems like an unbelievably benign reason to deploy them but...ok
The F22 is one of the most aesthetic aircrafts ever. Prove me wrong, you can't.
lol the f-22 has another 20 years ahead of it, what the fuck are you talking about?
Echoes of the F-106. This is what happens when your top-of-the-line interceptor never gets authorized for export.
What about those battle ships that were decommissioned before they were commissioned?
Ah, well. The industry made its money and that's the most important thing.
Is it true that the F-22 still has some super secret classified capabilities? Seems like disinformation
All of its actual capabilities are classified, still.
>One combat mission
Weren't they used to bomb a Wagner/SAA column in Khasham?