>be curious about military jets. >look them up

>be curious about military jets
>look them up
>most countries (US included) use a ton of jets from the 1970s and 1980s
why? how are they still able to compete? i am not well versed in military stuff and don't normally browse /k/ so can someone explain to a moron?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The US jets from the 70s and 80s can still handily beat any new hardware from everywhere else. Everyone else is making already outdated jets unless they're working on a 6th gen.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's not like you can add amendments to the laws of physics. Air is going to pass over/under an airfoil the same way, whether it's 1965 or 2020.

      but the US hasn't made any advancements that make it obsolete? or other countries too? why doesn't everyone just produce 6th gen fighters?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        depends on who you are fighting. If you want to shoot up tanks and enemy vehicles, bomb their buildings, drop cluster bombs on their troops, blow up their radars, etc. You can do all that with an upgraded F-16.

        If you want to establish air superiority, who are your enemy? Russia? The F-22 will merk their latest Flankers. Maybe if China's new stuff is actually legit it might be worth developing a new super stealthy fighter. Other than that, an upgraded F series type jset (like the "new" F-15 EX) will obliterate your typical slavshit equipped arab or 3rd world army into dust quite happily.

        It also takes like 20 years to develop a new jet, so people are working on them but it will take a while before you see them. That shit costs a looooot of money, so even then I think you'll see older designs used in parallel, as the new ones are a waste against anyone other than a true peer enemy

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >why doesn't everyone just produce 6th gen fighters?
        Because only one country on the planet has both the tech and money to build 5th gens

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's not like you can add amendments to the laws of physics. Air is going to pass over/under an airfoil the same way, whether it's 1965 or 2020.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    electronics has advanced so much that those platforms remain viable provided they get updated to the latest packages.
    A bit like how the sea harries wasn't all that good. But they had the latest generation of sidewinders and the sidewinders did most of the work.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      oh i see, so they do get fitted with new hardware including engines and whatnot?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        the new jet is literally a NEW jet, and the 70's one is a 70's one. They just look the same from the outside.
        Pic related, I put the original F-16 wienerpit against the new one

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          holy shit what a jump

          depends on who you are fighting. If you want to shoot up tanks and enemy vehicles, bomb their buildings, drop cluster bombs on their troops, blow up their radars, etc. You can do all that with an upgraded F-16.

          If you want to establish air superiority, who are your enemy? Russia? The F-22 will merk their latest Flankers. Maybe if China's new stuff is actually legit it might be worth developing a new super stealthy fighter. Other than that, an upgraded F series type jset (like the "new" F-15 EX) will obliterate your typical slavshit equipped arab or 3rd world army into dust quite happily.

          It also takes like 20 years to develop a new jet, so people are working on them but it will take a while before you see them. That shit costs a looooot of money, so even then I think you'll see older designs used in parallel, as the new ones are a waste against anyone other than a true peer enemy

          i see, thanks for the write up anon

          they are like the ship of theseus
          Just about every bit of them has been upgraded
          But it all still fits in the same hull and they keep the name. What come after the F-16 is as or more important than the F-16 part
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon_variants

          so nothing about the F16 is the same huh

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            no worries anon, I fricking love a proper /k/ thread, thanks for posing cool questions

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              This. I missed this shit.

              >This is what the ukie pilot is working with
              https://www.checksix.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/RK_9908_SIAD_013_Su27P_Medium.jpg

              >The russian pilot has this
              https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F9eqqljut3uq71.png

              The ukie pilot is having to check his engine temps, oil pressure, oil temperature, etc. as none of those things are computerised or automated. He's having to frick around with circuit breakers and warming up and switching on and off various systems, and everything is mechanical and analogue amd done with switches and 70's steam guages. He's listening to calls over the radio to find the enemy and steering his weak radar up and down like a spotlight looking for stuff.
              The Russian is basically playing warthunder by comparison with everything laid out in front of him, automted, streamlined, etc.

              Even modern wienerpits are "Busy and loud" by most pilots accounts. The ability to give the pilot less shit to worry about and stronger tools for engagement is an exponential force multiplier.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The ability to give the pilot less shit to worry about and stronger tools for engagement is an exponential force multiplier.
                this. fudd lore dictates simpler is better but they misattribute the simple part to the plane which burdens the pilot with unnecessary shit. same reason why every driver swears by H manuals but almost every professional rally driver uses a sequential shifter or a paddle shifter

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >same reason why every driver swears by H manuals but almost every professional rally driver uses a sequential shifter or a paddle shifter
                Well there you have the difference between ease of maintenance and ease of usage under pressure.
                I'd argue the military wants to combine both

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            In addition to what anon wrote about the different kinds of planes, the hyper-modern stuff is a lot more expensive to operate. Why use a plane that costs $10,000/hr maintenance when one that will cost a quarter of that will do? There's also the risk of technology from that plane getting into enemy hands if one is shot down or there is an accident. You don't want risk your latest and greatest tech unless there is an honest need for it.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              this anon makes another great point. Look at how fiddly it is to maintain the stealth coating on the F-22. Whereas the F-15 is rugged as frick and if the enemy aren't operating modern stuff, it's as good at shooting shit down

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              this anon makes another great point. Look at how fiddly it is to maintain the stealth coating on the F-22. Whereas the F-15 is rugged as frick and if the enemy aren't operating modern stuff, it's as good at shooting shit down

              i didn't consider that, and i guess as a result they only choose the best pilots for the expensive toys?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            that's not even morse what?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        they are like the ship of theseus
        Just about every bit of them has been upgraded
        But it all still fits in the same hull and they keep the name. What come after the F-16 is as or more important than the F-16 part
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon_variants

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        in Ukraine the ukies have been getting merked in the air war by Russia when it comes to fighter-vs-fighter engagements.
        The jet on the left is the Ukrainian Flanker; it has no active radar missiles, no data link, no GPS navigation, a crude radar warning receiver, a weak radar, etc.
        The jet on the right is the Russian Flanker, and it has proper active missiles, datalink, digital mapping and satellite navigation, a much better radar, etc.
        the russian jet can merk the ukie one long before the ukie pilot is even in range, the russian pilot basically has a call of duty minimap with all the enemies on it, they have much better jammers and electronic warfare gear, vastly better situational awareness, navigation, etc. etc.
        NATO call the first one the Flanker A, and the second one the Flanker E. The Flanker is a "1970s" jet, but the A gets shat on by the E

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >This is what the ukie pilot is working with
          https://www.checksix.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/RK_9908_SIAD_013_Su27P_Medium.jpg

          >The russian pilot has this
          https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F9eqqljut3uq71.png

          The ukie pilot is having to check his engine temps, oil pressure, oil temperature, etc. as none of those things are computerised or automated. He's having to frick around with circuit breakers and warming up and switching on and off various systems, and everything is mechanical and analogue amd done with switches and 70's steam guages. He's listening to calls over the radio to find the enemy and steering his weak radar up and down like a spotlight looking for stuff.
          The Russian is basically playing warthunder by comparison with everything laid out in front of him, automted, streamlined, etc.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >This is what the ukie pilot is working with
          https://www.checksix.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/RK_9908_SIAD_013_Su27P_Medium.jpg

          >The russian pilot has this
          https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F9eqqljut3uq71.png

          The ukie pilot is having to check his engine temps, oil pressure, oil temperature, etc. as none of those things are computerised or automated. He's having to frick around with circuit breakers and warming up and switching on and off various systems, and everything is mechanical and analogue amd done with switches and 70's steam guages. He's listening to calls over the radio to find the enemy and steering his weak radar up and down like a spotlight looking for stuff.
          The Russian is basically playing warthunder by comparison with everything laid out in front of him, automted, streamlined, etc.

          it's really fascinating how much of a difference tech makes

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            it's really significant. In this case the ukie pilot, when he fires his missile, he has to sit there, flying toward the enemy, keeping radar lock whilst he guides the missile. if he loses lock, the missile goes dumb and will miss.
            The russian pilot is notified the SECOND that missile is launched, and he has a very clear idea of where the ukie jet is that fired it. He can take evasive action immediately and 100% avoid it, by diving, flying directly away, etc. Or just dive behind a hill and break line of sight.

            By contrast, the russian can fire a missile, and the ukie pilot gets zero notification. After a time, the missile turns on it's own radar, and at this point the russian can drop the lock and no longer needs to guide the missile, take evasive action, etc. Its only when the missile turns its own radar on that the ukie gets any notification that a missile is launched, by which time it's quite close and evading it is far from certain. To survive, he MUST evade, and in doing so, break his lock, therefore killing his own missile. In practical terms, with the two jets firing at each other, its almost impossible for the ukie pilot to win, the only way is to do some sneaky shit, hide in a valley out of sight and ambush the russian unawares, which is a tall order. It's a massive generational gap wrapped up in the same packaging

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Honestly it's pretty crazy thinking that Ukraine didn't have BVR capability when Russia invaded the second time. Look at all those wienerpit/HUD videos from Russia where they just throw missiles from miles away. BVR combat is fricking scary

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Ukraine didn't have BVR capability
                they do
                they don't have FIRE AND FORGET BVR capability, that's what's killing them

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >they don't have FIRE AND FORGET BVR capability
                Oh, I wasn't aware. Even that still shows how much of a hamstring lack of tech can be

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                this is why they need F-16 so bad. it will give them access to Western weapons and sensor, which could help them level the playing field

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                this, the Ukies are stuck guiding missiles in, which is a miserable place to be in 2024

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      same goes for tanks my man
      basically ever since the Cold War ended in 1991 everyone stopped building very new stuff and just focused on upgrades
      also, during this specific period most new developments have been in the IT so the upgrades are mainly in electronics and other areas which you can't see from the outside of the jet
      the guts and capabilities of an F-16C and an F-16V are so different, they might as well be different aircraft

      however, we are on the cusp of truly new vehicles replacing Cold War-era platforms. give it another 10-15 years perhaps.

      the Sea Harriers had one of the best if not THE best naval radar around at the time, and the new model Sidewinders didn't do anything except be a bit more reliable perhaps

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        worth noting the sidewinders don't need radar anyway, but good radar obviously helps in finding baddies

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It might have had the best NAVAL radar at that time the argie mirages had a better plane and radar.
        But they where stuck with older sidewinders that meant that could only lock from behind while the bong new ones could lock from any position.
        The sea harries was only meant to engage russian prop long range patrol aircraft as a defensive measure for sub hunting groups.
        the sea harrier wasn't meant to go up against other fighters.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >the sea harrier wasn't meant to go up against other fighters
          the British pilots did train in air combat in case they ran into escorts, and that training stood them in good stead over the Falklands
          >older sidewinders that meant that could only lock from behind while the new ones could lock from any position
          theoretically yes, but in practice it didn't matter, because the pilots simply used the newer Sidewinders the same way they used the old ones, ie after getting into position behind the enemy
          so the best the new missile did was just be more reliable in general

          well, as a % of the GDP i'd say russia i guess?
          but as in USD the US is way ahead in spending
          i really never thought things were like that, and people shitpost that the US is a dying empire when they are still this ahead

          >people shitpost that the US is a dying empire when they are still this ahead
          by all financial metrics, that's utter cope
          t. quant
          we live in the best era of human history, save that 99% of the world is made up of morons b***hing that life is not like a Disney movie
          keep in mind that only people above the age of 55 can remember what it was like before the Berlin Wall fell, and frankly the 80s weren't that bad either
          we have had 35 years of peace dividend and unprecedented progress although it doesn't feel like it
          one or two recessions and these people are screaming apocalypse... fricking clueless idiots

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >one or two recessions and these people are screaming apocalypse... fricking clueless idiots
            i am shocked by how intelligent the discourse is here on /k/
            most of PrepHole is very moronic and feels like twitter, i just never browsed here cuz well i don't live in a place with a gun culture
            you are making me want to stay here

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              we, uh, have our share of schizo spammers

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I live in the UK and I have been talking about jets here since the board was added to the site. It's taken a sharp nosedive since the last couple of big wars and /misc/ leaking everywhere but there are people here with a passion for military stuff who just love the discussion, despite the daily troll threads.
              >I also have an illegal revolver in the loft, hi CID

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >an illegal revolver
                i'd ask to see it but that doesn't sound safe for you
                stay safe bong fren

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's not in the loft of this house anyway.
                It's a Webley revolver that my grandfather owned. Still works. I have faith in the incompetence of police in the UK but I might be unpleasantly surprised

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                also I never intend to get rid of it, destroy it, deactivate it, because it's my family's history and because no, lol

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                you can probably argue it's a family heirloom if caught, as long as it's not loaded

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                well it's not like I put it there. I'm disqualified from having a firearms license so it'll never be legit in any way

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >i am shocked by how intelligent the discourse is here on /k/
              adults post on this board and some of them are dedicated, passionate experts. PrepHole is similar

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              You SHOULD stay. You seem eager to learn which is good. There are idiots that try to derail threads or post bait, but you just gotta ignore 'em. There's tons of people that browse this board who don't live in gun friendly places, but weapons don't just include guns, military hardware counts as well. Don't have a big ego and you can learn a lot here
              >t. newbie who joined last summer

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I honestly don't know how most of the engagements in the falklands where. So i can't agree or disagree with you on most successful engagements in the falklands being tail end

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Just about every Sidewinder engagement was from the rear aspect, they were trained that way and the new missile still performed best that way
              One of the highest decorated Harrier pilots of the war, Sharkey Ward wrote a very detailed book about his experiences, you should check it out

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                thanks I will
                >tfw another one for the backlog list

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              AFAIK no argie equipped with sidewinders ever even engaged the sea harriers, sounds like British folklore. Also the general conditions (cold as balls, huge thermal contrast) made the AIM-9L perform a lot better even than it would under more normal conditions

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    airframe barely matters its all about missiles and radars which can be upgraded over time

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They're the same jets from the 1970s in the sense that this year's Toyota Camry is the same car as one from the 80s. Almost everything about them have been upgraded

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    We no longer need to change the shape that much. Now it's all about the stuff inside and the stuff the plane can lob at the enemy

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Aircraft, tanks, and other machinery get upgrade packages and new model variants and so forth which modernize them as time goes on. Just to use your pic as an example, an F16 built back in the 70s is not going to have the same abilities or be as capable as one built within the past five years. You can keep building the same old airframe with new parts packed into it and new changes or additions until the airframe itself you consider obsolete or incapable of housing the cool new technology your tech guys have been cooking up, and by that point you should already ideally have made and also be working on new models of airframe and planning new shit to jam into those.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this. An original F-16A would get <atomised> by a new F-16. Like it wouldn't stand a chance in hell. It would be lobbing wobbly ass FOX 1 missiles, navigating with maps and landmarks, with no data link, etc. The new F-16 pilot would frick the old one long before it could even fire anything.
      It's like in WW2, a german BF-109E series fighter would stand almost zero chance against a K series one, despitethe fact they are both "BF-109s".
      They might look the same, as the 70's and 80's jets, but they are massively different

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    1. All the "Old" US planes from the 70s and 80s have been heavily upgraded and can beat anything that anyone else has
    2. There are a frick ton of the older planes compared to the newer planes
    3. The new planes are much more expensive to maintain and operate and there aren't as many of them yet

    so basically, there are a lot of the older planes, they can already beat anything anyone else has and they are cheaper than the new stuff, so why not keep using them, maybe China will eventually get around to having a decent air force that will force the US to replace everything, but as of now there's no point, the US stuff is too good already.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just think about it, who are they competing against that they would even need to upgrade in the first place, the Russians are already terrified of the Ukranians getting F-16s which are like the oldest plane the US has, if the Ukranians got F-35s, maybe evenn just F-18s, they would be flying over Moskow the next day and Russia knows it.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    To add, F-16, -15, MiG-29, Su-27 etc. 70s and 80s airframes are '4th gen' jets. F-22 and F-35 are all new airframes because stealth requires a new fuselage with specific stealthy design.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why are you using the same file in both your threads, OP?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I mean I'm not the OP but its just the first image that comes up for "F-16"

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it's the first image in a google search for "F16"
      didn't see the other OP before i posted

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Most USAF F-16's I see flying today were built in the early 90's and some from the late 80's. Never seen one flying built in the 70's. There are also hundreds of F-35's with new ones being built.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >There are also hundreds of F-35's with new ones being built.
      problem is, none of them fly

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Shut the frick up helmetard

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    speaking of stealth aircraft, what are some examples of non-US ones? i always see the B2 bomber and whatnot but never see what the russian/chinese versions are

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The Russians are experimenting on the Su-57 which is stealthy-ish. Nowhere near US fighters but the Russians claim what they lack in stealth they make up for with radar technology. The Chinese are working with the J-20 and the J-31 as their stealth airframes

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        jesus is that how far ahead the US is?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          well ask yourself how many countries have a comparable defence budget to the US?
          And how many of those are planning on going into enemy airspace to bomb things?
          And how many of those aren't US allies that can just buy american?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            well, as a % of the GDP i'd say russia i guess?
            but as in USD the US is way ahead in spending
            i really never thought things were like that, and people shitpost that the US is a dying empire when they are still this ahead

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              the north koreans spend more in %
              but spending a high % of very little still gets you very little.
              The more money you can spend the more advanced stuff you can get.
              The more advanced your stuff is, the more people want it, the more money you get, the more you can spend on research.
              The USA has been outspending the rest of the world on military defense for decades.
              The chinese have been ramping up but aren't even on parity with the USA jet after several boom decades.
              The russians lost the 90'ies and most of the 00's.
              European countries while they have the knowhow and budgets are to divided to pool all of it and most of them prefer buying american over having to work with each other.
              America is the only global military power.
              t-western euro who's country is replacing their f-16's with f-35's because frick the french

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              dude I'm not even a yank and I can tell you that the USA are basically the modern Rome, there is nobody in the same league at all when it comes to this.
              There are players that have similar brain power and the ability to develop tech, but not to the same scale at all, nowhere close. Like bongs for example, they can make similar stuff but must team up with other economies to make it even at a smaller scale.

              That IS what a declining empire looks like (the decline can only start at the highest peak) but there is a long ass time before anything about this changes. The USA will dominate for decades to come, maybe half a century before anyone can get anywhere close

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >that IS what a declining empire looks like
                the bongs or the US?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                anyone, any empire. The decline can only begin at the absolute highest peak. Bongs, yanks, Rome, whatever.
                The UK has already declined, and has been declining for a century. The USA's decline might be about to begin depending on who you listen to. Think about it. The decline of the british empire began at the precise second that it hit it's biggest territorial expanse. All I mean is that when people HUURRR DURR About US decline on /misc/, that still means the US is an order of magnitude more powerful than the nearest compeitor.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                that makes sense, you must reach the peak of your health before you start ageing
                i think i get you, but we still don't know for sure if the US still has more prosperity ahead

                we, uh, have our share of schizo spammers

                still on average people aren't delusional about the world which is a nice change

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                anyone, any empire. The decline can only begin at the absolute highest peak. Bongs, yanks, Rome, whatever.
                The UK has already declined, and has been declining for a century. The USA's decline might be about to begin depending on who you listen to. Think about it. The decline of the british empire began at the precise second that it hit it's biggest territorial expanse. All I mean is that when people HUURRR DURR About US decline on /misc/, that still means the US is an order of magnitude more powerful than the nearest compeitor.

                even if the USA starts to decline who is going to rise?
                China is going to have to face its shrinking population at some point.
                India while growing isn't anywhere near a global power player jet.
                Africa is to divided to become a global power.
                Europe while solidifying is also aging

                even when america starts to decline it will still be the global power.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yep I agree with you 100%. China have real issues, india are a meme, europe are divided

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                i mean, when america rose to the top it also came out of nowhere
                we probably can't predict who will rise up

                https://i.imgur.com/dBUSk0L.jpg

                It's not in the loft of this house anyway.
                It's a Webley revolver that my grandfather owned. Still works. I have faith in the incompetence of police in the UK but I might be unpleasantly surprised

                neat, from my personal experience with police they probably won't bother you unless you do something moronic to get their attention like cook meth

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                well no America had been growing for a very long time and was set to have overtaken all the individual European powers by the late 20ies early 30ies at the latest.
                But then you know two world wars.
                The USA isn't a county, it is continent with federal state on it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                checked, what about he soviets?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                well the US ha already overtaken the russian Empire by the start of WWI.
                Much of the industrialisation of the USSR was done by american firms.
                The soviet union never could match the US economically.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                i mean didn't the soviets rise to 2nd place out of nowhere?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                they occupied half of Europe
                and the other half of Europe was ruins
                they didn't "rise" to become second, all the other power between them and second place got knocked down.
                But they where never close to being #1

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                i guess that makes sense

                Not really out of nowhere. The US was well aware that Operation Barbarossa was about to be a success, Germany captured the industrial heartland of the USSR. In order to keep the USSR in the fight and stop them from collapsing, the US spent billions and billions of dollars developing the Soviet industry out of reach of Germany. Of course, after the war was over, the USSR regained their industrial heartland and then some, AND they had the US-built industry beyond the Urals. That's what really catapulted them to second place

                i knew about lend lease but not about the industry thing

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Not really out of nowhere. The US was well aware that Operation Barbarossa was about to be a success, Germany captured the industrial heartland of the USSR. In order to keep the USSR in the fight and stop them from collapsing, the US spent billions and billions of dollars developing the Soviet industry out of reach of Germany. Of course, after the war was over, the USSR regained their industrial heartland and then some, AND they had the US-built industry beyond the Urals. That's what really catapulted them to second place

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                muh dick will rise into yah mudda

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Sort of. The F22 is probably the most capable stealth aircraft out there, but it costs as much as ten Su-57 and the US stopped producing them. Right now they fly the F-35 in large numbers which, in many ways, is a downgrade from the F-22 but it sits in a price range where the US government actually feels comfortable in using them without the fear that a lost jet could set them back billions

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            but what makes them this expensive?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              For one, they're stupidly complicated. Like unbelievably complicated. Even the materials used are some sci-fi shit. The other part is corruption, Lockheed know they made the best fighter in the world so they know they could charge whatever they wanted. But that reached a point where even the mighty US DOD considered it too much

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Just the airplanes skin alone is made out of magic voodoo dust. It has to be able to absorb radar. If you look at degraded examples, it looks like it's made out of a transparent glass-like material with some sort of soft material stuck to the outer layer from the inside, it's complete sci-fi stuff. The Russians just made a jet shaped to deflect or obscure radar reflections a bit.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                wait so that dust is not known by the public?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                lolno. No fricking chance in hell, lol

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                jesus christ that's terrifying to think that the government probably has sci fi shit they won't share with anyone

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                They had tech in the 70's and 80's that was released to the public in the 90's and early 2000's. Internet being born out of DARPAnet and GPS are a couple major example. There is probably more stuff that will never see the light of day because of an extreme niche use or national security. People forget how huge of a thinktank the DoD and the related corporations in the MIC are. The R&D is absurd in scale and scope and involves companies that you wouldn't think are involved with the MIC because their main business or side hustle is far more visible to the public eye and there are companies that people just don't even hear of or know about making critical components or having a single production line of a specialized item being paid directly from government coffers.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            IIRC the F35 has a lower RCS than the F22

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I'm not 1000% sure but still fairly confident that the F22 has better 360° stealth. It's possible that the F35 has it beat in head-on RCS.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I'm pretty sure it may be dependent on the band. I could have sworn there was a pilot statement to the effect that while the F22 has better RCS the F35 is better shielded from targeting bands.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      the russians made a meme one in the form of the SU-57 but it's not very stealthy really, more like a low observable jet. There's plenty of aircraft that have lower obervability in mind to make them less detectable at long range butr they aren't considered "stealth".
      The F-22, F117a, F-35, the cancelled original B1, and I guess the B-2 and to some extent the SR-71 are stealthy to less or greeater degrees, and all are US jets aside from the F-35 which is still overwhelmingly US but with a sprinkling of Bong technology when it comes to sensors and targeting systems, liftt jets, the aft fuselage and other bits.

      The rest are all in development and won't be out for a while.
      The CHinese are an unknown quantity, They look like they've been stealing western design secrets so they might be legit.
      The bongs had the Tempest. They've teamed up with Japan and Italy to make some joint design.
      Other than that it's all stealth drones, thought I thought the koreans had something going

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        thanks for the write up anon
        i am assuming drones are easier to make stealthy cuz of a lack of a human pilot?

        For one, they're stupidly complicated. Like unbelievably complicated. Even the materials used are some sci-fi shit. The other part is corruption, Lockheed know they made the best fighter in the world so they know they could charge whatever they wanted. But that reached a point where even the mighty US DOD considered it too much

        i wonder if at one point they will lower the price

        the north koreans spend more in %
        but spending a high % of very little still gets you very little.
        The more money you can spend the more advanced stuff you can get.
        The more advanced your stuff is, the more people want it, the more money you get, the more you can spend on research.
        The USA has been outspending the rest of the world on military defense for decades.
        The chinese have been ramping up but aren't even on parity with the USA jet after several boom decades.
        The russians lost the 90'ies and most of the 00's.
        European countries while they have the knowhow and budgets are to divided to pool all of it and most of them prefer buying american over having to work with each other.
        America is the only global military power.
        t-western euro who's country is replacing their f-16's with f-35's because frick the french

        kek, euros also don't spend much on average no?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, they don't but even the economy of italy is bigger than russias. So is the economy of Spain, France, Germany and the UK (poland has probably over taken them as well).
          If you combine the defense spending of all the euro countries they'd be the second largest defense budget in the world, still a long while behind the US but a decent bit larger than the Chinese.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >i wonder if at one point they will lower the price
          Nah, production stopped years ago. The F-22 won't be continued

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >how are these jets from the 80s competing with everyone else's jets from the 80s

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The actual aerodynamics didn't evolve much since the 80s, possibly slightly here and there but not enough to make the old fighters obsolete. What does evolve at a rapid pace is electronics and sensors, and those you can fit onto an existing airframe more cheaply than developing something entirely new.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The first F-16s your father flew is not the same F-16 Vipers you are flying today.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      wrong.
      USAF still has 232 pre-block F-16s.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Which should be sent to Ukraine so we don't have to keep maintaining them

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >how are they still able to compete
    Because we had great engineers, the designs are still valid and the maintenance was funded. They're just really good planes.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Aside from shit like sensor suites and electronics in general, aerospace industry has hit the same wall of diminishing returns firearms have.
    There's a reason the main service rifles of basically every single military in the world are just tricked out variants of 60-80's designs.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *