Growing pains are over, it's the single most capable aircraft available today and everyone who isn't actively purchasing them right now is either hiding behind the coat-tails of the people who are, or are having histrionic breakdowns.
I'd argue that the F-35's teething troubles aren't yet done and it can still improve. I mean, they never figured out the afterburner thing and the Sidekick project is still ongoing.
Heat from the afterburner apparently caused blistering on the tails of some F-35s. It was inconsistent and didn't affect all variants so Lockheed just told pilots not to keep the afterburning going for more than a minute or two at a time.
It was exactly one B and C model flying at the upper limit for F-35s at mach1.4+. The A model wasn't effected at all. They tried countless times to recreate the problem, but were never able to. IRRC, the two airframes were early product blocks, and they changed the composite skin composition and changed the RAM coating to ehat they call Z13. I don't really think it's much of a problem. Old news just gets reposted by butthurt shill.
>but cancelling the F-22 for it was an absolutely moronic decision.
The F-22 was never canceled because of the F-35; they have completely different roles. The F-22 procurement was shortened because of cost overruns, the end of the USSR and defense budget cuts because of that. The F-35 is to replace F-16, F-18 Hornet, and A-10. The NGAD (Air Force)(6th gen) will replace the F-22.
great plane, my only somewhat moronic belief is that the B and C models should have a gun, For the sole reason of strafing runs, etc. Dogfighting with a gun in the 21st century is a meme though
They do, as an added pod. Which is a much smarter choice, as it doesn't have to carry the weight around when the mission doesn't call for it.
I guess I just question why the gunpod isn't... Longer? Thicker? I know they developed a very fancy computer controlled gun for better efficiency in burst size, but I dunno how relevant that is for attacking ground targets.
It can be pulled off when not needed anyways, so I just don't see why they didn't use a bigger drum for the gunpods.
and this disproves my statement in what way, exactly? or are you just adding onto it?
If we are done testing stuff on a platform and moving on, why would we keep maintaining the outdated prototypes?
the f-35 was intended to be the cheaper multirole companion to the f-22's purebred air superiority autism. what was learned from the f-22 was applied to the f-35 because that's how linear time works, not because the f-35 was intended to supplant it. the f-22 died because of short-sighted bureaucrats and no other reason.
I still have yet to hear anything that disproves my statement.
the f-22 was an overly expensive testbed. we took what worked and made something better, and at this point it wouldn't hurt to perfect the design into something new, cheaper, and more workable anyways.
a testbed is still a fricking testbed, no matter the overall role of it. we can always use the stuff in it elsewhere
tech has been purpose built to be modular like that since ww2, anon.
great plane, my only somewhat moronic belief is that the B and C models should have a gun, For the sole reason of strafing runs, etc. Dogfighting with a gun in the 21st century is a meme though
As people not working on it or flying it we don't even know half of what makes it good, but regardless it seems to be very in-demand right now if that says anything. Yes I watched the lazerpig video, he's right.
F-35C is a good replacement for Super Hornets
F-35B is an amazing replacement for Harriers
F-35A is a mediocre plane, compromised by commonality with B and C
F-35A is a great replacement for the F-16. Better range, better performance when loaded with a combat loud-out. F-16 can fly mach1.3 with a combat loadout, compared to the A's 1.6 - while having better range. A much better avionics suite than the F-16. According to Norwegian pilots, the A can dogfight better than a clean F-16 with a 500lb training bomb inside. It has better high alpha control than the F-16, meaning it can point its nose where it wants, when it wants to get the gun kill - if need be.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2016/03/01/norwegian-f-35-pilot-counters-controversial-dogfighting-report/
I thought 35 was replacing the legacy Hornets and SuperBugs were gonna stay on till 6th generation.
It is. The Super Hornets are to be replaced by the NGAD (Navy). Formerly the F/A-XX program.
I guess I just question why the gunpod isn't... Longer? Thicker? I know they developed a very fancy computer controlled gun for better efficiency in burst size, but I dunno how relevant that is for attacking ground targets.
It can be pulled off when not needed anyways, so I just don't see why they didn't use a bigger drum for the gunpods.
>I guess I just question why the gunpod isn't... Longer? Thicker? I know they developed a very fancy computer controlled gun for better efficiency in burst size, but I dunno how relevant that is for attacking ground targets.
Fighter based gun CAS is a meme, as the plane is too fast to stay on station, and it can be done better by helos. Most of the CAS roll was done with precision bombs. IIRC the B-1 was better at CAS than the A-10. It's just more memorable a gun going BRRRT and the slugs impacting the target. >It can be pulled off when not needed anyways, so I just don't see why they didn't use a bigger drum for the gunpods.
Probably a compromise between aerodynamic drag, increase of RCS, and data that leans toward a gun not really being great at the job.
The F-35C is for carriers though.
The F-35A can use an airport and it’s very useful for the Air Force’s main mission. Most countries are buying F35As because of their capability for their air force.
It's terrible and the best plane on the market. Nothing matches it in terms of capabilities (cue Swedish and French cope, no being able to turn better isn't more important than stealth) and production. Its main rivals are either stillborn or has no real info on it and floats on sheer propaganda power, anything else will simply die before they see it coming. It's still up to its eyes in problems that need to be ironed out and I know it's not going to last until 2060 but I'm confident in saying it's the least shit plane in service today
Literally a glorified rafale. >stealth is largely unproven and probably doesn't work >weak single engine, can't supercruise without afterburner and only lasts for 1 minute >terrible maneuverability >extremely limited internal bay capacity, and ordinance carried in the exterior defeats the fighter's whole purpose >VTOL was a scam >only redeeming factor are the avionics which can be easily incorporated into other better airframes
A heavily propagandized chassis sold through political pressure exerted by the US on the rest of the free world. There's a reason China and Russia don't fall for it and aren't looking to buy some, not even one
Cutest and Best plane, and I'm unironically waiting for World War 3 so it can finally shitcan every hostile airforce singlehandedly, prove itself effective beyond any reasonable doubt and piss on Sprey's grave.
Hellish program.
Seems expensive to get good readiness out of.
But the former is past now, and if you can afford the latter it's probably a really good aircraft. Just make sure your internet connection's good for those scenario files...
Good for the west, but faces bad news in the form of Su-57, the peak performer of 1 v 1 fighter combat (cobra manouver, to name one). But it will do good if America decides to attack another development country like Afghanistan.
>but faces bad news in the form of Su-57, the peak performer of 1 v 1 fighter combat
Too bad none have been built since numbers 1 and 2, and 1 crashed on its first flight.
Of course, it's not stealth, barely has better avionics than the SU-35, and air show maneuvers like the cobra are useless in real combat.
>spins around doing useless maneuvers, losing all energy >gets hit by a missile that turns after launch and flys backwards at the pursuant (you) >fiery death recorded by the 2 other F-35s that have been sharing targeting information with the one you were busy chasing the whole time
or better yet
>dont see any radar return, get killed by BVR missile anyways
it's a cool ass plane, i prefer the f22 aesthetically speaking but both look very futuristic even tho both planes are kinda old, its crazy to me humanity managed to build such incredible aircrafts quite a long time ago (f22 is like 20 years old and f35 is 15) won't say shit about comparing performance to other jets and shit because i know jack shit i just like cool planes
It's probably a more realistic application of stealth technology than the F-22 or B-21. The US has gotten far more use in the past 30 years from workhorse light strike fighters like the F-16 and F/A-18 than it has heavy bombers like the B-1 or heavy air superiority fighters like the F-15. The F-22 is cooler, and is better as a fighter but it's unnecessary and too expensive for what it offers. The F-35 will still wipe out any tinpot dictator's air force without casualties in air to air engagements just like the existing fleet of aircraft did in 2003.
Other countries only now, nearly 40 years after the US introduced the F-22, finding out how expensive it is to build a 5th gen aircraft.
The F-35 is the cheapest a 5th gen jet can be built and mass produced and this has the frogs and everyone absolutely seething because THEY KNOW that when they give it a go at building a true 5th gen, it’s likely going to be wildly more expensive than the F-35.
It’s a never ending cycle that we have seen for 70+ years now
>The US comes out with a next generation jet >Everyone in the world says its shit >10 years later everyone is dying to buy it >The people who try to compete with it can’t even match its performance and end up making a worse copy >rinse and repeat
pretty good and better than anything flying today
still think VTOL is a meme that should have been avoided considering A) only the Marines demanded it and B) it was one of the main sources of problems and delays during development.
I was initially pretty skeptical about it. Not that it would lose to flankers due to "not being able to turn" or others memes from vatnicks, but I thought it was overhyped, very overpriced and that the program made some bad bets like the B variant. Reading more about it as it was being rolled out I turned around, it's a very impressive plane and cheaper than I ever expected. I'm almost a F-35fanboy now. Also the seethe it creates just by existing is a bonus.
It's a really good jet fighter perfect for modern conflicts. There were some growing pains and a massive spread of bullshit slander propaganda by Pierre Sprey and other fighter mafia morons but in the end people finally start to see the truth it is a great jet fighters that will prove its worth in the upcoming decades of it service.
It's never been truly put to the test and the kind of war where it would be would in all likelihood end in a catastrophic nuclear exchange, rendering the entire discussion moot.
The debate over the F-35 is destined to either rage on forever or end as the motto of the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces goes: "After us, silence".
>except its ever-increasing price tag
Black person, what? The price has gone down lot, and is cheaper than any 4th gen out. Especially when you have to addtargeting pods, etc to the 4th gen to compete in modern combat. The trillion dollar lifetime price until 2070 is no more than what the F-16, F-15, etc. cost. The F-35A is around $20 million dollars cheaper than the F-15EX, when the targeting pods are added.
It's a fat worthless piece of shit riding on the avionics coat tails of Raytheon and Northrop Grumman
Should have just upgraded the F-22 and let the Navy continued using 4th gens
One of the most interesting things Ukrainie shown us is that even high tech AA system are not some space magic bubble - with decent tactics and 3-digit IQ you can work your way around them.
With lower RCS you can perform even riskier missions and go for high value targets or just do what gen 4 fighters are doing now, but with minimal losses.
This. Stealth synergizes with other defenses like jamming and maneuvers. A stealth plane is hard to see but there's ways around that. A stealth plane flying nape of earth is super hard to see without a specific radar setup. A stealth plane flying nape of earth shooting cruise missiles while supported by jamming? Best you can do is shoot the missiles once they show up on radar.
From what I understand, the engineering was botched so it isn't really maneuverable at all, but that's okay because high tech stealth and BVR engagements mean it can destroy any aircraft on earth without being in much danger at all. Less a fighter jet, more a flying SAM platform that you can make do strikes.
I think it increases the security of the US more than any other weapon. We have to collaborate with our allies to make them showing we have a strong relationship and other countries want them so bad it gives us leverage because we only give them to our allies.
Growing pains are over, it's the single most capable aircraft available today and everyone who isn't actively purchasing them right now is either hiding behind the coat-tails of the people who are, or are having histrionic breakdowns.
I'd argue that the F-35's teething troubles aren't yet done and it can still improve. I mean, they never figured out the afterburner thing and the Sidekick project is still ongoing.
>they never figured out the afterburner thing
What afterburner thing?
Heat from the afterburner apparently caused blistering on the tails of some F-35s. It was inconsistent and didn't affect all variants so Lockheed just told pilots not to keep the afterburning going for more than a minute or two at a time.
It was exactly one B and C model flying at the upper limit for F-35s at mach1.4+. The A model wasn't effected at all. They tried countless times to recreate the problem, but were never able to. IRRC, the two airframes were early product blocks, and they changed the composite skin composition and changed the RAM coating to ehat they call Z13. I don't really think it's much of a problem. Old news just gets reposted by butthurt shill.
iirc they never figured it out because they could never replicate it.
Re AB thing. They never figured it out because they can't replicate the problem even tho they push it to the limit.
Stupid program,great plane.
Or is a poorgay.
fpbp and what ive been saying since 2014 even when f-35 hate was at its peak
It's good for the role it was intended for (low cost multirole), but cancelling the F-22 for it was an absolutely moronic decision.
F-22 was a failure.
Massively over-rated aircraft.
lol
lmao
If the F-22 had been completely cancelled, the USAF would be in better shape today.
We really didn't have a good use for the F-22. We've got a hundred or so in inventory but nobody is dumb enough to face it.
>but cancelling the F-22 for it was an absolutely moronic decision.
The F-22 was never canceled because of the F-35; they have completely different roles. The F-22 procurement was shortened because of cost overruns, the end of the USSR and defense budget cuts because of that. The F-35 is to replace F-16, F-18 Hornet, and A-10. The NGAD (Air Force)(6th gen) will replace the F-22.
They do, as an added pod. Which is a much smarter choice, as it doesn't have to carry the weight around when the mission doesn't call for it.
Is the pod smiling, or a shocked face with a double chin?
Just happy he gets to BRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTT
I guess I just question why the gunpod isn't... Longer? Thicker? I know they developed a very fancy computer controlled gun for better efficiency in burst size, but I dunno how relevant that is for attacking ground targets.
It can be pulled off when not needed anyways, so I just don't see why they didn't use a bigger drum for the gunpods.
whats the small inlet on the right side for?
That’s where the canon fires through.
Cold air inlet
Air intake to cool systems.
Nope, gun port is a motor-lifted hatch on the port side.
thanks
NGAD better blow the F-22 out of the water to excuse the near complete abandonment of it right as China decided to start getting fricky with Taiwan.
the frick are you talking about? the f-22 was the testbed for prototype shit we fine tuned and perfected for larger production in the f-35
bush-obama secretary of defense robert gates explicitly cited the f-35's existence as part of his rationale for killing the f-22
and this disproves my statement in what way, exactly? or are you just adding onto it?
If we are done testing stuff on a platform and moving on, why would we keep maintaining the outdated prototypes?
oh sorry i thought you weren't moronic
the f-35 was intended to be the cheaper multirole companion to the f-22's purebred air superiority autism. what was learned from the f-22 was applied to the f-35 because that's how linear time works, not because the f-35 was intended to supplant it. the f-22 died because of short-sighted bureaucrats and no other reason.
I still have yet to hear anything that disproves my statement.
the f-22 was an overly expensive testbed. we took what worked and made something better, and at this point it wouldn't hurt to perfect the design into something new, cheaper, and more workable anyways.
a testbed is still a fricking testbed, no matter the overall role of it. we can always use the stuff in it elsewhere
tech has been purpose built to be modular like that since ww2, anon.
I want to see it in combat, but I also don't want to see that kind of war.
Literally the best fighter ever made.
Very Frickable. Would bang all variants.
it'll be a great multirole and honestly, probably better in air superiority with its more advanced tech than the f-22
great plane, my only somewhat moronic belief is that the B and C models should have a gun, For the sole reason of strafing runs, etc. Dogfighting with a gun in the 21st century is a meme though
It's nicer than my Ford
My little cousin's training potty is probably nicer than your F*rd.
🙁
I still love my Ford
It's the Ferrari California of fighter jets.
As people not working on it or flying it we don't even know half of what makes it good, but regardless it seems to be very in-demand right now if that says anything. Yes I watched the lazerpig video, he's right.
it's really three different aircraft
F-35C is a good replacement for Super Hornets
F-35B is an amazing replacement for Harriers
F-35A is a mediocre plane, compromised by commonality with B and C
I thought 35 was replacing the legacy Hornets and SuperBugs were gonna stay on till 6th generation.
Everything I've seen, heard, and read, says the A is the best of the litter. I'm curious why you think it's mediocre.
F-35A is easily the best of the three, tf are you on
this. imagine buying a verison without a gatling gun
*version.
homosexual.
i will frick you until you love me.
I don't love anything, that's why I'm on PrepHole. But my wife will do you first.
I'll eat your children.
my wifes son wants me to apologize. sorry
EW. I don't eat dark meat, sorry.
F-35A is a great replacement for the F-16. Better range, better performance when loaded with a combat loud-out. F-16 can fly mach1.3 with a combat loadout, compared to the A's 1.6 - while having better range. A much better avionics suite than the F-16. According to Norwegian pilots, the A can dogfight better than a clean F-16 with a 500lb training bomb inside. It has better high alpha control than the F-16, meaning it can point its nose where it wants, when it wants to get the gun kill - if need be.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2016/03/01/norwegian-f-35-pilot-counters-controversial-dogfighting-report/
It is. The Super Hornets are to be replaced by the NGAD (Navy). Formerly the F/A-XX program.
I'm really sad that I'll be in my 70s by the time the F-35 is declassified enough to get a proper flight sim.
>proper flight sim.
Get on my level.
>I guess I just question why the gunpod isn't... Longer? Thicker? I know they developed a very fancy computer controlled gun for better efficiency in burst size, but I dunno how relevant that is for attacking ground targets.
Fighter based gun CAS is a meme, as the plane is too fast to stay on station, and it can be done better by helos. Most of the CAS roll was done with precision bombs. IIRC the B-1 was better at CAS than the A-10. It's just more memorable a gun going BRRRT and the slugs impacting the target.
>It can be pulled off when not needed anyways, so I just don't see why they didn't use a bigger drum for the gunpods.
Probably a compromise between aerodynamic drag, increase of RCS, and data that leans toward a gun not really being great at the job.
>time for another ten hours in the sissy-hypnosis pod, pilot
>yes, ma'am
Motion sims are bleh, industry moving away from them. Doesn't recreate the feel anywhere near good enough.
VR is where the industry is going.
VTOL VR kinda get it. Obviously a DCS-level sim is a long ways away.
The F35 feels more like a video game than other jets anyway, so you probably aren't missing much except for side panel detail.
on the bright side, by the time they can make one there will probably be full-dive VR so it'll be extra sick
The F-35C is for carriers though.
The F-35A can use an airport and it’s very useful for the Air Force’s main mission. Most countries are buying F35As because of their capability for their air force.
made for loving missionary sex
You sure?
Holy POOPER
leeeeeewd
It's a fat, ugly and overpriced piece of shit. A good symbol for americans.
t. My country will either purchase F-35, eell out for F-35 owners, or be overthrown using them in the next 20 years.
It's terrible and the best plane on the market. Nothing matches it in terms of capabilities (cue Swedish and French cope, no being able to turn better isn't more important than stealth) and production. Its main rivals are either stillborn or has no real info on it and floats on sheer propaganda power, anything else will simply die before they see it coming. It's still up to its eyes in problems that need to be ironed out and I know it's not going to last until 2060 but I'm confident in saying it's the least shit plane in service today
Good leader for a squadrant of Super Hornets.
i meant squadron
still 800 deficiencies in 2021, 10 out of them mission critical
None of which affect its ability to perform missions.
In my opinion, there are things that wer just meant to be in this world: Rome, Ozzy Osbourne, The United States, ACDC, the fa18 Super Hornet.
nice sub
Literally a glorified rafale.
>stealth is largely unproven and probably doesn't work
>weak single engine, can't supercruise without afterburner and only lasts for 1 minute
>terrible maneuverability
>extremely limited internal bay capacity, and ordinance carried in the exterior defeats the fighter's whole purpose
>VTOL was a scam
>only redeeming factor are the avionics which can be easily incorporated into other better airframes
A heavily propagandized chassis sold through political pressure exerted by the US on the rest of the free world. There's a reason China and Russia don't fall for it and aren't looking to buy some, not even one
Hi Rafaletard. Nothing you said is true.
>There's a reason China and Russia don't fall for it and aren't looking to buy some, not even one.
Had me till here, 8.5/10.
imagine simping for a gen 4 aircraft that you need to pay gen 5 prices to buy and fly
is largely unproven and probably doesn't work
Holy cope, Batman.
If the F-4 was the victory of thrust over aerodynamics, the F-35 was the victory of engineering over stupid program requirements
Took a while, but it's finally fleshed out. Probably really good buy if you can afford it.
I hope they make the land-operated A variant with a refuel probe. Lots of countries have tankers with the hose, but few with the USAF-style boom.
Cutest and Best plane, and I'm unironically waiting for World War 3 so it can finally shitcan every hostile airforce singlehandedly, prove itself effective beyond any reasonable doubt and piss on Sprey's grave.
why does it have a bulge just under the nozzle?
>He doesn't know about the thrust bulge
I'll leave it as a surprise for you
Arrestor hook for emergency/short landings.
Pubic mound
Pubic mound
Pubic mound
I think it is the F-16 of our generation
Hellish program.
Seems expensive to get good readiness out of.
But the former is past now, and if you can afford the latter it's probably a really good aircraft. Just make sure your internet connection's good for those scenario files...
Good for the west, but faces bad news in the form of Su-57, the peak performer of 1 v 1 fighter combat (cobra manouver, to name one). But it will do good if America decides to attack another development country like Afghanistan.
>but faces bad news in the form of Su-57, the peak performer of 1 v 1 fighter combat
Too bad none have been built since numbers 1 and 2, and 1 crashed on its first flight.
Of course, it's not stealth, barely has better avionics than the SU-35, and air show maneuvers like the cobra are useless in real combat.
>do cobra
>loose all energy
>???
>die
>spins around doing useless maneuvers, losing all energy
>gets hit by a missile that turns after launch and flys backwards at the pursuant (you)
>fiery death recorded by the 2 other F-35s that have been sharing targeting information with the one you were busy chasing the whole time
or better yet
>dont see any radar return, get killed by BVR missile anyways
it's a cool ass plane, i prefer the f22 aesthetically speaking but both look very futuristic even tho both planes are kinda old, its crazy to me humanity managed to build such incredible aircrafts quite a long time ago (f22 is like 20 years old and f35 is 15) won't say shit about comparing performance to other jets and shit because i know jack shit i just like cool planes
My opinion doesn't matter because I'm not a high time fighter pilot with F-35 and other current airframes to compare and contrast.
If you're not an expert with meaningful levels of applicable experience your opinion is trash. I stay in my lane.
I’ve grown to like it a lot. I used to be on team negative Nancy but after learning more about it, it’s a good plane.
It's probably a more realistic application of stealth technology than the F-22 or B-21. The US has gotten far more use in the past 30 years from workhorse light strike fighters like the F-16 and F/A-18 than it has heavy bombers like the B-1 or heavy air superiority fighters like the F-15. The F-22 is cooler, and is better as a fighter but it's unnecessary and too expensive for what it offers. The F-35 will still wipe out any tinpot dictator's air force without casualties in air to air engagements just like the existing fleet of aircraft did in 2003.
I feel like it was designed to fight yesterday's war. The future is drones and this is probably going to be the last fighter jet with a wienerpit.
The F-35 was built with this in mind, as a control node for wingman-type drones in the future
>Yesterday's war
Fully autonomous drones won't be a thing until the end of the century.
Other countries only now, nearly 40 years after the US introduced the F-22, finding out how expensive it is to build a 5th gen aircraft.
The F-35 is the cheapest a 5th gen jet can be built and mass produced and this has the frogs and everyone absolutely seething because THEY KNOW that when they give it a go at building a true 5th gen, it’s likely going to be wildly more expensive than the F-35.
It’s a never ending cycle that we have seen for 70+ years now
>The US comes out with a next generation jet
>Everyone in the world says its shit
>10 years later everyone is dying to buy it
>The people who try to compete with it can’t even match its performance and end up making a worse copy
>rinse and repeat
I want to fly it so badly. It's probably amazing.
pretty good and better than anything flying today
still think VTOL is a meme that should have been avoided considering A) only the Marines demanded it and B) it was one of the main sources of problems and delays during development.
on the other hand, the f-35b turned a half-dozen US allies into carrier operators overnight
The UK demanded it, too, as a tier I partner.
Japan also wanted it because STVOL makes it easier for their carriers to move jet aircraft to their various bases in a pinch.
>carriers
Anon, Japan has no carriers, only destroyers.
I think the F35B is the coolest of the bunch. It means a fricking awesome plane for smaller “escort” type carriers.
I was initially pretty skeptical about it. Not that it would lose to flankers due to "not being able to turn" or others memes from vatnicks, but I thought it was overhyped, very overpriced and that the program made some bad bets like the B variant. Reading more about it as it was being rolled out I turned around, it's a very impressive plane and cheaper than I ever expected. I'm almost a F-35fanboy now. Also the seethe it creates just by existing is a bonus.
I really love the chubby look for some unexplainable reason.
>chubby
All lean muscle, baby.
Scariest thing in the sky and the hate for it has finally died down despite years of
>muh cobra maneuver
It's a really good jet fighter perfect for modern conflicts. There were some growing pains and a massive spread of bullshit slander propaganda by Pierre Sprey and other fighter mafia morons but in the end people finally start to see the truth it is a great jet fighters that will prove its worth in the upcoming decades of it service.
production of american dollar. very expensive, very useless in real conflict. su-57 is better on every dimensions
I don't get why it was needed when F 22 exists, but it's cool
Can it run Doom?
It's never been truly put to the test and the kind of war where it would be would in all likelihood end in a catastrophic nuclear exchange, rendering the entire discussion moot.
The debate over the F-35 is destined to either rage on forever or end as the motto of the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces goes: "After us, silence".
I honestly don't know enough about it (except its ever-increasing price tag) to have an informed opinion about it.
>except its ever-increasing price tag
Black person, what? The price has gone down lot, and is cheaper than any 4th gen out. Especially when you have to addtargeting pods, etc to the 4th gen to compete in modern combat. The trillion dollar lifetime price until 2070 is no more than what the F-16, F-15, etc. cost. The F-35A is around $20 million dollars cheaper than the F-15EX, when the targeting pods are added.
>The trillion dollar lifetime price until 2070 is no more than what the F-16, F-15, etc. cost.
Extending the life of those airframes to 2070 ended up being closer to 3 trilion according to GAO.
Sauce where it says $3 trillion in the GAO report. The report qouted $1.7 trillion.
It's a fat worthless piece of shit riding on the avionics coat tails of Raytheon and Northrop Grumman
Should have just upgraded the F-22 and let the Navy continued using 4th gens
It looks terrible
>muh stealth unproven
One of the most interesting things Ukrainie shown us is that even high tech AA system are not some space magic bubble - with decent tactics and 3-digit IQ you can work your way around them.
With lower RCS you can perform even riskier missions and go for high value targets or just do what gen 4 fighters are doing now, but with minimal losses.
This. Stealth synergizes with other defenses like jamming and maneuvers. A stealth plane is hard to see but there's ways around that. A stealth plane flying nape of earth is super hard to see without a specific radar setup. A stealth plane flying nape of earth shooting cruise missiles while supported by jamming? Best you can do is shoot the missiles once they show up on radar.
I would put penis in she but for the cost of her hole too high
From what I understand, the engineering was botched so it isn't really maneuverable at all, but that's okay because high tech stealth and BVR engagements mean it can destroy any aircraft on earth without being in much danger at all. Less a fighter jet, more a flying SAM platform that you can make do strikes.
I have next to no idea what I'm talking about.
Well it's been described as an F/A-18E/F with more thrust so by fighter standards it's a bit sluggish.
I think it increases the security of the US more than any other weapon. We have to collaborate with our allies to make them showing we have a strong relationship and other countries want them so bad it gives us leverage because we only give them to our allies.
The strategy worked for the F-5 and F-16 so maybe it'll continue to work for the F-35.
that is the gayest 2007 boomer picture imaginable
And yet still true.
F22 was better.