JSF is a joke, why won't America sell these bad boys instead?
>"B-Because our allies will reverse-engineer them and/or sell them to our enemies!"
Okay fine, just put a clause in the contract saying they can't do that.
>"B-But they'll just do it anyway!"
Wow, sounds like you have shitty allies but if that's really what you're worried about, just rig every jet with a thermonuclear device set to go off if any part of the plane is detached from the main body.
This isn't exactly rocket science.
>They're obsolete desu, they only thing they do better than an F-35 is have a slighter lower RCS
An order of magnitude less, in fact. Much faster and much more maneuverable, too. Too bad the entire avionics suite needs to be re-engineered since all of the key contractors either no longer make the parts used in the F-22, or went out of business completely.
>lists a fuckhuge B-2 as having a smaller RCS than an F-22 or F-35
>B-2 0.75 ?
>B-2 0.1 ?
Yes, very believable
>"The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber"
Directly contradicts what your first link says.
Also, the first link lists the B-2 THREE TIMES, at 0.75 (Less stealthy than the Eurofighter), 0.1 (less stealthy than F-35/F-22, and at 0.0001, on par with the F-22
which makes zero sense
F-135 doesn't supercruise =/= F-35 doesn't supercruise, friend.
I mean, no, the F-35 doesn't. But who knows what ADVENT might add.
F-15s can't supercruise to my knowledge, and they're arguably the best 4th gen platform, period.
>F-15, best 4th gen platform,
>the F-35 doesn't [supercruise]
We are in agreement my friend!
F-135 is the engine in the F-35
So I don't get where you're heading. If the engine doesn't supercruise, the airframe can't either.
But I agree, I don't see that engine staying with the platform through it's (probably short) life cycle.
But it has a larger internal payload then the F-35 internally.
I don't get, why didn't the AF just stick with F-22's then getting the F-35A?
Is it because politics suck?
> a thermonuclear device set to go off if any part of the plane is detached from the main body.
So in one gets a missile strike it immediately erupts into a nuclear fireball.
Perfect, why wouldn't you do this?!!?
not that anon but it's listing results from different sources that need verification, hence the ? on them
Sorry, I should have made myself more clear. Yes, you are correct.
Did you know, that if you measure by time to cover 1 bodylength/ energy needed. flying is the most efficient form, and birds are the most efficient flyers.
been kicked out from /k/ with a dragon dildo in your ass, so you decided to shitpost on /v/, huh?
mods, pull your fucking heads from your prostates and start doing your fucking job!
>kicked from /k/
>comes to /v/
OTHER WAY ROUND, FUCK
Ok, that's enoug of the internet for me for today. My daily quota of dying brain cells has been reached
Because we don't want savages like you to have them. But who knows, wait another 20 years and we'll see.
Shit man, I don't know. I think Israel because jewing goyims is in their nature.
About turkey, well, turkey is like :
>"we friend with america... DEATH TO AMERICA IT IS NOT HALAL !"
>"we friend with israel... DEATH TO ISRAEL WE HATE JEWS !"
>"we friend with europe... DEATH TO EUROPE HAHA SEND IMMIGRANTS AHAH !"
>"we friends with china... FILTHY CHINESE Y U KILL UYGHUR TURK PEOPLE !"
>"we friends with russia... DIRTY RUSSIANS HELP ASSAD WE GIB ARMS TO ISIS !"
>"we friend with arabs... GLORY TO OTOMAN EMPIRE TAKE BACK MECCA !"
...Turkey is like Tourette's syndrome made into a country.
What's with this hard-on for reviving/upgrading old airframes so many people seem to have nowadays?
They're not going to spend the time and money to set all the manufacturing and stuff back up to start making degraded-ass Raptors, your nuke idea is fucking retarded, and America's already working on it's sixth gen aircraft, so there'd be no point in reproducing Raptors, especially considering people would keep the stupid mentality of "muh old planes are fine!!!" and all that, which would seriously fuck with the sixth-gen aircraft if we don't get a good set of leaders into power, otherwise, I hope we don't repeat these, and the old, mistakes that we had with the Raptor.
can someone explain to me like the retard I am why upgrading avionics/electronics is difficult gorrillion dollar project
Isnt it just hardware and software inside the airframe?
Would removing components/wiring from the cockpit/frame and replacing it really cost a mountain of jew gold?
Why would they be designed this why?
The main reason is it was too expensive and, at the time, the F-35 project was to be much cheaper. We all know how that turned out though.
They also wanted to have a different plane they could sell to other nations and yes, dumb politics too.
Because it costs a lot to remove and replace those avionics, not to mention designing them to fit into existing spaces. Plus, some planes, like the F-16, just flat out don't have the room to cram more avionics inside, and have to rely on external pods to make up for it.
not real. how could you tease me like this.
The Navy is already pissed that the F35 is taking so long to get online, they're giving four F/A-18A+/C squadrons Super Hornets this year (VFA 94, 113, 146, 192),
The F/A-18F will probably get upgraded to the International Roadmap/Advanced/Block III/"Super-duper" Hornet configuration in 2025ish, since they can't afford to lose the CAS/FAC(A)/Strike capability they provide, and F/A-XX is a long way off (think 2040 IOC)