Let's have an F-35 appreciation thread so we can all talk about how it's the best multi-role fighter jet currently in service.
Rules:
-No butthurt Russians
-No butthurt Chinamens
-No being angry the F-35 is superior to the Eurofighter
F-35 Appreciation Thread
Benjamin Walker
Other urls found in this thread:
Jaxson Howard
>F-35
Unimpressive and inadequate specs
Brayden Flores
compared to what?
Carson Martinez
A f-15
Elijah Green
Honestly:
The most capable fighter out there because of the combination of steath, data-fusion, data-sharing, powerfull radar, good EW and decent range (compared to F-16).
Now often haters will focus on the fact that it has worse raw physical performance compared to something like an Eurofighter. That's a legitimate point. It doesn't mean that the F-35 is worse tho. Im no hater of any of the planes, they all have their strenghts and weaknesses.
All in all the F-35 is a great fighter.. But I do hope that they manage to lower the cost-per-flight-hour of that thing. That is IMO the biggest concern I have with it.
Michael Flores
>that it has worse raw physical performance compared to something like an Eurofighter
isn't that ONLY when they're both completely clean though? I don't really think that counts considering you don't go into a combat situation without something making your wings dirty
Aaron Fisher
It's already costing less per hour than the F-15C.
Austin James
It make my peepee big
Daniel Lopez
The F-15 isn’t stealth and have sensor fusion
Kevin Rodriguez
>isn't that ONLY when they're both completely clean though?
It's an important point. However if we stay with the Eurofighter as an example it has a lot more trust-to-weight and retains energy (speed) better when maneurering at high speeds. Both of these where extremely important before stealth came around. They still are but not as..
The EF's numbers will worsen with a lot of stuff strapped to it, but from what I've read it still has the edge here.
>It's already costing less per hour than the F-15C.
True- and that's good! I would however like to see it fall a lot more. Remember that the F-15 has been used as the high-end top-performing fighter while the F-16, which the F-35 is meant to replace, has served as the real backbone of the whole NATO. With the sheer numbers of F-35s planned and amount of militaries that are going to rely on it as their main fighter cost-per-flight-hour is extremely important.
Brayden Martin
>we can build the best military technology in the world
>all we have to do is bankrupt our country
Joseph Flores
>tfw a few years of welfare expenditures equals the entire price of the F-35 program from start until it retires.
Julian Harris
Ayden Walker
>>all we have to do is bankrupt our country
Daniel Gonzalez
William Hughes
Cant wait for this aluminum junk to crash and burn...
... well again.
Anthony White
>pay billions on interest on debt to keep unemployed vets on suicide watch from starving in the winter
>but here is a seperate section for military related spendings
Ian Phillips
Not very much aluminum in the 35 user, it's mostly titanium and carbon composites.
Jacob Long
Your data fusion and other electronica can be retrofitted to most other planes.
Josiah Fisher
Big whoop. Get it below the F-16.
Christian Johnson
The expenditure that has increased the most and contributed to the national debt is military spending.
Military spending, the 2008 recession and emergency spending (ie the Iraq war) have been the largest contributors to the national debt.
People like to meme about Gibs but in reality welfare spending hasn't changed much relative to inflation, meanwhile military spending is much higher than it was during the 90s.
Of course whether the deficit even matters that much is debatable anyway, certainly the people who apparently cared the most about it have done fuck all about it since gaining control over the budget; apparently cutting welfare was just about tax cuts.
Isaac Ward
New aircraft are almost always more expensive to operate than the aircraft they replace, it's really not that big of a deal.
Owen Watson
Sebastian Parker
As former pastaperson from Italy I think the following: I will keep bitching about the F35 but I am happy we have it.
Worst case scenario it is a very performing 4.5 generation aircraft with a meme feature (stealth) best case scenario we have a solid guardian.
Charles Carter
>meme feature (stealth)
Literally one of the most important aspect of future modern air combat you absolute Mussolini looking ass.
Landon Wilson
Zachary Price
>during the 90s.
During which it was slashed in the post-cold-war 'peace dividend'. Gibs have always been a large part of the problem, and they've always grown. Now they eclipse the .mil budget twofold.
Kayden Lewis
because virtually all of the NATO 'allies' don't meet the recommended 2%GDP defense budget
Gabriel Cruz
>Your data fusion and other electronica can be retrofitted to most other planes.
it'll still be worse than the integrated sensors of the F-35
Cooper Fisher
I've heard that only the F-35A and C will benefit from the six AMRAAM upgrade. Can anyone confirm this?
Jackson Sanders
LABEL YOUR GOD DAMN AXIS
Otherwise, neat graph. Thanks for the source, user.
Juan Jones
Possibly. The USMC F-35Bs really shouldn't be too focused on A2A anyway.
Jason Williams
>moving the goalposts
Jonathan Thompson
Man, I love the F-35 and what its capabilities bring to the table but I think I will never get its aesthetics, especially when we are coming out of the 4th gen.
Landon Lopez
>when your jet is so shit you have to beg chinks and vatniks not to shit on it
Jesus Christ
Austin Peterson
>when your plane is so shit you have to beg the USAF to buy some
Carter Ross
>not stealthy
LMFAO
Caleb Carter
took this at an airshow a few years ago and got to see one hover right in front of me.
shit was fucking crazy.
Jose Clark
Okay retard
Owen Jenkins
I think we should allow buttblasted canadians in the thread, they're pretty funny.
Jackson Allen
The only thing I fucking hate so far about it is that it needs a bigger internal weapons bay. I wanted the fucking thing to carry hypersonic scramjet missiles inside of it. So I am assuming it would take a minimum of 10 years to have a operational hypersonic missile.
We have to beat the Russians in missile technology or to dumb it down for this board not buying Russian rocket shit while outselling them. Be more advanced than the Russians(not be equal to) even though we are trailing behind them in this field.
Mason Perez
>we are trailing behind them in this field
ehhhhhhh
Russian "Hypersonic Missiles" mainly consist of Iskanders mounted to the underside of MiG-31s as far as I've seen. The US and China are both leading a number of hypersonic research initiatives, and I suspect they'll be introducing actual operational weapons around the same time. Russia is almost certainly lagging behind, despite what National Interest articles may claim.
Ian Price
2014 they state they are working on a hypersonic missile and expect it to be operational by 2020. And now they talk about a mini-kinzhal design last December to fit inside their aircraft so I am now having a hard time deciding if they are working with 1 or 2 hypersonic missiles deign.
Our engineers are tasked with a more stupidly difficult task since less room is made. HAWC is to be operational by 2023 but the worst part I saw was an F-35 carrying it externally.
Henry Phillips
Best multi-role fighter jet coming through
Boeing > lockshit
Zachary Campbell
tell me how the f-35 performs while engaging air to ground targets. It is designed to engage ground targets, yes?
Oliver Perry
pfffft, good one, very funny.
As good as anything else these days, the EO-TS and Sniper XR are the same optics package. It has one of the widest ranges of certified weapons, and is only outclassed in total payload by the F-15E in the Fighter/Attacker size class.
Dylan Long
Can it carry more or less air to ground ordinance than the f-16? is the ordinance designed for the f-35 more or less effective than the ordinance designed for the f-16?
Camden Jackson
the f-15 is not designed to engage ground targets, it is an air superiority fighter.
Liam Rogers
Henry Ramirez
>is the ordinance designed for the f-35 more or less effective than the ordinance designed for the f-16?
the air to ground ordinance, specifically.
Lucas Diaz
Imagine being this brain dead.
Jace Cox
>F-15E
>Not designed to engage ground targets
>F-15E /Strike/ Eagle
>The version explicitly built for ground attack
Asher Gray
are you unable to disclose that information?
Dominic Fisher
What be F-15E?
Jacob Foster
Dude, the fucking slide says it right there. Are you illiterate?
Dominic Reyes
>1 engine
>based off the Yak-141 (1980) and the harrier (1967)
>$1.5 trillion dollars spent on the project
>which led to a sub par fighter that costs $94 million - $115 million per unit
>which took 15 years to complete
>no actual proof of stealth capabilities
Blake Cook
I understand that certain planes share similar chassis. The fact remains that the f-15 platform was designed as an air superiority fighter.
Wyatt Ross
It's a two-seater variant of the F-15 designed for multirole strike missions, kinda like the F-35 but 4th generation. It's a very respectable 4th generation fighter for sure and has a great payload & sensors (IIRC it has quite a good AESA AA & AG radar). Obviously not as good as the F-35 overall due to not being stealthy and not having sensor fusion etc.
Dylan Peterson
Imagine being a lockheed shill
Caleb Smith
it says ordinance. It doesn't say air to ground ordinance. I could give a fuck how many missiles it carries, if it can't engage ground targets its useless.
Justin Nelson
Kevin Sullivan
Also
>it’s a manlet fighter
>the disgrace that is pic related
Lucas Harris
thank you.
Do we still use maverick class missiles?
Mason Ortiz
How to say several sentences and be wrong with every single one.
>1 engine
So? More reliable than 2.
>based off the Yak-141 (1980) and the harrier (1967)
The Yaks were based on the Convair 200, L-M simply bought test data to refine the tech with. And it was the X-32 whose system is based on the Harrier.
I'm not seeing how "built using lessons of the past" is a negative, though.
>$1.5 trillion dollars spent on the project
50-year estimate of all costs, not money spent.
>which led to a sub par fighter that costs $94 million - $115 million per unit
Retard claim.
>which took 15 years to complete
Normal dev time for modern fighters.
>no actual proof of stealth capabilities
Super retard claim.
Oliver Kelly
>1 engine
Yeah, one of the most, if not the most reliable fighter engine out there. Also happens to be the most powerful fighter engine yet.
>based off the Yak-141 (1980) and the harrier (1967)
Proven to be false over and over again. Lockheed did purchase designs from the Yak project but they're two totally different designs.
>$1.5 trillion dollars spent on the project
If you want cheap sub-par fighters you should be looking towards the Russians.
>which led to a sub par fighter that costs $94 million - $115 million per unit
Substantiate your claim that is it subar. It is also in the same price range as the Super Hornet (a 4th gen) - and cheaper than the Eurofigher (also a 4th gen).
>which took 15 years to complete
F-22:
ATF program beginning: June 1981
YF-22 ('demonstrator') maiden: September 1990 (+9 years)
F-22 first flight: September 1997 (+16 years)
F-22 IOC: December 2005 (+24 years)
Eurofighter Typhoon:
Future European Fighter Aircraft program beginning: 1983
BAE EAP demonstrator maiden: August 1986 (+3 years; note that work had been done prior for the ACA program)
Eurofighter Typhoon maiden: March 1994 (+11 years)
Eurofighter Typhoon IOC: 2003 (+20 years)
Dassault Rafale:
ACX program beginning: October 1982
Rafale A tech demo maiden: July 1986 (+4 years)
Rafale C (arguable beginning of the test program) maiden: May 1991 (+9 years)
Rafale IOC: Oct 2002 (+19 years)
JAS-39 Gripen:
IG JAS 'program' beginning: 1980
[No tech demo]
Gripen maiden: December 1988 (+8 years)
Gripen IOC: November 1997 (+17 years)
F-35:
JSF program beginning: November 1996
X-35 tech demo maiden: October 2000 (+4 years)
F-35 maiden: December 2006 (+10 years)
F-35B IOC: July 2015 (+19 years)
F-35A IOC: August / late 2016 (+20 years)
F-35C IOC: December 2018 / early 2019 (+22 / +23 years)
Seems to be within the norms to me.
>no actual proof of stealth capabilities
Literally go check out Red Flag exercise results.
Henry Sanders
>Tripling down on being retarded
How exactly is that cockpit layout bad?
Zachary Walker
Not currently in the F-35, however, I believe they are working on a experimental missile called the JAGM (Joint Air To Ground Missile) which is supposed to be the next generation of AGMs.
Aiden Stewart
I guess it passes muster.
I hope it does as well in combat as it does in tests. Our pilots are relying on Lockheed.
Josiah Price
Large area displays are the future, old man.
Wouldn't expect a slav to give a shit about effective pilot ergos, though.
Ryder Hill
I reverse searched this and it came back to the Grippen - will they not be using a touchscreen like in the F-35 (I see buttons around the screen)? Seems like a step in a good direction regardless tho.
Aaron Thompson
you should probably delete this.
Carson Turner
Why? It's publicly published data.
Sebastian Gonzalez
Wtf is loaded on the racks? Look like mortar rounds?
Logan Nelson
>moar shooty fire in the back must be better because it looks cool
>the highest tech jet ever made is exactly the same as this cancelled design from 40 years ago lol and any jet that has vtol is copying the harrier because that's the only other vtol jet in existence
>nice things cost money wahh
>it's sub par because it's not made to dogfight with nonexistent 5th gen enemy fighters
>It took the same amount of time to complete as all these other jets. why couldn't they do it faster???
>I can still see it so it must not be stealth
Mason Fisher
>Ordinance
Learn to spell ordnance. Also, it's talking about payload mass, not which specific payloads it can carry. When it comes to permissive environments, the F-35 can absolutely carry more on its wing stations.
William Mitchell
Fuck off, retard.
Colton Gonzalez
Training bombs
Ethan Kelly
It's got one less engine, it can be less expensive to operate.
Parker Baker
Not if done correctly.
Brody Gonzalez
>one less engine
>than the F-16
F-35 confirmed to actually be FG-35
Aiden Ward
Shouldn't Moscow be spending it's money on the Pak-Fa rather than shills in a Eskimo seal clubbing forum? How embarassing
Tyler Clark
Moscow should also consider spending some money on hiring assassins to hunt down people that draw shit like this.
Carter Nguyen
We all should
Joseph Reed
What weapons are qualified today for it? And what weapons will be qualified for it in the next couple of years?
Did the UK get the gunpod for their Bs?
Nolan Cox
SS *shouldn’t* even be factored into this, obviously in a perfect world. As an oldfag I’m pissed because I’ve been paying into it for 20 years, but there’s a good chance I won’t see any of it.
Jason Smith
It would be nice though to one time have a thread on Jow Forums that didn’t immediately devolve into internet shit slinging.
Every other gotdam post on this board is “.357 is always better than 9mm,” “Glock/Taurus/KelTek/PSA are all absolute garbage.”
It would just be nice to see a thread stick to topic of OP without a middle schooler dick waving contest. Once.
Camden Walker
*Trump rubbig hands*
Landon Thompson
it's great , already has been in combat missions on multiple fronts and historically the best way to get the best weapon system is data from actual combat operations against hostile forces.
Jaxon Gray
>russian AA is a serious threat
Henry Perez
So, the order they've had in place since long before Trump took office?
Adam Williams
The F-35 can carry like 3x the payload further than the F-16 can, it'll never get down to the same level as the F-16 on operational costs, but it is also substantially more capable per airframe per operational hour.
Sebastian Cox
Do missiles have any substantial advantages over glide bombs for ground targets nowadays? I guess low altitude deployment range, but is that relevant now? Interceptability I guess?
James Cooper
I may be wrong but IMO the only differences are that the glidebombs (such as an SDB) take much longer to hit their targets because they just glide). An AGM such as the JAGM (which is similar to the 114K hellfire) would be pretty quick to hit its target - so probably a good option for close air support. Perhaps another user can chime in on the advantages/disadvantages of both weapons.
Luis Martin
Well, you can release glide bombs with a similar short range drop and fairly short transit time. A Hellfire only has a 20-pound warhead in about the same size package as a 250lbs loaded SDB-I.
Jose Clark
the whole world is laughting at the f-35, even the f-35 pilots. They can't even get oxygen to the pilots.
Nolan Bell
I used to hate the F-35, but it's grown on me. It seems like a pretty capable aircraft that's coming into it's own.
Adrian King
>One less engine than one engine.
Oh shit, did they release the version of the F-35 with the reactionless drive already?
Joshua Perry
t. angry fa18 fanboy
Cameron Reed
>Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow fanboy
Flight testing began with RL-201 on 25 March 1958, and the design quickly demonstrated excellent handling and overall performance, reaching Mach 1.9 in level flight.
not bad for 1958
John Phillips
You mean Vatnik in a state of absolute panic.