Bongs use F-35s for the first time

>the point of this almost piece of shit is its supposed "stealth" that evades radar detection because if it has no stealth it would be a literal piece of shit without any redeeming value

>use its against ragtag camelfuckers WITHOUT RADAR

>success

Attached: Screenshot_142.png (644x644, 936K)

Sprey go home

Fucking thank you! The F-35 is pretty much par for the course when it comes to major peacetime weapons development programs, for the US and pretty much every other country with any military to speak of.
The Abrams saw the exact same media bullshit when it was first introduced, and we've spent the last nearly three decades using them to facefuck pretty much everything they come across
>inb4 "Blowout_panels_working_as_intended_on_raghead_tank_sitting_in_the_open_but_somewhow_this_makes_the_abrams_bad.webm"

I honestly don't understand why someone is criticizing some issues in a highly advanced jet that is extremely complicated. Don't say anything unless you think that you can redesign and recode everything better.

I share your overall attitude, but that line of thinking is full of holes. Criticism is due when it is valid. The problem with the F-35 haters is that they do not have very many valid criticisms. Most of the shit the media spews is regurgitated info from half a decade ago, which has little to no bearing on the program in its current state.

t. retard
The F-35 would literally beat pretty much anything in the US Military inventory (and possibly the world) if you took away the stealth. The only exception to this I would imagine is the F-22.

Jow Forums would have died of apoplexy during the development of the F-111

I love this fat bitch and her thicc curves.

Her abs... hmmm

Attached: sexy abs.jpg (1024x748, 479K)

related

Attached: 1536260423586.jpg (1560x585, 224K)

islamists shouldn't own stealth planes.

>can't turn
>can't supercruise
>can't fly faster than march 1
lol

>it’s the F-35’s fault that our enemies are goatfucking sandniggers

Attached: 02D3A83D-382C-4A19-8F0C-B381C4163031.jpg (721x767, 81K)

Majority of pilots prefer the F-35 to other airframes in short range fights and it’ll be capable of supercruise if it gets the new engines in the mid-late 20’s. It’s perfectly capable of Mach 1.2+ flight, only two test aircraft had any issues with that early in development and it’s since been fixed.

Chink/Slav shills and the people who parrot them because anything that makes America look foolish is like their catnip.

In case anyone wasn’t already aware, Lockheed developed a modification to give the 35 internal storage for 2 additional AMRAAMS.

Dumb phoneposter

And that as of right this moment, more F35’s have been BUILT than Russia has planned to purchase SU57’s on its most optimistic day.

>turns fine
>why does it need to supercruise
>max speed Mach 1.6, which I think is faster than “March 1”

>they often had similiar problems

really? really now? is this your argument about why people think f35 is a total waste of money and time?

both f15 and f16 proved themselfs since the early days of their operational lifes and the fact that the f16 BLOCK 70 exists says quite a lot about the whole "muh sensor fusion" of the f35

Yeah, it says not everybody can afford or be trusted with the newest and best platforms.

What does the UK need multi purpose jets for? We're in one of the most defensible locations possible and the Americans can do whatever they want in the ME on their own easily.

The F-16 used to lawn dart. A lot. Like all the time.
And now it's one of the most prolific fighters in the world.

>t. Vatnik

>i dont like what he says
>welp better say he is a russian

Because conventional deterrence is a thing and multirole aircraft are useful in defense of your country.

Either a shill or someone dumb enough to parrot them. Only difference is you might do it for free.

>What does the UK need multi purpose jets for?
it's the eternal anglo... they want the world to burn because they destroyed their own country.

I was just asking
Would there not be more effective ways to defend though? Wouldn't Single purpose aircraft be cheaper and more effective when defending the Island?

>wouldn’t single purpose aircraft be cheaper and more effective
They would be more effective at their respective roles but they wouldn’t be cheaper. Large quantities of specialized aircraft aren’t a necessity anymore and, generally, it’s a better idea to have a bunch of multiroles instead. The trend of reducing the number of airframes in service began after WWII and has been continuing ever since. No country besides the US and China really has enough money to field tons of different aircraft.

thanks user pretty interesting

>parrot them

literally nothing he said was about russians or anything remotely close

Her rear

Attached: EE6F50AD-1A4E-4685-9732-946B776D2DC8.jpg (639x426, 75K)

>This English

Why did we ever allow Eurotrash and other 3rd world refuse to use the internet?

Attached: live-downtown-buenos-aires-bbc-news-24-protests-in-argentina-3395571.png (500x369, 109K)

i dont know cause without the eurotrash you wouldnt have the means to shitpost

This is some great perspective.

>What does the UK need multi purpose jets for?
For multiple purposes.