User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 2:59:16 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Red air's job is to be a training aid. That is it. They do not provide validation of capabilities or tactics, only a means to assess the performance of those tactics or uses of those capabilities. They are there to fly the dance card and exploit execution mistakes on the part of blue air. "We really wiped the floor with the bandits" isn't a useful boast, even if your bandits were unrestricted and very capable with no handcuffs. For those not exposed to it, red air's mission is to fly profiles that are limited by speed, acceleration, vertical climb, weapons capabilities etc. It sucks for the pilot because they get nothing out of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:11:24 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That guy is such an alarmist tool. We have thousands of unemployed veterans with real world experience and he has a job wirting about the details of the military. Virgins giving sex advice |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:25:39 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm guessing most of the people who design fighter jets have never flown one before... ETA If youre talking about Sprey he also didn't "design" the A-10 or F-16 as it often falsely claimed |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:26:51 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sooo just thinking here. Lets take a version of the F35B, ditch the fan and use that space and weight for the GAU-8?????? Hmmm?  Brilliant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:28:33 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So take the most important component of the whole program, and replace it with a bunch of useless weight. Brilliant. What is it with Aussies and guns? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:30:16 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No worries as he's not a designer either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I'm guessing most of the people who design fighter jets have never flown one before... The best programs seem to be the ones where pilot input is balanced against what engineers say you can or can't do, by excellent project management who know how to assemble the right personalities and workforce to make it happen. Look at the contrast between the F-4 and the teen fighters, for example. 
F-15C (Upgraded) F-16C  Now imagine decades of teen fighter pilots complaining about head down, head up fatigue, fighting with MFDs/MMDs trying to interpret sensor data, engine reliability, fuel efficiency, and how that wish list accumulated. What would their dream plane look like? F-35: 
 HMDS III F-35 Pilot Helmet Inside CGI Views Lightning II Aircraft |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:30:44 PM EDT
[#7]
Part pooper
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So take the most important component of the whole program, and replace it with a bunch of useless weight. Brilliant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:42:54 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Part pooper
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Part pooper
Quoted:
So take the most important component of the whole program, and replace it with a bunch of useless weight. Brilliant. 
I’m of the opinion that doubling (tripling if you count allied navies) the number decks that can operate a 5th-gen fighter/bomber is more important than giving hard-ons to Arfcom and antique congressmen. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 3:43:17 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not to toot my own horn, but I personally think that fighter jets manned by pilots in the aircraft are a dying breed. IF the solution to the problem of "pilots are squishy, expensive, get tired, and tend to be prima donas" happens to be "make an AI drone" . Why use missiles, and the accompanying weight, Say a quality missile cost 3 million bucks, drone costs 6, to take out a 40 million dollar enemy aircraft(and pilot and missiles/bombs), seems to be a win once the AI is developed, you can have said AI be set to only turn on if ground control is lost/delayed. Then you have IFF capability built into said AI. you lost a 6 million dollar drone(which BTW can corner at 15-20 G's, humans tap out at 8 IIRC). Gold star families become a thing of the past, so politicians love it(really hard to argue "we want to put Americans in harms way, and some of them will die.." VS. "we safely bombed the hell out of XYZ, it was rough we lost some drones, but yeah we are safe"); heck CNN can put some grieving factory worker on talking about how great their AI drone was??. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 4:10:38 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pierre Sprey "The F-15 had gotten loaded up with junk." (F-15 air-to-air kill record is currently 104:0) "We started a guerrilla movement and did the F-16, which would wax the F-15." (F-16 kill record is 77-1) "No wing, no turn. It's astonishingly unmaneuverable." (Refer to video in OP) "It isn't good at anything. It's a Turkey." (Exact opposite of what all the pilots are saying about the F-35, especially the ones that flew F-16C, A-10, F-15C, F-15E, AV-8B, Hornet, and Super Hornet.)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaHlWow6Yc4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 4:20:11 PM EDT
[#11]
The GAU-8 is giving the A-10 problems lately with malfs.
A-10 driver barely manages to belly-land after GAU-8 blows off his canopy, landing gear fails 
AGM-65 was the A-10's main intended weapon for Fulda Gap. If they magically survived an approach into armor town and were somehow able to get off Mavericks, then maybe the gun would have come into play, but they were literally counting on getting splashed by SAMs and hoping for CSAR. Read this article on A-10 CAS in Anaconda and think about every problem they had, and what solutions might exist now. Everything went wrong on A-10's first mission in Afghanistan |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 5:05:01 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry.
I’m of the opinion that doubling (tripling if you count allied navies) the number decks that can operate a 5th-gen fighter/bomber is more important than giving hard-ons to Arfcom and antique congressmen. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Part pooper
Quoted:
So take the most important component of the whole program, and replace it with a bunch of useless weight. Brilliant.
I’m of the opinion that doubling (tripling if you count allied navies) the number decks that can operate a 5th-gen fighter/bomber is more important than giving hard-ons to Arfcom and antique congressmen. from wiki: CountryNavyIn serviceIn reserveUnder construction Australia Royal Australian Navy200 Egypt Egyptian Navy200 France French Navy300 India Indian Navy000 (4 planned total) Japan Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force400 South Korea Republic of Korea Navy101 Spain Royal Spanish Navy100 Thailand Royal Thai Navy100 Turkey Turkish Navy001 United Kingdom Royal Navy000 United States United States Navy931 (11 planned total) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 5:39:18 PM EDT
[#13]
My gripes about the F-35 are:
1. Taking so long, development started in '92, first flight was in 2006... I mean come on, 30 years +/- before they started working on it we still had WWII surplus Corsairs in service. Meanwhile we continue to run our 4th gen aircraft into the ground. 2. Expense, seems to be a kind of a cluster. 3. Trying to do everything with one plane. F-35 is probably going to be a great fighter, I don't think they are much of a CAS aircraft. I have never even sat in a fighter but from the outside looking in it does look like a screwed up dragged out mess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 6:42:42 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
3. Trying to do everything with one plane. F-35 is probably going to be a great fighter, I don't think they are much of a CAS aircraft. Development has taken too long, no arguing that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 6:56:34 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No worries as he's not a designer either. Rogoaway is a photographer that created a click bait site and doesn't know what he doesn't know ETA If youre talking about Sprey he also didn't "design" the A-10 or F-16 as it often falsely claimed Of course the people who make these decisions and design these planes should take pilots input into account. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 7:19:16 PM EDT
[#16]
I don't know shit about the 35 except what media tells me, which means nothing.
It does seem like everyone always hates our new planes at first, they always suck, always a bad idea, till the new planes starts kicking ass, then everyone loves them |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2018 8:05:19 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s really not one plane, it’s three. (Maybe 4 of you count export models). And it’s fine for CAS, better than anything we currently have. LAAR would be better, but that’s a whole ‘nuther thread. Development has taken too long, no arguing that. Sure it absolutely has advantages, but it's not there yet. In a few years absolutely, but not currently. And yes, I have flown with the 35 to include some smaller LFEs. Not talking to LAAR, strictly what is in the current inventory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 1:43:07 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I disagree, but that's just me. Are we talking COIN CAS or talking MCO/Increased Threat CAS? Either way, it is more survivable than the A-10 in anything but a completely permissive environment. Hogs would be absolutely slaughtered in any denied environment, and thrive in the current permissive environment CAS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 8:29:53 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn't matter -- CAS is a mission, and weapons produce effects, and it has virtually nothing to do with the delivery platform. This is why everything from a Pred to an AC-130 to a Bone to an F-15E can validly perform "CAS", they just all bring different tools to the fight and can produce different weapons effects. Either way, it is more survivable than the A-10 in anything but a completely permissive environment. Hogs would be absolutely slaughtered in any denied environment, and thrive in the current permissive environment CAS. The COIN / TF CAS we are flying now is very different than an MCO type environment with the survivability issues you are talking to. Yes, they are both CAS but they are entirely different. The HOG, us, you all, hell just about anything would absolutely have issues in a denied environment and that is where the 35 thrives. There is no denying the 35 can bring some awesome capabilities to the table, but I still stand by my original comment. The 35 is not the best suited aircraft for the “CAS” we are currently flying. MCO is an entirely different story. Not sure when you got out, or if you are still in, but have you gotten a chance to look at the EOTS feeds? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 8:56:01 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Make sure you don't ever look at the stickers on Super Hornets, F-16E/F Block 70, or any F-15 coming off the line today then. Super Hornet Block II was already well above $90 million. I've seen figures ranging from $92 to $98 mil per, not even talking about the Block III they want now with CFTs and upgraded features inspired by the F-35. F-16E/F Block 70 for UAE are $200 million per, more expensive than an F-22A. UAE F-16E/F Deal F-15SG for Singapore costs $83.3 million per ($1 billion for 12 aircraft). Or you could buy F-35As for $85 million per and get VLO, integrated systems, unprecedented SA, best AESA currently produced, more lethality, more survivability, better performance, better combat radius, ease of training, substantial advantages across every parameter of how we used to compare planes, with no competition in the information performance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My problem with the f35 has always been its cost. Not necessarily with the plane itself. Super Hornet Block II was already well above $90 million. I've seen figures ranging from $92 to $98 mil per, not even talking about the Block III they want now with CFTs and upgraded features inspired by the F-35. F-16E/F Block 70 for UAE are $200 million per, more expensive than an F-22A. UAE F-16E/F Deal F-15SG for Singapore costs $83.3 million per ($1 billion for 12 aircraft). Or you could buy F-35As for $85 million per and get VLO, integrated systems, unprecedented SA, best AESA currently produced, more lethality, more survivability, better performance, better combat radius, ease of training, substantial advantages across every parameter of how we used to compare planes, with no competition in the information performance. There are no reliable sources about program costs except for OMB or CBO where the method will be well defined. Simple calculations such as dividing the total program cost by the number of airplanes seems logical and honest, but the costs are never reported this way. Sustainment and spares costs are never included in the airplane cost. Multitudes of other "small" contracts are never noticed, a good example is in the article about F-18 contracts I posted yesterday. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 9:03:01 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The F-35 will be a good fighter if we buy enough of them. But it's no F-22. We won't be getting any more F-22s though. The most painful part of reading GD's threads about F-anythings is the belief that if it's a "fighter", then it's a "fighter", and they can all replace each other. A dumb concept that ought to be killed off and forgotten. Second to that is the idea that airplanes that are advertised to fly two times the speed of sound, fly at that speed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 9:20:08 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kelly Johnson was an engineer. The best programs seem to be the ones where pilot input is balanced against what engineers say you can or can't do, by excellent project management who know how to assemble the right personalities and workforce to make it happen. Look at the contrast between the F-4 and the teen fighters, for example. http://f4phantomparts.com/fotos/COCKPITS/RF4G.jpg F-15C (Upgraded) https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=39347&d=1274578459 F-16C https://i.pinimg.com/originals/10/90/a4/1090a450c4e9fc0c4a96ee3e22becb1d.jpg Now imagine decades of teen fighter pilots complaining about head down, head up fatigue, fighting with MFDs/MMDs trying to interpret sensor data, engine reliability, fuel efficiency, and how that wish list accumulated. What would their dream plane look like? F-35: https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/50f838876bb3f70b4e00000a-750-562.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/07/07/16/360ADADD00000578-3679230-image-a-37_1467906588818.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3aimm04SWUThe comment about "the best programs" is naïve, based on what is visible outside a project, from the reports written by outsiders that might have interviewed an executive "leader" that has never been in the engineering building. The staff ranges from damn competent to bodies warming a seat, and from zero experience to 40 years of experience. Some of those people with 40 years of experience have two or three years of experience repeated several times. Almost none of them have broad experience across many projects or outside their little sphere at work. A company that tells the customer "what you need is" will be crushed by the customer. Sometimes a gentle hint works along with salesmanship that convinces the customer, but mostly it's a bad idea. The customer knows how to operate the airplane, knows how it wants to operate the airplane, and knows how much money it can spend or is supposed to spend at minimum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 9:53:28 AM EDT
[#23]
With its other capabilities it seems that maneuverability doesn't matter as much, but that is impressive.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 10:07:22 AM EDT
[#24]
F35 tickle fight aside, there will be ZERO CAS in an IADS environment.
WILL NOT HAPPEN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 10:31:44 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kelly Johnson was an engineer. The best programs seem to be the ones where pilot input is balanced against what engineers say you can or can't do, by excellent project management who know how to assemble the right personalities and workforce to make it happen. Look at the contrast between the F-4 and the teen fighters, for example. http://f4phantomparts.com/fotos/COCKPITS/RF4G.jpg F-15C (Upgraded) https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=39347&d=1274578459 F-16C https://i.pinimg.com/originals/10/90/a4/1090a450c4e9fc0c4a96ee3e22becb1d.jpg Now imagine decades of teen fighter pilots complaining about head down, head up fatigue, fighting with MFDs/MMDs trying to interpret sensor data, engine reliability, fuel efficiency, and how that wish list accumulated. What would their dream plane look like? F-35: https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/50f838876bb3f70b4e00000a-750-562.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/07/07/16/360ADADD00000578-3679230-image-a-37_1467906588818.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3aimm04SWUQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I'm guessing most of the people who design fighter jets have never flown one before... The best programs seem to be the ones where pilot input is balanced against what engineers say you can or can't do, by excellent project management who know how to assemble the right personalities and workforce to make it happen. Look at the contrast between the F-4 and the teen fighters, for example. http://f4phantomparts.com/fotos/COCKPITS/RF4G.jpg F-15C (Upgraded) https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=39347&d=1274578459 F-16C https://i.pinimg.com/originals/10/90/a4/1090a450c4e9fc0c4a96ee3e22becb1d.jpg Now imagine decades of teen fighter pilots complaining about head down, head up fatigue, fighting with MFDs/MMDs trying to interpret sensor data, engine reliability, fuel efficiency, and how that wish list accumulated. What would their dream plane look like? F-35: https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/50f838876bb3f70b4e00000a-750-562.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/07/07/16/360ADADD00000578-3679230-image-a-37_1467906588818.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3aimm04SWU
Have you had PMT 401? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 10:39:11 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here we get to listen to GD with its vast knowledge in air combat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 10:40:57 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The JSF was never intended to be an F-22, or to fly the same mission. The most painful part of reading GD's threads about F-anythings is the belief that if it's a "fighter", then it's a "fighter", and they can all replace each other. A dumb concept that ought to be killed off and forgotten. Second to that is the idea that airplanes that are advertised to fly two times the speed of sound, fly at that speed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The F-35 will be a good fighter if we buy enough of them. But it's no F-22. We won't be getting any more F-22s though. The most painful part of reading GD's threads about F-anythings is the belief that if it's a "fighter", then it's a "fighter", and they can all replace each other. A dumb concept that ought to be killed off and forgotten. Second to that is the idea that airplanes that are advertised to fly two times the speed of sound, fly at that speed. My point is that the F-22 was a staggeringly more advanced aircraft than its predecessors. The F-35 isn't such a beast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 10:42:28 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
F35 tickle fight aside, there will be ZERO CAS in an IADS environment. WILL NOT HAPPEN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 10:51:39 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am aware of the different missions the F-22, F-35A, F-35B and F-35C are intended for. My point is that the F-22 was a staggeringly more advanced aircraft than its predecessors. The F-35 isn't such a beast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 11:11:18 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds like canceling the Crusader and various other artillery projects was a bad idea then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 11:12:12 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
F35 tickle fight aside, there will be ZERO CAS in an IADS environment. WILL NOT HAPPEN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 12:17:46 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My point is that the F-22 was a staggeringly more advanced aircraft than its predecessors. The F-35 isn't such a beast. It’s a damn quantum leap. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 12:33:26 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
F35 tickle fight aside, there will be ZERO CAS in an IADS environment. WILL NOT HAPPEN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 12:35:35 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Computers do what they're programmed to do. Have you ever tried to program values? Or even simple cost driven decisions? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Not to toot my own horn, but I personally think that fighter jets manned by pilots in the aircraft are a dying breed. IF the solution to the problem of "pilots are squishy, expensive, get tired, and tend to be prima donas" happens to be "make an AI drone" . Why use missiles, and the accompanying weight, Say a quality missile cost 3 million bucks, drone costs 6, to take out a 40 million dollar enemy aircraft(and pilot and missiles/bombs), seems to be a win once the AI is developed, you can have said AI be set to only turn on if ground control is lost/delayed. Then you have IFF capability built into said AI. you lost a 6 million dollar drone(which BTW can corner at 15-20 G's, humans tap out at 8 IIRC). Gold star families become a thing of the past, so politicians love it(really hard to argue "we want to put Americans in harms way, and some of them will die.." VS. "we safely bombed the hell out of XYZ, it was rough we lost some drones, but yeah we are safe"); heck CNN can put some grieving factory worker on talking about how great their AI drone was??. Have you ever tried to program values? Or even simple cost driven decisions? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 12:35:49 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sure it will, as long as you stay ahead of the competition. But it looks like an awesome powerpoint footer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 12:53:18 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, first you don't really understand AI or ML. Second, programming cost driven decisions is very easy. "Values" falls into a definition trap rather quickly. Values drives cost driven decision calculations. Look at reported program costs. They are all correct according to their own metrics. Metrics based on values. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 12:59:36 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am aware of the different missions the F-22, F-35A, F-35B and F-35C are intended for. My point is that the F-22 was a staggeringly more advanced aircraft than its predecessors. The F-35 isn't such a beast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 1:05:01 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who does? Values drives cost driven decision calculations. Look at reported program costs. They are all correct according to their own metrics. Metrics based on values. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Well, first you don't really understand AI or ML. Second, programming cost driven decisions is very easy. "Values" falls into a definition trap rather quickly. Values drives cost driven decision calculations. Look at reported program costs. They are all correct according to their own metrics. Metrics based on values. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 1:08:59 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're making up a word salad, nothing you said has any meaning at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 1:10:41 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To you. But that's the tricky thing with these matters. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: You're making up a word salad, nothing you said has any meaning at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 1:11:31 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, it's objective. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 1:13:49 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
k den |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:08:09 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That doesn't even make sense. But it looks like an awesome powerpoint footer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Sure it will, as long as you stay ahead of the competition. But it looks like an awesome powerpoint footer. Does that make more sense? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:12:15 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Defeating IADS will allow CAS. Does that make more sense? But then lets really think about what we need in CAS plane once we get rid of the ADA, shall we?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:13:35 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Defeating IADS will allow CAS. Does that make more sense? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Sure it will, as long as you stay ahead of the competition. But it looks like an awesome powerpoint footer. Does that make more sense? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:17:39 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am aware of the different missions the F-22, F-35A, F-35B and F-35C are intended for. My point is that the F-22 was a staggeringly more advanced aircraft than its predecessors. The F-35 isn't such a beast. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The F-35 will be a good fighter if we buy enough of them. But it's no F-22. We won't be getting any more F-22s though. The most painful part of reading GD's threads about F-anythings is the belief that if it's a "fighter", then it's a "fighter", and they can all replace each other. A dumb concept that ought to be killed off and forgotten. Second to that is the idea that airplanes that are advertised to fly two times the speed of sound, fly at that speed. My point is that the F-22 was a staggeringly more advanced aircraft than its predecessors. The F-35 isn't such a beast. The F-18E/F will get there in two steps in less than 10 years if the Democrats don't interfere. The F-15 might. The F-22 is no slouch computationally, and it will also likely receive upgrades to match F35, but not soon enough to suit ARFcom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:18:06 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s really not one plane, it’s three. (Maybe 4 of you count export models). And it’s fine for CAS, better than anything we currently have. LAAR would be better, but that’s a whole ‘nuther thread. Development has taken too long, no arguing that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:19:19 PM EDT
[#48]
The idea that an F-35 can hold a candle to a slick F-16 in WVR combat is ludicrous. There' hardly anything that can touch a slick F-16 in visual combat.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:19:59 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The idea that an F-35 can hold a candle to a slick F-16 in WVR combat is ludicrous. There' hardly anything that can touch a slick F-16 in visual combat. Ok then Doug Masters.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2018 3:33:05 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The air force (and the navy) needs a bunch of cheap planes to use as bomb trucks so we don't fly the wings off the expensive stuff bombing mud huts. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
