WarKa DaNG
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2014
- Messages
- 2,446
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Lolllzzz
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Didnt America say f35 was rubbish and f16 were outdoing it in combat. Didnt they say war on terror is won and war in Iraq was won. This is psychological war and everyone believes it here. It probably does has a good kill ratio but not as much as they make out
Didnt America say f35 was rubbish and f16 were outdoing it in combat. Didnt they say war on terror is won and war in Iraq was won. This is psychological war and everyone believes it here. It probably does has a good kill ratio but not as much as they make out
Yes nice marketing. Enemy wong know. The enemy isnt sleeping. Not everyone fights the whiteman with spearsThe F16 comparison was done in the dog fight. F35 is not built for close combat. The F35 is built stay stealth and kill the enemy with BVR missile. The enemy wont even know what hit em.
Watch and learn.Yes nice marketing. Enemy wong know. The enemy isnt sleeping. Not everyone fights the whiteman with spears
Oh dear.Watch and learn.
Physics and mathematics of VLO design philosophy, and resultant effectiveness.
Also: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-3...hows-stunt-turns-older-jets-cant-touch-2019-1
Clear enough?
Now, I shall tell you another thing about F-35; its EODAS capability which provide 360 degree imaging and target acquisition coverage of potential threats to the pilot. This is huge because you cannot surprise F-35 even in WVR situations. F-35 pilot would be alert to angle of approach of the hostile aircraft from any direction and just need to press the button.
A large number of people are in for a rude awakening. F-35 can easily defeat any bird not named F-22A Raptor, and this situation will remain for indefinite period. These aircraft are built from scratch to contend with potential threats decades ahead from the norm at present - unprecedented amount of research and threat assessments inform development of these birds in short. Don't be naive.
Will be? You wish.Which is why I label it a mediocre fighter. And as airforces wisen up to these tactics, airforces such as Russia and China, it will be one expensive paper weight.
I do not have to 'try hard'. I have history on my side. See above.You try hard to dismiss criticism as petty.
I tried in vain to explain that a clean F-16 is a useless F-16. Never mind the cannon. I was on the F-16 for five yrs. I know what 9g feels like, but I also know that in full combat load, even just for air-air, that 9g is not always available. So if I see a clean F-16, I know it is not a threat to me, no matter how agile it maybe over me.The F16 v F35 dogfight instance does indeed demonstrate that in terms of maneuverability the F16 takes the lead over the F35, and also emerges superior in the dogfight category.
Will be? You wish.
We do not have history of producing 'paper weights'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959
If you take a look thru history, starting with the source above, you will see that essentially, the 1950s explosion of fighters was a time of experimentation. Many of them have limited operational deployment life, but the ones that have longevity, like the F-4 and the F-104, why so? See if you can figure that out.
But if we continue to the later decades, we will see a pattern that of diminishing quantity of designs and most of them ended up with long operational deployment life. Even my first assignment the F-111 that was ridiculed and initially hated ended up a feared weapon by the entire Warsaw Pact and it had no equal from the same.
So no, the F-35 will not be that dream you have of being a 'paper weight'.
I do not have to 'try hard'. I have history on my side. See above.
I will be blunt. Your Pakistan came around the same time we started experimenting with the jet age, so essentially, YOU are in no position to criticize US. An aircraft is a national project in that it requires the resources that only nation-states can provide, a higher level of education, established manufacturing base, continuous scientific foundations and achievements, and last but not least -- lots of money. Anyone from any country that do not match US in those regards and if his/her country do not contribute to aviation in general, let alone military aviation in specific -- STFU. The B-52 is just as old as your Pakistan, and it is still flying, so you are in no position to rant about drag coefficiency and assorted reasons why the F-35 is a 'bad' aircraft. Am not being mean, just as blunt as you are wishful.
I tried in vain to explain that a clean F-16 is a useless F-16. Never mind the cannon. I was on the F-16 for five yrs. I know what 9g feels like, but I also know that in full combat load, even just for air-air, that 9g is not always available. So if I see a clean F-16, I know it is not a threat to me, no matter how agile it maybe over me.
I cannot say that to the F-22 and F-35. Both jets are designed to produce 9g regardless of load. People either cannot understand or worse REFUSE to understand the significance of the enclosed weapons aspect of these jets. They think that enclosing the weapons is ONLY for 'stealth'. They are wrong. The F-35 have no wing stresses in terms of centripetal force from stuff hanging under the wings. That is why its maneuverability are minimally impacted by weapons load.
So if I see a clean F-22 or F-35, there is no telling its combat threat status, whether it is to me or to a ground location I am tasked to protect. Visually speaking, a clean F-22 or F-35 is ALWAYS a threat until established otherwise, like me seeing empty weapons bays, which is not likely.
People criticize the F-35 out of their emotions, not of their intellect because the latter would force them to concede that the rest of the world's air forces are done. There is no 'long wavelengths', no SPECTRA, and no Kolchuga can go against it. Quantum radar? Try another 20 yrs before deployment but by then, we WILL have something to counter that.
It is over.
Do you think others do?
As for Russian jets not performing in Desert Storm, we all know the level of pilots flying them, however do you believe the results would be similar if a professional air force were flying the same jets against yours?
Sorry to contradict you.. but 100 fighters against 50 is quite different from 500 against 50..that is not one-to-one in either case.. but might be less relevant if the 50 are stealth and the others are not..It does not matter how many countries against one. In air combat, it is still one-to-one. See if you can figure that one out.
F-35 haters, on PDF and elsewhere, want OTHERS to go to war against the USAF believing the F-35 is a piece of junk.I do not know what the F-35 can do. I am not going to war against USAF thinking it is a piece of junk.
Will be? You wish.
We do not have history of producing 'paper weights'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959
If you take a look thru history, starting with the source above, you will see that essentially, the 1950s explosion of fighters was a time of experimentation. Many of them have limited operational deployment life, but the ones that have longevity, like the F-4 and the F-104, why so? See if you can figure that out.
But if we continue to the later decades, we will see a pattern that of diminishing quantity of designs and most of them ended up with long operational deployment life. Even my first assignment the F-111 that was ridiculed and initially hated ended up a feared weapon by the entire Warsaw Pact and it had no equal from the same.
So no, the F-35 will not be that dream you have of being a 'paper weight'.
I do not have to 'try hard'. I have history on my side. See above.
I will be blunt. Your Pakistan came around the same time we started experimenting with the jet age, so essentially, YOU are in no position to criticize US. An aircraft is a national project in that it requires the resources that only nation-states can provide, a higher level of education, established manufacturing base, continuous scientific foundations and achievements, and last but not least -- lots of money. Anyone from any country that do not match US in those regards and if his/her country do not contribute to aviation in general, let alone military aviation in specific -- STFU. The B-52 is just as old as your Pakistan, and it is still flying, so you are in no position to rant about drag coefficiency and assorted reasons why the F-35 is a 'bad' aircraft. Am not being mean, just as blunt as you are wishful.
I tried in vain to explain that a clean F-16 is a useless F-16. Never mind the cannon. I was on the F-16 for five yrs. I know what 9g feels like, but I also know that in full combat load, even just for air-air, that 9g is not always available. So if I see a clean F-16, I know it is not a threat to me, no matter how agile it maybe over me.
I cannot say that to the F-22 and F-35. Both jets are designed to produce 9g regardless of load. People either cannot understand or worse REFUSE to understand the significance of the enclosed weapons aspect of these jets. They think that enclosing the weapons is ONLY for 'stealth'. They are wrong. The F-35 have no wing stresses in terms of centrifugal force from stuff hanging under the wings. That is why its maneuverability are minimally impacted by weapons load.
So if I see a clean F-22 or F-35, there is no telling its combat threat status, whether it is to me or to a ground location I am tasked to protect. Visually speaking, a clean F-22 or F-35 is ALWAYS a threat until established otherwise, like me seeing empty weapons bays, which is not likely.
People criticize the F-35 out of their emotions, not of their intellect because the latter would force them to concede that the rest of the world's air forces are done. There is no 'long wavelengths', no SPECTRA, and no Kolchuga can go against it. Quantum radar? Try another 20 yrs before deployment but by then, we WILL have something to counter that.
It is over.
Future war will be fought in BVR arena, at least for superpower, that's stealth tech for @CriticalThoughtTo continue the history lesson, the F-35 is just the basis for the future. Its design aim was to be a mass produced second tier companion to the F-22. It is never going to exceed its design aims.
This base platform for the future lays the foundation for overcoming diminishing returns through computation. In doing so, it has already solved huge technological problems. An engine capable of VTOL, sensor fusion and display through HMDS, along with a basic stealth design. Just one of those technologies would take a state decades to master. But here is the thing. The result of all those technologies still doesn't give air superiority today. It can't when air superiority wasn't even the design aim. Everybody understands how procurement works in the American military industrial complex. Everyone understands the politicians making decisions are clueless and need numbers like 28:1 to sway their opinion. To the outsider it may look like F-35 is the plan. It's not. Some years later, they will again be presenting numbers like 28:1 to get more funding for something else.
Now it is a shame that you spent an entire paragraph attacking my country of origin. It made you feel good, and it made you look dumb. Thank you.
The internal load may give it benefit in a roll but did it lead to a 400 degree per second roll rate? I am using hyperbole here to make the point that it is not a WVR fighter. It made trade offs and balanced various requirements but this did not produce the world's best dog fighter.
So how does it stand in a stealth scenario? By your own admission, you don't fight yourself, you fight fourth gen fighters. You are going into battle with a low opinion of your enemy and with over confidence. Sorry thought operational testing would reveal its problems. He never realized the military industrial complex may have deep roots that will ignore short term defects for long term plans. The USAF certainly has a plan. Meanwhile it's going around the neighborhood bullying kids with shiny toys.
Regarding the highlighted -- so what?To continue the history lesson, the F-35 is just the basis for the future. Its design aim was to be a mass produced second tier companion to the F-22. It is never going to exceed its design aims.
Do you not see how you contradict your own criticism? The F-35 was not intended to be a dedicated air fighter, therefore, it is a bad air fighter. That made no sense as a criticism. The 747 was not designed as a fighter, therefore, it is a bad fighter.But here is the thing. The result of all those technologies still doesn't give air superiority today. It can't when air superiority wasn't even the design aim.
Ah, yes, the old MIC standby as a distraction for one's own inadequate argument. Every country that must have a defense, even the ones that must import their defense, have a MIC. Nothing original here, folks.Everybody understands how procurement works in the American military industrial complex.
No, the real shame here is you trying -- in vain -- to criticize something you know nothing about.Now it is a shame that you spent an entire paragraph attacking my country of origin. It made you feel good, and it made you look dumb. Thank you.
There is a maneuver call the 'Dojo Drift'. Kinda like the 'Pulgachev Cobra'. Named after their respective pilots who executed the maneuvers.The internal load may give it benefit in a roll but did it lead to a 400 degree per second roll rate? I am using hyperbole here to make the point that it is not a WVR fighter. It made trade offs and balanced various requirements but this did not produce the world's best dog fighter.
Not our fault the rest of the world do not have a peer. Too bad the Soviets ignored Ufimtsev to their detriment.So how does it stand in a stealth scenario? By your own admission, you don't fight yourself, you fight fourth gen fighters.
That is your assumption of US. More to satisfy your own emotional needs than any accurate descriptor about US.You are going into battle with a low opinion of your enemy and with over confidence.
And we will fix them. Just like we did in the past for other platforms. This is a useless criticism in light of history.Sorry thought operational testing would reveal its problems.