US may resume production of the top-tier air superiority fighter F-22, which is way better than the retarded flying lemon F-35, which can't do anything well, has bankrupted our nation and our allies, and will ensure that we get raped by the Chinese 40 years from now.
businessinsider.com
Sup Forums will probably oppose this
I'd rather have F-14s back
Very rightly so. Clearly better plane.
>bankrupting other nations that bought into the jew
>suddenly making them pay for military defense
>all bankrupt nations are left-wing cuck nations
>white nationalism rises because left-wing cuck governments are broke
suddenly the picture is all so clear
this is not nam
why focus on planes when we could be focusing on greater surface to air protection
seems way cheaper
The fact that the F-22 is now bombing ISIS as a strike fighter is the final nail in coffin for the F-35, the F-22 does everything better.
The F-35 was made because America didn't want to share the F-22 and rightfully so
Simple as that
the payload is pretty shit desu
it doesn't make a very good strike fighter at all
That only works if you're on the defensive and besides darpa is working on lasers to shoot down missiles which would be cheaper in the long run
FUCK why didn't we just make more F22s??? They ended up being cheaper overall, they're a monster when it comes to the all around stealth, avionics, navigation, maneuverability, etc
At least the Marines won't get their hands on it.
LOCKHEED NEW JETS NOW PLS, THE MIG41 IS GONNA WRECK US IN 15 YEARS IF YOU DONT
get caught in a war with Islamic cavemen without having the most efficient strike fighter, no big deal.
get caught in a war with russia or china without an efficient air superiority fighter, you're absolutely fucked.
>Implying that the enemy combatants in the ME are more technologically advanced than those in Nam.
WEW
E
W
it's not about the enemies in the ME, it's about having a viable counter to russian or chinese fighters
Because it's about attacking others, not defending.
I thought that with the advent of the drones the fighter jets would have been rendered almost obsolete. Why all this effort for that flying wreck?
We are better off using the F-22, and updating the F-15 and A-10, than using the F-35. It's much much cheaper to do this too.
The drones are not good enough for all missions. We need the F-22, F-15, A-10, LRB, and Drones for Sam sites or light bombing. The F-35 is worthless.
no we need one single plane that can (theoretically) be used for every mission, because...uh...because reasons. We can't have a multi-plane fleet because it triggers the Jews' OCD.
Drones may eventually make jets obsolete, but that's many years into the future (I'd say probably 30-50 years, but I don't keep tabs on military tech too much so my opinion is pretty much worthless). Jets are still controlled directly by humans with none of the lag issues that drones face, making human judgements very valuable still.
Really, we should combine the Air Force, Navy, and Marine flight programs into one big fleet. Using the F/B-22, F-15SE, F-35, F-18, A-10, LRB, various drones, and cargo/AWACS aircraft. Everything else should be scrapped.
the F35 is basically an F22 that can be launched from an aircraft carrier.
No they won't. Drones are more likely to go away as satellite, and cruise missile technology gets better.
No it's not. Fighter aircraft are classified by maneuver envelope.
can the Air Force variant of the F-35 even be launched from a carrier?
>scrap the B1 Lancer
>scrap the B52
>scrap the hospital planes
>scrap the AC130s
Also, Naval Aviation is a total different animal than Air Force aviation. Naval Aviation has an entirely different cultural because every procedure they have is entirely different from the Air Force's. Even their planes are different to suit their environment.
Merging the programs is the exact opposite of what should happen and what would be beneficial.
Quite frankly the Army should get the A10s, the Air Force should keep its current fleet as should the Navy, and the Marine Non-Rotary Air Wing should be transferred to the Navy.
Until UCAVs can make value judgements, on the spot decisions, and adapt to changing situations, then there will always be a need for manned combat aircraft. Drones have their place in warfare. But not as a replacement for manned vehicles.
the best defense is a good offense
>can the Air Force variant of the F-35 even be launched from a carrier?
Our variant can . . . .. . We are relying in it!!
just fucking wow...
smells almost planned to just get shekels.
Damn, glad I wasn't on any of the engineering teams...
the f-22 was always better
f-35 can't even fight in the rain what a waste of money
>investing in the F-35 and not new rifles and body armor
fucking obama
That's why the F35 won't be cut. Other countries are in on the program. But that doesn't mean the USAF can't get new Raptors. The F35 was originally intended to compliment the F22 in American service, not replace it.
Killing the Raptor's production was a bad political move.
Lockheed Martin: Oh yeah britbong, remember when we told you the F-35s you bought for hundreds of billions of dollars can be launched from a carrier? About that.......oh and they blow up if they fly close to rain clouds too.
>cuck f-35
Well no shit, air superiority fighter cucks multipurpose strike fighter
How do you think we feel about losing the Harrier?
It was bloody criminal.
F-35 is cheaper
>F-35 has the most powerful jet engine ever made
>Still shit power
how
The AC130 is awesome though. Fabulous at raining death and destruction on towelheads.
>B52
one of the most economical planes we have. The thing can hold something like 70 1 ton bombs at the same damn time. If you have SF on the ground laser designating targets, that's a shitload of precision firepower, or a city block or two gone in one dumb bombing run.
The F-35 has no purpose, other than to lessen the size of aircraft carriers, but as we have seen, the planes cost more than building a larger aircraft carrier. In other words the military spent $1 trillion to save $50 billion. Sounds like a government operation to me.
I bet you feel pretty bad about losing the plane that raped the Argies. That shit is important to you
>THAT HORRIBLE, GUT WRENCHING FEEL WHEN I WAS OLD ENOUGH TO KNOW HOW BASED THE HARRIER WAS WHEN IT WAS CUT
when I was a kid I wanted to grow up to fly Harriers for the RAF, thats how based they were
Of course the F-22 is better. It's battle tested, and has been used for many years. It's more expensive to maintain, but they can complete 30-40% more sorties per month.
The F-35 requires 18 hours of maintenance per hours of flight time. This is crippling when it comes to how many sorties they can do per month.
The F-22 has two engines, the F-35 has one engine. F22 has 52,000lbs dry thrust, F-35 has 28,000lbs.
AF's selling point is that F-35 maintenance is more streamlined and requires less training. Yeah right
I hope Finland won´t buy F-35 in the future.. It is in our fighter competition but IMO way too expensive, not aerodynamically capable enough (?) and not really the most suitable fighter for small countries and their missions (fighter interception).
>The F-22 is just too expensive to make! So, I have a better idea!
>Oh yeah? What's that?
>Let's spend hundreds of billions of dollars just to DEVELOP another plane so that we can spend many MORE billions to build them afterwards!
>Great idea!
>I know, right?!
Agreed. The Harrier was always an important asset to the Fleet Air Arm, since socialist cucks gutted the Royal Navy back in the late 60's/early 1970's.
I thought you said YOU wanted to scrap them and was making fun of the fact, not saying to do it.
And yeah especially with the new arsenal planes coming out the B52 is probably gonna be around EVEN LONGER now. I've read stories of 3 generations of families working on B52's by now.
LoL , get out of here with your Ameripoor trash.
Su-35 MasterRace present :youtu.be
How can ameripoor's even compete?
Yes, the F-35 will wind up with a higher unit cost than the F-22 when all is said and done. What a mistake.
F-35 was a mistake, X-32 would have been much better.
>High_Quality_FSB_Propaganda.avi
I could take a shotgun to that thing.
Lightweight b8, m8.
The SU-35, while a damned good fighter, isn't on the same level as the Raptor.
That hilarious looking aircraft never ceases to amuse.
>isn't on the same level as the Raptor
Well, it has better maneuverability, but lacks stealth. Otherwise they are almost identical.
d'aww it looks so happy
that shit's ugly tho
The stealth is what's gonna get it though. 4/5 times the Raptor's gonna get a lock before it even knows it's there.
I mean yeah that 1/5 time when they actually fight it'll be nuts though
f-22 has better avionics
Thank Christ. The AF wanted the F-22... 500 of them to augment the aging Strike Eagle fleet and Obama said, "The F-35 is fine. You get those."
They're not even the same role. ASF are for an AS role and the F-35 can't compete.
We could also make the new F-22 lighter, more powerful with two F-35 engines, and give it a new updated suite of avionics from the F-35.
The F-22 pulled up next to an Iranian F-4 before they noticed and then only when the F-22 called to the Iranian to tell him "You should really go home."
>>f-22 has better avionics
Had , their getting AESA aswell and the new R-77 K's have bigger range than the AIM120's
Build a handful of YF-23's, if you're going to waste money you might as well do something cool with it.
Or build a modern version of the SR-71 :/
You posted a video of an RC plane.
>modern version of the SR-71
The SB-3 Ghoul?
>getting bombed by the happiest plane ever made
Brown people are really missing out.
Love that story.
The best thing about the F22 is it's precision stealth bomber ability. two JDAM's on hardpoints and it can just scoot by, never show up on radar and their HQ blows up two seconds later.
ITT: People who don't know shit about military aviation.
It's not about how many fucking loops your jet can do, it's how far and how fast it can acquire a missile lock on the target, whether it's on the ground or in the air.
The F-35 carries a lot of new tech that results in superior remote sensing. When you have a fleet of F-35's they can provide very detailed Intel of the ground along with being able to replace AWACS in a lot of situations in the air.
The F-22 is a superior air-to-air, probably the best in the world. A fleet of F-35's will be an insanely effective strike force, especially against conventional targets like Tanks, AAVs and APCs etc.
>implying the U.S. doesn't have some insane Mach X plane that's classified at the moment.
SR71 went Mach 3.2 in the 19fucking60s. Imagine what they cooked up at the Skunk Works by now.
Such a great plane. I'd even settle for the Silent Eagle in the fleet though if we could tool & produce them for a reasonable price.
>Why all this effort for that flying wreck?
Its a showcase plane meant to cover the money they were trickling off to other classified projects.
>Silent Eagle
MUH DICK
>we will never get a Naval F22
why go on
This would be true if the F35 was at it's original projected cost. If it was TRULY a cheaper plane then it could it's intended "swarm" tactic and just constantly put down fire will doing the AWAC thing like you said.
Problem is you could swarm F22's for the same price now, which since it's a superior plane at literally everything the F35 does it would make more sense.
Also, it would be a lot cheaper to EW stuff into the F22 than just build more F35's.
Also there's no way the F35 has better remote sensors than the F22.
Secretary Carter Opposes Restarting F-22 Production
nationaldefensemagazine.org
well if Trump wins we'll have a new SecDef so hopefully that sorts it out.
well, your trips tell me you're about to get a visit from men in suits.
nothing, because there's no money in manned hypersonics. It's all about the drones nowadays.
More like Cuckheed Martin, amirite? Glad my country pulled out of that mess, hopefully we'll order some superhornets and shit.
Where will you station them? All your base are belong to refugees.
It didn't have to end this way.
I read that you are planning to replace the A-10 with the F 35, how the fuck are they even remotely similar? The A-10 is a badass chain gun merchant of doom and the F-35 is a toy plane for queers…
>Tfw as president Trump would have demanded a refund
Do americans really believe that plane is invisible? like hurr where's our F-22 I no see it on my new military radar that came last week?
>the F-35 is a toy plane for queers
14 year olds expressing their knowledge is this way >> youtube.com
F-22 is old
But and F-22 with an F-35 software and electronics update would be the best air superiority hands down.
F-35 is a better multirole fighter.
Good! This plane is just so damn sexy.
HHHNNNNGGGG
Only retards say stealth is invisible.
But even if it's not, it makes it much harder to detect and is nowadays a crucial feature
It's invisible enough to not be spotted on the old Soviet radar sets most of the places we would bomb have, and any portable radars you'd bring in during your invasion of the Baltic states.
F-22's price is much higher than F-35's. Last time I heard, it would have been at almost $200 million or so in today's dollars
F-35's projected price back in the late 90's was at around $40 million.
With inflation calculated when it enters full rate production in 2019, it will meet this requirement at $85 million.
F-22's hardware is old compared to what they have managed to research and put into the F-35. An update to the F-22 incorporating these features, including the improved stealth coating, would make it the GOAT air superiority fighter again
were better off passing out mother fucking slingshots than using the f35.
the only combat role having a human pilot in the cockpit is superior to a drone at is CAS.
>meme YF-23
No
>SR-71
They have had good enough satellites and drones for a while now, you know?
memes aside, it was fucking garbage compared to XF-35
Couldn't even meet the STVOL requirements without discarding a shitton of stuff on it lmao
Lasers are a meme weapon. Something as simple as a paint that turns into large amounts of dust once heated up and the lasers are rendered completely useless.
More correct would be to say that it's really hard to identify and detect at longer ranges for Russia and China's low frequency radars
They will be able to identify and detect it if they are close enough, but due to the inverse square law, they can use their passive sensors to geolocate the location of where the radar emits its waves. In a SEAD operation, the enemy would shit their pants when MALDs and GPS guided missiles are coming their way
>old Soviet radar sets
91H6E is not soviet, and definetily not old. But this is all speculation since stelth aircraft never met our anti-air defences and vice versa.
These S-400 radars won't be good enough?
>wanting an NES over a playstation 4
They serve totally different purposes you dense cunt.