Only FIGHTER JETS
- Thread starter Dr.Gnar
- Start date
howlongcanausern
Active member
looks legit
ThisAngelicRage
Active member
holla to the 134th fighter squadron vtang, awesome guys! i got to ride along in one of the f-16c falcons, sooooo amazing!
my favorite jet has to be a F-102A delta dagger, my gramps flew one
my favorite jet has to be a F-102A delta dagger, my gramps flew one
NinetyFour
Active member
Congrats man. Glad the hard work payed off for you!
TinyTigers
Member
Yes!!!!! So stoked to go down to Luke! Have you started the B course yet?
howlongcanausern
Active member
howlongcanausern
Active member
gapersarefriends
Active member
greatest thread i've seen on NS
cobra_commander
Active member
The F-35 is nothing more than a 70 Senator imposed drain on our national defense budget. It is indirectly responsible for killing the F-22, and the Air Force's attempt to kill the A-10.
The only airframe it ever should have replaced was the F-16. Of course it can't replace anything because it doesn't really work, two decades latter. The U-2 was created from RFP to production in a few weeks.
The only fighters the US should be using are F-18s, F-15s, and F-22s. F-15s have done as well, if not better than, F-16s on putting warheads to foreheads in OEF/OIF. Its faster, and has EW capabilities to boot.
The only airframe it ever should have replaced was the F-16. Of course it can't replace anything because it doesn't really work, two decades latter. The U-2 was created from RFP to production in a few weeks.
The only fighters the US should be using are F-18s, F-15s, and F-22s. F-15s have done as well, if not better than, F-16s on putting warheads to foreheads in OEF/OIF. Its faster, and has EW capabilities to boot.
Twinjibber77
Active member
12373946:Dustin. said:
First, that video is sick
Second, I see 35s every day and it's hard to think they are cool knowing how much money and bullshit has gone into those shitbirds. They aren't even CLOSE to done.
Dustin.
Active member
The only fighters the US should be using are F-18s, F-15s, and F-22s. F-15s have done as well, if not better than, F-16s on putting warheads to foreheads in OEF/OIF. Its faster, and has EW capabilities to boot.[/QUOTE]
Even A-10's have EW. I don't understand this post at all, how'd you come up with those 3 jets?
Even A-10's have EW. I don't understand this post at all, how'd you come up with those 3 jets?
a_pla5tic_bag
Active member
I await the SR-72
987321654hgfd
Active member
Not a jet but still dope.
and for the history
and for the history
GayWolf420
Active member
can i post this here? i found it on reddit, its fucking intense. that ominous humming of the gun must be terrifying in real life.
Bump because LOL f35 joke.
a_pla5tic_bag
Active member
pretty agile for its size.
JGWI
Active member
Kinda neat fact I learned today. Boeing's Everett Factory in Washington is the largest building in the world at 472,370,319 cu ft and covers almost 100 acres. They mostly assemble passenger aircraft, but prior to its retirement they manufactured some components for the F-18 Hornet.
That's one big ass building.
That's one big ass building.
_69
Active member
Alright let me speak from the 10 year old within me.
Do you know how FUCKING BALLER these things are?! Like fuck!!! They can just fucking fly at twice the speed of sound and dodge missiles specifically designed to fuck their shit up, they don't care about you or your family or anyone else you've ever met, because they can fucking drop a massive fucking bomb and you and everyone you've ever known will be dead. They can even fucking sink aircraft carriers from fucking miles away without them even knowing, they can blow shit up that's moving faster than the fucking speed of anything, like fuck.
Do you know how FUCKING BALLER these things are?! Like fuck!!! They can just fucking fly at twice the speed of sound and dodge missiles specifically designed to fuck their shit up, they don't care about you or your family or anyone else you've ever met, because they can fucking drop a massive fucking bomb and you and everyone you've ever known will be dead. They can even fucking sink aircraft carriers from fucking miles away without them even knowing, they can blow shit up that's moving faster than the fucking speed of anything, like fuck.
Byron_tha_gr8
Active member
11206810:roddy116 said:throwback timeflying fortress
and a spitfire
WWII throwback ftw.
But ill stick to jets.
The little plane was carried like a bomb by the bigger one, then dropped and flown into ships. It was packed with explosives and fuel, was rocket powered, and had no weapons. Also the fastest plane in WWII, in any theater.
Those crazy japs.
daOyster
Member
From a technology standpoint, how can you not love the F-35? The helmet lets you see an unobstructed 360 degree view using integrated cameras in the planes hull. It's amazing and costs 400,000 alone. The Jet itself is highly maneuverable and the navy variant can hover and is more stable then the old Harriers. Financially, it might be a fail but it is still a spectacular jet.
Byron_tha_gr8
Active member
13445868:byubound said:The f4u corsair was a glorious machine.
too long and heavy, wasn't nearly as effective in the pacific as the Hellcat. And if the Bearcat had come out 6 months earlier, there wouldn't be any discussion. Supposedly it was better for air-to-land combat, which was why the marines wanted them so much more than the navy did.
Id say it was even with the Wildcat. Which wasn't bad, but got rekt by zero's, as did the corsair 7 times out of 10. The only reason the stats are even decent are far superior training and formation tactics. The if the Japanese had the training American's did, the zero would have won them the entire pacific.
Either way, Japan really had a more versatile aircraft in the zero, you could set them up for long range bombing, torpedo missions, air-to-air, air-to-ground, good carrier take off and landing, lots of agility, and as an effective escort. America didn't have a plane that came close to being that solid in so many areas. Other than the Bearcat, which came out late anyways.
whoa-dere
Active member
13445828:daOyster said:From a technology standpoint, how can you not love the F-35? The helmet lets you see an unobstructed 360 degree view using integrated cameras in the planes hull. It's amazing and costs 400,000 alone. The Jet itself is highly maneuverable and the navy variant can hover and is more stable then the old Harriers. Financially, it might be a fail but it is still a spectacular jet.
the marine version does vertical takeoff, not navy
NinetyFour
Active member
Not fighters but all are customer's airplanes:
This T-28 has had a wild history looking through the logbooks. It's been crashed and had the shit beat out of it but it looks stellar especially for 1957 and over 10,000 flight hours. The owner wanted a T-28 forever and finally got into this one, he's the right guy for it and absolutely gives it every bit of attention it deserves.
The green machine below is an Interavia I-3, an "all metal sukhoi". It's changed quite a few hands, but still has less than 300 hours. Definitely a pretty cool machine, basically an MT Prop and M14P engine with just barely some airframe attached. We did some maintenance on it today; my start video is kind of shit, and really not all that exciting though.
We also look after a few Extra 300's, hands down my favorite airplane. It's largely composite which is huge in my books, Lycoming equipped which is great because they're the best engines in the world, it's performance characteristics are amazing, every single thing in our customer's function with flawless precision because the engineers actually gave a fuck, and with that every component fits beautifully with all of their surrounding components which makes maintenance (my job) enjoyable and easy. This one is a favorite with it's very Tuskegee-esque livery.
This T-28 has had a wild history looking through the logbooks. It's been crashed and had the shit beat out of it but it looks stellar especially for 1957 and over 10,000 flight hours. The owner wanted a T-28 forever and finally got into this one, he's the right guy for it and absolutely gives it every bit of attention it deserves.
The green machine below is an Interavia I-3, an "all metal sukhoi". It's changed quite a few hands, but still has less than 300 hours. Definitely a pretty cool machine, basically an MT Prop and M14P engine with just barely some airframe attached. We did some maintenance on it today; my start video is kind of shit, and really not all that exciting though.
We also look after a few Extra 300's, hands down my favorite airplane. It's largely composite which is huge in my books, Lycoming equipped which is great because they're the best engines in the world, it's performance characteristics are amazing, every single thing in our customer's function with flawless precision because the engineers actually gave a fuck, and with that every component fits beautifully with all of their surrounding components which makes maintenance (my job) enjoyable and easy. This one is a favorite with it's very Tuskegee-esque livery.
JAHpow
Active member
It blows my mind in how short of a time we've advanced in flight.
First plane in 1903 with the Wright brothers
First jets in the 30s
Yeager goes supersonic in '47
On the moon in '69
5 years after that we have the F-16
F-22 development in the 90's
And now hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft that skip upon the atmosphere.
Might as well throw drones in there.
And then you think about stuff like space probes. For instance, Voyager 1 which launched in 1977 that's in interstellar space.
First plane in 1903 with the Wright brothers
First jets in the 30s
Yeager goes supersonic in '47
On the moon in '69
5 years after that we have the F-16
F-22 development in the 90's
And now hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft that skip upon the atmosphere.
Might as well throw drones in there.
And then you think about stuff like space probes. For instance, Voyager 1 which launched in 1977 that's in interstellar space.
cobra_commander
Active member
13445828:daOyster said:From a technology standpoint, how can you not love the F-35? The helmet lets you see an unobstructed 360 degree view using integrated cameras in the planes hull. It's amazing and costs 400,000 alone. The Jet itself is highly maneuverable and the navy variant can hover and is more stable then the old Harriers. Financially, it might be a fail but it is still a spectacular jet.
What they say it does and what it does are two different things.
I also don't see a ton of value in a $400,000 helmet system when we are kicking out good soldiers and marines because we don't want to pay them.
Especially when we are going to phase out fighter pilots in 10 years or so. Making these pretty much a total waste of tax payer doll hairs.
The F-35/JSF program was a bad idea from the get go. The idea of a single platform that can be modified for GP/Carrier/VTOL roles is stupid. A half million dollar wizbang helmet and camera system isn't gonna make it fucking magical. Still an over priced piece of shit that has yet to be operational.
Dustin.
Active member
13446146:cobra_commander said:
Every time you speak, I'm amazed at confident you come off even though you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. 99% of what you just said was bullshit.
Go on, reply back with more bullshit. I can't wait to see what you fabricate this time.
Bombogenesis
Active member
I would give ANYTHING to take a ride in a fighter jet.
Oh if I could turn back time..
Oh if I could turn back time..
cobra_commander
Active member
13446350:Dustin. said:
Which parts did I fabricate?
I've got a degree in Airplane design. I'm more than familiar with the current operational and strategic capabilities of our various abilities to flex power and how they relate to the current battlefield.
The F-35 is a mid range, relatively slow, moderately stealth multirole aircraft. The current stratigic focus for the DOD is on preventing and winning COIN and near peer wars.
The primary role of the Air Force in a COIN environment is logistics h(troop and equipment movement) and precision air to ground engagements against targets without early warning systems or capable Anti-Air assets. Precision and ability to avoid green on green (something the air force, especially fighter and bomber piglets is terrible at) are paramount. The F-35 offers little to no advantage over current multirole platforms in these cases and is actually a drop in operational capability from UAVs and A-10s.
The primary roll of the AF in near peer environments is prevention through overwhelming firepower projection, and second strike capabilities by projecting an image of impunity. The F-35 does not realistically offer a big enough advantage over current options to justify the cost (the F-22 does). The stratigic drawbacks of its low range, low endurance, and slow speed more than offset the tactical and operational advantages of its new tech and moderate stealth capabilities. A carrier group with F-35s (plus litorial craft with Marine variants) is not much more persuasive to China than a CG w/ F18s. A carrier group with long range, high endurance stealth UAVs (something more than possible in 5-10 years) does.
From an aeronautics and engineering perspective the whole JSF concept is and was silly and stupid. The idea that you could create a single 'modular' platform that would excell at both ground based, carrier launched, and VTOL is fucking stupid. They have different needs. By trying to do all in one you fuck over the capabilities of the ground based model with many of the limitations of VTOL aircraft. 'Modular' really doesn't work with aircraft design. Every part of a design ought to be focused around the singular purpose of the aircraft. JSF really is the product of a dated policy that was implemented to cut costs in defense spending with slight reduction in potential capability relaying on how advanced the aircraft was (for the late 90s) to stay ahead of near peer adversaries through mid 2020s. Well it is now 2015 the F-35 is not operational, extremely expensive and nearing the end of the period where it was assumed to provide significant tactical, operational, and stratigic advantage.
the tech really is there to replace fighter pilots. We could just have them wear that $400,000 helmet and put some cameras on the UAVs of the future. Not risk pilot lives. Have aircraft that could fly longer, faster and further, and not need to unfuck every pilots spine every time he does a 6+ G turn.
The F-35 has yet to do anything except burn taxpayer dollars in development.
I'm gonna go back to underfunded training for a bunch of guys who actually have been involved in implementing US foreign policy. But that's ok, we don't need money for weapons and munitions that actually get used. Spend it on the F-35.
TinyTigers
Member
13447008:cobra_commander said:
Ok now I'm 100% sure you are full of shit. You don't have a fucking clue what the 35 can do.
Dustin.
Active member
13447008:cobra_commander said:
*Pours tall glass of scotch, punches own dick, and loudly sighs* Here goes a huge waste of time:
Oh you have a degree in airplane design? Fantastic, you're driving my point home that you have no expertise related to tactical/operational levels of 3rd, 4th, and especially not 5th generation warfare. Do you know the capabilities of Russian double digit SAMs? Chinese fighters/SAMs verse their Russian originals? Do you know what a 6G turn feels like or why the fact that you even mention it highlights the unarguable point that you don't know why the fuck it's negative 1,000 on the give a fuck scale? You don't. I know you don't because of the simpleton bullshit you're saying.
Ironically, you are exactly the kind of fucking idiot that would have designed the F-35 in the first place. I know because I talk to them in person. Some know-it-all "I have a degree in X" dude with zero experience in anything that actually matters when designing a combat weapon, and to make it 100x worse you're tactical opinion is a product of nothing more than the last 12 years of low threat CAS in some third world country. How very quickly you've forgotten that every single war since Vietnam had SEAD, Strike, and escort packages working together to infiltrate IADs that look like baby shit compared to what we face today. Not to mention cyber, comm, etc. For fucks sake a Yugoslavian SA-3 (translation: kindergarten in the SAM world) shot down an F-117 in less than 15 years ago. You think the AF is concerned with CAS? You think that's the challenging part? News for you: low threat CAS comprises about 1% of what the Air Force trains to, prepares for, and spends money on developing. And frankly, it's fucking easy compared to leading SEAD or planning a strike package into a Russian MEZ. Mentioning the A-10 and F-35 in the same sentence is a gigantic red flag that says "I have no fucking idea what I'm talking about". It's like talking about why a BMW sedan is way worse at off road than a Jeep Wrangler. No shit, what the fuck are you talking about? Talk to me about the A-10 when we are discussing bombing targets on day 10 of the war, it's not going to even turn a wheel until the SAM/Fighter threat is decimated. It's a flying bullseye made for CAS and CAS only. It has no place in any conversation regarding the F-35 unless you are specifically trying to pin AF budget on it like every other ignorant and emotional douchebag sitting in his mother's basement claiming they're some kind of tactical god. You'd do very well in Congress for two reasons: You're outspoken about shit you don't understand and you're adamant that the A-10 and F-22 have fuck all to do with the F-35.
Itemized list of points I don't have days to discuss, because without years and years of flying, tactical, and air combat experience to hinge your opinions on, all you are doing is repeating bullshit you've read on the internet. Lockheed literally has a dude who's hired to read shit like this on the internet and try to figure out where the fuck someone imagined it from:
-The F-35 is the second most stealthy jet in the world. "Moderately stealthy"? Dude, GFY. You don't know a fucking thing about what those capes even mean or feel like to an adversary.
-"Relatively slow" If you are another asshole comparing mach 1.8 to mach 2.0 and this and that, maybe you should point out that 99.9% of fighters have never and will never get to that speed. The F-35 is plenty fast, moot point.
-Your entire first paragraph is about low-threat CAS....again....point to a jet that can't/isn't doing that right now. That's not what the F-35 or any 5th gen fighter is for. We have more than a robust setup for that in every service.
-UAV's are great for CAS. Any idiot can fly them and with other Air Force capes they can do as well as piloted fighters. Now why the fuck are you even talking about that in relation to a SEAD beast jet that definitely needs a pilot. IMO, the kind of wars that would have 35's and 22's on the point do not consider a single blue (It's blue dude. Not green. Good guys are blue and bad guys are red.) asset in enemy territory.
-You talk about F-18's like their many variants are remotely similar. Don't.
-"Not much more persuasive to China than a CG w/F-18's". I had to stifle vomit after reading this.
-Engineering and design plans and acquisition and blah blah blah. No shit. You would have to literally be retarded to argue that the F-35 was well designed from a financial, contractual, or time based standpoint. I don't think any intelligent person is or will ever argue that. So why the fuck did you waste 2 minutes of our life writing about it? It's done, that money and time is GONE. VTOL IS stupid, but the Marines are ridiculous sometimes so why the fuck wouldn't they request to land in the grass on the battlefield with a fucking F-35?
-The F-35 is, like nearly every jet ever, behind schedule. But it is flying at bases all over the country already, the Navy goes "operational" like tomorrow, and the AF goes operational in something like 6 months. Say what you want, but again that shit is in the past and it's happening now. If you want to cling to shit that doesn't matter now, by all means keep typing. If you want to talk about actually employing in combat, the F-22 did that for the first time (5 bombs?) a few months ago. It doesn't happen overnight.
-"The tech really is there to replace fighter pilots". First, not even fucking close. This again is a statement from your dillusional view that the Army and a few UAVs are going to storm into even a third world country and send it to it's knees. That war would be lost in 20 minutes. For starters, who the fuck do you think plans these wars to the second, in every unimaginably tiny detail, utilizing hundreds of years of combined experience and knowledge? Fighter Pilots. Go to Red Flag at Nellis. That's where war is practiced and war machines for air, space, cyber, comm, etc. are tested for the future. Fighter Pilots are in tune with ALL those facets of war, not just how to do CAS. A-10 dudes are awesome and they crush CAS as they should, but fuck dude when they learn about SEAD or high threat strike on Viper transitions it's like they're starting over with how much they've never seen before. You aren't going to see those guys as Mission Commanders. It's F-16, F-15E, and soon to be F-35 guys that kill it in that arena because they know about EVERYTHING. Master of none? How about Master of Knowing What Everyone Elses Capes are And Exploiting Them in Their Best Arena to Win As a Package? I have tons of UAV friends, some that fly fighters again that would strongly disagree and loudly laugh at your stupid stupid post. UAV's are one piece of the puzzle, someone has to put that together and that's the dudes in the air who can see it real time.
-6G turn comment....holy shit you're a dork. And no, I don't know anyone struggling with back and neck problems. That's what weights are for, this isn't 1989.
-"The F-35 has yet to do anything but burn taxpayer dollars in development". I cannot fathom a single other thing a jet can do but cost money while in development. Nice point....? It's in service now and entering Operational phase 1 for the AF and Navy basically right now.
-$400,000 helmet. That helmet replaces several other systems and combines them, so ya it's expensive but I doubt it would have cost less if they designed those feature into the jet itself. I'd be more concerned about it failing considering the systems and capabilities I'd lose.
-Underfunded soldiers, shit that gets used...blah blah blah. Look man, I work with a J-TAC every single day. I don't hate these guys and I definitely don't intend to come off that way. Those are the smarter guys. But finding your standard 1 each Marine or Soldier is not difficult. A rifle is a relatively simple machine. That's not exactly the challenge we face today. Frankly, aviation isn't the forefront at all either. That shit's in space and in the Google-sphere. That's where today's war is fought every day, that you don't see, and the SECOND lines of defense are non-kinetic/kinetic airborne and seaborne. Supply and demand has an unfortunate bearing on all military members that makes us feel less than human at best. That will never change.
In short, you're opinion of your understanding of warfare, tactics, and especially fighters is so far off the first mark of 1,000,000 that even this long ass response is years away from proving my point. I have an engineering degree too, that didn't make me an expert.
_69
Active member
13114420:saskskier said:
Sickest video ever. I'm a bit disappointed that he didn't mention that not a single SR71 Got hit by a missile. If anything was fired at one, the pilot would just increase the throttle and FUCKING OUTRUN THE MISSILE. LIKE THIS FUCKING PLANE DOES LIKE 2K MILES AN HOUR FLAT OUT.
cobra_commander
Active member
13447169:Dustin. said:
Typical fighter pilot mind set.
Maybe if CAS was a higher priority the AF would kill less Americans and more bad guys. That would be a good start. Unfortunately there are too many figher pilot GOs that think fighters are the gold standard. They, like everyone else, likes to train on what they view as sexy. It's the same way on the combat side. Everyone wants to train SRM, explosive breaching, and building clearing. no one looks forward to patrolling.
I'm not blaming you personally, it happens all over the place. On our side you get guys who think Dismounted Inf ops are the end all be all, guys who think small foot print UW missions can save the world and spread democracy, and guys who think any war that doesn't involve tanks going head to head is a waste of time. I'm sure it's the same on the Navy side.
Most fighter pilots I know and have interacted with (F-15, F-22, a small number of 16s) all have chronic back issues from the compressions. I'm glad you don't. Their knees, ankles and shoulders are in better health than mine, but their backs are worse.
I guess you missed the sarcasm in the green comment. There is a reason I used green not blue.
And in your post you agreed with me that the F-35 is a stupid program. From my end, I see billions of dollars going to sustaining a program that is way over budget, way behind schedule and has yet to contribute to National Defense. All that while we are cutting BCTs left and right and don't really have the budget to keep those we do have in a P status on their METL, all while we are facing multiple and simultaneous ground war conflicts, and cutting (or attempting to cut) proven air programs. Why aren't we buying any more F-22s? Why is the C17 (your biggest force multiplier) getting cut with no replacement? Why are we continuing to advocate spending on a program pretty much everyone agrees was flawed from the start when we can't afford to keep other programs running? Aside from the 70 Senators.
(I agree with your VTOL assessment. Only one airplane has done it well and that was the Harrier which was designed around the idea). Most Marine pilots fly F18s not Harriers anyway, no?