Military Plane discussion thread - Let’s talk Fighter/Attacker planes.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
The US is really missing out on not taking the F-14 Super Tomcat. This plane can provide naval force projection FAR beyond what the accepted Navalized F-18 can provide against Russia or China. But what can I do? A buyer for the USAF I am not. *EDIT* Drunkposted, plz to not hold against.
 
Last edited:
The Un-Clit said:
The US is really missing out on not taking the F-14 Super Tomcat. This plane can provide naval force projection FAR beyond what the accepted Navalized F-18 can provide against Russia or China. But what can I do? A buyer for the USAF I am not. :(
Click to expand...
How did you find a way to post on here from 1999?
 
Mr. Skeltal said:
The F-16 will always be the first love for me. I used to fix their engines, a shame that the airframes in service now are as good as they're gonna get. That said, a lot of what we had to do to make some of the old vipers fly was kinda nutty. We're talking canning enough shit out of the one Red X shop queen to hollow it out because some of the OEMs don't exist anymore and none of the existing contractors make parts that analog. It takes a long time for the boneyard special to show up at LRS so better to reuse what you have from an already stricken aircraft.

As to why we don't buy new ones? I think it was sunk-cost thinking and tunnel-vision on the JSF program. Don't get me wrong, I think the F-35A is a great plane for BVR engagements and standoff engagements of SAM/AA sites but it is no viper. They have a charm and a mission but I can't help feeling bittersweet about it all. I had to retrain when the vipers left for the 35s and like fuck was I going to get lumped in with the AMXS boys in that new-fangled 2A3X7 AFS. Staying on the component side of MXG was a good decision even if it meant having to go back to Sheppard.
Click to expand...
Apparently they’re going to try and squeeze more life out of them yet.
 
Kind of a general take but I think a lot of countries are way over-focusing on stealth technology. Assuming a detection system is developed which does not rely on sending out radio waves and then picking up on the ones that bounce back, stealth aircraft could become effectively worthless overnight. Keep in mind that not only has a ton of money been spent on stealth tech, a lot of the new generation 5 fighters have greatly sacrificed performance in other aspects in order to accommodate them being stealthy. Something I was thinking that fits the bill of a stealth defeating technology would be a detection system that detects micro alterations to the Earth's natural magnetic field to detect aircraft. This is not at all something far-fetched since while it is in its infancy currently, such technology does already exist. Who knows whether or not a country is actually working on this, but if a rando on the internet like myself thought of it, there's a fair chance that some expert military engineer has also thought of it.
 
mr.moon1488 said:
Kind of a general take but I think a lot of countries are way over-focusing on stealth technology. Assuming a detection system is developed which does not rely on sending out radio waves and then picking up on the ones that bounce back, stealth aircraft could become effectively worthless overnight. Keep in mind that not only has a ton of money been spent on stealth tech, a lot of the new generation 5 fighters have greatly sacrificed performance in other aspects in order to accommodate them being stealthy. Something I was thinking that fits the bill of a stealth defeating technology would be a detection system that detects micro alterations to the Earth's natural magnetic field to detect aircraft. This is not at all something far-fetched since while it is in its infancy currently, such technology does already exist. Who knows whether or not a country is actually working on this, but if a rando on the internet like myself thought of it, there's a fair chance that some expert military engineer has also thought of it.
Click to expand...
I think you are quite right. It has made me shake my head for years how all the 5th gen 'stealth fighters' (and of course the original one, the Wobblin' Goblin F-117) have terrible performance as actual combat aircraft compared to 4th and 4.5th gen fighter aircraft. Even without the statistical differences alone, I've seen some carefully modelled simulations with accurate flight and weapons charactaristics where planes like the Saab Gripen completely outperform and shoot down 9 out of 10 times 5th gen aircraft, even the mighty F-22 once in combat range.

The F-35 in particular is a fantastic stealth weapons delivery and networked warfare system, but as a fighter jet it sucks. If stealth is defeated by a new tech like you mention, it's going to become a VERY expensive sitting duck that will have to hide behind a fighter cover of F-15s, F-16s and F-18s to do it's job in a combat zone.
 
The Un-Clit said:
I think you are quite right. It has made me shake my head for years how all the 5th gen 'stealth fighters' (and of course the original one, the Wobblin' Goblin F-117) have terrible performance as actual combat aircraft compared to 4th and 4.5th gen fighter aircraft. Even without the statistical differences alone, I've seen some carefully modelled simulations with accurate flight and weapons charactaristics where planes like the Saab Gripen completely outperform and shoot down 9 out of 10 times 5th gen aircraft, even the mighty F-22 once in combat range.

The F-35 in particular is a fantastic stealth weapons delivery and networked warfare system, but as a fighter jet it sucks. If stealth is defeated by a new tech like you mention, it's going to become a VERY expensive sitting duck that will have to hide behind a fighter cover of F-15s, F-16s and F-18s to do it's job in a combat zone.
Click to expand...
Not really. The 35A has been brutalizing Vipers and Hornets over Goldwater for a few years now, the B is better than the harrier in every meaningful way and the C seems to be able to handle itself very well in BFM and BVR while having really good tactical integration in to the CAG when it is supporting super bugs and being supported by the Growler. Yeah, none of them are going to reliably beat F-22s or single seat eagles reliably, but those are pure fighters, the 35 is a strike fighter meant to operate in contested airspace, not a bomb truck like the B-1 or A-10 or CAS wagon like every attack helo thats going to spend 99% of its combat time in the relative comfort of outright air supremacy.

In reality the 35 has just been a popular target for corporate backed hit pieces in defense journals and newspapers for decades. But I have yet to meet a single pilot with significant time in the airframe that has anything bad to say about it.
 
mr.moon1488 said:
Kind of a general take but I think a lot of countries are way over-focusing on stealth technology. Assuming a detection system is developed which does not rely on sending out radio waves and then picking up on the ones that bounce back, stealth aircraft could become effectively worthless overnight. Keep in mind that not only has a ton of money been spent on stealth tech, a lot of the new generation 5 fighters have greatly sacrificed performance in other aspects in order to accommodate them being stealthy. Something I was thinking that fits the bill of a stealth defeating technology would be a detection system that detects micro alterations to the Earth's natural magnetic field to detect aircraft. This is not at all something far-fetched since while it is in its infancy currently, such technology does already exist. Who knows whether or not a country is actually working on this, but if a rando on the internet like myself thought of it, there's a fair chance that some expert military engineer has also thought of it.
Click to expand...
Infrared imaging is already used to beat stealth, but it is range limited and there is apparently a counter to that already.
BC1C3812-64ED-42ED-99D2-58CD6CC2E0AD.jpeg
5233FE4A-A2EA-4373-B4F1-C6B459CD0B42.jpeg
There is a reason why everyone is going in on stealth. (Or at least low observability) Any really precise alternative detection method is likely to get a lot of false positives.
 
Buttigieg2020 said:
Infrared imaging is already used to beat stealth, but it is range limited and there is apparently a counter to that already.
View attachment 3075111
View attachment 3075122
There is a reason why everyone is going in on stealth. (Or at least low observability) Any really precise alternative detection method is likely to get a lot of false positives.
Click to expand...
No gonna lie, the F-117 looks rad as all hell in a reflective LO coating.

Relating to it, I wonder if it doesn't work like a dichroic mirror, allowing radar through to be attenuated by the more traditional stealthing while scattering infrared light.
 
i remember hearing about the bottoms of planes/drones covered in super thin video screen panels that play the live feed from hd cameras on top of the craft pointing upward at the sky, so that the whole bottom of the craft blends seamlessly into the surroundings...that mirror reflection coating could be something simian to that
 
Sometimes I wonder why are they shooting their unguided rockets at the sky and so many flares.

 
MrJokerRager said:
Sometimes I wonder why are they shooting their unguided rockets at the sky and so many flares.

Russian_Aerospace_Forces'_Su_25_assault_aircraft_in_action.mp4
Click to expand...
But then you realize that it's a propaganda shoot not a combat flight shoot, right?

Gotta say for such antiques the Su-25 is still a decent ground attack beast, carries a shit-ton of boom and holds up real well when the only thing your enemies can shoot at you are machine guns, small AA and shoulder-launched SAMs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom