0
5

[–] twelveparsex 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

AF2 is a test aircraft; it is not painted with the same RAM coating production F-35s will be painted with. It's also not loaded with the same softwares suite so it lacks the capability to cue the weapons systems with the pilot's helmet.

Secondly, it's 2015 not 1960. Missile technology as matured. Kosovo was the last major aerial war the US was involved in. All A/A kills during the conflict were BVR engagements.

0
1

[–] gunsmcbadass 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

All very true, but I'm still under the impression that the military is trying so hard to create a jack-of-all-trades aircraft that what they've ended up with is a plane that is mediocre at everything.

0
0

[–] twelveparsex 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It's an F-117 that can carry more weapons faster and can defend itself. Why wouldn't a modern military want one?

0
1

[–] BasedBrazilian [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Thats some very interesting info you got there thanks!

0
1

[–] hairynip 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Well, from my brief wikipedia reading, the last time the US was in a PvP dogfight was around 2000 (~15 years ago). Though apparently fighters try to shoot down UAVs regularly now. With the widespread use of UAVs manned fighters almost seem archaic. But, I don't know much about it so I don't have any authority on the subject.

0
1

[–] BasedBrazilian [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Well, its the typical American approach to warfare - Add tons of technology and hopefully that alone will be a sufficient edge.

If the F35 electronics are really THAT good that they can detect enemies 360 degrees beyond visual range AND engage them effectively there is no need for dog-fights.. but were the electronics to fail or you be suprised by a jet you are screwed.

0
0

[–] hairynip 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

good point

0
0

[–] cavtroop 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

they said the same thing in the 60's, then we got our asses handed to us in Vietnam by some crappy Mig-15's and 21's. We had to undertake a massive retraining and rearmament program for the F4 phantoms, put gun pods on them, and train out pilots how to dogfight before we got the upper hand back. Just because dogfighting is rare, doesnt mean it's not important.

0
1

[–] twelveparsex 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It's 2015, not 1960. Missile technology has gone a long way. During the last aerial engagement the US was in all kills were BVR. Modern SAMs that Syria and a bunch of other countries that don't like the US flying over them have a range of over 100 miles with 150lbs warheads and can travel at over mach 3; they have guidance systems that once the missile's own radar becomes active the kill probability is over 95%. I don't care how much titanium you wrap the A-10 in or how redundant you make it, a 150lbs warhead will make it fall out of the sky.

0
0

[–] kerberos 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Too true, for every advance in tech, there is usually something to counter it, no doubt there will be some ECM, Jamming, or opponent in the future with stealth technology to level the playing field... F-35 is a peacetime cashcow for the ones holding the contracts