What's going on in India?

[StCapps]

In fact, the whole reason StA is shitting on the F-35, is that it isn't focused enough on fighting the last war, for his liking. His argument is that they focused too much on the next war, and got the mix wrong, because the next war isn't going to be all that different from the last one, not that it's designed to fight the last war.

StA is the one who wants to blow US tax dollars on fighting the last war, not Lockheed Martin.

[Speaker to Animals]

Those talking about dedicated air superiority Flying Tennis Courts (F-15) are the ones locked in the last war paradigm, obvious 1970's paradigm is obvious.

Dude, you have no fucking idea how air warfare works.

In a peer to peer fight all our refuellers get shot down. Without refuellers the F-35 is fucking useless. I can't keep spelling this out to you any more clearly and I am tired of reading endless Lockmart slogans as a response. You really don't know what you are talking about.

Right now American air superiority is for not because we depend upon those fucking refuellers. All simulations and research show that an anti-refueller strategy defeats America every fucking time. We need better aircraft.

[StCapps]

Dude, you have no fucking idea how air warfare works.

You're stuck in the 1970's, trying to fight the last war, instead of the next one, but as usual, you have zero self awareness, and project your own faults onto others.

[Smitty-48]

In fact, the whole reason StA is shitting on the F-35, is that it isn't focused enough on fighting the last war, for his liking. His argument is that they focused too much on the next war, and got the mix wrong, not that it's designed to fight the last war.

Well there is more than one war, there's also the war of making sure all the allies buy American, and so that war is fought by America buying a fighter which can replace America's 4Gens, while at the same time cornering the market for fighter jets world wide for generations to come.

I mean, think of all those STOVL aircraft carriers being bought, Japan, Korea, Australia, Spain, Italy, only F-35B is available for these ships.

Business is war.

[Speaker to Animals]

Moving away from important metrics like range and mission endurance was a mistake. Everybody knows it on the inside too.

Russia in particular could really fuck us over by knocking out our refuellers, which is their strategy. That's why they are developing the drones that we have seen. In a previous thread somebody was talking shit about why they would make a non-stealthy drone. Well, duh. Because stealth is not the ultimate thing. Speed, range, and the ability to knock out our refuellers would win the war.

[Speaker to Animals]

Dude, you have no fucking idea how air warfare works.

Neither do you. You're stuck in the 1970's, trying to fight the last war, instead of the next one.

No, I am not. You have no idea what you are talking about. I am right here in the 21st century pointing out that your bullshit F-35 is going to lose a war against Russia. It cannot win. It depends upon refuellers. It has no range. It has shit performance. It cannot load hypersonic missiles. It cannot out-perform real fifth gen fighters.

It's not even a legit fifth gen fighter.

[StCapps]

Moving away from important metrics like range and mission endurance was a mistake. Everybody knows it on the inside too.

Russia in particular could really fuck us over by knocking out our refuellers, which is their strategy. That's why they are developing the drones that we have seen. In a previous thread somebody was talking shit about why they would make a non-stealthy drone. Well, duh. Because stealth is not the ultimate thing. Speed, range, and the ability to knock out our refuellers would win the war.

The Russians don't have the ability to knock out enough refuellers to have the impact you are suggesting, and they certainly aren't going to accomplish it with fucking drones dude. More SIFCLF nonsensical prattle.

[Smitty-48]

Indeed, Mr Ivan has nukes, he can pick on the Russian near abroad, but he doesn't stand a chance against NATO head to head in the conventional spectrum.

[StCapps]

Indeed, Mr Ivan has nukes, he can pick on the Russian near abroad, but he doesn't stand a chance against NATO head to head in the conventional spectrum.

Now Mother Jones is going to dig into his Zerohedge talking points, and tell us about how Russia and China are taking over and America is doomed any day naow.

[Speaker to Animals]

This is the actual problem we face (not the Lockmart marketing woo woo):

The Rand Corporation’s Pacific Vision wargame simulating a conflict with China in 2008 found that even in a favorable scenario for the United States—half of U.S. missiles hit at long range and the none of their opponent’s do—a force of U.S. fighters outnumbered roughly three to one would be overwhelmed after firing off all its missiles. The less-maneuverable F-35s fared poorly in the ensuing dogfight. But in the end, nearly all of the U.S. fighters were lost.

https://news.yahoo.com/world-war-ii-say ... 00167.html


Every time RAND war games this shit out we lose. The reliance on stealth fighters will cost us. We are better off with F-22 as our air superiority fighter and a lot of F-15X as support, especially to provide a continuous supply of missiles to the F-22.

The F-35 in particular is overwhelmingly dependent upon tankers to refuel. Tankers are fucking trivial to shoot down. This is a huge problem for the F-35. It's not going to do you any good if you literally cannot even fly it to where it is needed.

Just consider the problems of relying on stealthy aircraft with limited armament loads that cost so much money to purchase and fly that you only have a few wings worth of them. That means at any given time, if your enemy can fly more aircraft than you have missiles, you fucking lose.