|
GotLag posted:God takes care of idiots and children. Presumably he's more interested in the latter for formalised sacrifices. And the former to make 'em.
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
Thomamelas posted:I'm not sure where you got those stories. There was some concern about potential sensor damage, and damage to the paint if an aircraft spent a long period being super sonic. It's more of an issue with the B and C variants. Those two have limits on how long you can be supersonic. The A doesn't. The program had a lot of issues, some of it comes from designing 3 airplanes to kinda be 1. It also got saddled with a new parts and logistics system that is it's own poo poo show. The A seems to be turning out okay. The B/C have issues but probably will get most of those worked out. So you get a good airplane out of a shitshow of design. I'm still not clear on what capability the F35 provides that the F16/F18 doesn't (at a much lower cost), other than increased stealth/survivability. In BVR they both use AMRAAMs so they have about the same offensive reach, and in close-in fighting the F16 is probably better. As far as ground attack, the F16 is a pretty good bomb truck too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 05:01
|
|
|
GotLag posted:God takes care of idiots and children. Stupid babies need the most attention
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 05:26
|
|
|
Number_6 posted:I'm still not clear on what capability the F35 provides that the F16/F18 doesn't (at a much lower cost), other than increased stealth/survivability. In BVR they both use AMRAAMs so they have about the same offensive reach, and in close-in fighting the F16 is probably better. As far as ground attack, the F16 is a pretty good bomb truck too. The not being seen bit and enhanced survivability are kind of a big deal. From the mock engagements, it looks like "I can shoot you before you can shoot me" is really nice in terms of kill to death ratios. When they do exercises, when the F-16 gets into knife fighting range, it does okay against the F-35. It's just that the F-16 died a few times getting while getting close enough. There is also some of sensor fusion stuff which isn't been taken advantage of right now but has some interesting options in the future. The idea of F-35 being close enough to get sensor data and feed it something else has a lot of potential for bomb trucks. It looks like the Air Force is going for a high-medium-low mixture at the moment instead of the high-low that was going to be the F-22 and F-35. Now it's looking like you'll have the F-22 for opening air superiority in the theater, with the F-35 doing a bit of that and suppressing air defenses. With F-15EX operating in areas where the threat of modern air defenses are lower. Either for no fly zones against things like helicopters or older generation fighters, or as a bomb truck. All of our last generation fighters had huge teething problems. The F-14A was shipped with engines that were a bit anemic and had a tendency to stall because they felt like it. Also the F-14s ate them like candy. The plane required massive amounts of maintenance. The F-16's fly by wire system had a huge number of teething issues. Also engine issues. And backroom problems since it was also a multinational fighter. Combined with dudes like Pierre Sprey who are screaming at Congress at even the hint of change from the original design. Basically airplane design is a poo poo show. And even if you find some way to have things flow smoothly, outside factors will add shitshows because they can. But bring it back to OSHA, the F-35 has managed to kill a lot less test pilots than the F-14 did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 05:32
|
|
|
Not to mention the F-35 has a much better radar and engines that make about as much dry thrust as an F-16 makes at full afterburner. I'd also like to point out that for as maintenance intensive as the Radar Absorbant Material coating is to keep in decent shape, its much better than other stealth planes. The B-2 is notably worse and even the practically prehistoric SR-71 had an issue where if you used chrome tools on it the cadmium would contaminate the titanium skin and it would start falling apart.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 06:21
|
|
|
It's not a famous song, but this my favorite example of a song being performed by machines. I especially like the flatbed scanner as the bass guitar. (Spectrum tape isn't done loading until 1:09) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgB5DU0uEdg
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 08:47
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:gently caress, I totally misread that. Well I retroactively was right for the wrong reasons, also don't feel bad since I apparently just skimmed the wiki too after you mentioned it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 09:14
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:Other critics have more reasonable complaints. https://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/GAO-20-339
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 09:53
|
|
|
Mierenneuker posted:It's not a famous song, but this my favorite example of a song being performed by machines. I especially like the flatbed scanner as the bass guitar. This one is my favorite music performed by machines, it is comparatively OSHA too https://youtu.be/9gMX_hR-RoM
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
EvenWorseOpinions posted:This one is my favorite music performed by machines, it is comparatively OSHA too OMG I Forgot about Compressorhead! Absolutely brilliant engineering. I love the little kickdrum dude the best. Anyway, this is scary 
Humphreys fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Oct 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 14:18
|
|
|
Architects, am I right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:The not being seen bit and enhanced survivability are kind of a big deal. From the mock engagements, it looks like "I can shoot you before you can shoot me" is really nice in terms of kill to death ratios. To visualize this F-35 vs F-15X   SAMs are a lot better than they used to be so being able to get rid of them so that much bigger, less survivable planes can dump precision guided bombs without being shot down immediately is very important.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
They should just make a stealth A-10, bing bong
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 15:43
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:To visualize this lol....yea sure on those numbers Literally every number in that graph is a closely guarded state secret.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 15:54
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:Anyway, this is scary 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:To visualize this Wow! It's still a giant waste of money, amazing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
gently caress SNEEP posted:Wow! It's still a giant waste of money, amazing. In a world where the only major combatants who can field air forces that matter still have lots of ICBMs with nukes the F-35 doesn't really matter for poo poo. We're not going to be dogfighting the Russians or Chinese except via proxy and then 2 to 3 generations behind. In the meantime we're dumping money still on some all in one wonderfighter that was some Cold War relics wet dream 30 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 16:38
|
|
|
the F-35 really is the best possible aircraft for its primary mission: transferring obscene amounts of money from the federal government to the mic. whether it can complete secondary objectives like flying in the rain, dropping bombs, or not randomly asphyxiating its pilot is up for debate, but as a money transfer vehicle, it is without peer
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Love when I accidentally bump the gun button in my F-35 and spray all six bullets onboard into nothing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 17:24
|
|
|
Do you, or have you ever worked for the Belgian air force as an F16 maintainer?
EvenWorseOpinions fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Oct 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
The F-35 stealth stats are kind of misleading too if memory serves because it’s only against one specific band of radar, if the enemy is using slightly different radar or IR or whatever it’s no better than anything else. The main driver for the f-35 in general was mainly reduction in supply and logistic chains between all the branches of the military, I think. The idea being that then one truckload of spares can service every single F-35 rather than needing a truck for the a-10, the f-16, the f-18, the super hornet, etc. Shame it’s a mediocre replacement for everyone of those roles iirc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
EvenWorseOpinions posted:Do you, or have you ever worked for the Belgian air force as an F16 maintainer? I choose to believe that guy was sitting in the cockpit hitting random buttons and saying "pew pew! pew pew!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:the F-35 really is the best possible aircraft for its primary mission: transferring obscene amounts of money from the federal government to the mic. whether it can complete secondary objectives like flying in the rain, dropping bombs, or not randomly asphyxiating its pilot is up for debate, but as a money transfer vehicle, it is without peer It is a highspeed/lowdrag funnel for cash from our pocket into corporations', that in turn give a cut to the politician that gave them the no bid contract. Perfect warplane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
Cat Hatter posted:Not to mention the F-35 has a much better radar and engines that make about as much dry thrust as an F-16 makes at full afterburner. Doesn't matter lmao, the F-35 is one and a half times the weight of the F-16 and generates more drag because it's a giant idiot plane designed for no one
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:06
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:Doesn't matter lmao, the F-35 is one and a half times the weight of the F-16 and generates more drag because it's a giant idiot plane designed for no one It’s designed for ... Freedom!
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Drone_Fragger posted:The F-35 stealth stats are kind of misleading too if memory serves because it’s only against one specific band of radar, if the enemy is using slightly different radar or IR or whatever it’s no better than anything else. Don't all the branches hate each other though so it's not like the Navy would ever let the Air Force use their spares anyway? Or do you mean Lockheed Martin can just turn out a ton of parts without having to worry about how many the AF vs Marines vs Navy need?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
Drone_Fragger posted:The F-35 stealth stats are kind of misleading too if memory serves because it’s only against one specific band of radar, if the enemy is using slightly different radar or IR or whatever it’s no better than anything else. Where do you even come up with something like that that? What “brand” of radar is the only one it’s useful against?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
It's a style of radar from what I recall. Anything modern it works well against, but older systems don't interact with the stealth paneling the same way or something
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
Humerus posted:Don't all the branches hate each other though so it's not like the Navy would ever let the Air Force use their spares anyway? It's a red herring argument. The H-60 has successful tri-service cooperation sharing components and supply chain. The C-130 is a dual service ridiculously multipurpose aircraft. Neither of these cost double the price of competing aircraft. The F-35 is an unmitigated disaster when it comes to cost per flying hour.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Where do you even come up with something like that that? Frequency band, not name brand. The RCS of an object is different depending on what frequency the radar is using, with lower frequencies usually getting a higher RCS (i.e. more visible on radar). e: VVVV well, girl or boy? Wingnut Ninja fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Oct 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:44
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/41ayDFZ.mp4 Imgur says nine injured, no deaths.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
Do those things ever go well?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
Nope. Found the source: https://abc7news.com/hot-air-balloon-full-of-fireworks-explodes-over-festival/4707979/
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 22:59
|
|
|
Azhais posted:It's a style of radar from what I recall. Anything modern it works well against, but older systems don't interact with the stealth paneling the same way or something It gets brought up from time to time, but as I understand it the lower frequency radar that can pick up stealth aircraft have really poor resolution and can only see that *something* is *there-ish*. Good enough to tell if the Luftwaffe is crossing the channel, not so much for knowing if something is an enemy fighter or get a missile close enough to acquire a target.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Frequency band, not name brand. The RCS of an object is different depending on what frequency the radar is using, with lower frequencies usually getting a higher RCS (i.e. more visible on radar). My turn to be illiterate, I completely read that as brand. Question remains though: where is anyone getting that it's only got a reduced RCS in a single band in in all the other bands it's "no better than anything else"? Like, come on, it's not any better than an F-4 or an F-14 in the bands its not optimized against? Lordy, even just the RAM would accomplish that, let alone geometry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
Cartoon Man posted:
nine injured, right
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
Everyone's favorite bridge claims another victim, and gets a full peel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR5MlZHA1fo
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
Cartoon Man posted:Nope. Found the source: This story barely-accurately describes what happened in the video. If you read the article, you'd think the balloon was filled with explosives itself and exploded before it hit the ground. The video clearly shows the payload pallet became engulfed in flames, detached after it looks like the supporting ropes caught fire, and then exploded once it hit the ground. Drop-out quality article right there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
Whooping Crabs posted:Everyone's favorite bridge claims another victim, and gets a full peel Is it me or have there been more of these since they raised the bridge.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2020 01:02
|
|
