Who would win?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • GreatbigHippo wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      The F-35 is the reason, Russia will rule the skies in a few years. So many nations, have also gotten infected with this disease, at least the French and Germany's will keep European skies, somewhat protected.


      Another reason, why the F-35 is absolutly, stupid and awful, is because it is replacing the A-10(What a beast) in the role of ground support, the F-35 can only last about an hour If lucky, on combat patrol, compared to the A-10 which can last about 7 hours, on combat patrol,

      Another issue with the F-35, is get this for every one hour of flight, it needs 100 HOUR'S MAINTENANCE!
      The plane its self, cant even take in fuel that is "warm"
      The plane cant take Sidewinders, and because of it carrying the payload internally, it really has small load.

      Here is the Kicker, The Defense Department's annual weapons testing report reveals that the military actually adjusted the performance specifications for the consistently-underperforming line of F-35 fighter jets. In other words, they couldn't get the jets to do what they were supposed to do, so they just changed what they were supposed to do...

      The program announced an intention to change performance specifications for the F-35A, reducing turn performance from 5.3 to 4.6 sustained g’s and extending the time for acceleration from 0.8 Mach to 1.2 Mach by eight seconds
      The A-10 isn't being replaced. At least not yet. Some politicians proposed replacing it with the F-35, but then pretty much everybody said it was an awful idea, so they didn't.
      The F-35 will replace the US Air Force A-10s and F-16s, US Navy F/A-18s, US Marine Corps Harriers and F/A-18s, and UK Harrier GR7s and Sea Harriers.



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • Pablo22510 wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      The F-35 will replace the US Air Force A-10s and F-16s, US Navy F/A-18s, US Marine Corps Harriers and F/A-18s, and UK Harrier GR7s and Sea Harriers.
      Unfortunately.
      very sad indeed, especially when every single aircraft there, is superior to the F-35, in every single way

      The idea of making an Aircraft, for all 3 branches was stupid, the marines like the STOVL, and the navy want normal carrier based aircraft, all diverting from the Air force requirements. Rubbish idea, Really is,



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • oceanhawk wrote:

      The idea of making an Aircraft, for all 3 branches was stupid, the marines like the STOVL, and the navy want normal carrier based aircraft, all diverting from the Air force requirements. Rubbish idea, Really is,
      The Marines only want STOVL because they have dreams of having CAS planes that can support them with the landing area the same size as one for a helicopter.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      The idea of making an Aircraft, for all 3 branches was stupid, the marines like the STOVL, and the navy want normal carrier based aircraft, all diverting from the Air force requirements. Rubbish idea, Really is,
      The Marines only want STOVL because they have dreams of having CAS planes that can support them with the landing area the same size as one for a helicopter.
      Really, they got hooked on that idea, because of the British Harriers



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • oceanhawk wrote:

      Really, they got hooked on that idea, because of the British Harriers
      Nah, it was before that, since WWII when they got slaughtered in the Pacific. That is why they bought the Harrier. They couldn't use it the way they wanted to though because dirt would jam the engines.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      Really, they got hooked on that idea, because of the British Harriers
      Nah, it was before that, since WWII when they got slaughtered in the Pacific. That is why they bought the Harrier. They couldn't use it the way they wanted to though because dirt would jam the engines.
      They didnt really get slaughtered in the pacific, I think they actually had the biggest K/D ratio of the war.



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • oceanhawk wrote:

      They didnt really get slaughtered in the pacific, I think they actually had the biggest K/D ratio of the war.
      No, one landing, they were shot to pieces and couldn't get CAS on the line.

      Of course they had a high K/D, all you need to say is "Tenno Heika Banzai".
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      They didnt really get slaughtered in the pacific, I think they actually had the biggest K/D ratio of the war.
      No, one landing, they were shot to pieces and couldn't get CAS on the line.
      Of course they had a high K/D, all you need to say is "Tenno Heika Banzai".
      Im not following here, they couldnt get CAS on the line, because the aircraft were not VTOL?



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      Im not following here, they couldnt get CAS on the line, because the aircraft were not VTOL?
      No, the Navy couldn't provide 'em so they wanted their own VTOL CAS aircraft.
      But why are you saying they wanted VTOL in the first place?, back in ww2..



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      But why are you saying they wanted VTOL in the first place?, back in ww2..
      Look, ignore the term VTOL.
      Marines wanted an aircraft that could take off and land anywhere, will giving CAS like Navy aircraft
      Alri I get ya know, but sure the navy was already provinding CAS in that region, during the war..



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      oceanhawk wrote:

      Alri I get ya know, but sure the navy was already provinding CAS in that region, during the war..
      I know, but during this landing, there was trouble and they couldn't get CAS.
      are you reffering to a single event?



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye