Hmmmm, are they?
https://breakingdefense.com/2017/06...range-dogfight-criticisms-laid-to-rest/?ob-dc
https://breakingdefense.com/2017/06...range-dogfight-criticisms-laid-to-rest/?ob-dc
Agreed. Waste of weight and added limitations with nothing to show for it.The thing that bugs me is they screwed up the fuselage design to accomodate the lift fan, so the plane can takeoff and land vertically. Then they make no use of this feature.
And it is pretty useless to takeoff, because they can't carry the weight of the weapons of fuel. A truly useless feature that prevented optimal aerodynamic design of the fuselage, and also limited internal weapons storage space.
VTOL video toward the end of this video.
I hate canned presentations so bad. The guy's even got blocked choreography for it.
We also currently can not defend a carrier from hypersonic anti-ship missiles.There is always an argument not to build any more super carriers. Mostly by others wanting to use the money for their own projects.
In my view, the aircraft carrier needs to complete rethink. It is either going to get small and fast, or its going to get very, very big.
Perhaps both directions at once.
But the undeneighable truth is the current aircraft carrier is damn big target, and the US Military is both feared and hated by many.
I'd assume so too. I know very little about the Harriers. I flew some early sims that featured it and quickly lost interest. Their special capabilities didn't, in my opinion, make up for their limited performance and payloads compared to the F-16, F-15, etc...I assume a Lily pad is a mat to enable a Harrier to take off from unprepared surfaces without sucking sand and other debris into the engines.
Well, here's how it went. It works... sorta.I don't think he really read it and thought you were referring to flying F35s, not Harriers. But yeah, the F35B is a great Harrier replacement and I'm sure the Marines love it. It'll be interesting to hear how your sim goes too.
Chess computers do a pretty good job of it.Drones can't make decisions and defend themselves
I've seen hints in the last few months on geek sites that there's already first generation AI software for the big ones (e.g. Predator, I assume) that will let them pick their own targets and initiate weapons deployment, but nobody wants to take responsibility for letting it loose.Chess computers do a pretty good job of it.
AI AI oh.
If true, please build a proper deep strike/interceptor stealth aircraft.I think they announced that Japan was going to start building F-22 airframes with F-35 computer/sensor equipment.
In my opinion, that would be the real game changer. A total domination fighter. 2 engines, the best maneuverability, better stealth, no stupid lift fan in the heart of the airframe.
Used for the Marines on their Wasp class carriers, the F-35 is a decent plane.
And as a stealthy lead element to take out radar and SAM sites, probably also a good plane.
For air to air, it is limited to all BVR engagements, and will likely need to direct missiles launched by other air assets if there are more than a couple of enemy fighters.
But if this plane comes toe to toe with a Russian super-maneuverable fighter, it will have to run for its life.
If it has secret capabilities, that would surprise me as this has been the most heavily documented plane I have ever seen.
Korean War era - Chuck Yeager was detailed to evaluate combat capability of a Mig-15 delivered by a refugee pilot. Flying an F-86 vs. the MIG it was no contest. Put Yeager in the MIG's seat......again, no contest. If that's changed, why does the AF still teach combat maneuvering?Oh, and visual range dogfights are won by the pilot, not the plane.