Pentagon will send more than 50 F-35s to Europe to deter Russia

Are they gifting them to the Taliban?


That will sure show Russia!

 

1) this is not 1941 ..
2) The F-35 loses badly to the F-18 - F16 - but.what is monstrously hilarious is your claim that the F-35 can beat the F-22. .. proof you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about .. just talking completely out backside. Clearly you don't know what the F-22 is.

 

It is good at ground attack.

The nukes in question will be carried by F-35s.

Not when it comes to ground attack.

 

Not good at ground attack .. A-10 -- Good at Ground Attack.

Carry nukes ? What on earth are you talking about .. You are out of your depth - just making things up as you go.

 

Sure, the F22 is a super expensive plane to build and fly and maintain.
Just the same - a pity that the production run was cut short as it's probably
the best fighter plane ever built. Never seen one at any air show I have been
to (Sukhois are amazing to look at... and watch)
But the design reasoning behind the F35 is that it doesn't have to fight - it can
pick off targets before the target picks them off. And the F35 is a superb support
platform for F22's, F15's etc.. BTW I find the F15 an amazing plane - hard to
think that it was designed back in the Vietnam War era, and McDonnell Douglas
still produce this highly succesful plane - not one lost in combat, yet.

 

Why on earth would you say that the F22 that the best fighter ever built -- with better stealth -- better everything .. would lose to the F35? This is why folks think you are clueless . like .. what on earth are you talking about .. just rambling nonsensical gibberish .. that has no basis in fact .. How is one supposed to respond to such nonsense ... and now you are telling me that on some level you were aware that what you were saying was complete nonsense.

Part 2 - Yes .. the F35 was designed to fight .. as part of its role is as a fighter .. it just doesn't do it very well .. which they tried to compensate for in the Company Propaganda Flyers .. by stating that it won't need to fight .. because of Stealth . but as told you previously .. it turns out that Stealth is a Scam .. so without a whole accompanyment of other planes (F22 F15 - F18 Super Hornet and so on ) to defend this piece of junk .. it is defensless..

A bit ridiculous - talking about the "Support Platform" Yes .. any scrawny kid can be real tough with 5 Big Brothers Standing behind him..

The F35 is a flying paper weight .. the purpose of which was to send money to defense contractors .. not to defend the nation.

 

No. The purpose of the F-35 was always to save money.

And stealth isn't a scam. It is just way overrated as an asset.

 

Good, always welcome more firepower,

 

Stealth is a scam .. this doesn't mean it is completely useless .. but as the other poster (pooh) stated "The plane was developed with the idea that it wouldn't have to fight" a narrative that many have trotted out .. including Lockheed Martin .. .. and that my friend .. is a scam .. misrepresenting information to keep the gravy train flowing .. .. but no need to take my word .. those are the exact words of the fellow who was a member of the Team that gave us the F-16 .. and the A-10 ...

2) "Save Money" ??? This is the most expensive .. over budget - not on schedule - massive maintenance - lemon show the US Military has ever seen .. to come up with something that does many things .. but all of them poorly.. Which is what happens when you try to design an aircraft for multiple platforms .. as Pierre Sprey Explains...

 

That has little to do with the F-35 design.

 

Of course it does .. as explained in the video. now go and learn .. and quite making stuff up and throwing it out there .. as if you have some support for claim ..

 

Wrong. The F-35 is good at ground attack. The A-10 is good at close air support.

Yes.

The Obama Administration developed some nifty little tactical nukes with a low clean yield and with very high accuracy. They will be able to land direct hits on Russian military targets with little collateral damage.

They will be deployed in Europe to face off against Russia.

They will be carried by F-35s.

http://fas.org/blogs/security/2013/09/b61-12holland/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2013/10/b61-12hearing/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2014/01/b61capability/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2014/02/b61-12pictures/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2014/03/b61-12integration/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2014/04/b61-12features/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2015/11/b61-12_cartwright/
http://fas.org/blogs/security/2016/01/b61-12_earth-penetration/

Thanks for you concern, but no. I am doing just fine.

No, everything I've said is true.

You are wrong. It is not a scam.

It isn't.

Because of its excellent stealth, the F-35 does ground attack extremely well.

It will be even more formidable when it is carrying these new nuclear bombs.

 

You just have no clue what this conversation is about .. so out of your depth and beyond..

Baby Steps -- Russia -- Nuclear war .. .. and we are going to do what ? Fly in with F35's Nice lovely and what will they fly home to ?

and Yes .. Stealth is a scam .. is not what it was touted to be .. and we have a crap airplane because of it .. as per someone who knows a whole lot more about it than you... and gives the reason why it is a terrible ground attack plane .. can't loiter .. can't turn .. runs out of fuel way too quick .. horrible for real combat.. against a real enemy.. Could send a tudor out to do bombing runs in Syria ..

Now go and learn --

 

I've followed the Joint Strike Fighter program (forerunner of the F-35) since its inception.

I can recommend some books for you if you wish.

 

Got all I need thanks .. but enjoy the Lockheed Martin flyers -- you paid good money for that Turkey

 

I have no material from Lockheed Martin

 

Then your books are not very good ..

 

Just because they disagree with you doesn't make them bad. One of the authors (Bill Gunston IIRC) has been a lifelong believer in the merits of short take off/vertical landing combat aircraft.

 

I just told you why they are bad .. what kind of a book on the F35 does not include information from the manufacturer ? Lockheed Martin..

 

I don't know how military hardware books are written. But if you are insisting that such books include information from the manufacturer, aren't you basically saying that even if it does it can't be biased?

 

Where did you get that from .. making up nonsense .. A book on the F-35 .. should have the specifications of the airplane .. and other such things .. which come from the manufacturer .. why is this difficult to understand .. comparisons of what the stated specs .. and trials .

Regardless .. the plane is a lemon .. a multi purpose plane that is not good at any of those purposes. a maintenance nightmare .. was supposed to be ready over a decade ago .. half the stuff doesn't work still .. is piece of junk .. now go watch the video I gave you and learn.

 

No No.. that was 33 blackhawk helicopters .. but how we manage to leave such toys there .. must be quite the story .. like .. fly the damn thing out .. anyhow .. Taliban and Russia will soon be fast friends .. building pipelines into the "new silk road" energy hungry India/China .. which is the reason we were there .. for 20 years. . and No .. that is not what "Winning" looks like

 

Stealth simply means that there's a much small radar reflection.
If you have a system like the Russian S400's in Syria, these have
a difficult time in pin pointing an F35. To really 'catch' the F35 you
would need a much larger radar dish - and this won't fit to the S400
system. And having spotted an F35 you need to track and lock onto
it, and that is also a big problem.
An F35 probably wouldn't survive a dog fight with an SU-35, say, but
it's designed not to be the fastest, nastiest dog - its job as it sense
bad dogs a long way out and call for backup dogs. F35's use steath
to hide, on-board sensors to detect and advanced computers to
co-ordinate other vehicles. F35's mean that the US can continue to
fly F15 and F16's longer as it provides support in areas that would
require the complete rebuilding or replacing of these combat jets.

 

When I first seen this I was like “Rock on Biden”… I’m not saying to sound cruel. I was really about to give him a thumbs up… but, well it’s a Trump policy lol.

 

I will not watch the video unless you stop accusing me of making stuff up and apologize.