F-35

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Seems that way. After that massive hack and security concerns related to COVID, I honestly don't know what logic justifies the continued spending on the F-35 other than "it's a massive federally funded jobs program."

@earl-of-trumps said
Let's not forget that the greater altitude means evading anti-aircraft shelling, too.

Higher and faster, the B29 was a better craft to use. you just won't admit it.

It speaks volumes of her zeal to obstinately double down on any initial point of view given.

Though she did acknowledge a muddled view recently, so who knows what 2021 holds for debates.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The only thing London has yet to decide on is the variant of F-35 it will purchase after the initial 48. It is still committed to buying its initial order of 138 units.

Given the number of Typhoons it has on the books, around 140, its not inconceivable(more like highly probable) that the remaining 90 F-35's will be of the A variety. That is conventional take off and landing (ctol)

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Hopefully it won't be a war of the biologists! Captain Trips scares me!

@athousandyoung said
The Tempest, like the Typhoon it is replacing, is a high altitude fighter-interceptor not a low altitude fighter-bomber. It fills the role the F15 and F22 fill, not the role the F16 and the F35 fill.

The USA sells more armaments, to other countries,
than THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED?!

@jimmyboy619 said
The USA sells more armaments, to other countries,
than THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED?!

Then buy Rafales or Gripens or Mig29s or JH-7s (all of which are inferior to the F35) or make a new low altitude fighter bomber that doesn't involve the USA but don't try to shoehorn a fast, expensive high altitude fighter-interceptor into low altitude dogfight fighter-bomber roles. The F15 Strike Eagle is very useful for ground attack but it's still not going to replace the F16. Likewise with F14s vs F18s or F22 vs F35. The low end of the hi-lo system is not only cheaper but differently optimized.

Good info. Thank you for correcting me about Chinese fighters.

The Gripen cannot compete with the Su35 because it does not perform well at high altitudes, has less range and no engine redundancy.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Multirole_combat_aircraft

The term "multirole" was originally reserved for aircraft designed with the aim of using a common airframe for multiple tasks where the same basic airframe is adapted to a number of differing roles. The main motivation for developing multirole aircraft is cost reduction in using a common airframe.

More roles can be added, such as aerial reconnaissance, forward air control, and electronic-warfare aircraft. Attack missions include the subtypes air interdiction, suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD), and close air support (CAS).

Multirole has also been applied to one aircraft with both major roles, a primary air-to-air combat role, and a secondary role like air-to-surface attack. However, those designed with an emphasis on aerial combat are usually regarded as air superiority fighters and usually deployed solely in that role, even though they are theoretically capable of ground attack. A good example is the F-14 Tomcat versus the F/A-18 Hornet; the F-14 was envisioned originally for air superiority and fleet interception defense with some variants later receiving secondary ground attack capability, while the F/A-18 was designed from the onset for air-to-surface strikes with a limited capacity to defend itself from other aircraft. In another instance, the Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale are classified as multirole fighters; however the Typhoon is frequently considered an air superiority fighter due to its higher dogfighting* prowess while its built-in strike capability has a lighter bomb load compared to contemporaries, for instance the Rafale which sacrifices air-to-air ability for a heavier payload.

*Poorly worded. Generally the low altitude fighters are far more maneuverable than the high altitude ones. Air superiority fighters tend to use missiles not close up gunfights aka “dogfights”

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Did the Allies know this? It's one thing to state that with the benefit of hindsight, but another to make a decision to send in a lone bomber on the basis of, at the time, current intelligence.

@kmax87 said
The only thing London has yet to decide on is the variant of F-35 it will purchase after the initial 48. It is still committed to buying its initial order of 138 units.

Given the number of Typhoons it has on the books, around 140, its not inconceivable(more like highly probable) that the remaining 90 F-35's will be of the A variety. That is conventional take off and landing (ctol)

Not automatically. There's the issue of logisistics and maintenance, I don't know enough about the technology, but while buying no more F35Bs than necessary for carrier operations and having the rest of the F35A variety is cheaper, in the long run it may well be cheaper to buy and operate only F35Bs. I don't think it's a straightforward decision, there's advantages to the airforce in having a VTOL variant as it removes the need for runways, but it has a smaller fuel tank and is limited to 7g maneuvers. I don't think it's a straightforward decision.