Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "" video.

@GreenBlueWalkthrough This goes beyond datalink. No, it wouldn't lose to a first gen. Dogfighting in a F-16 doesn't work like it did in a F-4 and in a F-4 it didn't work like it did in a F-86. Dogfighting with a F-35 is obviously different.
31
Usually to hack something you need to disassemble a program and look for exploits. Unless a F-35 is captured, decrypted and disassembled, you can't just "hack" into it. Link16 has been around for a long time, there isn't a publicly known instance of a hack.
2
Why would you put them in a non-stealth platform?
2
@tsegulin Pointless. 4th gen aircraft are almost as expensive as stealth aircraft, and their performance isn't that superior to stealth aircraft. For example, pilots say a F-16 has to punch in afterburner to keep up with a F-35 in dry thrust. That means in terms of raw performance, the F-35 smokes the F-16. The F-22 is known to be one of the best aircraft in terms of raw performance, so stealth doesn't hinder it at all. Either way it's a false economy, because even if the aircraft was cheaper it would be easier to shoot down. Paying a little more to protect the asset is a better move.
2
@grizwoldphantasia5005 Again, it's not cheap. It's not available. It's going to take even more time to develop and produce. The "good enough" would take 5-10 years, there's hundreds of F-35s rolling off the factory every year. They're better, and available now.
2
@grizwoldphantasia5005 I really don't get why this is so hard to understand. Even if you need to get in line to purchase an order of F-35s, you'll get it before a bolt on kit is developed. The cost of a F-35 is less than old plane + retrofit because you get a 5th gen for your money. You don't understand. Even if "by definition" the electronics are less expensive, they would require a different production line which isn't available. The production line for those electronics exists to make them to be an integral part of the F-35. So even if you could develop the package - which would take years - you'd either need to pay for an entire production line to be built, or you'd have to force F-35 production to slow down by demanding those electronics to be diverted from the main F-35 production line. You've clearly never had a situation where a spare part was more expensive than just buying a new product. Economies of scale are a bish.
2
@grizwoldphantasia5005 You won't get such a package developed in a year. This stuff takes years to develop and certify for combat operations. I'll give you five years, even though it should be closer to ten. You also won't get it done with 500M. That's the cost of a few F-16s. These are billion dollar programs. The F-15 is a seriously expensive aircraft. It defeats the purpose of doing this. Why would it cost 20M? 10M alone is the price of a modern pod if I'm not mistaken.
2
@grizwoldphantasia5005 I will tell you the numbers are unrealistic, because you're suiting them to your agenda. The brand new isn't even expensive. It's pretty competitive compared to 4.5 gen.
2
It didn't. It stayed in service until the mid-2000s and it was brought back for "research". Do you want the footage taken by F-117s bombing Serbia after the shootdown? It's easy to find.
2
The F-35 is truly heads and shoulders above the rest.
2
@-Zevin- The US fought North Vietnam, which was receiving state of the art Soviet equipment. The VC were slaughtered in the Tet Offensive. The US and North Vietnam signed a peace deal, the NV broke it, the US packed up and left. No farmers with rusty guns to be seen.
2
@pogo1140 Not really. An older aircraft has to use traditional methods, which means flying with energy retention in mind unless that energy has to be spent to either get out of a bad situation or score the kill. With modern aircraft, high AoA flying and HOBS allows the pilot to "cheat" and fight stupid because getting the kill right out of the gate is less risky than committing to a dance.
1
@pogo1140 The F-16 is software limited on high AoA maneuvers. If both sides are using equivalent missiles, the aircraft with the superior nose pointing ability can use those missiles first. Like, someone posted something along the lines of a 1st gen jet could beat a F-35 in a dogfight. Bringing up a F-16 with helmet mounted queuing is skipping to 4.5 gen. That's not the discussion and you decided to jump into it.
1
@pogo1140 Having a cueing system is still bound by gimbal limits unless you have lock on after launch. If you can pull high AoA without losing control of the aircraft, your AoA+gimbal limit gives you a very wide "field of view" to engage with. If two aircraft are engaging each other and one can pull high AoA and the other has to lock on after launch, that gives the aircraft with the highest AoA capabilities to shoot first and go defensive to prevent the missile from locking after doing a 180º.
1
@bruceparr1678 The F-117 went where no F-15 would ever go. The F-15 has such a record precisely because it's well covered and aircraft like the F-117 went in first to disable radars. It's all about how you use the aircraft, and the F-117 that got shot down was being used poorly and forced the USAF to change tactics. Didn't the Saudis lose a F-15 to an air-to-air missile jury rigged to be fired from the back of a truck? By your logic the F-15 is a failure for getting shot down by Houthis.
1