Riiiiight.

I suppose you don’t really have much choice other than re-writing history. The David Axe report and ensuing fire strom was the hail Mary play that failed to stop the program.
It only gets uglier for haters are all the services hit IOC

So now your worried about the stealthy F-35 when the Hornet is a orders of magnitude worse aircraft, that fails in range, EM, avionics, and every category you can imagine. Its impossible IYO for a super Hornet to beat a modern fighter.
In the grand scheme of things if the Hornet is a failure, then a huge portion of the DOD tac air fleet fails. And this is the heart of the matter for me. You complain about relaxed KPP for an aircraft still far more advanced than a hornet. A hornet with a paltry CR no stealth, and that likes to fight slow.
How can you therefore ask for the DOD to recap tac air with a plane thats worse.
Remember your argument is that its impossible to win a wvr fight using pedal turns TV or cobra manuvers and snap turns.
The F-35, SH, Mig, 29, and Su-27 are all QUOTE=Amiga500;2239705]Correct. The entire Navy tac air force is a dog.

worthless dogs.

But its got nice systems and is fairly reliable so they are happy with it* despite its range issues.

*Note it hasn’t had to defend a fleet against long ranged supersonic missile armed bombers yet. Their opinion may be subject to change at this point.

The Super Hornet is not a success in ACM. Its OK at best, has good missile pointability, but when it’d come to a gun fight, an F-16 with an anyway half decent driver would keep energy up and end the fight on its terms.

When you see USN pilots talking about -16 vs. -18, how many discuss EM? Virtually none, because it doesn’t favour their steed.[/QUOTE]

What plane with no TV goes 100 degrees AOA and maintains energy anyway? If the F-35s trick is to go high AOA Hobs sensors and stealth, why not play to its strengths?

Can the F-16 in any configuration do 100 degrees AOA? If not then how is it more manuverable?

Like I said before the SHornet had the fancy pedal turns added during the dev phase. Would you argue the SHornet is not a dog fighter?

And yet some of you seem dead set on racheting up the negative rhetoric surrounding the plane. Do we have any one here who disagrees with the F-35 program, but behaves like an adult?

Besides I thought the plane leaned more twoards a super hornets control laws any way?

Europe doesn’t need a new fighter engine. In fact they don’t even need fighters. They have no threat. And we can use the gullible Americans if we need protection.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sP4NMoJcFd4 want to go back to the molesting cats quote.

Sigh, all of this minutia and bickering over AGM-88s and the like which is pointless. Tell us Bill, even if the USAF
Used only 4.5 generation fighters, and defeated the threat, how does it benefit us? On one hand you argue about F-35 range and on the other hand advocate using twice the fighters and twice the tanker assets. Do we have enough Growlers and F-15 to cover every strike package and ever asset? What happens when the already kinematic challlenged
Growlers are bounced by Su-30s?
Can F-15s match SU-35s? Its odvious that a neer peer can easily overcome a Growler+ F-15+ F-16 striker + CJ F-16+ the extra tanker and awacs support combo. Crap Id just send the sukkois in to amraamski the Growlers, while the the S-300s keep everything else at bay.
Don’t get sucked in guys by pointless debates about things in the grand scheme of things dont matter. LO is a professional time waster/meggage board saboteur.