and 1 other like this
I can't even.
Embed this tack by clicking the box below, copying, and pasting
Source: twitter.com via ahnyerkeester on Gentlemint
Login to comment →
The development of that nightmare will never end. What a waste of tax dollars.
When airframes can maneuver like that, it don't look like a waste from here. The Russians and Chinese are using it too.
57plymouth may be referring to the common thought that TVing was developed too late to keep up with high energy engagements in modern A2A combat. Not to mention modern SAM threats. This article does a great job of explaining things from the fighter communities perspective. Essentially, TVing MAY provide some benefit, but more than likely is going to be a non-factor, or even a poor decision.But yeah...it looks badass, and I want to fly one!https://theaviationist.com/2013/02/21/raptor-vs-typhoon-us/
Okay, I get his point. Conservation of energy is important in a dogfight. My "yeahbut" is that not all thrust vectoring is to the extreme. Employed correctly, it could give you an advantage in a turn and get you in missile position faster than an opponent. I'm still going with thrust vectoring.
I talked with an F-22 crew chief today and he said that inverted somersault is a maneuver the F-22 demo team practices and performs a lot. There are a few, specific airframes for it. The older ones can't take it. It is a total BA move though.
I was actually referring to the expense of the F22.
Okay, can't really argue with that. It is expensive.
Gentlemint is a community for sharing and discussing all things manly.
Learn more →
See all Reserve items →
A weekly discourse on all things manly, courtesy of your Gentlemint co-founders. Listen now →