That’s blatantly not true. The US spends like 3% of its GDP on defense.
Gee. It’s almost like the whole point of the project was to get as much international buy in as possible they couldn’t afford to back out?
do you realize that a lot of the stuff in the F-35 were made by different companies between them BAE and martin baker
What are you on about
The VTOL system would be impossible without Rolls Royce
The point of the JSF was to replace the F16 AV8B and F/A-18 with one aircraft with many other nations being part of it
that’s most recent value, during the project they spend over 4.5% of their GDP
Oka,y, it was a tad exageration. But in 2023 US spent 3.4% of its GDP on its military for a total of $916 billion
UK spent 2.3% of its GDP at $74.9 billion
Germany 1.5% at $66.8 billion
France 2.1% at $61.3 billion.
It is a tad unfair to compare the rate at which the US develops stuff over europe considering they invest 10x more than everyone else
ah yeah during the developement of the F-35 they spend over 4.5% of their GDP, in fact their total spending on the military has been at its cheapest in 2022
Yep… Most nations are getting the F-35 at a steal. Why spend billions on R&R when you can let the americans spend the money and then buy the aircraft afterwards for a fraction of the cost :P
like the excuse to make some countries buy the F-35 just to carry a nuclear bomb in them lol, just look at germany they plan on making the tranche 5 typhoon and yet they still had to buy the F-35
not for Nukes though, I think to replace the Tornado. It is an aging platform.
Typhoon is great for air superiority, intercept, CAS and delivering stand-off weapons. But kinda useless for SEAD. F-35 does add that capability.
i remember something about using it on aircraft carriers to carry nuclear armament
I dont think the UK is planning that capability. Our subs carry our Nukes and I dont think Germany has any nukes other than those the US stores there. Maybe German F-35s will carry US nukes.
@x_Shini would probably know.
I would not be surprised if US F-35s had nukes though
yeah its to both replace the panavia tornado and for the NATO’s nuclear sharing concept in wich US will be sharing nukes or something to some countries so they can carry them in their F-35’s
Ok, so Europeans can outclass US air frames a decade or two later. I guess that’s a win.
1 Like
Yup german F-35 is supposed to take over the nuke carrier ability from the tornado.
The bombs we own are from the US sharing programm
Because it’s currently the US’ chief BVR aircraft which will obviously draw eyes from other top BVR aircraft like the EFT, it’s common sense, not to mention any variant of the F-15 in service today simply won’t be an airframe from before 1990 because none of them have that sort of service life, on top of the MLUs and Software updates still make it a competitive aircraft, just not quite up to the challenge provided by European 4.5 gen fighters (outside maybe the gripen since it has a limited hardpoint capacity)
I still can’t comprehend this argument that US airframes are from 30-50 years ago and still being flown today, the first variants of the f-15 and 16 were either upgraded, sold or mothballed decades ago and to sit here and whine about how old US aircraft are compared to competitors while fielding airframes that are the same age as the competition is just plain idiocrasy, truly a display of the intellect of US mains. It really doesn’t matter how old an aircraft is if it was built at the same time as a competitor, it’s like saying you are stuck driving a mustang from 1975 (when you can just go and drive one from 2024) and complaining about being beaten by another car from 2024
In most situations it is simply better and easier to perform in the EFT than the raptor, realistically if I were Air Policing, CAS, Anti-Ship, BVR, QRA, SEAD, CAP, literally any role outside of sheer air superiority I would rather be in the cockpit of a Eurofighter because it’s simply the better platform for a ‘swing role’ and still beats every virtually other airframe when it comes to consistency and reliability.
One on One, although I’d personally rather the F-22 over the EFT, I can get this. The F-35 I especially understand.
However.
There are currently 600 EFTs in all of Europe, with a planned 680 total. In the US alone, there are 630 F-35s, with a planned total of well over 2,000. One huge benefit is that not only do we have a good aircraft, we have a LOT of them. And the pilots to back it up. While the EFT may be “great” (although I disagree), it lacks both the numbers and pilotage to back up of more were ordered. The F-35 is also somewhat simple to maintain; needing what is roughly 5 MMH/FH, while the EFT from the consensus I have gathered seems to sit at around 9-10. By the time you have serviced two F-35s, you have finished servicing your first EFT.
Of course, none of this, the simplicities, the complexities, the cost, the cost, the numbers, are reflected in a game like this. Logistics, maintenance, all the most important things in the real world- they don’t reflect. So of course, in a game like this, the F-35 will do much worse. However, In the real world in a real circumstance, there are absolutely reasons to use the F-35 over the Typhoon.
It is also important to consider that the US usually runs it’s rounds and trainings and scenarios with its jets at a natural disadvantage to figure out how to make things better. Yes, the Raffle/EFT/etc. may have beaten an American F-22 or F-35, however odds are there was an intentionally disadvantaged American plane at the helm (which I understand is important however it also just needs to be recognized, as people will go and say "Raffle beat the F-22!!! Without understanding context).
1 Like
Well F-15C gets 8x Aim-120A now
And same with the F-15J(M)
Although the japanese only tested Aim-120B so hopefully gaijin will correct that
1 Like