Irony. Honestly no one cares what you think, regardless of how entertaining your replies are. Do your brain a favor and skip threads that doesn't interest you, I'd suggest the, does big foot exist thread, heavy stuff.
- - - Updated - - -
Yet here you are /facepalm.
All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side
India and the US have been build a warmer and warmer relationship for 20 years.
We wouldn't gift naval reactor and carrier launch and recovery technology to a country we didn't.
Your information is out of date.
- - - Updated - - -
First, no. You're actually just factually out of date at this point. India is outtie.
No. This is the follow up to that. Negotiations failed.
No. In so many ways.
First the PAK FA is principally an air superiority fighter. The F-35 is a multi-role strike vehicle.
If the F-35 ever got in range of a PAK FA (or a SU-35S, or anything else), the F-35 pilot seriously screwed up. Rather the F-35 powerful senses or electronic warfare suit allow it to fire long range missiles first, and utilize it's EW systems and stealth to dart in and out of detectability of enemy aircraft.
Or to put it simply, if four Su-35s came up against a mix of European F-35s and Eurofighter Typhoons, the Typhoons would hang back and wait for the MBDA Meteor armed F-35s to pick off as many Su-35s from long range first, before having the faster and more maneuverable Typhoons go into clean up the ones that got away. With respect to the US, this is why the F-35 is being armed first with the AIM-120D (medium/long range Air to Air Missile), while the F-22 is paired with the short/medium range AIM-9X.
It will be very hard for any aircraft in the world to survive that initial volley by F-35s with the Meteor or AIM 120D.
Secondly, the PAK FA's capabilities are something of a joke. Technologically it is a moderately modified SU-35S, which puts it a good 20-25 years behind the F-35. The sensor fusion, distributed internal systems, artificial intelligence, control systems, computer-human teaming that are the core of the F-35s technology set is incomparable to the PAK FA. It's engines aren't even stealthy.
Also there is a major limitation of the crappy PAK FA: it can't utilize its internal bays to fire missiles or drop bombs at supersonic speeds. It has to rely on it's external pylons for that task. By contrast the F-35 and F-22 can do that, and in fact, will almost never carry external ordinance.
So much for its "stealth"!
- - - Updated - - -
America would not have put a rocket in space as early without German scientists. That is absolutely true.
But put a man on the moon? The Apollo era rockets started to be generated, fabricated and perfected between 1964-1968. And they were built on contract not by government agencies (who in a public-private partnership participated in the design phase), but by private industry. The Saturn V was produced cooperatively by Boeing (S-IC first stage), North American Aviation (S-II second stage) and Douglas (S-IV, the third stage). The command/Service Module was built by North American and Rockwell. The Apollo Lunar module was built by Grumman.
America got German scientists. It didn't scoop up that many German scientists. Any by 1965, it was largely just figures like Werner von Braun in oversight roles, far reduced from the 'heyday' of German scientists in the early 1950s.
My great uncle was an second-generation Italian American. He worked directly on the Lunar Module. His slide rule that he used on the program is one of my most prized possessions.
German scientists got America's rocket program going, but America had 15 years to build a rocket industry of its own. And today? Our world leading space industry has very little heritage in the early 1950s designs. The one thing left to shed is junking the Atlas V and it's RD-180, but even that was a early 1990s join American-Russian project.
Nothing in what you linked says that.
Nope.
Yes, in every practical way. F-35 is useless in real combat scenario against an adversary with anti-stealth and the best anti-air technology, there will be no su-35s to pick off from a far, reign in your wet fantasies. Ruskies are not stupid. You will pick off unmanned decoys, reveal your positions and die. But don't fret. F-35 will never be used before it's replaced with some other new better and stealthier mutliroler kid. It's just a corruption scheme. Maybe just maybe you get to see it used against camels and civilians. Picking them off from a far, before the cavalry flies in. They will not know what hit them, no siree.
All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side
You mean a Russian fighter made post-90s brain drain is a pile of shit? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
AHAHAHA, you and your links again. Damn you fail at propaganda Skroe.
You link sources keep referencing itself and a same article you linked before, with it's most credible source being "unknown high ranking general".
Anybody actually believing this guy is utter retard.
But since most of the people here take this information as a gospel, i feel sorry for humanity. Critical thinking is not a sin but virtue, people!
And i'm starting to think you are paid troll, who keeps pushing agenda with garbage sources.