3 ms·

This is 100% true and I agree with all of it, but I would just add that for fighter jets specifically the calculus is a bit different. Unless you want to buy C

This is 100% true and I agree with all of it, but I would just add that for fighter jets specifically the calculus is a bit different. Unless you want to buy Chinese jets your choices are either F35s or a big step down to 4th generation fighters that are materially worse in terms of capability. Modern 4th gen fighters are still very capable, cheaper, simpler and more reliable, but if you ever do end up facing an adversary who has 5th gen fighters you'll be in trouble, so the trade off of choosing not to buy F35s is very real

flakeoil 5mo ago
But if you can have more 4th gen aircrafts and have easier support and maintenance so that you can keep them flying, then that might more than outweigh the 5th gen aircrafts possible superiority. A 5th gen aircraft on the ground is not very useful. It's easier to bomb out 100 aircraft than 400 aircraft. A 5th gen aircraft, disabled remotely via software is not very useful.
- ifwinterco 5mo ago
  Yep I don't disagree, especially with your last point
lostlogin 5mo ago
> so the trade off of choosing not to buy F35s is very real Amazing planes and all, but given that America is struggling to win the wars it starts, how useful are they?
- bawolff 5mo ago
  They seem to have no problem winning battles though which is the part aircrafts help with. Winning the war is more about strategy and political savyness.
- ethbr1 5mo ago
  You can't win a war with air superiority alone, but it's tough to win one after ceding the sky. Necessary but not sufficient.
benj111 5mo ago
Given the state of missile tech, is that as relevant anymore? If you strap a missile on to a Cessna that can take down a 5th gen fighter before it knows you're there. Doesn't really matter what fancy doodads the latest and greatest jet has. Further if your 5th gen jets are relying on tech from your adversary....
- ifwinterco 5mo ago
  I'm not an expert by any means but my understanding is improved missiles mean this is more relevant than ever. Non-stealthy 4th gen fighters are sitting ducks in 2026 against a peer opponent as we've seen in ukraine
- lobocinza 5mo ago
  The fancy doodads 5th generation has is reduced radar signature, improved sensors and data-link. The 5th generation can see and fire against a 4th gen fighter and evade before being detected and it can do that without EWACS (which are big, slow and easy to kill). That's why the US has a gap on replacing the current EWACS because it doesn't really need them.
  - quantgenius 5mo ago
    Stealth is somewhat overrated, especially 5th gen. Sure you get a lower radar cross-section which means you are less visible to X-band radar but near-peer adversaries or even non-peer technologically advanced adversaries don't rely only on X-band radar, to say nothing of distributed array radar where the transmitter and receiver are not in the same location. More than one networked war plane in the air are essentially distributed array radar. There are other bands which admittedly as not as good as X-band in terms of how much energy you need and how accurately you can locate things. But you can send a missile in the general direction using say S-band and have the missile turn on it's seeker once it's closer. Once the missile is close enough, a stealth plan can no longer hide. This is what the Russian S-400 and S-500 do for example. Even when Serbia was bombed during the Clinton years, American stealth bombers escaped not due to stealth but because they used decoys towed by fiber optics which transmitted what the missile seeker expected to receive from the plane while also aggressively jamming the missile seeker so the missile hit the decoy not the plane. One stealth bomber was hit anyway. Safran and other European manufacturers arguably produce decoys that are as good as anything US planes have, arguably better because they decided not to go all in on stealth and focus on other measures instead. Stealth is certainly better to have than not but stealth also means somewhat worse aerodynamics and much less serviceability. You need to apply stealth paint and cure it any time you work on the plane. The plane needs more work and is harder to work on because of the tradeoffs made to achieve stealth. So instead of 75%+ of the planes being available at any one time, you only have about 50% of the planes available at any one time and total operational costs are much higher. Given these disadvantages, it's not completely clear how much of a benefit 5th gen stealth is in a near-peer conflict. If the US is fighting Iraq fine. Now, if you can actually achieve what defense manufacturers say they will achieve with 6th gen stealth, where you have much lower RCS to all bands of radar from all directions, that could be a game changer but we don't actually know yet. The F-35 still doesn't do everything it was supposed to be able to do when the program started, so I would take these claims with a large grain of salt. And stealth countermeasures will continue to evolve.
kakacik 5mo ago
If potus can turn them into paperweight on his morning ego whim while not even being in indirect conflict with US but rather directly fighting US mortal sworn enemy, they are worse than useless and no sane country would want them even for free, a trojan horse of sort. 4th (4.5th) generation that reliably works is something dependable, even if not top notch. Something tells me that if you took F-35 to russian-held Ukraine airspace, it may not survive that long anyway, its not like its unhittable as Iran showed. What decides that war is anyway drones in numbers and their skilled use, not anymore artillery, tanks or endless armies of poor illiterate fuckers.
bluegatty 5mo ago
"Unless you want to buy Chinese " ??? Also - the landscape is changing. Stealth is a standoff mechanism, but weapon systems are starting to change the value of stealth. There are some who think that stealth mechanisms are being defeated with better sensors.
- ifwinterco 5mo ago
  China do have a fifth generation fighter, as do Russia in theory, nobody else is close right now. However if you're Canada there may be one or two issues with building your air force around Russian or Chinese hardware, even if they were available
dleslie 5mo ago
For most nations, if they find themselves in need of a 5th generation aircraft for defence then they've already lost, or are better served to prepare for a grossly asymmetric battle.

flakeoil 5mo ago

But if you can have more 4th gen aircrafts and have easier support and maintenance so that you can keep them flying, then that might more than outweigh the 5th gen aircrafts possible superiority. A 5th gen aircraft on the ground is not very useful. It's easier to bomb out 100 aircraft than 400 aircraft. A 5th gen aircraft, disabled remotely via software is not very useful.

ifwinterco 5mo ago
Yep I don't disagree, especially with your last point

lostlogin 5mo ago

> so the trade off of choosing not to buy F35s is very real Amazing planes and all, but given that America is struggling to win the wars it starts, how useful are they?

bawolff 5mo ago
They seem to have no problem winning battles though which is the part aircrafts help with. Winning the war is more about strategy and political savyness.
ethbr1 5mo ago
You can't win a war with air superiority alone, but it's tough to win one after ceding the sky. Necessary but not sufficient.

benj111 5mo ago

Given the state of missile tech, is that as relevant anymore? If you strap a missile on to a Cessna that can take down a 5th gen fighter before it knows you're there. Doesn't really matter what fancy doodads the latest and greatest jet has. Further if your 5th gen jets are relying on tech from your adversary....

ifwinterco 5mo ago
I'm not an expert by any means but my understanding is improved missiles mean this is more relevant than ever. Non-stealthy 4th gen fighters are sitting ducks in 2026 against a peer opponent as we've seen in ukraine
lobocinza 5mo ago
The fancy doodads 5th generation has is reduced radar signature, improved sensors and data-link. The 5th generation can see and fire against a 4th gen fighter and evade before being detected and it can do that without EWACS (which are big, slow and easy to kill). That's why the US has a gap on replacing the current EWACS because it doesn't really need them.
- quantgenius 5mo ago
  Stealth is somewhat overrated, especially 5th gen. Sure you get a lower radar cross-section which means you are less visible to X-band radar but near-peer adversaries or even non-peer technologically advanced adversaries don't rely only on X-band radar, to say nothing of distributed array radar where the transmitter and receiver are not in the same location. More than one networked war plane in the air are essentially distributed array radar. There are other bands which admittedly as not as good as X-band in terms of how much energy you need and how accurately you can locate things. But you can send a missile in the general direction using say S-band and have the missile turn on it's seeker once it's closer. Once the missile is close enough, a stealth plan can no longer hide. This is what the Russian S-400 and S-500 do for example. Even when Serbia was bombed during the Clinton years, American stealth bombers escaped not due to stealth but because they used decoys towed by fiber optics which transmitted what the missile seeker expected to receive from the plane while also aggressively jamming the missile seeker so the missile hit the decoy not the plane. One stealth bomber was hit anyway. Safran and other European manufacturers arguably produce decoys that are as good as anything US planes have, arguably better because they decided not to go all in on stealth and focus on other measures instead. Stealth is certainly better to have than not but stealth also means somewhat worse aerodynamics and much less serviceability. You need to apply stealth paint and cure it any time you work on the plane. The plane needs more work and is harder to work on because of the tradeoffs made to achieve stealth. So instead of 75%+ of the planes being available at any one time, you only have about 50% of the planes available at any one time and total operational costs are much higher. Given these disadvantages, it's not completely clear how much of a benefit 5th gen stealth is in a near-peer conflict. If the US is fighting Iraq fine. Now, if you can actually achieve what defense manufacturers say they will achieve with 6th gen stealth, where you have much lower RCS to all bands of radar from all directions, that could be a game changer but we don't actually know yet. The F-35 still doesn't do everything it was supposed to be able to do when the program started, so I would take these claims with a large grain of salt. And stealth countermeasures will continue to evolve.

kakacik 5mo ago

If potus can turn them into paperweight on his morning ego whim while not even being in indirect conflict with US but rather directly fighting US mortal sworn enemy, they are worse than useless and no sane country would want them even for free, a trojan horse of sort. 4th (4.5th) generation that reliably works is something dependable, even if not top notch. Something tells me that if you took F-35 to russian-held Ukraine airspace, it may not survive that long anyway, its not like its unhittable as Iran showed. What decides that war is anyway drones in numbers and their skilled use, not anymore artillery, tanks or endless armies of poor illiterate fuckers.

bluegatty 5mo ago

"Unless you want to buy Chinese " ??? Also - the landscape is changing. Stealth is a standoff mechanism, but weapon systems are starting to change the value of stealth. There are some who think that stealth mechanisms are being defeated with better sensors.

ifwinterco 5mo ago
China do have a fifth generation fighter, as do Russia in theory, nobody else is close right now. However if you're Canada there may be one or two issues with building your air force around Russian or Chinese hardware, even if they were available

dleslie 5mo ago

For most nations, if they find themselves in need of a 5th generation aircraft for defence then they've already lost, or are better served to prepare for a grossly asymmetric battle.