Your Nation's Air Force Mark II:

[San-Silvacian]

you can use the F-80 for ground support instead of a dedicated fighter.

[Organized States]

you can use the F-80 for ground support instead of a dedicated fighter.

Your right. That's probably what I will use it for.

[Alduinium]

So, is PAK FA inferior to F-22 or on par with it?

[Vitaphone Racing]

So, is PAK FA inferior to F-22 or on par with it?

It really depends what you prioritize more in a fighter. Although, if you wanted a definitive answer you'd need to wait another one or two years to see the finalized specification of the production variant.

[Alduinium]

So, is PAK FA inferior to F-22 or on par with it?

It really depends what you prioritize more in a fighter. Although, if you wanted a definitive answer you'd need to wait another one or two years to see the finalized specification of the production variant.

Eh, I'm thinking of getting the PAK FA because it would suit my rather soviet based air force better than the F-22, and because it appears to be multirole instead of simply air superiority.

[Vitaphone Racing]

you can use the F-80 for ground support instead of a dedicated fighter.

Your right. That's probably what I will use it for.

I'd rethink the timeline a bit. The P-80 was a horribly flawed aircraft and the US only persisted with it because they were in some international turmoil at the time and it was more or less the only jet aircraft domestically available to them at the time, the other ones were complete shite. Unless you're closely following the timeline of the US and you had a major conflict in the 1940's which pressured you to adopt a jet to counter enemy jets, the best option is ignoring it altogether, relying on P-51s to fill the gap (for the record, the P-80 was only marginally better than the best prop aircraft of world war 2 so it's not a huge trade off) and taking the F-86.

Remember, the F-80 became a strike aircraft because it was expendable, not because it was a good strike aircraft.

[Vitaphone Racing]

It really depends what you prioritize more in a fighter. Although, if you wanted a definitive answer you'd need to wait another one or two years to see the finalized specification of the production variant.

Eh, I'm thinking of getting the PAK FA because it would suit my rather soviet based air force better than the F-22, and because it appears to be multirole instead of simply air superiority.

They're both multirole

[Triplebaconation]

Your right. That's probably what I will use it for.

I'd rethink the timeline a bit. The P-80 was a horribly flawed aircraft and the US only persisted with it because they were in some international turmoil at the time and it was more or less the only jet aircraft domestically available to them at the time, the other ones were complete shite. Unless you're closely following the timeline of the US and you had a major conflict in the 1940's which pressured you to adopt a jet to counter enemy jets, the best option is ignoring it altogether, relying on P-51s to fill the gap (for the record, the P-80 was only marginally better than the best prop aircraft of world war 2 so it's not a huge trade off) and taking the F-86.

Remember, the F-80 became a strike aircraft because it was expendable, not because it was a good strike aircraft.

I think he's just the US with a different letter. Ignoring flawed but highly influential planes like the F-80 is boring and doesn't make much sense in a transitional period.

[Organized States]

I'd rethink the timeline a bit. The P-80 was a horribly flawed aircraft and the US only persisted with it because they were in some international turmoil at the time and it was more or less the only jet aircraft domestically available to them at the time, the other ones were complete shite. Unless you're closely following the timeline of the US and you had a major conflict in the 1940's which pressured you to adopt a jet to counter enemy jets, the best option is ignoring it altogether, relying on P-51s to fill the gap (for the record, the P-80 was only marginally better than the best prop aircraft of world war 2 so it's not a huge trade off) and taking the F-86.

Remember, the F-80 became a strike aircraft because it was expendable, not because it was a good strike aircraft.

I think he's just the US with a different letter. Ignoring flawed but highly influential planes like the F-80 is boring and doesn't make much sense in a transitional period.

I am basically an alternate history version of the US. Just with the States being larger and more Independent.

[Imperializt Russia]

Pluto was a ramjet meant to travel at several times the speed of sound. I am hesitant to believe you could rig it to any sort of propeller, much less a propeller on a plane moving at Mach 4.

Well, I didn't mean for it to travel that fast.
In fact, different question: Is it possible to have a nuclear powered bomber?

Completely.
It's even feasible. It's just neither practical nor necessary.

[Gallia-]

Kills Questerians and other republicants

[Triplebaconation]

"gallia" strikes again

Harriers are so badly area ruled that I'm not sure that would help much.

[Gallia-]

but muh supersonics

[Purpelia]

Am I missing something? Why does that bottom one have an asymmetrical wing layout?

[Gallia-]

What do you mean "the bottom one"?

They're the same plane.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... eapons.png

brb killin leonardo dicaprios

[Purpelia]

What do you mean "the bottom one"?

They're the same plane.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... eapons.png

brb killin leonardo dicaprios

Same aircraft, two images. The one on top looks sane, the one on the bottom has the right wing mounted further back than the left one.

[Gallia-]

What do you mean "the bottom one"?

They're the same plane.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/653 ... eapons.png

brb killin leonardo dicaprios

Same aircraft, two images. The one on top looks sane, the one on the bottom has the right wing mounted further back than the left one.

Indeed it does.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Same aircraft, two images. The one on top looks sane, the one on the bottom has the right wing mounted further back than the left one.

Indeed it does.

Would you mind explaining this intriguing arrangement?

[Gallia-]

Triplebaconation has already provided ample explanation.

The asymmetric wing layout serves to improve area ruling for supersonic flight.

[Purpelia]

Triplebaconation has already provided ample explanation.

The asymmetric wing layout serves to improve area ruling for supersonic flight.

Really? If you do not mind I am going to have to ask a citation on that. Since to me it sounds like something beyond the ridiculous.

Than again, my overall knowledge of the subject can be summed up as "something something and than it makes the thing fly".

[Premislyd]

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/169463542/Vehicles/Rafale.png

This thread has a Rafale now

[Imperializt Russia]

Triplebaconation has already provided ample explanation.

The asymmetric wing layout serves to improve area ruling for supersonic flight.

Really? If you do not mind I am going to have to ask a citation on that. Since to me it sounds like something beyond the ridiculous.

Than again, my overall knowledge of the subject can be summed up as "something something and than it makes the thing fly".

Area ruling, from a read of wiki, seems to state that transonic drag requires consideration of the cross-sectional area of the entire aircraft.

I assume this layout means that for a given cross-section, the area is reduced, due to the stepping of the wings.
I have no idea how it actually flies with an asymmetrical wing layout either.

[Lolomz]

the my amazing airforce :
air force :
4500 raven claws
100 Tsvyk Tsk-14E
600 KC-115
3200 Ay-05e
800 Ay-05E-UB
CPAC-AJ Multirole Jet Fighter x 450 ( air force variant )
Zatakian corra class attack copter (2003 version) x 500
MARSEN-A STEALTH UACV x 1300

[The Great Sioux Confederacy]

The Lakota Air Force operates the following aircraft:

12x North American OV-10D Bronco Light Attack Aircraft
10x Cessna 377B Super Skymaster Light Attack/Transport Aircraft
6x Cessna 377A Super Skymaster Forward Air Control Aircraft
8x Cessna 402 Light Transport Aircraft
10x North American T-6 Texan Trainer Aircraft
8x Bell 205 Light Transport Helicopters
4x Bell OH-58C Kiowa Warrior Scout/Light Attack Helicopters
1x Canadair CL-600S Challanger VIP Transport Aircraft

[Triplebaconation]

The LAC Rocket was the first operational jet fighter of the Lynerian Air Force.