4.5 gen is a meme, right?All these craps like Raphale, Gripen or Eurofighter are just 4th gen. What's the point of pretending they're anything but?And then there are the two only 5th gen stealth fighters: the F-35 and F-22. No comparison
China also has a few gen 4.5 fighters like the j20.
>>65334004i said 4.5 gen is a MEME
Eurofighter TWR makes me cum when it flies overheadNothing else matters.
Tranny shill thread
I can't wait until we're arguing over whether gen 5.5 fighters (GCAP, J-36, the ghost of FCAS) are meaningfully different from gen 5 fighters.
>>65335104aircraft are not supposed to fly over enemy heads
>>65335117>GCAP, J-36, the ghost of FCASlol
4th gen is older mechanically steered radars4.5th gen is modern AESA radar4.75th gen will be additional compute/electrical power to do AI/MUM-T control duties.We're still probably ~10-20 years from a true 4.75th gen though.5th/6th gen will still be significant but reserved for high-end peer conflicts and deep penetrating strikes.Most countries will still need manned non-stealth fighters for domestic air policing duties that can't reliably be done via drone, but in 2040+ they'll need high electrical output to run modern comptuers, sensors that current 4.5th gen fighters simply don't have the power budget to handle.
>>65335136yeah nah, it's still 4th gen shit. an upgraded F-16 isn't "4.5 gen" either... 4.5 gen just doesn't exist, its a bullshit marketing term
>>65335138I mean, it's the best way we have to differentiate them.You can't fucking tell me you actually think an F-16A and an F-16V are BOTH correctly classified as 4th gen with ZERO reason to differentiate the F-16V with the .5?
>>65335148it's a 4th gen with upgrades is what it is. it's as different as the T-72 and T-90
>>65335176So in other words, it's worlds apart.
>4.5 gen is a meme, right?If you're a thirdie airforce then that .5 makes the difference.>b-but how will they do in a war with the US????Not the tool for the job and not the strategy for fighting the US.
>muh generationsfuck you. there are 2 use cases for talking about generations:1. you're an American MIC lobbyist and you need to shill your plane to a senator. Unfortunately senators are drooling retards who can't understand technical characteristics of aircraft, much less their implications. So you have to dumb everything down to "our new plane is <current generation +1>"2. you're a non-American manufacturer who needs to get into a dick-measuring contest with the USA.you are neither, so talk like an intelligent person
>>65335138Ehh not exactly bullshit.The airframe gains substantial advantages with those upgrades.They are indeed in a higher tier than initial 4th gens.It's just, they're never going to break the ceiling into the stealth of 5th gen.Not without such thorough redesign that they become a separate plane, whether "-"-derived" or not.
>>65335213lol, someone pull up the turret ejecting webms of T-90s
>>65335372Right away Mr. Rogan
>>65335136Tbh, most “4.5 gens” produced have PD or PESAs. I’d have to check, but I’m almost certain that there are more f16s with apg 83/80s at this point than there are eurocanard+flankers with AESAs combined
>>65335433I'd argue that Tranche 1-3 eurofighters are 4th gen not 4.5th gen.Unless they have the Captor-E, they're 4th gen.
4.5 gen is, 70s-80s era design, 90s-00s computer and sensor tech, maybe an engine improvement.mild radar stealth characteristics and a superior maneuvering ability.
>>65333858>retarded debates about terminologywhen a measure becomes a target it ceases to be a good measure
>>65335447>building 4th gen fighters well into the 20th centuryWtf euros. Even the japs were throwing around aesas in the mid/late 90s
Remember how the designer of the F22 came out with drawings to turn it into a 6th gen plane and it wowed everybody and then the chinese unveiled planes that looked exactly like that? That was funny
>>65335586Even today there are no Captor-E equipped Tranche 3's in the RAF in service.They're going to upgrade their Tranche 2's for the Captor-E though, so that'll be expensive.
The 0.5 comes from the AESA radar. No AESA, not 4.5So a Gripen can be a 4th or a 4.5th gen depends on its radar
>>65335379So did we ever find out what hit that pidor tank? ATGM or tank shell?
>>65335693so if an AESA radar was slapped on an F-5, now it would suddenly become 4.5 gen?
>>65335822no because the F-5 is not a 4th gen fighter
>>65335822No, anon, you need to be a baseline 4th gen capable fighter airframe to begin with.The baseline for a 4th gen jet already mogs the F-5, so no, throwing an AESA radar on an F-5 doesn't make it a 4.5th gen because it still lacks basic 4th gen capability for flight control, kinematics, modern munitions, etc.
>>65335882But what if the F-5 was an F-20?
>>65335694Does it matter? When the spark meets the powder in a soviet tank, the end result is identical either way.
>>65335904if my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle
>>65335887>capability for flight control, kinematics,for dogfighting? lul
>>65335992No, for launching BVR missiles at the correct altitude/speed so they're actually getting good performance against another 4th/4.5th gen fighter.
>>65334004How do people know those aren’t 5th gen?
>>65334004J-20 is advanced 5th gen it has both stealth and super cruise. Only another aircraft like that is F-22 that is out of production.
>>65333858The F-15EX is 4.5 gen, everything else is 4th gen. Thirdies don't get to decide what gen their shit is.
>>65336000so an F-5 with an AESA radar or whatever couldn't lob a JASSM-XR missile?
>>65336056these are all on-paper capabilities the chinks claim so their people can pretend the PRC isn't just an inept government
>>65336079With the right computers it could, but a JASSM isn't going to help you in air to air combat.
>>65336080Source?
>>65336045>rafale: sleek, stylish>f-35: flying pig
>>65336129A MALD-J will
