HapyOne:


If you were talking of the Isrealites I will totally not doubt what you were saying but the US...Nah, they have to show the world what they got. Especially in this era of unending arms race, people need to know what you got so they can buy from you. When the f-35s came out, you know how many countries asked for it. I don't believe the US have any jet higher than the f-35s currently locked somewhere else. People need to know the best you got that's the way you solve the arms race and pour fear into your rivals and even alies self. Why do you think the Russians send their most advanced jet to Syria because they need to sell it and show off its capability in real battle.
If you don't show off nobody will buy especially when you are a super power.

BLINGZ88:
I don't even understand ur argument

ghostofsparta:
I disagree, because I'm showing of my best so you can buy it doesn't necessarily implies that's my best, as a matter of the fact, common sense should tell you if you got my best, then what need would they be to claim high ground or flex muscle when in par ? And why do you keep judging from fighter jets alone. I'm judging from all their arsenal (both publicly known and undisclosed) and defensive measures, Those aircrafts are nothing but ultra-expensive piece of metal equipped with the latest upgrade of the same-old high-tech function, few innovation, my point is despite the widely held opinion that air-superiority paves the way for victory, I myself had long figured a way wherein the forces all these exorbitant military toys relies on to function can be disrupted remotely. Do you have a knack for fighter jet, if yes, then it may interest you and your likes to know that all fighter jets are incomplete and vulnerable with their usual shortcomings if they CAN NOT be made to have real 'stealth function' and by that I meant that capability to actually CLOAK itself both visibly whilst still undetectable by all types of radar.

ghostofsparta:

Simple why do world powerful nations spend billions on developing and acquiring fighter jets despite their shortcomings and limitations, when that same billions can be used for better things like effectuating world peace among other less-violent stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pacifist (any Pacifist in this world where the belligerent will continue to exist no matter how peaceful is delusional).

Missy89:



Technology evolves. The 5th generation fighter jet for example are more advanced than the first fighter jets of world war one. It will continue to evolve and get better. that is why they will cost more because of R & D. Some of which is applied to civilian applications. Civilian airliners for example was copied from the bomber etc
Modern conventional warfare cannot be won without Air superiority anymore so countries will keep investing a lot of money on military aviation technology.

"The idea that showing you my best is not necessarily my best" is not always true. Most countries however do have export versions of their main conventional weapons ( they are usually cheaper and have less tech in them). Doesn't mean Huge military exporting countries are hiding all their best conventional weapons. Deterrence plays a large part of any country's security. Showing their cutting edge weapons alone prevents any adversary.

And by the way, exporting a large size of your weapon system doesn't mean the country buying it will be able to flex their muscles with you. Most of these arms sales comes with training. So if you buy Russian tanks for example, You are stuck with Russian tank tactics in other to get the full value. If Russia then decide to invade, The battle tactics is already predictable and Russia will win with superior training and tactics.

ghostofsparta:

Simple why do world powerful nations spend billions on developing and acquiring fighter jets despite their shortcomings and limitations, when that same billions can be used for better things like effectuating world peace among other less-violent stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pacifist (any Pacifist in this world where the belligerent will continue to exist no matter how peaceful is delusional).

HapyOne:


Are you talking specifically for fighter aircrafts or you also including the likes of bombers and attack aircraft.
Well, am going to assume you are speaking for all.
You saying all fighters jet aren't complete isn't right I believe especially using stealth ability has the yardstick. All jets where designed for a particular function, some designed for stealth mission, others as just bombers, others for escort mission and several others.
A strategic bomber for example the Tu-95 bear doesn't need stealth for anything, that's why it always carry escort with it.
A normal attack aircraft might not need a stealth function to take out it's target, though having full stealth will be huge advantage because it's meant to encounter air defense and unlike true air to air fighter jets that have no business with air defense system what will they need stealth for.
Apart from stealth, their other things too like speed, maneuverability, small size, payload, and others.
The f-35s interesting enough can attack ground targets in areas with air defense without actually encountering the defense systems using some sort of laser guided missiles which can be released far away from the target thus avoiding the risk of air defenses system.
When you design something to a particular specs and it works then it's complete and not having a feature that wasn't consider as a requirement shouldn't make it incomplete.
For example the Microsoft Hololens is designed or meant to have a true argumented reality unlike other VR headsets but currently they haven't been able to achieve a sustainable auguented reality and if they release it out to consumers like that, then I believe it's incomplete.

BLINGZ88:
stealth, it is funny how Wey throw that word around like it is some kind of invisible clock, maybe for attacking a country with rotten air defence system like Nigeria nd most of middle east but stealth doesn't make a plane invisible cos the amount of heat that a jets engine gives away is astonishing, and with advanced low frequency radar, stealth doesn't have a chance, I just pray that the world won't have to confirm the superiority of aircraft through ww3

ghostofsparta:
It's funny how you all don't get my point. I remain adamant that no superpower flaunts, exhibit for sale the best of their best military technologies much less of the core knowledge behind it. The 'to deter and intimidate' logic Missy89 gave only applies to nation perceived to be militarily inferior to theirs and do take note that these militarily-weak nations who drool to acquire them don't even fit into the category that may pose as 'threat' much more of fitting into the definition of an "adversary" as HapyOne erroneously used. What's the sense in an adversary purchasing latest weaponry from their adversary. Why would you Missy89, a superpower want to sell to HapyOne (your adversary) unless he is perceived inferior to you militarily ? And if the both of you still chose to disagree with my opinion then the both of you fail to realize that your argument defeats the purpose of continual espionage among true adversarial nation. To validate my point further, I cite the Rosenberg case and trial, that incident alone reaffirms the common sense that no true adversarial nations or superpowers would be glad if the knowledge of whatever it is that gives them upper-hand falls into the laps of their adversary.

@ HapyOne
I was referring to the overall military weaponry (offensive and defensive; naval, air and land) when I asked And why do you keep judging from
fighter jets alone. I'm judging from all their
arsenal (both publicly known and undisclosed)
and defensive measures.

Back to the topic
@ Missy89
I don't care if they're 5th or 9th generation provided still all jet fighters are vulnerable. They can still be destroyed during any given mission, its missiles interceptable and there will forever be means by which their counter-measures can be beaten, hence I believe the solution is a perfect jet fighter which to me is any type that can cloak itself, and by cloaking I'm talking about a capability of operating at zero-visibility. With all available scientific advancement, their [military contractors] have been unable to achieve this, otherwise The Philadelphia Experiment wouldn't have being a disaster but I personally know how this is possible.

You guys may be quizzed to know that as seemingly powerful as these expensive aircrafts are, despite those latest hi-tech features and state-of-the-art components snoring inside them, with their super-sonic speed, all [jet fighters] can be made significantly less-threatening with the deployment of what I call an 'R.I.D.' system. Yeah, a RID will rid the sky off any aircraft. Be it an high-altitude, drone or civil, surveillance or reconnaissance, this fvcker doesn't discriminate, they're all going to free-fall, wherein lies demerit of a RID because humans on earth will be at great risk. All types of aircraft are susceptible to RID. The only protection an aircraft has against a RID blast is if its equipped with a cloaking system. The meaning of cloaking differs from concept to concept but that which is not only visually unidentifiable but that which is also undetectable by radar, is what I speak of.

HapyOne:

Well I have no more comment about that.
Your suppose RID system sounds pretty interesting. Maybe you should share some light on it.

HapyOne:
If you truly know about how a true stealth system is possible, why don't you throw up some demo?

HapyOne:
It could change a lot of things in the field of science and warfare.

HapyOne:

I think you miss the point though.
Well it depends on what you mean by stealth...A truly stealth jet as ghostofsparta said, that is a jet that is truly invisible will be immune to air defence system because it won't emit anything so radar won't see it. Well, such technology is years away now but it is possible.