J-Fox

ENG/日本語• I commission art of my OCs • 2D/3D巨大女性• Old Size kink Lurker. 昔からのサイズフェチスレッドROM専. No soliciting commissions to me. DMs open. No RP. 🔞

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

Jaylin going for an "enthusiastic" walk.

She looks so good in this. I love how she sways, I love how it's implied she's been touring all over the place all throughout the day and night. Phenomenal work!

🎨:#Beeeeeenandayo

#거대녀 #サイズフェチ #巨大娘

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@Mjustine132_ No foolin, oh i could ever wonder how and why, haha.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

The only time an artist should "run with it" is if they like that particular character of the commissioner has and that should be negotiated in the moment. Or if the artist reaches out first.

Just because an artist likes an idea doesn't mean it's a freebie, unless they explicitly say so.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@iishungy That is a very hot sequence.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@AltairAsart This was a good idea, and great execution.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@AltairAsart This is a well-done idea and concept. Love the shy and nervous giantess stereotype.

[Tri1zz ( Comms Closed 3/3) @Tri1zz_]

My first Art that really hited in some way. It means that people likes Grace with abs, riiiiight? 🙄

#ZenlessZoneZero #ZZZ #ゼンゼロ📷

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@kuro_oolong96 @10_106m すごくかわいい！超高層ビルほど背の高いOLが大好き。このイラスト、すごくうまく描けてるね！

[KentaRyu🐉 @KentaRyu4]

The kind of reward Yamashiro Ren expected

[Raps @YoHomeboyRaps]

Sequel to Ant-Armor's amazing animation in which Praelia's nightmare continued:

https://t.co/pOut5wKzNE

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@YoHomeboyRaps Those blue nails on her make her look so cute! Also, yeah, she shouldn't stop, haha. This is so good!

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@eSM1LE_ Happened with game of thrones too. Producers and creatives should try and and execute a story or franchise with good closure.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@Chirini_ Im definitely in that category lol

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@HowDotTF She's so Adorable. Love it.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@GiantessMidori I appreciate you for being a fan of her, this is a welcome surprise haha.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@Kizuna_pro57 さらに重要なのは、本当に重要なことと、先延ばしや気が散る原因になりがちなこととのバランスをとることだと思います。

やらなければならないことに圧倒されそうになったら、ひと息ついてペースを落とし、何が可能か、そして実際に達成したい目標は何かをじっくり考えてみてください。

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@harorlood Lol I love how swol she is.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@1nsertNH Good animation, love the chemistry between these two characters!

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

I wasn't disagreeing with the economy of scale; I pointed out a part of that myself. My issue is, operationally, if I'm not a country that can get an F-16 readily due to its wait time for the newer ones, along with the F-35 by the way, but that has to deal with technology transfer and US ITAR. Then, like I said before, if you are in a country with that ecosystem, get those crafts.

As far as sales go, I mean, Ukraine put in a letter of intent for 150+ of them? So we'll see if that pans out, the same with Brazil getting 36?

Also, I can't stress enough, United States Air Force F-16 crew members will tell you that the Gripen (and that's their judgement on the maintenance with C/D Gripen) is less burdensome. My problem with the F-16 is that because it was built for traditional runway modification, I have to do more for the runway (which, in this case, as you have shown, is the highway) to keep that clean and have equipment to do such than I ever would with a Gripen. I can have a decent dirt runway with Gripen from the regional airport and run my ops off of that. I have to do more with the F-16 to make that happen, and Ukrainian crews have given high notice on that and have came up with their own ways to make it work.

https://t.co/IerKkwHnX1

The most erroneous thing to say is that the Gripen is built just for the BAS 90 system; it's built for dispersed operations. That means places like Finland, which has a similar system, are great for them. We know Finland got F35s instead because, yeah, lol, they joined NATO. Their legacy Hornets are made for that operational tempo, though; the problem is they're aging airframes. Same with Poland. The Baltics' states are considering it but they said that it wouldn't be hard to implement a similar system.

I agree with you, though; it's just the cost factor and out the outreach SAAB can do to prove their product. That'll change in 2027 though when we can see actual combat relevance and data coming from Ukraine with the C/D Gripen at first, and the later variants in the war should the war still be going on for that long.

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

To go back to maintenance and FOD. I've worked around the F-16 crews; I worked around the Gripen crews. I have seen the turnaround and scramble time of both; the truth is, the F-16 (Block 60s at that time) takes 30 minutes more to get into the air than the C/D variant. That 10-minute scramble time with several conscripts and one specialized technician was not just SAAB promotion haboob; it has a better preparation and sortie time than most NATO fighters. Countries in contested airspace would like that kind of turnaround if some things have gone to shit in local contested and high-intensity airspace.

"I'm really not sure how you can concede the Gripen has less payload capacity and overall capability than other 4th-gen aircraft and conclude that's a positive in favor of the Gripen."

Because I'm literally missing one, ONE hardpoint, and at maximum configuration it's 1 tonne LESS than the F-16 V, and that's the latest F-16 compared with the latest iteration (E/F) of the Gripen, but as you know, most fighter pilots don't go under full load most of the time when doing a sortie. Or at least with American Doctrine, we haven't needed to because we've been fighting in low-intensity conflicts for most of the past two decades. But I can get the gripen up in the air faster than the F-16 without having to worry that much about treating it like a pavement princess, like I would with the F-16, and I don't need a highway to necessarily do that. The way the Gripen's design and intakes are made, that's not just for show; those two are twin side-mounted air intakes located higher up on the fuselage. This raised positioning naturally distances the engine inlets from runway surface debris, vastly reducing the risk of ingestion. I have literally seen that, and with my time with the F-16, if you go out in a foggy or rainy environment, you can literally watch the intake of the F-16 form a mini vortex underneath it when it's running; it's more susceptible to FOD than the Gripen is by a large metric. Going back to payload, missing one hardpoint and 1 ton is less important than what munition can make it to target, which, for the most part, the Gripen can take most of the serious loads I would need. I'm missing one large bomb or missile; that's not a deal breaker for the capability I'm getting out of the thing.

"The word "nearly" in "nearly the same capabilities as the F-16" is doing a LOT of heavy lifting there. Nearly is frankly being too generous, the payload capacity difference between the Gripen and other 4th gens is not insignificant. Plus the flight performance is really "meh" compared to 4th gens, its the worst of the eurocanards in terms of flight performance. The Gripen is built around a single GE F404 RM12 engine, a variation of the engine the F-18 carries 2 of and is in the same powerclass as the other eurocanards. There is no replacement for displacement as they say and the small size and low power of the Gripen imposes limitations that no amount of upgrade packages can avoid."

Are we talking about the latest iteration (E/F) or older? Based on what I'm reading from you, you're talking about the older Gripen because the newer ones use the F414-GE-39E is a variation of what the Super Hornet uses? There is a significant difference between both engines here. Also, then going to the broader issues, am I comparing an old export Gripen (C/D) to an older F-16s (20s-60s or in Eurocircles MLU updates). We don't have open information on sustained turn of rate of the E/F variants, that remains classified but it is a different build than the C/D, so they aren't really comparable either.

Then speaking of the british MOD. Their main guy and think tank of this decade that is in RUSI (RUSI - Royal United Services Institute) in the 2020s has words for the F-16 and the gripen.
https://t.co/eY3GVsv2rN

https://t.co/fL2IvtESPJ

https://t.co/NL7p9SntOi

The guy has flown the thing and observed what its crews can do. So with recent information, I would take his judgement over what people on Warthunder say. And btw on that front, E/F has a better AoA than the F-16, which means it can win a 1-circle-turn fight better than that thing. That's for dog fighting though. BVR is still highly capable, and that's where most air-to-air fighting happens nowadays, but you'll have to look up the information for that.

Ukraine has now used and flown both (Being careful on the used part since that'll be more open information in the next year); we know the limitations of both from them. We know stuff about the F-16 and what it can do under contested airspace and its own form of running off of austere runways that the United States hasn't fully tried. They would want the gripen under these conditions because they aren't part of NATO. They don't have direct access to the ecosystem of that supply train, and instead are given fighters by donation and cooperation. However, those F-16s—some of them are coming in with new electronic packages and ECM—that's nice in live fire testing such as Ukraine, and you bet European defence agencies and even american ones behind the scenes are getting data from that so Lockheed can perfect the F-16, such they are here:

[J-Fox @SizablePixel]

@DeltyThe73rd And he scores big at the end too after his hardwork. One of the few instances we actually see that happening too haha.