@@lobstereleven4610 It’ll get real interesting when they bring out the Block IV variant. Word is that one will offer a ton more computing power & ability. I believe that’s being developed now & should be fitted (and retrofitted) into the planes sometime in the next 3-5(ish) years.
@@goldenageofdinosaurs7192 Maybe then the F35I won't need an external electronics pod. At the moment the Adir is like your stereotypical Israeli passenger on a commercial jet - always overweight with those extra bags full of Kosher stuff😜
A few years ago I spoke to a man who works at Lockheed Martin building the center wing boxes. He said that basically the F-35s are three different aircraft!
I don’t like that the B and C variants lack internal guns. I know missiles have come a long way since the Vietnam era but I know I’d still want a gun if I were in the pilot’s seat.
Media and armchair critics bang on about how the F-35 can't manoeuvre as well as the F-16 and how it couldn't dogfight one. They also forget the F-16 has to be able to survive to the merge to dogfight in the first place, or that the F-16 needs to know there's an F-35 to dogfight.
@@thelandofnod123 I have always thought that that assumption was an early version of the software and a current version will get the plane pull just as hard as an F16. I just thought they were talking about a visual range fight, something that would probably never happen between them. Just comparing their handling I thought.
@ I don’t think an F-35 would ever match an F-16 for manoeuvrability, but it doesn’t need to. As you say, the likelihood of an F-35 needing to out manoeuvre anything is very low.
@@thelandofnod123 Actually, it exceeds the F16 in all respects. The only way an F16 can turn like it does is when it's flying on half fuel load and minimal payload capacity...i.e. just two AAM's on the wingtips and the gun. Anything more than that and the F16 takes severe performance hits. If an F16 tried to point it's nose at low speeds like an F35, or even the F18, it would stall and fall out of the sky. But, dogfighting aside, the game would never get to that stage, if the F35 flew the fight properly. The F16 would be a ball of flames before the pilot even realised what happened.
@@carltanner9065 I wouldn't say all respects, however that wasn't the point. The argument from the armchair is that an aircraft that isn't as manoeuvrable as something in service is rubbish, which misses the entire point of the F-35.
I think the most important. feature of this aircraft is how it can consume so much data and provide it to a pilot in real time, showing them what they need. is clearly and quickly as possible so they can make decisions. As a continuation of this being. networked with other F30 fives and other. signals intelligence information. opens up some really cool abilities. Like When an aircraft runs out of missiles but it still can target the Remaining enemy and pass that Targeting information to another aircraft that does that. does have results. It's one of those things where one plus one does not equal two. Synergy baby.
Another great video, but can we please have metric units in the captions - 34,500lbs means nothing to me, and I grew up with imperial measurements (back then we would have said 15 tons). At least the ranges were in kms...
How is the F35A the smallest? By virtue of the F-35B having smaller vertical and horizontal stabs is is actually marginally 'smaller' by measuring extremities. the B has the hump for the lift fan behind the cockpit, but for all purposes the A and B are the same size
I do wonder why the RAAF didn't go for a hybrid as we did for the F111C - the more rugged undercarriage of the "C" and maybe even the larger wing of the "C" given our potential reliance on less than perfect runways. Obviously you wouldn't change the wings and undercarriage just for Oz but, as with the F111 program, those options already exist within the F35 program.
@@FatherExo How much more weight could be shaved with optimizations from more modern stuff like 3d metal printing and newer materials? Possible but impractical -expensive- ?
Interesting comparisons! However, there is one statistic that is not addressed: How does weapons payload differ for the models while the aircraft is in full stealth mode (ie only internally stored weapons). It is crucial to know this, as stealth is one of the plane's most touted attributes. I have seen reports stating that the internal weapons bay config is identical across variants, but other people disagree and seem to suggest that the B variant has a smaller bay. If this is true how would that affect the B variant's ability to carry the same number of AMRAAMs and sidewinders? I think you will concede this is a rather important question? Note: the moment one hangs external stores under the fuselage and wings, does the F-35 not just become another 4th gen fighter? In which case it would not stack up very well against other NATO front line planes (Typhoon, Rafale, JAS 39 Gripen) - speed, agility, load, power-to-weight, etc.
Rafale is still better g loading 10, Mig-35 is better g load of 10.3, Su-35-37, latter 2 are what we need, extra range without sacrificing maneuverability, full 3d thrust vectoring g loading of 10.1 with better speed retention and less maintenance.
@@thelandofnod123 Is that why the US bought MIG-29's from Moldova and reverse engineered their head mounted displays to create JHMCS and other tech in the 29, the US didn't have a phased array radar on a plane for 25 years after the USSR did, or when the US used Yak engineers to make critical parts of the f-35 function. US tech is now where Russian tech was in around 1997 ish. when the US used Yak engineers to make critical parts of the f-35
@@super_slav91 Ahhhhh, I see now, you have absolutely no idea about aerospace and engineering. Thanks for your input, but you should probably go back to your bridge before too many people get over it unhindered.
Hmmm, only two minutes into the video and there are already a few errors and misrepresentations. The various descriptions of G limits are comical in the implications drawn. Did anyone actually check any of this before writing the script? Or was it just made up on the spot? "Disclaimer" "Original footage and recreated scenes (using DCS, War Thunder, etc) may not be 100% accurate to the event being described but has been used for dramatic effect." They should have said something similar about the narration. Relies on "Barrier" arrested landings? So the F-35C doesn't catch a wire it just uses the barrier every time to land on the carrier? Did anyone do a sanity check on this video?!!!!! Oh God the idiotic claims made in this video are terrible!
The difference between being capped at 7G and 9G is significant, and not just in dogfights. Even in BVR engagements (usually supersonic) it is important since it limits turn radius and abort time if you need to go defensive or re-commit quickly. In BVR speed is critical to ensuring maximum kinetic energy of missiles coming off the pylon as well as draining kinetic energy from incoming missiles, and a 7G limit at supersonic speeds results in a significantly larger turn radius than the 9G equivalent. The difference between being able to pull 7G and 9G, or at least having the ability to, can literally mean the difference between life and death
"barrier" should have been "carrier" - as in normal carrier arrested landings. Was a typo in the script. - Made a pinned correction. I don't think there is anything wrong with comments about the G limits.
@@raafdocumentaries If that's all you think is wrong with the video you should probably give up making them. You made clanger after clanger throughout the video.
CORRECTION: 06:20 should read "carrier" not 'barrier" - wasn't a reference to the emergency barrier. We were referring to standard arresting wires.
The IDF is showing the world just how effective the F35 can be when used in conjunction with other 4/4.5 gen aircraft. Brilliant job
@@lobstereleven4610 It’ll get real interesting when they bring out the Block IV variant. Word is that one will offer a ton more computing power & ability. I believe that’s being developed now & should be fitted (and retrofitted) into the planes sometime in the next 3-5(ish) years.
@@goldenageofdinosaurs7192 Maybe then the F35I won't need an external electronics pod. At the moment the Adir is like your stereotypical Israeli passenger on a commercial jet - always overweight with those extra bags full of Kosher stuff😜
A few years ago I spoke to a man who works at Lockheed Martin building the center wing boxes. He said that basically the F-35s are three different aircraft!
We have many people hating on the f35 when it first came out and now people understand that the aircraft is good.
It is the most economical of the 5th gen after all 😂
I don’t like that the B and C variants lack internal guns. I know missiles have come a long way since the Vietnam era but I know I’d still want a gun if I were in the pilot’s seat.
Outstanding ....
Wasn't the C version supposed to have an extended range over the A version due to the larger wings and increased fuel capacity?
@@mahtisonni7593 No.
I personally prefer the A model but with the wings of the C-cus I love bigger wings and the double front wheel, it gives a better look.
Media and armchair critics bang on about how the F-35 can't manoeuvre as well as the F-16 and how it couldn't dogfight one. They also forget the F-16 has to be able to survive to the merge to dogfight in the first place, or that the F-16 needs to know there's an F-35 to dogfight.
@@thelandofnod123 I have always thought that that assumption was an early version of the software and a current version will get the plane pull just as hard as an F16.
I just thought they were talking about a visual range fight, something that would probably never happen between them. Just comparing their handling I thought.
@ I don’t think an F-35 would ever match an F-16 for manoeuvrability, but it doesn’t need to. As you say, the likelihood of an F-35 needing to out manoeuvre anything is very low.
@@thelandofnod123 Actually, it exceeds the F16 in all respects. The only way an F16 can turn like it does is when it's flying on half fuel load and minimal payload capacity...i.e. just two AAM's on the wingtips and the gun. Anything more than that and the F16 takes severe performance hits. If an F16 tried to point it's nose at low speeds like an F35, or even the F18, it would stall and fall out of the sky. But, dogfighting aside, the game would never get to that stage, if the F35 flew the fight properly. The F16 would be a ball of flames before the pilot even realised what happened.
@@carltanner9065 I wouldn't say all respects, however that wasn't the point. The argument from the armchair is that an aircraft that isn't as manoeuvrable as something in service is rubbish, which misses the entire point of the F-35.
There's one huge difference between the F35I Adir and the other variants; it's the only one proven as a long-range stealth attack fighter-jet
Wish more Australians would watch this, why we don't need the Bravo, the Alpha is a much better suited for the RAAF.
F-35A and F-35B must comeback in Ace Combat 8. 20 years of F-35 in 2026.
nice video
4:46 The Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy also use the F-35B, the USMC aren't the sole operators of the F-35B
My understanding the Italian Navy will take the F-35B to sea.
@@Idahoguy10157 Yep, they're procuring them for operations on Cavour.
And japan
@darkzealot88 Yeah forgot about that. Izumo-class "cruisers" will field them
Seeing this is an Australian sourced site, using metric measurements (or at least provide metric equivalent in captions) would be ideal.
Not really, aviation is still SAE, not metric.
great video. f-35 is still the pinnacle of stealth aircraft, china can never copy it 😐😐😐
I think the most important. feature of this aircraft is how it can consume so much data and provide it to a pilot in real time, showing them what they need. is clearly and quickly as possible so they can make decisions. As a continuation of this being. networked with other F30 fives and other. signals intelligence information. opens up some really cool abilities. Like When an aircraft runs out of missiles but it still can target the Remaining enemy and pass that Targeting information to another aircraft that does that. does have results. It's one of those things where one plus one does not equal two. Synergy baby.
Other European light fighters can Pull10 g and More
Another great video, but can we please have metric units in the captions - 34,500lbs means nothing to me, and I grew up with imperial measurements (back then we would have said 15 tons). At least the ranges were in kms...
It’s simple do what most of us do….Educate yourself….😊😊
@@josephlambe2796 although Lbs and miles are used primarily in aviation, imperial system is still used more often elsewhere.
How is the F35A the smallest? By virtue of the F-35B having smaller vertical and horizontal stabs is is actually marginally 'smaller' by measuring extremities. the B has the hump for the lift fan behind the cockpit, but for all purposes the A and B are the same size
That’s probably correct, though the B is lighter. I wonder if that’s what they meant by ‘smallest.’
@@goldenageofdinosaurs7192 The B is in the middle when it comes to weight. it is lighter than the C, heavier than the A.
Size measured by weight
@@Idahoguy10157 nope, the video specifically says smaller AND lighter
In future, can you use the metric system? Especially since you're an Australian channel and it is used by everyone worldwide.
What about the comparison of the LO between the variants? I'd be interested to see that.
I do wonder why the RAAF didn't go for a hybrid as we did for the F111C - the more rugged undercarriage of the "C" and maybe even the larger wing of the "C" given our potential reliance on less than perfect runways. Obviously you wouldn't change the wings and undercarriage just for Oz but, as with the F111 program, those options already exist within the F35 program.
Kinda sorta. But with the JSF program the way it is, the more standardised platforms, the easier it is.
A good review !
I worked on B’s and C’s.
Ask me anything
@@FatherExo out of the two, which one can edge themselves longer?
@@Kaioshinpasha clearly the B can edge a lot longer than either 2.
How do monarch butterflies know where to migrate to?
@@FatherExo How much more weight could be shaved with optimizations from more modern stuff like 3d metal printing and newer materials? Possible but impractical -expensive- ?
@@thelandofnod123 have you not watched the Venture Bros.?
Interesting comparisons!
However, there is one statistic that is not addressed: How does weapons payload differ for the models while the aircraft is in full stealth mode (ie only internally stored weapons). It is crucial to know this, as stealth is one of the plane's most touted attributes. I have seen reports stating that the internal weapons bay config is identical across variants, but other people disagree and seem to suggest that the B variant has a smaller bay. If this is true how would that affect the B variant's ability to carry the same number of AMRAAMs and sidewinders? I think you will concede this is a rather important question?
Note: the moment one hangs external stores under the fuselage and wings, does the F-35 not just become another 4th gen fighter? In which case it would not stack up very well against other NATO front line planes (Typhoon, Rafale, JAS 39 Gripen) - speed, agility, load, power-to-weight, etc.
Good question indeed
Somebody's taking notes 😂
Why does Tony Abbott suddenly appear for like a frame at 13:44?
Was he eating an onion?
Because he was the prime minister when Australia was adopting the F-35
Israel had Large scale combat test of the F-35s on Iran (from Iraqi airspace.)
mmm, still like the F86 Sabre.
9:50 Wait what? US Defence Force?
29% combat ready.
I suspect the Bravo is preferred over the Charlie for maritime operations is because there very few CATOBAR capable navies.
That's a bit of a silly statement.
What other forces have any CATOBAR carriers that they don't already operate the Rafale from them?
Rafale is still better g loading 10, Mig-35 is better g load of 10.3, Su-35-37, latter 2 are what we need, extra range without sacrificing maneuverability, full 3d thrust vectoring g loading of 10.1 with better speed retention and less maintenance.
We?
@@thelandofnod123 Australia
@@super_slav91 Australia most definitely does not need any Soviet rubbish.
@@thelandofnod123 Is that why the US bought MIG-29's from Moldova and reverse engineered their head mounted displays to create JHMCS and other tech in the 29, the US didn't have a phased array radar on a plane for 25 years after the USSR did, or when the US used Yak engineers to make critical parts of the f-35 function. US tech is now where Russian tech was in around 1997 ish. when the US used Yak engineers to make critical parts of the f-35
@@super_slav91 Ahhhhh, I see now, you have absolutely no idea about aerospace and engineering. Thanks for your input, but you should probably go back to your bridge before too many people get over it unhindered.
Why don’t y convert pounds to kilograms? Anyone can parrot of from a webpage!
In aviation fuel is always measured in pounds. And get yourself a converter app.
@@wozza77able why can’t you speak English coherently?
@@wozza77able why can't you divide by 2.2??!!
Because no one in aviation reads fuel and weapons stores in metric weight
@@FishandHunt No it isn't, that's just in the USA.
Meh, 'master of none' expensive crap. No thanks
70.000 Lb not stealth anymore
@@Karl-Benny How does weight make it less stealthy? B-2 spirit is many times heavier and it's as stealthy as the F-35.
Failure 35 😂
Nope
@@thelandofnod123 cry NATO loser is a fact, ignorant petulant 🏳️🌈😀😀😀😀😂😂😂 .l.
@thelandofnod123 the Israeli Air Force seems to be getting their money's worth out of them just like with their F-15s and '16s back in the 80s.
@@MotoroidARFC Indeed.
Hmmm, only two minutes into the video and there are already a few errors and misrepresentations. The various descriptions of G limits are comical in the implications drawn. Did anyone actually check any of this before writing the script? Or was it just made up on the spot?
"Disclaimer"
"Original footage and recreated scenes (using DCS, War Thunder, etc) may not be 100% accurate to the event being described but has been used for dramatic effect."
They should have said something similar about the narration.
Relies on "Barrier" arrested landings? So the F-35C doesn't catch a wire it just uses the barrier every time to land on the carrier? Did anyone do a sanity check on this video?!!!!!
Oh God the idiotic claims made in this video are terrible!
This video is still way better than the childish nonsense published on your channel.
The difference between being capped at 7G and 9G is significant, and not just in dogfights. Even in BVR engagements (usually supersonic) it is important since it limits turn radius and abort time if you need to go defensive or re-commit quickly. In BVR speed is critical to ensuring maximum kinetic energy of missiles coming off the pylon as well as draining kinetic energy from incoming missiles, and a 7G limit at supersonic speeds results in a significantly larger turn radius than the 9G equivalent. The difference between being able to pull 7G and 9G, or at least having the ability to, can literally mean the difference between life and death
"barrier" should have been "carrier" - as in normal carrier arrested landings. Was a typo in the script. - Made a pinned correction. I don't think there is anything wrong with comments about the G limits.
@@raafdocumentaries If that's all you think is wrong with the video you should probably give up making them. You made clanger after clanger throughout the video.
@@JoD-tz8ez Not the point. The point is the statements made about the G Limits and the many other clangers throughout the video.
First
You must be so proud.
OK MR VAS AND DR KARL AND GOD KNOWS WHO ELSE ( WHERE ARE YOU ? )