If F-35 were marketed by Sukhoi with 'Su' in the name, the jet would be touted as flawless and invincible from the first day of testing. However, only 12 would end up ever being built.
Strange considering that Russia's su57 was touted for the last decade as a massive failure so not sure where you are getting that information (ofc that's as unjustified as claiming the F35 is a failure). About the replies "confirming" the Russian military is a joke, I guess the surgical dismantling of the largest NATO army in Europe (with more forces than Russia and allies has deployed), with an extra 50 bn in aid, half of which is military aid, isn't enough to convince arm chair generals that Russian's mean business. The US military knows this ofc which is why the Pentagon is very upset with how the state department and white house is mishandling current conflicts that America is a part of, but also the mishandling of the defense budget for bloated defense contracts that do not seem to give the US military what it really needs.
@@TheCabbageMan Well that was a big load of sweet fuck all. Ukraine isn't even IN NATO you stupid berk. If it was, this would never have happened at all, and if it did, it would've been over real quick.
Can we just pause to appreciate that we get this level of info for free here on RUclips? I mean, I'm a nobody from Slovenia who gets to understand the strengths of F35s, just because I believe getting Ukraine'd is not how I want ANYONE to end up ^^ Anyways, thank you for your service & protection, I'll do what I can to make us deserve it
Currently studying for the RAAF officer selection board and I have to say, out of all of the material online I’ve been studying, this channel has some of the best information and analysis out there on the ADF and related affairs. Please keep up the good work mate!!
@@YaMomsOyster OSB=Officer Selection Board. Before OCDTs can enter as OCDTs they must first pass an OSB which is basically a board of senior officers that conduct a cross examination and interview on you to determine your "suitability" to become an officer.
Can confirm. Excellent analysis. My Electrical Engineering degree & interest in the military sphere, kept me informed enough to understand most of what was said. Given the Ukraine situation, I'm glad the West has such a dominant fighter being produced in numbers. Volume manufacturing is the king. With Love from Slovenia
@@elektrotehnik94 What Ukie situation, they are surrendering in droves rather than being ground into fertilizer by the Russian freedom fighters. Moon of Alabama
Best praise I ever heard was from a chief mechanic, he said it was bloody easy to work on and designed from the start to be easy to work on. Said he loved it over other planes for that reason.
@@BeKindToBirds That is high praise. As a former US Navy nuclear plant mechanic, I know that being able to work on your machines is one of the best attributes it can have.
Rare to find a youtube video with this level of accuracy and insights. In the end, all fighter programs goes through development troubles, and problems that even persist long after they are operational. Today's F-35 criticism mirrors that of the F-16 back in the 70s and I'm old enough to recall all the flak the Gripen received in the Swedish media: serious technical troubles, accidents, large cost overruns, delays and so on. But both the F-16 and Gripen trurned out fine aircrafts, as will the F-35.
Or the F111, it was late, way over budget and had issues with cracking and crashing, but come retirement after over 35 years of service, many a tear was shed. Anyway, the air war isn't won at airshows.
@Dick Izzinya It's a lawn dart because of the single engine. Which was why all branches specifically wanted twin engines so the plane could get home if it lost one. All hail the F-35 Lawn Dart 2.
People seem to forget that the WW2 fighter era has long been gone. Dogfights are almost a thing of the past. Manouverability and speed arent the only things that make a fighter good.
You are right, Sir. But still there is stealth, vertical landing... and for dogfights - in case such a situation would come up: there is a Eurofighter, a Rafale, a Gripen, ...the F22.
a jet really doesn't need to turn when most missiles can do 15~g manouvers, (number varies depending on what missile it is) the era of two aircraft turnfighting and blasting guns eachother is long gone, and even if its preformance is not as good as other aircraft, thats like expecting an 11 year old to be able to do taxes, drive a car and know how to boxfight. it'd be more fair to compare the f-35 to other aircraft at their early times (ie: comparing the f-22 5 years after it was put into production to the f-35 5 years after it was put into production)
Yes and no. There will always be the Cunningham vs Toon battle, though that might be 2% of the overall air combat activity. The other 98% is the gomer floating to earth via parachute wondering what happened. (never saw the shooter)
@@eskeline The only production jet I can think of that can truly out-turn a missile is the F22, and the pilot would basically melt into soup in a 15G+ turn (even if the aircraft can do it)
I am old enough to remember the Mirage being useless, the F-111 being overpriced, late and not worth it and the F-18 being an overpriced lemon... Geez, even the Macchi and A4's were slapped around too by the press. When each of these mature and upgraded over time, they became much loved, or at least admired, and were sadly missed when retired. It is perennial problem of military aircraft that the manufacturers always understate the cost, overstate how quickly they can deliver and pump up the stats to get sales... no military aircraft has ever come in under budget, fully ready to go and capable of what was promised when the type was introduced. Nature of the beast, and this will one will be a beast when fully capable.
I knew the F-35 was good, but your incredibly detailed breakdown and analysis has blown me away. I saw the F-35B doing manoeuvres at RIAT2016 and for clueless teenage me it was cool, but didn't strike me as anything more than a faster stealth Harrier. How wrong I was. When you take into account all of the incredible characteristics of the F-35 family across the board, and how it's quickly becoming the frontline workhorse of the US and her allies worldwide, no amount of lazy criticisms or fearmongering over artificial cost numbers can detract from this incredible machine. The proof is in the pudding; it wouldn't be such a popular export fighter if it was a white elephant.
I saw the flight demonstration at Avalon, and chatted to a RAAF pilot. He was adamant that the F-35 was Australia's best and most important military acquisition. Funny how so many couch critics won't even bother to do so little..
EVERY pilot is going to tell you how good their aircraft is. Even if the aircraft is a flying turd, they will tell the public that it is great and that they love flying it.
@Boogieman If it is so Good then why is the Pentagon the DOD and plenty of US weapons experts have problems with it after Twenty years of development and have to reduce its abilities because it cant do what it was designed to do and why are the talking about making another 4+4 jet to do its job please tell me what this jet can do that other modern jets cant like the Gripen and the Rafale
Good video and very accurate. One of the major issues with this platform is that it was basically designed when social media became the norm. Gen1 jet (F-80, F-86, Mig-15) was just putting in a jet engine into a structure that was always occupied by pistons engines. The performances weren't that great over the top of the line piston engined aircraft Gen2 (F-100) As engines became more reliable and powerful, what became the norm was speed and height. F-105, for instance, flew at well over Mach 2 at 60,000 feet. It was just a race between USA and Soviet Union on who can fly faster and higher. Gen3 (F-4) With the advent of high flying surface to air missiles (as well as air to air, and some stupid experiments into air to air nuclear missiles), flying high and fast was not enough anymore. Electronic counter measures were coming into existence and a combination of A2A and A2G was desired. Gen4 (F-15, F-16) A gentleman named Boyd (who was very popular and had enormous influence in the fighter community, and who Sprey considers his mentor) said due to the ever increasing performance of missiles wanted a very maneuverable aircraft that can hold it's G's. The F-16 is the cumulation of the kind of thinking. Gen5 (F-22, F-35) With missiles becoming really and I mean really mature, maneuverability wasn't enough. So low observability and situational awareness became paramount. The problem with the F-35 is while it is the most advanced fighter in situational awareness and sensor fusion the world has ever produced, those are not things you can easily show off in an air show or tell the general public or fanboys about. The pilot really can't show it's capabilities in any meaningful way or say "It can track 100 fighters in any direction and outmanuever it for an advantageous engagement and will always shoot first against any enemy". The fanboy would yawn at that but show that fanboy a Sukhoi doing the Cobra (a totally useless move in any sort of combat) and he would piss himself in excitement. And no "journalists" or "military expert" ever mentions that adjusted for inflation, the F-35 costs about the same in 2020 as an F-16C would have in the ninties. Fun fact: The F-16, that most reliable workhorse the whole world loves, was known as the "Lawn Dart" because it had many many more issue than the F-35 ever had and had 15 times (yes 15 times. It kept crashing into the ground for no reason, so the pilots nicknamed it LawnDart)) more accidents than the F-35 during it's development period. Thank God social media wasn't around back then.
The F-16 was nicknamed the lawndart at one point? I thought that only applied to the F-104 Starfighter. Well guess it shows nothing starts off perfectly, both then and now.
@@casuallatecomer7597 F-16 and the B-1 Bomber had the nickname "Lawndart" in USAF. The German used the nickname "Lawndart" for their F-104G. There were many problems with the first century fighters such as F-104s but one of the major problems during German services was also the decade of not having an air force between 1945 to 1955. Most Luftwaffe aces of WW2 (such as Adolf Galland and Günther Rall) loved the F-104 but Eric Hartmann (top German Ace of WW2) thought Germany should not buy the F-104. He thought it was too advanced for the (by then) inexperience of the German pilots. He wanted to buy either F-86 or the F-100 because it wasn't that far advanced than the ME-262. The new technology and speed Killed alot of pilots in accidents. Also the F-104 was designed as a high speed high altitude interceptor but Germany (and other nations) used it as a low altitude Bomber, which also contributed to the accident rate. I'm not making excuses for the Starfighter. It was a coffin. But that usually happens to new technology. It was the first production mach 2 fighter after all. Same as the F-16 for the USAF. The new technology (fly by wire) in the F-16 killed alot of pilots for the simple reason they put too much pressure on the stick and it would performed high G maneuvers, causing the pilots to blackout.
@@KausnHavoksmall correction the F-104 was designed as a high-speed daytime fighter made to meet the requests of Korean war fighter pilots of a high altitude, high-speed fighter.
Air-to-air nukes were sort of okay. Keep in mind that, at the time, large formations of bombers were the expected delivery systems for proper nuclear weapons, and the Genie (and its guided counterpart whose name I can’t remember) was intended to essentially obliterate most if not all of a Soviet bomber group before it could do much damage. It’s also important to note that this was the Cold War, where completely moronic programs that would otherwise have been condemned as such and gotten the proposing officer an informal reprimand for terminal stupid were accepted and developed.
"And no "journalists" or "military expert" ever mentions that adjusted for inflation, the F-35 costs about the same in 2020 as an F-16C would have in the ninties." 1997 F-16C/D unit price: $19,000,000. Adjusted for inflation (82.1%) in 2022 dollars: $34,602,018.69 F-35A cost (Lot 14, most current delivery): $77,000,000 per unit ...I'm no math expert here, but... Yeah, no.
Finally someone did their homework. This plane is a beast in basic performance, computer systems and in a distributed tactical environment, rules the sky. The sheep will always bleat nonsense.
Yes, "homework". Did he mention the F-35 is limited to 40 to 50 seconds of afterburner? No. Did he mention that the F-35 has no supercruise? No. Did he mention that it could never reach the proposed Mach 1.6 top speed without seriously damaging the aft section of the aircraft, including control surfaces, and burning the stealth coating? No. Did he mention that pilots are still suffering from headaches, nausea, and overall attention deficit due to the oxygen system? No. Did he mention that firing the gun has been reported to cause cracks to form in the air frame and gun support structure? No. Did he mention that in the article he mentioned, the F-16 had an external fuel tank, and the F-35 flew empty, and still lost, and that the restricted software had no bearing on the result? And that the pilot himself noted the aircraft suffered from serious energy disadvantage throughout the fight? No. So can it fight? No, it can´t. Can it run? No, it can´t. Even in extremis, if the pilot uses the afterburner to get away, he better do it under one minute. Because if he has to run with afterburner for longer, he WILL damage the aircraft, thus hindering his escape even further. The author was very disingenuous at times, like listing the engine as the most powerful in a fighter, when regardless of that powerful engine the aircraft is still one of the slowest modern fighter in the US arsenal. All that extra power was crucial to lug around the extra weight, and counter the not so aerodynamic lines of the fat aircraft, and it still isn´t nearly enough. The F-22´s engine is less powerful, and yet it pushes it to Mach 2.2, and with supercruise. Obviously fans and detractors alike will always try to skew the results in favor/against. That is expected. But claiming he did his "homework" is obviously not true, and his bias was shinning throughout the video.
@@bruhmomento4590 Some will. Others are design problems, that require a complete redesign of certain components and structures. The afterburner thing will never get fixed unless a new engine nozzle is designed, and the entire tail is redesigned with sturdier materials. But an increase in weight will throw off the center of gravity, causing even more problems. So i think they will just leave it. The F-35 is an aircraft suited for low intensity conflicts, like fighting Iraq. If a proper war emerges, the intense maintenance requirements will tie up every hangar and personnel in a hurry. The entire fleet will end up grounded, because most Air Forces do not possess the maintenance infrastructure for a prolonged conflict. Just wait and see.
@@Biden_is_demented The Pentagon has already concluded that the afterburner problems are not very serious. After all, the bubbling and burning of the coatings and damage of the parts were seen after 4-5 hours of supersonic speeds and aggressive maneuvering. The test pilot himself said that nobody would do the moves he did in a combat scenario (the plane he flew was the one that had damage to tail components). Supercruise is not mandatory, and it is not intended to be an interceptor or anything of the sorts. Your third point I covered in my first paragraph. It can reach mach 1.6. Is it dangerous to do so? Who knows. Like the original pilot said, the blistering and damage seen was only evident after hours of extreme stress trials and high speed maneuvers at the edge of the Lightning's flight envelope. The oxygen issue is really what is worst. Multiple problems with it in every model im pretty sure. Though, with more software updates, I assume the problem will go away (unless it is a hardware problem, then things good). If an F-35 pilot is firing a gun, things are already pretty grim. It shouldn't have to get in range of anything to use guns. Regardless, still a big issue. A dogfight scenario is utterly useless when trying to determine the F-35's capability. Boo hoo, it lost to an F-16 in a dogfight. Well guess what. The F-35 would NEVER, EVER, be in a dogfight. Read the analysis when you get a minute. Dogfights are a thing of the past dude. That F-16 would be obliterated before seeing anything on radar. Can it fight? Absolutely. Passive sensors and one of the most powerful fighter radars in the world gives it an unprecedented view of the battlefield, both air, land, and sea. Pair it with, say, F-15EX's, and you've got a flying supercomputer that can see for hundreds of miles in any direction, and a truck that can lob BVR missiles to whatever the F-35 deems a threat. Can it run? In a pinch? Yes. Could it cause problems? Yes. Would it be shot at while running? Depends. It's not so easy getting a weapons grade track on something that shows up as a deck of cards on radar. Your points here are iffy. there are plenty of better arguments to be had against the F-35.
One of the things i have heard time and time again from Pilots who get in the F-35 for the first time is. Situational Awareness they all say its Jaw dropping how incredible it is and that is the most important thing in Warfare.
I've been sticking up for this excellent aircraft for years. Looking at the broader design goals from the start, it was clear that this was going to be a game changer. The UK Labour government made a good call, pouring billions into this to make the UK the sole tier 1 partner before a single airframe rolled off the line.
It’s good to hear amounts of dim wit inbreds from England. Easy to Fool you guys. If you would just think for one minute, and I know that’s not likely, but let’s suppose you do, you will see that everything that can be done with this aircraft can be done much better unmanned. And at a much lower cost, allowing for much higher numbers and much better mission capability. Thanks for being a tier 1 fool .. ha ha ha!
Wow! REALLY appreciate your research, scripting, and enunciation. This is possibly the *most* informative single video on the F35 that I have seen--and I have watched many over the last decade. Even tho' quite a bit of this info is out there, scattered about, you put it all together in a coherent compelling frame-work, setting the stage with Sprey & Co.'s disparagement and then factually dismantling each point. Great content. Instant new subscriber.
I notice you focus, in this video, on the F35 as a monolithic platform, comparing it directly, to competing platforms. But I think its leaves out a vital part of the equation. That is, the ability of the F35 to use its sensor suite and sensor fusion to rapidly disseminate combat data to other platforms is, imo, the actual strength of the Lightning. After listening to pilots who have flown the F35 as part of training operations, What really makes the F35 special is its ability to make all the other friendly platforms in the battlespace better. Because Lightning can integrate mass amounts of Data into it's computer, and then transmit this data in its contextualized form through fusion, it can give its monumental Situational awareness capabilities to everyone else flying allied flags. That means that not only does F35 have dominate awareness of the battlefield, but so does all of it's friends, to include fixed/rotary wing, and even surface platforms. This makes the F35 deadly, even if there are only one or two in the taskforce/formation and gives all of those adjacent platforms an edge in the battlespace over RedFor which must rely on each others individual situational awareness and task management abilities to keep each other apprised of what's going on. F35 can carry weapons, but I foresee the F35 very rarely needing to use those weapons, instead acting, as you detailed early in the video, as a stealthy AWACs which generates warning and targeting tracks for other friendlies to take the initiative on, notifying them of hostile weapons launches, helping them defeat those weapons and constantly updating them with new battlefield information all while allowing it to maintain it's stealthy aspect and stay hidden from ENY sensors. I think this is what makes F35 so attractive to allied nations. By acting like a networked force multiplier, it alleviates even the need to fully replace existing fleets of allied nations, instead functioning as a sort of outsourced update for them by incorporating the sensor and jamming packages that would be too costly to integrate into those 4th gen platforms, in effect upgrading them to 4.5 gen. If you buy a SU57, you get a 5th gen jet. If you buy F22, you get a 5th gen jet. If you buy F35, you get a 5th gen jet, and a stealthy, fast, AWACs that can also fight, but also, all of your other stuff is made more combat effective. This is one of the formative interviews in the development of my understanding of how the F35 integrates into the battlespace. ruclips.net/video/jUGND1LkUMI/видео.html
F-35 developer "What if Ace Combat was real?" But a good video that explains exactly why the f-35 is so great. Warfare is all about information and having a plane that is dedicated to situational awareness as the f-35, even just mixed in with legacy aircraft can absolutely be an asset. The moment I learned both its passive and active sensor capabilities I knew exactly why the F-35 is current best fighter in the world. anyone who has ever played a game knows just how important information about your adversary is. from the very beginning of aerial warfare being able to find your opponent first and strike from unseen (out of a cloud, or from the direction of the sun) directions has been key to a pilots success.
@@זהסודי-ה7מ >make AC real > realized the existence of gigantic superweapons >realized the capabilities of mounting said super weapons on fighter jets >stop I can only get so erect
The only great thing the F-35 has accomplished is it's cost overruns and delays. Look closely at all the bells and whistles the F-35's have with their system data link blah blah blah... then look at target nations who are busy developing anti-satellite missiles and ask yourself... will any of the F-35's stuff work if the Satellites are gone? These aircraft were supposed to be operational 10 years ago and 1 trillion dollars ago.
@@wrayday7149 Did you watched the video? The F35 program did not cost 1 trillion, someone was watching too much propaganda… The F35 is the most successful fighter program since the F16 and it continues to deliver (800 examples so far) You’re just wrong sorry.
@@CrayonEater255 The most successful at what? Destroying budgets? Delays? This is the most delayed program ever. Every time they got close to making this thing operational someone would come along and revamp something and have to start all over from scratch. You know how this program successfully failed? The aircraft they were meant to retire to free up budgets? They got newer variants.
At least the constant stream of detractors might lead to adversaries underestimating the F35's strategic significance. Also, I love it when people start talking about Russia's next gen fighters as if they are a legitimate challenge to U.S. air dominance. The U.S. and its allies plan to order in excess of 3000 F35s. Russia has ordered 77 SU-57s. At this point it almost doesn't matter how good the SU-57 ends up being when they are faced with such a numerical disparity. Not even starting on the logistical advantage the F35 has as a globally operated platform, or the fact that the SU-57 seems to be designed around a dated dog fighting paradigm when the F35 has moved on to a holistic war fighting paradigm.
The actual Russians that matter knew what the JSF program was before any of the keyboard idiots in the West, and they respected and described it in ways you never hear in the Western click-bait spammer sites or statements. The Su-57 is really primitive in comparison, not even safe for production since it suffers from adverse yaw problems aerodynamically. That’s why they lost the first production sample on its pre-delivery functional check flight. Went into an uncontrolled spin that the very experienced Sukhoi test pilot could not recover from no matter what he tried. The vertical stabs are too small, so the wings blank them out in high yaw rates, which makes it prone to departure in that axis. Then look at how it isn’t even a VLO platform, with all the right angle seam lines, exposed faces, RCS reflectors all over, huge gaps between the panels and especially the weapons bay doors, let alone the IR signature.
@@LRRPFco52 It would be fascinating to read a detailed adversarial analysis of the F35 from an actor like Russia. Just spit-balling, but given the last couple of decades I assume Russia's efforts would be focused on asymmetric and geopolitical strategies focused on keeping high end military actors locked out of direct engagement; but if that fails I assume they must have a plan B before resorting to things like tactical nuclear cruise missiles for A2DA and airfield contestation.
@@sir_vix They said that something was different this time in how much effort the US was putting into leveraging software vs hardware. They also said the comments from school-aged children who jump up and down like spastic child at air shows have nothing to do with air combat. This was coming from one of their senior aerospace analysts who seemed to be tied to Sukhoi. He was critical of the MiG-29 pointing out how everything looked great on paper for it, but since it had 2 engines, it cost about as much to build as an Su-27 with half its capabilities, whereas the F-16 went on to be the most successful single engine fighter in history. He then said the F-35 is poised to be just as successful, even more since it masters the age-old rule: He who sees first, wins.
@@sir_vix The J-20 & FC-31 are the most interesting fighters from a geopolitical and technological perspective. Several US Presidents and their families have been helping China acquire these technologies, which makes me suspect there is a hidden plan to prop up China as a rising super power. If China is able to move into Russia's former space as the 2nd fiddle to Foreign Military Sales of fighters, it will shift the balance of global power dramatically.
@@LRRPFco52 I don't know that there have been direct or indirect presidential involvement in the transfer of high level military technologies, but there have certainly been a number of notable hacking events targeted at high level military institutions (both U.S. and its allies) which could very well result in the same effect. Plus, once aware of a strategic technological paradigm, it is much easier for a large state actor to pursue parity and incremental improvement on that arena than it is to establish a new paradigm which breaks or supercedes those that preceded it. China does not lack for qualified scientists and engineers, and its not like the underlying concepts of military aviation are inherently mysterious at this point; it is just a matter of time and volume of incrementation to catch up. However my thinking is that China lacks the experience of building and operating those high end systems at maximum scale and tempo in a global theatre. Moreover it hasn't learnt the kind of institutional lessons the U.S. has by making mistakes and enduring the real consequences at every level and scale of operations - regardless of how many displays of infantry coordination and choreography they televise.
Another great video and insight... At least now I have a better understanding of the F-35, instead of the 'bad press' I have read in the past. Love this phrase... "Non-stealthy beast mode"!
It’s a stupid phrase. Why bother having stealth, and all its performance compromises, at all? You’d be dumb to fly this plane into contested airspace in that configuration.
As someone who has been working with this program for several years now, I must say I'm impressed at how much detail was put into this vid (and how much garbage was left out!). Many people don't remember when the Hornet first arrived, but it got a lot of hate too over the venerable F-14, and we all know what a beast it turned out to be. The F-35 is much much more so.
@@goodputin4324 how is the F35 more capable? In pretty much every way. Forget the hype videos. Watch the ones with pilot interviews. The ones on red flag. Jr pilots with 25-1 kill ratios. We used to call the Hornets "lawn darts" because of his limited the range was. They had to tank right off the cat. The thing is, we don't even know what the F35 can really do yet. We are just now learning how to fight it. Tactics etc. In another 10 years, nothing will touch it (not the much can now). Forget all the lack of "dogfighting" crap. You're dead 150 miles before you even know it's there.
I think I should also mention that I'm in maintenance. I'm not a pilot. I'm not privy to all the secret squirrel stuff. What I'm talking about is based on the stupid smiles the pilots come back with. The feedback we get from them. The amazement they have at their own success with it in training engagements. With how much better the OTHER aircraft are when flying WITH them. Eagles and Hornets are much much more deadly with a few F-35s around. There ARE technical issues to be solved. Things that don't even have to do with the plane itself (ships are having a hard time with them because of the heat the engine puts off for example. Aircraft carriers need JBD upgrades because of them). LHDs need deck reinforcement for the VSTOL ops for the same reason. Harriers were loud landing over your head, but these are a whole new level of power. It will take time, but they can already beat most anything in the sky. I know that's a lofty claim, but it really isn't about dogfighting anymore (it IS pretty capable though despite all the internet experts). It's about information. It's about who knows what FIRST.
And for good measure, here's a video from Hasard Lee who is an active duty AF F35 pilot giving his perspective. Great watch as well. ruclips.net/video/9eUDF6ICE0s/видео.html&ab_channel=HasardLee
The main problem with the early models of the F/A-18 was that MDD /Northrop just took the YF-17 and made a "multirole - fighter". When they built a "real fighter", instead of an demonstrator, then the F/A-18 delivered on it's promises.
I always thought this jet was cool. Just never thought the jet I thought was cool when I was a kid would only just be getting into service when I had a kid. I agree though that the F-35 is a good platform for what it was designed for. I'm glad the RAAF have them. We need that high tech advantage.
@@Steven-rr9qs Fair. Idk I would love it if it was just a niche model that the Marines used like the Harrier, but being front line in 3 different branches like man c'mon you're not that good lookin.
Hypo could you please consider doing one or multiple videos on Australian Armour and Cavalry. Maybe talking about one or multiple of the following the M1A1, the different APCs like the M113, Bushmaster, Hawkei, the Boxer CRV and the Land 400 phase 3 program.
If your a simmer like me and play DCS world, you can get a grasp of the kind of information overload / multitasking a fighter pilot has to do. Its absolutely insane what this aircraft is capable of doing for the pilots that fly it.
Of the F35's I've seen in DCS, they all look to be pretty much hobbled. Their performance is nowhere near RL. They look more like early pre-production/testing planes that have been restricted to 6g maneuvers. Vipers routinely outmaneuver and shoot them down, both in BFM and BVR. Yet, in IRL, the F16 gets owned every time they go up against an F35. Even F22 pilots that get into dogfights with F35's don't like to do so because it's not a done deal. So, I don't know what's going on in DCS.
@@carltanner9065 Well its a free mod with a made up flight model since we'll never have access to the F35 data in the near future. So it's not going to be realistic at all. Just fun to look at more or less.
Another well delivered analysis, really appreciate the Australian perspective especially in the light of some potential heavy lifting the ADF may face in the future.
I remember the same vilification aimed at the F111..Some of it bordering on mouth frothing rage!, one of the main reasons was, it was not British!..Many wanted the TSR 2!..There was problems with the 'wing carry through box's' on the F111, which occasionally caused them to drop off! Once that was fixed, it went on to become one of the most long lived and successful aircraft of it's type, because of upgrades and uprates it was superior to anything flying in it's era!
To me this seems like a fantastic airframe. When reading about new defence projects these days, be it tanks, ship or planes, I always wonder why the main epmphasize lies on firepower. What is all that going to do for you if your opponent outspots you by a margin and blows the Sh*t out of you? I mean look at the Karabakh conflict, most of those chaps that died there didn't even know they were in danger until it was too late. My sergeant always used to say: What you can see can shoot and what you can shoot you can kill.
It comes to planning, execution and logistics. Simply put, if you need to hit four targets with 2000lb bombs and a plane can only carry two, then you need to use at least two aircraft. You need to then make sure you have subsequent logics in place to get those fighters there.
@@wrayday7149 As compared to one aircraft with four bombs and sixteen others required to escort it in or degrade enemy air defense capabilities, because it doesn't have stealth or range. Or, y'know, fly a flight of F-35s into Syrian airspace, take pictures of their air defense system, and fly back out without being spotted.
Nothing makes me laugh more than people who cant look past the misinformation about the lightning As a kiwi its very reassuring to see the aussies investing in these jets. Its a shame successive goverments here since clarke have neglected or failed to understand the importance of being able to support you guys in ensuring the security of our region.
the extreme hard left PM Helen Clarke is a disgrace. It was Clarke who made the decision to disband the RNZAF's air arm Skyhawks, which were extremely useful in an inter-operability and bi lateral context with RAN and RAAF. A decision akin to the inept Malcolm Fraser Government-incoming Hawke Government decision to not replace HMAS Melbourne and Australia's critical air arm. What made this decision even more of a blunder was she was sold off for nothing to guess who? China, who re-engineered so many aspects, catobar arguably one of the most significant wins for the regime's history. Incompetent PM's Australia has had in spades.
@@williambroadstreet3353 calm down mate with respect to the NZ portion of your comment i don't like the disbanding of the strike wing but when you look at the numbers we just couldn't afford to keep the venerable old girls running. And if we had picked up the replacement F16 option i doubt we would've seen the required budget to maintain the capability, especially post GFC and the effect the on flowing government austerity finance policies had on defence.
Notice the F16 at 5:25. Two large external fuel tanks and a targeting pod! These cost extra and add weight and drag and decrease performance. The F 35 has room internally for the extra fuel and a built in targeting pod/electronic warfare suite in addition to room for two 2000 pound bombs and 2 AIM-120 missiles or 6 AIM-120 missiles internally (where they do not significantly affect kinematic performance). With a typical combat load the F35 can out turn a F16 and F18. In beast mode it can carry up to six 2000 pound bombs or 24 SDB. Oh did I mention, its stealth and ASEA radar that can also do SAR/maritime search.
@@SilverUndead They said the same in Vietnam until they needed them and didn't have them when they were too close for a sidewinder to arm. It's better to have it and not need it then need it and not have it. If you're doing close air support and run out of other ordinance, you better have a gun. Lives could depend on it.
@@SilverUndead The fact that it's 2022 has nothing to do with whether or not a fighter should have a cannon. As advanced as missiles have become, a gun will always be a necessity when you run out of missiles or they malfunction.
Some other differences between the models or 4th gen: - The F-35A is the only variant with an internal gun, the BAE 25mm GAU-22/A. - The F-33B & C can carry a gun pod made for those variants with the same gun and more rounds (220). - The gun uses the same ammunition that the Harrier 25mm gun can shoot including new rounds recently developed for the USAF and EPAF models. USAF developed a solid point AP round and USMC Harriers use a Semi-AP explosive round. - The F-35B is much easier to fly than the Harrier, with its advanced digital flight control system, pilots say its a breeze and just move the joy stick where you want the plane to go and FLCS does the rest, like playing an easy video game. - As mentioned in the video, Block-4 software bring a whole bunch of new weapons to the F-35 capability including some European/British made weapons. - Soon more power computers for the mission computers (called TR-3 refresh) will be added for Block-4 upgrades giving the jet even more capability to be upgraded more in the future. - A new engine is being developed (by GE & P&W) for the F-35A & C that will give it more range, fuel economy, thrust and cooling capacity. I am sure most don't know but the engine supplies the air that runs the jets environmental control system including the air-conditioning system! - The F-35A is getting certified for carrying only the B61-12 (currently in production now) which has a max yield (per Wiki) 340 kilotons. Older jets (F-16 & F-15) can deploy earlier B61 models. - The F-35s use a different ejection seat than other USAF, USMC & USN aircraft use, most US jets use versions of a system called ACES made by Goodrich the F-35 uses the British made Martin Baker seat which I believe is the creator of the first EJ Seat and is one of the biggest suppliers in the world.
A few years ago I spoke to an experienced F-22 pilot and he said (in his direct experience working in conjunction with the F-35 that its sensor fusion makes it capable beyond other platforms and he said the 35 is an excellent fighter. That's a 22 driver and his tone and body language expressed sincerity and deep respect for the 35.
New to your channel, and certainly very impressed with this video in particular. I always had the instinctive feeling that such an ambitious program, with its inevitable setbacks, would ultimately prove to be a future dominating platform i.e. death from above. Understanding its potential requires a generational shift in thinking. I will be excited to see Australia invest in more units. Thanks for the high-quality content, mate. I'll keep simming the Viper until I can get my hands on this incredible machine!
There you go again. Confusing people with the facts! The F-35 saga reminds me of the "Great Mirage Bungle" headlines of the mid sixties, until the Israelis started vacuuming the sky with them. And of the abuse heaped upon the F-111, depicted early on as 'likely to be the most maligned and regretted defence acquisition ever made by Australia". This sort of thing always seems to accompany the switch from one generation of things to the next. In the thirties the transition from "an airframe with an engine strong enough to pull it around" to "an airframe strong enough to keep up with the engine" had people finding it difficult to let go of biplanes and fabric skins. Similarly with the various generations of post-WW2 aircraft. Going from a straight jet to a swept back jet, to very fast, to very agile, to a heap of sensors and software streaking around unseen requires imagination and courage.
Tacit Dionysus exactly! I remember when the Australian government even considered trying to pull out of buying the F-111 and as we all know now it turned out to be one of the most capable strike aircraft of its time.
@@garyhankinson5695 Try to sell a people on something new and unfamiliar, and they will scoff and complain. Take it away from them and they will cry and moan endlessly about the sky falling.
Came here to make this point as well. There have been very few military purchases in history that haven't had some mud slung at the by media armchair warriors.
@@remielpollard787 The western media were fully penetrated by the Soviets by the 1950s with one of the most effective counter-propaganda programs ever launched in history. They had professors in journalist courses throughout major universities, who also helped recruit people into western foreign intelligence services. They co-opted the US's Mockingbird project so that instead of pro-US propaganda, it started pushing thinly-veiled anti-US propaganda with messaging controlled by Moscow, just as Moscow controlled messaging from the IOJ in Europe and abroad. They weaponized western media against itself, which is why you never get a sense of patriotism in western media, but leftist and anti-nationalist messaging.
*funny how 99.99% of the people on the internet and media the criticize the F-35 have never and will never even see one in person with their own eyes or much less touch one lol but they're "aviation experts" lmao good video btw*
I just found your channel last week, and I've just gotta say great job on these documentaries. High quality, well edited, detailed, well-researched. Well done, and keep up the good work!
I mean, he was RT's prime contact when they needed to shill for russian jets. That says enough. Now, down with the rest of the fighter mafia, stupid nut jobs.
Your so smart remembering all this info. You should be a adf advisor or something instead of explaining it to people like me. I’ve forgotten more then half the thing you’ve mentioned but but very interesting anyways. You should be rewarded for this keep up the good work champ
Should i mention how at one point an export version of the a10 was propposed and some eu countries were interested but after it's combat performance was tested by fire, they opted out, and now those same countries are going all in into the f35? *If that's not a sign of an upgrade, idk what is*
Cuz it’s nuclear capable unlike the A10. That’s about it. This plane is a pos boondoggle. Don’t let this slick video fool you. Just read into how the AF treats it. They can’t wait to move on to NGAD.
@@411bvRGiskard ofc they can't wait to move onto NGAD, the F22 can't remain top dog forever, there is no current plan to replace slick Amy. NGAD would serve alongside it and maybe seeing some replacement of superhornets well into the 2040s. Amy's funded all the way through and up to a 2.5 trillion cap so it's going nowhere.
The best non FUD explanation of why the F-35 is such a dangerous game changer of a fighter...It is the next gen sensor suite coupled to stealth. Speed and manuavabilty is useless when an F-35 has already tracked you and fired a missile before you ever even knew the F-35 was there.
F-35 criticisms on the web in a nutshell: uneducated armchair aeronautical engineers w/ too much free time claiming they know more about planes than the pilots who fly them and the professionals who design them
It’s a treat to listen to you. I usually prefer reading, but you make listening preferable - chock full of facts, to the point, well modulated. Well done!
History repeating itself. I remember the F111 having the same criticism, however once the bugs were sorted out it gave the USAF and RAAF 40+ years sterling service.
Best F-35 video to date... ever. Been following the F-35 since the 1996 when I was a kid. Janes ATF flight sim on PC introduced me to the X-32 and X-35. Its been a long time since then. I always knew it was a winner!
@@criticalevent And over six times less likely to be shot down than a Harrier. Aside from the F-22, it is the most survivable aircraft in the sky today, because you can't kill what you can't see.
@@criticalevent The F-35 won't kill your pilot. The price difference won't make up the difference to a grieving family when the plane inevitably crashes during landing or is shot down in conventional conflict.
I think we can all agree that the X-32s big frog mouth meant that unless it was literally unstoppable and a complete bargain, it would never be picked over the X-35 purely based off aesthetics.
28 to 1 kill ratio is awesome, further destroys the argument that the LHD’s couldn’t fit enough F35b on them to make it worthwhile. The navy need f35b for the sensor fusion as well, as the kill ratio. It is a pity that the defence minister doesn’t take advice from yourself rather than some of the stuff ASPI out. You made an other excellent documentary.
I think a lot comes down to money, they are even reluctantly considering cross decking capabilities but want the US and/or Japan to pay for the decks to be treated facilitating it.
I admire your ability to mislead your audience. Your deception is well hidden and only exposed in the details you selectively and systematically suppressed. This pig will get many pilots hurt.
@@douginorlando6260 You know, we have 390,000 flight hours on the cumulative multi-variant JSF fleet now after 15 years of flights. Let’s see how your claims hold up to reality. 630 JSF variants delivered 390,000 flight hours 4 crashes (2 F-35As and 2 F-35Bs, 1 from faulty fuel tube on the first F-35B, all 3 others pilot error) 1 fatality from Japanese F-35A where the pilot executed a controlled flight into terrain (water) Only 10 years into the teen series, Harrier, and A-10, we had: 427 total airframe losses (mostly crashes, missing aircraft at sea) 147 fatalities You were saying something about getting pilots hurt? These are just the facts. I lived through the development of the teen fighters with a front row seat near the USAF Flight Test Center and Naval Weapons Test Center at China Lake, and have spent decades with these programs. I counted up all the losses and fatalities of the F-14A, F-15A/B/C/D, F-16A/B/C/D, F/A-18A-D, AV-8A/B and TAV-8B, and A-10A for their first 10 years of flight. I will have to do it again to account for a 16 year period, which is where we are at with the F-35A. F-35B is almost 13 years now. F-35C is 10.8 years of flight since its maiden in 2010. That’s what really caught my attention with the JSF program more than anything at first. I kept expecting to hear of at least one prototype crashing, if not 2. 5 of the F-14A prototypes crashed from 1970-1974, then they started crashing in the fleet at a crazy rate every year. 5 F-14As crashed in 1975, 5 in 1976. 56 total losses in first 10 years. The F-15A-D was actually really safe with “only” 17 F-15A/B crashes from 1976-1979, and 19 more from 1980-1986, so roughly half of the F-14A crashes over their initial 10 years of flight. 18 fatalities. The F-16 crashed a ton in its first 10 years of service. By 1983, it had over a 671 Class A mishap rate per 100,000 flight hours, with all sorts of problems that needed to be fixed. The AV-8A and AV-8B Harrier were death traps, especially the AV-8A. The AV-8B currently has the highest Mishap rate of any fixed wing jet in US military service and has killed so many pilots, it’s disheartening. Within the AV-8A and Harrier’s first 10 years of flight, 100 total airframe losses and 20 fatalities. With the F/A-18 Hornet, same thing. 100 total airframe losses between USMC, USN, and Spanish Navy, 20 fatalities. A-10 was all jacked up too. The massive GAU-8 30mm 7 barrel gun caused gas ingestion engine failures repeatedly, and they had 57 total losses and 23 fatalities in its first 10 years of flight. 5 of those fatalities were people on the ground who died when the A-10s crashed into their homes. You were saying something about how the F-35 will hurt pilots? I hate being right about this, but there are the facts.
LRRPFco52 ... To get an unbiased insight into some of the deficiencies that are hidden from the public, watch the review of F35 accident investigation report by fighter pilot Lemoine. Search “Lemoine”. You will find the F35 accident investigation report states the pilot was injured by the canopy when ejecting. Furthermore, when the pilot tried to accelerate and go around on a landing because he was running out of runway, the F35’s defective software actively chose to ignore pilot input which is why the pilot was forced to eject. Furthermore, the reason the pilot ran out of runway was because the helmet symbology was both misaligned and helmet glow washed out the outside view which created uncertainty where the runway began. This accident investigation report reveals the truth about what F35 pilots have to put up with.
Superb analysis and commentary again, mate, particularly the detailed info about sensor fusion use in practice and the performance at red flag. Rarely as good an explanation of those at least on RUclips.
I commented on another video of yours, and agree with the consensus below that your presentation is superior to many other supposedly "in-the-know" video commentators. I will predict that a retrospective review 10 years from now will likely show the common historic thread among new weapons systems- early criticisms and vocal detractors, coupled with some technical challenges eventually progress to yield a capable platform that achieved its intended purpose (M-16 rifle, Arleigh-Burke class DDG, F-22 Raptor, etc.). Value is another conversation unto itself, as "cost effective" is a catch-all term that requires some contextual boundaries for valid comparisons to peer systems. Well done, Sir! 👏👏👏
I personally think this is a really attractive looking fighter. I’m wondering if they chose the wrong airplane in the trial with the X32. The one thing I wondered is as technology for defeating its stealth technology improves, will it be at a performance disadvantage. Your video helped clarify that misperception. Keep up the good work.
Anything that defeats stealth makes the skies too unsafe for conventional aircraft. Stealth becomes comventional, and what we used to call conventional becomes grounded. Stealth becomes the price of admission.
I think Ward Carroll has an interesting talk with someone that test flew the X32 on his channel. I think he said something about boeing having to fly it to a lower altitude airport to demonstrate its vtol. Lockheed did a vertical takeoff from the airport the X32 couldn't take off from, flew it to the airport the X32 was going to do the vtol from, and vertically landed it there. Nothing to do with stealth, but Lockheed's tech was just more advanced, although that also meant more complexity in some areas.
Cobra Maneuver... great in Air Shows and coming down on a fast break in Basketball when quickly pulling up from the Free Throw line for a jump shot as the defense passé by lol!
Great presentation. Thanks heaps. Always thought this was a WOFTAM as it was a research project, and our needs would be closer to the Russians with Oz being a big country and all. Explaining the grand scheme that this aircraft is part of clears things up a lot.
The network capability of a flight of F-35 working together is also what set it above the legacy fighters. A group of four F-35 working together is much more effective that a group of four F-16.
@@idanceforpennies281 Nah if it's shit pilots will be the first to call it out, plenty of planes have a reputatutaion because pilots hate it. over the RAAF, RAF, USAF, USMC, USN I've not heard any outstanding issues, the cost is not a worry to the pilot
I never got the media over this fighter. I work in IT and i know what its like when ppl who dont know what they are talking about having a "legitimate" view on whatever. I dont know anything about jet fighters so i dont have any insights into something i am not a expert. Simple.
You got almost everything right. Such a relief from all the misinformation on the F-35. But since both USAF Generals Bogdan and Hostage have said that the F-35 is more stealthy than the F-22, we must conclude the F-35 frontal RCS is at least .0001M2
Nearly ever American ally is buying some of these fighters and people sitting in their mom's basement will watch one video about it and declare it shit.
If F-35 were marketed by Sukhoi with 'Su' in the name, the jet would be touted as flawless and invincible from the first day of testing.
However, only 12 would end up ever being built.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
And of those twelve, four would crash and three would be dismantled for parts to keep the last few running.
ah yes, individuals who know that Russia is a joke.
It's beautiful, I've seen too many people screaming "Russia on top!"
Strange considering that Russia's su57 was touted for the last decade as a massive failure so not sure where you are getting that information (ofc that's as unjustified as claiming the F35 is a failure). About the replies "confirming" the Russian military is a joke, I guess the surgical dismantling of the largest NATO army in Europe (with more forces than Russia and allies has deployed), with an extra 50 bn in aid, half of which is military aid, isn't enough to convince arm chair generals that Russian's mean business. The US military knows this ofc which is why the Pentagon is very upset with how the state department and white house is mishandling current conflicts that America is a part of, but also the mishandling of the defense budget for bloated defense contracts that do not seem to give the US military what it really needs.
@@TheCabbageMan Well that was a big load of sweet fuck all. Ukraine isn't even IN NATO you stupid berk. If it was, this would never have happened at all, and if it did, it would've been over real quick.
These are very well considered, researched and professionally presented contributions. Please keep up this great work.
nope
Ho ho
Can we just pause to appreciate that we get this level of info for free here on RUclips?
I mean, I'm a nobody from Slovenia who gets to understand the strengths of F35s, just because I believe getting Ukraine'd is not how I want ANYONE to end up ^^
Anyways, thank you for your service & protection, I'll do what I can to make us deserve it
@@elektrotehnik94 that is very very true!
Knowing what I know about military procurement, I wouldn't be surprised if the F-35 beat the F-32 mostly because the F-32 looked stupid lol
Currently studying for the RAAF officer selection board and I have to say, out of all of the material online I’ve been studying, this channel has some of the best information and analysis out there on the ADF and related affairs. Please keep up the good work mate!!
Good luck with your future prospects brother!
Did you get in there yet mate?
@@YaMomsOyster got recommended at OSB which I’m so over the moon about. Just holding out for that letter of offer now 🤞
@@willb4295 oh sweet, I don’t what that means but it sounds positive for you. Congratulations mate, work hard and stick with it .
@@YaMomsOyster OSB=Officer Selection Board. Before OCDTs can enter as OCDTs they must first pass an OSB which is basically a board of senior officers that conduct a cross examination and interview on you to determine your "suitability" to become an officer.
This video is THE most comprehensive appraisal of the F35 I have seen. I am grateful to live under its protection.
Can confirm. Excellent analysis.
My Electrical Engineering degree & interest in the military sphere, kept me informed enough to understand most of what was said.
Given the Ukraine situation, I'm glad the West has such a dominant fighter being produced in numbers. Volume manufacturing is the king.
With Love from Slovenia
Its decent, but no were near this, straight from a Legend in Billie Flynn whose flown every F35 variant made. ruclips.net/video/jUGND1LkUMI/видео.html
@@elektrotehnik94 What Ukie situation, they are surrendering in droves rather than being ground into fertilizer by the Russian freedom fighters. Moon of Alabama
- or at least under the illusion of whatever protection you choose to see.
@@TommyTCGT That comment really didn’t age well.
Pierre Sprey's condemnation of the F-35 is the best praise I've heard for it.
Pierre sprey was also an idiot and im pretty sure he is the one that said the F-16 didnt need a radar.
@@koekiejam18 That is correct my friend, on both counts!
@@trplankowner3323 haha thanks for confirming that!
Best praise I ever heard was from a chief mechanic, he said it was bloody easy to work on and designed from the start to be easy to work on.
Said he loved it over other planes for that reason.
@@BeKindToBirds That is high praise. As a former US Navy nuclear plant mechanic, I know that being able to work on your machines is one of the best attributes it can have.
Rare to find a youtube video with this level of accuracy and insights. In the end, all fighter programs goes through development troubles, and problems that even persist long after they are operational. Today's F-35 criticism mirrors that of the F-16 back in the 70s and I'm old enough to recall all the flak the Gripen received in the Swedish media: serious technical troubles, accidents, large cost overruns, delays and so on. But both the F-16 and Gripen trurned out fine aircrafts, as will the F-35.
Or the F111, it was late, way over budget and had issues with cracking and crashing, but come retirement after over 35 years of service, many a tear was shed.
Anyway, the air war isn't won at airshows.
F111 was not so good at first,we loved by 2010 we hated losing it.🇭🇲
@@hoyks1 Oh, yes!
@Dick Izzinya It's a lawn dart because of the single engine. Which was why all branches specifically wanted twin engines so the plane could get home if it lost one. All hail the F-35 Lawn Dart 2.
@@wrayday7149 Single engine a major issue anymore because engines have become much more reliable with modern technology.
People seem to forget that the WW2 fighter era has long been gone. Dogfights are almost a thing of the past. Manouverability and speed arent the only things that make a fighter good.
Even during WW2, fighters avoided dogfights as much as possible
You are right, Sir.
But still there is stealth, vertical landing... and for dogfights - in case such a situation would come up: there is a Eurofighter, a Rafale, a Gripen, ...the F22.
a jet really doesn't need to turn when most missiles can do 15~g manouvers, (number varies depending on what missile it is) the era of two aircraft turnfighting and blasting guns eachother is long gone, and even if its preformance is not as good as other aircraft, thats like expecting an 11 year old to be able to do taxes, drive a car and know how to boxfight.
it'd be more fair to compare the f-35 to other aircraft at their early times (ie: comparing the f-22 5 years after it was put into production to the f-35 5 years after it was put into production)
Yes and no. There will always be the Cunningham vs Toon battle, though that might be 2% of the overall air combat activity. The other 98% is the gomer floating to earth via parachute wondering what happened. (never saw the shooter)
@@eskeline The only production jet I can think of that can truly out-turn a missile is the F22, and the pilot would basically melt into soup in a 15G+ turn (even if the aircraft can do it)
I am old enough to remember the Mirage being useless, the F-111 being overpriced, late and not worth it and the F-18 being an overpriced lemon... Geez, even the Macchi and A4's were slapped around too by the press.
When each of these mature and upgraded over time, they became much loved, or at least admired, and were sadly missed when retired.
It is perennial problem of military aircraft that the manufacturers always understate the cost, overstate how quickly they can deliver and pump up the stats to get sales... no military aircraft has ever come in under budget, fully ready to go and capable of what was promised when the type was introduced.
Nature of the beast, and this will one will be a beast when fully capable.
You don't understand this is a flop
@@goodputin4324 same shit they said with f22
@@goodputin4324 jesus shut up.
Hundreds of these early Turkeys will be decommissioned before it’s fully operational with block 4. What a wasteful POS plane.
TBf i think the P-80 may have come early, under budget, and lived up to expectations. But that’s such an outlier that’s it’s insane
I knew the F-35 was good, but your incredibly detailed breakdown and analysis has blown me away. I saw the F-35B doing manoeuvres at RIAT2016 and for clueless teenage me it was cool, but didn't strike me as anything more than a faster stealth Harrier. How wrong I was.
When you take into account all of the incredible characteristics of the F-35 family across the board, and how it's quickly becoming the frontline workhorse of the US and her allies worldwide, no amount of lazy criticisms or fearmongering over artificial cost numbers can detract from this incredible machine. The proof is in the pudding; it wouldn't be such a popular export fighter if it was a white elephant.
I saw the flight demonstration at Avalon, and chatted to a RAAF pilot.
He was adamant that the F-35 was Australia's best and most important military acquisition.
Funny how so many couch critics won't even bother to do so little..
Sure mate. A pilot is gona stand there and tell a air show Muppet it's shit
The RAAF is one of the most aggressive operators of JSF. If you get a chance to see their demo, they drive it like they stole it.
I talked to probably the same pilots at Avalon 2019. They sung there praises of the platform.
EVERY pilot is going to tell you how good their aircraft is. Even if the aircraft is a flying turd, they will tell the public that it is great and that they love flying it.
@Boogieman If it is so Good then why is the Pentagon the DOD and plenty of US weapons experts have problems with it after Twenty years of development and have to reduce its abilities because it cant do what it was designed to do
and why are the talking about making another 4+4 jet to do its job please tell me what this jet can do that other modern jets cant like the Gripen and the Rafale
This is easily one of the best breakdowns of the F-35. Excellent work!
Yo I love your videos
Good video and very accurate.
One of the major issues with this platform is that it was basically designed when social media became the norm.
Gen1 jet (F-80, F-86, Mig-15) was just putting in a jet engine into a structure that was always occupied by pistons engines. The performances weren't that great over the top of the line piston engined aircraft
Gen2 (F-100) As engines became more reliable and powerful, what became the norm was speed and height. F-105, for instance, flew at well over Mach 2 at 60,000 feet. It was just a race between USA and Soviet Union on who can fly faster and higher.
Gen3 (F-4) With the advent of high flying surface to air missiles (as well as air to air, and some stupid experiments into air to air nuclear missiles), flying high and fast was not enough anymore. Electronic counter measures were coming into existence and a combination of A2A and A2G was desired.
Gen4 (F-15, F-16) A gentleman named Boyd (who was very popular and had enormous influence in the fighter community, and who Sprey considers his mentor) said due to the ever increasing performance of missiles wanted a very maneuverable aircraft that can hold it's G's. The F-16 is the cumulation of the kind of thinking.
Gen5 (F-22, F-35) With missiles becoming really and I mean really mature, maneuverability wasn't enough. So low observability and situational awareness became paramount.
The problem with the F-35 is while it is the most advanced fighter in situational awareness and sensor fusion the world has ever produced, those are not things you can easily show off in an air show or tell the general public or fanboys about. The pilot really can't show it's capabilities in any meaningful way or say "It can track 100 fighters in any direction and outmanuever it for an advantageous engagement and will always shoot first against any enemy". The fanboy would yawn at that but show that fanboy a Sukhoi doing the Cobra (a totally useless move in any sort of combat) and he would piss himself in excitement.
And no "journalists" or "military expert" ever mentions that adjusted for inflation, the F-35 costs about the same in 2020 as an F-16C would have in the ninties.
Fun fact: The F-16, that most reliable workhorse the whole world loves, was known as the "Lawn Dart" because it had many many more issue than the F-35 ever had and had 15 times (yes 15 times. It kept crashing into the ground for no reason, so the pilots nicknamed it LawnDart)) more accidents than the F-35 during it's development period. Thank God social media wasn't around back then.
The F-16 was nicknamed the lawndart at one point? I thought that only applied to the F-104 Starfighter. Well guess it shows nothing starts off perfectly, both then and now.
@@casuallatecomer7597 F-16 and the B-1 Bomber had the nickname "Lawndart" in USAF. The German used the nickname "Lawndart" for their F-104G. There were many problems with the first century fighters such as F-104s but one of the major problems during German services was also the decade of not having an air force between 1945 to 1955. Most Luftwaffe aces of WW2 (such as Adolf Galland and Günther Rall) loved the F-104 but Eric Hartmann (top German Ace of WW2) thought Germany should not buy the F-104. He thought it was too advanced for the (by then) inexperience of the German pilots. He wanted to buy either F-86 or the F-100 because it wasn't that far advanced than the ME-262.
The new technology and speed Killed alot of pilots in accidents.
Also the F-104 was designed as a high speed high altitude interceptor but Germany (and other nations) used it as a low altitude Bomber, which also contributed to the accident rate. I'm not making excuses for the Starfighter. It was a coffin. But that usually happens to new technology. It was the first production mach 2 fighter after all.
Same as the F-16 for the USAF. The new technology (fly by wire) in the F-16 killed alot of pilots for the simple reason they put too much pressure on the stick and it would performed high G maneuvers, causing the pilots to blackout.
@@KausnHavoksmall correction the F-104 was designed as a high-speed daytime fighter made to meet the requests of Korean war fighter pilots of a high altitude, high-speed fighter.
Air-to-air nukes were sort of okay. Keep in mind that, at the time, large formations of bombers were the expected delivery systems for proper nuclear weapons, and the Genie (and its guided counterpart whose name I can’t remember) was intended to essentially obliterate most if not all of a Soviet bomber group before it could do much damage.
It’s also important to note that this was the Cold War, where completely moronic programs that would otherwise have been condemned as such and gotten the proposing officer an informal reprimand for terminal stupid were accepted and developed.
"And no "journalists" or "military expert" ever mentions that adjusted for inflation, the F-35 costs about the same in 2020 as an F-16C would have in the ninties."
1997 F-16C/D unit price: $19,000,000.
Adjusted for inflation (82.1%) in 2022 dollars: $34,602,018.69
F-35A cost (Lot 14, most current delivery): $77,000,000 per unit
...I'm no math expert here, but... Yeah, no.
Finally someone did their homework. This plane is a beast in basic performance, computer systems and in a distributed tactical environment, rules the sky. The sheep will always bleat nonsense.
Yes, "homework". Did he mention the F-35 is limited to 40 to 50 seconds of afterburner? No.
Did he mention that the F-35 has no supercruise? No.
Did he mention that it could never reach the proposed Mach 1.6 top speed without seriously damaging the aft section of the aircraft, including control surfaces, and burning the stealth coating? No.
Did he mention that pilots are still suffering from headaches, nausea, and overall attention deficit due to the oxygen system? No.
Did he mention that firing the gun has been reported to cause cracks to form in the air frame and gun support structure? No.
Did he mention that in the article he mentioned, the F-16 had an external fuel tank, and the F-35 flew empty, and still lost, and that the restricted software had no bearing on the result? And that the pilot himself noted the aircraft suffered from serious energy disadvantage throughout the fight? No.
So can it fight? No, it can´t. Can it run? No, it can´t. Even in extremis, if the pilot uses the afterburner to get away, he better do it under one minute. Because if he has to run with afterburner for longer, he WILL damage the aircraft, thus hindering his escape even further.
The author was very disingenuous at times, like listing the engine as the most powerful in a fighter, when regardless of that powerful engine the aircraft is still one of the slowest modern fighter in the US arsenal. All that extra power was crucial to lug around the extra weight, and counter the not so aerodynamic lines of the fat aircraft, and it still isn´t nearly enough. The F-22´s engine is less powerful, and yet it pushes it to Mach 2.2, and with supercruise.
Obviously fans and detractors alike will always try to skew the results in favor/against. That is expected. But claiming he did his "homework" is obviously not true, and his bias was shinning throughout the video.
@@Biden_is_demented do you think the problems of the F-35 will ever get fixed? I’m pretty curious
@@bruhmomento4590 Some will. Others are design problems, that require a complete redesign of certain components and structures. The afterburner thing will never get fixed unless a new engine nozzle is designed, and the entire tail is redesigned with sturdier materials. But an increase in weight will throw off the center of gravity, causing even more problems. So i think they will just leave it.
The F-35 is an aircraft suited for low intensity conflicts, like fighting Iraq. If a proper war emerges, the intense maintenance requirements will tie up every hangar and personnel in a hurry. The entire fleet will end up grounded, because most Air Forces do not possess the maintenance infrastructure for a prolonged conflict. Just wait and see.
@@Biden_is_demented so it’s basically a terrible idea to put f35Cs on carriers since they’re not good for a full scale conflict with China?
@@Biden_is_demented The Pentagon has already concluded that the afterburner problems are not very serious. After all, the bubbling and burning of the coatings and damage of the parts were seen after 4-5 hours of supersonic speeds and aggressive maneuvering. The test pilot himself said that nobody would do the moves he did in a combat scenario (the plane he flew was the one that had damage to tail components).
Supercruise is not mandatory, and it is not intended to be an interceptor or anything of the sorts.
Your third point I covered in my first paragraph. It can reach mach 1.6. Is it dangerous to do so? Who knows. Like the original pilot said, the blistering and damage seen was only evident after hours of extreme stress trials and high speed maneuvers at the edge of the Lightning's flight envelope.
The oxygen issue is really what is worst. Multiple problems with it in every model im pretty sure. Though, with more software updates, I assume the problem will go away (unless it is a hardware problem, then things good).
If an F-35 pilot is firing a gun, things are already pretty grim. It shouldn't have to get in range of anything to use guns. Regardless, still a big issue.
A dogfight scenario is utterly useless when trying to determine the F-35's capability. Boo hoo, it lost to an F-16 in a dogfight. Well guess what. The F-35 would NEVER, EVER, be in a dogfight. Read the analysis when you get a minute. Dogfights are a thing of the past dude. That F-16 would be obliterated before seeing anything on radar.
Can it fight? Absolutely. Passive sensors and one of the most powerful fighter radars in the world gives it an unprecedented view of the battlefield, both air, land, and sea. Pair it with, say, F-15EX's, and you've got a flying supercomputer that can see for hundreds of miles in any direction, and a truck that can lob BVR missiles to whatever the F-35 deems a threat.
Can it run? In a pinch? Yes. Could it cause problems? Yes. Would it be shot at while running? Depends. It's not so easy getting a weapons grade track on something that shows up as a deck of cards on radar.
Your points here are iffy. there are plenty of better arguments to be had against the F-35.
One of the things i have heard time and time again from Pilots who get in the F-35 for the first time is. Situational Awareness they all say its Jaw dropping how incredible it is and that is the most important thing in Warfare.
I've been sticking up for this excellent aircraft for years. Looking at the broader design goals from the start, it was clear that this was going to be a game changer. The UK Labour government made a good call, pouring billions into this to make the UK the sole tier 1 partner before a single airframe rolled off the line.
It’s good to hear amounts of dim wit inbreds from England. Easy to Fool you guys. If you would just think for one minute, and I know that’s not likely, but let’s suppose you do, you will see that everything that can be done with this aircraft can be done much better unmanned. And at a much lower cost, allowing for much higher numbers and much better mission capability. Thanks for being a tier 1 fool .. ha ha ha!
This is one of the only accurate videos on the JSF I’ve seen in recent days. You did an excellent job on this.
Wow! REALLY appreciate your research, scripting, and enunciation. This is possibly the *most* informative single video on the F35 that I have seen--and I have watched many over the last decade. Even tho' quite a bit of this info is out there, scattered about, you put it all together in a coherent compelling frame-work, setting the stage with Sprey & Co.'s disparagement and then factually dismantling each point. Great content. Instant new subscriber.
I notice you focus, in this video, on the F35 as a monolithic platform, comparing it directly, to competing platforms. But I think its leaves out a vital part of the equation. That is, the ability of the F35 to use its sensor suite and sensor fusion to rapidly disseminate combat data to other platforms is, imo, the actual strength of the Lightning. After listening to pilots who have flown the F35 as part of training operations, What really makes the F35 special is its ability to make all the other friendly platforms in the battlespace better. Because Lightning can integrate mass amounts of Data into it's computer, and then transmit this data in its contextualized form through fusion, it can give its monumental Situational awareness capabilities to everyone else flying allied flags.
That means that not only does F35 have dominate awareness of the battlefield, but so does all of it's friends, to include fixed/rotary wing, and even surface platforms. This makes the F35 deadly, even if there are only one or two in the taskforce/formation and gives all of those adjacent platforms an edge in the battlespace over RedFor which must rely on each others individual situational awareness and task management abilities to keep each other apprised of what's going on. F35 can carry weapons, but I foresee the F35 very rarely needing to use those weapons, instead acting, as you detailed early in the video, as a stealthy AWACs which generates warning and targeting tracks for other friendlies to take the initiative on, notifying them of hostile weapons launches, helping them defeat those weapons and constantly updating them with new battlefield information all while allowing it to maintain it's stealthy aspect and stay hidden from ENY sensors.
I think this is what makes F35 so attractive to allied nations. By acting like a networked force multiplier, it alleviates even the need to fully replace existing fleets of allied nations, instead functioning as a sort of outsourced update for them by incorporating the sensor and jamming packages that would be too costly to integrate into those 4th gen platforms, in effect upgrading them to 4.5 gen.
If you buy a SU57, you get a 5th gen jet. If you buy F22, you get a 5th gen jet. If you buy F35, you get a 5th gen jet, and a stealthy, fast, AWACs that can also fight, but also, all of your other stuff is made more combat effective.
This is one of the formative interviews in the development of my understanding of how the F35 integrates into the battlespace.
ruclips.net/video/jUGND1LkUMI/видео.html
Finally, someone outside of military circles who understands modern aerial combat and its complexities. Great job.
That little flex on the famous fighter mafia at the end made me chuckle. Very comprehensive and imformative piece. Thx!
F-35 developer "What if Ace Combat was real?" But a good video that explains exactly why the f-35 is so great. Warfare is all about information and having a plane that is dedicated to situational awareness as the f-35, even just mixed in with legacy aircraft can absolutely be an asset. The moment I learned both its passive and active sensor capabilities I knew exactly why the F-35 is current best fighter in the world. anyone who has ever played a game knows just how important information about your adversary is. from the very beginning of aerial warfare being able to find your opponent first and strike from unseen (out of a cloud, or from the direction of the sun) directions has been key to a pilots success.
all we need to make AC real is to find a way to stuff 180 missiles into that thing
@@זהסודי-ה7מ >make AC real
> realized the existence of gigantic superweapons
>realized the capabilities of mounting said super weapons on fighter jets
>stop I can only get so erect
The only great thing the F-35 has accomplished is it's cost overruns and delays. Look closely at all the bells and whistles the F-35's have with their system data link blah blah blah... then look at target nations who are busy developing anti-satellite missiles and ask yourself... will any of the F-35's stuff work if the Satellites are gone?
These aircraft were supposed to be operational 10 years ago and 1 trillion dollars ago.
@@wrayday7149 Did you watched the video? The F35 program did not cost 1 trillion, someone was watching too much propaganda…
The F35 is the most successful fighter program since the F16 and it continues to deliver (800 examples so far) You’re just wrong sorry.
@@CrayonEater255 The most successful at what? Destroying budgets? Delays? This is the most delayed program ever. Every time they got close to making this thing operational someone would come along and revamp something and have to start all over from scratch.
You know how this program successfully failed? The aircraft they were meant to retire to free up budgets? They got newer variants.
At least the constant stream of detractors might lead to adversaries underestimating the F35's strategic significance.
Also, I love it when people start talking about Russia's next gen fighters as if they are a legitimate challenge to U.S. air dominance. The U.S. and its allies plan to order in excess of 3000 F35s. Russia has ordered 77 SU-57s. At this point it almost doesn't matter how good the SU-57 ends up being when they are faced with such a numerical disparity. Not even starting on the logistical advantage the F35 has as a globally operated platform, or the fact that the SU-57 seems to be designed around a dated dog fighting paradigm when the F35 has moved on to a holistic war fighting paradigm.
The actual Russians that matter knew what the JSF program was before any of the keyboard idiots in the West, and they respected and described it in ways you never hear in the Western click-bait spammer sites or statements. The Su-57 is really primitive in comparison, not even safe for production since it suffers from adverse yaw problems aerodynamically. That’s why they lost the first production sample on its pre-delivery functional check flight. Went into an uncontrolled spin that the very experienced Sukhoi test pilot could not recover from no matter what he tried. The vertical stabs are too small, so the wings blank them out in high yaw rates, which makes it prone to departure in that axis.
Then look at how it isn’t even a VLO platform, with all the right angle seam lines, exposed faces, RCS reflectors all over, huge gaps between the panels and especially the weapons bay doors, let alone the IR signature.
@@LRRPFco52 It would be fascinating to read a detailed adversarial analysis of the F35 from an actor like Russia. Just spit-balling, but given the last couple of decades I assume Russia's efforts would be focused on asymmetric and geopolitical strategies focused on keeping high end military actors locked out of direct engagement; but if that fails I assume they must have a plan B before resorting to things like tactical nuclear cruise missiles for A2DA and airfield contestation.
@@sir_vix They said that something was different this time in how much effort the US was putting into leveraging software vs hardware. They also said the comments from school-aged children who jump up and down like spastic child at air shows have nothing to do with air combat. This was coming from one of their senior aerospace analysts who seemed to be tied to Sukhoi.
He was critical of the MiG-29 pointing out how everything looked great on paper for it, but since it had 2 engines, it cost about as much to build as an Su-27 with half its capabilities, whereas the F-16 went on to be the most successful single engine fighter in history. He then said the F-35 is poised to be just as successful, even more since it masters the age-old rule: He who sees first, wins.
@@sir_vix The J-20 & FC-31 are the most interesting fighters from a geopolitical and technological perspective.
Several US Presidents and their families have been helping China acquire these technologies, which makes me suspect there is a hidden plan to prop up China as a rising super power.
If China is able to move into Russia's former space as the 2nd fiddle to Foreign Military Sales of fighters, it will shift the balance of global power dramatically.
@@LRRPFco52 I don't know that there have been direct or indirect presidential involvement in the transfer of high level military technologies, but there have certainly been a number of notable hacking events targeted at high level military institutions (both U.S. and its allies) which could very well result in the same effect. Plus, once aware of a strategic technological paradigm, it is much easier for a large state actor to pursue parity and incremental improvement on that arena than it is to establish a new paradigm which breaks or supercedes those that preceded it. China does not lack for qualified scientists and engineers, and its not like the underlying concepts of military aviation are inherently mysterious at this point; it is just a matter of time and volume of incrementation to catch up.
However my thinking is that China lacks the experience of building and operating those high end systems at maximum scale and tempo in a global theatre. Moreover it hasn't learnt the kind of institutional lessons the U.S. has by making mistakes and enduring the real consequences at every level and scale of operations - regardless of how many displays of infantry coordination and choreography they televise.
'A trouble past does not mean a troubled future', just look at the Collins class for an example of that. Good Job. Looking forward to your next video
The Collins have been fixed.
Another great video and insight... At least now I have a better understanding of the F-35, instead of the 'bad press' I have read in the past.
Love this phrase... "Non-stealthy beast mode"!
It’s a stupid phrase. Why bother having stealth, and all its performance compromises, at all? You’d be dumb to fly this plane into contested airspace in that configuration.
@@411bvRGiskard I would want stealth tech to help with mitigation. Thus making it more versatile. Kind of like how window wipers were added to cars.
Legend. Thanks for the excellent content mate- love your work!
As someone who has been working with this program for several years now, I must say I'm impressed at how much detail was put into this vid (and how much garbage was left out!). Many people don't remember when the Hornet first arrived, but it got a lot of hate too over the venerable F-14, and we all know what a beast it turned out to be. The F-35 is much much more so.
How so?
@@goodputin4324 how is the F35 more capable? In pretty much every way. Forget the hype videos. Watch the ones with pilot interviews. The ones on red flag. Jr pilots with 25-1 kill ratios. We used to call the Hornets "lawn darts" because of his limited the range was. They had to tank right off the cat. The thing is, we don't even know what the F35 can really do yet. We are just now learning how to fight it. Tactics etc. In another 10 years, nothing will touch it (not the much can now). Forget all the lack of "dogfighting" crap. You're dead 150 miles before you even know it's there.
I think I should also mention that I'm in maintenance. I'm not a pilot. I'm not privy to all the secret squirrel stuff. What I'm talking about is based on the stupid smiles the pilots come back with. The feedback we get from them. The amazement they have at their own success with it in training engagements. With how much better the OTHER aircraft are when flying WITH them. Eagles and Hornets are much much more deadly with a few F-35s around. There ARE technical issues to be solved. Things that don't even have to do with the plane itself (ships are having a hard time with them because of the heat the engine puts off for example. Aircraft carriers need JBD upgrades because of them). LHDs need deck reinforcement for the VSTOL ops for the same reason. Harriers were loud landing over your head, but these are a whole new level of power. It will take time, but they can already beat most anything in the sky. I know that's a lofty claim, but it really isn't about dogfighting anymore (it IS pretty capable though despite all the internet experts). It's about information. It's about who knows what FIRST.
And for good measure, here's a video from Hasard Lee who is an active duty AF F35 pilot giving his perspective. Great watch as well. ruclips.net/video/9eUDF6ICE0s/видео.html&ab_channel=HasardLee
The main problem with the early models of the F/A-18 was that MDD /Northrop just took the YF-17 and made a "multirole - fighter". When they built a "real fighter", instead of an demonstrator, then the F/A-18 delivered on it's promises.
Your channel is SO underrated! (y)
I always thought this jet was cool. Just never thought the jet I thought was cool when I was a kid would only just be getting into service when I had a kid. I agree though that the F-35 is a good platform for what it was designed for. I'm glad the RAAF have them. We need that high tech advantage.
It is not ugly.
The X-32 was, arguably, pretty ugly, but not the 35. I find it quite a good looking plane.
call a spade a spade, its ugly as shit.
@@shoeby9273 Beauty is in the eye...
@@Steven-rr9qs Fair. Idk I would love it if it was just a niche model that the Marines used like the Harrier, but being front line in 3 different branches like man c'mon you're not that good lookin.
@@shoeby9273 Honestly I really like how the F-35 looks
It's beautiful ;
Hypo could you please consider doing one or multiple videos on Australian Armour and Cavalry. Maybe talking about one or multiple of the following the M1A1, the different APCs like the M113, Bushmaster, Hawkei, the Boxer CRV and the Land 400 phase 3 program.
i second this! Add the Apache buy vs Tiger into it also
+1 I'd love to hear more about the Hawkei
@@captaron we given the guy content for months here LOL
Yeah mate I'll do a guide to the Aus army going over structure, units, small arms, vehicles and heavy weapons. Its on the list.
@@hypohystericalhistory8133 Thank You
If your a simmer like me and play DCS world, you can get a grasp of the kind of information overload / multitasking a fighter pilot has to do. Its absolutely insane what this aircraft is capable of doing for the pilots that fly it.
Of the F35's I've seen in DCS, they all look to be pretty much hobbled. Their performance is nowhere near RL. They look more like early pre-production/testing planes that have been restricted to 6g maneuvers. Vipers routinely outmaneuver and shoot them down, both in BFM and BVR. Yet, in IRL, the F16 gets owned every time they go up against an F35. Even F22 pilots that get into dogfights with F35's don't like to do so because it's not a done deal. So, I don't know what's going on in DCS.
@@carltanner9065 Well its a free mod with a made up flight model since we'll never have access to the F35 data in the near future. So it's not going to be realistic at all. Just fun to look at more or less.
Another well delivered analysis, really appreciate the Australian perspective especially in the light of some potential heavy lifting the ADF may face in the future.
I remember the same vilification aimed at the F111..Some of it bordering on mouth frothing rage!, one of the main reasons was, it was not British!..Many wanted the TSR 2!..There was problems with the 'wing carry through box's' on the F111, which occasionally caused them to drop off! Once that was fixed, it went on to become one of the most long lived and successful aircraft of it's type, because of upgrades and uprates it was superior to anything flying in it's era!
I'm sad F-111 had to be put out of service but the planes we got from its demise were amazing.
To me this seems like a fantastic airframe. When reading about new defence projects these days, be it tanks, ship or planes, I always wonder why the main epmphasize lies on firepower. What is all that going to do for you if your opponent outspots you by a margin and blows the Sh*t out of you? I mean look at the Karabakh conflict, most of those chaps that died there didn't even know they were in danger until it was too late. My sergeant always used to say: What you can see can shoot and what you can shoot you can kill.
It comes to planning, execution and logistics. Simply put, if you need to hit four targets with 2000lb bombs and a plane can only carry two, then you need to use at least two aircraft. You need to then make sure you have subsequent logics in place to get those fighters there.
@@wrayday7149 As compared to one aircraft with four bombs and sixteen others required to escort it in or degrade enemy air defense capabilities, because it doesn't have stealth or range.
Or, y'know, fly a flight of F-35s into Syrian airspace, take pictures of their air defense system, and fly back out without being spotted.
The F35 is what I'd want my children fighting a war from.
The tactical advantages it will offer (when fully combat ready) will be eye-watering.
you'd want your children fighting a war? 🫠
Africa did it
Nazi Germany did it
Vietnam did it
Why not?
Yes! Draft children!
This is the synonymously most american and dumbest thing Icever read on here, wow
@@bobman36 based.
Nothing makes me laugh more than people who cant look past the misinformation about the lightning
As a kiwi its very reassuring to see the aussies investing in these jets. Its a shame successive goverments here since clarke have neglected or failed to understand the importance of being able to support you guys in ensuring the security of our region.
imagine 75 squadron rolling these out, dreams are free i guess xD
the extreme hard left PM Helen Clarke is a disgrace. It was Clarke who made the decision to disband the RNZAF's air arm Skyhawks, which were extremely useful in an inter-operability and bi lateral context with RAN and RAAF. A decision akin to the inept Malcolm Fraser Government-incoming Hawke Government decision to not replace HMAS Melbourne and Australia's critical air arm. What made this decision even more of a blunder was she was sold off for nothing to guess who? China, who re-engineered so many aspects, catobar arguably one of the most significant wins for the regime's history. Incompetent PM's Australia has had in spades.
@@williambroadstreet3353 calm down mate with respect to the NZ portion of your comment i don't like the disbanding of the strike wing but when you look at the numbers we just couldn't afford to keep the venerable old girls running. And if we had picked up the replacement F16 option i doubt we would've seen the required budget to maintain the capability, especially post GFC and the effect the on flowing government austerity finance policies had on defence.
ANZAC brothers in Arms👍
Which our f18a went to New Zealand and not Canada.🇭🇲 Like our Skyhawks.
I’ve already placed an order for a total of 5 F-35s. Should be here within the next week or two. Can’t wait!
Notice the F16 at 5:25. Two large external fuel tanks and a targeting pod! These cost extra and add weight and drag and decrease performance. The F 35 has room internally for the extra fuel and a built in targeting pod/electronic warfare suite in addition to room for two 2000 pound bombs and 2 AIM-120 missiles or 6 AIM-120 missiles internally (where they do not significantly affect kinematic performance). With a typical combat load the F35 can out turn a F16 and F18. In beast mode it can carry up to six 2000 pound bombs or 24 SDB. Oh did I mention, its stealth and ASEA radar that can also do SAR/maritime search.
Stupid “beast mode” is NOT stealthy and will degrade effective combat range just like it would for the F-16. It’s a stupid phrase. Let it go.
The cannon needs more than 180 rounds to be truly be useful.
@@garycleveland6410 When will you ever be close enough to use a cannon anymore in 2022?
@@SilverUndead They said the same in Vietnam until they needed them and didn't have them when they were too close for a sidewinder to arm. It's better to have it and not need it then need it and not have it. If you're doing close air support and run out of other ordinance, you better have a gun. Lives could depend on it.
@@SilverUndead The fact that it's 2022 has nothing to do with whether or not a fighter should have a cannon. As advanced as missiles have become, a gun will always be a necessity when you run out of missiles or they malfunction.
Some other differences between the models or 4th gen:
- The F-35A is the only variant with an internal gun, the BAE 25mm GAU-22/A.
- The F-33B & C can carry a gun pod made for those variants with the same gun and more rounds (220).
- The gun uses the same ammunition that the Harrier 25mm gun can shoot including new rounds recently developed for the USAF and EPAF models. USAF developed a solid point AP round and USMC Harriers use a Semi-AP explosive round.
- The F-35B is much easier to fly than the Harrier, with its advanced digital flight control system, pilots say its a breeze and just move the joy stick where you want the plane to go and FLCS does the rest, like playing an easy video game.
- As mentioned in the video, Block-4 software bring a whole bunch of new weapons to the F-35 capability including some European/British made weapons.
- Soon more power computers for the mission computers (called TR-3 refresh) will be added for Block-4 upgrades giving the jet even more capability to be upgraded more in the future.
- A new engine is being developed (by GE & P&W) for the F-35A & C that will give it more range, fuel economy, thrust and cooling capacity. I am sure most don't know but the engine supplies the air that runs the jets environmental control system including the air-conditioning system!
- The F-35A is getting certified for carrying only the B61-12 (currently in production now) which has a max yield (per Wiki) 340 kilotons. Older jets (F-16 & F-15) can deploy earlier B61 models.
- The F-35s use a different ejection seat than other USAF, USMC & USN aircraft use, most US jets use versions of a system called ACES made by Goodrich the F-35 uses the British made Martin Baker seat which I believe is the creator of the first EJ Seat and is one of the biggest suppliers in the world.
The delays and problems make sense when you realize the design they pulled off. This weapon is honestly ridiculous
Dam bro this is one of the most information video about the f35. Thank you for explaining.
Im really thank you for taking your time and explaining.
This channel continues to bring new information to me and the greater audience.
Haha... That last line was perfect. "After all reality doesn't really care what the fighter mafia thinks."
A few years ago I spoke to an experienced F-22 pilot and he said (in his direct experience working in conjunction with the F-35 that its sensor fusion makes it capable beyond other platforms and he said the 35 is an excellent fighter. That's a 22 driver and his tone and body language expressed sincerity and deep respect for the 35.
Excellent video. I always knew there's more to the F35 than all the negative buzz.
This is the best review I have seen on the aircraft. No hyperbole, just facts. Well done 👍
New to your channel, and certainly very impressed with this video in particular. I always had the instinctive feeling that such an ambitious program, with its inevitable setbacks, would ultimately prove to be a future dominating platform i.e. death from above. Understanding its potential requires a generational shift in thinking. I will be excited to see Australia invest in more units. Thanks for the high-quality content, mate. I'll keep simming the Viper until I can get my hands on this incredible machine!
There you go again. Confusing people with the facts!
The F-35 saga reminds me of the "Great Mirage Bungle" headlines of the mid sixties, until the Israelis started vacuuming the sky with them. And of the abuse heaped upon the F-111, depicted early on as 'likely to be the most maligned and regretted defence acquisition ever made by Australia".
This sort of thing always seems to accompany the switch from one generation of things to the next. In the thirties the transition from "an airframe with an engine strong enough to pull it around" to "an airframe strong enough to keep up with the engine" had people finding it difficult to let go of biplanes and fabric skins. Similarly with the various generations of post-WW2 aircraft. Going from a straight jet to a swept back jet, to very fast, to very agile, to a heap of sensors and software streaking around unseen requires imagination and courage.
Tacit Dionysus exactly! I remember when the Australian government even considered trying to pull out of buying the F-111 and as we all know now it turned out to be one of the most capable strike aircraft of its time.
@@garyhankinson5695 Try to sell a people on something new and unfamiliar, and they will scoff and complain.
Take it away from them and they will cry and moan endlessly about the sky falling.
Came here to make this point as well. There have been very few military purchases in history that haven't had some mud slung at the by media armchair warriors.
@@remielpollard787 The western media were fully penetrated by the Soviets by the 1950s with one of the most effective counter-propaganda programs ever launched in history.
They had professors in journalist courses throughout major universities, who also helped recruit people into western foreign intelligence services.
They co-opted the US's Mockingbird project so that instead of pro-US propaganda, it started pushing thinly-veiled anti-US propaganda with messaging controlled by Moscow, just as Moscow controlled messaging from the IOJ in Europe and abroad.
They weaponized western media against itself, which is why you never get a sense of patriotism in western media, but leftist and anti-nationalist messaging.
@@garyhankinson5695 Where did the RAAF use them at?
I hope that we never get to find out just how amazing this fighter is in a real near peer conflict.
Next do the Littoral Combat Ship. It suffers from the same sort of thing. Early reports, actual mechanical issues, etc. But the Navy loves them now
*funny how 99.99% of the people on the internet and media the criticize the F-35 have never and will never even see one in person with their own eyes or much less touch one lol but they're "aviation experts" lmao good video btw*
I just found your channel last week, and I've just gotta say great job on these documentaries. High quality, well edited, detailed, well-researched. Well done, and keep up the good work!
Every time I hear Sprey's name I cringe. He was wrong about everything all the time. He is proof that if you lie the press loves you.
I mean, he was RT's prime contact when they needed to shill for russian jets. That says enough. Now, down with the rest of the fighter mafia, stupid nut jobs.
Your so smart remembering all this info. You should be a adf advisor or something instead of explaining it to people like me. I’ve forgotten more then half the thing you’ve mentioned but but very interesting anyways. You should be rewarded for this keep up the good work champ
Should i mention how at one point an export version of the a10 was propposed and some eu countries were interested but after it's combat performance was tested by fire, they opted out, and now those same countries are going all in into the f35?
*If that's not a sign of an upgrade, idk what is*
Cuz it’s nuclear capable unlike the A10. That’s about it. This plane is a pos boondoggle. Don’t let this slick video fool you. Just read into how the AF treats it. They can’t wait to move on to NGAD.
@@411bvRGiskard ofc they can't wait to move onto NGAD, the F22 can't remain top dog forever, there is no current plan to replace slick Amy. NGAD would serve alongside it and maybe seeing some replacement of superhornets well into the 2040s. Amy's funded all the way through and up to a 2.5 trillion cap so it's going nowhere.
You have the ability to make apparently dry subjects interesting. A rare gift. Still enjoy the WW2 exploits of the Australian army the best.
It's amazing how pierre sprey has never ever said anything correct in his entire life and is still considered a source of authority by many people.
One on the best articles I’ve seen about the F35 , love it
The best non FUD explanation of why the F-35 is such a dangerous game changer of a fighter...It is the next gen sensor suite coupled to stealth. Speed and manuavabilty is useless when an F-35 has already tracked you and fired a missile before you ever even knew the F-35 was there.
And that’s the thing, the F-35s speed and manoeuvrability are actually pretty good, better than the aircraft they replace.
That all becomes useful when the potential competitors field their own gen 5 platforms.
The advantages that you've stated won't last long
This comprehensive review of the F35 just earned you a new subscription
_"You ain't dogfighting me, but my missile. Good luck with that."_
I have yet to meet one that can outsmart missile
"Some people think they can outsmart me. Maybe. Maybe..."
Astounding work man. You thoroughly busted the myths that have to do with the F35. Great job!!!
F-35 criticisms on the web in a nutshell: uneducated armchair aeronautical engineers w/ too much free time claiming they know more about planes than the pilots who fly them and the professionals who design them
The pilots HAVE to say they like the plane in public and so do the idiot designers. The plane’s nick name by pilots is FAT AMY! That’s says it all!
They are up there with the moon-hoaxers. The NASA engineers CLEARLY didn't know ANYTHING bruh! :)
It’s a treat to listen to you. I usually prefer reading, but you make listening preferable - chock full of facts, to the point, well modulated. Well done!
History repeating itself. I remember the F111 having the same criticism, however once the bugs were sorted out it gave the USAF and RAAF 40+ years sterling service.
Yer,know we want it back.f111🇭🇲🇭🇲
Best F-35 video to date... ever. Been following the F-35 since the 1996 when I was a kid. Janes ATF flight sim on PC introduced me to the X-32 and X-35. Its been a long time since then. I always knew it was a winner!
One of the best detailed and thorough videos explaining the truth about the F-35 out there. Well done!
Well researched and just as impressively delivered. Outstanding video. You have a new subscriber.
The F35 is akin to the F111, it had its problems but is now an iconic and formidable plane.
No it isn't
@@goodputin4324 yeah it is.
It’s much more than a Harrier.
@@criticalevent And over six times less likely to be shot down than a Harrier. Aside from the F-22, it is the most survivable aircraft in the sky today, because you can't kill what you can't see.
@@criticalevent The F-35 won't kill your pilot.
The price difference won't make up the difference to a grieving family when the plane inevitably crashes during landing or is shot down in conventional conflict.
This aircraft, like the much maligned F111 before it, will become a bang for buck champion as well. Thank you for putting the record straight.
Truly fascinating how the media can take something completely out of context and create argument and panic over it.
I think we can all agree that the X-32s big frog mouth meant that unless it was literally unstoppable and a complete bargain, it would never be picked over the X-35 purely based off aesthetics.
28 to 1 kill ratio is awesome, further destroys the argument that the LHD’s couldn’t fit enough F35b on them to make it worthwhile. The navy need f35b for the sensor fusion as well, as the kill ratio. It is a pity that the defence minister doesn’t take advice from yourself rather than some of the stuff ASPI out. You made an other excellent documentary.
Like he said, even an unarmed F-35B would change the battle space for the Navy
I think a lot comes down to money, they are even reluctantly considering cross decking capabilities but want the US and/or Japan to pay for the decks to be treated facilitating it.
I admire your ability to mislead your audience. Your deception is well hidden and only exposed in the details you selectively and systematically suppressed. This pig will get many pilots hurt.
@@douginorlando6260 You know, we have 390,000 flight hours on the cumulative multi-variant JSF fleet now after 15 years of flights. Let’s see how your claims hold up to reality.
630 JSF variants delivered
390,000 flight hours
4 crashes (2 F-35As and 2 F-35Bs, 1 from faulty fuel tube on the first F-35B, all 3 others pilot error)
1 fatality from Japanese F-35A where the pilot executed a controlled flight into terrain (water)
Only 10 years into the teen series, Harrier, and A-10, we had:
427 total airframe losses (mostly crashes, missing aircraft at sea)
147 fatalities
You were saying something about getting pilots hurt? These are just the facts. I lived through the development of the teen fighters with a front row seat near the USAF Flight Test Center and Naval Weapons Test Center at China Lake, and have spent decades with these programs. I counted up all the losses and fatalities of the F-14A, F-15A/B/C/D, F-16A/B/C/D, F/A-18A-D, AV-8A/B and TAV-8B, and A-10A for their first 10 years of flight. I will have to do it again to account for a 16 year period, which is where we are at with the F-35A. F-35B is almost 13 years now. F-35C is 10.8 years of flight since its maiden in 2010.
That’s what really caught my attention with the JSF program more than anything at first. I kept expecting to hear of at least one prototype crashing, if not 2.
5 of the F-14A prototypes crashed from 1970-1974, then they started crashing in the fleet at a crazy rate every year.
5 F-14As crashed in 1975, 5 in 1976. 56 total losses in first 10 years.
The F-15A-D was actually really safe with “only” 17 F-15A/B crashes from 1976-1979, and 19 more from 1980-1986, so roughly half of the F-14A crashes over their initial 10 years of flight. 18 fatalities.
The F-16 crashed a ton in its first 10 years of service. By 1983, it had over a 671 Class A mishap rate per 100,000 flight hours, with all sorts of problems that needed to be fixed.
The AV-8A and AV-8B Harrier were death traps, especially the AV-8A. The AV-8B currently has the highest Mishap rate of any fixed wing jet in US military service and has killed so many pilots, it’s disheartening. Within the AV-8A and Harrier’s first 10 years of flight, 100 total airframe losses and 20 fatalities.
With the F/A-18 Hornet, same thing. 100 total airframe losses between USMC, USN, and Spanish Navy, 20 fatalities.
A-10 was all jacked up too. The massive GAU-8 30mm 7 barrel gun caused gas ingestion engine failures repeatedly, and they had 57 total losses and 23 fatalities in its first 10 years of flight. 5 of those fatalities were people on the ground who died when the A-10s crashed into their homes.
You were saying something about how the F-35 will hurt pilots? I hate being right about this, but there are the facts.
LRRPFco52 ... To get an unbiased insight into some of the deficiencies that are hidden from the public, watch the review of F35 accident investigation report by fighter pilot Lemoine. Search “Lemoine”. You will find the F35 accident investigation report states the pilot was injured by the canopy when ejecting. Furthermore, when the pilot tried to accelerate and go around on a landing because he was running out of runway, the F35’s defective software actively chose to ignore pilot input which is why the pilot was forced to eject. Furthermore, the reason the pilot ran out of runway was because the helmet symbology was both misaligned and helmet glow washed out the outside view which created uncertainty where the runway began.
This accident investigation report reveals the truth about what F35 pilots have to put up with.
If pier spray and the fighter plane mafia doesn't like it I do
Any chance of a canzuk navy review? Even if it's just carrier or amphibious strike groups.
Best channel i have come across, great video mate👍👍
That very last comment sums it all up - “history doesn’t really care what the fighter mafia thinks”. Great stuff👍
Thank you, this is by far the best video I have watched on the amazing F-35's.
EVERY weapons system that has such new, groundbreaking capabilities is going to have some teething troubles.
Superb analysis and commentary again, mate, particularly the detailed info about sensor fusion use in practice and the performance at red flag. Rarely as good an explanation of those at least on RUclips.
Love your videos man!
I commented on another video of yours, and agree with the consensus below that your presentation is superior to many other supposedly "in-the-know" video commentators.
I will predict that a retrospective review 10 years from now will likely show the common historic thread among new weapons systems- early criticisms and vocal detractors, coupled with some technical challenges eventually progress to yield a capable platform that achieved its intended purpose (M-16 rifle, Arleigh-Burke class DDG, F-22 Raptor, etc.). Value is another conversation unto itself, as "cost effective" is a catch-all term that requires some contextual boundaries for valid comparisons to peer systems.
Well done, Sir! 👏👏👏
I personally think this is a really attractive looking fighter. I’m wondering if they chose the wrong airplane in the trial with the X32. The one thing I wondered is as technology for defeating its stealth technology improves, will it be at a performance disadvantage. Your video helped clarify that misperception. Keep up the good work.
Anything that defeats stealth makes the skies too unsafe for conventional aircraft. Stealth becomes comventional, and what we used to call conventional becomes grounded. Stealth becomes the price of admission.
The X32 was a dog; I think it was so overweight that they had to remove body panels for the lift fan to work.
I think Ward Carroll has an interesting talk with someone that test flew the X32 on his channel. I think he said something about boeing having to fly it to a lower altitude airport to demonstrate its vtol. Lockheed did a vertical takeoff from the airport the X32 couldn't take off from, flew it to the airport the X32 was going to do the vtol from, and vertically landed it there. Nothing to do with stealth, but Lockheed's tech was just more advanced, although that also meant more complexity in some areas.
Cobra Maneuver... great in Air Shows and coming down on a fast break in Basketball when quickly pulling up from the Free Throw line for a jump shot as the defense passé by lol!
Great presentation. Thanks heaps. Always thought this was a WOFTAM as it was a research project, and our needs would be closer to the Russians with Oz being a big country and all. Explaining the grand scheme that this aircraft is part of clears things up a lot.
I see this channel going big! Nice work
The network capability of a flight of F-35 working together is also what set it above the legacy fighters. A group of four F-35 working together is much more effective that a group of four F-16.
The F-16s have their place in multiple tactics working with the F-35s
@@BOBO-ut3mn Of course, but not the point.
Thank you for the best F 35 presentation I have seen, keep up the great work.😃
It's interesting that a F-35 the only 5th generation fighter without thrust vectoring is still one of the more maneuverable planes on the planet
People always seem to praise the problematic projects(see SLS launch systems) and discredit the quality projects. This was excellent content.
Switzerland Defense Forces just selected the F-35A as their chosen fighter, winning against the Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
Heard/saw one of these training the other day. Could hear the power when he was pulling out of a dive and throttled up, it sounded bloody awesome.
The F-35 is only disliked by people who never flown it
Apart from the independent test pilots. Air force pilots bullshit all the time about the equipment their government bought and they are PAID to fly
@@idanceforpennies281
Nah if it's shit pilots will be the first to call it out, plenty of planes have a reputatutaion because pilots hate it.
over the RAAF, RAF, USAF, USMC, USN I've not heard any outstanding issues, the cost is not a worry to the pilot
That poor old X-32 never stood a chance looking that way.
I never got the media over this fighter. I work in IT and i know what its like when ppl who dont know what they are talking about having a "legitimate" view on whatever. I dont know anything about jet fighters so i dont have any insights into something i am not a expert. Simple.
You got almost everything right. Such a relief from all the misinformation on the F-35. But since both USAF Generals Bogdan and Hostage have said that the F-35 is more stealthy than the F-22, we must conclude the F-35 frontal RCS is at least .0001M2
Let it be underestimated. When in real life it's the Boogieman.
This is the best video ever that covers the F35
Nearly ever American ally is buying some of these fighters and people sitting in their mom's basement will watch one video about it and declare it shit.
This video needs more views