Adebeast yeah very cheap lol ...... it was supposed to be like 60 million per jet but it costs 120 + for good versions and to keep it maintained and stealthy its a lot of money down the drain
Do you have a crystal ball? The thing will not be able to do what was promised I wish it would it just cant. That means that most country's will not buy any maybe even less they agreed on at first............ Making that fat ugly slow thing even more expensive including the engine. This is what you get when people are put in a position where no one asks and they can put the tax payers money in their own pocket.
"Lightning will ground F35 fighter jet known as the Lightning II Britain’s £150 million new combat jet has been banned from flying in bad weather amid fears that it could explode."
It will always be a piece of shit aircraft though. Latest technology but it cant fly when there's a thunderstorm coming. LMFAO and they have cleared it for all weather twice before so I wouldn't be so confident. Obama really got up ur Americans rectums didn't he?
First, the leaked report last January, 2015 was not dogfight exercise to see who wins between an F-16 and F-35 but a flight control software test to see if the F-35 can maintain control at extreme angles of attack (AOA). What they found from the test are 2 important factors. The good news is, the F-35 can maintain control at extreme AOA as high as 110 degrees, most fighters have an AOA limit around 25 degrees. However the flight control software restricted the pitch authority too much and hampered the aircraft's ability to maneuver. This was quickly misinterpreted by the media as "the F-35 can't dogfight", but no dogfight took place and the flight control software can be quickly updated to remedy the issue. In a dogfight however heres what Royal Norwegian Air Force Maj Morten “Dolby” Hanche had to say.Note: Major Hance is flying an F-35A with block 3i software that is limited to 7Gs, full 9G capability will only be available once block 3F software is installed. "Overall I can say that a stripped-down F-16 has slightly better sustained turn rate than the F-35. However, an F-35 has the advantage with regards to getting inside the turn of its opponent (due to higher angle of attack capabilities and superior instantaneous turn rates). A stripped-down F-16 is a formidable opponent to anyone in BFM (Basic fighter maneuvers). However, this changes quickly when we dress the F-16 up for combat. If we are to compare the F-16 and F-35 on an equal basis, we must assume that the F-16 will be carrying both external fuel, a «jamming pod» for electronic warfare, weapon mounts for bombs, missiles and a camera pod for target acquisition and illumination. With this loadout, the F-16´s performance is significantly reduced: The maximum angle of attack is reduced by 40% (the ability to move the nose away from the direction of travel), the roll rate is lowered, the maximum allowable airspeed is reduced and the g-limitations are stricter. Read more here: nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/06/30/dogfight-og-f-35/ Furthermore he says this: "The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane - where nose is pointing - and where the aircraft is actually heading - the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16." Notice how the Major describes the F-35's dogfighting abilities similar to the fighting style of the F/A-18 using high angle of attack and slow speed maneuvering. The F/A-18 is one of the best slow speed dogfighters out there, it maneuvers best at around 300 knots, this is the F/A-18's corner speed or the speed where the aircraft can maneuver best. By comparison the corner speed of most fighters like the Mig-29, F-16 and F-15 is around 450 knots. The F/A-18 can point it's nose around at incredible angles at this slow speed, however it has one major draw back, excessive maneuvering at extreme slow speed can cause the F/A-18 to slow down even further to the point that it becomes sluggish, once it is too slow, the F/A-18 needs to accelerate quickly to get back to its corner speed. Unfortunately the F/A-18's acceleration isn't very impressive. Major Hanche says this about the F-35:"Without using afterburner, and with more fuel on board than the F-16 can carry, I accelerated the aircraft to 300 knots in a continuous climb. Acceleration only stopped when I lifted the nose to more than 25 degrees above the horizon. I do not think our F-16 could have kept up with me without the use of afterburner. I was also impressed with how quickly the F-35 accelerates in afterburner. On my fourth flight I took off using full afterburner. The plane became airborne at 180 knots. At that point I had to immediately bring the engine back to minimum afterburner to avoid overspeed of the landing gear before it was fully retracted (speed limit is 300 knots). "Overall, flying the F-35 reminds me a bit of flying the F/A-18 Hornet, but with an important difference: It has been fitted with a turbo." Read here: nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/11/20/a-fly-f-35-erfaringer-fra-den-forste-uka/ So in conclusion the F-35A has the nose pointing ability and slow speed maneuverability of the F/A-18, with the acceleration and sustained turn rate of an F-16C. Combine this with stealth, integrated avionics, sensor fusion and the ability to lock on to any target around the aircraft due to the DAS cameras all around the fuselage and you can see why most of the top airforces around the world are lining up to buy this fighter.
heh 0:08 more then THHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWICE AS LONG AS THEY PLAN AND COST TWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAISE AS MUCH. LOL :D
Also, have you guys ever had the time to sit down and do your reaearch on the F-35? The plane never actually did any dogfight against the F-16. There was an article from a Norwegian F-35 pilot who refuted all these
Sigh. Remember that DOT&E report? The one that GENERAL BOGDAN HIMSELF, (the F-35 program office leader, remember him?) said was FACTUAL? According to THAT REPORT the F-35 did dogfight with an F-16D (the two seat, slower, less manoeuvrable version) but not one, it was 17 dogfights. Yes, 17. And the F-35 LOST EVERY SINGLE ONE, even though it was carrying less than a full load, and THE F-16 WAS FITTED WITH DROP TANKS, hampering its manoeuvrability by limiting it to 7g instead of the usual 9g. And the F-35 was cleared for the full 9g combat envelope too, but had "such poor energy manoeuvrability characteristics" (yes, that's a quote from the report) that it could not pull more than 6.5g during the entire set of 17 engagements. That's fact. Read the damn report before you even think of answering. The US Air Force official position on F-35 dogfight capabilities is that yes, they are poor, but it doesn't need them because if an F-35 gets into a dogfight then the pilot must have made a mistake. That was said by General Mike Hostage, at the time head of Air Combat Command. The plane cannot dogfight well enough to beat a handicapped F-16D, as was proved when it TRIED 17 TIMES AND LOST EVERY TIME. FACT. As for the Norwegian pilot's article, it makes no claims that the F-35 can competitively dogfight with anything. It very cleverly gives the impression that dogfighting in an F-35 is a great experience, yet says NOTHING about what it can do. Very clever. Very deceptive. I think it is a dishonest article and that the Norwegian pilot knows the F-35 can't dogfight worth a damn compared to an F-16. If the head of Air Combat Command thinks it can't dogfight I suspect it can't. Read the DOT&E report, that gives you the facts, at least according to the F-35 program office leader it does.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-the-f-35-was-not-beaten-by-an-f-16/ Again I'll repeat, the F-35 and F-16 never actually fought, it was a test to see how it's maneuverability works, but you wouldn't care because you hate the plane so you're gonna just dance around the coldrin And as for the Norweigian pilot's claims, if you read it (which you haven't) you'd know he highlights precisely why the F-35 can infact dogfight against any plane you throw at it.
You are incorrect, FireAngelLondoner, it wasn't 17 "dogfights." It was a series of maneuvering exercises from different starting positions. If you want to know about the F-35's combat performance from people who know, why don't you read the evaluation below, written by a former F-16 pilot, who interviews anonymous F-35 pilots with significant previous experience in the F-15C, F-15E, F-16C and A-10. These pilots generally strongly prefer the F-35 in almost all combat situations. www.heritage.org/defense/report/operational-assessment-the-f-35a-argues-full-program-procurement-and-concurrent
what ever it is not major problem of f-35 in dogfight you know in dogfight all the fighter's win rate is just 50% in now days. because in now strategic activation dosen't require high meanuver. in many WVR test f-16 shot not only f-35 but also f-22 and other things. in addition ef-2000 or rafael got kill mark in WVR engage with f-22 f-16 is just good stuff for WVR. in real if 4th gen fighters front of 5th gen like f-35 they'll be a paper plain.
Finally? They've been operational for three years and they head to the Pacific this year. Ask people in Yuma how loud they are :-) I think they are absolutely worth the cost. The enemy won't get close enough for a dogfight ;-)
So many hits on government funded crap to shut people up......... Let me guess that's also a myth ;) The F35 sucks it wont ever work. Even these highly intelligent over paid military geniuses cant do what the F35 was promised to do. It's like entering the Paris Dakar rally with a freaking F1 car. Anyway it will take most people another 10 years before they noticed they could just as well have whipped their ass with the tax money they paid to finance this fat looking disaster. Just by looking at it you know it cant be fast. And it isn't neither is it stealth. One thing it surely is ........... Most expensive American military failure.
the authors are plain stupid. regarding your question about busting myths: this is impossible, f35 is 95% filled with new tech which is classified, and will be until it is replaced with another generation. but in trying to understand f35, I came to a conclusion that this isn't just a plane, it's a system, or an intermediate informational hub. it wasn't meant to be involved in chaotic wars like WWII of Vietnam. it's main roles are to deliver intel and strike very precise targets, as it's more like a spy plane. why? and what is the concept of the new type of warfare? I don't know. these guys indeed have achieved a breakthrough in whatever they wanted, but they won't tell us what that is, but they didn't manage to achieve all their goals in this project. But make no mistake, the goals weren't about being super maneuverable or having the highest top speed. So claiming that money was wasted is stupid, because the russians will NEVER catch up with this plane, su57 has no similar tech, su57 is the best plane for chaotic warfare (classic), but they may be wrong... as there aren't too many chaotic wars now, as everyone knows everything about everyone, russians don't even know what this plane is about. You don't have to bomb the whole country into rubles, like Americans did during WWII to win it, now you hit their strategic targets, and the enemy is crippled, that's my guess of their concept.
CrazyIvan we are talking about link 16.. its next gen network operations capacity.. And im not even talking about the Eurofighter JTDIS/MIDS systems.. wich are top of the game Link 16 was implemented in the spanish armed forces recently for example.. and it means data is shared between F18s, destroyers, subs, EVAs (radar EWS) Eurofighters, AWACs ground units.. everything... An F18 can attack with AMRAAM/METEOR with its radar off if a destroyer or an EVA or an EF is ilunminating the target..
Yes however the F-35 has a superior sensor suite compared to the F-18 regardless which gives it unparalleled target target tracking and discrimination. Also note that F-35's AN/APG-81 AESA is superior to the Super Hornets AN/APG-79 AESA. Hell the F-35 can use the AN/APG-81 for jamming.
Personally, I'd rather leave stealth missions to the F-22, ground-support to the A-10, dogfighting to the F-16 and the combination to the F/A-18. The F-35 would be real useful for the Marines, that's it. It's only good attributes are V-TOL capability and stealth. But, hey, what would a retired navy technician know, right?
The F22 isn't likely to be used at all...... To expensive and the chance it kills it pilot and itself being just as big probably bigger then the enemy taking it down the future doesn't look bright for the F22. Clear you are American Do you really think the F/A 18 even F16 would win a dogfight vs a Eurofighter or Rafale? It wont when you think they will it's clear why you are retired.... Probably 2 years early in that case.
The F-35, now that its myriad of technical problems have been solved, will smoke any 4th generation fighter out there, except in close visual range dogfighting, which is rare these days. The F-35 is also cheaper than some 4th gen fighters and is still decreasing in price. The trillion is an estimate of the total cost of the F-35 fleet over the entirety of its service life.
I know there's a lot of Cynics when it comes to the F-35 program but I don't think that the general public realise what the F-35 is truly capable of, I mean it's not like the military will reveal all of its capabilities outright, I've heard some rumors that its a keeping an ace up its sleeve and it has something to do with that networking capabilities but I don't think its safe to say it here. This is a terrible analogy but look at the Ford GT at Le Mans this year.
I hope there going to be good Australia put money into this from the beginning to even bort 72 super hornets to cover the time it would take to get the f-35 But we had to do some thing because b4 the hornet we were still flying as our main attack fighter/bomber the f-111.we,ve put all our eggs in 1 basket .but at least we will still be able to work with the USA in combat missions when we need to
Could well be a safer place. Now imagine your old plane was affordable, easy to service and you had lots of them. Replace that with a handful of not very serviceable and super costly - you wont be going out much. Just keeping it to the essentials. Might that make the world a safer place? Quite possibly....
The problem with this whole networking plan, is literally every other country is building advanced networking technologies for their fighters, Russia, Japan, China, Europe etc.
They should definitely keep the A-10 and F-18 Super Hornet and just replace the F-16 with the F-35, as the A-10s and F-18s are vital to close air support CAS and for the F-18 very good planes that can dogfight and carry significant amount of bombs. Six A-10s with aerial refueling and 4-6 F-18s can deny a 2 mi by 2 mi block for as long as the pilots can hold out or if they switch indefinitely add six F-22s and six F-15 and its indefinitely a No-Fly Zone!
The A-10 is an aging fleet, the youngest was built 32 years ago. About half the original fleet is no longer operational. The A-10 can only operate in air space controlled by friendly forces. The life expectancy of the A-10 was only to 2028 and it may remain with Air National Guard units until that time.The F-18 Super Hornet will remain in operation for some time. The older F-18 hornets are reaching their life expectancy and need to be replaced.The F-16 may also remain for some time in the Air National Guard.
+Dan Zervos they all worked wonderfully in 91' and prior and are all still very capable like I said built better and newer ones. Upgrade what works don't spend so much money on something that doesn't even loiter or carry that much and can only go 1.6 Mach.
F-35 = "Waste of Money" I would upgrade: 1) F-15C & F-15E to F-15 2040 2) F-18C/D upgraded with Raytheon RACR or APG-79 v X 3) F-16C/D to F-16V or F-16 Block 70/71
It would cost 2-4 trillion to upkeep and upgrade the old fleet compared 1.5 trillion for the entire program cost of the F-35 which includes planes, fuel, maintenance, and weapons for the planes entire lifetime.
+bweazel You're a fool for wasting expensive $200,000,000 per F-35 and trillion dollars disaster aircraft. F-35 can't even beat and filled the roles of the F-16C/D, F-18C/D, AV-8B, and A-10C. F-35 too expensive, can't turn, can't climb, can't run, and is a dead duck. F-35 replacing A-10C is a Joke! F-35A ain't titanium bathtub bulletproof, can't carry 30 mm, and can't fly low like the A-10C. F-35A angle attack and maneuverability doesn't even out performed the F-16. F-35B STOVL have smaller stubby wings and F135 STOVL engine is causing problem to Amphibious carrier by burning it the runway. AV-8B is better than F-35B. F-35C can't even performed in attack mode and carry 12 AAM like the F-18C/D. F-35 = Garbage
This is a stupid idea but I wonder if Ultra Hi Res, State of the art cameras would detect any kind of abrupt movements in the air (night and day). I mean, they are already developing technologies that recognize faces much better than the average human perception so just imagine if this kind of technology reaches the hand of the military. Doesn't that render stealth tech irrelevant? Or am I really that stupid :P plus I've heard that quantum tech radar could detect stealth but only in a very controlled environment. That was like back in 2013. But making quantum tech usable is still a kind of an eternal struggle from what I have heard.
Ultra Hi Res Cameras are still limited by the distance that they can detect the air movements and the reflected light from the stealth aircraft (the articles, that I have I read, usually put the maximum range of detection to around 30 to 50 miles) This is well within the range of the missiles carried by most fighter aircraft . Radar can detect stealth, what Stealth does is reduce the distance or warning time you get from radar. Normal radar might detect a non stealthy aircraft at 200 miles away, meaning if the enemy aircraft is fly at 600 mph, you would have about 20 minutes of warning before it arrived. That gives you time to launch quick reaction aircraft or respond. Stealthy aircraft reduce this detection range to say... 35 miles away (estimate only....exact range is classified). However, at 35miles away, the stealthy aircraft has already launched its weapons from around 60 -75 miles out. You find out you are under attack when the explosions start going off around you. In regards to Quantum Radar, .... Well, you might have to wait a while... physics.aps.org/articles/v8/18
Joseph Sanchez Actually, that stupid idea of mine stemmed from the telescope they use up there in space but then I realise that those were telescopes and not a camera! anyway I've recently read some articles on "arsenal plane" and it's absolutely lethal, it's not like China has the exclusive right to use hypersonic missiles. Plus the amount of tech development the US Air Force can pursue is truly astounding, I don't know if you've heard of Google's deepmind AI but just imagine the military applications.
You F-35 haters AND defenders both need to consider that EMP weapons are emerging, and the F-35 will not stand a chance, and maybe even an F-4 Phantom is vulnerable.
+Scollis E.M.P.'s have existed for a while. But non-nuclear E.M.P.'s work mostly against basic circuitry. Not closed and hardened systems like aircraft.
the f35,using its ability to network is probably going to write the book on air superiority or go down as a overpriced turkey, given my dislike of pierre spey I hope it's the best thing ever
Where do you get this trillion dollars crap? I know, I know, it is from computing R&D, procurement, lifetime maintenance, etc. It is a silly, silly figure. It probably doesn't even use present value. We don't compute the costs of any other programs this way. The costs paid so far are $55 billion for R&D and $20 or $30 billion for procurement of aircraft so far.
What ever. The f35 will be shot down by the Satan 400 coz it doesn't go fast enough to outrun it. The f35 is not going to be able to fill all the roles of the planes its suppose to replace , like the a10,f18,f16etc. They should have built more f22s and kept there other planes in service. But the f35? Come on the yanks can do better than that
The 400s and their radars will be taken out LONG in advance. Do you really think the US bastards don't have a way to defeat it? As fore the F-22. I do agree. But in the past The F-14 was also in the same boat with the F-35. No one liked it.
As much as I miss the old RCPowers videos, OG RCpowers got me into this hobby, I freaking love these videos! Keep 'em coming!
How hilarious this show is, I really miss this videos. Hope you return soon.
Skynet .. rolf lmao lol
This was hilarious. Great vid :3
After a trillion dollars there will be NO MONEY for the rest of the "team"! The F-35 is just a bad joke that went too far!
it will escalate to 2 trillion nearly
The F35 gets cheaper in 2018 INCLUDING THE ENGINE. so yeah, the program is not a fail
Adebeast
yeah very cheap lol ...... it was supposed to be like 60 million per jet but it costs 120 + for good versions and to keep it maintained and stealthy its a lot of money down the drain
Do you have a crystal ball? The thing will not be able to do what was promised I wish it would it just cant. That means that most country's will not buy any maybe even less they agreed on at first............ Making that fat ugly slow thing even more expensive including the engine. This is what you get when people are put in a position where no one asks and they can put the tax payers money in their own pocket.
HITESH Adhikari no
Oh man!. You made laugh so much, you've got talent doing this plane videos. : )
So many rabbit holes, so little time. Keep it up!
Was that Crazy Eddie I heard at the end there? Hah! This is the most interesting F35 video I've seen in... Ever! Great series, Dave!
I miss this so much why did you stop!? your almost to 80000 subscription you rock!
"Lightning will ground F35 fighter jet known as the Lightning II
Britain’s £150 million new combat jet has been banned from flying in bad weather amid fears that it could explode."
prototype usually don't fly in bad weather until all the bugs are resolve which take years in fighter plane , eventually will fly in all weather
F35's have already been cleared for all weather.
Lightning....... Eurofighter is just 300 mph faster............
It will always be a piece of shit aircraft though. Latest technology but it cant fly when there's a thunderstorm coming. LMFAO and they have cleared it for all weather twice before so I wouldn't be so confident. Obama really got up ur Americans rectums didn't he?
Did you not see the comment above?
They look cool... and can hover. That's more than enough reasons for it to be in service.
First, the leaked report last January, 2015 was not dogfight exercise to see who wins between an F-16 and F-35 but a flight control software test to see if the F-35 can maintain control at extreme angles of attack (AOA).
What they found from the test are 2 important factors. The good news is, the F-35 can maintain control at extreme AOA as high as 110 degrees, most fighters have an AOA limit around 25 degrees. However the flight control software restricted the pitch authority too much and hampered the aircraft's ability to maneuver.
This was quickly misinterpreted by the media as "the F-35 can't dogfight", but no dogfight took place and the flight control software can be quickly updated to remedy the issue.
In a dogfight however heres what Royal Norwegian Air Force Maj Morten “Dolby” Hanche had to say.Note: Major Hance is flying an F-35A with block 3i software that is limited to 7Gs, full 9G capability will only be available once block 3F software is installed.
"Overall I can say that a stripped-down F-16 has slightly better sustained turn rate than the F-35. However, an F-35 has the advantage with regards to getting inside the turn of its opponent (due to higher angle of attack capabilities and superior instantaneous turn rates).
A stripped-down F-16 is a formidable opponent to anyone in BFM (Basic fighter maneuvers). However, this changes quickly when we dress the F-16 up for combat.
If we are to compare the F-16 and F-35 on an equal basis, we must assume that the F-16 will be carrying both external fuel, a «jamming pod» for electronic warfare, weapon mounts for bombs, missiles and a camera pod for target acquisition and illumination. With this loadout, the F-16´s performance is significantly reduced: The maximum angle of attack is reduced by 40% (the ability to move the nose away from the direction of travel), the roll rate is lowered, the maximum allowable airspeed is reduced and the g-limitations are stricter.
Read more here: nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/06/30/dogfight-og-f-35/
Furthermore he says this:
"The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane - where nose is pointing - and where the aircraft is actually heading - the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16."
Notice how the Major describes the F-35's dogfighting abilities similar to the fighting style of the F/A-18 using high angle of attack and slow speed maneuvering.
The F/A-18 is one of the best slow speed dogfighters out there, it maneuvers best at around 300 knots, this is the F/A-18's corner speed or the speed where the aircraft can maneuver best. By comparison the corner speed of most fighters like the Mig-29, F-16 and F-15 is around 450 knots.
The F/A-18 can point it's nose around at incredible angles at this slow speed, however it has one major draw back, excessive maneuvering at extreme slow speed can cause the F/A-18 to slow down even further to the point that it becomes sluggish, once it is too slow, the F/A-18 needs to accelerate quickly to get back to its corner speed. Unfortunately the F/A-18's acceleration isn't very impressive.
Major Hanche says this about the F-35:"Without using afterburner, and with more fuel on board than the F-16 can carry, I accelerated the aircraft to 300 knots in a continuous climb. Acceleration only stopped when I lifted the nose to more than 25 degrees above the horizon. I do not think our F-16 could have kept up with me without the use of afterburner. I was also impressed with how quickly the F-35 accelerates in afterburner. On my fourth flight I took off using full afterburner. The plane became airborne at 180 knots. At that point I had to immediately bring the engine back to minimum afterburner to avoid overspeed of the landing gear before it was fully retracted (speed limit is 300 knots).
"Overall, flying the F-35 reminds me a bit of flying the F/A-18 Hornet, but with an important difference: It has been fitted with a turbo."
Read here: nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/11/20/a-fly-f-35-erfaringer-fra-den-forste-uka/
So in conclusion the F-35A has the nose pointing ability and slow speed maneuverability of the F/A-18, with the acceleration and sustained turn rate of an F-16C.
Combine this with stealth, integrated avionics, sensor fusion and the ability to lock on to any target around the aircraft due to the DAS cameras all around the fuselage and you can see why most of the top airforces around the world are lining up to buy this fighter.
I think you are only person who is speaking here with knowledge of the facts. Very well. Thank you.
ruclips.net/video/zgLjNsB_hyM/видео.html
heh 0:08 more then THHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWICE AS LONG AS THEY PLAN AND COST TWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAISE AS MUCH. LOL :D
hitting like before watching cause damn i was waiting for this one...
The F-16 didn't beat the f-35 in a dogfight.
For the money spent on the F-35 we could probably have built a bunch of F-22's, F-15's, A-10's, and F-18's.
+Clyde Marshall
Not really no.
Clyde Marshall I bet ur not saying that anynore after 10 months
Or bought 10,000 Gripens. LOL
U are a funny guy. and u know what? I like funny guys.
Also, have you guys ever had the time to sit down and do your reaearch on the F-35? The plane never actually did any dogfight against the F-16. There was an article from a Norwegian F-35 pilot who refuted all these
theaviationist.com/2016/03/01/heres-what-ive-learned-so-far-dogfighting-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/
Sigh. Remember that DOT&E report? The one that GENERAL BOGDAN HIMSELF, (the F-35 program office leader, remember him?) said was FACTUAL? According to THAT REPORT the F-35 did dogfight with an F-16D (the two seat, slower, less manoeuvrable version) but not one, it was 17 dogfights. Yes, 17. And the F-35 LOST EVERY SINGLE ONE, even though it was carrying less than a full load, and THE F-16 WAS FITTED WITH DROP TANKS, hampering its manoeuvrability by limiting it to 7g instead of the usual 9g. And the F-35 was cleared for the full 9g combat envelope too, but had "such poor energy manoeuvrability characteristics" (yes, that's a quote from the report) that it could not pull more than 6.5g during the entire set of 17 engagements. That's fact. Read the damn report before you even think of answering.
The US Air Force official position on F-35 dogfight capabilities is that yes, they are poor, but it doesn't need them because if an F-35 gets into a dogfight then the pilot must have made a mistake. That was said by General Mike Hostage, at the time head of Air Combat Command. The plane cannot dogfight well enough to beat a handicapped F-16D, as was proved when it TRIED 17 TIMES AND LOST EVERY TIME. FACT.
As for the Norwegian pilot's article, it makes no claims that the F-35 can competitively dogfight with anything. It very cleverly gives the impression that dogfighting in an F-35 is a great experience, yet says NOTHING about what it can do. Very clever. Very deceptive. I think it is a dishonest article and that the Norwegian pilot knows the F-35 can't dogfight worth a damn compared to an F-16. If the head of Air Combat Command thinks it can't dogfight I suspect it can't. Read the DOT&E report, that gives you the facts, at least according to the F-35 program office leader it does.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-the-f-35-was-not-beaten-by-an-f-16/
Again I'll repeat, the F-35 and F-16 never actually fought, it was a test to see how it's maneuverability works, but you wouldn't care because you hate the plane so you're gonna just dance around the coldrin
And as for the Norweigian pilot's claims, if you read it (which you haven't) you'd know he highlights precisely why the F-35 can infact dogfight against any plane you throw at it.
You are incorrect, FireAngelLondoner, it wasn't 17 "dogfights." It was a series of maneuvering exercises from different starting positions.
If you want to know about the F-35's combat performance from people who know, why don't you read the evaluation below, written by a former F-16 pilot, who interviews anonymous F-35 pilots with significant previous experience in the F-15C, F-15E, F-16C and A-10. These pilots generally strongly prefer the F-35 in almost all combat situations.
www.heritage.org/defense/report/operational-assessment-the-f-35a-argues-full-program-procurement-and-concurrent
what ever it is not major problem of f-35 in dogfight
you know in dogfight all the fighter's win rate is just 50% in now days. because in now strategic activation dosen't require high meanuver. in many WVR test f-16 shot not only f-35 but also f-22 and other things.
in addition ef-2000 or rafael got kill mark in WVR engage with f-22
f-16 is just good stuff for WVR.
in real if 4th gen fighters front of 5th gen like f-35 they'll be a paper plain.
Finally? They've been operational for three years and they head to the Pacific this year. Ask people in Yuma how loud they are :-) I think they are absolutely worth the cost. The enemy won't get close enough for a dogfight ;-)
Dogfights are used for training these days. Dogfighting in combat is obsolete since engaging targets at 100+ miles
The f-35 will never be what the a-10 was👌
Look up busting F35 myths
So many hits on government funded crap to shut people up......... Let me guess that's also a myth ;) The F35 sucks it wont ever work. Even these highly intelligent over paid military geniuses cant do what the F35 was promised to do. It's like entering the Paris Dakar rally with a freaking F1 car. Anyway it will take most people another 10 years before they noticed they could just as well have whipped their ass with the tax money they paid to finance this fat looking disaster. Just by looking at it you know it cant be fast. And it isn't neither is it stealth. One thing it surely is ........... Most expensive American military failure.
Costs way less than an EF r Rafalle ... go figure.
the authors are plain stupid. regarding your question about busting myths: this is impossible, f35 is 95% filled with new tech which is classified, and will be until it is replaced with another generation. but in trying to understand f35, I came to a conclusion that this isn't just a plane, it's a system, or an intermediate informational hub. it wasn't meant to be involved in chaotic wars like WWII of Vietnam. it's main roles are to deliver intel and strike very precise targets, as it's more like a spy plane. why? and what is the concept of the new type of warfare? I don't know. these guys indeed have achieved a breakthrough in whatever they wanted, but they won't tell us what that is, but they didn't manage to achieve all their goals in this project. But make no mistake, the goals weren't about being super maneuverable or having the highest top speed. So claiming that money was wasted is stupid, because the russians will NEVER catch up with this plane, su57 has no similar tech, su57 is the best plane for chaotic warfare (classic), but they may be wrong... as there aren't too many chaotic wars now, as everyone knows everything about everyone, russians don't even know what this plane is about. You don't have to bomb the whole country into rubles, like Americans did during WWII to win it, now you hit their strategic targets, and the enemy is crippled, that's my guess of their concept.
So the big F-35 weapon is networked ops? something allready in use by a lot of other fighters...including the F-16 and F-18?
Nope current fighter have extremely limited connectivity and data sharing capabilities compared to the F-35.
CrazyIvan
we are talking about link 16.. its next gen network operations capacity..
And im not even talking about the Eurofighter JTDIS/MIDS systems.. wich are top of the game
Link 16 was implemented in the spanish armed forces recently for example.. and it means data is shared between F18s, destroyers, subs, EVAs (radar EWS) Eurofighters, AWACs ground units.. everything...
An F18 can attack with AMRAAM/METEOR with its radar off if a destroyer or an EVA or an EF is ilunminating the target..
Yes however the F-35 has a superior sensor suite compared to the F-18 regardless which gives it unparalleled target target tracking and discrimination. Also note that F-35's AN/APG-81 AESA is superior to the Super Hornets AN/APG-79 AESA. Hell the F-35 can use the AN/APG-81 for jamming.
nope the big weapon is stealth
Oh thanks... never would guess
Personally, I'd rather leave stealth missions to the F-22, ground-support to the A-10, dogfighting to the F-16 and the combination to the F/A-18. The F-35 would be real useful for the Marines, that's it. It's only good attributes are V-TOL capability and stealth. But, hey, what would a retired navy technician know, right?
The F22 isn't likely to be used at all...... To expensive and the chance it kills it pilot and itself being just as big probably bigger then the enemy taking it down the future doesn't look bright for the F22. Clear you are American Do you really think the F/A 18 even F16 would win a dogfight vs a Eurofighter or Rafale? It wont when you think they will it's clear why you are retired.... Probably 2 years early in that case.
the f-22 is better at dog fighting than the f-16
the f-22 is being outsourced so it will be cheaper, plus the whole killing the pilot thing was fixed
The F-35, now that its myriad of technical problems have been solved, will smoke any 4th generation fighter out there, except in close visual range dogfighting, which is rare these days. The F-35 is also cheaper than some 4th gen fighters and is still decreasing in price. The trillion is an estimate of the total cost of the F-35 fleet over the entirety of its service life.
Scary funny!!
1 trillion is the whole project. R&d , testing,building and running costs over its lifespan. Haters gonna hate.
I know there's a lot of Cynics when it comes to the F-35 program but I don't think that the general public realise what the F-35 is truly capable of, I mean it's not like the military will reveal all of its capabilities outright, I've heard some rumors that its a keeping an ace up its sleeve and it has something to do with that networking capabilities but I don't think its safe to say it here. This is a terrible analogy but look at the Ford GT at Le Mans this year.
ben should have said i am not conner " I Am BATMAN "....
Can't the JAS 39 Gripen do a similar datalink?
How about a vid of the Ford Trimotor?
The problem with replacing the F-16 is........it can still hang with the newest fighters in terms of manuverability
How much to add fuzzy dice?
Ok enough, I think your burning out........lol
I saw a F35 walking down the street the other day.
are they upgrading to windows 10 for free on their network?
Great, now you made the F-35 seem like a bad idea!
you are so awesome! :DDDDDD
rofl hahahahahahA @ 2:35 Johnny Connor
_"These F-16's are set to retire and clinically obese!"_
*shows a photo of the Block 60 @**0:30*
*-fail-*
That wasn't a Block 60. The Block 60 is only used by the U.A.E
Dead Pizza Defense
F-16 block 60 exclusively used by UAE
What about KC-390 (brazilian jungle wonder)? Its a good iten! (made im Brazil, so... shit, no!)
Will this plane actually make the cut? I highly doubt it.
I doubt it too. MiGs and Sukhoi's will chew them up.
+bweazel NOTHING will touch the F-35! It will destroy even the PAK-FA! MiGs can't do sh*t!
I'm referring to MiG-29/35 and Su-27/35.
Your dreaming if you think that!
"Trigger engage"
F35 Looks cool as fuck (it can hover) and the f22 raptor look cool too
I hope there going to be good Australia put money into this from the beginning to even bort 72 super hornets to cover the time it would take to get the f-35 But we had to do some thing because b4 the hornet we were still flying as our main attack fighter/bomber the f-111.we,ve put all our eggs in 1 basket .but at least we will still be able to work with the USA in combat missions when we need to
It's over budget but. Just think if u said a billion back when the f16 n f18 were built.
The graphic @0:55 shows a Hellenic F-16... when Greece isn't buying any
hahaha......"ok, yeah this not good, not good..."
I think I heard "Skynet" before... hehe
Could well be a safer place. Now imagine your old plane was affordable, easy to service and you had lots of them. Replace that with a handful of not very serviceable and super costly - you wont be going out much. Just keeping it to the essentials. Might that make the world a safer place? Quite possibly....
It is heavier than F-15C! It is a single engine F-15 !
The problem with this whole networking plan, is literally every other country is building advanced networking technologies for their fighters, Russia, Japan, China, Europe etc.
They should definitely keep the A-10 and F-18 Super Hornet and just replace the F-16 with the F-35, as the A-10s and F-18s are vital to close air support CAS and for the F-18 very good planes that can dogfight and carry significant amount of bombs. Six A-10s with aerial refueling and 4-6 F-18s can deny a 2 mi by 2 mi block for as long as the pilots can hold out or if they switch indefinitely add six F-22s and six F-15 and its indefinitely a No-Fly Zone!
The A-10 is an aging fleet, the youngest was built 32 years ago. About half the original fleet is no longer operational. The A-10 can only operate in air space controlled by friendly forces. The life expectancy of the A-10 was only to 2028 and it may remain with Air National Guard units until that time.The F-18 Super Hornet will remain in operation for some time. The older F-18 hornets are reaching their life expectancy and need to be replaced.The F-16 may also remain for some time in the Air National Guard.
+Dan Zervos simple make newer models, don't fix what is NOT broken just like the B-52...
+Dan Zervos they all worked wonderfully in 91' and prior and are all still very capable like I said built better and newer ones. Upgrade what works don't spend so much money on something that doesn't even loiter or carry that much and can only go 1.6 Mach.
+Jaime A23SSJ lol '91* sleep deprivation
do a vid of the f22 raptor
.... I'll be back.
American planes name
1) F-22 raptor
2) F-35
3) F-18 hornet
4) F-16
5) F-15
6) F-14
F
F
F haha
ABHISHEK conqueror What do you mean? I don't understand the joke if there is one . :P
F-35 = "Waste of Money"
I would upgrade:
1) F-15C & F-15E to F-15 2040
2) F-18C/D upgraded with Raytheon RACR or APG-79 v X
3) F-16C/D to F-16V or F-16 Block 70/71
It would cost 2-4 trillion to upkeep and upgrade the old fleet compared 1.5 trillion for the entire program cost of the F-35 which includes planes, fuel, maintenance, and weapons for the planes entire lifetime.
+bweazel You're a fool for wasting expensive $200,000,000 per F-35 and trillion dollars disaster aircraft.
F-35 can't even beat and filled the roles of the F-16C/D, F-18C/D, AV-8B, and A-10C. F-35 too expensive, can't turn, can't climb, can't run, and is a dead duck. F-35 replacing A-10C is a Joke!
F-35A ain't titanium bathtub bulletproof, can't carry 30 mm, and can't fly low like the A-10C. F-35A angle attack and maneuverability doesn't even out performed the F-16.
F-35B STOVL have smaller stubby wings and F135 STOVL engine is causing problem to Amphibious carrier by burning it the runway. AV-8B is better than F-35B.
F-35C can't even performed in attack mode and carry 12 AAM like the F-18C/D.
F-35 = Garbage
A warhoooooooooooog
reminds me of EDI from Stealth
the days of conventional dogfighting is rapidly declining. the F35 doesn't need to be better at that. but it certainly isn't the quality it should be
This is a stupid idea but I wonder if Ultra Hi Res, State of the art cameras would detect any kind of abrupt movements in the air (night and day). I mean, they are already developing technologies that recognize faces much better than the average human perception so just imagine if this kind of technology reaches the hand of the military. Doesn't that render stealth tech irrelevant? Or am I really that stupid :P plus I've heard that quantum tech radar could detect stealth but only in a very controlled environment. That was like back in 2013. But making quantum tech usable is still a kind of an eternal struggle from what I have heard.
Ultra Hi Res Cameras are still limited by the distance that they can detect the air movements and the reflected light from the stealth aircraft (the articles, that I have I read, usually put the maximum range of detection to around 30 to 50 miles) This is well within the range of the missiles carried by most fighter aircraft . Radar can detect stealth, what Stealth does is reduce the distance or warning time you get from radar. Normal radar might detect a non stealthy aircraft at 200 miles away, meaning if the enemy aircraft is fly at 600 mph, you would have about 20 minutes of warning before it arrived. That gives you time to launch quick reaction aircraft or respond. Stealthy aircraft reduce this detection range to say... 35 miles away (estimate only....exact range is classified). However, at 35miles away, the stealthy aircraft has already launched its weapons from around 60 -75 miles out. You find out you are under attack when the explosions start going off around you. In regards to Quantum Radar, .... Well, you might have to wait a while...
physics.aps.org/articles/v8/18
Joseph Sanchez Actually, that stupid idea of mine stemmed from the telescope they use up there in space but then I realise that those were telescopes and not a camera! anyway I've recently read some articles on "arsenal plane" and it's absolutely lethal, it's not like China has the exclusive right to use hypersonic missiles. Plus the amount of tech development the US Air Force can pursue is truly astounding, I don't know if you've heard of Google's deepmind AI but just imagine the military applications.
they should have made more f22s
there will be no more dogfights tho
they are just mad because the f-35 is replacing f-16/f-18/a-10 lolz
Joint Strike Fighter......
Cant really Dogfight the F-35 if your Dead
Hm too expensive
why is this unlisted?
I believe this is a joke video
it's not
Oh dear.....
more vids more vids more vids... Please
Flying Duck
do you even know the advantage of a fourth generation plane over a third generation one? who still do dogfights in this era lmao.
2:45 It looks like a crow
why can I see this?
BS jet has been grounded as BS should be
You F-35 haters AND defenders both need to consider that EMP weapons are emerging, and the F-35 will not stand a chance, and maybe even an F-4 Phantom is vulnerable.
+Scollis
E.M.P.'s have existed for a while. But non-nuclear E.M.P.'s work mostly against basic circuitry. Not closed and hardened systems like aircraft.
Below it
Made in China
Lol terminator is real
You've made me afraid to click the like button.
Sky nett .......terminator😂😂😂
HEY!!! SHUT UP ABOUT THE F16!!!!!
SKY NET
twhiiiiice*
the f35,using its ability to network is probably going to write the book on air superiority or go down as a overpriced turkey, given my dislike of pierre spey I hope it's the best thing ever
Lol just look at all the ignorant comments below
Where do you get this trillion dollars crap? I know, I know, it is from computing R&D, procurement, lifetime maintenance, etc. It is a silly, silly figure. It probably doesn't even use present value. We don't compute the costs of any other programs this way.
The costs paid so far are $55 billion for R&D and $20 or $30 billion for procurement of aircraft so far.
😂
actually this is all wrong but ok
su27 flanker can kill this f35 lightning....waste of money....
You can't kill what you can't see my friend
lol
LOLOL
ЯК-141 USSR
The Japanese fighter jet it better
X-10 shin shin?
Space AIDs ops added 8 models lol.
pak fa t 50 shits on the f35
After it gets shot down by the F-35. That ii if the 50 ever gets put into service. What are there? 4 or 5 proto types?
What ever. The f35 will be shot down by the Satan 400 coz it doesn't go fast enough to outrun it. The f35 is not going to be able to fill all the roles of the planes its suppose to replace , like the a10,f18,f16etc. They should have built more f22s and kept there other planes in service. But the f35? Come on the yanks can do better than that
The 400s and their radars will be taken out LONG in advance. Do you really think the US bastards don't have a way to defeat it? As fore the F-22. I do agree. But in the past The F-14 was also in the same boat with the F-35. No one liked it.