es tremendo avion pero lean la historia de los planos del yak 141 y se daran cuenta de donde viene los sistemas de esta aeronave, en wikipedia los encontraran
@TrangKaze Harriers are very expensive to maintain, the F-35 is an improvement, since most parts are interchangeable between models. They are also a bit on the slow side, and extremely dangerous to preform VTOL manuvers compared to the F-35, might be why we always called the Harriers at Cherry Point, Carolina Lawn Darts..
lockheed and boeing should not waste resources in competion, but help each other out to make more and better incredible machines!! That's my opinion at least... :)
@irongut12345 Hey it's human nature what do you expect. Man has been fighting wars for pointless reasons for the entirety of recorded history what makes you think it should change now.
Why do silly Americans jump up and down and scream and clap when something works. Surely they know it's gonna work...so why are they so surprised. Americans are so uncool in that sense....no stiff upper lip like the Brits
@Aussiephil99 Because their watching something happen that they dreamed about for years while creating it. You just heard the JSF is the heaviest fighter to hover, which means they broke a world record, and do not tell me you wouldn't be happy if you created something that broke a record.
@Aussiephil99 By the way, the British did first the Hawker Siddeley Kestrel and then the Harrier evolved from it. The renaming occured for making it a bit more american.
@RyannRebel 'You just heard the JSF is the heaviest fighter to hover'. And therein lies the problem, it drags around far too much mechanical baggage to be worthwhile.
I dont think taking off horizontally is even important, the Harrier cannot do it with a combat load, it needs a short runway. These planes will operate from aircraft carriers and short runways anyway. What is important is that it can land horizontally as landing is the most dangerous exercise on a short carrier for a jet.
As long as it can do a short take off run from a carrier with a ski jump thats totally fine for the US and UK Navy and Air force.
@Xiolablu3 You seem to have forgotten the reason for the Harrier being built.....vertical take off and landing in jungle warfare (with payload). The design is impeccable, and still to this day hard to improve on. It was a sad day when our UK forces announced the decommissioning of the Harrier.
Unmanned STV rejection may cost some their program and job: E.g., the LAVI fighter. The 1st in aviation history flights of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV] with no aerodynamic control surfaces, stealth inlets/wing-body design took place in Israel in 1987 [May 18, 1987, Aviation Week]. Unclassified video in a Facebook cite ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains sub/supersonic agility/safety gained by STV. EF, f35/f22 are not STV while unmanned NGB or ??? may be. Cf. X-44MANTA, X-47b, RQ-170, T-50, B-2.
The first in the history of aviation flight tests of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV] with no aerodynamic control surfaces, but with special stealth inlets and integrated wing-body design like those of the X-44 MANTA and the X-47b, took place in Israel in 1987 and briefly reported on May 18, 1987 by Aviation Week. A new video in a Facebook cite ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains the agility and safety gained by STV. The F-35 and F-22 are not STV while Next Generation Bomber [NGB] may be
You guys do know Lockheed Martin needed help from Yakovlev for the design of the VTOL engine, the whole engine system is based off the Yak-141, which they used in the F-35B.
@hellcatdave1 I dont think so, the Yak needed 3 engines to hover, the Lighting only uses one. If they did need any help from Yak, they probably studied the design, just like they studied every VTOL aircraft before they created this one.
they feel sorry for Boeing??? Look at all the crap thats going on now with the jet! Cost over run and not to mention engine problems!!! Break out the blade tape and bubble gum and keep my AV-8BII flying! hahahahaha
@canals22 Actually the F35 JSF is the next superfighter. Its versatility in the three models being made take the place of all the other multirole fighters in the USAF's fleet. The CTOL takes the place of the F16. The STOVL takes the place of the Harrier. Also the CV takes the place of the F18 fighter. With the F35 being cheaper to produce it is definitely the future of the USAF's multi role fighters for sure. Not to mention it is dirt cheap compared to the F22 and about as reliable as an A10.
@COD5252 There's 2 fans, one right behind the pilot and one in the back. The one behind the pilot draws in air from the top and pushes it under the plane. You can see the plane opening behind the pilot to let the first fan draw in air, it closes under forward flight.
still no where near as goog as the new UPGRADED HARRIER JUMP JET i still aint seen it actually start flying off after virtical takeoff and as for coming to a stand still from 500mph and just hovering there in about 10-15 seconds WELL IT SIMPLY CANNOT. No reverse THRUST
@dhudson369 I agree, the F35 cant go into forward flight from the hover, only rolling STO...Try doing that in a small Forest clearing eh? Harrier can, plus some other manoevers I can think of.... It amuses me these US vid clips, the way they try not to talk about that..Fuck me, Harrier can even climb out at 45Deg from the hover. Cant EVER see F35 do that one. Technically it never will between you and I.
What? The PAK-FA is much larger aircraft with a completely different mission. For a start it isn't capable of VTOL or carrier operations. You can't directly compare them.
Sorry but X-35 uses engine designed from Yak-141 engine (blueprints sold to USA in erly 90s) and heaviest fighter to hover ever was Yak-141 - 15800 kg and it was made 29 december 1989
VTOL is the truly future's aircraft. wind shear and crosswind landing , ......be forget ........stupid I hope to see the commercial airplane in VTOL tech.....
I cannot believe (UK) we are wasting time and energy on this dead duck.
It cannot VTOL on ships because of the tail thrust, carries too much deadweight in flight, fails to outperform 30yr old designs in flight and currently cannot carry a combat load while using its VTOL capabilities.
While I appreciate your patriotism, the Harrier is such a 'fucked up' piece of 'junk' that the US Marines wanted it ;)
Ive explained my point well enough I think. The F-35 has been in development for so long because it still has many fundamental flaws which are little closer to being resolved than they were 18 months ago. It carries deadweight in flight, and cannot carry an effective payload.
They wanted it because the only can operate their planes in certain areas where STOVL is needed, and they only purchased a few MANY years after their introduction
Its not a total epic piece of junk, hell I actually kinda like it but it is the king of carrying dead weight around lol
the F-35 is a decent plane which your country will probably purchase in a few years once we perfect it
The F-35 does have stealth built in btw it is made of similar material to the F-22
We have to buy F35 now, its been mandated along with our two white elephant megacarriers. It was on hold for a short while because Lockheed didnt want us to have the ability to work on our own craft, so restricted access to some data, but far as I know that issue has been overcome now.
Unfortunately the DoD are ignoring reports from its allies that the F-35's reported superiority over older Russian aircraft is false.
The stealth tech reduces its signature but by no means makes F35 radar invisible. If they can get it to carry a warload, it could be useful...but certainly no match for other modern fighter designs like Typhoon or F22.
My personal opinion is that this is like quite a few projects in recent US military procurement history...it is politically motivated and pushed through by politicians who's own boroughs will benefit from its production.
They require ridiculous amount of maintenance although they are "superior", and I also believe nobama canned this project cause it was too pricey
I guess only time will tell if the F-35 is a good craft and although I do hear what your saying about being lobbied into production
I believe this is going to be a useful aircraft and more suitable for replacing some older ones and also opens doors to new countries who dont have air fields or carriers
Actualy F-35 is based on blueprints of Russian Yak-141 that was sold in early 90s
USSR and Russia realised long time ago that this kind of VTOL is dead end. Same goes with "stealth" Ufiimcev and his team created a whole thing in USSR in 50s same time they developed principal ways not only negate EWD based "stealth" but detect that planes even better because they have perfect resonant frequencies. B2 for example SHINE LIKE A STAR on radar wih approx 81m wave length
It doesn't take a genius to know that an F-117 or an F-22 would shine like a star from such a long wavelength radar. No matter how you shape your small airplane, it won't scatter in a narrow beam in only a few directions.
That said, you need a pretty large array to get good resolution on VHF radar (Which Russia and China have) and you definitely couldn't fit one inside a fighter. This might make Stealth more useful in air to air combat in the long term.
Actualy it was done first time in mass production in MiG-31
It has PESA powerfull radar and system of frequency transformation (something that USA still does not has) and L-band antenna is AIRFRAME of a jet literaly - antenna elements are split to edges of wings
MiG-29 and Su-27 also have that system (only those for domestic use of cource)
And "stealth" jets have highly stable resonant freqs - thats why they "shine" - B2 "shines" in approx 81 m wavelengh
I would hesitate to say that the Russians are superior in X band radar. Latest American AESAs aren't anything to scoff at.
As for the L band antenna on the wings, that should provide decent horizontal resolution. Its vertical capabilities would depend on whether or not they mount anything on the tail... All in all, I'd say it's very doable, but I'd have to think about L band scattering for a bit to assess whether it's worth it.
Actualy you need to study some physics. Ever heard of TRIANGULATION? left wing antenna, right wing and nose radar = triangle. thats it. And Russia IS superior in radar tech - first AWACS, MiG-25 with 600Kw radar (USA was able to catch up only with APG-9) first airborne phased array radar e t c
And it is nothing bout scattering - AESA has its own serious flaws -
like poor performance on high angles and sad sensitivity - working AESA will be spotted by enemy long before jet with AESA will enter zone where its radar will able to sense its own reflected from target signal - unless you have L-band radar with freq transfor Also AESA is easy to flip off target and bad in scaning tasks - here come again L-band for scaning releasing main radar to tracking tasks only e t c
I do know something about physics and diffraction. You list wings and forward radar, but looking at a profile of a SU-27, that's basically one line. It should have a fairly narrow beam in the horizontal direction, but its vertical would be pretty bad. You'd need to have something on the tail, which is easy enough to do. Or you could be lazy and do a barrel roll to find vertical position. Point is I did consider what you were talking about, probably in more detail than you did.
The question of scattering off of an F-22 is relevant. A higher power X-band radar might be better depending on the improvement in detection.
Your criticism of AESA is kind of strange, considering that russia seems to be going in that direction too and the performance of the best US made AESA radars is not known to the public. Ausairpower actually seems to like US AESA, but completely despises the F-35 and all types of F-18s. It considers these too small to operate the highest power radar.
You forget one impostand thing - jets are MOVING in 3 dimention - jets is not rotating antenna of ground radar - thats why it does not needs anything else.
And i do not criticise AESA - i just say it has its own serious disadvantages - just as L-band radar do also - thats why unlike USA - we melted them both in one thing - to combine their advantages and compensate disadvantages
Are you saying it would be implemented as a SAR, which are usually used for ground surveillance? I'm not entirely sure about that idea...
That said, there is something wrong with the F-35 project. Too many people want too many things from a single plane and I doubt any of them will be entirely satisfied with the result.
Not exactly SAR - key principles of this tech is still state secret - so there is only common knowlege published. Shortly say it is tech that melts advanced L-band survelance radar and phased array X-band in one with ability to transform frequencies the way that L-band radar can use PAR as emmiter. USAF still failed to create something like Zaslon - thats for sure.
And F-35 is a total dead born whoax - just like Yak-141 was. waste of money
I think you need to read up on the performance of Harriers in the South Atlantiic,, based on tiny carriers in wild winter oceans they stood off and defeated the Argintine Air Force... this plane showd its metal.. so talk about waht you really know about and not some loud farting noise that seems to be coming out of your mouth
Are you a total fool... or just ignorant is specific area where you rant idiocies the JSF is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team led by Lockheed Martin with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems as major partners. The British versions will be built in Britain
@soundslave Catch up? You do realize that we took the Harrier and heavily modified it when creating the AV8B right? There was no need for us to develop a new VTOL when we can simply improve on one already in existence. Oh and I wouldn't exactly call the F-35 "Catching-Up." I'd call it a major leap ahead.
Actually it took Lockheed very little time to design the x-35, compared with how long it took the UK to design the harrier.. and you guys had help from Germany and the US to boot.
this plane is replacing the harrier because its VTOL is better and this plane can go supersonic. Which was the main reason they made this plane in the first place.
why do you say these things? you are clueless, if the harrier was better then they wouldn't be making this and the harrier is known to be incredibly difficult to fly unlike this
Hover is cool but never shot down an enemy. We have airports. Why carry a lift fan when you can carry more weapons or fuel. And I am sure they had to make sacrifices on the other variants that they shouldn't have had to.
They don't all have lift fans in the weapons bay, just the USMC and RN versions. They are replacing harriers. The USMC and RN NEED the lift fan because we have very small carriers. We rarely use airports. USMC battalions also keep Cobras or Harriers hot and parked just rear of the battle lines so that company commanders have immediate access to them.
One of the problems the Marines and RN had with the harrier is that the centralized location of the lift engine meant that heat-tracking projectiles went straight for the pilot. That aside, heavy or not, being easily serviced with parts and knowledge shared across branches is a great help which would mean that more air support is available more often. Plus no one in the Corps trusts those A10's
Please explain why weight limits the F-35! The F-4 was a huge plane yet it shot down Mig-17's! Every plane that flies has it's disadvantages and the skill is to develop tactics and better weapons to overcome them!
that's not my opinion, the designers of the f-35 say that the plane will be mainly a bomber, not a dogfighter. And a specific edition of the plane will be used for special operations, so it will have the VTOL tech on it. It's one of the heaviest fighter planes ever constructed
All F-35 variants will be first-day-of-the-war stealth fighters, capable of deep penetration of the most sophisticated air defenses.
The F-35 is designed for extraordinary air-to-air combat performance, using advanced stealth to avoid detection while employing a massively powerful sensor package to locate, target and destroy multiple adversary fighter aircraft. Those threats are eliminated before the F-35s presence is even known.
First look, first shot, first kill. With supersonic speed, the most powerful engine ever flown in a fighter, the ability to carry weapons internally and avoid the aerodynamic drag of external stores, and turning agility of up to 9 gs, the F-35 will provide close-in or long-range air-to-air combat capability second only to the F-22 Raptor, and superior to all other fighters.
The designers seem pretty confident judging what I read! You still fail to explain why weight limits it's abilities
weight does add some disadvantages for the jet. you need bigger engines etc... and they probably have to make do new technologies to compensate for a heavier jet. say trust vectoring to increase the agility of the jet.
Low speed agility due to weigh, and compared to saab and more likely, enemy's like the russian fighters it doesn't have more agility no matter what speed it goes. It must rely on its stealth and superior tech. If the russian customers manage to get proper tech and training it will be somewhat messy and expensive. That`s not gonna happen tho :)
offtopic: And stealth goes away when it needs external tanks, as it will possibly need to fulfill its tasks in the northern areas between Norway and Svalbard.
" it doesn't have more agility no matter what speed it goes"
It can pull a 9G turn.....the limit a pilot can tolerate.....that's as agile a plane can be!!! External tanks aren't required when tankers are airborne.
I don't know it all! I just don't make up shit and try and make it conform to my beliefs! Also I research a topic before commenting.......it makes you sound like you know it all!
In AA combat SPEED is everything so why would a plane like the F-35 engage in a low energy gunfight and loose it's advantage? That Cobra maneuver the SU's a Mig's do is great for an airshow;do it in combat and there DEAD!
That's why tactics such as the low-yo-yo, high-yo-yo, and others are used! Do you think this has never been done before? F-4 Phantom V. Mig-17 in Vietnam....the 17's lost the air war and the Mig-21's weren't used hardly at all for fear of losing them.
The new Eurofighter is a great plane but your comparing it to the F-35....the Eurofighter is primarily an air to air plane like the F-22 and the F-35 both an air to air and ground attack.
"That's why tactics such as the low-yo-yo, high-yo-yo, and others are used!"
the high yo-yo maneuver are to be used if speed is abundant. (diving down on a enemy)
the low yo-yo are not to be done in low altitude. meaning if you run out of speed you will also come closer to the ground to maintain speed and then the fighter with bad low speed maneuverability, IF its faster. will normally try to make a run it.
replay 1:07 - 1:08 over and over haha
Tonyboy451 2 weeks ago
And there goes $5000 in fuel...
Dv9UnKnoWn3 3 weeks ago
かっこえー
gsa1350 1 month ago
es tremendo avion pero lean la historia de los planos del yak 141 y se daran cuenta de donde viene los sistemas de esta aeronave, en wikipedia los encontraran
sukoy999 2 months ago
DAMN. thought it was a remote controlled plane before i clicked on it. why does it have to be the real thing!!?? :(
Pringles352 4 months ago
Looks very stable
VTOLKits 4 months ago
Nice looking aircraft.
inside1976 4 months ago
Now how much fuel did it use up for that hover? 25%? 50%?
jmr1068204 4 months ago
So it cant fly forward, and then land vertically? Seriously? Should have kept the Harrier.
TrangKaze 4 months ago
@TrangKaze Harriers are very expensive to maintain, the F-35 is an improvement, since most parts are interchangeable between models. They are also a bit on the slow side, and extremely dangerous to preform VTOL manuvers compared to the F-35, might be why we always called the Harriers at Cherry Point, Carolina Lawn Darts..
Triberius 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
But it looks so damn cool!!
Snakebite142 6 months ago
lockheed and boeing should not waste resources in competion, but help each other out to make more and better incredible machines!! That's my opinion at least... :)
Triplewave4 6 months ago
fucking american ass holes..i guess you are going to kill more innocence with that new monster eh?
irongut12345 6 months ago
@irongut12345 There are no innocent. More ignorance coming from people who don't live in the states. Which cell of al qaeda you from?
AgentSmith31 6 months ago
@AgentSmith31 LOL well said man =)
ilikemonkeysss 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@irongut12345 go fuck yourself you fucking cunt.
Imat00l 6 months ago
@irongut12345 Yes.
jliver69 6 months ago
@irongut12345 Hey it's human nature what do you expect. Man has been fighting wars for pointless reasons for the entirety of recorded history what makes you think it should change now.
Triberius 4 months ago
the only thing that sucks about it is it has to refuel every 20 mins but any ways AMERICA F YA!
THEGOODGECKOGUY 7 months ago
how is this awesome thing a fail???
spacegravity4me 7 months ago
:D The Jet with the most Flexible "ANUS"! Got it?
Demosai 8 months ago
i like f16 vista better
53destroyer 8 months ago
how many Walmarts can we put next to Lockheed?
brown9708 8 months ago in playlist Lookheed Martin
Starscream is better!
McWeslyF1 9 months ago
Cancel this $113 million dollar fail.
BucksOrDie2150 9 months ago
Transformers: Robots in disguise
happyking9 10 months ago
Plant 42 Rocks baby Good Job !!!!
holiday12345ABC 10 months ago
"C'mon Simon, YEAH BABY!" o.o Are they having sex while testing a prototype F-35? xD
hellcatdave1 1 year ago
Thanks to european financials...
lepivert 1 year ago 12
@lepivert what?
ddioppp 8 months ago
@lepivert ya but not very much usa almost funded all of it and i think swedin only put 8 million into it as usa says it will put 1 trillion into it
USAmilitarypower 4 months ago
I work on the JSF, incredible machine
johnnyjohn2005 1 year ago
Why do silly Americans jump up and down and scream and clap when something works. Surely they know it's gonna work...so why are they so surprised. Americans are so uncool in that sense....no stiff upper lip like the Brits
Aussiephil99 1 year ago
@Aussiephil99 Because their watching something happen that they dreamed about for years while creating it. You just heard the JSF is the heaviest fighter to hover, which means they broke a world record, and do not tell me you wouldn't be happy if you created something that broke a record.
RyannRebel 1 year ago 2
@RyannRebel ....I bet you British engineers never acted like that when the harrier first flew....they have more class
Aussiephil99 1 year ago 2
@Aussiephil99
Amen brother
jonthedoors 1 year ago
@Aussiephil99 By the way, the British did first the Hawker Siddeley Kestrel and then the Harrier evolved from it. The renaming occured for making it a bit more american.
laurentien00 1 year ago
@RyannRebel. The harrier was the first ever plane that could hover. that is a record in another league
mr9396 1 year ago
@mr9396 I think the first was the Bell x14, February 1957.
binaway 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RyannRebel 'You just heard the JSF is the heaviest fighter to hover'. And therein lies the problem, it drags around far too much mechanical baggage to be worthwhile.
netherledy 9 months ago
now where is the design for the X35 car? 1/2 scale this and morph it into a flying car now!
BlackTriad1 1 year ago
My life goal is to fly one of these...
SplendidsSuperSquad 1 year ago
I dont think taking off horizontally is even important, the Harrier cannot do it with a combat load, it needs a short runway. These planes will operate from aircraft carriers and short runways anyway. What is important is that it can land horizontally as landing is the most dangerous exercise on a short carrier for a jet.
As long as it can do a short take off run from a carrier with a ski jump thats totally fine for the US and UK Navy and Air force.
Xiolablu3 1 year ago
@Xiolablu3 You seem to have forgotten the reason for the Harrier being built.....vertical take off and landing in jungle warfare (with payload). The design is impeccable, and still to this day hard to improve on. It was a sad day when our UK forces announced the decommissioning of the Harrier.
EngineerAn 1 year ago
This is the offspring of a harrier and a F22 raptor
mastererik323 1 year ago
Unmanned STV rejection may cost some their program and job: E.g., the LAVI fighter. The 1st in aviation history flights of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV] with no aerodynamic control surfaces, stealth inlets/wing-body design took place in Israel in 1987 [May 18, 1987, Aviation Week]. Unclassified video in a Facebook cite ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains sub/supersonic agility/safety gained by STV. EF, f35/f22 are not STV while unmanned NGB or ??? may be. Cf. X-44MANTA, X-47b, RQ-170, T-50, B-2.
1Bengalor 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The first in the history of aviation flight tests of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV] with no aerodynamic control surfaces, but with special stealth inlets and integrated wing-body design like those of the X-44 MANTA and the X-47b, took place in Israel in 1987 and briefly reported on May 18, 1987 by Aviation Week. A new video in a Facebook cite ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains the agility and safety gained by STV. The F-35 and F-22 are not STV while Next Generation Bomber [NGB] may be
1Bengalor 1 year ago
Big respect to everyone at the Skunk Works.
Thanks for F111, the U2, the YF12, SR71, F35 and probably others we don't know about. Keep at it.
Bravo.
trespire 1 year ago
einfach nur ein geiler jet
Bililalago 1 year ago
It can float but can it actually move forward and fly from that position.
halcyon0830 1 year ago
We're in the future of aviation
JasonTylerRicci 1 year ago
"at 35,000 pounds, its the heaviest craft ever, to HUVER!". In America, things dont hover, they huver ; )
TCoops 1 year ago
You guys do know Lockheed Martin needed help from Yakovlev for the design of the VTOL engine, the whole engine system is based off the Yak-141, which they used in the F-35B.
hellcatdave1 1 year ago
@hellcatdave1 I dont think so, the Yak needed 3 engines to hover, the Lighting only uses one. If they did need any help from Yak, they probably studied the design, just like they studied every VTOL aircraft before they created this one.
Xiolablu3 1 year ago
they feel sorry for Boeing??? Look at all the crap thats going on now with the jet! Cost over run and not to mention engine problems!!! Break out the blade tape and bubble gum and keep my AV-8BII flying! hahahahaha
rsaf18 1 year ago
Overengenieered failure...
canals22 1 year ago 19
@canals22 Why is it a failure? There really hasn't been any proof that it failed.
iceagescrat1 6 months ago
@canals22 I know, that comment was a year ago. Lol
iceagescrat1 6 months ago
@canals22 Not really.
ilikemonkeysss 6 months ago
@canals22 Actually the F35 JSF is the next superfighter. Its versatility in the three models being made take the place of all the other multirole fighters in the USAF's fleet. The CTOL takes the place of the F16. The STOVL takes the place of the Harrier. Also the CV takes the place of the F18 fighter. With the F35 being cheaper to produce it is definitely the future of the USAF's multi role fighters for sure. Not to mention it is dirt cheap compared to the F22 and about as reliable as an A10.
KOxHARxMORNY 2 months ago
@canals22 but will it blend
TidalRay89 2 months ago
ok now the thrust is applied to only at the rear of the plane,so why dosent the plane rotate about its axis instead of going up.
COD5252 1 year ago
@COD5252 There's 2 fans, one right behind the pilot and one in the back. The one behind the pilot draws in air from the top and pushes it under the plane. You can see the plane opening behind the pilot to let the first fan draw in air, it closes under forward flight.
Odenkay 1 year ago
1 small step for a plane one huges step for planekind ???? XD
nice that it works netherlands wants to join the project again i thinks its good of my coutry to do that
7249xxl 1 year ago
Heavy, lots of moving parts, what's wrong with this picture/ plane.
gregrutz 1 year ago
System for vertical start is from russian Yak-141
maxmiztejm 1 year ago
looks like its got a dick
rurikia 1 year ago
If that plane was a chick, I'd fuck it right in the ass.
akkalakakalakka 1 year ago
Great works from a Great team In a Great Country ( U S A )
barzoman2 1 year ago
@barzoman2 (and the UK) They produced the engine (Rolls Royce)
Xiolablu3 1 year ago
@Xiolablu3 That is a GREAT WORK from Both USA and UK
barzoman2 1 year ago
HARRIER JUMP JET
Energik57 1 year ago
HOLA A TODOS
me pregunto ............''''???
que se estudia para dicenñar aviones tan sofisticados como esta maravilla
pliz respondanme a mi pagina de you tube
vale
adioz
sombra2604j 1 year ago
@sombra2604j beryberygood
we
japantakarabune
1000
takarabune1000 1 year ago
still no where near as goog as the new UPGRADED HARRIER JUMP JET i still aint seen it actually start flying off after virtical takeoff and as for coming to a stand still from 500mph and just hovering there in about 10-15 seconds WELL IT SIMPLY CANNOT. No reverse THRUST
dhudson369 1 year ago
@dhudson369 thats because this is the X-35? the F-35 can do the same (maybe more) than the AV-8
TheSnivilous 1 year ago
@dhudson369 I agree, the F35 cant go into forward flight from the hover, only rolling STO...Try doing that in a small Forest clearing eh? Harrier can, plus some other manoevers I can think of.... It amuses me these US vid clips, the way they try not to talk about that..Fuck me, Harrier can even climb out at 45Deg from the hover. Cant EVER see F35 do that one. Technically it never will between you and I.
EnglishTurbines 1 year ago
they should put a dummy underneath it, then turn on the afterburner and toast the shit out of it!!!!!!
kjun13 1 year ago
Could be job for... ... ... MYTHBUSTERS!!!!
It's not a myth, but it is destruction haha
Xdreamer89 1 year ago
with the next incoming of Pak-Fa,F-35 has become unuseful,because it is no longer the best airplane in real service
anisocoro 1 year ago
What? The PAK-FA is much larger aircraft with a completely different mission. For a start it isn't capable of VTOL or carrier operations. You can't directly compare them.
StargliderX 1 year ago
yeah like pak fuck is any advanced though.. F-35 flew 6 years before pak faw was even drawn dummy russian cheerleader.
hell the raptor flew like 10 years earlier.
mind you by the time pak fuck is flown in service, you bet raptors and 35s have been upgraded to toast pak fucks.
pak fuck is like 10 years behind.
nakazatoGTR 1 year ago
:) good very good jejejeje
maru3338 1 year ago
sick ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
xXAvaitorXx 1 year ago
The Yak's Was an Epic Fail.
siaxis1 1 year ago
@MDSCUSTOMS
Yak-141 was supersonic - but VTOL is dead end breed on current level of propulsion tech
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
Nice russian technology... this is a remake of the 20 years old Yak 141...
SrNutritivo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
jsfطائرات العمودية مثل اف35الطلوع
iugrehc 2 years ago
Naaah.
willempiekip 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
easy kills for sukhois
vtwinmesa 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ATTN: 0Novo is a faggot.
So I'm following the faggot around the internet, or where he has been and am leaving a message.
He.
Is.
A.
Faggot.
Anananonymous 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
0:43
Sorry but X-35 uses engine designed from Yak-141 engine (blueprints sold to USA in erly 90s) and heaviest fighter to hover ever was Yak-141 - 15800 kg and it was made 29 december 1989
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
The interwebs is serious business.
0Novo 2 years ago
its a series of tubes!
dodgedart74 2 years ago
VTOL is the truly future's aircraft. wind shear and crosswind landing , ......be forget ........stupid I hope to see the commercial airplane in VTOL tech.....
Poranimn 2 years ago
Save cost for building the long range runways that is main role by VTOL aircrafts.I think......
Poranimn 2 years ago
lol the thruster looks like a dick the way it spins around
bartybum 2 years ago
I cannot believe (UK) we are wasting time and energy on this dead duck.
It cannot VTOL on ships because of the tail thrust, carries too much deadweight in flight, fails to outperform 30yr old designs in flight and currently cannot carry a combat load while using its VTOL capabilities.
Screw the Fuckup-35, we need a Harrier 3!
GuzziHeroV50 2 years ago
LOL
Harrier 3 what the other 2 werent fucked up enoguh??
F-35 is gold dont hate a good product just because its not british junk
bigman95impala 2 years ago
While I appreciate your patriotism, the Harrier is such a 'fucked up' piece of 'junk' that the US Marines wanted it ;)
Ive explained my point well enough I think. The F-35 has been in development for so long because it still has many fundamental flaws which are little closer to being resolved than they were 18 months ago. It carries deadweight in flight, and cannot carry an effective payload.
GuzziHeroV50 2 years ago
They wanted it because the only can operate their planes in certain areas where STOVL is needed, and they only purchased a few MANY years after their introduction
Its not a total epic piece of junk, hell I actually kinda like it but it is the king of carrying dead weight around lol
the F-35 is a decent plane which your country will probably purchase in a few years once we perfect it
The F-35 does have stealth built in btw it is made of similar material to the F-22
bigman95impala 2 years ago
We have to buy F35 now, its been mandated along with our two white elephant megacarriers. It was on hold for a short while because Lockheed didnt want us to have the ability to work on our own craft, so restricted access to some data, but far as I know that issue has been overcome now.
Unfortunately the DoD are ignoring reports from its allies that the F-35's reported superiority over older Russian aircraft is false.
GuzziHeroV50 2 years ago
The stealth tech reduces its signature but by no means makes F35 radar invisible. If they can get it to carry a warload, it could be useful...but certainly no match for other modern fighter designs like Typhoon or F22.
My personal opinion is that this is like quite a few projects in recent US military procurement history...it is politically motivated and pushed through by politicians who's own boroughs will benefit from its production.
GuzziHeroV50 2 years ago
Now if they made a Veritech Fighter, I'd be impressed :D
GuzziHeroV50 2 years ago
F-22 is worse than a 1980s jaguar
They require ridiculous amount of maintenance although they are "superior", and I also believe nobama canned this project cause it was too pricey
I guess only time will tell if the F-35 is a good craft and although I do hear what your saying about being lobbied into production
I believe this is going to be a useful aircraft and more suitable for replacing some older ones and also opens doors to new countries who dont have air fields or carriers
bigman95impala 2 years ago
@GuzziHeroV50
Actualy F-35 is based on blueprints of Russian Yak-141 that was sold in early 90s
USSR and Russia realised long time ago that this kind of VTOL is dead end. Same goes with "stealth" Ufiimcev and his team created a whole thing in USSR in 50s same time they developed principal ways not only negate EWD based "stealth" but detect that planes even better because they have perfect resonant frequencies. B2 for example SHINE LIKE A STAR on radar wih approx 81m wave length
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
It doesn't take a genius to know that an F-117 or an F-22 would shine like a star from such a long wavelength radar. No matter how you shape your small airplane, it won't scatter in a narrow beam in only a few directions.
That said, you need a pretty large array to get good resolution on VHF radar (Which Russia and China have) and you definitely couldn't fit one inside a fighter. This might make Stealth more useful in air to air combat in the long term.
NoOne3234 2 years ago
@NoOne3234
Actualy it was done first time in mass production in MiG-31
It has PESA powerfull radar and system of frequency transformation (something that USA still does not has) and L-band antenna is AIRFRAME of a jet literaly - antenna elements are split to edges of wings
MiG-29 and Su-27 also have that system (only those for domestic use of cource)
And "stealth" jets have highly stable resonant freqs - thats why they "shine" - B2 "shines" in approx 81 m wavelengh
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
I would hesitate to say that the Russians are superior in X band radar. Latest American AESAs aren't anything to scoff at.
As for the L band antenna on the wings, that should provide decent horizontal resolution. Its vertical capabilities would depend on whether or not they mount anything on the tail... All in all, I'd say it's very doable, but I'd have to think about L band scattering for a bit to assess whether it's worth it.
NoOne3234 2 years ago
@NoOne3234
Actualy you need to study some physics. Ever heard of TRIANGULATION? left wing antenna, right wing and nose radar = triangle. thats it. And Russia IS superior in radar tech - first AWACS, MiG-25 with 600Kw radar (USA was able to catch up only with APG-9) first airborne phased array radar e t c
And it is nothing bout scattering - AESA has its own serious flaws -
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
like poor performance on high angles and sad sensitivity - working AESA will be spotted by enemy long before jet with AESA will enter zone where its radar will able to sense its own reflected from target signal - unless you have L-band radar with freq transfor Also AESA is easy to flip off target and bad in scaning tasks - here come again L-band for scaning releasing main radar to tracking tasks only e t c
ausairpower. net/APA-Rus-Low-Band-Radars. html
ausairpower. net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM. html
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
I do know something about physics and diffraction. You list wings and forward radar, but looking at a profile of a SU-27, that's basically one line. It should have a fairly narrow beam in the horizontal direction, but its vertical would be pretty bad. You'd need to have something on the tail, which is easy enough to do. Or you could be lazy and do a barrel roll to find vertical position. Point is I did consider what you were talking about, probably in more detail than you did.
NoOne3234 2 years ago
The question of scattering off of an F-22 is relevant. A higher power X-band radar might be better depending on the improvement in detection.
Your criticism of AESA is kind of strange, considering that russia seems to be going in that direction too and the performance of the best US made AESA radars is not known to the public. Ausairpower actually seems to like US AESA, but completely despises the F-35 and all types of F-18s. It considers these too small to operate the highest power radar.
NoOne3234 2 years ago
edit: second sentence I meant improvement of radar return off of a US stealth airplane.
NoOne3234 2 years ago
@NoOne3234
You forget one impostand thing - jets are MOVING in 3 dimention - jets is not rotating antenna of ground radar - thats why it does not needs anything else.
And i do not criticise AESA - i just say it has its own serious disadvantages - just as L-band radar do also - thats why unlike USA - we melted them both in one thing - to combine their advantages and compensate disadvantages
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
Are you saying it would be implemented as a SAR, which are usually used for ground surveillance? I'm not entirely sure about that idea...
That said, there is something wrong with the F-35 project. Too many people want too many things from a single plane and I doubt any of them will be entirely satisfied with the result.
NoOne3234 2 years ago
@NoOne3234
Not exactly SAR - key principles of this tech is still state secret - so there is only common knowlege published. Shortly say it is tech that melts advanced L-band survelance radar and phased array X-band in one with ability to transform frequencies the way that L-band radar can use PAR as emmiter. USAF still failed to create something like Zaslon - thats for sure.
And F-35 is a total dead born whoax - just like Yak-141 was. waste of money
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
@NoOne3234
It is fully capable L-band radar on a jet fighter - that is the case
MarshallJukov 2 years ago
How long has it taken the US to design something that the UK have had for years, and ours is a proven warbird. :-)
plazmanian 2 years ago
Comparing the Lightning and the Harrier is like comparing apples and 40 year old oranges.
flyboy4692 2 years ago 25
Yeah exactly!
and the harrier is low as shit, these brits are just mad they couldnt make any of these parts in britain
Well we all know british only make shit that breaks and needs service
bigman95impala 2 years ago
I think you need to read up on the performance of Harriers in the South Atlantiic,, based on tiny carriers in wild winter oceans they stood off and defeated the Argintine Air Force... this plane showd its metal.. so talk about waht you really know about and not some loud farting noise that seems to be coming out of your mouth
MartinIDavies 2 years ago
Are you a total fool... or just ignorant is specific area where you rant idiocies the JSF is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team led by Lockheed Martin with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems as major partners. The British versions will be built in Britain
MartinIDavies 2 years ago
@flyboy4692 Yeh, except it took america 40 years to catch up with the British. better late than never I guess.
soundslave 1 year ago
@soundslave Catch up? You do realize that we took the Harrier and heavily modified it when creating the AV8B right? There was no need for us to develop a new VTOL when we can simply improve on one already in existence. Oh and I wouldn't exactly call the F-35 "Catching-Up." I'd call it a major leap ahead.
flyboy4692 1 year ago
@flyboy4692 yep they both look about the same but its completly different taste.
flightdeckreviews 1 year ago
Actually it took Lockheed very little time to design the x-35, compared with how long it took the UK to design the harrier.. and you guys had help from Germany and the US to boot.
konatsukuonji 2 years ago
Not to mention all of the blue prints from Yakulov for the 141 , funny that hey!
bubbles867 2 years ago 2
And how did lockheed solve the thermal probles with the thruster ....... they asked the UK..!
US are very good developers but are not good innovators
thozz 2 years ago
You're flat out saying that 350 million people that you don't know are not able to be innovative because of their relative geographical location??
That's a pretty bold and foolish statement! Are we to judge all brits as religitarded inbreeders because of the royal family?
konatsukuonji 2 years ago
cute comment, but this one is stealth, faster, and multi functional...
marinedr77 2 years ago
Stealth? F35 is stealth? Um, no.
You may be thinking of F22 which is low-observable.
GuzziHeroV50 2 years ago
F-35 uses very difrent technology. Are you seriously comparing Harrier and new ffith generation stealth fighter?
Harrier is useless against modern fighters.
MokomaSusi 2 years ago
By far my favorite aircraft :D
cincinatibengal 2 years ago
in MY opinion i prefer it
sochall728 2 years ago
Comment removed
suma4m 2 years ago
pause the video at 0:39 and it looks like that guy wants to grab someones ass.
jkills24 2 years ago 11
quite a good Vertical Take off And Landing, but the harrier is a non beaten VTOL aircraft.
sochall728 2 years ago
this plane is replacing the harrier because its VTOL is better and this plane can go supersonic. Which was the main reason they made this plane in the first place.
jkills24 2 years ago
true and i like this aircraft, but the harrier is a classic
sochall728 2 years ago
Yes the harrier is classic, but it's old, and when F-35B makes it's debut it will be "beaten".
OlderG0ds 2 years ago
why do you say these things? you are clueless, if the harrier was better then they wouldn't be making this and the harrier is known to be incredibly difficult to fly unlike this
SheepJumpFish 2 years ago
I hope that that is my career, flying that.
hutigg 2 years ago
Excellent, my future project too....
femtophysiker 2 years ago
wow, at 0:41 it looks like a freeze frame. VTOL rules!
megachiken21 2 years ago
i remember watching this on tv lol
airsoftgunrunner 2 years ago
It has a lift fan in the weapons bay, that's just dandy. And it's heavy too, great.
gregrutz 2 years ago
The lift fan isn't in the weapons bay. Why are you concerned with weight? You just witnessed it hover.
ozzy1351 2 years ago 2
Hover is cool but never shot down an enemy. We have airports. Why carry a lift fan when you can carry more weapons or fuel. And I am sure they had to make sacrifices on the other variants that they shouldn't have had to.
gregrutz 2 years ago
They don't all have lift fans in the weapons bay, just the USMC and RN versions. They are replacing harriers. The USMC and RN NEED the lift fan because we have very small carriers. We rarely use airports. USMC battalions also keep Cobras or Harriers hot and parked just rear of the battle lines so that company commanders have immediate access to them.
GavinSimmons 2 years ago
Comment removed
ozzy1351 2 years ago
Comment removed
ozzy1351 2 years ago
One of the problems the Marines and RN had with the harrier is that the centralized location of the lift engine meant that heat-tracking projectiles went straight for the pilot. That aside, heavy or not, being easily serviced with parts and knowledge shared across branches is a great help which would mean that more air support is available more often. Plus no one in the Corps trusts those A10's
GavinSimmons 2 years ago
why wouldnt they trust the A10, thats one of the best ground support aircraft ever made
FordManMT 2 years ago
yes, but they are not building many of the VTOL versions
FordManMT 2 years ago
Not yet.
tuggerpuppy1 2 years ago
they would mostly use them for carrier based opporations.
If the turbo fan really takes up that much room I doubt they will have many. You dont want to go out gunned
FordManMT 2 years ago
bravoooooooooo i want to see it in our air force
ridoking2007 2 years ago
this plane is coming to holland and america or are there more countrys
theuntheman22 2 years ago
Основные конструктивные особенности своровали с Як-141 !!!!
Pravilnost 2 years ago
The F-35 is going to be the best plane of it's generation! The F-16 was great and the F-35 is light years past it's technology!
ozzy1351 2 years ago
the f-35 is a very heavy plane and the f-16 can easily shoot it down
giann1s 2 years ago
Please explain why weight limits the F-35! The F-4 was a huge plane yet it shot down Mig-17's! Every plane that flies has it's disadvantages and the skill is to develop tactics and better weapons to overcome them!
ozzy1351 2 years ago
that's not my opinion, the designers of the f-35 say that the plane will be mainly a bomber, not a dogfighter. And a specific edition of the plane will be used for special operations, so it will have the VTOL tech on it. It's one of the heaviest fighter planes ever constructed
giann1s 2 years ago
From Lockheads web page:
All F-35 variants will be first-day-of-the-war stealth fighters, capable of deep penetration of the most sophisticated air defenses.
The F-35 is designed for extraordinary air-to-air combat performance, using advanced stealth to avoid detection while employing a massively powerful sensor package to locate, target and destroy multiple adversary fighter aircraft. Those threats are eliminated before the F-35s presence is even known.
ozzy1351 2 years ago
First look, first shot, first kill. With supersonic speed, the most powerful engine ever flown in a fighter, the ability to carry weapons internally and avoid the aerodynamic drag of external stores, and turning agility of up to 9 gs, the F-35 will provide close-in or long-range air-to-air combat capability second only to the F-22 Raptor, and superior to all other fighters.
The designers seem pretty confident judging what I read! You still fail to explain why weight limits it's abilities
ozzy1351 2 years ago
weight does add some disadvantages for the jet. you need bigger engines etc... and they probably have to make do new technologies to compensate for a heavier jet. say trust vectoring to increase the agility of the jet.
picopiku 2 years ago
people never always believe smart alecky trolls like giann, they got no frakking spine to defend their theories.
weight actually is an advantage, since kinetic energy of that mass prevents the plane from slowing down too fast.
the 35 may be heavy but so were the 16, 15, 14,
gian lacks understanding of basic physics.
nakazatoGTR 2 years ago
Low speed agility due to weigh, and compared to saab and more likely, enemy's like the russian fighters it doesn't have more agility no matter what speed it goes. It must rely on its stealth and superior tech. If the russian customers manage to get proper tech and training it will be somewhat messy and expensive. That`s not gonna happen tho :)
MatsNorway 2 years ago
offtopic: And stealth goes away when it needs external tanks, as it will possibly need to fulfill its tasks in the northern areas between Norway and Svalbard.
MatsNorway 2 years ago
" it doesn't have more agility no matter what speed it goes"
It can pull a 9G turn.....the limit a pilot can tolerate.....that's as agile a plane can be!!! External tanks aren't required when tankers are airborne.
ozzy1351 2 years ago
ok fan boy ill guess you know it all.
MatsNorway 2 years ago
I don't know it all! I just don't make up shit and try and make it conform to my beliefs! Also I research a topic before commenting.......it makes you sound like you know it all!
ozzy1351 2 years ago
Shut up tard.
"It can pull a 9G turn"
if its heavy it will need more speed to be able to pull a 9g turn meaning it will be gunner food in the low speeds against the lighter fighters.
"External tanks aren't required when tankers are airborne. "
Got no time for refueling against incoming fighter/bombers from russia. Norway doesn't have tankers in air 24/7
russia are flying close to the border almost daily.
MatsNorway 2 years ago
"it will be gunner food in the low speeds
against the lighter fighters"
In AA combat SPEED is everything so why would a plane like the F-35 engage in a low energy gunfight and loose it's advantage? That Cobra maneuver the SU's a Mig's do is great for an airshow;do it in combat and there DEAD!
ozzy1351 2 years ago
in a gun fight you lose speed in every turn. do it for long enough and the enemy comes on your inside and takes you out.
MatsNorway 2 years ago
"in a gun fight you lose speed in every turn"
That's why tactics such as the low-yo-yo, high-yo-yo, and others are used! Do you think this has never been done before? F-4 Phantom V. Mig-17 in Vietnam....the 17's lost the air war and the Mig-21's weren't used hardly at all for fear of losing them.
The new Eurofighter is a great plane but your comparing it to the F-35....the Eurofighter is primarily an air to air plane like the F-22 and the F-35 both an air to air and ground attack.
ozzy1351 2 years ago
"That's why tactics such as the low-yo-yo, high-yo-yo, and others are used!"
the high yo-yo maneuver are to be used if speed is abundant. (diving down on a enemy)
the low yo-yo are not to be done in low altitude. meaning if you run out of speed you will also come closer to the ground to maintain speed and then the fighter with bad low speed maneuverability, IF its faster. will normally try to make a run it.
Mats