Added: 3 years ago
From: lucafr2001
Views: 108,161
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (204)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • still havent seen one go from hovering to horizontal flight, doesnt work me thinks, just hope the royal navy dont buy them for the new carriers.

  • Generation six fighters are at a greater advantage with its HMD. ( head mounted display). Because in f14 and f15 you have to turn your whole body around just to see where your enemy is but with the HMD you can look around without having to turn your head and you can also look throught the floor

  • Live Free Or Die Hard!!! I love the U.S.A.

  • @laghater Lol you think you have freedom, i find that fucking hilarious.

  • @Antifaith29 im not from the u.s.a but why would you believe that a country built on freedom wouldn't have any? im guessing you believe the big businesses are corrupt and so are our governments haha your fucking hilarious.

  • f-35 melhor aviao que existe!!

  • @rafaelsantos51 /watch?v=UQB4W8C0rZI&feature=r­elated

    /watch?v=TS7O14nzrzE&list=FLRM­rYhn69o_LtNk71gU43BA&index=15&­feature=plpp_video

    andas a fumar erva a mais

  • Dear santa...

    upgraded starscream

    better than harrier :o

    and easier to fly?

  • In this Video.It technically shows the X-35B STOVL. Since the F-35B STOVL wasn't made yet back then. and it doesn't look anything a like.

  • from a maintenance point of view... this thing must be a nightmare with rigs and augmenter removal/install's... i feel sorry for the crewchiefs...

  • летающяя шняга)))

  • Is the vital control processing unit protected from EMP? Seems to me that this is very vulnerable to electronic jamming systems yet to be seen.

  • @reddog694uk Every piece of electronics in the US/Russian/NATO/CSO countries all have EMP protected electronics.

  • Comment removed

  • @4V14T10N EMP = Electromagnetic pulses, these include all the types of radiation like radar, and an EMP is also given off when a nuclear explosion occurs. so if you want to stop answering things before you "google it" or any other form of access of knowledge that would really help with the stupidity you just thrown at me.

  • Comment removed

  • @4V14T10N There are many EMP weapons the Russians even have some the size of a soda can, this is just a small documentary watch?v=YAmq1ODX8iA watch?v=HMGBznHYGsA

  • Comment removed

  • @TheMilitaryTactics I have watched the documentary, you ve sent to me, first thanks for the effort...

    But i dont think there is such a thread, and for the simulator machine, that they tested with remote controlled model helicopter and the car, is using a lot of energy and we dont know the amount of effect it is causing, we dont know wheather the electronics are fried OR short circuited... And it is effective in a very small area...

  • @4V14T10N Well one you it was built to be in a small radius but if a nuclear bomb was detonated over the continental USA at 300 miles high all of the USA (and more) will be brought to a full stop apart from the millitary as they cover the electronics with certain metals to protect them, but the EMP is a weapon.

  • Comment removed

  • @TheMilitaryTactics @TheMilitaryTactics "but if a nuclear bomb was detonated over the continental USA at 300 miles high"

    Well i told that, qouting from myself;

    ""EM pulse may occur that could be a result of many big forces....""

    such an effect could occur... And in a situation like that;

    "millitary as they cover the electronics with certain metals to protect them,"

    I am not sure that can protect the electronics first of all "metals" are natural conductors.

  • @4V14T10N well for the metals they can conduct it through specially made structures that will prevent the pulse to enter or the harm the electronics.

  • @TheMilitaryTactics The USA has EMP weapons to. 

  • Look people,the Harrier was a great aircraft foits time,no doubt,But come on,really.The F-35 is so much more advanced.It can fly supersonic,it's avionics and radar systems are light years ahead of the Harrier,how can they not,Harrier is over 30 years older.I mean really,look how much technology has advanced.Of course it's not combat tested,neither was the F-15,but the F-15 proved to be the premiere fighter for years.Harrier was not a good dogfight fighter,the f-35 was designed to dogfight also.

  • @FRANK1FM What you say is absolutely correct and is not the point of the argument, which is that you cannot say a plane is going to be better before it's even entered service.(Even the F15 wasn' heralded as being better than the F4 or Mig 25 whilst still in development.)

    That it will be a better aircraft than the Harrier is not at question, era and technology are on it's side, but until it's actually "done the job" it's only theoretical and therefore

    "is better" is incorrect.

  • OMG why they wrote f35 at the YAK-141 8)

  • Why is everyone arguing about which is best harrier or jsf. The jsf is the replacement for the harrier for the uk and usa. The harrier is proven, but is also over 40-years old.

  • Don't we have runways?

  • Australia"s air force just bought 100 of these mother fuckers

  • @mwhite4324 no we havent not yet we are expected to acquire around 100 aircraft to replace its Hornets and F-111s from 2012. , we havent actually bought them.

  • @mwhite4324

    yeah and they are really not happy about it XD

  • We dont need virtical take-off which is seemingly for invade other contry.

    We need the ability to have 4 misiles against ships and over mahha 2 speed and keep flying through 450 kairi and stelth.

    This is not what we want to buy.This is crap.Fuck you americans must fix this crap as soon as possible and discount please.under 5,000 US dallers.

  • @44485523 1) its made by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Northrop Grumman BAE Systems, and so its not completly US.

    2) it comes in three versions the F-35A/B/C and only the B can do VTOL. the other two do CTOL/STOL with the A being the largest one out of the lot (with better range and more fire power) and C being for large carriers (its the same size as the B but has more range due to the fact it doesn't have VTOL).

    3)I would answer you more but try to spell a little better(not trying to be mean).

  • hope i get to fly this in the royal navy fleet air arm!!! queen elizebeth class aircraft carriers!

  • GOD SPEED COLONEL, SIR!!

  • Heavy and expensive.

  • cheap plane 

  • @germany2010ful Tell that to the US tax payer. LOL

  • I hope the real ones are better at dodging missiles than they are in BF2, those things are missile magnets....lol.

  • That looks so much like the F-22 Raptor

  • Ugly, slow, short range, low payload, expensive and late = F-35

  • They forgot the two other versions of the F-35 both of which have a larger weapons payload, which makes them a better "strike plane" compared to the A and C models the B (stovl version) is a piece of shit. heavier, shorter range, less agile, smallest payload. woohoo it can go up and down.

  • The Harrier was the first PRACTICAL V/STOL fighter ever made...there were unsuccessful experiments using multiple lift-engines before that, but the Harrier was the first single-engine, vectored-thrust plane ever, and the first and only to succeed operationally. I've already responded to "EnglishTurbines", so for everyone ELSE'S benefit, the Harrier CAN VTO, but always uses STO in operations, since it is very range/payload limited with a VTO. It's a small benefit, but doesn't beat the F-35's.

  • @justforever96 a) Harrier does not always use STO in ops. b) STO is more often than not used because in VTO the whole wing and airframe is a fuel thirsty dead weight

  • Two pillars of thrust wow....and from one engine....gosh , and the Harrier only had 4 pilars of thrust from one engine making this complex layout un-neccessary. As I've said elswhere, one hit in that rear nozzle or the front fan ...one useless plane.

  • @SuperAncientmariner Dude maybe you should stop talking about F-35 B and vertical landing par start talking about real purpouses of jets like bombing or air-to-air combat there is absolutely NO comparison between these 2 planes end of story

  • @availabl3account Excuse me but I was under the impression that this page was about Vertical take-off and landing and about the F-35.. The end of the story is that in bombing and air to air combat, you are right, there is no comparison......the Harrier has done both,(successfuly) the F-35 has done neither

  • @SuperAncientmariner Absolutely AND in the 50's Britain has a supersonic Harrier designed (essentially and F-35 in the 1950's) our Supersonic Harrier was called the P-1154 and debt to Americafor WW2 and hence the government white paper scrapped it.

  • @TheMightyBlighty The project you re talking about was shut down in 1965 which is 20 years after the WW2 over, the first jet fighter was Me-262.(period)

  • @availabl3account Yep, followed v. shortly by the Meteor

  • @SuperAncientmariner Heey "dude" how you been? Thanks for the confirmation by the way...

  • @availabl3account My pleasure old chap.lol

  • @availabl3account LOLOL The first OPERATIONAL jet fighter - look up the word operational. Frank Whittle patented and built the first Jet engine and Whittles was part stolen by the Germans, however they did not see his ideas for the "fuel dump" or as he called it later the AFTERBURNER. The me262 had dreadful engines that had to be stripped ever few hours, whittles engine had almost equal endurance to modern jet engines.

    You know NOTHING.

  • @SuperAncientmariner It's not about vertical take off and landing it's about strike planes. I find it very helpful to read titles and discriptions. The F-35 has two other versions that don't have stovl abilities.

  • @macuss87 Totaly agree old chap, but our discussion was about the B varient and the VTOL capability which is, as you can see by following the vid, the main point of this page.

  • @SuperAncientmariner Not sure what the discusion was about but the argument you use doesn't work. The P51 did both very well also but would you put it against an F35? it definetly is better than the harrier but thqt does not meen the harrier was anything less than an amazing fighter.

  • @123456789mischief You have me at a disadvantage. Where did a P51 come into things, and what did it do both of, and what argument?

  • @SuperAncientmariner sorry didn't make my point well. I was just saying that despite the F35 not being proven in combat it will do better than the harrier. it surpasses it in all areas of operation. not trashing the harrier just saying its had it's day like the P51/spitfire etc.

    maybe the piffing I don't think that is somthing the F35 can do but I am not an expert so like everyone here its an opinion. I hope it turns out to be a good machine since its what were getting in canada. CF35A

  • @123456789mischief No probs mate . I think i was replying to someone saying the 35 was better at things than the Harrier when it had'nt actualy done them. I hope, given the cost and advances in technology, that the 35 is better...be some red faces if it isn't.

    BTW, you mean Viffing I take it. :o) (Vector In Foreward Flight...evasion manouevre)

  • @SuperAncientmariner yea viffing why I put down piffing is beyond me. just loosing what little inteligence I had.

  • @123456789mischief Ha Ha, tell me about it, I'm not a typist either. Mind you, compared to some, one letter is nothing and anyway the meaning was crystal clear.

  • @SuperAncientmariner You're making an argument against ever using anything new, ever. Whenever some new military hardware is introduced it will always be true that the previous generation hardware will have a record of already having done the job and the new one won't have that record yet because... you know... it's NEW. Take such an argument seriously and every military in the world would be using sticks and stones.

  • @dunbar9finger if you scroll back a while you will see what the argument was.You will see that what was being said is just that. Someone was saying the 35 was better than Harrier and was better at everything when it had in fact done nothing. As you say it is new, it has'nt got a record of achievement so can't be compared. Thanks for the agreement

  • @SuperAncientmariner

    Range, cost per unit over time, And fly by wire, which means the safety factor is huge!  The pilots of the harrier are considered the best stick and rudder guys. period the 35 is more like a video game, which is good overall, but it does mean that the pilots will be tasked and over-tasked in other areas..like long range precision weapons strikes, something the harrier was never asked to do. just my 2 cents

  • @availabl3account - One plane it can't replace is the A-10. Think it can do the A-10's role? Lets put it to the test. F35B against M1 Abrams. I bet the F35B would look awful! XD

  • @LeksServices What the f-35 can carry the JSOW and JASSM missiles that can kill a tank farther then the a-10.

  • @N1cholas240 You have a point, but i think the presense of a flying gatling gun takes a little more out of the enemy. It's like the difference between getting shot and stabbed. I'd rather be shot, it's a lot less intimate.

  • @LeksServices all variants will look awful

  • @availabl3account @SuperAncientmariner hahahaha, fighting on the internet is stupid...

  • @AppleAreTastey What fighting are you refering to. 2 differences of opinion do not make a fight. Consider this..... On a page about the F35b I'm told not to talk about the F35b??? I comment on that and you think thats a fight.

  • It's horrible at being a strike fighter and is currently terrible at providing support to ground forces. Hopefully they can improve upon those lacking areas and fix the areas that simply do not work for this "Lightning" jet or "Shark of the Sky." It's certainly no Dolphin.

    It's set to replace the A-10 by the year of 2028. The A-10 has done a marvelous job in its service and has provided a laugh for anybody on the ground to hear that "Freedom Fart."

  • @SuperAncientmariner I agree, the F35 an "Advanced" multi role AC? Which cant go from the hover into forward flight like our 40 yr old Harrier can? Makes me laugh that does.....Rolling STO....Only. The clips amusing too..the way they carefully avoid that touchy subject...Most of the US worms on here dont even realise this F35 shortcoming.

  • @EnglishTurbines I think they realise it but they would go apoplectic if they admitted it lol

  • Fantástico Fighter!!!

  • harrier was the first to take off and land vertiacal

  • I'm sure you know better. It was the first to be into production however the Russians and the French started testing the theory long before the Harrier came into existance. The Russian version of course being the Yak-36, Yak-38 and the Yak-141. However, F-35 is only revolutionary in the aspect of stealth VTOL capability otherwise its virtually the same as the Yak-141. In fact it even almost looks the same...

  • @strizhi A few dates.

    Flying Bedstead test rigs:

    British.......1954,  Russian........1956.

    First free non-tethered VTOL Flight:

    P1127....1961 Yak 36....1967.

    Of course it looks like the 141, Lockheed purchased all the plans of the 141 and used them for the 35.

  • computers keep the planes in the sky my arse what about the harrier pilots?

  • The netherlands is gonna get some of these anytime now :)

    Holland!:D

  • It's not a opinion.... It's a fact, american pilots are undertrained. Why else would they bomb there allie's?....

  • @MrIHateAmerica

    So when the british killed 300 paratroopers in ww2 that means that their soldiers and army is under trained correct?

    Get over it friendly fire is a part of war

  • I want a link to this.... Nearly every allied soldier who fought in WW2 was undertrained.... But firendly fire in ww2 is understandable due to the lack of communications...

  • MrIhateamerica,

    Were the greatest country on earth, and you know it!!! You can like the f-22s, f-35s, and my big red white and blue dik!!! Now go stand in line for bread ytou pice of shit...

  • lick... lol @ typo...

  • Comment removed

  • US of Gay is the most in debt country in the world, most of it to China... Yeah, the F-35 is great but only it's a international jet.... Nah, you can suck my big red, white and blue cock... Learn to spell the English language...

  • no, most of the united states debt is to the united states

  • You mean to China...

  • no, the united states debt is over 12 trillion, only half of it is to foreign countries. at the moment, most of it is to japan and china

  • The UK's debt is sky rocketing...

  • Ok...

  • but they'll still buy our t-bills

  • @cjohnnys WTF is a "t-bill"?

  • @justforever96A T-bill is,I believe, a short term US treasury bond, the smallest being 1,000 dollars.

  • @MrIHateAmerica  undertrained pilots whom dominate everywhere they fly?

  • Really...

  • sure thing bud... lets see what's the score these days? whats the kill ratio American pilots vs the world?

  • Fuck knows.... Don't care...

  • Cause they stupid

  • Hawker Siddeley Harrier, the first VSTOL jet fighter-bomber......

  • I've seen this documentary and it's funny how they didn't mention...the Yak 141; a design that closely resembles the F-35 in its VTOL configuration....and one that flew over 10 years ago..successfuly.

  • Shut the hell up about that useless Russian crap, you Communist.

  • Oh you didn't know? Your country actually bought the designs of the Yak 141 from the Russians; OUCH! check out Wiki; give credit where credit is due.

  • really??did the YAK 141 got the stealth tech and advanced weapons??if it is,yeah the US is duplicating the russian tech...hell no dude

  • Shit by the Time i'm 17 the cf18 will be put out of service guess I'll have to fly that ugly beast in the future. Oh well I hope those planes weapons systems are better than it's looks.

  • The engine technology is exactly same of the Russian Yakovlev 141. The only difference is its stealth capability and advance weaponry and avionics. Nice aircraft still

  • how the hell is going to be the same this 5th g aircraft just imagine that

  • is it??is the Yak 141 got the V/STOL capability??what ur mean THE ONLY different is stealth capability and advance weaponry and avionics??thats just all of it...

  • I just join USMC 3 days ago.. I will fly this plane!!!

  • ......no you wont...your not an officer

  • wow no shit.... No makes me wonder why Im going to get my degree so I can become and officer.. makes me wonder why the Military has fucking TA.. damn your a dumbass go away, tool

    Fuck "will" is future tense stupid shit, that means I WILL fly this plane in the future..

  • you said you just joined, so now your enlisted, meaning you could go to OTS but you still dont have your fucking BA since your still in college you wont be flying them......any time fucking soon...and they would not put you into an f-35..youd get shoved into a Hornet

  • Ok let me again point back to the word "will" its future tense.. damn your dumb, yes I am enlisted, yes i do not have a BA YET!! but I will fly them, your a dumb ass, hell you must be from the UK or something..

  • ......No, im just an E-5 in the USAF

  • Comment removed

  • hahaha from the uk if ur fat u must be from usa. n our pilots couuld shoot u out of the sky anyday dumb shit ur f-22 is better than our eurofighter by a bit but tht dont mean shit cos our pilots are better than u

  • @MrDJSilky hahaha im from the USA and i thought that first part was funny

    yeah, Eurfighter is really nice, but the F-22 is about the same... but im an F/A-18 guy sooo :P

  • The UK and America are allies you dumbass. It doesn't matter who could kill who when your allies. On the other hand, American pilots are more disciplined than the UK's. Therefore, quicker reaction time and better decisions under pressure. Now go back to eating your crumpets and tea.

  • yeah,damn i agreed with ur dude

  • @BuIIsEye

    Nah, americans pilots lack discipline and training...

  • By your name I see you're extremely biased, so your opinion doesn't count at all.

  • @DonE1899 That is so great. I work on this plane on the flight line for Lockheed and I will tell you this jet is amazing. Good luck in your endeavor to fly these things. Don't pay any attention to the goof. Military will give you the opportunity to do that.

  • Thank you sir, I cant wait to fly this plane for the USMC and my country.

    When I worked at Best Buy, I met a gentlemen who worked on the lift fan project. This was when I lived back in Indianapolis, Rolls Royce had thier lift fan project team out there.

    Semper Fi..

  • @DonE1899 Trust me, we're doing our best to ensure you have the best in the sky, and I have to say I envy you, because I think you may do just that. I'm to old so I can't fly, but I know how to work on them and I'm very much involved in the production of this plane. You're determination and ambition makes you a prime candidate as a pilot. Good luck.....

  • How's was your drill sargeant? lol

  • US GAO announced today the F-35 is 2-3 years behind schedule and is over $70 billion overbudget...and it's not even in service yet, what a lemon this thing turned out to be.

  • @wartmcbeighn You believe every thing you read in the papers. They are saying this because that is an expectation because of the history with the F 22. That's how they base those things. Go to work there and find out the truth and your "lemon" claim will disappear.

  • It still doesn't have anything on the TR3B. From Area 51. Then again, nothing in the military's arsenal does.

    ;-)

  • lol the navy wont get any!!!!

  • Actually they are already getting F-35s, they're just not getting the ones that take off and land vertically. Instead they will get the carrier variants F-35c. Airforce will get the conventional take off version and the Marines will get the F-35b which is the awesome one in the video because the Marines are awesome.

  • Umm the plane is not in service yet? what do you mean their already getting them?

  • I mean it has already been rolled out in July. I didnt say it was in service yet. The Navy has already signed a deal with Lockheed and will be getting them when they come into availability in 2014 according to Lockheed Martin and the US Navy.

  • yes then you should have said going to get them not already getting them.

  • Lockheed is still making money by building not effective planes which cost are not equal to effectiveness.

  • That's is really a great fighter plane with great abilities,supersonic

    and the great ability of advanced machinery.

  • yak is mach 2 and has vertical take off

  • NOPE THE yak-141 was only up to MACH 1.6..

  • The pilot said it flies backwards. If he says it can why is he an idiot.

  • Comment removed

  • Well, while it cannot fly at mach two backwards, it CAN hover backwards and sidewards...

  • true, harrier is the same stuff as this.. the RAF is using this to replace the Harrier and for the USAF, F-16 and F-18

  • This plane is a great successor to the awesome AV8B Harrier II; it has all the Harrier's capabilities plus advanced avionics and can lift a full combat load in vertical takeoff. A lot less good pilots will die learning to fly this jet and it will bring much more combat power onto the heads of the enemy.

  • Computer Love! I hope this and the F-22 don't end up being some boondoggle.

  • YEAH in 2014 or 2012 we will have this baby's in ISRAEL !!! yeah MAN !!!!!!!!!!!

  • We are having them like tomorrow because they just stopped the F-22 and now building these babies

  • f-22 gonna stop production at 187 planes,wich is a good number o planes eh,this 1,yanks order 2000 o this babies,so looks like a good deal..

  • still incomplete, harrier still the best...this f35 need at least 3 years more to get everything in order

  • it already in order right now because F-22 have been banned so we could build these babies

  • They have not been banned ,their production run maybe over............

    They will be in service for the next 40 years..

  • harrier is old buddy,n pilots complain of how difficult to fly it in a hover situation,this plane is user friendly n this jet comes wit advance avionics,radar range n bvr capability that harrier wish to have,harrier is old laddie,this is new,you saying harrier is best is like super nintendo is better than playstation 3 wich is kind o donkeyshit ennit,you a harrier fanboy,i dont mind,but truth is,harrier is gettin retired pretty soon..

  • They say Harrier has another 10 years left in service at least. I aggree this should be better but that's obvoius becauuse it's new tech. It's like comparing the the F15 aginst the F4 Phantom.

    You can't knock the good old Harrier. It has proved itself time & time again.

    This my son hasn't....

  • my mate's goign to fly one of these when they come into service

  • great is that we make use of hi tech in making weapons to kill instead of finding solutions for the poor and sick

  • Well said..

    Who are we going to fight with these anyway?

    No other country has anything like this or other USAF planes, why does no one else think it's a bit odd to spend this kind of money?

    It's not for defense thats for sure, it's empire building, they just call it "Defense"

  • I thhink you'll find that Russia and europe has planes that are equal to US planes.

  • Is there a stealth jet in the Russian, or European inventory?

  • Stealth capabillity doesn't make for an invincible plane. Russia is developing a stealth jet.

  • developing, any specs? any info? nothing? then you can't compare.

  • it's a design build from the SU-47 and MiG 1.44. It is going to be the first russian 5th generation fighter jet. It is know as the Sukhoi PAK FA, and will have it's first flight in 2009.

  • Yes, but again, Nothing to compare so far.

    Neither Su-47, Nor Mig 1.44 are true stealth fighters.

  • The design of the SU-47 is one of the most agile fighters ever made. If the new russian jet is that agile, it can match the

    F-22 in a dogfight. If you hornestly believe that only the US has advanced jet fighters, then you don't know anything about military aviation.

  • 1. An aircraft's agility can Never match that of a missile, and thus, is not at the forefront of military aviation.

    2. Su-47's forward swept wing design has inherit flaws, such as added weight, weakened wings, etc. This is the same reason why the Su-47 will Not be anything more than a technology demonstrator, much like the X-29. The design is simply too impractical.

    3. US does have the most advanced fighter jets, 3rd generation stealth, 2nd generation AESA radar, High Mach supercruise, etc.

  • The F-22 doesn't own the sky. Russian SU-35 Super Flanker, and the Eurofighter Typhoon can match the F-22 in a dogfight. Though the F-22 is the fastest super cruise plane, the Eurofighter is very close to it. The SU-47 simply needs to be perfected.

  • 1. Neither Eurofighter, Nor Su-35 can perform nearly as well in a dogfight when they have bombs, and missiles strapped on their wings. The sheer power of the raptor's engine, combined with the huge control surfaces, along with a minimal drag body gives the raptor unparalleled advantage

    2. Eurofighter can only cruise at Mach 1.2, in CLEAN configuration.

    3. Su-47 is based upon a failed concept. Americans found out in 1984, and Russians just realized this now.

  • Have you ever seen videos of the SU-35?

    It can do just about all the things a F-22 can do. And the SU-47 design wasn't a complete failure. As I said, some parts of the design will be used in the Sukhoi

    Pak-FA. The F-22 is indeed extremely good, but don't think it is invincible.

  • Yes, the Su-35 had no Missiles, no bombs. It was a clean configuration.

    I never said the F-22 was invincible, but it out matches ALL other fighter known to the public, by far.

  • The Su-47 is test plane only. It was never meant for service. The US had a forward swept plane it tested in the 80s there is nothing new about the technology.

    The Su-37 is a great aircraft but it is a 4th generation plane. The Russians have collaborated with Brazil and India to develop a stealth plan like the F-22, but it will be a long time before we know how things work out.

  • please read all my comments to fully understand what I was talking about (:

    I know the Su-47 is only a test jet. Have you never heard of the Sukhoi Pak-Fa. It's supposed to be russia's answer to a 5th generation fighter. And in a dogfight the SU-35 and SU-37 can match the F-22.