@TheBuffaloeye They are $112 million, compared to $138 million for the Raptor. That is the unit cost to build one. Does not include R&D, or maintenance. BTW, those figures are estimates.
@playbak To sell to Coalition allies and create jobs for US citizens working in aviation and defense sectors. US defense industry has more than tripled since the 1st gulf war. As long as people still wanna kill one another theres always money to be made.
@DrainExpress There are also a lot of lazy people that have zero desire to perform an honest day of work. Why should I subsuduze health care for people that come to the USA and want to leech off the system? If Canada wants Socialism, then that's their business, but it's not the American way; we're the land of risk and reward ... opportunity if you're willing to work for it.
Take a trip out to PAX River Naval Station Maryland and you will see this plane perform in extreme manuevers that these videos seem to suppress, and you will see it in a different light! Believe me, it is fully capable of 9G sustained turns although it is not intended for that.
@akngac5 Coming from Australia I don,t get to the US that often mate (2007 last trip) The way the whole program is heading, sky rocketing unit price and the like, its a fair bet that our air force will be getting more super hornets at any rate. Personally (and I,m no expert) the silent eagle looks the goods. With the advancement in Russian IRST systems and L band radar, the whole idea of stealth seems to be a bit overrated
Understood. Love Australia, been to Perth and of course Sydney. Anyways, the Superhornet is a great weapons platform but can not keep up with the F-35 peformance wise in a side by side comparison. The Super can carry a larger weapons load and has a great radar package. I currently work on Supers and love them.
Infra-red search and track systems is quite common in most fighter aircraft and has been around for awhile. The first planes to use these systems are the F-101 and F-102. L-band, or better known as AESA also equiped on the F-35 won the 2010 David Packard Excellence in Acquisition Award for performance against jammers.
You do know that many other coutries will have this plane right? not only USA. And dont say that only the US invented it cause all the other countries also contributed to the project.
@Aemiod yah, I know that! however, the USA makes the best planes, compare other fighter jets that countries LIKE Russia have developed their speed just doesn't compare,,,also American jets are easier to control under extreme circumstances!!! etc. etc....
hay guys the the new f-35 has 360 pilot cam meaning that say if the pilot looks behind himself he doesn't see plane he sees the full sky like hes floating cant see the plane
The amazing F35. Helping to bankrupt America one plane at a time. These will come in handy when were trying to kill peasants with explosive belts strapped around their waists.The F-35 is the most expensive defense program in history.It's also a symbol of everything that's wrong with defense spending in America.
Has Canada's politicians been sniffing glue, they want to buy how many of these overpriced over complicated machines. Great piece of technology but Canada has greater things it should spend money on than machines of war.
There's an episode on NOVA that shows the documentation of the JSF project between Lockheed Martin's X-35 and Boeing's X-32... Season 30 episode 4, check it out on HULU
@cfesel Well its a bit more complecated then that, I've seen the TEF's moving up and down to act like a speedbrake, I guess it depends on the airflow around the wing. its also not only the flaps that do the braking but also the rudders and the elavator correcting for it all. Its not so simple as everything is controlled by computers.
@repsollenny mmmm For example, let's say that the U.S is in war against Russia, so if the U.S Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II figths againts the Su 30 or Su 35 who do you think will win?
@COLOMBIANO8891 Pretty much unpredictable, won't come down to fighters if that happens. But 1 thing is certain, the F-35 will see the Sukhoi's alot faster then the Sukhoi's will see the F-35 and in that way of thinking a F-35 *could* use all 6 AMRAAM's and down 6 Sukhoi without ever being seen.
@COLOMBIANO8891 try to check out the pacific vision exercise, it was in hawwaï i think . the conclusion: "for the sukhoi it was like clubbing baby seals" .F35 has to small wings to be a good fighter ...
@OnlyLifeMatters Canada only ordered the non-VTOL version, the Airforce could have simply upgraded the CF-18 Hornets, or bought modernized Super-Hornets. As for the F-22 the Americans pretty much cancelled that project, the payloads where all interior so when they wanted to engage a target the stealth advantage dissapeared immediately. At least the F-35 doesn't suffer from that flaw.
its a relic that belongs in the dumpster of history. Russia has a Tu-400 that can take down stealth fighters, china now has stealth fighter technology, russia has stealth fighter technology....their friends now have it. Everybody is now invisible!! I can imagine the next dog fight....yes, everybody is buzzing around but cant see the enemy and get bored and go home hoping that a Tu-400 doesnt take em out.
i read the f-18 has a longer range and nad a faster speed then this crap so why buy it just cause its stealth,it not even stealth canada needs the f-22.
But the F-16 does not have the range of the 14's & 15's 18's and even the 22.
I guess I'm trying to illustraite that there is no point building 2 aircraft for the same purpose. But ....after watching the F-22 in action, in a one on one dogfight just my opinion, it would whip the 35. But then The Super Hornet would probably beat the F-22 with a long range missle shot?! If you ever want an opinon on plane v plane, you should go for vs the Euro, or something like that. That would be fun! cheers
Oops sorry about the repeat post....In effect in this example the 35B is a node in a much bigger operation. The 35's engine is actually the same as the engine that the Raptor's use, but the Raptor has two and vector thrusting and I'm sure you have seen the vids. The Raptor, just like the old and new Hornet's, the 14's and 15's of days gone ( or are the 15's still in service) can run patrols in pairs or engage an enemy pair. The F-16 is more agile ( watch Operation Red Flag - best movie ever!
THE NEW ERA IN AVIATION STARTED in ISRAEL with FIRST-EVER flight of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV]. (May 18, 1987, Av. Week). Facebook video ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains Super-Kill-Ratio, Extra TO/L-safety (Civil & military) gained by STV, thereby ending dominance of common stall/spin dangerous aero-control. F-35 & F-22 exploit only part of STV potential [tailless= better stealth, reduced drag/structure/weight/fuel). Cf. X31, X44 MANTA, X47b, RQ170, SU-MKI30, T50, B2, NGB, FB22, X-727.
3D or unmanned STV rejection talk 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 mini aero-control, stealth inlets/wing-body design took place in Israel in 1987 [May 18, 1987, Aviation Week]. Unclassified video in Facebook ["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, FB-22.
@KingKoopa1028 Are you stupid, do you really think the USAF is going to replace the F-22? Its the greatest aircraft ever built, the F-35 was meant to replace the F-16 Dumbass! Stop commenting on something you don't know SHIT about.
There is no way to quantify the F-22 with the title greatest aircraft ever built, unless cost overruns, problems with paint, and with the introduction of the Meteor BVRAAM in the next year or so, it`s AMRAAM has been superceded, so not really that great, especially since it hasnt seen combat so hasnt proven itself
@Tommyfungun We didn't scrap it, we just cut the production line because of how expensive they were. And well, it doesn't take a genius to know that the US doesn't have an amazing economy right now...
the 22 & 35 cannot be compared. All 3 blocks of the 35 are built for different operations A-from land base, B is VTOL C is Carrier. A lose but accurate analogy is that the 35's will always operate as part of a greater defensive / offensive movement. The B for example could replace whaat the Apache does. Sits and hides in dense terrain armed with missiles that are guided by other systems. When instructed they could just pop up and their missles controlled and fir
the 22 & 35 cannot be compared. All 3 blocks of the 35 are built for different operations A-from land base, B is VTOL C is Carrier. A lose but accurate analogy is that the 35's will always operate as part of a greater defensive / offensive movement. The B for example could replace whaat the Apache does.
@1234567loading The f-22 but it still has ground attacks but the f-35 has more grounds attacks i know i play over g fighters on xbox360 and its pretty realistic.
@repsollenny Can you believe that Canada is actually buying 8 or 16 of these from Martin? (im not sure if got the number correct, please correct if im wrong.) Canada will officially not be a pussy anymore! :D
65 canada is buying, for something like 10 billion + another 10 billion in running and repair costs... its fucking stupid tho, for that much money, canada could create a independant plane instead of buying USA shit... i hear that the USA has electronic warfare devices that can kill all electronics or even take remote control over the flight computer of the f35, they built it, so if they ever go up against it, they will win, why u think they not sellin us fa22s, because they cant be hacked
@FlipitySwitch Actually we should cancel the sale since china as already stole the plan from you dickheads! the plane is now stealth for african/midle east countrys! New upgraded f-15 would have been much enough to do the job (patrolling Canada=twin reactor!)and much cheaper while being an excellent superiority plane...but its too late...we will have 65 unstealhty monoreactor f-35! thank you Harper!
How do you make a LFR low frequency stealth proof plane? you have to add radar absorbant material which absorbs lower frequencys which takes up a lot of extra space in the plane or maybe some new kind of coating that has not been developed yet. Such a coating would take up less space than inner triangular absorbing traps and cones which trap the radar inside the plane and absorb the energy of the radar wave and keep it from bouncing back to the reveiver which can detect a stealth plane.
The russians have a plane which uses the whole body of the plane as a radar. One can have a low frequency radar with that type of radar because larger surface area is needed for lower frequency radar or a larger dish. LFR can detect stealth technology. I don't know it they have developed it yet but It might be a future addition to later generation stealth technology in order to detect other stealth planes. The stealthier plane wins but not against stealth detecting radar and LFR proof stealth.
@buckfitches, it is the coordination of a pilot that cannot be matched. flybywire only coorects minor wobling and unsteadness. Making choices to bomb, fly low and shoot at ground targets or shoot down enemy fighters can be best now only accomplished by a human pilot and not a machine. a Computer jet pilot is no match for a real one.
@buckinfitches no machine can yet match the coordination and reflexes of a manned pilot. It takes a lot more than G forces to fly a plane. One has to use camera's with robots and remote controls frequency can be jammed. Completely automated computer technology cannot match decision capability of human pilot. Maybe oneday it will but that is a very long time in the future.
Why the fuck did they waste there time making this? With UAV technology a manned aircraft is no longer necessary and actually limits the performance. A human can only handle so much G force. Make a better version of this that is capable of double the speed, double the g forces, half the weight, and less money duhh!
@buckinfitches Actually I can imagine UAV tech not being used anymore in a decade, aircrafts like the F-35 can engage targets without having to point their nose to it, so no more extremely high G's, the missiles do the work for you.
@repsollenny I would bet everything i have that that will be the last new manned aircraft they design. Yeah the missiles do a lot of the work... no need for dog fight but you can still get shot down and die. Much better for the pilot to be in the US lying the plane from a base. Pilots would be more confident and take on dangerous missions with zero fear. The planes performance can also be greatly improved. There are too many reason to never have a manned aircraft again.
I think the DoD has stated or at least hinted that the F-35 will be the last manned aircraft that the US develops. Since the F-15, every fighter the US has made has been designed to be aerodynamically unstable, but the use of computer controlled systems make them incredibly more agile. The problem now is that the technology is producing planes that make maneuvers that human pilots wouldn't be able to stand.
@Wiems35 the future is only going 2 be unmanned for as long as terrorists are idiots, as soon as they figure out the effective counter measure for UAVS, like a emp, and get a hold of it, pilots will have to come back into planes... UAVS are only good for fighting insurgencys, they can never compare to a manned aircraft
The countries that use UAV's don't even have pure EMP technology, they have nukes, but no one is going to use those to shoot down UAVs. Besides, what would a pilot be able to do with a plane that loses it's electronics? The more we create fighters that can handle maneuvers that humans can't, the less we'll need pilots in the craft. They'll just be flown remotely.
@Wiems35 im sure america has several counter mesures for UAVS, from jamming the signal that controls them, to taking over the on board computers... for every invention of a sword, their is a invention of a shield to protect from it... and i can almost guarentee america has some sort of non nuclear anti air EMP weapon
@Wiems35 yes, your right, but my point was... they will eventually get that technology, even if it takes them 100 years, then they will have 2 put pilots back into airplanes, because, in terms of UAVS, its alot easier to kill the remote connection linking the UAV to the drvier, then it is to kill the on board computers that control the aircraft.. but im sure there will also be inventions that will help pilots withstand higher Gs, just like a Gsuit does
@repsollenny Well if it's propellant is used up at long range it's quite likely, and in close range fighting even with off bore sight being high; that still only means it can see you, it still has to then get close to you and that's not 100% sure. Getting the first missile off will help but they still put a gun on the F-35 and TV on the F-22, so really it does matter and the F-35 lacks.
Thrust vectoring is basically a change of Rate of turn for Turn radius. I don't know how that is to be employed but Thrust Vectoring won't help dodging a missile.
@SvenPhantom Thrust vectoring improves the efficiency of changing direction. Increase efficiency = Increase thrust, Increase thrust = Increase acceleration. If you can accelerate faster than the missile then it can't hit you. If no one can avoid a missile, then you'll lose an F-35 every time they get the first shot. And at long range missiles have low PKs. The claimed range of any missile is long after it has run out of propellant, it is now gliding; if it turns it will slow down be outrun.
@SvenPhantom Well, the R-77 has a claimed top speed of Mach 4.5. but in most cases it will run out of propellant long before it gets to the enemy aircraft if it then manoeuvres it will lose speed from drag. To turn, it needs to accelerate in a new direction. It will use it's control surfaces to deflect air which will take kinetic energy from the missile, therefore slow it down, considerably.
@repsollenny "the missles do the work for you" ???? jajajajajajajajajajajajajqajajajajajajaj thats wat the usaf has said since the 60s didnt work then doesnt work now jajajaja
@pinkdiamonds78 I dont remeber saying we were king of the world. You assume much my poorly educated friend. Let me guess instead of cracking a book you base your opinions on video games and biased opinions of others. For shame.
"jajajajajaja". If only we had Latinos building our planes. The F-15 has been modified and is (along with the F-18) considered the US's best fighters. Thrust vector isn't the be all and end all, it's more or less for air shows.
@buckinfitches Read the book Wired For War by P.W. Singer. It is all about robotics and UAVs in the modern battle feild. It actuall states that Lockeed Martin designed the F-25 JSF so that it can be modified to take on unmanned capabillities.
I was in the Marines from '93-'97. On the first day of F/A-18 framp school they told us not to get too attached to the Hornet because by the time our first enlistment was over, the new JSF would be entering service. I hope this airplane is worth the wait and the cost.
I read US airforce actually was going to aquire 2443 of the for around 363 billion dollars.... and here in Canada, since we aren't as rich... we'll buy 65 for 16 billions.
The F-35 is a failure. It was suppose to be 1/3 the cost of the F-22. Lockheed has already doubled the original price. Unlike the Boeing JSF, Lockheed had to build 3 different airplanes. It never could super cruise, it was too heavy, and could not hold enough internal weapons.
Actually it was planned to be about 60 million, it's fly away cost is still lower than the F-22's, Boeing had 2 JSF, X-32A and X-32B, the X-32B had issues trying to take off. The JSF requirements weren't to supercruise. Boeing's JSF had a hard time trying to match the newer requirements.
these dam a/c were suppose to be put into production in 08 and the war department jus keeps extending the deadline for the rest of our old shit like the harrier, the av8b needs to be replaced badly, way too much manhours put into maintenance, but still an awsome aircraft when in combat
@pooleegriff I agree with you. It's better to keep the original design and improve it. I noticed that the more radar invisible a plane's body becomes the less fast and agile it will be like the bird of prey for example unless they find a new radar absorbant matterial that absorbs all frequencies or one that reflects them all but I don't know if that is physically possible maybe several different radar reflecting material coatings which can reflect more than one radar frequency.
@pooleegriff I have never seen a stealth fighter before at an airshow. I was hoping they would send one to the Blue Angles air show in S.F. but I have only seen the spirit B2. If they send an F35 lightning I will be satisfield by I want to see the F22
@pooleegriff You can fly an F35 lighting? Are you in the airforce or a test pilot or something? From what I have heard on the news was the F35 lightning is much cheaper to make than the F22 Raptor which more agile. I agree with you. I think the F22 better we already have a lot of them.
I challenge lockheed martin and Northrup grumman to build a completely new fighter that is better than both. A competely radar invisible fighter from all angles using fly by wire.
@rockpianoguy Lockheed Martin can make a plane on theirself just fine, afaik Northrop Grumman hasn't made a plane in ages they make more vessels and sensors now. And an completely radar invisible fighter will probably never exist and even if it does there are other sensors to track planes down e.g. infrared and using fly by wire? F-35 has fly by wire too...
@rockpianoguy, Umm this is A brand new design on this aircraft I saw the release at the Miramar Air Show A year or two ago. What would be the point of dumping hundreds of millions of dollars on A new design when you just did and it isn't even at full capacity in the military? Hell the first time this thing flew was only 4 years ago..
Wouldn't upgrades to the F-15 be a lot cheaper than this?
CookmanRob 1 day ago
Namo of Sing?
LaplaceTra 4 days ago
I say F-22 Raptor looks alot better
Adult0Swims 5 days ago
Boring Video
raulinsjc1 2 weeks ago
The view isn't cool at all (But it doesn't mean the performance as well).Are they cheaper than F22?
TheBuffaloeye 2 weeks ago
@TheBuffaloeye They are $112 million, compared to $138 million for the Raptor. That is the unit cost to build one. Does not include R&D, or maintenance. BTW, those figures are estimates.
Daeva23 1 week ago
so we need this plane for what again?
playbak 3 weeks ago
@playbak To sell to Coalition allies and create jobs for US citizens working in aviation and defense sectors. US defense industry has more than tripled since the 1st gulf war. As long as people still wanna kill one another theres always money to be made.
SickKnowledge82 2 weeks ago
@playbak To bomb the enemy duh...
xDead27Eyex 1 week ago
Congrats! You've got a useless marvel of technology at your disposal and a couple of hundred million people who cannot afford basic health care.
A really great achievement... Be proud! Stay stupid - it doesn't hurt....
DrainExpress 3 weeks ago
@DrainExpress There are also a lot of lazy people that have zero desire to perform an honest day of work. Why should I subsuduze health care for people that come to the USA and want to leech off the system? If Canada wants Socialism, then that's their business, but it's not the American way; we're the land of risk and reward ... opportunity if you're willing to work for it.
TheKrasnaludek 3 weeks ago
Song?
LaplaceTra 1 month ago
it somehow looks very cheap and tacky
MustNotRead 1 month ago
There goes the GDP of Uganda
waarzitdespatiebalk 1 month ago
@waarzitdespatiebalk lol
xDead27Eyex 1 week ago
Name of song please?
LaplaceTra 1 month ago
Song?
Lenin2304 1 month ago
Over priced lawn dart.
tincity1 1 month ago
When i,v seen a video of this thing pulling 9gs with vortices ripping off its wing tips, i,ll be sold.
MrCalman65 1 month ago
@MrCalman65 It has already pulled 9.9 G's
repsollenny 1 month ago 2
@repsollenny Amazing! By the way do you know the name of the song? Sounds awsome!
LaplaceTra 2 weeks ago
@MrCalman65
Take a trip out to PAX River Naval Station Maryland and you will see this plane perform in extreme manuevers that these videos seem to suppress, and you will see it in a different light! Believe me, it is fully capable of 9G sustained turns although it is not intended for that.
akngac5 1 month ago
@akngac5 Coming from Australia I don,t get to the US that often mate (2007 last trip) The way the whole program is heading, sky rocketing unit price and the like, its a fair bet that our air force will be getting more super hornets at any rate. Personally (and I,m no expert) the silent eagle looks the goods. With the advancement in Russian IRST systems and L band radar, the whole idea of stealth seems to be a bit overrated
MrCalman65 1 month ago
@MrCalman65
Understood. Love Australia, been to Perth and of course Sydney. Anyways, the Superhornet is a great weapons platform but can not keep up with the F-35 peformance wise in a side by side comparison. The Super can carry a larger weapons load and has a great radar package. I currently work on Supers and love them.
akngac5 1 month ago
@MrCalman65
Infra-red search and track systems is quite common in most fighter aircraft and has been around for awhile. The first planes to use these systems are the F-101 and F-102. L-band, or better known as AESA also equiped on the F-35 won the 2010 David Packard Excellence in Acquisition Award for performance against jammers.
akngac5 1 month ago
Name of the song pls.
Sounds awsome!
Thanks.
LaplaceTra 1 month ago
@LaplaceTra Yeah!!! ME 2!!
greengoatsmajkel 1 month ago
wow, don't mess with the USA!!!
MrBobbi1980 1 month ago 9
You do know that many other coutries will have this plane right? not only USA. And dont say that only the US invented it cause all the other countries also contributed to the project.
Aemiod 2 weeks ago
@Aemiod yah, I know that! however, the USA makes the best planes, compare other fighter jets that countries LIKE Russia have developed their speed just doesn't compare,,,also American jets are easier to control under extreme circumstances!!! etc. etc....
MrBobbi1980 2 weeks ago
@Aemiod They contributed money. This is America's project and other countries will simply buy.
xDead27Eyex 1 week ago
Cool Video! Does anybody know the title of that song?
LaplaceTra 1 month ago
I looked this one up because of battlefield:)
lemonrey0310 2 months ago
You like stealth! There you are.
pierix27 3 months ago
hay guys the the new f-35 has 360 pilot cam meaning that say if the pilot looks behind himself he doesn't see plane he sees the full sky like hes floating cant see the plane
TheJangodarkblade 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
New Russian plane PAK FA T-50 The BEST IN THE WORLD!
Gangstersev 7 months ago
nice Walmart
brown9708 8 months ago
The amazing F35. Helping to bankrupt America one plane at a time. These will come in handy when were trying to kill peasants with explosive belts strapped around their waists.The F-35 is the most expensive defense program in history.It's also a symbol of everything that's wrong with defense spending in America.
ADDMOREMAPS 9 months ago
Has Canada's politicians been sniffing glue, they want to buy how many of these overpriced over complicated machines. Great piece of technology but Canada has greater things it should spend money on than machines of war.
quentin544 10 months ago
It turns out that this plane will cost us 1 trillion dollars so we need to cancel this plane and start fresh again.
Videowatcher198 10 months ago
didn't lockheed get renamed as boeing
niplapla 11 months ago
@niplapla WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT CRACKHEAD?.......no it didn't
thatoneguy12ize 9 months ago
is it a stealth like the F-22 Raptor
niplapla 11 months ago
Damn think about this, Canada is only buying like 65 of those, while the US is buying about 2500 of them!!!! 0_0
MasterX117 11 months ago
There's an episode on NOVA that shows the documentation of the JSF project between Lockheed Martin's X-35 and Boeing's X-32... Season 30 episode 4, check it out on HULU
JVOiscariot1 11 months ago
my dad helps build this air plane thats y its my favorite air plane
sarahsongz155 1 year ago
@repsollenny cool
cfesel 1 year ago
what does lef and tef stand for at the one minute mark in the video
cfesel 1 year ago
@cfesel Leading Edge Flaps & Trailing Edge Flaps they both work toghetter to act like a speedbrake.
repsollenny 1 year ago
@repsollenny so instead of having just the tef, the lef was added to cancel out the extra lift?
cfesel 1 year ago
@cfesel Well its a bit more complecated then that, I've seen the TEF's moving up and down to act like a speedbrake, I guess it depends on the airflow around the wing. its also not only the flaps that do the braking but also the rudders and the elavator correcting for it all. Its not so simple as everything is controlled by computers.
repsollenny 1 year ago
@repsollenny ok cool. Are you a pilot?
cfesel 1 year ago
@repsollenny was that white smoke coming out the left wing?
Jakekellogg1 10 months ago
@Jakekellogg1 It was fuel being dumped, the valve didn't close correctly and had to be replaced.
repsollenny 10 months ago
@repsollenny I have a question so, this new aircraft is better than the russians military aircraft like the Su 30 or Su 35?
COLOMBIANO8891 6 months ago
@COLOMBIANO8891 Depends on how you define better.
repsollenny 6 months ago
@repsollenny mmmm For example, let's say that the U.S is in war against Russia, so if the U.S Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II figths againts the Su 30 or Su 35 who do you think will win?
COLOMBIANO8891 6 months ago
@COLOMBIANO8891 Pretty much unpredictable, won't come down to fighters if that happens. But 1 thing is certain, the F-35 will see the Sukhoi's alot faster then the Sukhoi's will see the F-35 and in that way of thinking a F-35 *could* use all 6 AMRAAM's and down 6 Sukhoi without ever being seen.
repsollenny 6 months ago
@COLOMBIANO8891 try to check out the pacific vision exercise, it was in hawwaï i think . the conclusion: "for the sukhoi it was like clubbing baby seals" .F35 has to small wings to be a good fighter ...
aimanXIII 6 months ago
@aimanXIII you're wrong.
saybya 5 months ago
@saybya well I'm not, check this vids : /watch?v=UQB4W8C0rZI&feature=related or
/watch?v=BhGIglwmFB8&feature=related or
/watch?v=KaoYz90giTk&feature=related
or use google.
aimanXIII 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aimanXIII more people brainwashed by propaganda?
watch?v=RgiThPPnIcY
just stop trolling videos
watch?v=OowCBVh8-_0
unless you know what you are talking about
ht tp :/ /w w w . lockheed martin . com/ us /news /press-releases /2008 /september/ Setting Record Straight on F- . html (delete spaces)
hotpocketpoison 1 month ago
@hotpocketpoison what do u mean brainwashed by propaganda?
explain ur links pl0x
lokohehehe 5 days ago
@lokohehehe they are for all the stupid people who doubt the capabilities of the F-22 and F-35.
hotpocketpoison 5 days ago
@COLOMBIANO8891 um f-35 easy and russia wouldnt find the f-35
USAmilitarypower 4 months ago
Canadians have the CF-18 the Americans have the F-18 "Hornet". Two engines folks.
Jazzy1500 1 year ago
Yes, Canada did order these. Sad considering they're single engine.
Jazzy1500 1 year ago
@Jazzy1500 F16 WAS SINGLE ENGINE 2...
;)
ClarksonsinUSA 1 year ago
@aarrmmeenndd100 It may be the hovering version that costs so much.
OnlyLifeMatters 1 year ago
@OnlyLifeMatters Canada only ordered the non-VTOL version, the Airforce could have simply upgraded the CF-18 Hornets, or bought modernized Super-Hornets. As for the F-22 the Americans pretty much cancelled that project, the payloads where all interior so when they wanted to engage a target the stealth advantage dissapeared immediately. At least the F-35 doesn't suffer from that flaw.
LastThree804 1 year ago
@LastThree804
The airforce does not have any f-18's.
lovetofly12 1 year ago
I beg to differ search CF-18 youtube or google.
LastThree804 1 year ago
@LastThree804
The canadian airforce has them but not the U.S. airforce.
lovetofly12 1 year ago
Comment removed
nonstop250 1 year ago
Didn't Canada put an order for 25 of these things?
LastThree804 1 year ago
@LastThree804 65
repsollenny 1 year ago
@repsollenny So canada put in an 65 of these air craft!
niplapla 11 months ago
@LastThree804
We might cancel them, cause we don't have enough money to pay for them. There might be an election on this matter.
gundamWWW 1 year ago
its a relic that belongs in the dumpster of history. Russia has a Tu-400 that can take down stealth fighters, china now has stealth fighter technology, russia has stealth fighter technology....their friends now have it. Everybody is now invisible!! I can imagine the next dog fight....yes, everybody is buzzing around but cant see the enemy and get bored and go home hoping that a Tu-400 doesnt take em out.
Thanks for the video - very funny.
civicnation4two 1 year ago
@civicnation4two What exactly is a Tu-400...there is no aircraft with that designation, so what are you talking about
wartmcbeighn 1 year ago
Sorry, s400.
civicnation4two 1 year ago
how fast can these things go cuz i herd that by making vertical takeoff possibel you reduce the max speed of the aircraft??
deli12345563 1 year ago
nice vid.
rockybarbarella 1 year ago
AAA
1:49pm Tuesday (CST) - Time in MississippiAH!
1:11 CHRONOLOGICALORDERMATITISKINIDIP
1:49pm Tuesday (CST) - Time in MississippiAH!
AAA
GelandnaleG 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
F-35 is very funny plane , and gloryfing comments below are even more funny.
Vykuk123 1 year ago
this will send russia a run for its money
shane13daman 1 year ago
unfortunately with its' powerful afterburner and circular exhaust in infra red this craft has no stealth.
mrfrankincense 1 year ago
i read the f-18 has a longer range and nad a faster speed then this crap so why buy it just cause its stealth,it not even stealth canada needs the f-22.
omega4chimp 1 year ago
wtf the t 50 looks like the f 22
the russians got it from the americans!
mrgeorgemacho 1 year ago
beautiful plane.
mrgeorgemacho 1 year ago
that was interesting. One could see so many details.
I liked how one could see the control-surfaces acting.
0MoTheG 1 year ago
But the F-16 does not have the range of the 14's & 15's 18's and even the 22.
I guess I'm trying to illustraite that there is no point building 2 aircraft for the same purpose. But ....after watching the F-22 in action, in a one on one dogfight just my opinion, it would whip the 35. But then The Super Hornet would probably beat the F-22 with a long range missle shot?! If you ever want an opinon on plane v plane, you should go for vs the Euro, or something like that. That would be fun! cheers
jamesdstudent 1 year ago
Oops sorry about the repeat post....In effect in this example the 35B is a node in a much bigger operation. The 35's engine is actually the same as the engine that the Raptor's use, but the Raptor has two and vector thrusting and I'm sure you have seen the vids. The Raptor, just like the old and new Hornet's, the 14's and 15's of days gone ( or are the 15's still in service) can run patrols in pairs or engage an enemy pair. The F-16 is more agile ( watch Operation Red Flag - best movie ever!
jamesdstudent 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE NEW ERA IN AVIATION STARTED in ISRAEL with FIRST-EVER flight of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV]. (May 18, 1987, Av. Week). Facebook video ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains Super-Kill-Ratio, Extra TO/L-safety (Civil & military) gained by STV, thereby ending dominance of common stall/spin dangerous aero-control. F-35 & F-22 exploit only part of STV potential [tailless= better stealth, reduced drag/structure/weight/fuel). Cf. X31, X44 MANTA, X47b, RQ170, SU-MKI30, T50, B2, NGB, FB22, X-727.
1Bengalor 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3D or unmanned STV rejection talk 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 mini aero-control, stealth inlets/wing-body design took place in Israel in 1987 [May 18, 1987, Aviation Week]. Unclassified video in Facebook ["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, FB-22.
1Bengalor 1 year ago
Which one is superior aircraft F-22 or F35?
1234567loading 1 year ago
@1234567loading F-22
repsollenny 1 year ago
@repsollenny - Now hang on, that depends on the use. The Raptor is purely for air superiority. The Lightning is designed to be a multirole fighter.
aaron8862006 1 year ago
@repsollenny are you stupid? The F35 is meant to replace the F22
KingKoopa1028 1 year ago
@KingKoopa1028 What? No! They are meant to operate side by side.
repsollenny 1 year ago
@KingKoopa1028 Are you stupid, do you really think the USAF is going to replace the F-22? Its the greatest aircraft ever built, the F-35 was meant to replace the F-16 Dumbass! Stop commenting on something you don't know SHIT about.
beast95117 1 year ago
@beast95117
There is no way to quantify the F-22 with the title greatest aircraft ever built, unless cost overruns, problems with paint, and with the introduction of the Meteor BVRAAM in the next year or so, it`s AMRAAM has been superceded, so not really that great, especially since it hasnt seen combat so hasnt proven itself
wartmcbeighn 1 year ago
@beast95117 I thought we scrapped f22, we are broke
Tommyfungun 1 year ago
@Tommyfungun We didn't scrap it, we just cut the production line because of how expensive they were. And well, it doesn't take a genius to know that the US doesn't have an amazing economy right now...
TEHGROUND 1 year ago
@TEHGROUND Ok man, thanks good to know
Tommyfungun 1 year ago
@1234567loading Dear Loading,
the 22 & 35 cannot be compared. All 3 blocks of the 35 are built for different operations A-from land base, B is VTOL C is Carrier. A lose but accurate analogy is that the 35's will always operate as part of a greater defensive / offensive movement. The B for example could replace whaat the Apache does. Sits and hides in dense terrain armed with missiles that are guided by other systems. When instructed they could just pop up and their missles controlled and fir
jamesdstudent 1 year ago
@1234567loading @1234567loading Dear Loading,
the 22 & 35 cannot be compared. All 3 blocks of the 35 are built for different operations A-from land base, B is VTOL C is Carrier. A lose but accurate analogy is that the 35's will always operate as part of a greater defensive / offensive movement. The B for example could replace whaat the Apache does.
jamesdstudent 1 year ago
@1234567loading The f-22 but it still has ground attacks but the f-35 has more grounds attacks i know i play over g fighters on xbox360 and its pretty realistic.
omega4chimp 1 year ago
Nice music on this, sounds like Paradise Lost
Sicknose 1 year ago
f35 has verticle take off
mrexample99 1 year ago
Did obama cut this project?
vabch82 1 year ago
@vabch82 No.
repsollenny 1 year ago
@repsollenny Can you believe that Canada is actually buying 8 or 16 of these from Martin? (im not sure if got the number correct, please correct if im wrong.) Canada will officially not be a pussy anymore! :D
FlipitySwitch 1 year ago
@FlipitySwitch I think Canada is planning 65 fighters actually, 8 or 16 would be far to little.
repsollenny 1 year ago
65 canada is buying, for something like 10 billion + another 10 billion in running and repair costs... its fucking stupid tho, for that much money, canada could create a independant plane instead of buying USA shit... i hear that the USA has electronic warfare devices that can kill all electronics or even take remote control over the flight computer of the f35, they built it, so if they ever go up against it, they will win, why u think they not sellin us fa22s, because they cant be hacked
101andrewj 1 year ago
@FlipitySwitch Actually we should cancel the sale since china as already stole the plan from you dickheads! the plane is now stealth for african/midle east countrys! New upgraded f-15 would have been much enough to do the job (patrolling Canada=twin reactor!)and much cheaper while being an excellent superiority plane...but its too late...we will have 65 unstealhty monoreactor f-35! thank you Harper!
Paezuzu 1 year ago
@vabch82 instead he cut nasa, because you know, america really needs 100 million dollar fighters
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj Hey buddy, freedom through superior firepower!
vabch82 1 year ago
How do you make a LFR low frequency stealth proof plane? you have to add radar absorbant material which absorbs lower frequencys which takes up a lot of extra space in the plane or maybe some new kind of coating that has not been developed yet. Such a coating would take up less space than inner triangular absorbing traps and cones which trap the radar inside the plane and absorb the energy of the radar wave and keep it from bouncing back to the reveiver which can detect a stealth plane.
rockpianoguy 1 year ago
The russians have a plane which uses the whole body of the plane as a radar. One can have a low frequency radar with that type of radar because larger surface area is needed for lower frequency radar or a larger dish. LFR can detect stealth technology. I don't know it they have developed it yet but It might be a future addition to later generation stealth technology in order to detect other stealth planes. The stealthier plane wins but not against stealth detecting radar and LFR proof stealth.
rockpianoguy 1 year ago
cant wait to see some of these badboys flying around Aussie airspace :)
budgybottom75 1 year ago
@buckfitches, it is the coordination of a pilot that cannot be matched. flybywire only coorects minor wobling and unsteadness. Making choices to bomb, fly low and shoot at ground targets or shoot down enemy fighters can be best now only accomplished by a human pilot and not a machine. a Computer jet pilot is no match for a real one.
geoffreyah 1 year ago
@buckinfitches no machine can yet match the coordination and reflexes of a manned pilot. It takes a lot more than G forces to fly a plane. One has to use camera's with robots and remote controls frequency can be jammed. Completely automated computer technology cannot match decision capability of human pilot. Maybe oneday it will but that is a very long time in the future.
geoffreyah 1 year ago
Why the fuck did they waste there time making this? With UAV technology a manned aircraft is no longer necessary and actually limits the performance. A human can only handle so much G force. Make a better version of this that is capable of double the speed, double the g forces, half the weight, and less money duhh!
buckinfitches 1 year ago
@buckinfitches Actually I can imagine UAV tech not being used anymore in a decade, aircrafts like the F-35 can engage targets without having to point their nose to it, so no more extremely high G's, the missiles do the work for you.
repsollenny 1 year ago 2
@repsollenny I would bet everything i have that that will be the last new manned aircraft they design. Yeah the missiles do a lot of the work... no need for dog fight but you can still get shot down and die. Much better for the pilot to be in the US lying the plane from a base. Pilots would be more confident and take on dangerous missions with zero fear. The planes performance can also be greatly improved. There are too many reason to never have a manned aircraft again.
buckinfitches 1 year ago
@repsollenny
I think the DoD has stated or at least hinted that the F-35 will be the last manned aircraft that the US develops. Since the F-15, every fighter the US has made has been designed to be aerodynamically unstable, but the use of computer controlled systems make them incredibly more agile. The problem now is that the technology is producing planes that make maneuvers that human pilots wouldn't be able to stand.
Wiems35 1 year ago
@Wiems35 the future is only going 2 be unmanned for as long as terrorists are idiots, as soon as they figure out the effective counter measure for UAVS, like a emp, and get a hold of it, pilots will have to come back into planes... UAVS are only good for fighting insurgencys, they can never compare to a manned aircraft
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj
The countries that use UAV's don't even have pure EMP technology, they have nukes, but no one is going to use those to shoot down UAVs. Besides, what would a pilot be able to do with a plane that loses it's electronics? The more we create fighters that can handle maneuvers that humans can't, the less we'll need pilots in the craft. They'll just be flown remotely.
Wiems35 1 year ago
@Wiems35 im sure america has several counter mesures for UAVS, from jamming the signal that controls them, to taking over the on board computers... for every invention of a sword, their is a invention of a shield to protect from it... and i can almost guarentee america has some sort of non nuclear anti air EMP weapon
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj
Ok, that means terrorists are decades away from having anything to stop UAVs.
Wiems35 1 year ago
@Wiems35 yes, your right, but my point was... they will eventually get that technology, even if it takes them 100 years, then they will have 2 put pilots back into airplanes, because, in terms of UAVS, its alot easier to kill the remote connection linking the UAV to the drvier, then it is to kill the on board computers that control the aircraft.. but im sure there will also be inventions that will help pilots withstand higher Gs, just like a Gsuit does
101andrewj 1 year ago
@repsollenny Are you talking about the aim 9x?
And how can you avoid the enemies' missiles if you don't manoeuvre?
mrfrankincense 1 year ago
@mrfrankincense You're not going to outmaoeuvre a missile, not going to happen unless its a Hollywood movie.
repsollenny 1 year ago
@repsollenny Well if it's propellant is used up at long range it's quite likely, and in close range fighting even with off bore sight being high; that still only means it can see you, it still has to then get close to you and that's not 100% sure. Getting the first missile off will help but they still put a gun on the F-35 and TV on the F-22, so really it does matter and the F-35 lacks.
mrfrankincense 1 year ago
@mrfrankincense
Thrust vectoring is basically a change of Rate of turn for Turn radius. I don't know how that is to be employed but Thrust Vectoring won't help dodging a missile.
SvenPhantom 1 year ago
@SvenPhantom Thrust vectoring improves the efficiency of changing direction. Increase efficiency = Increase thrust, Increase thrust = Increase acceleration. If you can accelerate faster than the missile then it can't hit you. If no one can avoid a missile, then you'll lose an F-35 every time they get the first shot. And at long range missiles have low PKs. The claimed range of any missile is long after it has run out of propellant, it is now gliding; if it turns it will slow down be outrun.
mrfrankincense 1 year ago
@mrfrankincense
Considering most BVR missiles go at Mach 3, I don't think you'll be outrunning it any time soon.
SvenPhantom 1 year ago
@SvenPhantom Well, the R-77 has a claimed top speed of Mach 4.5. but in most cases it will run out of propellant long before it gets to the enemy aircraft if it then manoeuvres it will lose speed from drag. To turn, it needs to accelerate in a new direction. It will use it's control surfaces to deflect air which will take kinetic energy from the missile, therefore slow it down, considerably.
mrfrankincense 1 year ago
@repsollenny What if they get the first shot?
mrfrankincense 1 year ago
@repsollenny "the missles do the work for you" ???? jajajajajajajajajajajajajqajajajajajajaj thats wat the usaf has said since the 60s didnt work then doesnt work now jajajaja
pinkdiamonds78 1 year ago
@pinkdiamonds78 angry troll is stupid too?
MadMilitiaMen 1 year ago
@MadMilitiaMen u would answer something as irrelevant as that, go to sleep u retarded american keep dreaming ur the king of the world
pinkdiamonds78 1 year ago
@pinkdiamonds78 I dont remeber saying we were king of the world. You assume much my poorly educated friend. Let me guess instead of cracking a book you base your opinions on video games and biased opinions of others. For shame.
MadMilitiaMen 1 year ago
@pinkdiamonds78
"jajajajajaja". If only we had Latinos building our planes. The F-15 has been modified and is (along with the F-18) considered the US's best fighters. Thrust vector isn't the be all and end all, it's more or less for air shows.
JohnQRandom 1 year ago
@buckinfitches Read the book Wired For War by P.W. Singer. It is all about robotics and UAVs in the modern battle feild. It actuall states that Lockeed Martin designed the F-25 JSF so that it can be modified to take on unmanned capabillities.
FlipitySwitch 1 year ago
@FlipitySwitch exactly what i was just saying, america could, if they wanted to, hack a canadian f35, and even control it...
101andrewj 1 year ago
I was in the Marines from '93-'97. On the first day of F/A-18 framp school they told us not to get too attached to the Hornet because by the time our first enlistment was over, the new JSF would be entering service. I hope this airplane is worth the wait and the cost.
cyberkirb 1 year ago
I read US airforce actually was going to aquire 2443 of the for around 363 billion dollars.... and here in Canada, since we aren't as rich... we'll buy 65 for 16 billions.
Ofionnain 1 year ago
The F-35 is a failure. It was suppose to be 1/3 the cost of the F-22. Lockheed has already doubled the original price. Unlike the Boeing JSF, Lockheed had to build 3 different airplanes. It never could super cruise, it was too heavy, and could not hold enough internal weapons.
ti994apc 1 year ago
@ti994apc
Actually it was planned to be about 60 million, it's fly away cost is still lower than the F-22's, Boeing had 2 JSF, X-32A and X-32B, the X-32B had issues trying to take off. The JSF requirements weren't to supercruise. Boeing's JSF had a hard time trying to match the newer requirements.
SvenPhantom 1 year ago
This plane sucks! We all are going to die!!!
xero925 1 year ago
is it just me or is the f-35 design not as......appealing as the f-22?
Magnedudewon2 1 year ago
these dam a/c were suppose to be put into production in 08 and the war department jus keeps extending the deadline for the rest of our old shit like the harrier, the av8b needs to be replaced badly, way too much manhours put into maintenance, but still an awsome aircraft when in combat
j10betty 1 year ago
nice! what can I say
Scranfield96 1 year ago
Your forgetting about BAE systems and Northrop Grumman who have worked along side Lockheed martin to design and build this aircraft.
dave3152 1 year ago
anybody wanna fuck around now!!! Go freedom and liberty for all peace loving people.. love this vid
rbya911 1 year ago
@pooleegriff I agree with you. It's better to keep the original design and improve it. I noticed that the more radar invisible a plane's body becomes the less fast and agile it will be like the bird of prey for example unless they find a new radar absorbant matterial that absorbs all frequencies or one that reflects them all but I don't know if that is physically possible maybe several different radar reflecting material coatings which can reflect more than one radar frequency.
rockpianoguy 1 year ago
@pooleegriff I have never seen a stealth fighter before at an airshow. I was hoping they would send one to the Blue Angles air show in S.F. but I have only seen the spirit B2. If they send an F35 lightning I will be satisfield by I want to see the F22
rockpianoguy 1 year ago
@pooleegriff You can fly an F35 lighting? Are you in the airforce or a test pilot or something? From what I have heard on the news was the F35 lightning is much cheaper to make than the F22 Raptor which more agile. I agree with you. I think the F22 better we already have a lot of them.
rockpianoguy 1 year ago
its like a stubbier f22
ITSbigwillystyle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The F-35's electronics is so high tech that it is superior than any jet exsisting; youtube.com/watch?v=cPKw3RksCcI
hesap11th 1 year ago
I challenge lockheed martin and Northrup grumman to build a completely new fighter that is better than both. A competely radar invisible fighter from all angles using fly by wire.
rockpianoguy 1 year ago
@rockpianoguy Lockheed Martin can make a plane on theirself just fine, afaik Northrop Grumman hasn't made a plane in ages they make more vessels and sensors now. And an completely radar invisible fighter will probably never exist and even if it does there are other sensors to track planes down e.g. infrared and using fly by wire? F-35 has fly by wire too...
repsollenny 1 year ago
@rockpianoguy, Umm this is A brand new design on this aircraft I saw the release at the Miramar Air Show A year or two ago. What would be the point of dumping hundreds of millions of dollars on A new design when you just did and it isn't even at full capacity in the military? Hell the first time this thing flew was only 4 years ago..
pooleegriff 1 year ago
@rockpianoguy name new fighter that does not have fly by wire.
123456789mischief 1 year ago
lockheed martin owned the shit out of boeing
cmonutube 1 year ago
f-35 doesnt need a bubble canopy because it has a HMD so it can see thru the metal and stuff
shadowknight3656 1 year ago
I hope the US cancels its orders for the F-35 and makes more f-22s. If nothing changes Russia will have a better air force by 2017.
RFXCGZZ 1 year ago