f-35 symbolises what is wrong with america nowadays, corporate rip off of american taxpayers money for something absolutely useless against the Pak Fa
I'm not saying the russians are the best in every field, NO, the French have the best explosives, the Russians have the best radar-signal processing algorithms and software, while the Americans have built other better weapons, but in SAM guidance and target assessment Russia wins out, and that includes winning over their own stealth aircraft too.
and in civil aircraft, Boeing is safer than Airbus, Airbus is fully automated like F35 wants to be and automation has often worked against safety
@napper6162 You do realize this video was made over 1.5 years ago before anyone knew about the problems? (which are being addressed and fixed-ANY project like this will have problems. That...is the point of doing tests.)
@PchanStitch - who are you kidding? The brainy ones in the aerospace industry, including some in the US, had known and predicted what a useless turkey the F-35 would become shortly after the first prototypes had flown.
@PchanStitch the point is that unlike F16 which lived in the real world of the cold war years and mig29 competition, this one here is overrated and seems to defy some principles of physics... I see 2 issues right away, 1) It can be detected by sophisticated passive radar 2) due to its complexity it's not an easy to upgrade aircraft / add avionics and weapons to, my country has both F16 and Mirage which are being easily upgraded all the time, upgrading cannot stop
@PchanStitch F16 well equipped beats F35 at most tasks, you can grab an F16 and make mission specific modifications at a fraction of a the cost, as for stealth, it does not exist, the best thing you can do over enemy territory is have sophisticated fake drone targets leading the mission, if there's enemy AA defense it will be triggered because they will sense the drones for real aircraft
@VERGIS92 Actually, using the F-22 in exercises such as Red Flag proved that stealth is very effective, considering one or two F-22s were swatting down whole flights of F-16s, F-15s, Mirages, SU-35s, and other aircraft like flies and never once could the other aircraft find them. The F-35, being designed with the same principles and technology should be just as effective. You're not getting the full story over there, I am sorry to say.
@PchanStitch if the enemy has F16 and F15 with premitive and classic radars yes,
but passive radar will catch F22, AA with passive radars will catch it from 100s of miles away. This radar only 'listens' and uses algorithms to infere intelligent transmission, such radars are used in SETI and even with simple technology can detect alien transmitting for a fraction of a sec from another galaxy amongst millions of noisy, random signals
@PchanStitch but even the classic active radar is not simple, you can buld active radar that transmits complicated wavelengths in various orientations which the F35 has not been tested against, these radars can easily be implemented in ground form, less so in airborne form. When comparing 2 things we need to compare latest technology of one against the LATEST of the other, I'm sure Lockheed Martin will be the first to sell anti F35 radars after the plane sells
@VERGIS92 I can assure you they've tested the radar-absorbing coating and shape of the plane against every possible radar imaginable. If you, a civilian on the other side of the world can see it as a potential issue, I can absolutely promise you beyond the shadow of a doubt the people designing this plane over the last decade thought of it and addressed it as well.
@PchanStitch I'm sorry but engineers and aircraft makers never figure things out 100%, we have seen it in Airbus aircraft, in the Patriot missile and elsewhere, they all had limitations, problems. in the F35 they make it look as if it can fool passive radars, which is utterly impossible, and as if it can fool powerful and smart active radars which is 50-50 possible, not to mention other possibilities, I'm sure it passed those easy radar tests, but radars evolve just as fast
"Passive radar warning system apertures–at three different frequency ranges – are embedded in the skin of leading and trailing wing edges and horizontal tail surfaces. The EW system also can use the radar antenna for electronic support measures (ESM). Expected mean time between failure (MTBF) is 440 hours.
The radar warning system is active all of the time, providing both air and surface coverage."
@PchanStitch this technology is not new, active phased arrays, signal cancellation etc, even cell phone towers use such technology to track the user, all we are seeing in the F35 is existing technologies combined, but it still cannot hide from passive radar itself. Neither the russians nor the americans have pure stealth, all they have are systems that are stealth to some radar, and some detection methods, technology is never all on one side of the game
@VERGIS92 Fortunately, we DO have something to counter passive radar. It's called the AGM-88 HARM. Which the updated version CAN home in on Passive radar and continue to track the radar's location after shut down. So. Maybe they can detect the F-35. Good for them, that means there's an 80% chance those radar operators only have about 90 seconds left to live. Thanks to the wonder of SEAD aircraft, the radars are only good for a few minutes before they become very dead.
@PchanStitch not so fast, how are you going to take out a Tor-m 1 battery?
it's moving randomly on and off, while limited within 6 km range its missiles move at 30+g, they will shoot down any incoming missiles no matter how small or agile, they cannot shoot at high flying F35, but other systems can
@VERGIS92 Pretty simple, really....don't use a missile, use an LGB or a JADAM dropped well outside it's reach, like a B-2. Or take out the other systems first.
You really seem a bit slow in the head to think the people who fight these wars don't have this stuff figured out. They pay people big bucks to notice things like this and solve it.
@PchanStitch you really have no idea what air defense can do, and especially Tor-m1 systems, no bomb or missile can get through, and it can handle many targets at a time, none of the bombs you mention works. and especially at the self-propelled Tor-m1 you can forget it completely. it's a difficult system to operate, requires very sharp training and setup, but it's extremely effective,
you think F35 has all the answers just because it cost many billions, wihtout providing science proof
@PchanStitch and in fact NATO has repeatedly requested to see the Tor-m 1 participating in actively NATO exercises in the hope to figure it out (so that Israel and other countries can learn what it can do in case they face it in Iran),
it's not a fully automatic weapon, if the Iranian crews are well trained they will win, if not well trained it may not work as good, the system itself has been designed by very few - very clever russians, that cannot be found in the US
@VERGIS92 And you think this mighty Tor system is this unstoppable force with no real world proof as well. The Tor system has NOT been tested against any of these advanced systems, so just about anything you say is purely speculation.
@PchanStitch it carries 4-5 on the crew unit, and many more on the firing unit, plus it can be whole battery, many such vehicles together! Sure, if you use fake targets you can fool it into firing, or use too many bombs , but it will be such a lengthy and heavy bombing that it will cost you more than losing an aircraft (each smart bomb or Cruise missile costs $2million or so), the Tor-m1 along with many other AA systems have been tested by our army, they all work
@PchanStitch the army tested against all our planes, against Eads, Bae, and Israeli electronic counter measures, it has been tested against Turkish planes with Israeli counter measures, it has been tested against targets simulating many other threats.
1) it's impossible to jam, it only covers 6km of active range, but it trasnmits in 3 different radar patterns, and with so much power that the enemy planes are doomed,
@VERGIS92 Ah, so one thing it's never been tested against is the B-2 stealth bomber. Or the F-22. Or anything else we have that is what you would call...classified.
That's the beauty about such planes like the F-35 and B-2, and that is roughly 50% of the plane is things no one outside of the Pentagon and people who fly it have any kind of clue about. For all you know, they may have the perfect counter against this system, but why should they announce it?
@PchanStitch its job it's not to shoot down those planes, they will be flying well beyond range, even if visible, Tor-m1 job is to provide anti bomb, and anti missile shield to ground radars, airports and other AA systems to 6km. you cannot have 100% anti aircraft defense using any single system on its own, as for the US defense program and the Pentagon they'd better look how to become stealth to spies (Russian, Chinese, Americans) that work within, and worry less
@VERGIS92 As for the spies that work within, you are very ignorant to think that it hasn't already been going on. Remember, if YOU can figure it out, the Pentagon and CIA was way, way ahead of you. And they are also smart enough to keep it a secret. This isn't the French military who is best known for waving the white flag and surrendering, this is the military that is best known for utilizing top secret assets to leave enemies dead and dumbfounded.
@VERGIS92 And I can assure you, just like the F-117A, SR-71, the stealth helo in the Bin Laden raid, the US military DOES have and WILL use aircraft, technology, jammers, and weapons you had no clue whatsoever even existed, and it is very, very possible the Tor will be as useful against them as a knife is for eating soup.
@PchanStitch many countries develop weapons that are not commercially available, the key to developing those weapons is having well educated physicists, something that is used in astronomy or particle physics may evolve in a passive radar, a silent torpedo, or a laser gun, which the global military industry does not want to commercialize, for example a laser gun on planes would mean end of business to Raytheon and Eads missiles, but the physicists know
@VERGIS92 I agree with you. Engineering physicist/Nuclear physicist are a must. lasers/beams would be sick though highly unstable. focusing a tremendous amount of energy at the speed of light would be quite dangerous but effective.
@PchanStitch the aircraft is not a waste, one way or another it will be sold, but the sales pitch is much exaggerated, we better be more realistic as to what the F35 can and cannot do, and how the technologies used can benefit other military aircraft and the civil aviation industry later on
@VERGIS92 Your biggest flaw is you keep confusing US research with NATO and other countries. Forget them. They are not the Pentagon. They are not the CIA. They are not Skunkworks. They have NO access to locations like Tonopah Test Range and Groom Lake where all the top secret research takes place. Just because THEY don't have a counter does NOT mean it hasn't been developed yet. The fewer people who know such counters exist, the better.
@VERGIS92 Which means, when and if we go to war with Iran, they'll be sitting in the system thinking they're perfectly safe. Completely unaware that the system has been figured out (by the way, more than likely we've built an equal to which we've been testing counters at Groom Lake), which will be their last thought before whatever slams into their system and blows them to itty bitty bits.
@PchanStitch Iran does not strike me as a serious military, they focus on interesting Russian technology, but do they have well trained crews? and it will probably be full of defectors and spies anyway. Without serious military academy and secret service, any weapon is no much use ,the same applied for Argentina in 1982, the British crews,using inferior but clever techniques tricked the Argentine missiles, while the Argentine ships were sitting ducks for British subs
@PchanStitch and anyway, let's forget about Torm1 for a minute, what about US navy ships and carriers? you think you can defeat their shield using laser bombs and missiles? I doubt it, they have been tested to handle 100 serious threats at a time, the firing range is very limited but enough to protect the ship, no matter what the F35 does, the Carrier will have more powerful sensors, radars, and more missiles, aircraft will always be inferior
@VERGIS92 Actually, the Navy itself acknowledges that if you shoot enough cruise missiles and/or bombs at it, some will get through. Which is why the carrier needs 6 or 7 ships protecting it, and even that isn't promised. Just as your 'mighty' Tor. If 240 bombs or a couple dozen missiles come at it, it WILL die, and the military WILL use those resources to kill that system and its operators deader than dead if that will interfere with them hitting a high value target.
@PchanStitch and here are the test targets used at the test firing field
eads-3sigma
bsk-defense
they test Patriot, Velos, S300, S400, Crotale, Stinger, Tor-m1 and more, and every time they upgrade or change software new testing is done, the AA not only has to shoot down the enemy target, but it has to deal with 5-10 other targets at the time, some friendly , some enemy bluffing targets, and the ones that are assessed as enemy missiles, it's a tough job for the SAMs
@PchanStitch you know what happened during the tests in mid 1990? which I know from operators themselves, Patriot failed entirely, Velos and Stinger had limitation and could be fooled or jammed, S300 can be avoided or shot down by air-to air, the Tor-m1 using its 80s design passed all tests. Today all systems have been further upgraded, but Tor-m 1 designers are amazing, they even made it to distinguish between diversion counter measures (aluminum stripes) that can fool Exocet
@PchanStitch Exocet is a french missile equiped with proximity fuse, it has some secret very powerful exlosive, in the Folklands war in 1982 the Argentine AF destroyed a British ship with a single Exocet, the ship did not sink but the fire melt it like butter killing many and putting it out of action, on the next attack other British ship managed to fool the incoming Exocet by aluminum stripes ejected in the air, disorientating the missile, this you cannot do with Tor-m1
@VERGIS92 Consider this. A B-2 can drop an LGB from 30,000 feet 15 miles away. Oh, and also. It can carry 80 of them. So, you have two little issues with this great Tor. 1.) the B-2 can drop the bomb before it detects it, and 2.), sooner or later it's going to run out of missiles well before the B-2 runs out of bombs. Now, imagine if there's 2-3 B-2s working together. Oh crap, now there's 240 bombs. Now spread them out from three different directions....bye-bye Tor.
@VERGIS92 Then there's also counter number two: Fly low, below it's detection. Iran has lots o' mountains for aircraft to fly behind and use for masking, and with the wonder of U-2 coverage and spy sats, it's not too hard to keep tabs on where those systems and where they are going so they can be avoided fairly easily.
@VERGIS92 You see, the major flaw with the Tor...it only carries 4-5 missiles. A single jet can carry that many AGM weapons or more, and they ususally fly in flights of four. So, if you launch several of them at it at the same time, it's not going to have any missiles left to defend itself very soon. And if you have several flights coming in from multiple directions, then it CAN be taken out with relative ease. And consider Iran only has 29....against LOTS of aircraft.
@PchanStitch in fact, there's no aircraft or missile that can take out Tor-m 1 or other similar system, and it has been tested against many aircraft , the ground system always has advantage over the air
@VERGIS92 - LOL. The bankrupt USA doesn't have the money to adopt your recommendation. The game is already over for the USA. Economic implosion will start in full force within 3-4 years. American war plans against nations that dared to drop the dollar for oil export are tell-tale signs of desperation. It will fun to see how the Iran theater plays out. Buy gold and silver; take physical delivery; and get ready to move to an economically stable, well-governed country.
what air supremacy and fairy tales, as soon as the F35 transmits a signal, it will give away its position, even if it is 100% signal absorbing itself, it still uses radar to scan for threats, which means that it is possible to make a radar to detect it (easily), and it still cannot defeat AA systems such as TOR-m1, come near TOR-m1 at 6000m and it's game over for ANY aircraft!
@shaider1982 - actually the F-35 has been limited to subsonic flying because its "stealth coating" tend to peel off and damage the engine when it flies above Mach 1.0.
@shaider1982 - I'll bet that the Russians and the Chinese would love to see the US devote hundreds of billions more on fixing the constellation of problems of the F-35. LOL. Fanatics in US political/military circles want a "full-spectrum military dominance" over the global. That will probably NEVER happen. But the US is headed to full-spectrum dominance in insanity over other countries.
For those who are ignorant. This plane is so high tech even the missles are not normal. When fired it follows it's target to the death even around corners and can wait patiently in the air hovering in mid air then when the target is in range the missle flies over and blows it up. This is not a normal plane.
You will allow me to doubt claims of extreme maneuverability! As far as stealth is concerned, I again doubt the overall advantages of the technology given the limitations that this brings to the airframe of the plane.
F-35 flight Experience تزويد اف35 ضعيفة السرعة من جهه وحدة دئما انطلاق مع الجوية2 بي سرعة معينة
دئما انطلاق 2الجوية اف35مزودة بي الخرائط المضلمة ضعيفة من جهة السرعة ولكن قوية من جهة الاحدثيات الخرائط المضلمة بي تعاون مع ناسا لي معرفة الهجرة الشرعية
FlyHigh3344 i would like to agree with your comment but I have to dissagree with your last line. Technology is never perfect and it showed in the vietnam era where all these high ranking officers decided to remove the gun from the next generation of fighter because the future was missles. Stealth can take you so far, so what happens when an SU or Mig slips pass all this wonderfull technology and gets into a turning fight. The F-35 needs to be able to fight and survive in any enviroment.
I know this is a late comment but doesn't HOBS (High Off Bore Sight) LOAL (Lock On After Launch) missiles (like the IRIS-T and the R-73 Archer) sort of exclude the need of getting behind your opponent to shoot him down?
international? Really? If it was truly international I don't think we'll need F-35's. Why couldn't they just say NATO? I mean really, will they sell to the Chinese?
1. short takeoff- only one of the 3 versions can do it while dumping half the fuel to hover.
2. supercruise-not enough fuel
3. stealth- claim to be golf ball size meaning it is detectable wile F22 is Marble size. The point is many nations already have anti stealth radar. No problem detecting it.
4. Super Manuverbility- they show you videos of F22 and people pass it as F35. Not one video showing it do difficult moves. TOTAL FAIL.
@TheAustin007powers where did you hear that? low frequency radar can detect it .AESA radars can detect F22s in range of 50 miles or so. F-117 was shot down in 1999 because it was detected. F35 itself needs to detect its own teammates in a war. How do you think they do that if they can't detect stealth? Stealth is not totally undetectable, it is only low observable.Stealth only makes detection harder , not impossible. Your fact is simply an opinion.
@edwardtang1977 because fot even that kind of radar to detect a stealt aircraft they have to hone in ona specific signature and only the military knows each aircrafts specific signature
F-117 was shot down in combination of luck and overconfidence. It flew the same route, the serbs were prepared and were able to move a SAM battery on the path, cutting down the distance.
The way AWACs and other friendly aircraft "detect" F-35 is by secured datalinks.
@Beliserius1 you should learn something about "overconfidence " then. Your AWACs is out of date. No AESA radar to communicate with the F 35. It is stupid to have one plane being stealthy but an entire squadron of support that is not stealthy. It has to be upgraded but it is not 'yet' done. Show me one video of F35 doing difficult manuevers. I bet all you'll find is F22 posing for F35. The F22s need upgrades to communicate with your own 3rd gen. planes. It has yet to be upgraded.
@Beliserius1 No it is not. Your radar has a short range . Do some research why don't you? I wasn't talking about the F35's radar. i meant your AWACs that communicate with it would have to be within 200nmi. Not pulling manuever disqualifies it as a 5th generation plane by your own standards. The F22 is not a priority cuz it is cancelled and grounded indefinitely. You currently have no budget to upgrade any of this that is why you are fighting sand people.
E-3s can detect targets at around 400km, the competitors of similar class are the Israeli Phalcon, at roughly the same detection range, and Russian A-50, again at roughly thes ame range.
The 5S system is a marketting gimick. F-35's sensor suite makes it deadly in WvR combat without having to pull off fancy post stalls.
F-22 is experiencing some teething problems with the oxygen generation system, nothing that couldn't be taken care of.
Oh and just to prove you even further wrong, the E-2 for the Navy, has detection ranges of around 400km, passive threat detection at more than 800km, and IFF recognition of 550km away.
These capabilities are top notch, despite reliance on older technology.
@Beliserius1 400km is for ships you moron. And 400 is nothing for a missile that has a range of 2000km+ and land based radars to detect. F35s have a RCS ten times that of F22s . Even Lockheed Martin would agree. E-2 uses passive array radars and are not stealthy at all. Flying anywhere near the F35 makes it a target and the F35 can't function without AWACs. Many countries are having second thoughts on purchasing the F35. It is a fact.
as for your "2000km+" SAMs, keep in mind, the land based radars have a limitation of horizon. Since the E-3 will be flying at around 8km high, the SAMs will only be able to detect the E-3 at 300km away. Further, the AWAC doesn't act alone, many will be decoys, EW, and actively seeking SAM sites.
Even with an rcs 10X the F-22, it is still the most stealthy thing out there, next to the F-22.
@Beliserius1 you seriously think land based radars are inferior to AWACs? China has anti stealth radars. Low frequency radars are perfectly capable of detecting marble sized objects. EMP can blind the whole fleet. Since I beleive a country like China would be on the defence and US being the attacker, there is no win for the attacking side unless your goal is to wipe out the entire population. Shooting satallites right on top of China can blind F35s. It's nearer for China to do so,
@Beliserius1 I am sure N Korea will find you there before the Chinese does and all they have to do is tell China. The fact is, China demonstrated they can surface right beside your carrier whenever they wanted. Your whole fleet was unable to detect it. They did it 3 times to prove it. They fired a ICBM off of san francisco to warn you not to devalue the dollar. If land based radars suck, why are you using it as a defence? Works both ways. EMP testing is done by China. US cruise ship distabled.
@Beliserius1 EMP is real man research on it. All China needs is fisherman to "harass" you. You're government knows perfectly well F22s are of no use. First attack at most. After that everyone sees you and it is an all out war. F35s are worse. I know you're think the US is too big to fail but hey wake up and check the facts. China's got AWACs too and from Israel, Netherland, Britain, Russia, Ukrain. Israel's equipment is yours but modified to be better, cuz Jews own you.
@Beliserius1 you are owned by Jews man. And the Jews are good to the Chinese.What US should do is come up with a new design instead of being igonrant on the F35. VTOL is from Russia. The Russian went to lockheed Martin. You trust him? The F35 can't supercruise, can't super manuever, the only reason you are fighting Muslims is you can't do anything about China and that includes military. China says you touch Pakistan and it is touching China. And you back off.
@Beliserius1 and your fighter escort today as we speak can't communicate with F22s . F35 can jam F22s . That is why it is cancelled. Anyone can make a good plane with 350 million per plane. Russia and China both got longer range missiles and that is all that matters in a BVR engagement. US looks good in the 90s but now you have trouble fighting libya. C'mon. China is 20 years behind but sorry it has been 21 years since the 90s. Wake up man
@Beliserius1 The f-22 is far superior because its role as a air superiority fighter not a multi-role all export versions are severely downgraded but still superior to 4th gen fighters. longer range missiles maybe we dont have them because the technology is hot air so far the probability of hitting a f15 or f16 at that range is garbage add a flick of the wrist and its missed for sure. non manuvering targets ... flares oh and jamming lol no not the f22 lol
@edwardtang1977 i bet when you think"Chinese" , you're not thinking about the professors that are teaching at MIT. Nobel prize mathmaticians , nerdy engineers.Yes , they got more of those than you got people. Take a look at the graduation ceremony at your ivy leagues. . Look up the last name of the General in Hawaii in charge of all your F22s. It is General "Wong".
@Beliserius1 even though you have stuff you can shoot down China's missiles,you're too far away to make it in time. China's missile (DF21D ) is mach 10+. F35s have a range of 1000nmi. It would need to be on a carrier to get to China. Carriers are not stealthy and are prone to the DF21D. China just completed 200+ fast attack stealth missile boats (type 022) that have 500km range missiles. One guy finds one F35 and he can link it with the other guys. Not to mention the submarines.
@edwardtang1977 Ok another chair pilot that has no idea what he is talking about.
1. Most aircraft 3rd 4th or 5th generation aircraft dump fuel before if they are to heavy they land
2.Supercruise- not enough fuel...WHAT? that doesnt make sence.
3.Anti Stealth Radar. lol No aircraft is completly invicible. What the F-22 has is the ability to manuever around radar signals thus making deep penetration into enemy territoty poss. No country can cover every single inch in space with their radar.
@edwardtang1977 Part 4: The russians fly the way they do because they want to sell their aircrafts. They take alots more chances than the US pilots because they are not authorized to take. The russian pilots are ordered to take the aircrafts to the extreme flight envelopes because they need to show superiority over other aircrafts, while the US pilots have a set of flight plans they need to follow.
@mu5ic1 Compared to the F-22... yeah it's affordable. Mainly because the F35 was developed jointly by the united states and with the NATO partners like Canada and the UK, which lead to shared R&D costs. The JSF program still have a lot of issues, but compared to the money sink that the F22 program was, the JSF program is cheap. I wouldn't call 380 billion in R&D cost cheap, but because it's shared over several countries, the burden on the U.S. isn't as bad as the F22 program.
Its not the speed or the manuvourability that mater with this plane. Its the electronics, the targeting systems, radars, and communications devices in this thing are unmatched by every single plane ever made. You people who say the J-10, and the Pak50 will beat it, you wont even get one bite. both of those planes are not fully Stealth because of there engine exshausts petruding from the back that are completely unstealthy. So yea the F-35 will shoot them all down before there ever is a dogfight
@FlyHigh3344 You are the only intelligent one here... Anyways, this version of the F-35 has its potential adjusted to the threats.. If we launched it with the full potential of the program, we couldn't sell it... This frame has more upgrade potential than any other plane today... It's at least 400% better than the best 4th gen. competitor. It's better than PAK-FA and J-20 too given the attack threat they represent with their current weapon systems and information management ability...
@FlyHigh3344 land-based radar and ship's radar will always be superior to this plane's. Plus this plane requires a who platoon of bodyguards who are not stealthy to support it. Yeah...the enemy will not find out. How does it communicate to AWACs? AWACS must send signal to it while it pretends it is not there. There are no stealth planes...only low observable planes. Low doesn't mean it is invisible. Low frequency radar see it just fine.
@FlyHigh3344 but speed and manuvability is needed to qualify it as a fifth generation plane. What is this? Cheating? One criteria not matched...then it is 4th generation. Show me ONE video where it has "super" manuverbility? I am not going to ask for much. A simple vertical climb would satisfy me.
@FlyHigh3344 There are items that is hard to be added on by upgrades, Other than stealth, current 4th gen fighter can be upgraded to have the avionics, radars, IRST and communication. But the airframe, speed and agility can't be upgraded easily or cheaply. Put it simply, the F35 can't upgrade its way from its criticism
@FlyHigh3344 Your acting as if the F35 will be behind the PAK-FA while its in front of it? Are you retarded? The PAK-FA will see F35's heat signature with its IRST (Which is the most advanced) and fire its missiles before the F35 even sees it. Head on, the PAK-FA is no compromise in stealth, expecially with its LERX in neutral position for added stealth. What is your profession? Do you flip burgers by day, and comment on youtube by night?
@mattmatt115 There is one big problem with the PAK-FA. It just doesn't have the budget that the JSF program has. Because of that, I highly doubt that the PAK-FA will deliver on the promised capabilities they advertised. Also the probability that the F35 will have to fight a PAK-FA? near zero. Russia is not a hostile nation and either are south korea and india which plan on buying the PAK-FA.
@Larintail2500 The PAK-FA/T-50/Soviet "Advanced Tactical Fighter" has been in the works since the 80's. Do you think you really know what the true development budget is and was for the T50?
There are many other programs which are/were parents/surrogates to the T50 whatever you want to call it. IE, Mig 1.42, 1.44, Su47, Su37 etc.
It has been a progressive development with many technology demonstrators and design bureau cooperation and T50 is the culmination of all that R&D since the 80's
@mattmatt115 Same can be said of american jet fighters. On that note the YF-22 started development in 1981. A lot of technology on the F35 came from the F22. The stealth tech was a supersonic upgrade from the F117, and the STOVL capability is a more mature version of the harrier. As far as budget goes, I highly doubt that Russia can match JSF's 380+ billion dollars considering Russia's %of GDP devoted to defense spending.
@Larintail2500 Things designed in Russia are a little more complicated than that. The culture is different over there, and people are nationalistic and want to see their country improve and be strongest, not simply to have the most toys of all their friends and only want to see their wallets engorge. Its not just 1:1 comparison to stick development costs of T50 beside JSF and on a side note, the two planes have different missions anyway.
@FlyHigh3344 Shut up and close your mouth it's stinks too much.This plane will have the same history as other U.S. military aircraft. The plane how fly 1.6 mach HAHAHA all is in speed and manuvourability, both aircraft disturb each other so that no one can not shoot from a distance and the dog fight begins (speed and agility) And why F-22 Raptor sry F-22 Craptor all of them on extensive modifications electronics? Bad plane and everything else which is made in the USA. Think 3 times befor you say
@19stojkovic93 You are so ignorant. The F-35 can fly at mach 7. Also, there is no need to go into a dogfight. The missle fly out of this plane and find it's target and blows it up. The missles can go around corners and hover in mid air waiting for the target or search and find the target and blow it up. If one of these missles is targeted at anything it is 100% guaranteed death.
@FishBowl911 I don't know to cry or to lol hard about your useless arguments. I have nothing against this plane and i like it. But F-35 and F-22 isn't very future tech at all. If you compare YF-22 and YF-23 you will clearly see that YF-23 was way better ( after some time F-22 borrowed much of YF-23 things ). This plane can't go mach 7 and it will never do that. The angle from front to wing isn't high enough for that speed. Anyway, there are no missiles who could just hover in air.
@DavzZz321 Mach 7? From a turbofan? Angle from front to wing? What are you talking about? I think you may need to revisit your textbooks on bypass engines and Bernoulli's pinciple.
@tigerswede3 You probably answered to the wrong comment :D I never said anything about Mach 7 speed. I said that F-35 is pretty much ripped off version from F-22. If F-22 was called bad, then this have even more problems.I'm saying that USA picked up the wrong aircraft at beggining. YF-23 was way better and F-22 ( YF-22 ) was upgraded with things what we're in YF-23. YF-23 was about killing enemies before they could even get close while YF-22 ( F-22 ) is more agile.
lol first lie only 5th gen multi-role lol. the f22 a mutli-role less ammo but it shot ground or air. f22 eat this thing alive. pak-fa eat this thing alive. j10 lets see head on i say the j10. dog fight we'll see. extreme maneuverability vs what a f16/15 or a f18 super hornet at most let s list who better, su30mki, su35,su37,su47, f22, pak-fa, Griffin, euro fighter, mirage 2000. lol defeat any threat yeah see it vs a s500 or a pak-fa. oh a slow 1.6 a bit better then a f-117. she a good attacker.
"The only 5th gen multirole fighter", in other words, ha ha you cant get the F-22 so we'll sell you this piece of shit, we have to make money some how.
@Mrprime94 You might think that but the main reason is due to the lack of variable geometry inlets for the engines. This is done for stealth reasons, just like the B-1 too. The B1a was good for over mach 2 but the b1b eliminated the var intakes and now its only good for 1+. Good trade off, I guess.
Is it possible to design the F-35 with systems that respond to enemy radar by sending out waves that exactly cancel out the waves sent by the enemy, thus negating the radar?
@RedFoxAce That would only work if we knew where the enemy radar was located... And if we knew that, we would just bomb the hell out of it. Waves travel at the speed of light and nothing goes faster than light, so by the time any friendly system detected the enemy waves, it's already too late to react.
There are no current 5th-Generation fighters in development by the U.S. The next fighter will be considered 6th-Generation. It remains to be seen whether this fighter will be manned or unmanned. The F-22's performance is limited by having a pilot; it can perform maneuvers so extreme that it would kill the pilot.
The F-35 is not designed as an air-superiority fighter. It is a ground-attack fighter with an very good air-to-air capability. It is not designed to "rule the skies" in the way that the F-22 is. To win FUTURE combat engagements with the Chinese and other adversaries, the F-22 should be put back into production at once.
Nice to see Lockheed Martin is going to became hollywood (finally their commercials got better animations :P ). Whats going to next ? let me guess probably toys.
Well , anyways nice commercial to convince potentional future buyers they buy the best current product on the market ,but........................ in commercials everything works :)
This has been flagged as spam show
f-35 symbolises what is wrong with america nowadays, corporate rip off of american taxpayers money for something absolutely useless against the Pak Fa
TheKingnek 6 hours ago
what the hell, technology these days.
itsfelix 1 day ago
I'm not saying the russians are the best in every field, NO, the French have the best explosives, the Russians have the best radar-signal processing algorithms and software, while the Americans have built other better weapons, but in SAM guidance and target assessment Russia wins out, and that includes winning over their own stealth aircraft too.
and in civil aircraft, Boeing is safer than Airbus, Airbus is fully automated like F35 wants to be and automation has often worked against safety
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
nice car salesmanship in light of the constellation of problems and failures of all 3 variants of the F-35.
lies sugar-coated in a video fantasy for American wet dreamers
napper6162 2 weeks ago
@napper6162 You do realize this video was made over 1.5 years ago before anyone knew about the problems? (which are being addressed and fixed-ANY project like this will have problems. That...is the point of doing tests.)
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch - who are you kidding? The brainy ones in the aerospace industry, including some in the US, had known and predicted what a useless turkey the F-35 would become shortly after the first prototypes had flown.
napper6162 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch the point is that unlike F16 which lived in the real world of the cold war years and mig29 competition, this one here is overrated and seems to defy some principles of physics... I see 2 issues right away, 1) It can be detected by sophisticated passive radar 2) due to its complexity it's not an easy to upgrade aircraft / add avionics and weapons to, my country has both F16 and Mirage which are being easily upgraded all the time, upgrading cannot stop
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch F16 well equipped beats F35 at most tasks, you can grab an F16 and make mission specific modifications at a fraction of a the cost, as for stealth, it does not exist, the best thing you can do over enemy territory is have sophisticated fake drone targets leading the mission, if there's enemy AA defense it will be triggered because they will sense the drones for real aircraft
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Actually, using the F-22 in exercises such as Red Flag proved that stealth is very effective, considering one or two F-22s were swatting down whole flights of F-16s, F-15s, Mirages, SU-35s, and other aircraft like flies and never once could the other aircraft find them. The F-35, being designed with the same principles and technology should be just as effective. You're not getting the full story over there, I am sorry to say.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch if the enemy has F16 and F15 with premitive and classic radars yes,
but passive radar will catch F22, AA with passive radars will catch it from 100s of miles away. This radar only 'listens' and uses algorithms to infere intelligent transmission, such radars are used in SETI and even with simple technology can detect alien transmitting for a fraction of a sec from another galaxy amongst millions of noisy, random signals
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch but even the classic active radar is not simple, you can buld active radar that transmits complicated wavelengths in various orientations which the F35 has not been tested against, these radars can easily be implemented in ground form, less so in airborne form. When comparing 2 things we need to compare latest technology of one against the LATEST of the other, I'm sure Lockheed Martin will be the first to sell anti F35 radars after the plane sells
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 I can assure you they've tested the radar-absorbing coating and shape of the plane against every possible radar imaginable. If you, a civilian on the other side of the world can see it as a potential issue, I can absolutely promise you beyond the shadow of a doubt the people designing this plane over the last decade thought of it and addressed it as well.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch I'm sorry but engineers and aircraft makers never figure things out 100%, we have seen it in Airbus aircraft, in the Patriot missile and elsewhere, they all had limitations, problems. in the F35 they make it look as if it can fool passive radars, which is utterly impossible, and as if it can fool powerful and smart active radars which is 50-50 possible, not to mention other possibilities, I'm sure it passed those easy radar tests, but radars evolve just as fast
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92
"Passive radar warning system apertures–at three different frequency ranges – are embedded in the skin of leading and trailing wing edges and horizontal tail surfaces. The EW system also can use the radar antenna for electronic support measures (ESM). Expected mean time between failure (MTBF) is 440 hours.
The radar warning system is active all of the time, providing both air and surface coverage."
And that is just a bit of what IS NOT classified.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch this technology is not new, active phased arrays, signal cancellation etc, even cell phone towers use such technology to track the user, all we are seeing in the F35 is existing technologies combined, but it still cannot hide from passive radar itself. Neither the russians nor the americans have pure stealth, all they have are systems that are stealth to some radar, and some detection methods, technology is never all on one side of the game
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Fortunately, we DO have something to counter passive radar. It's called the AGM-88 HARM. Which the updated version CAN home in on Passive radar and continue to track the radar's location after shut down. So. Maybe they can detect the F-35. Good for them, that means there's an 80% chance those radar operators only have about 90 seconds left to live. Thanks to the wonder of SEAD aircraft, the radars are only good for a few minutes before they become very dead.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch not so fast, how are you going to take out a Tor-m 1 battery?
it's moving randomly on and off, while limited within 6 km range its missiles move at 30+g, they will shoot down any incoming missiles no matter how small or agile, they cannot shoot at high flying F35, but other systems can
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Pretty simple, really....don't use a missile, use an LGB or a JADAM dropped well outside it's reach, like a B-2. Or take out the other systems first.
You really seem a bit slow in the head to think the people who fight these wars don't have this stuff figured out. They pay people big bucks to notice things like this and solve it.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch you really have no idea what air defense can do, and especially Tor-m1 systems, no bomb or missile can get through, and it can handle many targets at a time, none of the bombs you mention works. and especially at the self-propelled Tor-m1 you can forget it completely. it's a difficult system to operate, requires very sharp training and setup, but it's extremely effective,
you think F35 has all the answers just because it cost many billions, wihtout providing science proof
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch and in fact NATO has repeatedly requested to see the Tor-m 1 participating in actively NATO exercises in the hope to figure it out (so that Israel and other countries can learn what it can do in case they face it in Iran),
it's not a fully automatic weapon, if the Iranian crews are well trained they will win, if not well trained it may not work as good, the system itself has been designed by very few - very clever russians, that cannot be found in the US
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 And you think this mighty Tor system is this unstoppable force with no real world proof as well. The Tor system has NOT been tested against any of these advanced systems, so just about anything you say is purely speculation.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch it carries 4-5 on the crew unit, and many more on the firing unit, plus it can be whole battery, many such vehicles together! Sure, if you use fake targets you can fool it into firing, or use too many bombs , but it will be such a lengthy and heavy bombing that it will cost you more than losing an aircraft (each smart bomb or Cruise missile costs $2million or so), the Tor-m1 along with many other AA systems have been tested by our army, they all work
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch the army tested against all our planes, against Eads, Bae, and Israeli electronic counter measures, it has been tested against Turkish planes with Israeli counter measures, it has been tested against targets simulating many other threats.
1) it's impossible to jam, it only covers 6km of active range, but it trasnmits in 3 different radar patterns, and with so much power that the enemy planes are doomed,
unless you have a Boeing behind giving you power
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Ah, so one thing it's never been tested against is the B-2 stealth bomber. Or the F-22. Or anything else we have that is what you would call...classified.
That's the beauty about such planes like the F-35 and B-2, and that is roughly 50% of the plane is things no one outside of the Pentagon and people who fly it have any kind of clue about. For all you know, they may have the perfect counter against this system, but why should they announce it?
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch its job it's not to shoot down those planes, they will be flying well beyond range, even if visible, Tor-m1 job is to provide anti bomb, and anti missile shield to ground radars, airports and other AA systems to 6km. you cannot have 100% anti aircraft defense using any single system on its own, as for the US defense program and the Pentagon they'd better look how to become stealth to spies (Russian, Chinese, Americans) that work within, and worry less
about F35's
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 As for the spies that work within, you are very ignorant to think that it hasn't already been going on. Remember, if YOU can figure it out, the Pentagon and CIA was way, way ahead of you. And they are also smart enough to keep it a secret. This isn't the French military who is best known for waving the white flag and surrendering, this is the military that is best known for utilizing top secret assets to leave enemies dead and dumbfounded.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 And I can assure you, just like the F-117A, SR-71, the stealth helo in the Bin Laden raid, the US military DOES have and WILL use aircraft, technology, jammers, and weapons you had no clue whatsoever even existed, and it is very, very possible the Tor will be as useful against them as a knife is for eating soup.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch many countries develop weapons that are not commercially available, the key to developing those weapons is having well educated physicists, something that is used in astronomy or particle physics may evolve in a passive radar, a silent torpedo, or a laser gun, which the global military industry does not want to commercialize, for example a laser gun on planes would mean end of business to Raytheon and Eads missiles, but the physicists know
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 I agree with you. Engineering physicist/Nuclear physicist are a must. lasers/beams would be sick though highly unstable. focusing a tremendous amount of energy at the speed of light would be quite dangerous but effective.
Yourheartjustglows 3 days ago
@VERGIS92 So, dare I ask...why are you even WATCHING this if you think it's such a waste?
PchanStitch 2 days ago
@PchanStitch the aircraft is not a waste, one way or another it will be sold, but the sales pitch is much exaggerated, we better be more realistic as to what the F35 can and cannot do, and how the technologies used can benefit other military aircraft and the civil aviation industry later on
VERGIS92 2 days ago
@VERGIS92 Your biggest flaw is you keep confusing US research with NATO and other countries. Forget them. They are not the Pentagon. They are not the CIA. They are not Skunkworks. They have NO access to locations like Tonopah Test Range and Groom Lake where all the top secret research takes place. Just because THEY don't have a counter does NOT mean it hasn't been developed yet. The fewer people who know such counters exist, the better.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Which means, when and if we go to war with Iran, they'll be sitting in the system thinking they're perfectly safe. Completely unaware that the system has been figured out (by the way, more than likely we've built an equal to which we've been testing counters at Groom Lake), which will be their last thought before whatever slams into their system and blows them to itty bitty bits.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch Iran does not strike me as a serious military, they focus on interesting Russian technology, but do they have well trained crews? and it will probably be full of defectors and spies anyway. Without serious military academy and secret service, any weapon is no much use ,the same applied for Argentina in 1982, the British crews,using inferior but clever techniques tricked the Argentine missiles, while the Argentine ships were sitting ducks for British subs
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch and anyway, let's forget about Torm1 for a minute, what about US navy ships and carriers? you think you can defeat their shield using laser bombs and missiles? I doubt it, they have been tested to handle 100 serious threats at a time, the firing range is very limited but enough to protect the ship, no matter what the F35 does, the Carrier will have more powerful sensors, radars, and more missiles, aircraft will always be inferior
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Actually, the Navy itself acknowledges that if you shoot enough cruise missiles and/or bombs at it, some will get through. Which is why the carrier needs 6 or 7 ships protecting it, and even that isn't promised. Just as your 'mighty' Tor. If 240 bombs or a couple dozen missiles come at it, it WILL die, and the military WILL use those resources to kill that system and its operators deader than dead if that will interfere with them hitting a high value target.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch and here are the test targets used at the test firing field
eads-3sigma
bsk-defense
they test Patriot, Velos, S300, S400, Crotale, Stinger, Tor-m1 and more, and every time they upgrade or change software new testing is done, the AA not only has to shoot down the enemy target, but it has to deal with 5-10 other targets at the time, some friendly , some enemy bluffing targets, and the ones that are assessed as enemy missiles, it's a tough job for the SAMs
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch you know what happened during the tests in mid 1990? which I know from operators themselves, Patriot failed entirely, Velos and Stinger had limitation and could be fooled or jammed, S300 can be avoided or shot down by air-to air, the Tor-m1 using its 80s design passed all tests. Today all systems have been further upgraded, but Tor-m 1 designers are amazing, they even made it to distinguish between diversion counter measures (aluminum stripes) that can fool Exocet
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch Exocet is a french missile equiped with proximity fuse, it has some secret very powerful exlosive, in the Folklands war in 1982 the Argentine AF destroyed a British ship with a single Exocet, the ship did not sink but the fire melt it like butter killing many and putting it out of action, on the next attack other British ship managed to fool the incoming Exocet by aluminum stripes ejected in the air, disorientating the missile, this you cannot do with Tor-m1
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Consider this. A B-2 can drop an LGB from 30,000 feet 15 miles away. Oh, and also. It can carry 80 of them. So, you have two little issues with this great Tor. 1.) the B-2 can drop the bomb before it detects it, and 2.), sooner or later it's going to run out of missiles well before the B-2 runs out of bombs. Now, imagine if there's 2-3 B-2s working together. Oh crap, now there's 240 bombs. Now spread them out from three different directions....bye-bye Tor.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 Then there's also counter number two: Fly low, below it's detection. Iran has lots o' mountains for aircraft to fly behind and use for masking, and with the wonder of U-2 coverage and spy sats, it's not too hard to keep tabs on where those systems and where they are going so they can be avoided fairly easily.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@VERGIS92 You see, the major flaw with the Tor...it only carries 4-5 missiles. A single jet can carry that many AGM weapons or more, and they ususally fly in flights of four. So, if you launch several of them at it at the same time, it's not going to have any missiles left to defend itself very soon. And if you have several flights coming in from multiple directions, then it CAN be taken out with relative ease. And consider Iran only has 29....against LOTS of aircraft.
PchanStitch 2 weeks ago
@PchanStitch in fact, there's no aircraft or missile that can take out Tor-m 1 or other similar system, and it has been tested against many aircraft , the ground system always has advantage over the air
VERGIS92 2 weeks ago
is it programmed to display 'GAME OVER' on its 5th generation screen?
VERGIS92 3 weeks ago
@VERGIS92 - LOL. The bankrupt USA doesn't have the money to adopt your recommendation. The game is already over for the USA. Economic implosion will start in full force within 3-4 years. American war plans against nations that dared to drop the dollar for oil export are tell-tale signs of desperation. It will fun to see how the Iran theater plays out. Buy gold and silver; take physical delivery; and get ready to move to an economically stable, well-governed country.
napper6162 2 weeks ago
what air supremacy and fairy tales, as soon as the F35 transmits a signal, it will give away its position, even if it is 100% signal absorbing itself, it still uses radar to scan for threats, which means that it is possible to make a radar to detect it (easily), and it still cannot defeat AA systems such as TOR-m1, come near TOR-m1 at 6000m and it's game over for ANY aircraft!
VERGIS92 3 weeks ago
5th gen.... ;) give me a break! heheheheheheheheheeeeeeee....
andrzejartymowicz 1 month ago
This video is popular on Vatican City
franciscomrls0 1 month ago
This video is a favorite on Costa Rica
atthewburns1229m 1 month ago
Top speed of only Mach 1.6?
shaider1982 1 month ago
@shaider1982 - actually the F-35 has been limited to subsonic flying because its "stealth coating" tend to peel off and damage the engine when it flies above Mach 1.0.
napper6162 2 weeks ago
@napper6162 I think they'll be spending billions of dollars, again to make it possible to go supersonic without wrecking the stealth aspects.
shaider1982 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
napper6162 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shaider1982 - I'll bet that the Russians and the Chinese would love to see the US devote hundreds of billions more on fixing the constellation of problems of the F-35. LOL. Fanatics in US political/military circles want a "full-spectrum military dominance" over the global. That will probably NEVER happen. But the US is headed to full-spectrum dominance in insanity over other countries.
napper6162 2 weeks ago
5th generation ?? LOL! Это ж ЯК 141:)
Teyijas 2 months ago
how many speed ?
Hoangcuong054 2 months ago
@Hoangcuong054 Mach1.6
mnbrat 2 months ago
For those who are ignorant. This plane is so high tech even the missles are not normal. When fired it follows it's target to the death even around corners and can wait patiently in the air hovering in mid air then when the target is in range the missle flies over and blows it up. This is not a normal plane.
FishBowl911 4 months ago
They should buy more of these than the F-22's. Those are basically extreme stealth interceptors. These are multipurpose beasts.
MrSuperkiki 4 months ago
I would name this aircraft is "Defender of the Wall Street" and "Marauder of oil fields"
iseeunowintube 4 months ago
You will allow me to doubt claims of extreme maneuverability! As far as stealth is concerned, I again doubt the overall advantages of the technology given the limitations that this brings to the airframe of the plane.
vangelis13 5 months ago
Vers la Strategic Air et de la mer et la terre
iugrehc 5 months ago
@VioletFlame137 The god that doesnt speak,the jesus when never see? same people?
eleninwatch 6 months ago
Can the F-35 supercruise?
spawnofwheezedog 6 months ago
hahaha no its not affordable
konischev 7 months ago
yak 141 remix!!
tiltrotorcoaxialheli 8 months ago
@tiltrotorcoaxialheli
So what?
XKS99 7 months ago
دئما 2معا دئما2معا الجوية اف35 ضعيفة من جهة السرعة وقوية من جهة الاحدثيات الخرائط المضلمة
iugrehc 8 months ago
F-35 flight Experience تزويد اف35 ضعيفة السرعة من جهه وحدة دئما انطلاق مع الجوية2 بي سرعة معينة
دئما انطلاق 2الجوية اف35مزودة بي الخرائط المضلمة ضعيفة من جهة السرعة ولكن قوية من جهة الاحدثيات الخرائط المضلمة بي تعاون مع ناسا لي معرفة الهجرة الشرعية
iugrehc 8 months ago
@iugrehc Hugh? Umbaaaaa, wooombaaa zooluuuuuu........
FishBowl911 3 months ago
cool way to waste your money [U.S.A]
Exiled0Force 8 months ago
@Exiled0Force I think what is a waste is the USA giving money to your country. LOL
socshooter 7 months ago
what freedom??
skateboy159 8 months ago
FlyHigh3344 i would like to agree with your comment but I have to dissagree with your last line. Technology is never perfect and it showed in the vietnam era where all these high ranking officers decided to remove the gun from the next generation of fighter because the future was missles. Stealth can take you so far, so what happens when an SU or Mig slips pass all this wonderfull technology and gets into a turning fight. The F-35 needs to be able to fight and survive in any enviroment.
socshooter 8 months ago
@socshooter
I know this is a late comment but doesn't HOBS (High Off Bore Sight) LOAL (Lock On After Launch) missiles (like the IRIS-T and the R-73 Archer) sort of exclude the need of getting behind your opponent to shoot him down?
MrFalconfly 7 months ago
Lockheed Martin=best company ever
nickgbruns 8 months ago
international? Really? If it was truly international I don't think we'll need F-35's. Why couldn't they just say NATO? I mean really, will they sell to the Chinese?
EFSpartan 8 months ago
To qualify as 5th generation:
1. short takeoff- only one of the 3 versions can do it while dumping half the fuel to hover.
2. supercruise-not enough fuel
3. stealth- claim to be golf ball size meaning it is detectable wile F22 is Marble size. The point is many nations already have anti stealth radar. No problem detecting it.
4. Super Manuverbility- they show you videos of F22 and people pass it as F35. Not one video showing it do difficult moves. TOTAL FAIL.
edwardtang1977 10 months ago 2
@edwardtang1977 nobody has anti stealth radar and i happen to know that for a fact
TheAustin007powers 9 months ago
@TheAustin007powers where did you hear that? low frequency radar can detect it .AESA radars can detect F22s in range of 50 miles or so. F-117 was shot down in 1999 because it was detected. F35 itself needs to detect its own teammates in a war. How do you think they do that if they can't detect stealth? Stealth is not totally undetectable, it is only low observable.Stealth only makes detection harder , not impossible. Your fact is simply an opinion.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977 because fot even that kind of radar to detect a stealt aircraft they have to hone in ona specific signature and only the military knows each aircrafts specific signature
TheAustin007powers 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977 by the way the f-117 was not to the level of stealth of these planes and was detected in daylight by sight, it was bad tactics
TheAustin007powers 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
F-117 was shot down in combination of luck and overconfidence. It flew the same route, the serbs were prepared and were able to move a SAM battery on the path, cutting down the distance.
The way AWACs and other friendly aircraft "detect" F-35 is by secured datalinks.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 you should learn something about "overconfidence " then. Your AWACs is out of date. No AESA radar to communicate with the F 35. It is stupid to have one plane being stealthy but an entire squadron of support that is not stealthy. It has to be upgraded but it is not 'yet' done. Show me one video of F35 doing difficult manuevers. I bet all you'll find is F22 posing for F35. The F22s need upgrades to communicate with your own 3rd gen. planes. It has yet to be upgraded.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
|Your AWACs is out of date|
To an extent. It's capability matches that of the best out there, but it's size is the only limiting factor.
|No AESA radar to communicate with the F 35|
F-35's data links arent via radar.
| Show me one video of F35 doing difficult manuevers|
F-35 relies on sensor integration, not pulling post stall maneuvers. The program is still teething.
|The F22s need upgrades to communicate with your own 3rd gen|
Not a priority at the moment.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 No it is not. Your radar has a short range . Do some research why don't you? I wasn't talking about the F35's radar. i meant your AWACs that communicate with it would have to be within 200nmi. Not pulling manuever disqualifies it as a 5th generation plane by your own standards. The F22 is not a priority cuz it is cancelled and grounded indefinitely. You currently have no budget to upgrade any of this that is why you are fighting sand people.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
E-3s can detect targets at around 400km, the competitors of similar class are the Israeli Phalcon, at roughly the same detection range, and Russian A-50, again at roughly thes ame range.
The 5S system is a marketting gimick. F-35's sensor suite makes it deadly in WvR combat without having to pull off fancy post stalls.
F-22 is experiencing some teething problems with the oxygen generation system, nothing that couldn't be taken care of.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
Oh and just to prove you even further wrong, the E-2 for the Navy, has detection ranges of around 400km, passive threat detection at more than 800km, and IFF recognition of 550km away.
These capabilities are top notch, despite reliance on older technology.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 400km is for ships you moron. And 400 is nothing for a missile that has a range of 2000km+ and land based radars to detect. F35s have a RCS ten times that of F22s . Even Lockheed Martin would agree. E-2 uses passive array radars and are not stealthy at all. Flying anywhere near the F35 makes it a target and the F35 can't function without AWACs. Many countries are having second thoughts on purchasing the F35. It is a fact.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
No, the 400 is for bomber sized aircraft.
as for your "2000km+" SAMs, keep in mind, the land based radars have a limitation of horizon. Since the E-3 will be flying at around 8km high, the SAMs will only be able to detect the E-3 at 300km away. Further, the AWAC doesn't act alone, many will be decoys, EW, and actively seeking SAM sites.
Even with an rcs 10X the F-22, it is still the most stealthy thing out there, next to the F-22.
AWACs don't need to be stealthy.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 you seriously think land based radars are inferior to AWACs? China has anti stealth radars. Low frequency radars are perfectly capable of detecting marble sized objects. EMP can blind the whole fleet. Since I beleive a country like China would be on the defence and US being the attacker, there is no win for the attacking side unless your goal is to wipe out the entire population. Shooting satallites right on top of China can blind F35s. It's nearer for China to do so,
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
| you seriously think land based radars are inferior to AWACs|
Yes. In terms of area covered, land based radars are limited by the horizon.
|China has anti stealth radars|
No such a thing
|. Low frequency radars are perfectly capable of detecting marble sized objects|
And be completely useless in battle due to the clutter, noise, and EW
|EMP can blind the whole fleet|
The only reliable, weapons grade EMP device is a nuke. This wouldn't be smart to use against the US.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 I am sure N Korea will find you there before the Chinese does and all they have to do is tell China. The fact is, China demonstrated they can surface right beside your carrier whenever they wanted. Your whole fleet was unable to detect it. They did it 3 times to prove it. They fired a ICBM off of san francisco to warn you not to devalue the dollar. If land based radars suck, why are you using it as a defence? Works both ways. EMP testing is done by China. US cruise ship distabled.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
| I am sure N Korea will find you there before the Chinese does and all they have to do is tell China|
Why go through North Korea? Heck, we can even announce our presence, they still won't be able to engage us.
|The fact is, China demonstrated they can surface right beside your carrier whenever they wanted|
You mean the same carrier that "Accidentally" ran over a Russian submarine? Right before the budget hearing?
|They fired a ICBM off of san francisco|
Stop BSing urself.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
|EMP testing is done by China. US cruise ship distabled.|
BS
|If land based radars suck, why are you using it as a defence?|
The only land based radar system by the US for defence is the OTH radars, and they are not used for tracking, only for warning.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 EMP is real man research on it. All China needs is fisherman to "harass" you. You're government knows perfectly well F22s are of no use. First attack at most. After that everyone sees you and it is an all out war. F35s are worse. I know you're think the US is too big to fail but hey wake up and check the facts. China's got AWACs too and from Israel, Netherland, Britain, Russia, Ukrain. Israel's equipment is yours but modified to be better, cuz Jews own you.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
|EMP is real man research on it|
EMP is real, but the only effective weapons grade device is a nuke. All other EMP devices are limited to a few meters in lethality to electronics.
|All China needs is fisherman to "harass" you|
Political gesturing has nothing to do with capabilities
|You're government knows perfectly well F22s are of no use|
In Iraq, afghanistan or Libya, yes because they do not have a single competent air force.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
|F35s are worse|
Still the second best fighter in the world
|China's got AWACs too and from Israel, Netherland, Britain, Russia, Ukrain|
And they have what? 5-10 of these?
Grats, without a competent fighter escort, they are sitting ducks.
|Israel's equipment is yours but modified to be better|
Right, that is why Israel can't wait to get it's hands on the F-35.
The main reason behind Israel's modification of electronics is to ensure they are not leashed by the US.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 you are owned by Jews man. And the Jews are good to the Chinese.What US should do is come up with a new design instead of being igonrant on the F35. VTOL is from Russia. The Russian went to lockheed Martin. You trust him? The F35 can't supercruise, can't super manuever, the only reason you are fighting Muslims is you can't do anything about China and that includes military. China says you touch Pakistan and it is touching China. And you back off.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
|you are owned by Jews man|
Pal, Israeli are on the american payroll, not the other way around
|VTOL is from Russia|
Only the 3 bearing tilt mechanism is from Russia. The lift fan, shaft are original designs. Further, F-35 is more than just VTOL.
|The F35 can't supercruise, can't super manuever|
Doesn't need to.
|the only reason you are fighting Muslims is you can't do anything about China and that includes military|
Right, I eat beef because I can't go to the moon.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 and your fighter escort today as we speak can't communicate with F22s . F35 can jam F22s . That is why it is cancelled. Anyone can make a good plane with 350 million per plane. Russia and China both got longer range missiles and that is all that matters in a BVR engagement. US looks good in the 90s but now you have trouble fighting libya. C'mon. China is 20 years behind but sorry it has been 21 years since the 90s. Wake up man
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977
|and your fighter escort today as we speak can't communicate with F22s|
F-22s won't be the escorts for AWACs, it will be performing it's own mission seperately.
|F35 can jam F22s . That is why it is cancelled|
Yeah, and pigs can fly, that is why we eat them
|Russia and China both got longer range missiles and that is all that matters in a BVR engagement|
For non-maneuvering targets, yes. These missiles are worthless against a fighter
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 man you're seriously delusional and sour
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 The f-22 is far superior because its role as a air superiority fighter not a multi-role all export versions are severely downgraded but still superior to 4th gen fighters. longer range missiles maybe we dont have them because the technology is hot air so far the probability of hitting a f15 or f16 at that range is garbage add a flick of the wrist and its missed for sure. non manuvering targets ... flares oh and jamming lol no not the f22 lol
danster3461 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@edwardtang1977
|now you have trouble fighting libya|
You have ZERO clue what you are talking about. The only reason Libya has taken this long is due to the retarded president.
|China is 20 years behind but sorry it has been 21 years since the 90s|
China is still 20 years behind. The F-22 prototype flew in 1991, J-20 flew in 2011, 2011-1991 = 20 years.
You need to wake up and stop disturbing me with your non-sensical opinions.
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977 i bet when you think"Chinese" , you're not thinking about the professors that are teaching at MIT. Nobel prize mathmaticians , nerdy engineers.Yes , they got more of those than you got people. Take a look at the graduation ceremony at your ivy leagues. . Look up the last name of the General in Hawaii in charge of all your F22s. It is General "Wong".
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@edwardtang1977
|there is no win for the attacking side unless your goal is to wipe out the entire population|
Or to dethrone the CCP
|Shooting satallites right on top of China can blind F35s|
China has not demonstrated a reliable ability to shoot down satellites, nor would it blind the F-35, only to stop them from transmitting back in C&C
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977 fine fine. F35 is the greatest ok? US never fails
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@Beliserius1 even though you have stuff you can shoot down China's missiles,you're too far away to make it in time. China's missile (DF21D ) is mach 10+. F35s have a range of 1000nmi. It would need to be on a carrier to get to China. Carriers are not stealthy and are prone to the DF21D. China just completed 200+ fast attack stealth missile boats (type 022) that have 500km range missiles. One guy finds one F35 and he can link it with the other guys. Not to mention the submarines.
edwardtang1977 9 months ago
@edwardtang1977 Ok another chair pilot that has no idea what he is talking about.
1. Most aircraft 3rd 4th or 5th generation aircraft dump fuel before if they are to heavy they land
2.Supercruise- not enough fuel...WHAT? that doesnt make sence.
3.Anti Stealth Radar. lol No aircraft is completly invicible. What the F-22 has is the ability to manuever around radar signals thus making deep penetration into enemy territoty poss. No country can cover every single inch in space with their radar.
socshooter 7 months ago
@edwardtang1977 Part 4: The russians fly the way they do because they want to sell their aircrafts. They take alots more chances than the US pilots because they are not authorized to take. The russian pilots are ordered to take the aircrafts to the extreme flight envelopes because they need to show superiority over other aircrafts, while the US pilots have a set of flight plans they need to follow.
socshooter 7 months ago
last seconds of the vid : Affordable? wtf?
mu5ic1 11 months ago 21
@mu5ic1 Budget fighter?? LOL
poyanator 10 months ago
@mu5ic1
It's the price of a super hornet. I'd say that is affordable
Beliserius1 9 months ago
@mu5ic1 affordable as in a small sovereign nation could afford 10
nickgbruns 8 months ago
@mu5ic1 yes, affordable.
Ryan61598 8 months ago
@mu5ic1 Compared to the F-22... yeah it's affordable. Mainly because the F35 was developed jointly by the united states and with the NATO partners like Canada and the UK, which lead to shared R&D costs. The JSF program still have a lot of issues, but compared to the money sink that the F22 program was, the JSF program is cheap. I wouldn't call 380 billion in R&D cost cheap, but because it's shared over several countries, the burden on the U.S. isn't as bad as the F22 program.
Larintail2500 5 months ago
@mu5ic1 I think the americans use this term to mean what a lot of us call "value for money".
bigdhav 5 months ago
@mu5ic1 compare it to the F-22, its much more affordable for NATO countries to buy these than f-22's.
MrSuperkiki 4 months ago
That's what you call HD video!
FGsGFdG2 11 months ago
i love lockheed its my favorite company :D
kkingcobra2155 11 months ago
Its not the speed or the manuvourability that mater with this plane. Its the electronics, the targeting systems, radars, and communications devices in this thing are unmatched by every single plane ever made. You people who say the J-10, and the Pak50 will beat it, you wont even get one bite. both of those planes are not fully Stealth because of there engine exshausts petruding from the back that are completely unstealthy. So yea the F-35 will shoot them all down before there ever is a dogfight
FlyHigh3344 11 months ago 11
@FlyHigh3344 You are the only intelligent one here... Anyways, this version of the F-35 has its potential adjusted to the threats.. If we launched it with the full potential of the program, we couldn't sell it... This frame has more upgrade potential than any other plane today... It's at least 400% better than the best 4th gen. competitor. It's better than PAK-FA and J-20 too given the attack threat they represent with their current weapon systems and information management ability...
JeanAlesiAgain2 10 months ago
@FlyHigh3344 land-based radar and ship's radar will always be superior to this plane's. Plus this plane requires a who platoon of bodyguards who are not stealthy to support it. Yeah...the enemy will not find out. How does it communicate to AWACs? AWACS must send signal to it while it pretends it is not there. There are no stealth planes...only low observable planes. Low doesn't mean it is invisible. Low frequency radar see it just fine.
edwardtang1977 10 months ago
@edwardtang1977 messages can be encrypted
TheAustin007powers 9 months ago
@FlyHigh3344 but speed and manuvability is needed to qualify it as a fifth generation plane. What is this? Cheating? One criteria not matched...then it is 4th generation. Show me ONE video where it has "super" manuverbility? I am not going to ask for much. A simple vertical climb would satisfy me.
edwardtang1977 10 months ago
@FlyHigh3344 There are items that is hard to be added on by upgrades, Other than stealth, current 4th gen fighter can be upgraded to have the avionics, radars, IRST and communication. But the airframe, speed and agility can't be upgraded easily or cheaply. Put it simply, the F35 can't upgrade its way from its criticism
HMSBeagle200 9 months ago
@FlyHigh3344 tHANKYOU! sOMEONE UNDERSTANDS!
MilitaryAircraft101 7 months ago
@FlyHigh3344 Your acting as if the F35 will be behind the PAK-FA while its in front of it? Are you retarded? The PAK-FA will see F35's heat signature with its IRST (Which is the most advanced) and fire its missiles before the F35 even sees it. Head on, the PAK-FA is no compromise in stealth, expecially with its LERX in neutral position for added stealth. What is your profession? Do you flip burgers by day, and comment on youtube by night?
mattmatt115 6 months ago
@mattmatt115
russian garbage is no match for american,
ceko1907 5 months ago
@ceko1907 Please elabroate? Which garbage is no match for American, could you provide statistcal evidence of Americans VS Russia.
mattmatt115 5 months ago
@mattmatt115 There is one big problem with the PAK-FA. It just doesn't have the budget that the JSF program has. Because of that, I highly doubt that the PAK-FA will deliver on the promised capabilities they advertised. Also the probability that the F35 will have to fight a PAK-FA? near zero. Russia is not a hostile nation and either are south korea and india which plan on buying the PAK-FA.
Larintail2500 5 months ago
@Larintail2500 The PAK-FA/T-50/Soviet "Advanced Tactical Fighter" has been in the works since the 80's. Do you think you really know what the true development budget is and was for the T50?
There are many other programs which are/were parents/surrogates to the T50 whatever you want to call it. IE, Mig 1.42, 1.44, Su47, Su37 etc.
It has been a progressive development with many technology demonstrators and design bureau cooperation and T50 is the culmination of all that R&D since the 80's
mattmatt115 5 months ago
@mattmatt115 Same can be said of american jet fighters. On that note the YF-22 started development in 1981. A lot of technology on the F35 came from the F22. The stealth tech was a supersonic upgrade from the F117, and the STOVL capability is a more mature version of the harrier. As far as budget goes, I highly doubt that Russia can match JSF's 380+ billion dollars considering Russia's %of GDP devoted to defense spending.
Larintail2500 5 months ago
@Larintail2500 Things designed in Russia are a little more complicated than that. The culture is different over there, and people are nationalistic and want to see their country improve and be strongest, not simply to have the most toys of all their friends and only want to see their wallets engorge. Its not just 1:1 comparison to stick development costs of T50 beside JSF and on a side note, the two planes have different missions anyway.
mattmatt115 5 months ago
@Larintail2500 By the way, a lot what you can see inside F-22 was taken from YF-23. YF-22 was almost completely rebuilded with things from YF-23.
DavzZz321 3 months ago
@FlyHigh3344 Shut up and close your mouth it's stinks too much.This plane will have the same history as other U.S. military aircraft. The plane how fly 1.6 mach HAHAHA all is in speed and manuvourability, both aircraft disturb each other so that no one can not shoot from a distance and the dog fight begins (speed and agility) And why F-22 Raptor sry F-22 Craptor all of them on extensive modifications electronics? Bad plane and everything else which is made in the USA. Think 3 times befor you say
19stojkovic93 5 months ago
@19stojkovic93 You are so ignorant. The F-35 can fly at mach 7. Also, there is no need to go into a dogfight. The missle fly out of this plane and find it's target and blows it up. The missles can go around corners and hover in mid air waiting for the target or search and find the target and blow it up. If one of these missles is targeted at anything it is 100% guaranteed death.
FishBowl911 4 months ago
@FishBowl911
hovering missiles huh? where you pull that one out of
karambiatos 3 months ago
@FishBowl911 I don't know to cry or to lol hard about your useless arguments. I have nothing against this plane and i like it. But F-35 and F-22 isn't very future tech at all. If you compare YF-22 and YF-23 you will clearly see that YF-23 was way better ( after some time F-22 borrowed much of YF-23 things ). This plane can't go mach 7 and it will never do that. The angle from front to wing isn't high enough for that speed. Anyway, there are no missiles who could just hover in air.
DavzZz321 3 months ago
@DavzZz321 Mach 7? From a turbofan? Angle from front to wing? What are you talking about? I think you may need to revisit your textbooks on bypass engines and Bernoulli's pinciple.
tigerswede3 1 month ago
@tigerswede3 You probably answered to the wrong comment :D I never said anything about Mach 7 speed. I said that F-35 is pretty much ripped off version from F-22. If F-22 was called bad, then this have even more problems.I'm saying that USA picked up the wrong aircraft at beggining. YF-23 was way better and F-22 ( YF-22 ) was upgraded with things what we're in YF-23. YF-23 was about killing enemies before they could even get close while YF-22 ( F-22 ) is more agile.
DavzZz321 1 month ago
@tigerswede3 Oh found my comment that you were replying to. I clearly said - it CAN'T do mach 7 ;)
DavzZz321 1 month ago
@DavzZz321 I know what you said. Why would you even mention mach 7? that's twice the speed of the air breathing world record holder...
tigerswede3 1 month ago
@tigerswede3 I was answering to the FishBowl911 who said that F-35 can fly at Mach 7 ( which totally makes no sense at all ).
DavzZz321 1 month ago
lol first lie only 5th gen multi-role lol. the f22 a mutli-role less ammo but it shot ground or air. f22 eat this thing alive. pak-fa eat this thing alive. j10 lets see head on i say the j10. dog fight we'll see. extreme maneuverability vs what a f16/15 or a f18 super hornet at most let s list who better, su30mki, su35,su37,su47, f22, pak-fa, Griffin, euro fighter, mirage 2000. lol defeat any threat yeah see it vs a s500 or a pak-fa. oh a slow 1.6 a bit better then a f-117. she a good attacker.
starknight97 11 months ago
@starknight97 i bet the f-15se can take her too.
starknight97 11 months ago
"The only 5th gen multirole fighter", in other words, ha ha you cant get the F-22 so we'll sell you this piece of shit, we have to make money some how.
Mrprime94 11 months ago
mach 1.6 what a piece of shit, an F/A-18a can go 1.8!
Mrprime94 11 months ago
@Mrprime94 It can Supercruise and that much more important.. youll never go that fast in real combat anyways
DonE1899 11 months ago
@Mrprime94 You might think that but the main reason is due to the lack of variable geometry inlets for the engines. This is done for stealth reasons, just like the B-1 too. The B1a was good for over mach 2 but the b1b eliminated the var intakes and now its only good for 1+. Good trade off, I guess.
r1cw 11 months ago
mach 1.6 isnt good enough for me..but australia's getting 100, overall im happy though
TheDudeFrom0Z 1 year ago
@TheDudeFrom0Z i am from victoria and we are getting only 5 of the models, the rest are going to quensland
sprig3432 11 months ago
Is it possible to design the F-35 with systems that respond to enemy radar by sending out waves that exactly cancel out the waves sent by the enemy, thus negating the radar?
RedFoxAce 1 year ago
@RedFoxAce That would only work if we knew where the enemy radar was located... And if we knew that, we would just bomb the hell out of it. Waves travel at the speed of light and nothing goes faster than light, so by the time any friendly system detected the enemy waves, it's already too late to react.
JTL14789 1 year ago
But will it blend, that's the question.
TheKirb90 1 year ago 2
There are no current 5th-Generation fighters in development by the U.S. The next fighter will be considered 6th-Generation. It remains to be seen whether this fighter will be manned or unmanned. The F-22's performance is limited by having a pilot; it can perform maneuvers so extreme that it would kill the pilot.
ugadawg5 1 year ago
The F-35 is not designed as an air-superiority fighter. It is a ground-attack fighter with an very good air-to-air capability. It is not designed to "rule the skies" in the way that the F-22 is. To win FUTURE combat engagements with the Chinese and other adversaries, the F-22 should be put back into production at once.
ugadawg5 1 year ago
See it even has a little sword at the top for reeally close quarter combat.
Drewskiidrew 1 year ago
I kinda got a semi watching this thing maneuver
nuggz503 1 year ago
Nice to see Lockheed Martin is going to became hollywood (finally their commercials got better animations :P ). Whats going to next ? let me guess probably toys.
Well , anyways nice commercial to convince potentional future buyers they buy the best current product on the market ,but........................ in commercials everything works :)
Vykuk123 1 year ago