2/6 F-35 JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER IS A LEMON

[@danielqmul]

Run!! Get the fuck away from this airplane.

[@jerryg53125]

This just in........Canada buys 88 F-35"s .Sometimes you just got to wait for it.

[@brussell639]

It's funny that the pilots who actually fly the F35 say that it excels at all of these tasks. Not one pilot wants to revert back to a legacy plane.

[@nilservik7964]

And what else do you expect them to say ?

[@brussell639]

@@nilservik7964 I expect to hear an objective analysis from the person who's life depends on how good or bad their plane is. Every new fighter plane has it's bugs to work out. When the F16 was in this phase, it was a dangerous plane. On average, they were losing one plane every week from crashes. There's only been one F35 plane lost to a crash in testing so far.

[@nilservik7964]

@@brussell639 That doesn't mean that it "excels in all of it's tasks" . One of the first testpilots said it can't climb, can't turn, can't climb. When it comes to manouverability, speed, payload and airtime before refueling it has many competitors who are better.

[@brussell639]

@@nilservik7964 Yes, and the software upgrades to the flight control computers have since eliminated those problems. You're only listening to the initial reports where they are working those issues. Don't you give any credence to the fact that all fighter jets have initial concerns that have to be addressed, and once they are addressed, they're no longer an issue? If the F16 was treated in a similar fashion, it would have simply been grounded as an unsafe airplane because of all the initial engine problems and flight control problems. But they didn't have the internet then, so it didn't get as much bad press as it initially deserved. But just like the F35, they were able to correct the issues it had, and it has gone on to be a very successful and capable plane. The F35 being flown today is not the same as the first few off the production line. They're constantly improving it, but a lot of people only want to stick to what they heard in the very beginning.

[@nilservik7964]

@@brussell639 Software upgrades don't solve those problems I mentioned. Yes, the plane has had massive software problems and maintainance problems, but that has nothing to do with being under motorized and lacking lift and payload. I have followed this plane closely because my country has spent terrible amounts of money on it that should have been used elsewhere.

[@RegaDega]

11 years later, and this has aged horribly.

[@meleket]

Lockheed Martin laughing all the way to the bank.

[@charlesbukowski9836]

This program was a complete money grab...it was robbery straight up pure and simple ...not just to the benefit of the MIC but also politicians and the general staff to boot ...AND WE PAID FOR IT

[@charleswest6372]

Bunch of scumbags

[@Dcook85]

Hate to see the full maintenance manual on this thing...... probably makes the entire Encyclopedia Britannica look like an issue of Readers Digest.

[@Rascallucci]

I read somewhere that the F35 is so difficult to maintain whereby you can only fly one sortie every 5 days.

[@frankblangeard8865]

As long as the USA only fights countries without the capability of fighting back then the performance of the F-35 really doesn't matter that much. Afghanistan, Libya...countries like that.

[@luked4043]

Frank Blangeard yeah but the cost matters.

[@luked4043]

Frank Blangeard what on Earth is the point in having a fighter so much more expensive that can't do the job better than what we have.

[@Ewig_Luftenglanz]

Cobradriver99 and you did it with f15 and f 16 not f35

[@AvroBellow]

Yep, if the USA faces China or Russia, it's game over.

[@Neville60001]

Wait 'till they fight Russia or Chine in a future conflict....

[@SeanP7195]

Oops!! Now you can get one for less than a Rafale and countries are begging for them. They have three factories and the waiting list is 5 plus years.

[@Spjungen]

Aircraft designs are all about specialization. There are different roles for an airplane, and they demand different characteristics of the airframe if those roles are to be fulfilled successfully. Probably the only exception was the F-16...it's probably one of the biggest successes of the aeorspace industry, and it was damn near excellent in all its roles for the price, which is why it's been so incredibly successful in exports. Not all aircraft are like that though.

[@realnapster1522]

Mig 21 was also very successful.

[@KapiteinKrentebol]

The F-35 was even bad in Battlefield 2. =P

[@NotSus_]

it's shit in bf4 as well...

[@thefreeman8791]

LOL. What do you mean? You could do back flips off a carrier with that thing in BF2. :D

[@brussell639]

Oh, you mean a plane's top secret performance characteristics aren't realized in your little game?

[@rickdeckard782]

Don't walk, run! LOL!!!

[@perokatic9208]

Flies once and needs a full overhaul

[@charleswest6372]

And new pilot!

[@wusong7966]

I totally agreed with this guy's opinion. As a fighter is definitely will not stand a chance against Russia and Chinese made fighters. And for a close support machine is too expenses and too weak against anti aircraft guns.

[@titojr03]

Wu Song You must be a very un-eduacated buffoon or a ridiculous but amusing person; a clown. I'm not intentionally trying insult your intelligence so lets get that out of the way now, at least not deliberately. I haven't even begun to view this persons opinion, actually I read your ridiculous comment way before I could even begin to load this video. Ok look, Mr. very claim to know…. Russia maybe I may actually give you the benefit of the doubt but thats pushing it..but please do research before making any claim or any kind of debate. You sound sooo .. I don't even have a word for it. How could you sit there and say for one that the Chinese have any advanced fighters. They have NUMBERS. They exceed in numbers my fellow human-being. The F-35 is a project in progress…we've had the F-22 Raptor 5th Generation Stealth Fighter since the 90s. The F-15 Strike Eagle, A-10 Thunderbolt, F,16 Fighting Falcon, F-18 Superhornet, F-117 Nighthawk, F-35 JSF Joint Strike Fighter….is a fraction ..only what we want you to know…OMG please tell me you haven't based your judgment on Made In Ching parts …seriously. We invented stealth tech along with so much more….and not just recently but as far back as the 60s almost 50 years ago…the world is just now learning of stealth and thats only because we want them to know since we can detect stealth by now. Stand a chance? You have got to me kidding me!!!! Close In Air Support was Designed in WWII. By the Untied States Marine Corps. We've been using this since we invented flying by the Wright Brothers. We have matched any Communist MIG in combat FACT!!! And murdered them in every conflict. Sir get your facts straight, or debate at a kindergarden level because your level of intell suggest you are but a child. Leave the grown man talk to adults and keep away.

[@AVasiev]

Steven JayR You haven't defeated any communist MIGs in Korea thats for sure. Additionally the F-35's inferiority became glaringly obvious in a recent simulation run by John Stillion and Harold Scott Perdue, two analysts at RAND, a think tank in Santa Monica, California. Founded in 1948, RAND maintains close ties to the Air Force. The air arm provides classified data, and in return RAND games out possible war scenarios for government planners. In relation to this your claims about China are out of place, they have nearly 300 Su-27/30 like aircraft including 150 home made gen 4.5 SU ripoffs which are a fraction of the price, and I would wager more effective than the JSF....this isn't a discussion on who would win a war, as this gets way too complicated, but hypothetically I would rather be in a Chinese J-11 than a JSF in a one on one fight.

[@shingGOLDmonkey224]

Steven JayR lol all it takes to detect stealth is long wave-length radar, and that's been around since 1940, not just recently.

[@jimg1159]

Vynl Scratch That's NOT TRUE AT ALL. A long wave radar can be used like a smoke screen, to track the aircraft as it passes through and causes a change in the modulation of the signal. But it is not a sure thing and only works at short ranges. Ever heard of a HARM missile pony boy?

[@jaysay7095]

***** Don't compare their Walmart junk to their high end merchandise.

[@MrFarnanonical]

All the F-35 hate is ridiculous. 99 percent of the issues the F-35 has had have been software. They went into production before all of the software had been developed. So early F-35s had software that limited its performance because a lot of the code hadn't been written yet. Once it was ready they updated the software and removed those restrictions. As of 2021, the F-35 has already been used in combat in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. People don't seem to understand that software development is an iterative process, and it's still being developed. As for readiness, the Marine STOVL variant already far exceeds the F-18 legacy Hornet and the Av-8b in terms of readiness.

[@albedoshader]

I didn’t know that beauty is the main concern for fighters in a battle. Thanks for the info.

[@stevescott1032]

As light infantry, I didn't give a shit about fighters. They don't win wars and are too loud and noisy to be around. I kinda feel the same about the giant bombing mission. That's unnecessary killing of innocents. It didn't make the Germans look any cooler. The c-130 above me through... that was the angel of death. Helicopters were sick to have around too.

[@AugustusLarch]

Infantry rocks. I have never been in the service. But I go on long range patrolling to stay in shape. Sometimes 35 miles in a circle before dark. That is my limit. What the US is missing is infantry. There could be a majority of infantry. A better way to understand the enemy.

[@AndrewLambert-wi8et]

I THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY THAT ONE OF THE MAIN SELLING POINTS WERE THAT ONE CAN SEE THROUGH THE FLOOR. I THOUGHT IF ONE DARES TO GO SO CLOSE TO THE TARGET, IT COULD BE DANGEROUS FOR THE PLANE.

[@quazars236]

even the Russian experts consider this f35 seriously. a threat (for the pilot and the national budget). that's why they cancelled their own version of yak many years ago.

[@Apollo-tj1vm]

1:55 why is he talking about flying low to find targets? There is a great invention called cameras that you can use to see stuff with. You can be thousands of feet above of the area then make sure you are looking at your enemy not civies or friendies then use precision guided bombs to hit your target accurately. Unlike the A-10 which have shot up British tanks in Desert Storm.

[@ztunelover]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, The su27 and its derivatives are the prettiest aircraft in my eyes.

[@doriamedina]

Bring back and update the F-14 Tomcat!

[@gordywarin6804]

haha they could but the f14 is too hard to maintain and easily outclassed by the f15, and the f/a-18. the f14 could proably kick this jsf f-35 tho

[@Bluto2973]

***** As bad as the F-35 is, the F-14 is comparable in terms of being a maintenance nightmare.

[@thefreeman8791]

The F-35 is a maintenance dream. All those saying that it is terrible have nothing to base that off of except their own biases.

[@ConstantineJoseph]

Why isn't anyone investigating Lockheed Martin. 1.5 TRILLION is a SCAM, OUTRIGHT SCAM on our money

[@VERGIS92]

@VERGIS92 simply put: 1) if it's REALLY stealth then one F35 cannot detect another F35, hence I don't have to buy F35 to counter a surprise Turkish attack. 2) if it's not stealth, I can rather invest a tiny fraction of the budget in detection tools, and again not buy F35

[@rsKayiira]

Mr Winslow Wheeler is wrong here(I'm commenting from 2022 so I have the benefit of hindsight). Mistake was underestimating advancements in computation and sensors. F35 direction was right.

[@AndrewLambert-wi8et]

THE NAVY HAS BACKED OUT. I SAID IT IS 30 YEARS OLD. I WAS WRONG! IT IS IN FACT 35 YEARS OLD DESIGN. THE USA SELLING THOSE OLD F35A MODELS TO EUROPE. A 35 YEAR OLD PLANE.

[@dalek14mc]

…Mate…The Navy doesn’t use the F-35A. What are you talking about ?

[@VF1Skullangel]

F-35=Thunderchief II

[@Redout9122]

Thanks for posting these videos. So many great quotes about fighter design and the JSF.

[@incar95678]

The modern day F-16 is the multirole bombtruck conversion of the YF-16. We're talking MUCH heavier. Yes, its had engine upgrades but the wing area has remained at 300 Sq/ft2. Its an 'almost great'. You want to compare aircraft, compare it to the YF16.

[@AndrewLambert-wi8et]

SWISS ARMY KNIFE? THE PENTAGON DOESNT DO STUPID THINGS. I DONT BELIEVE THE MOVIE "PENTAGON WARS" THEY HAVE NOW SWEDEN AS PARTNER.

[@Bluelightning23]

The AV8 was the successful aircraft used for many years. how can this guy sit there with a straight face and say the F35 which Is also for the navy and Marine Corps Is too complex?

[@jerryavila1]

It all rings true today. A remarkable professional this guy.

[@jamesp4521]

I feel sorry for the future soldier on the ground and for the JTAC guy who has to tell them all I have for you is this F35.

[@gnolkenstein5527]

the enemy does not feel the difference off getting an gbu-12 on their head by an a-10 or a f35 schoo schoo back to RT

[@kcimb]

Guess what, you’re wrong. F35 works.

[@bennittotheburrito9606]

Be happy you have one of the best fighters ever above you

[@danielmolinar8669]

At least they can worry less about friendly fire.

[@geertvanschaik7976]

We're now a couple of years later and the F35 is now operational. Why is it never above Syria? The F16, F15 and F18 were called obsolete and needed to be replaced by the F35 as quick as possibe. Now with the first planes operational you would expect them over theaters like Syria, but nothing like that. Why is that? Because it's crap?

[@DrWhom]

Read up on the operational history of the f111 aardvark to get an idea of the issues.

[@kingsnakke6888]

@@DrWhom Except Sprey and his buddies lied. The Aardvark also has a higher kill rate than your precious little 'hog, by the way...

[@alonnehring402]

Israel has used the F35 in Syria hundreds of times actually

[@alonnehring402]

Funny how now in 2024 it's above Syria all the time

[@GoMiGman]

There was A LOT of truth to the warfare experts who came out in the early years of the F-22 production and said "Why spend all this money on this ridiculous aircraft when you could just as easily and it would be A LOT cheaper and smarter to make better F-15's, F-16's and F-18's?" Those people surely knew what they were talking about now that we look at this dud they're building for gazillions of taxpayer's $! I personally think the F-22 is fine and they should've built it because technology needs to keep up with technology but then offered a different version to some other countries such as Japan and the UK to help ease the cost (NOT ISRAEL because they only leach off the US and it would cost the taxpayers money for that) and maybe even Australia would've been interested in purchasing the Raptor and that's it. They could upgrade the F-15's just like they did with the Silent Eagle and make it a little bit stealthier (that would be much cheaper). Do the same thing with the F-16 and they don't even have to touch the F-18 because it's already doing that. It is an excellent aircraft and has lots of room for improvement. That's the way they should've gone, no doubt about it.

[@Spjungen]

Dude, just scratch the whole stealth idea altogether, seriously, you'll find you start laughing at yourself for ever having believed in it once you come to realize just how stupid it is. EVEN if it did work, the costs and impracticality of maintaining the skin and pilots' resulting inability to even get air time in the plane because of the need for repairs, simply outweighs any possible benefits the whole "stealth" gimmick could ever bring. There's a reason the Russians and the French, people who aren't stupid, stick to the tried and tested method of just building a really good plane that's fast and can fight, and as a result they've got winners such as the Rafale and Su-35. While we're stuck with the losers because well, Lockheed loves its money man what can you do. It's got buddies securing contracts for it and has no reason to stop fooling gullible politicians into buying useless junk.

[@GoMiGman]

Spjungen Well, I agree with some of the stuff you said but I'm not so sure about the cost of maintaining the F-22 resulting in its pilots not getting enough training time. Let's not forget that despite the economic downturn the US has faced in the last 5 years or so, it's still by far the richest and most powerful country in the world, regardless of what any of the fan-boy haters say and that there will never be a time where American fighter pilots won't be getting any training time. Just look at what they do at Red Flag with the Raptor on a regular basis. Don't forget that so far there's only 187 units operating and that most of those pilots are ones that have come from flying the F-15C and F-16D and so on. These are well established pilots and their training is rigorous and constant no matter what and second to none and will always be. So I would respectfully disagree with you on that point, anyway.

[@GoMiGman]

***** I agree that it's smarter, but risky in that it's predicated on knowing that there isn't a chance of any war really breaking out between the US and Russia for at least the near future. However...........God forbid.......should war suddenly break out for some reason within the next 5 years, how would Russia fair under that plan you mentioned knowing they currently have nothing that compares to the B-2 Spirit and the F-22? Maybe in some ways it's also smart if you can afford it to be sure you have the superior tech at all times?

[@GoMiGman]

***** You know, I do believe that we are at least 2 decades (maybe more) away from being able to deploy a fully operating squadron of remotely operated fighters that will have not only the capability of say the F-22, but to be able to closely operate with the "manned effect" because of intelligence and just good old human instinct. We've all seen the reckless bombing by Predators in Pakistan and Yemen and that's a highly contested affair when collateral damage is just unacceptably too high because of whatever reason. I do attribute it to the "unmanned" factor and of course to this new type of warfare the US has had to deal with that's as far from asymmetric warfare as can be. I think UAV's do have their place in the current dynamic of "fighting terrorism", but with UACV's where you're actually fighting against another "machine" and being able to out-dual it (so to speak), be it manned or unmanned, we still have a ways to go. And even then, do you think that the days of manned aircraft would be over anyway? Even when we reach the point where we're using autonomous UACV's, I find it hard to believe that the 'human' element will no longer have a place in the aircraft itself. As far as what you said about the F-22 - wouldn't it have been a better choice to terminate this idiotic program in the JSF and continue the Raptor production? I think that had the US offered a slightly downgraded version of the F-22 and included all the countries that signed up for the F-35 program, they could've easily reduced the end cost of each unit just by the ensuing production level. Halting the program after investing so much money into it is the main reason why the individual cost is so high. With the production of each aircraft the individual cost decreases incrementally. IMO, that was the big mistake. Also IMO, the Russians were always playing catch-up. I think they were matching the US' production models from the 60's on but lost an edge once they started going beyond the MiG-21. They lagged way behind with the MiG-23, 25 and 27 and it wasn't until the MiG-29 and Su-27 were fielded that they were back in the game and in the meantime, the US (which was not only already ahead in innovation and technology) was already way ahead of Russia's Design Bureau just by virtue of having fielded production aircraft such as the F-15, F-14 and even F-16. Those three aircraft were at least 6 years ahead of anything viable in the MiG-29 or Su-27. So I'm not sure if it was smart strategy on their part as you suggest or just plain outright lagging behind and having no choice but to follow that format? If you think about it, the PAK-FA is at least 15 years behind the F-22 (with still A LOT of obvious deficiencies compared to the Raptor) and if it weren't for the fall of the Soviet Union, who knows where Russia would be today vis a vis matching the US pound for pound with tech and firepower or even being in the same stratosphere as the US is in terms of 5th generation A/C? Another product of that lagging behind and the set-back effects of the fall of the Soviet Union is having to consolidate MiG and Sukhoi just so that MiG doesn't go under and if you look at the production aircraft both those mammoth institutions have fielded with the exception of the PAK-FA, it's only been one version of the Su-27 after the other and the same thing goes for the MiG-29. Anything else they did simply mounted to nothing much but showcase such as the Su-47 Berkut (while just an absolute beauty with those forward swept wings and intimidating black color) is nothing but a technology demonstrator prototype.. Even the Su-34 which was supposed to be Russia's answer to the F-15/F-111 is basically another variant of the Su-27 that came way too late. I'll give them tons of credit for being able to design a single concept that has become so versatile, but I wouldn't consider it anywhere near the level that the US has been able to achieve with the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22. You say it's smarter, financially to do it the way they did and you're probably right. But my question is if it's 'better' in terms of capabilities? And if it's affordable, why not do it like the US has? Just don't get involved in anything like this disaster in the F-35. Sorry for the long comment! :)

[@GoMiGman]

***** Indeed. I think a lot of that Russian philosophy you elude to goes back to the success the Soviets had in WWII with the T-34 against the Panther and then the AK-47 all the way on to the MiG-21. Then I think they suffered a setback with the MiG-23 and in some respect the MiG-25 as well. Only the secrecy they shrouded the MiG-25 with gave the west fear until they discovered it wasn't all they thought it was. Meantime, the US had come out with the F-15 and 16 and it wasn't until the MiG-29 actually had a FBW system in it that it could compete with the F-16's flying capabilities. Same with the Su-27 and the F-15. Once the Su-27 incorporated a FBW system, I don't believe it was a match for the F-15. Now you got all kinds of models derived from the Su-27 platform it really is incredible. Even the PAK-FA (from what I've read) has many interchangeable parts & systems with the Su-35/S. I hope we never get to see who's weapons or philosophies are really better than the other's because that'll probably end up being resolved with nukes.

[@danzervos7606]

Got the same type of misinformation about the Abrams tank and Apache helicopter going into the Gulf Wars. Said they would be a disaster in combat, instead they shone.

[@rifleman1002]

Uhhh no. The Apache choked in the dust. The A 10 was brought in during that time and it shone. The M1A1 was powerful, but the logistics for them is huge. They can't go far without gas trucks trailing them. And they use a special fuel, so normal Gas wouldn't work.

[@GrahamCStrouse]

+rifleman1002 The M1 variants are actually multi-fuel capable, but they are enormous gas guzzlers regardless of what you pour into them. And they're very heavy, which is a transport issue. Unless we declare war on Mexico or Canada, we're gonna have to haul any M1s to where the fighting is, quite possibly by air. A tank that weighs close to 70 tons becomes a logistics liability in that scenario. Countries with enemies on their doorsteps can afford to go heavier. We really can't still a good tactical tank, though. Just an economic and logistical liability...

[@Elmarby]

@BadassMutha400 It's from a Dutch programme called NOVA, 12th of July 2010.

[@calcrappie8507]

Another critic who was horribly wrong. Order book is epic. 17 countries have orders in. Cost of F-35A is lower than anyone expected due to high production rates.

[@wkgurr]

Still a lemon. The fact that a country buys this scrap heap is a sign of the pressure the US arms salesmen can still exert and not a sign of the quality of this dud. The Russians would pulverize this lemon exactly as they do with the vaunted Abrams in the Ukraine conflict.

[@michaelmixon1099]

Too bad we do not have another Kelly Johnson.

[@hekinho1]

+Michael Mixon To be able to give money back to the government when a project get finished... wild dreams today...

[@RockerDave12]

All the more reason to bring back the F-14 Tomcat with it's Phoenix missile system.

[@alonnehring402]

It costs more than an f35

[@TheKille22]

I meant it in a positive way. I like all those planes that you've mentioned! Even MiG-21's are kind of cool looking.

[@andrewlambert7246]

I agree totally and utterly about beyond visual range combat. It always fails because of among other jamming.

[@dalek14mc]

Uh, then feel free to explain why an overwhelming majority of air-to-air kills in the last 50 years have been beyond visual range.

[@danielmolinar8669]

@@dalek14mcNo comment. Especially The f-15

[@jhaand]

OMG. Why are we still trying to buy this airplane? It's a flying turd.

[@nyalldavis]

We in the UK invented the harrier, sure the F-35 is better in every way, but at its time the harrier was necessary. It was created because we needed a jet that could land without a runway, we didn't have another suitable way to fly our missions (aircraft carriers or building a local runway were un-workable). The F-35 was made when America had aircraft carriers, long range fighters that could easily fly from their base to the conflict, all they needed. But the must have wanted a jet to "look cool", because there was no need for it that hadn't already been forfilled by cheaper, better performing planes.

[@GrahamCStrouse]

The Harrier has it's issues but it's still a pretty useful plane. It was designed as a VTOL plane and.the designers knew there would be some trade offs involved. I think there's still some merit to building a VTOL F/A plane if that's what you're going for. But the F-35 is just a disaster.

[@AvroBellow]

No, the F-35 is NOT better in every way than the Harrier. The Harrier WORKED AS ADVERTISED and was fantastically reliable with that ingenious Rolls Royce Pegasus engine setup.

[@sp769]

Invented and then whinged them together

[@iNuchalHead]

Lol, Dutch for "compromised" is "halfbakken." Lol.

[@DrWhom]

half baked.

[@MultiSun75]

The real threath. The coronavirus

[@firefightergoggie]

I dont quit understand what you mean when you say "pods was guns", but gun pods were developed for the F4 and F105 era aircraft when it was discovered that such planes could not rely on missiles alone. After that, the generation 4 fighters like F15, F14, F/A18 and F16 fighters were all equipped with Volcun canons. For close in fighting.

[@VF1Skullangel]

Not really considering the F-14 was never really upgraded. the major problem with that plane was how expensive it was to maintain it otherwise it could adopt the AM120 Amram system easily from the F-15 just as the F-18 Superhornet did.

[@sep69]

Hello there, this is the future coming back to tell you it took another 10 years before the project was actually declared failed.

[@maverikmiller6746]

Yeah. Don't forget to add that 3 weeks ago Japanese Air Self Defence Force declared they had to drop their air interception rate of Chinese flights from 500s to 331 per year because as Japanese said "F-35 is not suitable for emergency take off and very expensive to maintain".

[@jb76489]

Is that why so many countries are adopting it?

[@danielmolinar8669]

From who? Pierre Sprey?

[@VF1Skullangel]

The New Sukhois like the PAKFA and J-20 aren't proven yet and will likely run into the same issues as the F-22 and F-35 programs and will also likely bankrupt defense budgets for whoever is parcipating in the programs. Not many countries oped for the Su-35 anyways due to the extreme amount of money it takes to keep them flying. Most are going for the F-15SE and F-18 Superhornets. We should be doing the samething here in the states.

[@Ptpd3370]

One look at the RIAT 2018 F-35 display has this guy eating his words. And oh, the 20-1 air to air combat record at Red Flag. I personally spoke to an F-16 pilot who was told be ground control where to look for it (12 miles, at your 1 o'clock). He pointed the radar at it and... nothing. At 12 miles! All of which means you'll likely see it with your eyes before radar will, which means.... you're dead meat. You can't hit what you can't see, and even in the event there's a WVR engagement its a great dogfighter. Acceleration 20% better than a CLEAN Flanker. AMRAAM PK levels way above any F-15/16/18. Like any aircraft, its had its problems in development - but the bugs have largely been worked out. It's in mass production and (this is important), the pilots LOVE it. One F-35 driver I spoke with (who came from F-15's) said its not even a fair fight - kills F-15's easily. The F-15, the one with an undefeated 104-0 air to air combat record. Think about that and let it really sink in...

[@gustavomazonave8536]

Old video. But the haters are being proven wrong.

[@DrWhom]

The bugs have been worked out. LOL! Is that crow tasty, you pitiful fool?

[@bennittotheburrito9606]

@@DrWhomthey have lol

[@KondorDCS]

I agree with you, but please don't call MiGs and Sukhois ugly as hell. MiG 21s 23s and 27s ARE ugly, but 29s and 35s are beautiful planes, not to mention effective! Same goes for Sukhoi 27s 30s 33s and 35s.

[@akear]

I am sure it will out turn the Viper and any other modern fighter. My problem it does not have a bubble canopy. It cockpit from the outside looks like a F-4E.

[@firefightergoggie]

Im just concerned that the old way of thinking from the late fifties and early sixties might have crept into the design team. Remember back when they thought that guns were a thing of the past and deleted them from fighters all together? Then little Mig 15's caught the F4's and F-105's in Vietnam and got some alarming kill rates. I know the F-35 has a gun, but I'd like to know it can out turn a Mig 29 or Su35 with ease. Then I'll be comfortable with it. Know what I mean?

[@Aofex]

I loved the Tomcat, but what you are saying doesn't make sense. All the Tomcats are now either in a museum or as scrap metal. Also the F-14 isn't designed to do the kind of missions needed. And the Phoenix missiles were designed to shoot down heavy bombers, they are not as good for use on smaller, more agile aircraft.

[@Sweetblood777]

Lairdriver. you need to view the abilities of the SU35 & SU37s. The T50 out flies the F22.

[@AdamB9098]

F-22 program was cancelled because it got way too expensive. There are something like about 150 raptors in service to "assist" eagle squadrons with air supremacy but have not as of yet been deployed to theater. Basicly, they are just really expensive air show jets.

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

The USAF is shy about putting F-22s in harms way. Unless it's a domestic hurricane, then they are cavalier about it.

[@TD402dd]

People like this man are operatives to stop countries from buying them. Britain has shown their disdain, not for buying them, but for the approval of the VTOL taking so long. Based on the problems with the Harrier, they should be glad the operations approval is so thorough. There is no other VTOL in world that can fly supersonic nor has the stealth capability.

[@AugustusLarch]

Stealth is a ruse. There is optical tracking now. They can see you on TV. The unit will spend 2% of airframe life at supersonic. That doesn't matter either. Easy turnaround it will never have. Also the operational cost is god awful. 12 units of other types could be in operation compared to one of this dog.

[@SeanP7195]

@@AugustusLarchHi, you’re wrong and he’s right.

[@DHANZ1969]

The Israeli cabinet approved the purchase of 17 additional Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II jets during a meeting on Sunday evening. The decision to purchase the additional jets will increase the number of ordered F-35s to a total of 50.

[@DrWhom]

I thought the Jews were smart.

[@LJSJIUJITSU]

@TheMarelis I say they bring back the F-86 Sabre and update that design with more modern avionics. I think it would be a great aircraft.

[@shawn97006]

What garbage. This video did NOT age well.

[@tomclunie]

Mass produced unmanned interceptor drones probably make this thing obsolete anyway.

[@thegodofhellfire]

RUN, get away from that airplane it's going to ruin your air force.

[@boffinboy100]

@TheMarelis There have been only 3 successful modern close support machines: A10, Su25, Harrier GR--. for close support, you don't really need stealth, and although the Harrier does have an IR problem, why spend $bn on fewer F35s when you can upgrade the current ones?

[@xDustyRocker77x]

what is the best fighter for SEAD operations? JSF?

[@KondorDCS]

2.14 "It's vulnerable to the kinds of weapons that can shoot it down." Does this sentence have any meaning? If it can shoot the JSF down that it's elementary that it is 'vulnerable' huh? BTW I totally agree with this man, he makes some very valid points.

[@Baseshocks]

@TheMarelis Problem is thats what it only should be, only crate the B version thats it and procure other platforms for the navy and air force.

[@raptor5908]

A trillion-dollar-piece of crap! Greets from Europe!

[@alpha001ful]

where are part 3,4 and 5 ?

[@KK_on_KK]

Remember when we retired the Tomcat for COST? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

[@alannhod7353]

F35 LIVES MATTER!!!! *Breaks store window*

[@benbennit]

Wow a trillion dollar museum piece, ouch!

[@Turboy65]

11 years later this video is kind of funny. The F-35 is proving itself to be a game changer. It's not perfect but it's good enough that all our potential adversaries have been scrambling to copy its capabilities or come up with a counter to it.

[@Sub___Zero]

aye!...i miss that buddy. AND A-6 INTRUDER (my 2nd favorite after F4E Phantom)

[@91general]

@bujoun76 it is actually because it costs alot for e.g the 5th generation f-22 its testing is supposed to be 7billion

[@zedeco]

@hotpocketpoison why should i go to our links, i dont belive what is on paper companys put out

[@NOLIBERALBIAS]

Guess who was paying for it if we cancel it.

[@Flyingdutchy33]

7 miljard euro voor 7000 banen. Werkgelegenheid noemen ze dat...

[@sicumine]

@MARTINELECA Now, that's a smart topic! Well done, Martine! :) and now seriously, change it into what? Euro? He he he!

[@jazz6804]

wat do u mean by lemon? plzz answer!

[@DOUGLAS55ish]

There were sure a lot of people talking out their ass years ago. I wonder what they have to say now?

[@MrDreetman]

Give SAAB a call... They might give you a decent price on the Griffin NG. ;)

[@Sub___Zero]

AGREED

[@gtubgle]

Soooo, cut flying hours, extending the life of current aircraft, would save money and build an aircraft that actually works. Makes too much sense I guess.

[@squidembyro8334]

This is why Australia should've bought sukhois instead.

[@turnandburn9384]

The thgree most significant design factors that determine the aerodynamic performance are; Wing Loading, Aspect Ratio and Thrust To weight Ratio. The F-35 fails in all thtree. It's bad in Battlefield because it's bad in real life. In fact, it's WL is significantly higher than the F-4E. It's AR and TWR is exactly the same as the F-4E. So, it's aerodynamic performance is nearly identical to the F-4E.

[@savaii4menow]

Air Force declares the F-35A ‘combat ready’ By Air Combat Command Public Affairs, / Published August 02, 2016

[@Schauming]

lol, and we also know that a Swiss army knife is not good as a simple knife. Even Mora knife is far better for cutting and chopping. The same reason why I personally prefer Gripen than F35.

[@RoadWarrior07744]

everything that's I've heard in this documentary is true. only people who were involved with this project know the truth and the whole truth about this project.

[@dallatorretdu]

Agree, I'm not sure about the pilot training but USA already had functional F-16 Vista and F-15 Active prototypes that (while still in prototype) are more maneuverable than the complete F-22, Politics is strange

[@inczelacc]

dallatorretdu politics is business!

[@charliegareginyan9584]

+dallatorretdu the F 22 had better RADAR and stealth. And VISTA and ACTIVE were overly complex and would require big changes of the production. Line.

[@RoadWarrior07744]

Charlie Gareginyan the F22 was build on the same concept as the F15. .so far the best 2 fighter jets that were build perfectly were the F15 and the F22. the Israeli's were the first one's to prove how well the F15 could perform .on the other hand the first version of the F35 were a total failure . the fixing the second version of the F35A lightning strike 2 . were done by Boeing and the IAI. the Israeli aerospace industries .

[@charliegareginyan9584]

RoadWarrior077 quite LOL

[@johnnyjohn9961]

what ever happened to the f22 ?

[@verdebusterAP]

Its not a matter of relying to too much tech its just the way of the world right now. every new fighter is has more and more of latest tech built. Like Eurofighter, does not have the stealth but is just as heavy on the tech

[@martentrudeau6948]

WINSLOW T. WHEELER was right and so was Sprey.

[@zedeco]

the USA still think that other country radars are upgrading

[@ztunelover]

What do you mean j20 and pak fa? If the su35 variants faced this thing it's toast. Fortunately the su35 is just as rare as this bird, and while the f35 has the stealth ability the su30mki would also toast the thing in a dogfight situations.

[@Viper550ful]

No its not that thin. F-35 has stealth fibre-mats build in the composite skin, that will actually reinforce the structure of the airframe, instead of metallic paint layers that were put on the earlier stealth designs and were very prone to damages. Of course a bullet will penetrate every plane out there.

[@UnknownHumanoid]

Are u kiddin' mee?? this shit cost aprox 159mil $??? OMG! :)))

[@dollarhugo37]

We all know its a lemon, who cares! This lemon is paying my bills and sending my kids to college.

[@KondorDCS]

Care to elaborate Y is Winslow saying that assault rifles could seriously damage it if (based on what you say) the stealth fibres make it tougher? In comparison the A10 wouldn't even notice is she was sparyed with assault rifles, cause she has pure (cheap as shit) armor. Is it cause the weight/power issue, that the stealth shit made the F35 too heavy already that they couldn't give it adequate armor protection?

[@incar95678]

Could you lay out some examples where this documentary is BS? Give the guy in the video his credit - he did help design and develop the F-16 and the A-10 Warthog, two of the military's most successful airplanes. I think he knows what he's talking about.

[@nelsontragura1441]

Why don't they build an 18 trillion dollar plane? They won't be paying their debt anymore anyways.

[@doilybarn6154]

I love his answer to the question at 12:38

[@JD12ish]

I'm curious what these two guys, who obviously really know their stuff, would have to say about the F-15, F-22 and then Eurofighter Typhoon/Dasault Rafale. What about the latest Russian derivatives of the famous Flanker?

[@VF1Skullangel]

I wonder if he feels the same about the Pak FA and J-20.