F-35 is useless

A sensitive report prepared in the US by Rand Corporation says Australias biggest defence purchase, the joint strike fighter will be inferior to Russian and Chinese rivals.

[@Mornys]

Luckily it didn't cost much... Wait a minute! $1.45 TRILLION!!!

[@Verheerender]

Omnia in numeris I’m from the future I heard that they may replace the 35 with some other jet I forgot the name but there about to do it

[@makkt9188]

Piece of shit murican planes. Just like that piece of shit F-117 Nighthawk claimed to be "teh best stealth aircraft ever made" and it was shot down by Soviet Isayev S-125! US$110 million gone to waste. USELESS!

[@danzervos7606]

The F-117 flew thousands of missions in Serbia, and both Gulf Wars. The Russian built weapons systems provided to Serbia and Iraq managed to down just one aircraft. Sounds more like the Russian equipment was cr-p.

[@JBC814]

It's a piece of crap. Buy Russian or upgrade F-15's and F-18's. The contract should have gone to Northrop's F-23 back in the 90's. Totally absurd on our part, and I wouldn't recommend that Australia buy any of them.

[@sarielreigns777]

Fail-15 and Fail-18 are also Crap.

[@rafl326]

bruh

[@rafl326]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/j4LKf6qoqbuikJY

[@hellascommentor]

And we have the results of Red Flag 2017: 20:1, 20.7:1 and 24:0... Outstanding for a plane which can't turn, can't climb and can't run. Game Over.

[@burleylien2263]

agree, billion dollar trash

[@tomixtomix8532]

Born dead :-(

[@bestamerica]

Burley Lien agree, billion dollar trash ' ussr russia su35 is a big waste currencys rubles waste waste rubles

[@sarielreigns777]

@@bestamerica Su-35 is much better than the Fail-35. Get the Fuck out of here dumbass Yankee

[@larinvermont3271]

Eight years later, and the participating nations are still fighting about the JSF's effectiveness! We haven't moved along very far .....

[@TrangleC]

The F-35 is not only inferior in visible range combat. Its main weapon for beyond visible range combat, the AIM-120 AMRAAM is highly unreliable at ranges beyond 20 miles. The official success rate of this weapon hitting a target that is farther away than 20 miles is 46%, but it only achieved that rate against very simple targets like straight flying remote controlled F-4 Phantom jets or hovering helicopters. None of the targets had a missile warning system or flew any evasive maneuvers. The inofficial success rate of the AIM-120 missile against targets that don't stand still or fly in a straight line is rumored to be somewhere in the 10 to 12% range. That means even the 6 missiles a F-22 can carry internally are statistically not enough to hit a single target at longer ranges. The F-35 can only carry 2 to 4 of them internally. There isn't much of a realistic chance of either the F-22 or the F-35 being able to kill a half way modern enemy fighter from a distance, without getting close and engaging in a dog fight, where they lose all advantages stealth might have given them.

[@filmcreations]

And your conclusion is based on what facts that the F-35 is inferior? Very little on this plane's abilities has been publically released. Every piece of criticism you've been reading is all speculation.

[@filmcreations]

Simranjeet Singh---> Well we know it would lose in a dogfight due to Wing Loading, Wing Size in comparison to body size, top speed of just Mach 1.6, lack of Thrust Vectoring, slow Climb Rate, and slow Acceleration." Are you living in 2009? Its 2014 now. Please don't tell me that your source of information is Peirre Sprey, APA and that stupid RAND corp report Australia media has been peddling which is loaded with bogus information. You do know that RAND came out denouncing that report and saying it never evaulated the JSF or any fighter directly in that wargame exercise. The F-35 has an instantanous turn at over 9G and a sustain turn higher than the F-16 and F-18 super hornet weapons loaded. Do you not know that when comparing specs on a plane you also have to ask at what level we are comparing each plane at? Any plane with a weapons load and full internal fuel is going to inherit severe drag and weight penalties (and I haven't even added external tanks). An F-16 maxs at Mach 2.0 clean and dry but with a weapons load doesn't even do close to Mach 1.6. An F-15 has the same problem and with weapons load barely touches Mach 1.8 with a much lower sustained turn rate. The F-35 does not have an official top speed declared because shakedowns are not complete but it does carry the largest thrusting and most fuel efficient engine of any fighter pumping out over 28,000 lbf military and 48,000 lbf max. When the F-35 throttles up (without after burners), the accompanying F16s have to use afterburners to keep up. Its rate of climb is not an issue. ---> "It also lacks Supercruise and has less Planform Alignment as well as less advanced skin materials making it less stealthy than an F-22, probably less stealthy than a J-20, and pretty much equal to the PAK FA as well as the J-31. So you are speculating wildly...And on old outdate information which was bad at the time. The F-35 will do Mach 1.2 without after-burner (with combat and fuel load) which is basically a low end supercruise. So it might not be declared a supercruise machine officially but its very close. Thrust vectoring is not needed and offers no benefit. I hope you don't think TV is some "GOD" of manuverabilty. You're sadly mistaken if so. You are also completely wrong on the RAM skin. So you have any idea on the make-up of the RAM skin? Because they are thinking of using it as an upgrade to improve the RCS and integrity of the F-22. Overall its not supposed to be as stealthy as the F-22 but there is no way that it is less stealthy than the J20 or the Pakfa indesign which are very large and some cases blocky designs (J20) especially with canards. Bad for RCS. ---> "We know the number of missiles it can hold and we know pretty much every advanced technology in the F-35 as well as the F-22 has been developed by other countries (Russia and China) and is being developed right now by others (India, Japan, Turkey, Iran, Sweden). " No, you have already shown you don't know every advancement. You only think you do. A lot of your sources are wrong. Do you know what new weapons are being developed? Not all have been disclosed. Did you know that even if the F-35 is out of missiles and has an empty cannon, it is still dangerous to have on your tail in a dogfight and can still bring you down. There is so much to this plane that has not been made public yet. No other fighter has such capabilities. ---> "We also know the plane has AESA radar, which has been developed by other nations." And your point is??? The F-35 has an advance passive fusion sensor intergration and advance IR sensor intergration as well as sensor fusion. Its sensors are the most advanced of any nation. It also has a situation awareness system unmatched on a level never even seen before. ---> "Also, we know for sure the F-35 has exploded past expected budget and the prices are still rising. Because of these reasons, Canada and Australia have stopped orders for the time being while they ponder on other ideas and aircraft." Actually the price is dropping. Yep! You definitely have not been keeping up to date with the latest. That would explain your, "it can't climb and can't turn," reaction. Really are you still living back in 2009??? Its 2014 now. You do realize that, right? Also, Development problems and assembly line problems because of bad management doesn't mean a fighter is doom or won't perform as promised. True the F-35 has had its share of mis-management. Its also implimenting new radical technologies never tried before so its very hard to estimate the costs of such a learning curve. But the DoD did a shakedown of the program and now the program is under control. 2013 was the F-35's best year and it did tremendously well. Most bad news in the media is overblown. Active service pilots from the USA Australia, Denmark and England have all praised the F-35 as a dream to fly, powerful and handles incredibly. Its capabilities are unmatch and unlike anything they have exer experienced. So I'll take an active service pilot's testiment over a critic any day. As far as stop orders? no they cut down their initial orders but they have been taking delivery. As the F-35 matures, more will be acquired by these nations. Most of the F-35 hold ups now is software. South Korea dumped an F15SE purchase for the F-35. They are not stupid when it comes to fighter decisions. ---> "we know pretty much every advanced technology in the F-35 as well as the F-22 has been developed by other countries (Russia and China) and is being developed right now by others (India, Japan, Turkey, Iran, Sweden)." OH GOD! Where did you get that? Who told you that? You obviously have no clue whats going on with the F-35. More bogus information and speculation. Russia has been behind in technology even back when it was the Soviet Union. It hasn't even developed a really dependable and modern AESA radar for itelf. Iran is developing nothing but crap for itself. India is busy trying to develop the T-50 with Russia and is in termoil over the prototype which they say is crap and is on the verge of cancelling.

[@davidkillens8143]

Inferior as what? When the F-35 finally matures, it will be an exceptional multi-role ground attack and interdiction aircraft. If it has to go up against modern fighters in a modern conflict where both sides have networking, EAW, and an IADS, then it may suffer serious losses. The F135 engine is huge, but optimized to live and fight below 40k ft and Mach 1. That is a result of a design requirement for persistence, to be able to loiter above ground forces. But when comparing US versus Russian technologies, it is difficult because each system is quite different and unique. The US favors a huge jump in technology by building complete systems while the Russian system rewards success and is evolutionary.

[@filmcreations]

Simranjeet Singh How can I do that? I can't alter your comments. Not even sure which comment you are talking about.

[@davidkillens8143]

***** The gun and dogfight was considered gone by some "experts" over 50 years ago, but that opinion has consistently proven wrong. There is a very good reason all dogfighters (even the F-22) carry internally mounted cannon. Stealth does not make any aircraft invisible, all it does is reduce the distance to sense it's presence. The F-35 is optimized for ground attack, it's radar is designed for that function, and not as large as the PAK FA. It's real simple physics, the larger the radar, the longer range and better ability to sense targets. Same with the engines, the F-35 engine is huge, but it is more akin to a jumbo jet, where it works best at 35,000 feet and subsonic. The PAK FA's engines are built to go very fast and high, Mach 2.5 and over 60,000 feet. The optical sensors in the F-35 are staring, designed to pick up ground targets and launches of SCUDs. The PAK FA has an optical sensor, but it can be directed like a telescope to look many miles away to pick up hot jet exhaust. In a stealthy weapons load, the F-35 can carry two AMRAAM and two short range missiles. The PAK FA can carry 4 more long range missiles (6 + 2) than the F-35. Because the F-35 carries the AMRAAMs canted, they cannot be fired at supersonic speeds, while the PAK FA has no such limitations. If an F-35 and PAK FA met, it would be like a cat playing with a mouse. The PAK FA, because of it's speed and altitude advantage, delivers more energy to the missiles, they will have more range. One aircraft is shooting downhill with more speed, while the other is shooting uphill with a lot less energy. It can circle at the limits of the AMRAAM, and easily avoid them just by turning away. And since the PAK FA also has more endurance, it can play for hours while the F-35 eventually has to turn and head home, exposing it's tail to an enemy faster, at higher altitude, and carrying a lot more missiles. As far as the missiles, the AMRAAM has a radar seeker, the PAK FA's defensive countermeasures are built for that. But the missiles in the PAK FA may have the same airframe, the sensor mix is heat-seeking, and radar guided. So when an F-35 sees missiles coming at it, one missile is radar seeking, while the other has a heat-seeker.

[@Andrew-gw5wx]

Lol I want some Russian planes in the U.S. Army. American generals and defense heads shouldn't let their pride get in the way of their decisions. Let Lockheed Martin die or weaken for making this overpriced shit. It seems like diversified planes for different roles is still more reasonable than a shitty jack of all trades.. Helicopters for vtol ground support and rescue. F16s or su-37s for fighting. Bombers for bombing. Aren't the a-10s retiring from the U.S. Military? I hope this isn't the replacement

[@rock3tcatU233]

LM has paid for half the congress, I don't think that will happen any time soon...

[@edwardtang-sp9su]

IT is very useful...against countries that have no technologies to fight them! If you think about it, the US only fights smaller countries ...then NATO joins the game to prove their weapons are all superior to people with only AK-47s and RPGs. The goal is to create an illusion of world dominance. Never meant to fight Russia or China. Look at Iran, now armed with Chinese and Russian weapons. Deal signed! US:"Hey..let's go bully some inferior countries instead..fuck this shit!" I beleive Australia though...they are not just talking..they actually bought F-18 superhornet instead. They backed their claim with cash.

[@SurvivalRussia]

@Jamespot24 No. From Vietnam war up to present day. Often visual ID is needed i aerial combat.

[@machinimafan27]

The F35 is the worst plane i've ever seen ever. Why would they get rid of the A10? It does its job way better.

[@hellascommentor]

Missile Lock.

[@theinternet3585]

They aren't getting rid of the A10

[@michaeldublg]

this video is so full of nonsense.

[@SeaToby11]

When will the F-35 haters give up the ghost? The F-35 in competitions with other fighters have won eleven times with no losses. Not a bad score, 11-0.... breakingdefense.com/2016/05/f-35-wins-denmark-competition-trounces-super-hornet-eurofighter/

[@Structureel]

Well this clip is from 8 years ago. I think it's fair to say that the only thing that hasn't really changed in the F35 is it appearance. The rest of the plane has been thoroughly developed and improved. And as soon as they fix the last remaining software issues, it will be a superb weapon. Also let's be fair, the F35 wasn't designed strictly for air-to-air combat. It's a multi-role system. So I guess it would always be a Jack of all trades, master of none.

[@SeaToby11]

Rik Slagter More nonsense. From a Norwegian pilot. Yes, the F-35 can dogfight well... theaviationist.com/2016/03/01/heres-what-ive-learned-so-far-dogfighting-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/

[@joeburgon8606]

I completely agree, the aerodynamics and stealth coating don't have any reason to change but things such as the FADEC, the control surfaces, the radar systems and the complexity of the computer systems will of course have gotten better from 2008 to 2016, if they didn't improve those things why on earth wouldn't they have just put it into full production in 2008?

[@tpowell453]

When they make it work? Maybe then. But probably not because by then it will have cost well over a trillion dollars, and no matter WHAT the fuck it ends up doing - it won't be worth the price. Right now, as of today, it is still a shit bird. And the most expensive shit bird ever, btw.

[@SeaToby11]

Ima SuperPerson More nonsense. Appears they have found another problem, but they will address the problem and fix it soon. Over 3 thousand fighters will be built, fixing one hundred or two is not going to break the bank, the budget. After its planned lifespan of fifty years there are going to be planned upgrades we haven't even thought of yet that will cost much, much more. The gremlins are just that, gremlins... This trillion dollars bullshit is just that too. What do you expect when you include fifty years of operational costs to the acquisition budget you don't and won't pay up front anyway? A FALSE super inflated sticker shock purchase price that the anti-military skeptics can quote... I can do the fucking math, most sixth graders can by the way. Three thousand fighters times the average sticker flyaway acquisition cost of US $100 million is $300 billion, no where near a trillion, or a trillion and a half dollars. Amazing how much more operational costs over 50 years is... A operational cost which would be reflected with any NEW fighter. A operational cost which is much less than flying our fourth generation fighters over the next 50 years...

[@TheamazingSeal]

Not a mach to a Su-37.

[@unicohijo1121]

can american jets do the cobra

[@philipbasler5077]

yes.... they can

[@filipvidinovski7960]

You may be surprised to learn that the first documented cobra-like maneuver was performed by one of the F-14 prototypes in the early 70s. Search for "f-14 cobra" on yt.

[@zed9095]

Before anyone says anything about the Sukhoi being unable to perform a Cobra with its full payload, here's a clip kzbin.info/www/bejne/i6Tcfoh3m81pnMk

[@philipbasler5077]

@@zed9095 nobody said that

[@glsracer]

@TheBushmaster94 I have to agree. The design of the PAK FA & SU-35 are such that they are very talented in close maneuvers. In addition, powerful twin engines give the Russian jets higher acceleration & climb ability. The F-35 was not designed for the same role. Its radar & munitions suite should out perform the Russian systems at greater distance, possibly ending the fight well in advance of visual range. With that said both the F-22 and F-35 are more costly than they should be

[@SpaceAudio]

The cost is astronomically high, very expensive and delicate to maintain. That 3-in-1 concept compromises each mission it is designed for.

[@hellascommentor]

$85 million per production unit is astronomically high? Go for F-18 Advanced Super Hornet which is only $80 million... How the 3 variants compromise each mission?

[@danzervos7606]

The build cost per plane is comparable to all current advanced fighter designs. Development costs were high, but if spread over thousands of produced aircraft, should make the plane reasonably priced. What is unique for the F-35 fighter program was the effort to estimate the total cost of the program through its expected life cycle. This has never been done before and it is a big number, but it would be big for any weapon system expected to be around for upwards of 40 to 50 years.

[@AdamB9098]

The problem with BVR is that there is almost NEVER a BVR engagement. There is always the fear of a "friendly fire" incident, so the pilots want to visually ID their targets before doing anything.

[@MrStix-hs7ud]

do you know how much is classified about the F-35? And the plane isnt even finished yet

[@SeaToby11]

And a month later the USAF goes IOC with its first squadron of F-35As. The Hill AFB F-35s had to turn on their transponders so that the Mountain Home AFB SAMs could see them... Second of August 2016... www.businessinsider.com/f-35-too-stealthy-2016-8

[@tomixtomix8532]

Born dead :-(

[@tpowell453]

You don't either. If you did, you wouldn't be on here talking about it Mr Smartass.

[@MrStix-hs7ud]

Ima SuperPerson i am not saying the plane is good, i am just saying that we cant really make any accusations yet.

[@tpowell453]

Mr. Stix - Sure we can. It's published fact. We can repeat known facts all we want until they make this plane perform to spec, or junk it. The plane has MANY known defects, and it is not combat-worthy. See wikipedia and other forums for facts.

[@Hello6761]

@TheHtjohn That's Battlefield 3, are you really gonna base the performance of a fighter jet from one in a game?

[@jo-oy4vj]

haters always hate

[@ProEFESDEZ]

This plane is usseless, the f-15 is better than this shit

[@armen45100]

+Pro F14 Tomcats from the 80s are better than f35 lol

[@ednuttah]

+Jonathan Andrew 557 Facts always straighten.

[@blackdogleg]

+Jonathan Andrew 557 yep, but what you say is meaningless during war.

[@fuckoffyouall1]

+Jonathan Andrew 557 but facts never lie

[@onealmr]

on 240p?? Really?? I know 2008, the time of this video, was years ago but there were videos here on youtube that were at least 720p. I can't wait for the 8K to come down in price. Trying to watch this video in 240p just absolutely hurts trying to watch it.

[@thankforsharingable]

wait , if chinese copy your design, how come they got better fighter than you do ? i don't get it.

[@sschevy8558]

bingo

[@tpowell453]

Let them copy it. Fuck, we should just give it to them and then use a real plane. They'll be screwed. LOL

[@pashapasovski5860]

thankforsharingable 2 engine plane,bigger subsurface and it's not a Swiss knife!

[@deborahsolomon1549]

Does anyone actually do fucking research. The f-35 is a great plane. Sure it can’t turn like a raptor or a viper but it was meant to attack from bvr ranges. For example at red flag the f-35 had a 20:1 kill ratio and most were beyond visible range and by the time the opposing force knew they were being targeted it was too late! So yes the f-35 is and awesome new plane built for stealth and multi role capabilities. So Next time any of you that read this check your facts before believing everything in a bullshit video.

[@dk17th]

the idea of replacing a harrier jump jet, an A10 ground attack plane, fighter planes, and a bomber with just one plane is nuts. jack of all trades and master of none.

[@arsarma1808]

Well, F35A is better in every way than the Viper, and may carry as many bombs as an A10 (admittedly has a few thousand less rounds in the cannon). F35B is better in every way than the Harrier (not saying much) F35C is better than every way then the Super Hornet This is an old report, with unfinished F35s between the limiters have had any time to mature. More recently, the capabilities of the F35 have become more clear (90 degree AOA), make it rather competent.

[@kaydnburns5935]

+ArsArma the F-35 has a terrible acceleration and its wings are much too small for a good fighter jet. its a great bomber but like they said in the video. its a completely useless fighter.

[@arsarma1808]

Kaydn Burns If the F35's wings are too small, so are the F16s. The F35's wing/body ratio is very similiar the F16. Not that it's really relevant, because both planes generate significant body lift. The same goes for the acceleration and T/W.

[@tpowell453]

Dude, shut the fuck up. The weight of the aircraft matters. It's about wing-loading and shit that is WAY over your pay grade. Don't even try this topic. Go back to commenting on hair styles.

[@2adamast]

+ArsArma 88 lb/ft² vs 108 lb/ft² Similar but different nevertheless.

[@balakdurjana]

F-35 Baby Seal Motto: "Too big to fail & too big to succeed.''

[@Celitegames]

the su-35 is so much better than f35..... f35 vs Su50 does not have oportunity

[@xpythagoras4044]

pretty much all on paper

[@mikeryan1412]

hope the fight isn't close to a thunder storm or he has to turn or climb

[@anthonysaponaro6318]

Don't make yourself sound ridiculous

[@jaxpok8167]

Red flag with the F-35 happened after your comment was made.

[@mk014a0003]

Jax Pok - What's your point? The Red Flag reference above seems to refer to an earlier exercise.

[@tpowell453]

Worthless to everyone except LockMart. They're getting richer every day off this turd.

[@GoMiGman]

Please. What's crappy is people's inability to admit that this thing is a friggin disaster! Not one single US built fighter in the past 60+ years has taken the beating from the idiots to the experts as this turkey has! Put your biased blindfold aside and just look at 1 single thing, forget about the HUGE list of deficiencies this dud has, just one thing, and that's the wings. They made such a GIGANTIC sacrifice on the size of the wings to make the single design STOVL compatible. Put it besides the awesome F-22 and look how huge the wings are on the Raptor jeez I wonder why?!?! Go down the line F-18, 15, 16, 14, F-4 etc. The only one that comes close is the Harrier which had a legitimate reason for small wings and the F-104 Starfighter which also had a specific role that required tiny, thin wings. This thing is an epic disaster of gargantuan proportions. There's no dancing around it. You could write a book on all the other problems it has but why?

[@enomis9393]

You can't judge a plane by the design of it's wings, especially now. Modern fly-by-wire systems could make a brick fly and turn like a bicycle at mach 1, F-35 may be not built with air superiority and superior manouverability in mind, but it's the most advanced in all that competes with electronics, no shit. And may be a cost effective jet in the long term because of the relative ease to maintain and sharing of many parts between different versions. Still meet the requirements for a 5th gen fighter and it's still in developement because they don't want to rush just to be outmatched in few years to come by the modernization of radars that are quickly filling the gap with the passive stealth capabilities of planes. F-35 will be both passive and active stealth capable for sure, they're still working on it.

[@FrancisJoa]

enomis9393 Physics stay physics and if you need wings to turn then this will never change no matter how much fly-by-wire and other stuff you have.

[@enomis9393]

FrancisJoa Sure, but F-35 doesn't look like a freaking F-117 to me, still pretty aerodynamic enough, sure with thrust vectoring and all could be even more manouverable, but seems like that it's not gonna be a total lemon, but more like a very balanced plane that have multipurpose and cost-efficiency in maintenance for targets... And will have groundbreaking electronics like any plane have ever seen, so the manouverability will be heavily affected by that. Sure the costs are going up and the delay is becoming very heavy, but consider the shitty economic situation of... uhm yeah pretty much the whole world, i dare any one that wants to do a joint venture cooperation of a plane so advanced to not having delays and fuckups in times like these. Then there's the international opinion being catastrophical, i think they're pretty much exaggerating, Lockheed is not the dumbest company in the world for sure, maybe corrupted, but not dumb

[@FrancisJoa]

enomis9393 Again you are one of the advocats of this crap airplane. Thrust vector causes even huge problems for the F22 because it loses so much energy and speed when it´s used that the plane becomes an easy target. It is a lemon and Pierre Sprey is right about it. The whole stealth crap is a marketing tool and only good against under developed counrties. There are already passiv radar systems (the German company Cassidian for example) which can detect all of the so called stealth planes (even the F22). You spend much money on useless stuff. Ask yourself why countries like England and Germany didn´t developed a stealth plane? The Germans have already new rockets like the METEOR and the IRIS-T rockets which will knock down these stealth planes without any problems.

[@blackdogleg]

I think the answer to "why" would be nepotism. Some ones idiot son making decisions. This is what happens when people are given positions of authority due to who daddy is and not abilities.

[@KingOfAllAnimals]

My biggest argument towards the supposed superiority of the F35 has been around the idea of it being a "Swiss Army Aircraft." Multi-Role is fine to a point but there are distinct situations where a aircraft is not suited towards certain rolls. Ground Attack has proved to be one area best suited towards specialist aircraft designed to survive the conditions and perform its intended role. For heavy ground pounding the A-10 and AC-130 gunships are perfect for the roles of In fast and hit hard and Hang Around and Churn the Ground. The OV-10 Bronco was super versatile and filled in the role of light arms air support that a helicopter would provide with the difference they were much faster than helicopters. The F35 was supposed to fill these roles but cannot for dozens of reasons. It also is overly complicated and being a maintenance hog is no good. It is essentially a hopped up Buick with extra fancy gizmos going against tanks with attitudes. It cannot keep up in close in fighting where the F-4 phantom jets found themselves when they were missile only aircraft. Lastly, still cannot hide that Infrared Emissions still.

[@CRAZYHORSE19682003]

LOL These videos are not aging well as we learn more and more of what the F-35 can actually do.

[@mauser66]

Yes you're right. The more it flies, the more it crashes or is grounded due to technical problems.

[@walterprice7824]

The F-35 is ugly, and not a really good aircraft. But I'm not gonna be an idiot and preach that Russian aircraft are far superior, because really there not. the only reason people still praise the PAK-FA is because the Russian government shrouds the flaws and issues in secrecy.

[@EpicDyster]

I think it's sexy as fuck.

[@Wehrmacht900]

As if the Americans don't? Have you not seen America's recent History of calling literally everything they build "best in the world"? Land of optimism.

[@walterprice7824]

Well most of our equipment has been proven on the battlefield, while Russian equipment is just assumed to be effective

[@Wehrmacht900]

Proven against what, militants with out dated weapons.

[@walterprice7824]

Proven against an army that had Russian T-72s and MiG-29s

[@bruinsma60]

F35 a waste of tax money into the pocked of Lockheed.

[@kipper3448]

I know this is an old video and I must admit in 2008 I was not particularly enamored of the F-35 either. But... trying to compare this plane to the Russian or Chinese fighters is wrong. It really is apples and oranges. Yes their fighters are better at close range. It even says that they are 'double inferior' in visual range combat. I do not disagree. However this is a true gen 5 fighter and this emphasis on maneuver by the Chinese and Russians proves that they are not equal to the game. The F-35 will absolutely destroy these fighters well BEFORE it gets into visual range - it can detect the Su-35 (which is really just a pretty Flanker for the export market) at 180km (if I remember correctly - might be 300km) and launch on it. In combat testing at Red Flag/Top Gun these things are taking out 20 gen 4 fighters with no losses. Their opponents (F-16/F-18) are saying that they got bored because they were just getting shot down time and time again without even seeing the F-35. What the Russians and Chinese have done is made gen 4.5s, so yeah they are better at the dog fight and would probably crap on F-16s, but the enemy wont even see the F-35 that brought them down. Hell the missile that the F-35 fires could come from some crew served weapon on the ground or even from a friendly ship at sea so it doesn't even need to use its own weapon systems. Hated this thing at first, and then I realized just what a gen 5 fighter really is. So yeah, we need to stop thinking dogfight and start thinking complete battlefield freedom of movement and an ability to take out any target either by itself or as part of true combined arms. (I will pass around the collection plate now that the sermon is over :) )

[@calcrappie8507]

Yep, the haters were too busy hating and not seeing the true capabilities of the platform. An F-35 without weapons is dangerous too.

[@MarshallJukov]

@TheTequilaShooter Gotcha again! Spinning your nonsense again hoping me and Mago won`t come thig way?

[@sarielreigns777]

That dumbass Yankee is here for the last 8 Years? Damn!

[@deltacharlieromeo8252]

Where is he? I'm a big fan hahahaha

[@whichlens435]

I still live in 1917 too. Sweet day grand'pa.

[@bestamerica]

WhichLens I still live in 1917 too. Sweet day grand'pa. ' aww that good... love grandpa as good honor parents = honor grandparents

[@cpyv781]

Known for air inferiority

[@gspotmop8242]

the F35 is 20 to 1 against F16 aggressors in red flag 2017, take that trolls!

[@bestamerica]

gspot mop the F35 is 20 to 1 against F16 aggressors in red flag 2017, take that trolls! ' F-16 is a more faster speeding and better flying than F-35... both F-F has to be good team jetfighters as together

[@TD402dd]

Fast forward to 2017, and it is the most dominant fighter in the world in all training exercises. Isn't it terrible what people say when they are ignorant of facts with a hate agenda.

[@philkeyouz2157]

How it can be useless , it's not operational yet

[@mindstate1]

Phil Keyouz it was clubbing babby seals

[@TheFarmanimalfriend]

The single engine means one bird strike and a $350,000,000 plane is history.

[@rubberductape4985]

Ok I don't really like this aircraft either but how is a bird going to catch up and shove its head in the back engine?

[@KatariaGujjar]

​@@rubberductape4985 It doesn't go in the back engine. The bird goes in the air intakes and destroys the engine from inside. It's a very frequent and unavoidable problem in both military and civil aviation. Any time the aircraft is in low altitude flight, landing or takeoff, it is susceptible to birdstrikes. Double engined aircrafts can survive if one engine is lost, but a single engined aircraft like F-35 is a goner.

[@filmcreations]

OK...Funny how this Australian news release quotes RAND on the F-35 when RAND themselves claim they never posted such a conclusion based on "ONE" of their pacific war game simulation. So this is what they released publically in response to what they claim in the Australian media as a mis-representation. "“Recently, articles have appeared in the Australian press with assertions regarding a war game in which analysts from the RAND Corporation were involved. Those reports are not accurate. RAND did not present any analysis at the war game relating to the performance of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, nor did the game attempt detailed adjudication of air-to-air combat. Neither the game nor the assessments by RAND in support of the game undertook any comparison of the fighting qualities of particular fighter aircraft”

[@Oxide_does_his_best]

cry me a river

[@javiermac5885]

1 Trillion dollar scrap !!!!

[@bestamerica]

S000 L111 1 Trillion dollar scrap !!!! ' ussr russia is a big waste rubles milliion rubles waste

[@insatiable2rossi]

I probably know anything about this "F 35 yanna puuta puonto", but that last guy for some reason sounded like a thief trying to hide something! :D :P

[@LRRPFco52]

USMC F/A-18 pilot , Top Gun Instructor (F-16 adversary pilot), and rare F-22 pilot: "The F-22 was the most amazing plane I ever flew after all the years I have in the Hornet and the F-16. It was beyond my wildest dreams as a pilot what I could do in that plane, and none of it was because it's the fastest, most maneuverable fighter. The F-35 is really another at least half a generation more advanced than the F-22, and I can do things the F-22 can't do even in the air dominance role. If you get into the air in a 4th Generation fighter against a 5th Gen, you're already dead." Senior F-15C pilot comment: "There are things I can do in the F-35 that were never possible in the F-15C, and never will be possible in the F-15C. I have a better combat radius in the F-35 with internal fuel than I do with the F-15C with 2 wing tanks." F-15E pilot: "I have more legs in the F-35A than I do in an F-15E with Conformal Fuel Tanks." Israeli pilot: "When Americans come fly out of or into Israel in the F-35, they see the full picture of the Middle East, with all the air and surface contacts that are visible to all net-linked systems, which is simply unbelievable." Norwegian F-16 pilot now flying the F-35: "I can be more aggressive in the Within Visual Range fight with the F-35 because it is much easier for me to point the nose throughout the full flight regime, even at low speeds, whereas I would lose control if the system would let me in the F-16 at high AOA. We are also able to fly missions profiles in the F-35 that would be suicidal in the F-16." F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot: "Flying the F-35 is like flying a turbo-charged Super Hornet. There is more power available, and the aircraft is the easiest plane I've ever flown." Canadian test pilot: "Of the 80+ different aircraft I have personally flown, none of them come close to being as easy to fly as the F-35, and I can do things in the F-35 that are unimaginable in other fighters."

[@asala2116]

If Indonesia buy 180 Sukhoi planes , I would have to admit painfully that there Airforce will be a lot more superior then Austrlia's. No f-35 can outrun a Sukhoi designed SU-35 OR SU32 .. Why didn't Australia stick with the idea to buy Russian made SU-35S? They are best plane in the world by far.. F-35 is faulty and has many software designs also overpriced.

[@TD402dd]

It's 2017 now, and many are still saying ignorant things about the F-35, except it is proving it is superior to all other aircraft. India flying modern Russian fighters (having made the US look bad in the past) refuse to fly against the F-35 because they couldn't find them. The 2008 view was before the actual production planes were being shipped. Liars all of them!

[@SuperiorAmericanGuy]

The F-35 is useless? Then don't replace anything with this plane then

[@jimiie5436]

+mrwong11989 The current fighters are ending their life span..

[@rasosteva]

+jimiie5436 United States are slowly becoming regional power. Russia is now big boss

[@alip82]

+jimiie5436 still better than this crap

[@SuperiorAmericanGuy]

+spooks walrus well maybe we should build A-10s, F-16s, harriers and F-18s with stealth capabilities then instead of F-35s

[@jimiie5436]

spooks walrus I saw somewhere a documentary i think, they talked about how expensive it is to prolong the life of the current airplanes. It is very expensive as well :( Usually it is cheaper to replace old airplanes with new designs.

[@GuessTech]

I know I'm writing a book here -- but -- you also can't ignore the logistics ability, people, and software on the ground/carriers tied to each jet. With the newer jets.. like the F-35,.. the logistics are immense on the ground. They know whats going on in the air in real time in all categories. Further, the ground has the largest array of radar's to utilize to detect other encroaching aircraft's, using the craft flying's utilities, and the utilities on the ground combined.

[@GuessTech]

Ultimately -- I believe a grand goal is to use these great jets in a pattern. X amounts of F-22's, X Amount of F-35's, and sprinkle a few F-15or16 older craft modified in the flight pattern. So if you get into a situation you have the best craft for it.. If somehow a MiG get's into a few mile range and isn't shot down 30+ miles out,.. you flank out the F15E's,.. and let them dogfight and provide backup with the other jets who aren't just old school bombers.

[@GuessTech]

Further, Lockheed knows way more than you or I about it's competition and it's own jet's performance and it's own jet's down-sides. They aren't in comission.. these F-35's are designed to be modular, sharing parts.. and I would imagine that as we speak LHMartin are making classified changes to the capabilities and complaints of the test pilots, which is much easier to do with a modular designed aircraft.

[@GuessTech]

To reign it in: The F-22's are beasts at medium to long range Air-Air combat.. Firing smart missles at dozens of miles away. Now, what is missing in this puzzle? A craft that can fill in the holes in a fleet. The F-35,.. the F-35 can land and take off vertical, in stealth mode, and do the shorter range dog-fighting for the F-22's.. You would pack these two sets of craft together on a mission (along with other craft).

[@GuessTech]

Good answer/point. I think many of us from movies, videos, etc think of air to air combat to be like "Top Gun" was.. dog fighting each other in visible range. This is no longer the way this combat works. These jets are designed to detect and engage other jets at ranges of 20+ miles. It is well reported that the F-22 would have a tough time in a dogfight,.. but those jets coming in for a dogfight can't get as close as 20miles to the F-22 before they are locked on, and shot down.

[@GuessTech]

It seems the F-35 is, by design, more of a jack of all trades, master at none, but good at all. To put it into perspective,.. it is like comparing two supercars,.. one that can go 230mph and the other 205mph. But in real world use the 205mph car is much more useful and outperforms the 'faster' top end vehicle. There is much more to these things than numbers. Further it isn't like the US military to be behind in Tech. What we, civilians see, is but a piece of the pie that exists.

[@Porty1119]

@zszs100 Let's examine what you just said. There are no DPS/E-M charts available for the J-20, therefore its agility is an unknown. The T-50 has not even reached IOC. The Su-47 was a CONCEPT aircraft that DID NOT SEE SERVICE. Finally, Canada isn't going to be fighting much of anything. Their socialist economic system can't support worthwhile (defense) spending without major changes, and the RCAF couldn't do much in a major conflict with *any* aircraft. The JSF is a step up from 4th-gen aircraft.

[@mikeplaysit]

Two issues.. "Doesn't think it was AS bad as it was made out to be." -Well, for something of that price, and something that's meant to be such a leap in technology, you would hope to at the very least come out slightly ahead, not worse than. Also, "The manufacturer showed me simulations." Need I say it? The manufacturer's simulation....

[@VF1Skullangel]

@HerculesRockefellerr Most of these stories of sukhois beating stealths are bullshit. The only confirmed kills in simed combat has been the Su-30 against the F-15 and even then that was kept confidial meaning we will never know the actual results of the fight. The F-22 on the other hand has been tested against the Sukhoi and never lost once.

[@GuessTech]

I have no problem with the long lived My country is better than your country speak.. hey, take pride.. go for it. I do have issue with people who make statements of which they cannot possibly qualify with factual data.

[@EpochMod]

Oh and the "Clubbing baby seals was said by a fighter pilot who was flying the F-22 Raptor against More than 2 F-15's.... So once again it's not about "Visual Range" It's about you are dead and didn't even know where I was.

[@PassportBrosBusinessClass]

@komodo8887 I would argue that the F-16: #1 hasn't actually fought any worthy opponents and #2 is a good plane not hampered by having to fit the stealth multi-purpose roles the F-35 has. Everyone thinks air combat is like "TOP GUN" but when you really think about it, Russia, America and China will never be dogfighting each other. All the Arab nations have INFERIOR air forces and can't afford to renew them. WHO EXACTLY ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DOGFIGHT WITH THESE THINGS?

[@PassportBrosBusinessClass]

The F35 was nothing more than corporate welfare for Lockheed Martin. I realized from the moment I saw the F35 that it was never going to be a more useful fighter than the F16 and the VTOL system would never work as well as the Harrier. Trying to combine so many elements and stealth, only bumped the prices into the stratosphere and created a plane that was tremendously inferior as a multirole craft.

[@Sub___Zero]

for an F22 cake you will need upgrades like: 150ml milk 450ml flour 300ml butter 45 eggs 100ml sugar.Drop them to a furnace with 1500°C and you have CANCEL PROGRAMMMMM TASTY

[@utley]

Gotta love the stupid titles such as F-35 is useless. Just have to compare it with all of the other 5th generation fighters that are already on the assembly lines, right? Oh yeah...Chinese and Russian 5th generation fighters are just now going into demonstrations and flight trials for feasibility. No mention on how far behind they are compared to the F-35. Fucking useless opinions listed here, nothing more.

[@BrandonSchwarz]

1. Its 200 Million dollars, 2. Im pretty sure if 9 countries are participating in the program than they think its good, the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, Netherlands, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, and Turkey, then they think its a good jet. And i'm pretty sure 9 different countries are smarter than this bull. 3. The U.S. Already has an active F-35 squadron, so its obviously not shut down, but it was delayed. 4. Its not made for close air combat, I would go on-not enough characters.

[@BlindBusDrivr]

lmfao this is such bullshit. It can turn, just not against Russian fighters but for the last 50 years pilots have been trained to NEVER get into a turning fight with a russian plane. It's climb rate is classified. And how cannot it not run? It's got an engine that can do nearly 50,000 lbs of thrust with continuous afterburner. And anyways with it's 360 degree Heads Up Targeting display and Lock after Launch missiles it won't even require super-maneuverability in the first place!

[@AirTrackerGAMES]

@82ndairborne100 Everyone keeps saying "you can't compare this to that because blah blah blah" well guess what? I just did so deal with it. You CAN compare them. It's like comparing a dog to a cat, both have different roles, but they're both house pets, they just look and act different that's all. You can still compare them because they're both pets. As long as they have some similarities, you can compare them.

[@lairdriver]

@Porty1119 I can assure you - we can afford to quadruple the size of our Army. Our Country is quite rich. And our fighting forces are extremely potent and well trained. Our Pilots are among the best in the World. We have a Fleet of 100 CF-18s ...may not sound like a lot, but it is not like anyone will be attacking Canada anyways. In Combat our men proved themselves in Afghanistan and in Libya. You dont give the RCAF enough credit lol

[@lairdriver]

For those of you doubhting the F35 - most of these critics are basing their scorn on test frames and versions of the F35 that will never see combat. The completed variants arew worthy of scrutiny - but they are not completed. The Americans build the best Aircraft in the World. Always have and always will. It is ridiculous that people are saying that Chinese aircraft will compete against it..that is a fucking joke.

[@Nightsd01]

The Russians finally built a shitty copy of the F-22, so they can sell it on the international market. The Russian Air Force won't be able to buy that many F-22 copies. The F-22 is simply a better aircraft, and is much stealthier and maneuverable than the PAK-FA. Visual range combat is unnecessary today unlike Vietnam. With the advent of AESA radar, and computerized equipment, the US dominates the air.

[@gun_nerds]

@randyjsell BVR combat is not a common as you might think. visual identification is still needed often, even today. also russian are actually extreme capable in bvr combat equipment. the radar of the sukhoi t-50 can track and engage f22 and f35 at ranges up to 120km but f22 or f35 on the other hand can't. in visual range combat russian have the upper hand anyway due to their agility and engine power but also because of their extremely capable short range missiles.

[@brendenshark403]

@EminidisMike and the f22 has better radars missiles stealth and avionics and missiles.as you know USA has the best technology so how would a plane made in 1988 be better than a USA 1990 plane and Russia stole the design from the f18 and they stole the design for the su47 from the USA's x29 that was made in 1984 and there bombers from the us b1 and the t50 from the yf23 witch the pak t50's engine blow out on the 8/23/11

[@brendenshark403]

@EminidisMike we ya what other way is there to make a mach 1 pulse aircraft that can take off verticly and also USA way advanced the f35 from other foreign planes like way way better avionics AND IT IS MANLY MEANT FOR GROUND BUT IT STILL HAS MISSILES THAT CAN SHOOT FURTHER THAN RUSSIA'S.and Russia only made.and only 3 su35s's were made and i was wrong the technology in it would only cost USA 45 million

[@brendenshark403]

@EminidisMike they only made 25 su 35's and they have old technology and the USAF doesn't say some of the maneuvers that the f22 can do did you know that look it up and a 4th gen better than a 5th gen and the su35 doesn't even know its coming and USA has the furthest rang missile and the f22 cost 170 million as the su 35 cost 70 million hmm i say f22 has more avionics than the government tells the public

[@MarshallJukov]

@em745aa ...On one occasion I remember the F-16s did score some kills eventually, but only after taking 18 ‘Archers’. We didn’t operate kill removal (forcing ‘killed’ aircraft to leave the fight) since they’d have got no training value, we killed them too quickly. (Just as we might seldom have got close-in if they used their AMRAAMs BVR!) They couldn’t believe it at the debrief, they got up and left the room!" No futher comments needed.

[@MarshallJukov]

@em745aa "read following" No its you read dummy: "But when all that is said and done, the MiG-29 is a superb fighter for close-in combat, even compared with aircraft like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18. This is due to the aircraft’s superb aerodynamics and helmet mounted sight. Inside ten nautical miles I’m hard to defeat, and with the IRST, helmet sight and ‘Archer’ I can’t be beaten. Period. Even against the latest Block 50 F-16s the MiG-29 is virtually invulnerable in the close-in scenario...

[@MarshallJukov]

@TheTequilaShooter We shown you a scan of a magazine where Lybomir Slavov clearly indicates that he used with no problems using same tactics that domimated F-16s in all past exercise including that of Germany to dominate new Block 50 F-16. You ignored it too - boldly acusing us in lies, twisting reality to its exactly opposite just like you did with Vishnu Som`s words on MiG-35 take off.

[@MarshallJukov]

@TheTequilaShooter We found a professional source that criticize Tellis`s fairytale. We pointed you on Mihir Shah, IAF chief marshal Fali Major, but you IGNORED it with your usual attitude and pomposity as if its they and not Tellis have no any special education or any involvement into MMRCA itself anyhow. Just like you twisted the words of Vishnu Som to their completely opposite meaning. In fact you don`t have to be a pro to see how WRONG is Tellis`s data is like Gripen`s dry mass of 8100kg

[@MarshallJukov]

@TheTequilaShooter Now answer me how is that physicaly possible that an aircraft with max wing loading of 780kg/m^2 (526) can have better sustained turn rate than aircraft with max wing loading of 559kg/m^2 (416)? And how an aircraft with one tail fin, one engine can outmanuver intergated triplane with two tail fins and two engine which can themselves assist its manuvering by regulating their thrust?

[@G777GUN]

@BoxyTheSpaceDog Too true. And that is a good point on the F22s fuel. It consumes too damn much. Even if the F22s got back to their bases they would quickly use up the fuel stores. Unless the base is destroyed. The S-400 system looks so awsome. It has a range of somthing like 400km. And in service of 2007. Lol. The Airbourne Laser cant even shoot a target at 20 miles yet. Plus I bet Russia has made those missiles more heat resistant than previous missiles.

[@BoxyTheSpaceDog]

@G777GUN Russia never saw F-22 as any threat.By the way if any F-22 was ever foolish enough to venture into Russian airspace,Pak-Fa/T-50 wouldn't be the plane that will intercept it.It would be either Mig-31M2 or missile from S-400 AA system.F-22 is air superiority fighter,Pak-Fa is multi-role fighter,in real combat situation they would never fight each other.F-22's fuel consumption is also weak point.Can't leave for longer battle without external fuel canisters or mid-air refueling.It's a dud

[@BoxyTheSpaceDog]

@HerculesRockefellerr Also ask your self why in that video not even one current Sam System is shown?No S-300V or MPU-M,no S-400,no Tor-M2,no Buk-m2,no Panzir-S1 etc...All those Sam Systems are highly maneuverable and very capable.Almost all of them are able to see F-35 long before it's even near to engage.Also why aren't any new Russian planes shown in that video?Like Su-30MkII,Su-35,Mig-35,Mig-31-m2 and so on?Video also doesn't mention BVR capability of Russian planes,radars and missiles?

[@BoxyTheSpaceDog]

@HerculesRockefellerr So?I knew about this long ago,lol.When TV in Australia aired few documentaries about a plane they are involved in making but that will never be delivered to them,lol.Why don't you check how many sensors and radars does T-50 have.And what does it all matter when if ever F-35 get's to the skies it will be surpassed and it already is.Russian S-400/500 can see it long before the plane is even in engagement zone,not to mention long range AA missiles 400km+.F-22/35 are tech duds

[@BoxyTheSpaceDog]

@1MagicAndMayhem1 What I wrote is true!Plasma engine for planes is some 100kg in weight and problem before was that it interferes with electronics if they aren't isolated properly but it does work!By the way I don't get my info from RT but from reliable sources.By the way media in US is also controlled.You can have 100 channels but they all speak same.I know,it's aired here in Australia too.By the way if replaying have some foundation on topic and give few facts.What has failed?Your banks,lol!

[@BoxyTheSpaceDog]

@1MagicAndMayhem1 Hello,hello,McFly anybody home? It's never gonna fly!Even if it does it'll be 10 years from now!Russia already had 400+km missiles and anti -stealth radars,OLS system,maybe Plasma cavitation too,T-50 has 4 radars on it and multiple sensors(one in front/back and on wings),has long range missiles which F-22/35 can't carry and their radars are ineffective until some 150/200km but missiles still only have maximum range of 120km.Russia is fielding S-500 cosmic defense system 2014'!

[@Armored_Kong]

Also BAE system would built next generation jamming pod for F-22 Raptor. Also change 4 digital glass cockpit to panoramic cockpit display glass cockpit. Also US military company got to find a way to make F-22 cheaper. Also Robert Gates better modernize/upgraded F-15E Strike Eagle to F-15SE Silent Eagle, F-16C/D to F-16E/F Block 70 Super Viper, & F-18E/F Super Hornet to Block 2 version.

[@Armored_Kong]

Right now F-35 prices is sky rocket right now. Soon later Robert Gates going cancel F-35 program and brink back F-22 Program by starting over. He would ask Raytheon to develop Advance Infrared Search and Track (AIRST) / better new guidance missiles, ask Northrop Grumman to develop L band radar to put on F-22 wings, ask Pratt & Whitney to upgraded F119 to 3D Thrust Vectoring, lastly ask Boeing & Lockheed Martin to develop type of mineral metal that could stand .50 caliber / more range for F22.

[@GeorgeTheCretan]

No they will not proceed in production in this type of aircraft, they are planning to start design the same aircraft from the beggining again,,, if you know they stoped its production, it was supossed to begin in 2012, they will be delayed 13 months more, they have many problems because its design, no aerodynamics, that means no speed no maneurelability, watch this video carefully and search for more details,,, an F16 is much more better than this type of F-35,

[@GeorgeTheCretan]

Also check this out and tell me why usa maybe will not proceed to this construction of aircraft. a also forget the f-35 with hover take off,,, it costs too much and its useless,, The sustained turning performance of the F-35A Lightning II was recently disclosed as 4.95 G at Mach 0.8 and 15,000 ft. A 1969 F-4E Phantom II could sustain 5.5 Gs at 0.8 Mach with 40 percent internal fuel at 20,000 feet

[@Armored_Kong]

I think it would be better off if USA cancel the F-35 and let their partnership had the F-35. I think US military should bring back FB-22 program. The FB-22 Strike Raptor look like F-14 with Stealth together. The FB-22 Strike Raptor would be serve in USN & Air Force. I still keep the F-35B with USMC. F-35 is useless against Sukhoi Fighters but useful against Mig fighters. The FB-22 Strike Raptor is better choice for USN & Air Force but not the F-35 aka "Useless."

[@215alessio]

with special radar IR receivers and radar reception devices you can pin point a f35 craptor 2. Italy is about to cancel it, i hope so. But that won't happen (political pressure). anyway the reduced the numbers to buy from 131 to 90 . expensive garbage. an eurofighter eats a whole squadron of these craps for lunch, let be the russian counterparts

[@MetaliCanuck]

the aussies backed out 2 years ago and ordered like 140 super hpornets immediately and your even getting them. the austrailian stopped sending money to the project and said theyll look at the 35 when the things is operational. \i get my facts from airfroces of the world magazine, a very in depth magazine i order from overseas.

[@Wilvin]

No. That leaves us with the F-22. The future U.S. Air Force will be a well balanced combination of F-22s and F-35s. F-22 will dominate the skies and F-35 will eliminate ground target. There will be no need for other aircraft except for pure numbers. You can't produce enough F-22s to replace the entire Air Force fighter fleet. It would cost way too much

[@F22raptor46]

I understand that. But there is a video where they have shown the F-35 actually performing a Bell maneuver, remember the Bell or Tailslide is a maneuver only planes with great T/W ratio can perform. Especially the Flankers, and here an F-35 did it!!! Here watch this - /watch?v=WvsUeaJwPa0

[@MarshallJukov]

@TheTequilaShooter .....We had done about 4.5 g but I felt almost nothing. The oxygen flow in the MiG 35 was outstanding, very easy to inhale, no real pressure on the lungs." Now try to tell me dumbass that Vishnu Som`s reference to MiG-35 taking off like 747 was any sort of negative.

[@BoxyTheSpaceDog]

@G777GUN Mig-31M and Su-32/34 along with T-50 do have same radar ranges and similar long range missiles as used in S-400 system,same goes for ships with Sunburn,Club and Bramos/Saphire missiles.S-500 will be space defense capable.Whatever they don't bring down Tor-M2,Buk-M2,Panzir-S1 will :-)

[@82ndairborne100]

@AirTrackerGAMES It is impossible to compare the A-10 to the F-35. They both have separate roles, even in the name A-10 stands for Attack-10 and F-35 stands for Fighter-35. Also for the A-10 to dogfight would a catastrophe, it can't turn like the F-35.

[@brendenshark403]

@EminidisMike um f22 is more advanced than any modern fighter and the f35 is made for ground it is replacing the a10 and f18 witch are made for ground and Russia steals all there design also Russia also is getting help from indiea (WOW PRETTY SAD)

[@JVC7400]

RAND has even said on their website that the simulation was based on inaccurate info, and does not contain the aircraft's good specs. And can not be usen as a vision on how it will perform. they even say that on their website ffs. go and check for yourself :)

[@davo171]

The rand report was NOT an air combat sim, and Rand had to come out and say as much.