F-35 | How to Keep it Deadly in a War

[@minxythemerciless]

The hidden problem in all this is not lack of information but an excess of information and the hard task refining that to a form that is sufficient but not excessive. This means partitioning your communications channels so that for example, a single ground based controller only needs to handle say 10 aircraft while there are hundreds of aircraft in the area of operations and dozens of controllers who must cooperate.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

That‘s a really interesting point about an important issue. Maybe I can pick it up in a future video.

[@bullpupgaming708]

Basically the airplane version of why the Land Warrior Program didn't work out, or at least one of the reasons.

[@trevynlane8094]

Indeed. There is a reason that most modern carriers do not tend operate more than 72 aircraft at once (not counting spare airframes) and it is difficulty in coordination. It is an issue that dates back to the Midway class of aircraft carriers in the 1940s. 72 was found to be the maximum that could be coordinated by one carrier.

[@hithere7382]

We only do ground based commanders close to land with a significant US or Allied presence enough to warrant the radars and comms. The rest of the time it's AWACS doing the quarterbacking in the sky.

[@patrikstrandquist1875]

That is very true. To much information is bad as well. That is one interesting thing in the JAS-39 E where you have computers helping the pilot to prioritize all the incoming information.

[@TouringWolf42]

I think people hugely underestimate the numbers advantage the F-35s have. If we were going to fight Russia, the hundreds of F-35s we have are already enough to effectively saturate Russia's air defence and air force. Take into consideration also that we have zero clue on the actual state of the VKS after taking so many losses in Ukraine, but what we do know is already bleak, since Russia barely has long AWACS capabilities anymore. So in reality, it's less about if it can fight, and more if it's profitable to use it, since it would be overkill by a huge margin.

[@sujitbala1492]

Exactly. People normally pay attention to how advanced a single model is rather that its numerical value. When strictly talking about BVR engagements, I personally believe a Su-57 can bring down an F-35 in a 1v1 BVR (fictional scenario). An F-35 can only carry 4 AIM-120D at best while the Su-57 can carry 4 R-77M and 2 R-73 Archers and an additional 2 Hypersonic R-37M, one of Russia's best air to air missiles. Sure, stealth will play a role here but modern radars can detect low radar signatures especially if you have those fancy AESA radars or AWACS coverage. Its only limiting factor is the range which you can detect it, target and tracking is a different story but that will help the closer you get. For the F-35 closer you get = more disadvantage. If the Su-57 plays smart and uses terrain masking to its advantage if any, then there's a good chance the Su-57 can score a kill. Here's where the varying number of bandits will apply, Russia will have to face at least 10-15 F-35s for each Su-57, and most people just never talk about that. Lets be honest, there is no way an Su-57 is gonna fight a squadron of F-35s. Around a 1000 F-35s in active service compared to 22 Su-57s deployed, that's how we know who the winner is.

[@trey1531]

Military GPS III is rolling out new anti-jamming features. Also, there are more ways of positioning than just INS and GPS.

[@hithere7382]

I used to work at Radio Shack for spending money in college and a coworker about 15 or 20 years my senior alleged to have worked for Lockheed during the development of the guidance bit of the first Tomahawk TLAMs. Something about it literally following pictures along a path.

[@mosh.4245]

@@hithere7382That method is called TERCOM/DSMAC.

[@Dicksonia_squarrosa]

@@hithere7382 terrain matching navigation

[@JollyOldCanuck]

@@hithere7382 TERCOM, terrain contour matching.

[@flybobbie1449]

Can now use earth contour backed up with ground feature recognition, thanks Google maps.

[@mattheide2775]

The clearest information takes two decades to collate. Thank you for the video 😊

[@thomassidwell4727]

Just to mention....Dale Brown references multiple "low cost-low Earth orbit" satellites designed by the character Jon Masters, being launched by modified Comercial aircraft via drop launch of rockets, as a means of replacing attacked satellites with a short term "disposible" constellations of "cheap" relay satellites in a shooting war scenario. A single Boeing 767 class aircraft being able to carry 2 launch vehicles, each capable of deploying 4 "NIRTSATS" (Need It Right This Second Satellites) in low Earth orbit.

[@dextermorgan1]

That's interesting. I've never heard that. Who's Dale Brown? Was he talking about something that's already been built or something to be built in the future? Thanks.

[@IvanTre]

Dale Brown is a boomer and doesn't keep up with the times. Bigger mobile launchers can easily put SAR satellites into orbit. Civilian companies build ones that weigh 90 kg. China no doubt has a bunch stored somewhere for when the war comes.

[@mobiuscoreindustries]

That is a cool concept though nowadays re-usable first stages can yeet several dozens of full size sats within an incredibly short notice and basically only limited in cadence by the output of second stages and the act of rolling back and inspecting the booster. With a fully re-usable rocket you are looking at hundreds of sats delivered in a framework that can be turned around in the span of days or hours, literally putting more freight into space than can be physically destroyed by attackers.

[@IvanTre]

@@mobiuscoreindustries you sure China can't use lasers to burn more satellites than you can put out ?

[@pat8988]

@@dextermorgan1 Dale Brown is a military fiction writer. His NIRTSATS are (were) a fictional element in his books. He was a bit ahead of his time, but wrote some good books. Ward Carroll is due to interview him soon on his channel.

[@jamesdelrogers542]

The F35 was conceived up from the beginning to be .Open architecture modular design , The technology lockouts are an important part of how it was to be used diplomatically geopolitically , This program is in a constant state of development , So much of that can happen with simple software upgrades , The fuel tanks that are all over the thing Are not just to make optimal use of the internal space to extend range , But they can be pulled in any time To add new systems , That was part of the design from the beginning , Especially the big fuel tank that sits behind the canopy , That is used for the Lift fan in the Marine variant , That could actually have a shaft connected to it like in the b , Driving a generator Two power directional energy weapons , That could be a solid state laser But more than likely it would be other spectrum energy , During world war two the united states had developed a new machine gun They never feel that it because they knew that the germans would just acquire it and copy it , The same thinking is going into the up thirty five , All kinds of classified research Ready to go when the time comes . I would argue that the fighter bomber role of the f thirty five only represents about twenty percent Of what this aircraft actually is .

[@zaco-km3su]

Definitely not in a constant state of development. Well, it had problems and they had to be solved.

[@proxy3386]

@@zaco-km3su I believe I heard somewhere that the F-35 should be receiving bi-yearly (per-six-months) software updates, though don’t take my word for it. It does seem to *BE* in a constant state of development alongside other programs.

[@jamesdelrogers542]

@proxy3386 as a 19 year old in 1991 I did the first drawings of the 32 and 35 and piched the entire program to them , they took this long intentionally so the tech would not be outdated win it went into production , I was 14 win I did the first dising drawing for the b2 the latter f22 and f23 . I have never received anything for this except a lot of grief, the idea was that the the f35 and f32 would be built, by now we would have 777 f-22 and start the fb-22 ,we would also start the process of fasing out 4 gen aircraft as we replace them with the 5th gen as they end there service life , this did not happen for multiple reasons , what I can tell you about the 35 is that from the beginning it was ment to be a missile targeting and detection system especially low flying , and it is not ment to work alone in this role ,I'd it deploys it's own weapons it risks giving away its position .

[@proxy3386]

@@jamesdelrogers542 okay so you are a trroll noted

[@jamesdelrogers542]

@proxy3386 no i was born edio savant , Maybe on the autistic spectrum ,I was a student of natural sciences and a visual artists, that grew up next to top gun school in san diego, I am the descendent of royal Italian Egyptian and maltese bloodlines ,my great grandmother became some one vary important in the .Mason and win I was a small child she died and handed it down to me , so some thing the call my permission was used , they also made deals with the mob which is something they do all the time , essentially I was human trafficed .the shapes in these airframe designs are all from nature, also if you understand how light reflection work particularly off of chrome or reflective surfaces, than can roughly predict what raider signals will do .the two are essentially the same they just oscillate at different frequency. They have really treated me horribly, I would not have done this ,and now as an Egyptian to see what they are doing in gaza expeshaly the children not to mention as a child what was done to me .

[@The_ZeroLine]

We have a lot of unknown satellite capabilities being launched every single day as well as more being developed. Satellites also our most closely guarded secrets. So, there’s a lot more up than most people factor in today when war gaming these things. Connectivity is a strength of the F-35, not a weakness. It’s more of a big sensor suite and communication hub than an attack / fighter jet. Even if a few F-35s are getting jammed, they can use another aircraft not being jammed.

[@Stumpy-qc5pw]

Great video. Good explanation of the click baiting headlines relating to F35 downsides. Nearly every platform when first entering into service was accompanied by complaints around cost and delays.

[@OperationDarkside]

Any tool, that gives adversaries a serious headache, is a good tool.

[@herptek]

The Russians already arrange themselves the headache with execessive vodka on the night before operations.

[@IvanTre]

Imagine what kind of headache USAF is going to get once Chinese field ramjet powered IR seeker missiles that have an endurance of 5 minutes and can lock onto the exhaust of an F-35 from 5 km away. And imagine all they say about multilateration is true. In that case, stealth planes are almost completely useless in a hot war, because enemy will get bounces off those planes and localize them.

It is going to be intersting to see how the F-35 is beeing viewed in a few decades. Statsitically I should be around to compare.

[@jpierce2l33t]

Love this Chris, very fine analysis! Many points I'd never previously thought of, thanks for the great content!

[@gamerstady7189]

Superb presentation , Thank you

[@camdenharper7244]

Something I didn't hear you mention. Once you start jamming the F-35, it can start shooting at you

[@bigsmokeinlittlechina174]

And better than the su-57

[@flybobbie1449]

How?

[@bigsmokeinlittlechina174]

@@flybobbie1449 flight hours, production numbers, and sales

[@Genjuanpa]

May be not if it is jammed. That is what jamming does

[@lucchesi87]

HOME ON JAM. pretty old tech.

[@goetzliedtke]

The ability to adjust to send data by new paths implies that there is routing of data. So the interesting target is not the sources and receivers of data but the routers. Routers talk to each other to update routes. Routers have both what I call software and hard software - compiled instructions that form the machine code executed on a processor and compiled instructions that form the hardware which executes at speeds much faster than software. Either form can be modified and those modifications can cause performance to drop.

[@robertbeech8210]

Thanks, very concise and informative.

[@davidramos5216]

Thanks for the explanations and your point of view! Tell us about your books behind and the reading you advice to us! Thanks again from Brazil 🇧🇷!👋👋👋

[@SMlFFY85]

If you only heard about the F-35 from internet forums, you'd be forgiven for thinking the plane was barely capable of flight.

[@ernestoherreralegorreta137]

Couldn't one not end up thinking the same after watching the latest heavy questioning lashed by Congressman Gaetz onto Secretary Austin regarding the astounding fact (accepted by Austin) that barely 40% of the F-35s are ready to fly a basic mission on any given day ? The F-35 program was a mistake, a very expensive mistake.

[@COLT6940]

​@@ernestoherreralegorreta137lol clickbait article and intentionally misinterpreting F35 peace time combat readiness, tell that to the IAF f35s that have 80% combat readiness.

[@ernestoherreralegorreta137]

You'll have to face up to reality eventually. The root of the problem is the same as that of the struggles Boeing is facing nowadays in the airline market.

[@COLT6940]

@@ernestoherreralegorreta137 midwit buzzwords be like:

[@timthetiny7538]

@@ernestoherreralegorreta137 gaetz had no idea ever he was talking about. Not that he ever does

[@marcusott2973]

Much awaited, much appreciated excellent insights as always from you.

[@ryanseet8314]

Recently, the Singapore defence minister said F35s were operating in the Ukraine theatre. And it’s performance exceeded expectations. Singapore proceeded to buy 8 more F35As immediately, on top of 12 Bs. One can only speculate what aspect he was referring to.

[@prodigalsoniv48]

I believe he was talking about the F-35s ability to detect iskandar missile launches from 900km away etc

[@aaroncabatingan5238]

​​@@prodigalsoniv48Yeah, the guy is probably referring to f35s operating within NATO territory, but their radar range can reach as far as Kyiv itself.

[@josephwallis8965]

I'll think twice, selling to Singapore, Singapore might allow China and Russia to inspect the planes and analyse the electronic footprints and details, it all comes down to whether you can trust Singapore which boasted its biggest trading partner is China, betrayal is by allies when least expected.

[@Phantom-rb8yv]

do you believe everything they tell you? wtf, no wonder Americans still believe Hitler is alive wtf lmao

[@Marty_YouTuber]

I love Air Power. This was a great video.

[@spurgear]

In before the Vatniks start talking about the plywood SU-75

[@hertzwave8001]

it can go 2 times the speed of light so its good

[@johnmoser1162]

All screws tight ?

[@keepyourbilsteins]

Need to refer to it by its NATO designation.

[@Sahtoovi]

@@hertzwave8001 yeah and it can pull at least 180G so idk what these westoids are talking about sounds like cope to me

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

I don't think they even bring it up, it's not just a blatant foreign sales cash grab but the internet collectively deciding on the NATO designation was a psychological killshot.

[@UncleJoeLITE]

Great questions for Australia, Chris. I'm guessing our F-35s would run out of everything within a week, but the data links are interesting. Australia is developing our 'Loyal Wingman / GhostBat' to leverage our strengths & act as a force multiplier / weapons truck. Hopefully these links will be robust vs the CCP, our only possible enemy.

[@RocketSurgn_]

The Loyal Wingman type concept (also grouping with the B21) really has potential to be a huge advantage. Just the options it opens up for a clean configured stealthy F35 to direct a set of much cheaper relatively expendable drones, like bomb and missile truck drones or even to leave its own active radar off while a drone transmits its own data.

[@urgaynknowit]

The micro aggression and smiles that he showed, I caught that too: and it was nice to see someone else catch it

[@rick7424]

?

[@indahooddererste]

Danke!

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Thank you very much!

[@Dad_Brad]

I’m wondering if Chris prefers American English or British English most?

[@michaelmoorrees3585]

I like the snippets of an F-35 taking off near Las Vegas, with the Stratosphere, in the background. Could be Nellis AFB, just north of Las Vegas, which is only a short flight from Area 51 (Groom Lake), which seems so appropriate for this bird !

[@severinp.7050]

I liked the video. What are your thoughts on the problems regarding availability and combat readiness? As well as the problems and adjustments of Refresh 3

[@rare_kumiko]

MC for F-35 is not that low, most of the alleged problems are about it having a particularly bad month in FMC. But when shit hits the fan, it can be done, Israel has got a very high availability rate during the last few months.

[@chrisspulis1599]

Great job. Thanks

[@brennus57]

Thanks Chris. This seems I a good, object look at this platform. I feel like I've been swamped by a huge amount of propaganda and misinformation regarding this thing for years.

[@MsZeeZed]

And of course Chris thinks of military jets as his “fancy birds” 😹

[@Peter-d9p]

Brilliant channel👍. Could you do a show on drone shoot-downs and the various ways this is being tackled by Ukraine? For example are helicopters part of effective defence against dones? Or light aircraft with a gunner firing sideways? Or a cheap AAM? What about the AV8B shooting down Houti drones?

[@jklappenbach]

8:09 EW jamming is overrated. There are techniques for overcoming jamming, which include the use of multiple antenna on a receiver to be able to triangulate the origin of a given signal, and be able to deconflict multiple signals. Especially when those competing signals will never be in phase for very long if a receiver is in motion. Also, there are ways of shielding antenna such that they directionally filter for signals. Finally, there are spread spectrum frequency hopping techniques that can make jamming of specific frequency domains useless.

[@myronplichota7965]

Tech tip to Chris: quit using bass-boost/treble-cut EQ on your vox.

[@wirosisableng0073]

Mainan bagus 👍 dirancang menembus radar dan semua pertahanan udara

[@goetzliedtke]

The problem with agile communications that adapt to external problems is that the adjustments need to use the bandwidth for the data to advertise the changing links. As more adjustments are made, the less data is passed over the established links. As an attacker, I don't need to stop communications - I just need to make the system think that a link is about to be stopped. If I do that, allow the system to start to adjust and adapt, and then cause the communication system to believe there is a another problem, I can eventually force the system to use up all of the communication bandwidth telling the many nodes where to send the data.

[@aBoogivogi]

You can avoid INS drift by flying high enough to use star tracking :p

[@zlm001]

Thanks

[@vojtechpribyl7386]

I'd really like to know how many of these soft features that the F-35 has are present on all those 5th gen concurent projects.

[@danielkarlsson9326]

It is going to be intresting to see the interaction between JAS 39E and F35's of the other Nordic countries as both probably are the most evolved western jets when it comes to the Sensors and datalinkage. I personally think that Whilst the F35 will be a potent plattform it still will be less powerfull than most advocates of it believe.

[@dextermorgan1]

And I personally think it'll be more powerful than has been let on.

[@RocketSurgn_]

I love the Gripen, it’s a beautiful plane and has some great design choices… but it’s very much made for specific needs including being affordable to operate. A flight hour is something like 6k US for the Gripen vs 25-40k for the F35. It’s also made to be maintainable by small ground crews with limited training or support equipment to fly from small dispersed airfields along the Nordic highway system after an expected “enemy from the east who definitely is not necessarily Russia, wink wink” overrun of their main air bases. That puts even more importance on ease of maintainability, part availability/reliability etc that the F35 isn’t expected to have to worry about. The 39 is a great platform, uniquely good at what it’s made for and does have some great sensor fusion and pilot assist designs to help manage task loading, but it’s nowhere near as bleeding edge in tech across the board. A big part of the design focus of the F35 was making it far more updatable than previous platforms as sensors/software needs/etc continue to evolve.

[@richardmeyeroff7397]

I just read about a chinese Rail gun that didn't do what the chinese wanted but sent some thing 8 miles up and sound like it could be developed into a anti-satellite weapon much more useful that a laser as it won't be bothered by atmospheric problems. what are your thoughts?

[@alancranford3398]

I became interested in air power at age five because my family had to spend a couple of weeks sleeping in the fallout shelters on Spangdahlem USAF base during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I endured much frustration because I was just learning to count to ten and the alphabet at the time--and there was no readily accessible Internet. "Networked" is the current buzz phrase for "learning to play well with others." Before WW2 the US Army developed TOT (Time On Target) barrage techniques, but the Army Air Corps was dead set against close air support. The Marines had both CAS and naval gunfire support--along with a limited amount of field artillery modeled on the Army's TOT. By 1944 the US Army could network everything on the battlefield within range of a target to dump high explosives, smoke, and poison gas in a short, sharp barrage lasting only a minute--the poison gas capability wasn't used. Forward air controllers and artillery forward observers could call in fire for front-line units in contact with the enemy. Now, just about anybody with a radio and a map box (electronic or paper) can request fire dumped on an enemy through a centralized fire direction center--aircraft strikes in multiple flavors (helicopter, drone, close air support A-10s, precision-guided munitions from B-52 bombers miles away from the battle), surface-to-surface missiles from ships or from land-based launchers, traditional cannons (both field artillery and naval gunfire), and any adjacent units within mortar range. This evolution didn't happen overnight. By the Sixties, integrated fire support made US forces so lethal that only close combat by irregular forces was possible. Getting into a long-range artillery battle would result in heavy losses. Just ask Saddam Hussein why he dumped his First Gulf War strategy of fortified strong points for dispersed light infantry units that hid out in the population. Shoot at a US unit--nothing happens for a few minutes, and then the world explodes.

[@tomlobos2871]

well, in case of a war challenges develop into unexpected directions by nature. question is how adaptive it will be and with that what systems are concidered in 15, 30 years from now.

[@corujariousa]

Talking about high-tech systems is always exciting. I just hope our military has been learning and acting on the background based on lessons from the war in Ukraine. We see cheap drones causing havoc in the battlefield. China, for example, can mass produce cheap drones and later use them to overwhelm defense systems from adversaries. The economics alone of this scenario is extremely detrimental to the defending side.

[@IvanAlejandro99]

I thought your channel was about history

[@bobbyb.6644]

How many available at any given time ? 🤔

[@TrollOfReason]

Dozens. So, more than the entire extant Chinese inventory of J20s, & the *entirety* of the Russian 4th gen aircraft inventory.

[@WhatIfBrigade]

Feels like Starlink would be very challenging for in terms of getting rid of the satellites.

[@vangarus]

Nukes in space do

[@WhatIfBrigade]

@@vangarus That destroys all of your own satellites in the area and neutral's giving them cause to declare war. It also invites similar retaliation meaning signal relays from ships and allies become the fallback. That gives NATO the advantage.

[@LackofFaithify]

Block 4? Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count.

[@Spartaner251]

for the com matrix, all parts communicate through the cyberwarfare domain?

[@flybobbie1449]

laser communication. I had customers 30 years ago worked at Malvern talking about secure laser comms.

[@flybobbie1449]

Ideal for satellite comms. to aircraft or ground.

[@saadatkhan9583]

please explain why a good drone with a variety of sensors not perform equally well, at far lower cost, and greater endurance?

[@pat8988]

What was that thing on the back of the F-35 at (9:50)??

[@proxy3386]

It looks like a pre-production test aircraft, with all the antennas in the front, and all the other stuff just scattered around that doesn’t exist in the production F-35 whatsoever.

[@wilmaharvey4216]

DANKE.!! 🤔🤔🤔😉😉😉🙂🥇

[@bobbastian760]

F35 is VTOL, surely they could start using this if basing is attacked at improvised bases. (pretty extreme scenario but that's the point in having VTOL right).

[@markoconnell804]

In taking out space based satellites if by bomb or kinetic means you also will jeopardize your own satellites and friendly nation’s satellites, potentially making current and future space based assets impossible.

[@matchesburn]

Why didn't you bring up Link-22?

[@stefanaleksic4113]

Is it true that russian SU 25 can use disel fuel?

[@TrollOfReason]

Yes. But it would affect performance. The Frogfoot is a subsonic ground attack craft, so that really isn't much of an issue beyond reduced operating range, flight ceiling & increased vulnerability to ManPADS. Also, like all multi fuel engines that make allowances for diesel, the minute amounts of incompressible water in diesel reactions will demand increased maintenance & reduce engine life. Everything demands a tradeoff when you deviate from the optimum, & the SU25 is no exception. Really good plane!

[@SlavicCelery]

To be fair, most aircraft can use a variety of fuels because of turbine engines. That said, much like the TrollofReason alluded to, performance varies based on the fuel quality. Same thing is true of turbine powered vehicles on land (Abrams, etc).

[@0MoTheG]

Link-16 provides time and positioning BUT bombs do not have it. Laser does not work through clouds, rain.

[@bruceparr1678]

Has the F35 seen combat? and I do not mean bombing un defended soft targets in the levant.

[@michaeldunne338]

Has the aircraft bombed defended and/or hard targets, in Syria or Lebanon? Given the hostilities with Hezbollah since last Octboer, wouldn't be surprised ... Otherwise, Israel's media has claimed that the aircraft has shot down drones and cruise missiles from Iran (launched from around the Middle East).

[@tsumikiayato1560]

Not really, there's no pilot-to-pilot combat with it yet, at least none reported. It has shot down cruise missiles though

[@MrCampasaurus]

I mean that's a broad list of aircraft that haven't seen combat then. Or do you seemingly only give them a pass because they're not the F-35?

[@rick7424]

Red Flag excercises.

[@brealistic3542]

Were you aware that the developers are seriously thinking about putting laser weapons on these ? It in Aviation and Space Technology magazine.

[@louisburke8927]

The noun data is already plural

[@seanoconnor8843]

I'm wondering how much of this expensive equipment can be used against an army with matching shoes

[@gags730]

What will happen when the F-35s get Jammed? All we hear about is how everything talks to everything and how information is processed and shared... but what do they do when there is no information at all with one of these planes? These are very complicated planes and relying on all this technology is not always an advantage. Anyone have insight on that? Thanks

[@fauzin3338]

That's why ECCM (or oversimplified as "counter-jamming") exists. The probability of being in a condition where "there is no information at all" is minute, due to this very approach of design: resilience through redundancy.

[@TrollOfReason]

The jamming source gets a missile sent at it. Or! The computer filters out the jamming: The physics is pretty simple, since jamming can't destroy a good signal, just hope to overwhelm the receiver past its input thresholds with junk. Yet, that the good signal still exists, & the receiving computer utilizes a digital handshake, it can get useful signals despite the noise. It's how digital TV signals work despite using a suboptimal bandwidth for transmission, full of junk & interference. Filtering is partially why the F35 has such a powerful computer on board. Or! The plane uses/coordinates channels of information that aren't jammed. Yeah, jamming isn't that good & hasn't been for decades compared to keeping your head down when the birds are up. Praying in a tool shed does more than jamming these days, & it doesn't interfere with friendly RADAR & wireless communication.

[@johnsamsungs7570]

Why restrict your satellite navigation systems to only two there are four GPS (United States), GLONASS (Russian Federation), Beidou (China) and Galileo (European Union). If they jam yours use theirs! Australia is building the Ghost Bat system to allow to up the F-35 with extra sensors, extra payloads and Electronic Warfare (EW) Systems plus extra fuel! One F-35 with six unmanned flying friends this is multi layered defence and offence capabilities. The Yanks are doing a similar system and the POMS.

[@OdyTypeR]

Sounds like we might _actually_ need the Department of Redundancy Department?

[@NE-Explorer]

Star link and other quick deployment satellites

[@neues3691]

Zumindest vor der russischen Luftwaffe müssen wir keine Angst haben, sofern die Amerikaner in Europa bleiben.

[@geo8rge]

Why is this equipment only available to F-35? Can it be fitted to F-16?

[@TrollOfReason]

Because the F16 geometry is self-defeating for nearly every stealth feature & system. Meanwhile, the EW systems & computers need a lot of room, & the F16 doesn't have it available. It's why the F14, big & unmaneuverable tho it is, is capable of doing more of what the F35 does compared to the F16. Space & geometry. The F16 is superb at what it does, but the F35 is a completely different animal in a changing combat airspace. I mean, the now retired F111 did things & went places the current F16 can't.

[@Winged_Gunsknecht]

Also mind that the F-16 platform are 50 years old by now. And was designed to be a small, lightweight dogfighter, the Fighter Mafia dream. There are only so much space on the poor loaded-down things to fit upgrades. And new blocks only get you so far without essentially designing a new aircraft.

[@geo8rge]

@@TrollOfReason So wouldn't F-35 be a better choice for Ukraine?

[@TrollOfReason]

@@geo8rge Yes in the immediate. No in the longterm. Plus, there's no need & there are strong political/security/classified technology concerns. The current & more recent crop of F16 variants are the platinum standard for 4th generation aircraft. It's the plane all non-stealth airframes must compare themselves to, & ultimately be found lacking. That kerfuffle wouldn't be shifted by F35, anyway, since the defenders are still constrained in how they are allowed to use NATO-spec kit. 😑

[@Renegade-Master-88]

So it needs a starlink dish

[@Porter92]

Im not worried about space. The US is fielding enough systems and if china russia attacks one, the US will take the few they each have out compared to the amount we have

[@bjorntorlarsson]

So the F.35 has an internet connection onboard? Impressive...

[@petewinter7759]

Is that Tintin I can see on the wall to your left ?

[@tedferkin]

Still not a fan of the reliance on a single airframe. I am a firm believer that you cannot have a universal aircraft. To me the F-35 should be being used in tandem with aircraft like the F-22 and even the F-16/Gripen. You need a mixture to cover all areas. I'm not saying that the F-35 is not a fantastic aircraft, we will find out at some point. The thing is, can it do everything for every NATO airforce, what happens when we find a design flaw that stops it doing certain missions?

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

But it was meant to be used in tandem with the F-22. But the F-22 program was killed. Come on people, this information has been around for a couple decades.

[@Winged_Gunsknecht]

The F-16 did fine, despite starting out as a purebred air superiority fighter. Why should the F-35 be any different?

[@TrollOfReason]

That's how the F35 works, anyway. It's not a replacement for the F14/F16/F22 fleet, but a vanguard force multiplier. It makes all of those planes better, as opposed to replacing them. The US & her allies are still able to take advantage of preexisting airframes & infrastructure, while F35 lets those planes sing in ways they've never done, before.

[@CURTSNIPER]

its going to be used in tandem with the F15EX, known as the military's newest missile truck in the sky. the 35 will be used almost like a combat capable, stealth, AWACS, communicating with the fleet and marking targets for everyone

[@jeffscherer2136]

The f35 and it's adoption has basically negated the air forces of every other nation that doesn't have them. The J20 is big and has canards and is totally unproven. The su57 is cute, they wouldn't even be a speed bump against an f22 or f35.

[@aquilesca5tr0]

There were f35 prototypes with canards

[@ark-mark1]

In the west, including you, most of the military thinkers think Russia thinks how Nato thinks, meaning you compare individual planes performance against individual plane. In Russia they have built a system where there are no individual actors in the battle or war but all different weapons and sensor systems work as one organism. The F-35 will not be fighting against SU-30 or SU-57 but a network of radars, radar planes, fighter planes manpads, satellites and so on. They have decision making centers which computers track all enemy targets and choose the best or fastest way of destroying the target, depending on the situation.

[@carlpolen7437]

You think the west doesn't do this? In fact, interconnected information battlesystems using computers were created in the west. What you highlighted has been a central part of American warefare for over thirty years. Hell, its been relatively MATURE for the last twenty years, unlike the russians. In fairness a big part of the reason the Russians are behind is because of the econoimic/inidustria collapse they experienced in the nineties. But the fact remains, they are FAR behind in terms of battlefeild information managment.

[@rick7424]

You are such a bot.

[@Russia-bullies]

You mean “securely”,instead of “stealthily”.

[@dustyak79]

Sad moment when Creators you’ve watched for years start going grey when you realize you’re probably a bit older than them. Least you’ve got hair unlike a bearded Brit.

[@glynparker9524]

Chris, good video. Data sharing is important and I you and NATO have it based around the F35 because of the stealth and it's likely to be further forward on the Battlefield. My worry is a lot of eggs have been put in one basket. These data share systems can be built into other planes either new or as an upgraded model of current aircraft. So stealth? When and not if, someone finds a way of detecting them better, how does the F35 stack up against existing aircraft as a weapons platform? Certainly can't call it a bomb truck, range is poor, speed isn't outstanding, maneuverability average. Conclusion: expensive to buy Expensive to maintain 2 trick pony: 1. Stealth- for now 2. Data share- can be put into another aircraft. Glyn NZ

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

So you're gonna bolt the data sharing capabilities to older aircraft that will not be able to get close and gather data. Anything that detects stealth will detect regular aircraft better. If you make a flashlight to help you see people wearing dark clothes at night, people wearing white clothes will shine like the sun.

[@koskok2965]

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The F-35 is not stealth. Its RCS is garbage when compared to no-compromise VLOs like the F-117 and F-22. Specialized radars from late ( around 2005 and onwards ) and current S-300 variants allow the batteries to kill any F-35 that gets within range to use its SDBs. Not to say that an F-35 will necessarily try to conduct SEAD/DEAD by itself, but the fact that it's incapable of doing so is more than enough to discredit it as a true stealth aircraft. It's also too "bright" from any aspect other than straight from the front when compared to true stealth aircraft like the F-22, while its rear aspect is downright horrendous, again, unlike the F-22.

[@davidbauer8800]

Thanks for a very informative video, but I'm curious what your underlying "Statement of Facts" might be - several examples to consider... 1. British Hubris that Russia (& China?) intend to attack when their military is structured for defense & the likelihood that at least one Party (say N. Korea?) would employ the "Samson Option" on all space satellites (& undersea communication cables)... 2. The fragility of the supply chain on an already difficult support system to launch sorties of F-35's, F-22's, & even F-16's in a dirty, chaotic real war scenario. Imagine even that low-tech shrapnel strewn on the runway designed to be swept into the jet intake, and to also scour the stealth aircraft coating. There seem to be so many low-tech, cost effective means to counter the expensive high-tech wonder weapons in a combat environment.

[@lancemurdoc6744]

Considering the numbers of F 35 in service of the USAF, the percentage of grounded planes, the number of construction "flaws", the operational costs and the ratio between flight and maintenance...it is save to say the F 35 is already a extremly deadly plane on every level...And thats a good thing.

[@whya2ndaccount]

Perhaps "pinning its hopes on for a "potential" upcoming conflict"?

[@NineInchTyrone]

Small nuke air bursts for EMP ?

[@BionicleJackson]

Don't be an aggressive authoritarian, and the F-35 won't be an issue.

[@HallBr3gg]

"Nadal" is surname not a middle name!!!

[@mikusoxlongius]

Well, if they could get more than 29% of them to be mission capable. That would be a good start...

[@rick7424]

Over 60% are mission capable. Your number refers to full mission capability which is a different standard.

[@shaider1982]

Hope you can collab with Millennium7* on this type of topics.

[@bathhatingcat8626]

Millennium 7 needs to stick to technical specs and stay away from current events/politics

[@comediangj4955]

​@@bathhatingcat8626apologies on his behalf for not being a NATO simp

[@hithere7382]

@@comediangj4955 You wish you had the combat power and the statesmanship to field something like NATO.

[@rick7424]

​​@@comediangj4955Your attempts at undermining this channel are poor.

[@eugenax9345]

Nuclear Nadal :P

[@Porter92]

I doubt they will jam the f-35 it has what a million channels or whatever every second? Or am i thinking of a radar jamming thing? Sorry not a pilot haha

[@FrancisFjordCupola]

How to keep it deadly? Well... look at what happens today. Russia keeps pushing meat into the grinder. Thus the most important thing is munitions and spare parts. Munitions to keep shooting. Spare parts to keep flying. Communication issues can be solved especially with narrow beam and direction datalinks. But I think that we should revamp the IT and make it possible to run frugal - on as little information exchange as possible.

[@ark-mark1]

They can use fighter craft as a decoy and make the kill with a ground launched missile or vice versa or any kind of combination of such. They have the situational awareness in totally different level that any of the people here in west seem to grasp. They will track the f-35 from the moment it taxies on to runway for take off and make the kill when it best suits for them. F-35 is stealth for enemy fighter aircraft but can be seen from satellite, ground based radar or awacs plane and locked by it while the fighter or anti air missile system needs only to launch the missile. On top of that they have been gathering data about israeli F-35 in Syria for over 10 years now.

[@typxxilps]

Why is that "big picture" chapter so late in the middle than instead on the beginning ?

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

Brought to you by the Lockmart share holders association.

[@rick7424]

Those shareholders want the jet to work. Your argument makes no sense.

[@angrybirder9983]

Wait, what happened to the "History" part in "Military Aviation History"? It's apparently "Military Aviation Future" now. This isn't a bad thing. I'm very much happy that current issues are being covered. The content just... doesn't fully match the name anymore.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Last month was almost exclusively WW2 and another two more historic videos are planned for this month :)

[@wuhaninstituteofvirology5226]

​@@MilitaryAviationHistoryWill you also make videos about naval and army aviation?

[@TM-vp7jr]

There is nothing good about F-35 except price tag

[@kostyac6411]

A unique weakness of the F-35 is the ability to spam it with a ChatGPT generated imitation of its signals. Easy large battlefield denial by taking local radio or TV station.

[@charlesrichardson8635]

Even the best AI isn't going to be breaking the encryption necessary for a imitation that's useful. That's just jamming that that leads to HARM.

[@rick7424]

*lacks citation*

[@user-oo8xp2rf1k]

I have never seen any F35. So I guess it works.

[@Phil-D83]

Flying coffin against an advanced adversary

[@rick7424]

Prove it.

[@WolfHeathen]

Also, we can't forget the fact that at least seven F-35s have crashed in the last 3 years for seemingly no other reason than flawed hardware and/or software design, and that's only in the US. Other nations seem to have issues with this thing as well.

[@Lashb1ade]

The F-35 accident rate is similar to F-15. Fighters crash shockingly often.

[@mickkelly6389]

X

[@P61widow]

It seems to be great aircraft, but has some serious problems and cost. Keep the A-10 and F-16, more cost effective and better for the mission.

[@pauldean8638]

I want to talk about Matt geatez in the senate 8 days ago where they find out the airforce only has 29% f35 operational fleet