The F-35 Lightning II - Why The Hate?

The F-35 Lightning II perhaps the most polarizing fighter jet ever made, has managed to both excel in exports and performance, while being much less popular than it’s often less capable peers.
Despite being the most successful stealth aircraft ever made - it is NOT without it’s problems.. But, do these issues really make it nearly as bad as we’ve been led to believe? Find out in this video, on the Notorious - Joint Strike Fighter.
Want to learn more about this topic? Here’s some additional viewing:
EOTS: • Electro-Optical Target...
DAS: • F-35 DAS
Sensor Fusion: • F-35 Sensor Fusion
Data Link: • Data Link Processing a...
AESA Radar: • APG-81 AESA Radar for ...
Doctrinal use (example only): • USA vs Russia: Breakin...
Special thanks to:
Denis S - Vixctor - John S - Gilbert W F - Jacob E - Joonatan - Provenance EMU - Bitels - Joe Jury - Doc.
All footage is owned by respective owners, used under section 107.
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
Attributions
F-35 3D: • RNoF F-35 Intercepts B...
Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grummen, Pratt & Whitney, US Department of Defense, various 3rd party users.
Music Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio, check out their work! • Cyberpunk Industrial D...
#F35 #Kaboda #Military
SOURCES -
F-35 Armament: sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/RL305...
Yak-141 Copycat myth: www.codeonemagazine.com/articl...
Gen. Mike Hostage: breakingdefense.com/2014/06/g...
F-35 Crash rates: www.aerotime.aero/articles/ar...
F-35 Cost misconception: www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/...
Please note, more may be added at a later date, if specific citations are requested.
0:00 Intro
0:56 The F-35
1:38 X-32 vs X-35
2:04 Export Success
2:46 Variants
4:13 Yak-141 Copycat myth
5:15 Convair 200
6:32 Development
7:08 Production
7:26 Why it’s so good
7:41 Armamanet
8:21 Situational awareness
13:14 Radar and EW
16:30 Dogfighting
17:42 Stealth
19:51 The Hate
20:16 “It’s too slow”
22:31 “It can’t dogfight”
23:25 “It can’t shoot straight”
24:45 “It doesn’t work”
25:57 F-135 Overheating issue
27:00 F-135 Fix ‘ECU’
27:11 “They keep crashing”
29:08 “Trillion dollar jet”
32:04 Hated Brilliance
32:27 Conclusion
32:59 Outro
Please note the following; 1) illustrated images and videos may not always match narration due to shortages of footage or imagery on certain things; 2) I will be adding any updates here to correct any mistakes that take place, and I ask that you take my content not as the singular piece of information that shapes your perspective, but a stepping stone to more in depth and nuanced understanding. 3) Poland and Singapore were missed out of the list of customers at 2;11.
And lastly - Thank you for 10,000 Subscribers!

[@eftalanquest]

everyone: "the f-35 is so damn expensive" the always penny pinching german government: "yeah, let's buy the f-35 instead of the f/a-18 because it will overall be cheaper"

[@connormclernon26]

Better that they have the latest and best so they can keep current for as long as possible and put off having to update as long as possible

[@jaredgarbo3679]

Imagine is 1908 and deciding to go with a pre-dreadnaught over a dreadnaught because its cheaper.

[@Werrf1]

@@jaredgarbo3679The _Danton_ -class say hello...

[@markbrisec3972]

And the Swiss, Danes, Canada and Israel.. Basically every single US ally can't wait to get their hands on the F-35 with the exception of France and them wanting to prove something. Like for example that the Rafale is better than the F-35. Which most definitely isn't. Canada and Germany are pitch perfect examples. Primeminister Trudoe wanted to save money and cancelled the F-35 deal basically in the first week in office.. Yap, they've changed their minds and buying 88 jets. Germany's ex Chanzellor Angela Merkel also denied any possibility of buying the F-35. Well we all know her political predictions regarding Putin and Russia.. Thankfully the new Chanzellor Olaf Scholtz quickly realized Germany's extremely weak military position and he immidiately decided to pump 100 billion€ in Bundeswehr, with a large chunk of that money going towards the F-35...

[@jtjames79]

It's a lot more expensive than a fleet of semi/expendable stealth drones. The real question is if a manned fighter jets are obsolete or not. A bunch of cardboard drones just recently took out a bunch of Russian fighter jets. Sure they were on the ground. But they have to land eventually.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

One of the best F-35 hate moments was David Axe writing an article for War Is Boring regarding the F-35s "loss" to an F-16 where the leaked report included the test pilot's conclusion that the F-35 just needed a control software update. Almost as if he stopped reading before reaching the last few pages.

[@djzoodude]

Lol, yeah, that was pretty great. They literally flew a prototype F-35 against an F-16 to see how the production models should be coded for combat, and it somehow became a story about how the F-35 can't dogfight. Now that fully combat coded F-35s are out there, we're seeing just how much nonsense that was, with F-35s regularly beating F-16s in dogfights.

[@michaelimbesi2314]

Yeah, well, that’s what happens when your columnist drinks the Pierre Sprey kool-aid

[@_Coffee4Closers]

Exactly... the actual test report stated that the CLAWS (Controls Logic) were limited to 3.5 G's for this early "maneuver" test (not a dog fight). The test pilot's final recommendation was that the test aircraft was safe to proceed to further open the CLAW limits for further evaluation. This is how actual engineering proceeds. It would take many more gradual tweaks and tuning before they fully open the limits to 10G's. David Axe surly knows this but LIED anyway to get clicks.

[@imkeerock]

Came here to also say this. For people to compare a production F16 with an over 9 g limit to a prototype F35 with an under 7g limit at the time was just ignorant. Now that the F35 has the block 3 update, let’s see that dog fight again!

[@slmyatt]

Much of the negative press is probably a result of Russian and Chinese influence operarions, it being easier to kill it in Congress than in the air.

[@zeph0shade]

All of this sounds suspiciously like something an F-35 would say...

[@KabodaOfficial]

I have to admit, this did make me laugh. Good job. :)

[@BalloonAsap]

or just a very very very very very very very very very very very nice f-22 (they dont exist)

[@admiralrng6506]

​@@BalloonAsap would you intercept me?

[@PeachDragon_]

​@@BalloonAsapa fat f22 painted in black

[@ZFPAkula]

In 1988 the US Navy was spending $74 Million for a new F-14D Tomcat. After adjusting for inflation, the F-35C is a freaking bargain.

[@_Coffee4Closers]

Exactly... they also are not aware that the F14 killed 4 test pilots before the first plane was produced. If the F35 did that with today's Internet, I can not even image the outcry.

[@trolleriffic]

@@_Coffee4Closers Current F-35 loss rate is 0.44 aircraft per 100,000 hours. At a similar stage in its lifetime the F-16 was about 10x worse if not more, and in 1979 the F-16 loss rate hit 30.64 per 100,000 hours - that's almost 70 times the rate for F-35!

[@democracy_enjoyer]

the variable swept wings also made it's maintenance both extremly difficult, and extremly costly

[@doujinflip]

The maintenance downtime was a big reason the Navy euthanized the Tomcat, I remember something like 40% ready at any time. Hence why the Hornet took over practically everything on deck other than cargo runs, and I hear the F-35 is similarly easy to maintain at least compared to previous stealth platforms.

[@at_omic8578]

iirc the Tomcat adjusting for inflation is... what, about $200 million?

[@satelliteprime]

In rather funny twist of irony, citing a "lacking top speed" as a design flaw in a modern jet fighter is perhaps the fastest way for someone to prove that they have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to modern air combat and jet fighters.

[@gabrielmallory1012]

Top speed is still more important than maneuverability. A high top speed or the ability to supercruise (which I believe the F-35 can do) is important to react to time-sensitive targets. Also, a high top speed allows the aircraft to launch munitions further (like the f-15ex).

[@forzaelite1248]

​@@gabrielmallory1012 Fighters haven't been clocked over Mach 1.4 or much over mach at all in history starting with Vietnam, not quite sure speed is as important as you think. If the target was really time sensitive it'd be better to fire a cruise missile or smth faster than a jet

[@xyxxanx9810]

@@gabrielmallory1012 Top speed is far less important than cruising speed. To reach maximum speed jets have to use their afterburner, drastically increasing their fuel consumption and IR-profile. Jets from the 60's and 70's could easily exceed Mach 2 but going that fast limited their range to a few hundred kms and since high speed interceptors are obsolete, there is no need to sacrifice range and flexibility for speed.

[@yaoyichenvictoriasch7014]

Then again, it depends on the role of the jet. Interceptors do need a high top speed.

[@philipszeremeta2621]

@@gabrielmallory1012 it can not super cruise. It can go super sonic with use of afterburners however

[@CircaSriYak]

The biggest failure of the F35 program is that we all call it the F35 instead of just "The Lightning" which is 100x cooler.

[@DefaultProphet]

Lightning II

[@terraoftime]

Well there are 2 other lightning's thats why. The OG P-38 which is where the 35 derives its name as the lightning II because lockheed built them both, and you have the English Electic Lightning which was the last domestically produced british fighter and was made in the early 1960's

[@rocketrockstar8171]

Vincent Black Lightning coolest motorbike name ever!

[@tofubutcher7456]

Pilots refer to it as "Panther", they will often say panther instead of F35 in interviews

[@notusneo]

​@@DefaultProphetif Lightning so good where is Lightning t-

[@damonstr]

Love the implied dig at the Su-57 by showing it when the words "legacy aircraft" are uttered 😂

[@sneakyfishiix8014]

It's barely 4th gen+ trash and the polished turds that are Russian pilots make it it worse.

[@jloiben12]

I mean creating a new fighter program that’s 4th gen is certainly… a choice

[@thesupreme8062]

​@@jloiben12its by now means new, its a soviet design

[@janchovanec8624]

@@jloiben12 it's a progress. They aren't quite there, but don't worry, British, French, Italian and German companies will be jumping on their contracts as soon as the war ends, if it ends. Su-57 with Western tech might be a decent jet in 15 years, provided they actually develop the engines they show on "stat sheets", but don't have yet.

[@philonetic321]

Commieboos will swear it's 5th gen, even though it has the radar cross section of a horse and doesn't even have a heads up display, much less 360 visor with datalink.

[@Yxalitis]

Very low radar cross section isn't about being invisible, but about avoiding a weapons-grade lock. Many people point out VLF (very low frequency) radars can "see" stealth aircraft, but these systems are unable to achieve anything close to the fidelity needed to guide a missile to the aircraft. Also recognise that in non-combat operations stealth aircraft are often equipped with devices designed to make them show up on radar, for ease of traffic control, both civilian and military, as well as to keep the exact stealth characteristics hidden from foreign countries seeking to gain intel on the capabilities. Finally, arm chair critics are, taking a wild guess here, not in the military, the defence industry, or have any knowledge other then that which a lazy google search will provide, while feeling smug they know more about a platform then the countries buying and deploying the systems into their military.

[@alexdemoya2119]

this guy gets it. being able to roughly know where a F-35 is doesnt mean you can fire SAMs at it.

[@ChipCheerio]

To be fair, simply being in the military doesn’t grant anyone inside knowledge on military research and development. I mean we love our service members, but most of them just sat around motor pool and complained before leaving service. Not exactly someone who knows anything more than anyone else.

[@fredmdbud]

@@ChipCheerioto be fair, it can grant access to information not available to the public (security clearance), as well as working with systems such as search-and-track and targeting radars, electronic countermeasure and counter-countermeasures, etc. in order to work with the equipment, it's expected that the operators are taught the basics to know about the stuff they are looking at.

[@WetaMantis]

@@alexdemoya2119 Bullshit.

[@17thshard62]

That final point is essentially what Cyber Command prefers as its main policy: "Those not in the know should be the only ones talking."

[@terraoftime]

I used to hate this jet back a while ago. Then i listened to the people who fly it and one of my friends who is transitioning from the super hornet and it has completely turned me around. The F-35 is so eywateringly better than anything else out there that it really isn't even a fair comparison.

[@hunterreeves6525]

Yeah that’s what made me start realizing years ago that the F35 was getting unfair hate. I’m well aware that if your average person military thinks something is junk, then they’re not gonna hold back on telling people about it. So the fact that you never hear that about the F35, and in fact you hear the opposite, that’s all you really need to know about how good the F35 is

[@terraoftime]

@@hunterreeves6525 Yeah, i have personal experience with things in the U.S military that i think are kind of junk, but i still know that the "junk" is better than just about anything else out there.

[@marseldagistani1989]

​@@hunterreeves6525 Also hurr Durr Pierr Spray

[@alganhar1]

I never have hated it. You see while my brother has never flown one, he IS an Aeronautical Design Engineer working for BAe Systems, as well as Eurofighter Typhoon he is also part of the British design team involved in the F-35 project. While he has never revealed any hard facts about the aircrafts capabilities, he did once say to my kids, that if they were to join the RAF as Pilots, try to get into F-35's, as they are the most survivable things in the sky.

[@jgw9990]

​@hunterreeves6525 There's also been a lot of propaganda from America's enemies about F35, especially Russia. The reason is that they lack the resources or skill to produce anything close to it. Other countries have sour grapes about not being able to get on the programme, India never misses an opportunity to Diss stealth fighters of any type because they have no realistic hope of having one for example. France has also been keen to dismiss 5th gen because again they don't have one and refuse to buy American because they are French.

[@yaseen157]

I was surprised by how well put together this video is. I'm an aeronautical engineering graduate, and it's great to see someone summarise the situation so well.

[@KabodaOfficial]

Thank you!

[@ianlowery6014]

@@KabodaOfficial It is very good! Also try hypohystericalhistory (note the name!) an Australian military historian. His analysis of the F35 is here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/j4LKf6qoqbuikJY It is worth looking at his other stuff.

[@glennchartrand5411]

People can't get it through their heads that air combat has changed. It's not 1990 anymore, the anti-aircraft missiles are too good to rely on maneuvering to defeat them , and even if you could you burn up so much fuel you can't complete your mission. If you want to get past air defense systems , you need to avoid being detected in the first place.

[@ameritoast5174]

Hey, I watched Top Gun Maverick and it proves that you are wrong : )

[@DZ-1987]

​@@ameritoast5174funny

[@ryanc9876]

Eh, it's possible to detect the F-22 and F-35, but the most important thing is to avoid getting targeted. Only some (edit: some? likely both the B2 and B21) of the stealth bombers are nigh undetectable by low frequency radars. But you can't get a weapon's grade lock with those, so basically--they know you're there, but they can't do shit about it aside from firing aimlessly and that just makes you an easier target. Stealth bombers on the other hand... "never know what hit em."

[@Maynarkh]

And if you are detected, you try to avoid a target lock

[@pyronuke4768]

Oh yes, please keep quoting battle reports from an era where even the most reliable missiles would still hit their target only once out of eight times, it's not like missiles or radars have improved much in the last 50 years.

[@someoneunusual7186]

I honestly thought that the F-35 was just overall a bad, overengineered jet, but after listening in on the points you made in the video: I'd like to apologize to the megaminds behind the design of this skybeast 🙏

[@DefaultProphet]

Hell yeah brother welcome to the right side of history

[@Typexviiib]

With all the propaganda out there its pretty easy to come away thinking the f35 sucks. There are a lot of groups out there that have a vested interest in keeping f35s from proliferating.

[@James-9999]

⁠@@Aim54Deltamass produced, stealth and doesn’t need a huge runway. It will make a fine replacement for the f-16, I mean it’s so bad russia paid for a pr campaign to try and get us to stop making them😂

[@DefaultProphet]

@@Aim54Delta That Turkey wrecks every one of your kinematic faves

[@peterfireflylund]

It was always it would be a great jet… if they could make all the new tech work. It was not at all obvious that they could make it work and the project spent a looooong time in development hell.

[@Noisy_Cricket]

One thing I don't think people understand is how ridiculous it is for a fighter jet to be able to detect a Falcon 9 launch from over 800 miles away. If it can see a Falcon 9 launch at that distance, it's going to see every normal missile launch within at least 100 miles, if not much more. Plenty of time to either take evasive action, warn a carrier about the launch, or take action against the launch vehicle.

[@vegetassj1629]

All of you are acting like 4th Gen fighters don't have MAWS and RWR.

[@trolleriffic]

@@vegetassj1629 And you're acting like RWR is still useful against modern LPI radars.

[@isaacjones8461]

@@vegetassj1629 some 4th gens have MAWS, most dont though

[@blimpgaming8534]

​@@vegetassj1629lol bros been playing to much war thunder if you think rwr is still as effective against modern missiles

[@cabriskus4700]

@@vegetassj1629Stop playing war thunder bro

[@777Outrigger]

The top aces of WWII ddid not dog fight. They saw dogfighting as a dangerous and low yielding endeavor. Instead they developed ambush tactics. From top German Ace Erich Hartmann; "I never cared much for dogfight. I would never dogfight with the Russians Get the highest altitude and if possible come out of the sun…. Ninety percent of my attacks were surprise attacks..... The pilot who sees the other first has already half of the victory." And from some fighter pilot; "If you enter into a dogfight in an equal position with your opponent,, your tactics suck" The F-35 will always enter into a dogfight in an advantageous position with it's opponent, and will ambush with it's stealth and superior sensor system, like Hartmann did with his tactics..... In Red Flag 17-1, the F-35 often entered into a visual fight, but despite being outnumbered, it still kicked derriere with it's ambushes. The F-35 will always see first. Incredible advantage.

[@ahhmm5381]

So.... what about the other 10 percent? We going to pretend it doesn't exist?

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

​@@ahhmm5381 in the other 10% the F-35 has the radar, the optics, the nose pointing ability and the missiles to win the fight.

[@777Outrigger]

@@ahhmm5381 No, but the F-35 is much more maneuverable than given credit for. And EODAS will give the F-35 unprecedented SA in a visual fight. The pilot will know exactly that's an SU-35, and not an F-15, at 5 miles. No hesitation. And he'll be able to see behind to the rear too. Most people don't understand how hard it is to see another aircraft at even 3 miles. Big sky, little airplane. ...

[@ahhmm5381]

@@777Outrigger That's nice. Tell me, can it beat the F-16 at close range?

[@ahhmm5381]

​@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Its a jack of all trades plane, so it would lose that 10%

[@a24396]

The F-35 is an absolute beast. Its record at RED FLAG speaks for itself: a 70:1 kill ratio. And it's not so clear that a radar-guided missile can even SEE an F-35. Especially a missile with an active radar seeker. Not so sure that the seeker can see an F-35 when it goes pitbull. Edit to add: I suspect, though I obviously can't prove, that much of the maligning of the F-35 is actually BECAUSE of how capable it is. If I were Russia or China, I wouldn't want to actually have to fight an F-35 in combat; I'd try to kill it during appropriations by convincing decision-makers it was a piece of garbage and by getting the public to put pressure on them to "stop wasting our tax dollars." A democracy is susceptible to this kind of information campaign, and our rivals know it, a few encouragements here and there really makes a tremendous difference in coverage.

[@Rigel_6]

Well, as it happens, while not a direction corelation-causation I'm sure, it's funny how many of the F-35 haters also turn out to be commie bootlickers. As for your point, remember that interview on RT about how F-35 was garbage? Was it that charlatan Pierre Sprey or somebody else? I can't remember

[@pavelsulc2617]

I think you nailed it. Russia is very good and efficient and patient in carrying out such disruptive actions. And they don't hesitate to invest considerable resources in this kind of struggle. Often they don't even need to promote their version of the truth. It is enough for them to sow contradictions and doubts in the population of their enemies.

[@offsetcircle1903]

I'm pretty sure a Russian TV program literally brought on that bastard Pierre Sprey to say how bad it was, not even in russian but in full English, so yeah it's definitely the case that a lot of the hate was due to deliberate misinformation

[@yono367]

alot of the buzz about the F-35 being bad actually originated from a russian news source

[@michaelw6277]

As someone who had maligned the Lightning a lot of years ago my thoughts came from a barrage of reports regarding cost overruns, schedule overruns, performance deficits, and the feeling that it was never going to reach IOC status. I’m very happy to see that it has all come together, finally, but for a time it was reasonable to see the program as an expensive mess.

[@solowingborders3239]

I love these things, the F-35A replaced our legacy Hornets in the RAAF. Oh and you forgot Singapore as a customer, they're acquiring the F-35B; I got a Singapore F-35 patch while at the RSAF museum.

[@KabodaOfficial]

Ah, I'll add that in the description - thanks for letting me know!

[@solowingborders3239]

No worries mate!

[@9HighFlyer9]

I met some of their F-16 pilots at Luke AFB open house. My daughter got to put on a flight suit and have her picture taken in the cockpit of one of the squadron's planes. Now, many years later she's in college and wants to fly fighters. I remember everyone we talked to was incredibly friendly and were great ambassadors for their home country. Plus the 425th FS has one of the coolest patches.

[@PrograError]

IMO as a small island state surrounded by potentials, we don't need the stealth... therefore the F-35, instead we need a F-22 with the sensors ... if the enemy gets thru the "net", we are basically doomed anyways... so we need more interdiction power than stealth offensive power... plus our foreign policy is defensive in nature anyways... not like the US's offensive (same with most buyer of the F-35s, sans japan)

[@solowingborders3239]

@@PrograError Righto, but I feel like you've got the F-22 and F-35 swapped around. The F-35 is the one with the better situational awareness and interdiction ability. The F-22 is a straight up air dominance killing machine with better overall stealth (and a moot point considering it can't be exported). It's also better to have the stealth features; especially as time goes on. As for the US having an "offensive" foreign policy...eh...the US isn't likely to shoot first and nor are it's allies.

[@CocoaBeachLiving]

The folks that criticize the F-35 just need to hate something, anything,especially if it's an American product. How many other fighters were lambasted with scorn until the time came to prove they were worthy of praise. The best part is when the F-35 has the chance to show its superior qualities, those who hated it, will end up loving it, denying they ever said otherwise. Really great video. Well balanced.

[@marseldagistani1989]

I think it's something parroted by the "Reformer" crow. And if you known anything about them, they basically thought that the F15 would have been better if it didn't have Radar had short range and was a day time fighter. Oh and did I mention the lack of Radar? Something that the Soviets put in all their jets starting from the MiG21

[@casematecardinal]

I'll always have a disdain for it. I recognize it's ability but like space marines in warhammer people give it far too much undeserved credit and tend to look at it in a vacuum. We are now in a time in air to air combat where stealth isn the end all be all and like everything else has benefits and drawbacks. We are not at the end of history by any means.

[@casematecardinal]

@@marseldagistani1989 dont lump everyone who is ambivalent about the f35 into the damn reformer camp. Some people just don't like the complacency and willingness to put every egg in the same basket and proudly count chickens before they hatch. Call me a cynic but I always expected for the f35 to have compromises that would be exploited with the use of developing technologies.

[@thelouster5815]

You severely underestimate the mental gymnastics Reformers and Vatniks will take to call the F-35 inferior to something like the SU-27.

[@thelouster5815]

@@casematecardinal *Calls stealth unimportant* *Willfully ignores how stealth is the biggest reason 5th generation fighters exist and blow 4th gen aircraft out of the metaphorical water* Galaxy brain tactician here. I’ll go on a hunch and say you think Russia is doing well in Ukraine too.

[@michaelimbesi2314]

You know, there was another military procurement program that was buying a very technologically advanced platform from a gigantic defense contractor. That program also experienced substantial delays and cost overruns early in its life, and was also controversial, but was also ultimately ordered in relatively large numbers anyway. That platform? The Arleigh Burke class destroyer. Their troubles are now long forgotten and these days, they’re considered to be the trusty old workhorse of the Navy, and a model program for cost efficiency and capability. I think that in 20 years, the F-35 may well be looked back on similarly. It’ll be funny to see if people then talk about how NGAD is too expensive and can’t fight and some journalist writes articles about how expensive it is and how we should just cancel the program and build a simpler, cheaper fighter like the F-35.

[@yia01]

well keep in mind that current in develpment next gen fighter wont be replacing the F35. they will be replacing the F-22 and F-15. F35 will be doing multi-role for decades to come. the next gen fighter will need to be fast enough to do interceptor, agile enough to dog fight, stealth enough for 1st site, 1st shot, and cheap enough to replace both teh f22 and f15 fleet.

[@xfrostyresonance8614]

@@yia01 The next-gen fighter doesn't need to be cheap enough to replace both fleets. It simply has to be cheap enough to allow its wingmen to fill that role.

[@chrisdussault3087]

​@@yia01they're saying the next gen fighter will have more in common with the B2 than a fighter aircraft

[@Stryker2279]

​@@chrisdussault3087they say that in regards to physical design, not performance characteristics. Basically, they're saying it won't ha e a conventional tail, that's it

[@alaxn542yyggghbhbbbbbbbnnj]

Fighters are useless now, I can develop a cheaper better way for air supremacy and area denial using current technology in a way both china and USA have not thought off.

[@_Coffee4Closers]

Thank you for making one of the first honest videos about the F35. I have been fighting this fight for over a decade, and constantly after David Axe published his laundry list of MISREPRESENTATIONS and outright LIES of what test pilot and engineering reports stated over at WiB. Since then I have had to argue with idiots non stop about things like, "it can't fly in the rain", "it can't dogfight", "it got beat by a block 30 two bag F16", "it costs too much", "it can't fly in hot weather", "stealth is no good because the S400 has magical powers that defy physics", "one crashed", "a man I knows cousin, said that his friend knew a man that talked to a pilot, that said it sucked".... on and on and on. The pile of bull shit for the past decade has been deep and never ending. One thing I would add about "top speed"... people yammer about an F16 being able to go Mach 2 (a dubious claim) while the "published" F35 top speed is MACH 1.6 and think this is meaningful. They read number on the internet without understanding what these numbers mean. The published speeds are for a "NAKED" F16 with zero weapons, stanchions, fuel tanks, etc. However, an F16 will need a Targeting Pod, a couple of sidewinders, and a couple of JDAMS to be worth anything in combat. Now ask these idiots how fast an F16 loaded for combat can go, and see the stupid look on their face, when you explain that it will be slower than MACH 1.0, while the internally armed F35 will still be cruising along at MACH 1.6. So in reality the F35 is WAY faster then any F16.

[@IsaacKuo]

Ah yes, the S400 with magical powers that defy physics. This was sure a crazy week for the S400's reputation. I mean, it's one thing to get blown up by a missile. These things happen. But the Ukrainians recorded live VIDEO of it getting blown up, plainly from a drone flying overhead. To be clear, it wasn't just trolling - recording live video is militarily useful for assessing damage and confirming the target wasn't just a decoy (much less kaboom). But it sure was awesome trolling also.

[@ricdale7813]

Agree completely. I remember the F4 Phantom guys in the 70's freaking out about the F16 when it came along. Same arguments and we all know how that turned out.

[@bluemarlin8138]

The F-16 can still go supersonic with a combat load, but not by much, especially at low altitude. The F-35 can hit its top speed in a standard configuration, and is still low supersonic in “beast mode,” just like the F-16.

[@_Coffee4Closers]

@@bluemarlin8138 Yea, I know every design point and cycle deck of the F35 program...

[@24YOA]

People hate excellence. People hate rooting for the best. Especially if it's new.

[@markbrisec3972]

I always knew that the F-35 will be recognized as the most advanced fighter jet of it's era. The F-35 definitely had its share of problems. From the massive cost overruns to multiyear delays to problems with many untested and new technologies installed on the jet.. But they've all been mostly ironed out.. I remember the moment when I realized that the F-35 is a game changer and truly the master of the sky. And that moment was when Israeli Air Force took delivery of the F-35 and inducted them into their squadrons..

[@ZionistWorldOrder]

yeah but since israel is oh vey so very special, they and they alone have the open source version. All others are allies but israel is special 🤮 so their versions are the most useful complete version besides the usa. For them its worth it, for the poor rest its a scam.

[@TimvanderVelden-dp3fs]

@@ZionistWorldOrder The Israelis have just gotten normal A versions, with some changes which they made themselves. They don't get 'special treatment'.

[@bluemarlin8138]

@@ZionistWorldOrderLOL, wrong. The US does downgrade a few export systems (with the Abrams being the most notable), but the F-35 is NOT one of them. The F-35 was a joint project between the US and about 10 other countries, and the partnership agreement included that they’d all get the same systems that the US gets. (If the US thought it couldn’t trust a partner, it would just kick it out of the program like it did to Turkey when they bought S-400). The participants had the option of including some domestic systems in their purchase orders, but only Israel did so (presumably to integrate with its domestic missile defense systems). Everyone else was more than happy with the production version, and already have a lot of US systems that are easily integrated with F-35. I realize from your handle that you’re obviously biased against Israel and anything it does, but try to at least partially base your propaganda on facts next time.

[@ZionistWorldOrder]

@@bluemarlin8138 you telling me the old news as if it were some feat is the real lol here buddy, it seems you have no idea what israel gets, the name does imply bias, as well as decades long interest in the matter and related topics. I will provide you with yet another news you seem ignorant of. The tanks israel gets from usa... theyre corrected for fatal faults when the us versions are not. During second Iraq war 2003-? i even believe these might be abrams tanks, the then classified report showed fuel tank placement was a fatal hazard with examples of how ieds and anti tank weapons hit there made most damage. What did israelis do? They demanded mod versions with the problem solved. Did the us get that upgrade? Not for the years since then that i bothered keeping track. Israel is chosen, they own the usa the fed and anything worth owning or controlling. Usa gives more to israel yearly than the entirety of continent Africa combined...

[@ZionistWorldOrder]

@@bluemarlin8138 Türkiye kicked itself out of being scammed by a fighter that wont lock on your enemies unless the us says go.. we dont need remote controlled fighters thank you very much. We already make lots of your crap, been subcontracting for airbus and boeing and making parts for f35 even after leaving the programme.. we will make our own and become selfreliant rather than ask the enemy for bullets.

[@jnbfrancisco]

I was an F111 avionics technician and instructor from 1970 to 1980. The F111 received very similar criticism. I thought the criticism was mostly due to ignorance of the goals of the design and comparing it to older designs that did not have the very complicated systems that would be required to penitrate a sofisticated enemy's defences. There were several other groups that were unhappy because of the contractor that was selected. Many were unhappy with the cost and most of those are unhappy with any money spent on military defence.

[@christopherpardell4418]

As I understand it, the F-35 normally flies with a system activated that makes it readily visible on radar, both for navigational safety, and to keep its full stealth capabilities from being analyzed. It only engages full stealth capability when on a mission requiring stealth. So when folks claim it can be detected by a SAM system from 50 miles away, I’m pretty sure they have no idea how often they have not detected them at all. Besides, Russian SAM systems have certainly proven themselves to be pretty easy to thwart.

[@piotrd.4850]

How to tell you don't know s..t without telling that you don't know s...t. Stealth - unless pushed to extreme in platforms like B-21 - has two purposes: make mission planning and EW SOMEWHAT easier and weapon lock somewhat harder. F-117s were being detected during Gulf War by British destroyers with long wave radars. This "system activated" is two fold - one it is called TRANSPONDER (most aircraft have them) and 2nd is just piece of specially shaped metal, called corner reflector. Coming back to RCS: it depends on angle, power balance and band/frequency as well as receiver noise (that's why GaN is big thing) and processing capabilities. F-35 with external stores watched from the side/bottom is very likely to be detectable to releatively modern radar at said distance. It's TARGETING it effectively that's going to be challenge. PS: Easy to thwart? For one, Soviet era Air Defence saved Ukraine, as well as saved Russia which - due to organisational deficiencies - wasn't able to use time bought by otherwise capable systems. Really, Soviet/Russian hardware is well known until this point, including piss-poor post sales support and contrary to stereotype, complex maintenance. But when used by people who are not mentally Russians, it usually proves to be more than adequate. For two - In comparison to what? Sadly, we will never have - much less know results of - confrontation between clean configuration of F-35 and Patriot LTAMDS coupled with PAC-3 MSE. Because, result of confrontation with F-15 / Legion are known and, shall we say, not all favourable ;)

[@AA-xo9uw]

Luneburg lens reflectors are mounted to assist in PPI RADAR reflectivity.

[@Frozander]

@@piotrd.4850 No need to get mad and assume things. It is talking about lens deflectors that can be mounted on the plane to hide its real RCS.

[@gregparrott]

as one of your commenters noted and identified by name, a Luneburg lens is physically attached to the F-35 prior to performing non stealth operations en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luneburg_lens One downside seems to be that it can't be removed in flight.

[@christopherpardell4418]

@@gregparrott As I understood it, the radar reflector was deployable in flight, and could be retracted within the stealth skin like missile stores and the doors on the in flight refueling nozzle. I hadn’t heard that it was externally fixed. Seems to me if it can’t be retracted, then it absolutely can be jettisoned.

[@jdiluigi]

If this was a presentation given in an auditorium. I would be the guy starting the slow clap that turns into a standing ovation.

[@williambrasky3891]

Fighter stealth is more about preventing target lock. Detection is important, but secondary. Everything you said stands, just felt like that bit was missing.

[@concordegaming5037]

I heard about this from "The Insane Engineering of the F-35B." No plane will ever be completely invisible to radar, it's important to delay detection for as long as possible until it's too late for the enemy to retaliate. I believe it's a similar concept for the SR-71, which wasn't even remotely a stealth aircraft, but it was so fast it might as well have been, because by the time the aircraft was detected by the enemy, it was already on its way out of range.

[@chrisbacon3071]

I’m so glad my country (Britain) is buying/bought these planes! 😍

[@cipsahoy9639]

I guess the harrier was such a cool aircraft the US thought it might repay the UK with a modernized version

[@ahhmm5381]

I wonder how long until it is obsolete.....

[@chrisbacon3071]

@@ahhmm5381 I give 20 years before it need an update.

[@ahhmm5381]

@@chrisbacon3071 Or until it comes across a stealthy air superiority fighter

[@ChadwickTheChad]

​@@ahhmm5381No other nation even comes close, so clearly, that would take decades.

[@janizzkar]

The best indication for how good the F35 is reading what has been publicized of the Finnish HX program. The F35 came in first or shared top score in all scenarios that were simulated and achieved highest overall score. In the overall capability scoring F35 got a 4.47, the 2nd place plane got 3.81 (apparently this was rumoured to be the F18 super horned and growler offer, gripen coming 3rd and rafale/typhoon failing to get to the latter stages of eval.). The passable requirement was a score of 4.0, only the f35 reached that. There is so much more info in the publication of the programs results. But its been the most transparent, unbiased assessment of all the planes western countries are offered. The f35 bleww all the others out of the water. Many even from terms of cost when everything was put into one (industry things etc). Finland chose everything simply from what performed logically the best. there was lobbying attempts but those have no effect in decisions here in finland , that was prevented from the start and is not a culture here to let lobbying affect decisions in the end like that.

[@Chameleonis]

In Czech Republic was debate if we should buy F-35 or Gripen - E. Army and current government voted for F-35 to buy in 2027 when we will get rid of leased older Gripens. And I see its a great option when pro-russian/populist political parties are mad as hell. lol Cant wait to see 3 F-35A from US and 2 F-35B from UK in the skies above Ostrava on NATO Days later this September

[@peterfireflylund]

Maybe some of those Gripen will find their way to Ukraine soon?

[@Chameleonis]

@@peterfireflylund I dont know, thats up to Sweden/SAAB. Those Gripens are temporary solution and dont belong to Czech Air Force. But id like to see them fight for Ukraine.

[@2.Cuzzzz]

F-35 is going to be nothing compared to the next gen gripen…not the E

[@darylbas8216]

I feel like the F-35’s reputation has been largely rehabilitated. Over the last few years I’ve seen many “it’s fantastic” and a few “it’s a decent jack of all trades” videos and articles, and almost none “it’s an overpriced boondoggle”. I rememberer that, once upon a time, this latter take dominated almost all information one could readily find on the F-35. It’s the complete opposite now.

[@MrSteve8511]

That is because LM pays to control content. This started 10 years ago when 35 failures and set backs were killing public support.

[@darylbas8216]

@@MrSteve8511 So, you’re saying the F-35 is a bad plane, but Lockheed Martin has been paying people off (KZbinrs, military experts, whole countries) to say otherwise?

[@MrSteve8511]

@darylbas8216 absolutely. Has been for years. If the F35 was a great as all the fanboys say the evidence otherwise wouldn't be everywhere. The airforce new air dominace fighter was only pushed after we learned that the 35 wouldn't be what was promised. The F15x models would never be considered. The airframe of every legacy fighter has been extended due to the lack of progress on the 35... The F16 block 70 is cheaper and more capable than the 35 in all areas except stealth.

[@darylbas8216]

@@MrSteve8511 So, did we also not land on the moon? I’m sorry, but there’s so little evidence for your point of view it’s kind of farcical really. Some of the things you said aren’t even close to correct and others are just fabricated, immediately putting this theory of yours into question. Like the new air dominance fighter having anything to do with the F-35. That would be kind of tough as it’s not slated to replace the F-35, but rather the F-22. The F-15EXs, what you called F15x are not being considered as replacements either. Rather those are being considered for working in tandem with the F-35 as missiles trucks or when survivability of the airframe is not an issue, such as after the F-35s have achieved air dominance. Furthermore, the latest blocks F-16 are cheaper than the latest block F-35A, but only by about 10 million dollars. Even if the F-35 did nothing better than the F-16 (which simply isn’t true) getting a true stealth fighter for 10 million dollars more than a completely non stealth one is a heck of a bargain. I’m not pulling my information from videos on the internet, or random news articles either. I’m getting it from press releases and publishings made by the Air Force itself. So, if you want to claim that Lockheed Martin is running some kind of scam here, you have to claim the military of not just the US, but multiple other countries as well, is in on it. That is just so far fetched that it is essentially a conspiracy theory on the level of the moon landings, or Roswell. I suppose it isn’t impossible, but I see no evidence to support any of those, and certainly not this one either. Simply put, all the information available from actually reliable sources (pilots, defense agencies, experts) suggests the F-35 was an extremely expensive program which did, indeed, have a tumultuous life cycle, but which ultimately produced a fantastic platform. This isn’t just Lockheed Martin saying this, it’s everybody who has ever touched the plane since it entered service across dozen of disparate air forces. I mean, the preponderance of the evidence is overwhelming, making your claims extremely dubious, at best.

[@MrSteve8511]

@darylbas8216 say what you want. 70% of the F35 fleet is a work in progress. After 20 years it is still not what we promised. Except for the fact we sell this to anyone who wants one. AND then we sell the weapons and support to both sides of anyone's war. All the things I mentioned were a direct result of the 35s shortcomings. I worked on flight test on 35 for years and all of us had misgivings on what was happening. It was all political theater to push and pump this jet.

[@Red-238]

If there were a anime about jets, the f-35 would have been one hell of MC with its character development and struggles.

[@sorahidaka9977]

How much anime you watch per day lol

[@major_kukri2430]

​@@sorahidaka9977yes

[@daltonv5206]

You're not wrong and I kinda wanna see it now

[@mikael.wilhelm]

There *is* an anime about fighter jets! It's called "Girly Air Force", and it's ranked 6.14 on myanimelist, which means it's barely watchable (if your standards are low to begin with). The star of the show is a JAS-39F Gripen, because it's small frame makes it kawaii. She is joined by a F-15J and a RF-4EJ. No F-35's were harmed in this anime though, presumably because its bulky fuselage is not kawaii.

[@Arcalargo]

The F-35 should be a set of triplets.

[@Xenomorphine]

Very few, if any, opponents COULD out-turn it. Video footage proves it's equivelant to an F-16 in fully clean 'airshow' mode - which would have to strap on external fuel tanks, sensor pods and weaopns, just to come up to the same standard as what the F-35 internally has. It's actually the only aircraft in the world without thrust-vectoring which can replicate some of the moves the F-22 performs. One simulated mission was very telling, in regards to this. Might have been Red Flag. OPFOR piltos knew they wouldn't have a chance against them, but they assumed they could achieve the mission objectives by going suicidal and 'mission killing' the F-35: Engaging them so that they would be forced to jettison their air-to-ground stores, leaving them incapable of striking the target. During the debrief, they were confused as to how the F-35 managed to do precisely that and asked the pilot why he didn't do as they had assumed he would. He said he was flying with internal JDAM through their entire fight. The weight of it had such a negligable influence, that he didn't feel the need to physically get rid of it. So, after dealing with them, he continued to the target and went home. In short, the F-35 effectively has a good deal of immunity from being mission killed, even in the face of quantity-over-quality strategies.

[@apolloaero]

To add to your point on speed. The F-35 can reach mach 1.6 with 2 2,000 lb JDAMs and 2 AMRAAMS. Other aircraft can't reach their top speed, even with just an A2A loadout. The F-35 suffers no additional drag as long as it remains in stealth mode

[@moonasha]

I always say, the F-35 is better thought of as an attack aircraft. It just so happens to perform air superiority so well, because the competition is so bad.

[@skull1161]

So instead of saying that the F-35 is just better than everything you're saying that everything is just worse. Is that not the same thing?

[@arthurlau98]

​@@skull1161well, I interpreted his answer as F35 is better at air superiority when US is not even trying. Inmagine what they get when they actually built one for air superiority? NGAD is going to be amazing.

[@thelouster5815]

@@skull1161 Bruh, look at Russian aircraft. Calling it a competition is insulting to competitions. The F-35 is so far ahead of Russia’s “aircraft” it’s like Jon Jones taking on an anorexic teenage bully. Deletion is the best case scenario for that bully.

[@dwizzleusa4202]

Good is good, real stealth is stealth..

[@prettyformality137]

lets also the mention that when combat loaded, the F-35 actually has a better turn rate than other contemporaries when fitted with missiles (cause people only compare turn rates when jets dont have missiles on em for some reason, missiles cause drag yall, the F-35 doesnt have that problem ((internal weapon bays)))

[@IsaacKuo]

I used to be one of the F-35 skeptics. For me, it came down to cost. The perception was that the F-35 was hopelessly over budget and that it was impossible to fix the cost problem. Well, they were wrong about that. Flipping the cost issue has, to me, changed the F-35 from a cross to bear into a no-brainer (even before considering the extra capabilities compared to all alternatives).

[@xfrostyresonance8614]

The federal government may make stupid decisions with money, but the F-35 program was specifically designed to create a cost-effective, export capable fighter that could replace the Raptor in a lot of ways. If it didn't do that, even Uncle Sam would realize it's a good idea to pull the plug.

[@DefaultProphet]

@@saquist NGAD is explicitly meant to be and I quote “an order of magnitude” more stealthy than current designs so not sure where you’re getting that belief.

[@DefaultProphet]

@@saquist F117 used RAM. F-35’s offense isn’t just rcs.

[@DefaultProphet]

@@saquist Have you with any stealth plane?

[@IsaacKuo]

@@saquist What you're saying makes no sense. First you say you believe NGAD will be less dependent on stealth, but then you say losing the tail stabilizers will be important (which means sacrificing maneuverability in favor of leaning all in on stealth). And regardless of whatever you think is true or not about RAM coating details, both topographical stealth and RAM coatings are means to achieve the same thing - reduced radar cross section (i.e. stealth). You seem to think that NGAD will lean on topographical stealth - which definitely involves sacrificing other characteristics such as maneuverability, speed, and payloads in favor of stealth - while bizarrely thinking the F35 relies on heavy stealth coating, which does not involve sacrificing other characteristics such as maneuverability, speed, and payloads. Just makes no sense at all. Anyone can take a fast maneuverable jet and apply a coating onto it. It will remain fast and maneuverable. It won't be particularly stealthy, though, especially not compared to the F-35. But if you take an aircraft and lose the tail stabilizers, the resulting aircraft will simply not be as maneuverable, assuming it can still fly at all. And designing in S curved intakes to reduce intake radar profile involves increased drag and reduced performance, lowering speed, climb, and (indirectly) maneuverability. We don't know much about NGAD, but your statements don't make sense no matter what NGAD is like. Your basic premise might even be valid if we look at F-15EX, which honestly is a platform that can't rely on stealth. But even then, the specific arguments you're making just seem nonsensical.

[@artnull13]

Can’t wait for your T-14 video 😉

[@KabodaOfficial]

Keep your eyes peeled!

[@djzoodude]

The Armata?

[@ChadwickTheChad]

It'll be good comedy.

[@hydrolifetech7911]

A detailed review of T-14: It's vaporware!

[@killian9314]

Thank you, Dalekmk14 had covered the Yak141 lift system myth a while ago, but you can bring awareness to a new audience.

[@the_dudeguy]

There's hate with every new fighter program, this is just the latest in the cycle. You look at the history of not just fighters, but most aircraft in the US inventory and you'll see many were plagued with criticism too. I think the internet being widespread during the F-35's development helped amplify its critics in a way other programs didn't have.

[@S1LVERF15]

That “COME ON COME ON” clip alone is worth the 30 min doc (which is fantastic)

[@tigerpjm]

It's one thing to say the S-400 can detect the F-35 from 50km away.... maybe it can. But detecting something and getting a solution accurate enough (a targeting solution) to fire a missile at it are two very, very different things.

[@trezapoioiuy]

If they even dare to turn it on knowing F35 might be around

[@DanielDos2]

Yeah this really isn’t the gotcha people think it is. The S-400 will turn on and then be seal clubbed by a HARM shot from an F-15. Because they don’t just send one plane alone with no missiles. That’s only a scenario in the mind of an idiot.

[@0XFVCKS]

KZbin finally recommended something good. What a great video, man. Subbed!

[@KabodaOfficial]

Thank you!

[@srinitaaigaura]

As per test pilot Billie Flynn, the F-35's actual kill ratio in Red Flag for the debut was 78:1, not 20:1. And that was block 3i, far more restricted than Block 3F and Block 4.

[@user-vw1vf5cw7d]

It's difficult to believe such a claim

[@daltonv5206]

​@@user-vw1vf5cw7dwhen you understand how all the systems of the f35 work together and then understand that every f35 in the air can link what they see in real time. Plus stealth. And compare that to what the opposition is flying and how limited legacy systems are in comparison... It's not that outlandish. In fact it's only going to get more skewed with NGAD and block upgrades for f35.

[@user-vw1vf5cw7d]

@@daltonv5206 Even the F-15A had a 10:1 kill ratio against the F-4C and the F-5E and this was considered at the extraordinary. Now telling me that achieved 78:1 having the same weapons ( AIM-120D ? AIM-9X ? ) despite being an inferior platform (with this F-104 like wing loading) is crazy. Even if we admit that they had an almost 100% kill rate in BVR kills , at the end some opponents would survive to mix in visual range ( in a real life scenario, not a 2 vs 2 ....) . Possibly that 78:1 was achieved against A-4s of Draken international. The fun fact is that most of us so called "haters" we would never doubt a 10:1 kill ratio against F-15Es or F-16 block 50s however this orchestrated campaign and the fake hype for the F-35 has become so ridiculous, clearly targeted to silence critics inside US (they have to justify all these billions spent) , to promote sales among allies and to intimidate enemies

[@LeviBulger]

The best thing about rhe F35 is that each one gets exponentially better with the more F35s flying along with it

[@rowanyuh6326]

Rip F-32😭 never produced never forgotten 😭 almost got a Crusader IV 😭

[@KabodaOfficial]

Thanks for watching guys - Sorry this one took so long. I've got a lot of comments about things I address in the video, so for the haters, please before writing another F-35 hate comment, just watch the video through - it would be appreciated!

[@stuartjobling9360]

Well said 👏 👌 👍

[@aaronwalsh8469]

Most of the f35 hate originated from Russian propaganda.

[@robot336]

I was an F35 hater , it took me yrs to realise just how good it is and I'm still playing catch up .

[@a24396]

The F-35 is an absolute beast! Its record has proven its worth and the only people that are consistently opposed to the F-35 at this point seem to be intentional in their dishonesty.

[@ToTheNines87368]

I’m not a hater, love the plane, but being an impulsive shit I can sympathize with commenting before finishing youtube videos 😂

[@liesdamnlies3372]

But but but, Pierre Sprey said on RT…

[@TrinityCore60]

…who was a notorious liar speaking on a Russian propaganda channel. Invalid argument.

[@kathrynck]

You actually missed some of it's positive qualities ;) Like the LPI characteristics of the radar (and it's upcoming gallium upgrade). It's really out of this world. Leveraging it's 3-D realtime virtual sense of space to keep a narrow 'cone' of air with a hostile aircraft "blacked out" from outgoing radar emissions, even while doing aggressive maneuvering. Not to mention it's burst & frequency hopping options. The EW capabilities also, you do mention them, but I'd wager that 99.99999% of people without a security clearance can really appreciate what a dominant feature it is. Or the synergy it has with AIM-120D and SDB II ordinance particularly. SDB II's have a range of 50+ km, without producing any heat or smoke trail, have 3 forms of redundant guidance, and cost no more than a cheap Maverick missile. I think many people may not notice in your video that being "on an F-35's 6-oclock" means the F-35 can still shoot at you. It really deconstructs the entire dogfight concept. Some also point out the thrust to weight ratio in a very "on paper" manner. Fully fueled it doesn't look great. But... an F-16 with ALL THREE drop tanks, carries about 12,000 lbs of fuel. While the F-35 carries 20,000 lbs of fuel "clean". Basically it's "drop tanks" are on the inside. If you compare the F-35 to other aircraft and simply stipulate that all compared aircraft shall have 400km of range worth of fuel, the F-35 suddenly looks very, very good. It's designed to take off with a T:W ratio of around 0.8, reach it's mission objective with a T:W ratio of about 1.0, and land with a T:W ratio of about 1.2. Much like most of the worlds best, most maneuverable fighter aircraft. But without strapping drop tanks to it. Meanwhile, on the flip side, you can _add_ drop tanks to it, for truly jaw-dropping range. Mind you, the tanks have attached pylons, so that when dropped, the aircraft returns to a stealthy configuration "on the fly" (literally). To be fair, on the issue of stealth, the proliferation of IRST systems has "somewhat" changed the game. But the F-35 has the best IR sensor suite there currently is, and has done as much as humanly possible to limit it's IR signature with it's coatings, high-bypass engine, speed limit, etc. It's a slimmer margin of advantage in the IR space. Because jet planes are unavoidably warm, it's a less dominant lead there. But it is at the top of that food chain currently. And it's an area which the F-22 badly neglects by comparison. Granted, where there's clouds, or rain, IR shows it's limitations very quickly, and the F-35's advantages grow dramatically. Oh, also on the issue of situational awareness... one thing nobody ever seems to consider is the concept of having a visual range engagement at night. The 360 degree fused sensor suite and the HMDS give the F-35 a dramatic advantage there. The F-35 isn't just "not all that bad", it's "monstrously good". I would rate the F-35 as being on-par with the introduction of the jet engine, in terms of the weight it carries in the global balance of air power. If you've been following military aircraft procurement for a long time, a pattern emerges. Where there are "elements" within the media (and within congress), which become increasingly hostile towards a platform the more potent and effective it is. Meanwhile lauding obsolete or ineffective platforms with praise. I wish I could say it's merely the clickbait phenomenon, but it seems to be a deeper, more unsavory problem than that. Anyway, my bread was buttered by the X-32, the X-35 was "the other team". And I would say that we deserved to lose that competition, and Lockheed hit a walk-off grand slam on the Lightning II. Now if you want to talk about the YF-23 vs YF-22, I'd say the airforce completely bungled the selection process. But the Lightning II? Just phenomenal. Honestly I find the idea that it's available for export at all, to be puzzling and somewhat nerve-racking, from a security point of view. About the only time you wouldn't want to be in the F-35 in an engagement, would be in a "guns only" fight, with an F-22 or Su-35S (in daylight, with good visibility). It wouldn't be a sitting duck, but it's the only scenario where it wouldn't have the advantage. Can't wait to see it to get block IV, especially the sidekick missile racks for +50% missile carry internally. The GE XA-100 engine option will be interesting too, I'm curious how that will compare with the updated engine core for the PW F135.

[@piotrd.4850]

When export and production sharing for F-16 has been afterthought, F-35 was built around it, and without it there wouldn't be F-35 AT ALL, much less sustainabe one. YF-23 as otherwordly as it has been and still is, made sense only with two circumstances: selecting YF-120 GE engine as well and moving with development of recently revealed weapons bay planned originally for around 2020, with modular setup and capcity up to 20 not-yet-avaialbe missiles. (Oh, and being built in reasonable, 300+ number). Even recent articles about Alaska excercises mentioned that F-22 ("super F-15") still somewhat lack range and endurance on supercruise and discussion about Meteor or similar missile in USAF ends with USA needing not better missiles BUT MORE OF THEM PER AIRCRAFT. Here, original configuration of YF-23 had been at disadvantage. PS: my money is on GE loosing. Again.

[@kathrynck]

@@piotrd.4850 YF-23's single monolithic weapons bay was substantially larger than the F-22's. Both in sheer cubic feet, and in "usable space", allowing for a wide range of weapons to be mounted in a wide range of configurations. For the ATF competition, it was shown to carry 3 AIM-120's and 2 AIM-9's in a very simple rig. But this actually left over half of the bay empty, utilizing only the bottom-most portion near the bay doors. The plans at Northrup & McD-D for a final production version, was to use 2 or 3 vertical "clips" of 4 AIM-120's each (staggered for fin clearance). And to add a small bay just under & behind the cockpit area, for 2 AIM-9's. So it would have been 8-12 amraams, and 2 nine-X's. It would also have had capacity for a rotary system for bomb loads, or room enough for truly large weapons systems like 2500+ lb bunker buster ordinance. There was also talk of a 'recon' version with that cavernous space filled with fuel for really outlandish range. There was a LOT of space in there. The loadout of the prototype was just a "display model". Also, the YF-23's proposed "carrier variant" would have been much more feasible than the YF-22's carrier capable proposal (which ended up getting canceled). The 23 just had so much more combined wing & lifting body area to work with. As for the engines, both GE and PW make great engines. Whether for the YF-23 or the F-35. The only reason the F-23 would have likely used GE engines, is because those went faster on less fuel "in" that airframe. The plane itself could use either, and there were 2 prototypes of each plane, each with a PW and a GE setup. So I wouldn't characterize the YF-23 as being _limited_ to the GE engine. But more just that the particular airflow of that prototype let the GE engine outshine the PW engine. While the reverse was true for the YF-22. YF-23 was faster, more fuel efficient, had a lower RCS to a noteworthy degree, was _drastically_ more stealthy in IR, and would have had quite a bit more payload flexibility. And as far as maneuvering goes, the all-moving tail surfaces were each the size of an F-5's wing. You'd have to be going crazy slow to see any drop-off in maneuvering authority (vs thrust vectoring). Also, the program requirements kept getting changed, to make sure both planes met the requirements. For the 22, that meant they could catch up. For the 23, that meant they had to go back and undo already designed components. Ultimately the flying prototypes of the 23 had about 1,000 lbs of 'thrust reversers' in the tail, which were removed from the contract requirement so the YF-22 could compete. So effectively, the 23 outperformed even with 1000 lbs of sandbags as a handicap in it's back pocket. The YF-23 was effectively a gen 5.5 plane, that showed up to a gen 5 competition, and lost because the test was rigged to make sure everyone got a participation trophy, and the F-22 promised to be marginally cheaper. It could be argued that I am biased. Still, I don't think I'm _that_ biased. The X-32 deserved to lose to the X-35, and I think Lockheed's engineers did an absolutely stellar job on the 35 (program management aside). Although I'd argue that's partly because Boeing wouldn't listen to any input from Phantom Works. Even with that taken into account though, the F-35 is a terrific design. Anyway, as for the F135 core upgrade vs the XA-100, there's pros & cons to each. The XA-100 will add range (about 20%), more flexibility (more gradient) in power output, and in fuel-sipping mode, it'll be more iR-stealthy. It's also likely that in mid-tier power output mode, the plane would be able to do sustained supercruise. Really more of an air superiority feature, but very nice to have as an option, even if it removes that fuel efficiency perk. That's a lot of pros. On the other hand, the F135 is well proven, the maintenance training, tooling, & supply lines already exist, and the core upgrade should give it between 47,000 and 49,000 lbs of max thrust (compared to the XA-100's 44,000). That means achieving a T:W ratio of '1' sooner in a sortie (without dumping fuel), more acceleration, and a higher top speed. Also due to pre-existing economy of scale, it'll likely be cheaper. And traditionally, PW engines are simpler (less moving parts) than GE engines. Although sometimes there are interesting advantages to a more complex design. I really don't know which they'll pick. Could build a strong argument for either engine. If I _had_ to guess, I'd agree that PW probably has the inside track, just due to the economics of it. I'm certain there will at least be a test plane flying the XA-100 though, and I'm really curious how well it'll work. Also, the Navy, with their thirst for range, might buck the herd, and go with XA-100's exclusively for the C model. PS: definitely 300 should have been a minimum for any air superiority plane procurement. 100% The effects of economy of scale are actually more drastic than most media outlets imply. Your whole R&D, and an enormous amount of planning & investment in factory set-up, all gets bundled into the per-unit cost. Most drastic example being the B-2, which went over-budget to about 600m per plane (if they buy 100), but getting procurement clipped to 20 drove the price up to over 2 billion per plane. And then there's the economy of scale for the ongoing economics of spare parts or upgrades... And the USAF _needs_ at minimum 240 units to do all of the air superiority work they want to do, in all the places they want to do it. Allow for a little bit of peacetime (or wartime) attrition, and dips in readiness rate? 300 becomes a good minimum. 190 units was just bonkers.

[@daltonv5206]

I could listen to you talk jets all day 🍻 I can't wait to see what NGAD cooks up. I have a feeling it's going to be a bit unconventional

[@kathrynck]

@@daltonv5206 I'm curious about NGAD too! I'm not in the loop on that. So I'm waiting on the theatrical release too hehe. I _think_ they'll prioritize range & supercruise. And be more stealthy. Which probably all means "less of an acrobat". But that's just a guess :)

[@yakymua]

Russian disninfo ops have been active online since 2008… do you think they’d have an interest in getting the F35 program cancelled?

[@zacharyramsli8002]

One of the most absurd criticisms of the F35 I've heard; is that it can't carry targeting pods. DAS/EOTS be like: Am I a joke to you, no you're the joke.

[@piotrd.4850]

1. Why can't it ? 2. Litening+SAR - there are scenarios where specialized pods are still useful regardles of what you have on board.

[@deathdragon2283]

The station for the gun pod has already been proposed for use with a wide range of external pods

[@REktSigMa]

Fighter jets are going from Dog Fighters to Battlefield manager. F-35 is a jet that closely resembles an officer jet. Like data links makes the f-35 like a mini-AWACS. F-35 can track friendly units and separate them from the enemy units on everyone that is connected to its data link screens. F-35 can target air and ground targets at the same time and fire at targets that is behind the F-35.

[@robertsneddon731]

There was a report of a pilot, taxying to the runway for his first flight in an F-35 who suddenly realised his plane was informing him of everything flying for two hundred miles around him, speed, vector, aircraft type. Some of this was sensor fusion from the systems on the aircraft, the rest of it was data links from other aircraft, ground radars etc. It was all invisible, he didn't have to decode symbols on three different displays to figure out what was going on, the software on the plane was doing all this for him.

[@americankid7782]

From what I have seen about the current programs we are running to replace the F-35, they are going to be twin seater aircraft controlling drones while minimizing the Radar cross section even more. It’s going to be wild.

[@REktSigMa]

@@americankid7782 Like It is hard to understand Lockheed Martin's Train of thoughts between the F-22 and the F-35. They really don't make any sense in terms of next gen fighters. It is almost like they both belong to 2 different countries.

[@REktSigMa]

@@americankid7782 Lowering radar cross section is too late at this point, like the front half of the F-35 would have to be made smaller in every area. It is almost like the F-35 was built with stealth low on the list of purposes.

[@REktSigMa]

@@americankid7782 I don't think the USA cares about Stealth anymore tbh. Like with all the electronic warfare now days, anti-radiation missiles, not to mention, the F-35 connects with every unit in that battlespace and creates a full 3-D image of the entire battlespace for unmatched Situational Awareness. and the F-35 pilot has Augmented Reality can see the entire battlespace inside his helmet.

[@RealVladPutin]

I flew the f350 econoline van over a bump one time, the closest I ever got to flying the f35.

[@Spectre578]

I was a big hater of this jet because of that report where the F-35 maneuvered like barge, but then I found out the reason it did was it was a pre-production aircraft with electronicly limited controls. No s*** I couldn't turn! Since then, this aircraft has grown on me. Though I would love to see an f22 built with all the new tech the Lighting has. Even if just to flex over the Russians and Chinese.

[@SoloRenegade]

the Yak-141 used a method patented in the US before the Yak-141 was ever even a concept.

[@verttikoo2052]

You know the greatest Ruzzian innovator? Us Patrekoff?

[@SoloRenegade]

@@verttikoo2052 Nope, never heard of him. Was he good at innovating crap?

[@verttikoo2052]

@@SoloRenegade Us Patrekoff (sorry the typo k not g) = United States Patent and Trademark Office

[@SoloRenegade]

@@verttikoo2052 lol, that would actually make a great joke, using the USPTO as a sort of russian "name".

[@verttikoo2052]

@@SoloRenegade Regus Patoff is another great inventor 🥳🤭

[@Dv087]

You've convinced me... I'll take one in gray and one in blue. Let me know when you're ready for my credit card number

[@ryanreedgibson]

Damn, dude! Great video! YT has been recommending me small creators lateley and I'm loving it!

[@SarahMaywalt]

With the focus on flight the American military has and the budget it's willing to spend on it, I don't know why anyone would think the US would produce this many planes for itself if the F-35 were really a disappointment.

[@DefaultProphet]

Good point. Similarly countries that don’t have the budget wouldn’t be building aircraft carriers if they were really so vulnerable as some are claiming.

[@SoloRenegade]

the per-unit price of the F-35 is now cheaper than most 4th gen fighters.

[@larsjrgensen5975]

Maybe, but the engine problems needs to be fixed with extra maintenance or a total replacement of the engine, when a new engine design is ready. The stealth coating and general maintenance of the aircraft is a lot higher then most alternatives.

[@b.c.2281]

​@@larsjrgensen5975Engine issues aside, I think it's understandable to look at the coating issue as a ridiculous expense in peacetime. In an actual conflict scenario, maintaining that coating could mean fewer pilots and aircraft lost in combat vs. an older airframe without those capabilities. Cost seems worth it in that frame of reference.

[@larsjrgensen5975]

@@b.c.2281 The ready/availability rate of the F-35 is still lower then a F-16 or Gripen, because of the higher maintenece of coating and engine, so in situations where a F-16 or Gripen is good enough, the cost of the mission is about half of the F-35 and more aircraft are available to carry out the missions.

[@waynesworldofsci-tech]

Great video. Sums up the details perfectly. Thanks for your hard work putting this together.

[@craigkdillon]

Personally, I think the hate came from two things --- 1. sticker shock, and 2. Ignorance of stealth. The public was stunned by the price tag. When coupled with the lack of performance, many people thought we were being scammed. It was slower than the F-15. It carried less than the F-15. It was dumpier looking than the F-15., And, it was several times more expensive. So, many hated it. Not understanding stealth, people did not know that it first took a flight of planes to knock out radars, before an F-15 strike can occur. F-15's could be spotted before the enemy was in range, and so had a higher probability of loss. Basically, one F-35 takes the place of several F-15's, F-16s, and A-9s. They are cheaper actually.

[@MarxismIStreason]

Much thanks from a fellow fan of the F35 platform for producing this high quality and very well researched video. Also.. Thank you for including enough info to allow for this 30+min clinic upside their dome, instead of the 5 min teaser we usually get from other channels.👍 Subscribed as soon as the video ended.

[@KabodaOfficial]

Thank you, I’m honoured!

[@BungieStudios]

The F-35 is relatively just as capable as the F-22 in air to air roles based on publicly known simulations. It's cheaper, easier to maintain, has more room for upgrades, and has the latest tech absent from the F-22. The F-22 still is king of the hill in the air superiority niche. Yet, the F-35 is the next best thing while being way more affordable AND able to serve in multiple roles.

[@BungieStudios]

Being the protected child really hurt the F-22. It made it more expensive to maintain, harder to upgrade, and unfortunately stealth secrets were leaked anyways thanks to foreign espionage.

[@stevem2323]

absolutely.

[@CrystallineFoxCF]

Something that basically everyone who claims the speed is a flaw for the F-35 forgets is that, yeah, if you have speed on your side, you can outrun the enemy jet, but most jets aren't going to outrun the missile, air to air missiles, at least the ones that are declassified, have an average to speed of about Mach 4 (specifically long range Air to Air missiles, not short range ones such as the Sidewinders, those have a top speed of about Mach 2.5), that's literally faster than the SR-71, and far faster than the Mig-25, so no, speed at this point is basically redundant even in Air combat, and even less so if you're being shot at from the ground, because you get SAMs that, for some of them, can reach hypersonic speeds, so it's better to just not get locked than it is to try to outrun the enemy

[@dex6781]

fr. speed and maneuverability is meaningless when you're facing a missile that can pull 60 gs at mach 3

[@robertsneddon731]

There was a comment on a recent Perun video describing the MBDA Meteor air-to-air missile as like having an "I win" button on your computer game.

[@CrystallineFoxCF]

@@robertsneddon731 Basically yeah, it is

[@DarkRendition]

I’m only 3 minutes into the video but I can tell this one is the best F35 documentary made to date. -British accent -Detailed explanation of each derivative -Great video length

[@KabodaOfficial]

Thank you, you’re too kind!

[@imkeerock]

Also, fantastic video. I got a lot from it. Thank you! And thanks for showing F35’s and not just using random planes like other youtubers do. Great job!

[@KabodaOfficial]

Haha thank you, when the video stops matching the exact thing I’m saying - you can tell I’m running out of footage 😅

[@terenceblakely4328]

I'm old enough to remember similar hate on the F15, F16 when they were in development. Ironically some of the critics of the F35 cite that staying with upgraded F15s would be a much better policy... even though they ripped the F15 back in it's development.

[@damaskusseraph6046]

The fighter mafia with Pierre sprey and the like right?

[@timkimzach]

Yep, late 70s as a kid I was always hearing how the F15, F16, AND the F14 were junk. The Soviets had better stuff, etc., etc. That's why when the F35 hate started 10 years ago I didn't buy it.

[@xordus]

Thank you for explaining the effectiveness of this program. So many people misunderstand this aircraft, even people who are otherwise fairly knowledgeable. It is really frustrating to explain to them why they're so wrong because there's so much nuance to explain. This video is awesome.

[@NonsenseFabricator]

The realistic main use of the cannon is strafing low-priority ground targets, and it's a shame the USAF keeps doing that with its best platforms. We have to retire the entire B-1 fleet early because of so many show-of-force flights over Afghanistan that would've been better serviced by a drone, a helicopter, or some other cheap platform.

[@Infinityand1]

Truly fantastic video! Great work!

[@adaslesniak]

Thank you. You made it at least for me. I had all this opinions about it being inefficient, expensive platform, but you made me change my mind (at least in most cases) and now I definitely see this plane in different light.

[@Cars-N-Jets]

I love the F22, especially with RaZZ flying it but the F35 is so good looking too. They both look amazing.

[@nicholasleon7819]

flying so high and so fast with so much information about your surroundings i imagine being a pilot with these sensors active is as close to being omnipotent as you can get at the moment

[@michigan2974]

The F-35 is by far the greatest fighter ever built by any country, sure it isn't the best in reliability/maintenance, dogfighting, (maybe stealth, I've always heard the 22 has a lower cross section), weapon payload, range, speed, etc; but in each and every single one of those categories it's either close to the best or more than good enough for what the mission will require, and for a cost of 70-80 million for a unit, an F-16 cost $63mil, F-18 $70, and F-15EX $90 mil. It's cheaper than some previous gen fighters with better sensors, stealth, and adaptability, you'd be insane to buy any other aircraft in the current market if the F-35 is on the table

[@joevaccaro6655]

Love the video, very captivating indeed 💯. To get a good idea of what this jet is about, listen to Marine, Navy, and Air Force pilots that flew 4th gen jets and are now flying the F35. It’s like asking yourself “how do I know if I’m a good footballer?” “Should I take it from someone that some that never played football and says I’m bad? Or, should take it from David Beckham, Pele, or Maradona that say I’m good?”

[@StritarD]

Amazing thumbnail!

[@alexanderwaite9403]

The F35 is a BEAST! All the hate it gets comes from as I see it from the misconception of its price but also a large number of people who fear change. They look at all the tech on the F35 and they don't want to believe it will work and they see the US militarys failures in Iraq and Afghanistan and this reinforces their beliefs that the US military produces crap. The F35 is a great platform and the pilots who fly it rave about its cabilities. I like what you said about dog figts, "why get in one when you can shot them down a 100 miles away!"

[@DennisHeikki]

Great video, really enjoyed it! As proud as i am as a Swede that SAAB makes good planes, i'll be jealous of ALL our neighbours (Denmark, Finland, Norway) buying F-35s. They're gorgeous planes, and it's so cool how the pilot's helmets have augmented reality tech which allow them to see through the airframe of the f35 in any direction whilst being fed info like some damn iron man suit. But oh well, apparently we're working with japan, italy, the UK, france, germany and spain to create a 6th gen fighter. Let's hope it's a good one!

[@Hungary_0987]

As a hungarian, thanks for the gripens!

[@democracy_enjoyer]

f35 is underrated and overhated

[@ethanc1288]

Great job on the Video, and as an F-35 fan I thank you.

[@andrewlang7149]

Great video. Learned a lot about the F-35 I didn’t know.

[@oldpain7625]

8:30 Love the invitation for a cup of tea. Bout that time. Cheers Edit: By the way, this is the single best video on the F-35 that I've ever seen. AWESOME work! 👏 Found a new channel to subscribe to!

[@KabodaOfficial]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@Itchybol]

2:11 you forgot about Poland

[@KabodaOfficial]

Good spot!

[@MrGriff305]

Once the upgrades happen, the F-35 will be a great workhorse. So far, 1000 have been built.

[@SHINR__]

That was the coolest intro I have ever seen, well done my friend. Very underrated channel.

[@KabodaOfficial]

Glad you like it!

[@markbell6864]

Great video. Great facts most point do not know or understand. Keep up the good work.

[@krunchyninja7206]

Tldr: they hate us cuz they ain't us

[@lordquintus1419]

19:05 I in fact do Not look ridiculous, my mk1 eyeball may be outdated hardware but the built in sensor blend of "zoom-in(tm)" sensors on the novel IPhone8 platform allows the stunning 5x zoom coupled with state of the art 1080p video clarity enhancements such details can easily be made out

[@DawgPro]

Ok... the guy's in love whit a phone.

[@Alachua03]

This spring I went to the 2023 Fun and Sun Air show at Lakeland, Florida and got to see the USAF F-35A and the USMC F-35B put on an impressive show! Loud and Proud!

[@pocketwingman]

i was there too! was in the crowd just to the left of the C-17, probably 100 feet or so

[@uku4171]

Awesome video. Will look out for the next one as well.

[@mlruuu]

i absolutely came to love the f35: it was supposed to be a jack of all trades, getting rid of the a10. i dont know if these are connected, but thunderbolt -> lightning doesnt seem like a horrible name transition, though it might be a horrible practical one.

[@karsten11553]

very, very frightening!

[@skull1161]

The A-10 has almost always been a low cost attack aircraft. Put it in the middle east where the scariest anti air device is a hand held SAM. It works great there, good payload, and long loiter time. But if you need a modern SAM site network disabled then you're gonna use a combination of EA-18s and F-35s. That's why the F-35 is not replacing it. The A-10 might be retired though.

[@merafirewing6591]

​@@skull1161 I honestly find it stupid to retire the A-10.

[@Maynarkh]

@@merafirewing6591 its a damn near 70 year old aircraft design that is increasing in expense with every passing year. Dedicated coin is being moved over to the new Sky Warden. While CAS will be done by the F-35. The GAU-8 is an overrated, inaccurate piece of trash.

[@merafirewing6591]

@@Maynarkh your Sky Warden is a piece of crap, I bet even ww2 AA would shred it.

[@SealFredy5]

Dude threw my boy concurrency under the bus. Concurrency is a necessary component of all development. Literally every piece of equipment is produced with concurrency regardless if it's explicitly called out or not. Initial production is never perfect, the F-35 program came up with a term to describe how production and operational usage were necessary to build the best aircraft possible. The fact they spent the effort to do this indicates a systemic thinking to account for design changes, and practical usage rather than purely an engineering challenge. That should be commended rather than lauded. Historical examples of concurrency would be the F-16's elevators. They were enlarged to create better stability after a few blocks. That was then retrofitted across all models. The Early F-16 did not have the capability to use radar guided missiles. The aircraft was always intended to have that capability, it was just a capability added to later aircraft after other core design components were worked out (and of course budget). You can pull up the block system for the F-16 or F-18 and they are very comparable to the F-35's LRIP blocks in significant changes which are then retrofitted across the fleet. I think a great analygy of concurency is the explanation of Waterfall vs Agile software development. If you try to create all requirements up front, you will inevitably forget certain things, or create requirements about things that are either unnecessary or end up not adding to the end goal. Agile creates a cycle of continuous development that feeds/builds requirements as development occurs. So while Agile development is less certain and can take longer based on initial estimates, the end product is usable more quickly and you avoid sinking large amounts of time in unnecessary or non-applicable requirements. I will point out that trying to estimate/complete stuff upfront always leads to follow-on programs or cost overruns that completely negate any in theory time or cost advantages of waterfall development. TLDR: Concurrency is good and represents a realistic path to capable equipment creation.

[@KabodaOfficial]

I didn’t mean to say the use of concurrency itself was a bad one, but the fact it makes the project look expensive in the early phases, you make some great points here!

[@SealFredy5]

@@KabodaOfficial Yeah, it's a major downside with concurency & agile. Estimates become... accurate. Politicians/executives don't want accurate, they want rosy.

[@rocketrockstar8171]

Kaboda keep the good content coming mate!👍

[@jedijc5411]

The perfect F-35 Mission..... Based on its Sensors and Data Link...... One Air Force Squadron of F-35s is on Strike Mission and Destroys their assigned Targets but, uses all their Air to Ground Weapons to complete their Mission. However, while originally RTB (Return To Base) is then credited with Air to Air, Air to Ground, Surface to Surface, and Even Surface to Sea Targets Destroyed. Lastly, when the Squadron Finally Lands they Still have All their Air to Air Weapons and Canon Rounds. In English..... Whatever an F-35 locks up, anything with the same Data Link and in range Will Shoot at that target (an Aircraft Weapons, Man Pad Weapons, SAM Site Weapons, or Ship's Weapons).

[@ahhmm5381]

That does not seem particularly impressive

[@iamscoutstfu]

Hes underselling it. Its not the same data link. Its anything the f35 can talk to, which is basically everything. No other jet can provide target grade locks to everything around it, is stealthy, and can provide AWACs support while distributing and integrated battlefield picture to its allies all at the same time.

[@avroarchitect1793]

@@ahhmm5381 then you don't understand that nothing could quite do that before, especially in this way.

[@ahhmm5381]

​@@avroarchitect1793 Indeed. Kinda embarrassing if you think about how long computers have been able to do this....

[@aunderiskerensky2304]

@@ahhmm5381 its more about the security of the datalink, strength of the portable relay etc. we can't have 140million dollar fighters be hackable after all, and they have to work through storms that knock out most everything else. likely emp shielded as well. its not so simple as getting the computer on the jet to talk to the missile thats talking to the other targeting pod a hundred miles away, it's developing the tools and language to do it safely at any time in any weather anywhere on the globe without hesitation or interference of any kind. THAT is impressive.

[@michaelbetzer1966]

I also disliked the F-35. Until I retired from Lockheed. Now I say ," Go F-35! Make me some retirement money!" $$$$$$$$$!

[@bernadmanny]

It's almost like a cutting-edge new technology platform will have a lot of refinement before it reaches its complete state.

[@alpacaofthemountain8760]

Amazing video! You have a bright future for your channel, and hopefully you

[@KabodaOfficial]

Thank you!

[@jim4194]

Great video well done

[@michaelw6277]

My counter point to anyone who speaks of any performance deficits the Lightning may have regarding it’s low speed turning capabilities is that it can literally shoot down planes that are behind it. Give that kind of capability to something as old as the F-4 Phantom and it’s suddenly relevant and dangerous again… and all of that is to say that air show maneuvers don’t win fights on a modern battlefield.

[@vMaxHeadroom]

Great analysis and spot on as the F-35 is one hell of a fighter aircraft...People do not seem to get the true capabilities of how it can see the enemey and destroy before it is even seen. The sensor suite is so far ahead of the compitition and it is only getting better with the Block 4 upgrades and I am a huge Typhoon fan...I hope we buy a lot more for the UK and at least have a full compliment for our two carriers.

[@logistician1376]

Great video thank you for your insight.

[@joshuasenior4370]

Very informative video