Stop talking about the F-35 if you don't understand that...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- The F-35 target recognition also called combat ID, is peculiar, like many other systems on this aircraft.
Let's learn more!
#F35 #f35lightning
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com...
Join the Discord server / discord
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/...
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.c...
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the UA-cam Partner Program, Community guidelines & UA-cam terms of service.
This video really shows clearly the big reason that NATO AEWC and ELINT platforms are on constant patrol along the Ukrainian border, with multiple different platforms from multiple angles.
They are collecting as much data as possible about each and every Russian asset in use in Ukraine to populate the core database with as many reference returns as possible to help the F-35 (and other platforms) to positively identify targets
Yeah, in last months Russian pushed to the front even their new radars, It was real treat for electronic intelligence .
It’s not even about platforms anymore, they are just nodes.
F-35 is kinda special, it’s first of it’s kind, but now everything is going to be build with data collecting and sharing from as close to the fight as possible.
That include common soldier, check out “smart scope” - new Fire Control System for rifles
@@emceha but f35 has one weakness.Vulnearable to cyber attacks
This game of collecting Electronic Order of Battle and threat systems capabilities has been going on since the 1950s. The difference is that we can feed it rapidly into a vast network so pilots can get that updated data very quickly, and have it contribute to their holistic Situational Awareness and Positive ID.
In the past, the data would be tightly controlled and carefully disseminated through channels that took time to get down to the operational squadrons.
"This video really shows clearly the big reason that NATO AEWC and ELINT platforms are on constant patrol along the Ukrainian border"
It's also why China keeps baiting responses from Taiwan. The more data signatures that can be captured, the better the preparation.
@@Biden_is_demented You didn't seem to notice that I was referring to China capturing data, not the US. Russia isn't capturing anything meaningful.
That being said, China just lost their access to Western semiconductors and processors last month and they don't possess the ability to make their own. Russia lots access in 2014. That makes China's window pretty short, as it will be shrinking going forward. China is clever enough to understand that.
Most people have no idea or poor understanding of what the F35's sensor and fusion suite is capable of.
Their capabilities have yet to be demonstrated against an enemy with a decent airforce. There's little combat info available in the public domain yet.
The F35s flying right now with the Israel Defense Force have yet to be interdicted by enemy fighters...that's probably not just luck.
A small group of (Undetected)F35s sitting 60-80 kms off the track of an incoming enemy air attack can see everything. A couple of Raptors(also undetected) are vectored in and fire up their very powerful ECM pods...suddenly the strike package is back in the 20th century.
A full squadron of F35s and Raptors(still undetected) then obliterates the incoming strike with a hail of new AIM260 AAMRAMS falling like the archers arrows at Agincourt.
The End.
F-35 initial APG-81 was able to jam the APG-77 in the F-22A, which was the most capable fighter radar ever devised until APG-81 came along. That lit a fire under the Raptor incremental upgrade program to get the APG-77 up-to-par with APG-81, but the processing power available and TRM quality are a bit ahead in the JSF series. F-22 has had new core processors installed and various “sensor upgrades”, but they are very hush-hush about what those exactly are.
Neither the F-22 nor F-35 carry jammer pods, since they have very capable AESA radars that can track-while scan/track-while-scan-and-jam. The frontal area and power behind those AESAs, combined with Very Low Observability, allow them to deliver the same or better effects than EA-18G Growler, for example.
It’s an unfair fight if ATF or JSF are in the air against anything else right now, for these and many other reasons. They represent a paradigm shift in air combat, not hype.
So can the F-35 tell a lark from a sparrow three leagues away? If yes then maybe elves are involved.
I recall reading somewhere that these software and databases are out of reach from non US operators. They cannot tweak or update it on their own. It is like black magic to them. Interesting video!
I can understand the US not letting allies tweak existing entries (even for their local copy). Not letting Allies add new entries is silly.
@@unknownuser069 I thought really hard and finally remembered the source of my information - wikipedia.
I copy and paste the exact words below
"An issue that affects all the international partners in the F-35 involves access to the computer software code for the aircraft. The F-35 relies heavily on software for operation of radar, weapons, flight controls and also maintenance. The U.S. military has stated that "no country involved in the development of the jets will have access to the software codes" and has indicated that all software upgrades will be done in the U.S. The U.S. government acknowledges that Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Turkey have all expressed dissatisfaction with that unilateral U.S. decision."
So, except UK, no other country has access to the coding of F35.
Here's the link to the wikipedia article en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_procurement
@@aaindtharivalan8720 I believe Israel also has accessed to the software on the F-35?
It isn't unusual for the US to hard code things like IFF and specific features and analytical outcomes. All last and current gen guided MANPADS also require similar security encryption and anti tampering methods designed to prevent NATO assets from being targeted should they fall into enemy hands.
I think this is true except for Israel that can make their own apps for the plane.
Making a very fascinating yet complex topic intelligible for the layperson is quite an achievement. Entertaining, too, and hair is once again on-point. Great job, M7.
Really good video in my opinion.
This is one area where my understanding of the plane's avionics is that it's using black magic, deeply integrated with a network of covens :P
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This is the funniest thing I have ever read on the internet
Initial NCTR for Block II had 637 parameters, not 400. Who knows what they're onto now...
Sweet! So.. next time, if I get a CAPTCHA image to select all the blocks containing a SU-27, I am helping build a data cell in the Track.
Trolls are out in force this video
Dempster-Shafer is just applied agnostic Bayesian analysis. If you understand Bayesian analysis (the Wikipedia article is fine, or there’s tons of good UA-cam videos on it) then to understand you just expand the variables and remove the a priori beliefs to unveil the underlying probabilities rather than only use the final probabilistic outcome. Ask questions if you need this explained more.
USAF employs the world's most sophisticated technology to make the epic mistakes.
In air combat having a system that instantly figures out who and what is flying around you is amazing. Every second saved finding your enemies is a second they don't have to defend. U can shoot them down before they know your hostile or even there is your good
Russia's trolls are evolving a bit, I see they are equipped with hijacked, probably older abandoned accounts. Lots of anime avatars or obscure companies suddenly talking about how bad the F-35 is, lol.
So in order to defeat the F-35, the enemy should use a propeller plane for about 1/1000 the cost of a fighter jet. Who knew!
You gave an excellent explanation of this in 9:37... I suspect I understood about 25% of it.
Meanwhile, the F-35 reviews the graduate level courses on these topics and fuckton of classified information... Thousands of times per second. Then it'll presumably run a one-sided 99.95% confidence interval on all of it, pick what everything it is, explain what it's doing, and spit out all sorts of creative murder-related options for the pilot to choose by twitching a finger.
Meanwhile, the enemy probably doesn't know that they've been spotted yet.
O_o
The F35 is a very expensive flying computer… that isn’t good when not connected to the link DATA.
So, it can not fight on its own very well.
Hi, M'7! It's nice to see that you're back! How was your resurrection? :-)
OBTW, excellent video.
😂
Ha i wonder what your 9 to 5 job is…i have a few ideas😊
Theres so much information in your videos..Thankyou
Could you do a video on the Eurofighter's avionics?
I am not buying a google pixel simply because of the ads. Enough.
Please reduce the annoying sound effects in such videos.
Dempster-Shafer? I wrote it in Fortran IV!
So a Polikarpov I-153 will have a pretty good chance against an F35.
It could get in visual range before being recognised as a threat
**proceeds to fly biplane to do low flying SEAD operation**
Jas 39 E uses a very similar concept. Meeting a new not before seen target the radar profille is recorded, every signal coming from the target is recorded by the E warfare suite and the IR profile is recorded and added to the existing library. The more often the fighters are mapped down to the smallest detail. This new knowledge is passed to every Jas in the Airforce, time for this is measured in hours before every fighter is updated.
Block 3i (long outdated) F-35 had 637 Non-Cooperative Target Recognition parameters 7 years ago. Sensor fusion and networking means something much different with a 5.5 Gen platform than a 4.5 Gen.
Gripen E IRST is a single point sensor from Leonardo, so unless it's really close to a target, there isn't much resolution to feed anything useful into a threat library.
On JSF, each aircraft has no less than 7 IR sensors, so in the frontal quadrant, there is triangulation and 2 different regions of IR spectrum overlaid between the DAS and EOTS, fused with the passive RF sensors embedded in the wings, tails, fuselage, and AESA.
That data is immediately piped through a multi-bandwidth line of sight LPI Data Link to other F-35s and ISR nodes.
Gripen E doesn't have any of that. It uses legacy omni-directional (detectable/jammable) data-link with limited transfer rates. It's still a very capable system vs legacy adversary aircraft, but would struggle vs MiG-31BM and Su-35S employing R-37M hypersonic AAM.
@@LRRPFco52 Advanced EOTS, in an F35 only excist in block 4.
@@sorennilsson9742 Current EOTS fused with DAS allows passive triangulation and fusion with the other sensors through a quad CPU bank, to the extent that F-35s dominate the airspace even when F-22s are in it. It has been that way since 2017. Gripen E doesn't bring anything to that space since it lacks VLO.
I’m a professional pilot. Retired a few years ago. Have flown with pilots who flew the F-35 and had come from many different platforms. 100% of these pilots preferred the F-35 over every other platform they had flown. Now, the A-10 pilots that left the f-35 for the A-10 reserve units love the A-10 and it’s unique mission. But that mission can only occur with the guarantee of air superiority and the vast majority of SAM and manpad threats neutralized by Aircraft like the F-15E, F-16, F-35, F-22, B-1/2/52 aircraft.
Combined overwhelming arms with relevant data and mission understanding is crucial to success.
A propeller aircraft not being a fighter according to the F-35's database? Hold my EMB 314 Super Tucano...
Technology has advanced substantially since the time of the USS Vincinnes' accidental downing of the Iranian airliner, mistaking it for being an Iranian F-14.
The US NAVY is running the software lab that builds and manages these target identification "Library's" (IIRC It was supposed to be done by the program but i become so far behind the NAVY picked up the slack.)
Love to follow the discussions. Don't always agree. This is 1 time: it can't be 15% chance to be a balloon with 10% chance to be right. IMO just say 15% chance right it is balloon :)
My sensors are going crazy identifying tha mech The computer keeps flipping between a MAD (Maurader) and at CAT (Catapult). I'm locking it in as a Madcat.
I've often wondered if systems like this can be spoofed more easily. If, for example, you can 'fake' the track of a propellor signal on a slow flying jet aircraft, it might get screened out by the algo's, resulting in the F-35 pilot getting a nasty surprise.
@@unknownuser069 I can't speak for him, but I'm pretty sure he meant it as a jokey example, not to be taken too literally, as did I, as I couldn't think of any other example of a key variable off the top of my head.
He never said that it would be screened out. That implies that if the aircraft can't identify something it simply figures "eh, probably nothing" and ignores it. His statement was to do with the aircraft identifying a signal track and taking the best bet given the data that it has. Propeller =/= not a fighter. Doesn't mean it's not a target at all
@@unknownuser069 You clearly know absolutely nothing about ECM.
It is not possible to answer your question without breaking the law. True (as opposed to publicly stated) ECM capabilities of aircraft and ships are kept under extremely close wraps. Anyone who claims to know any details is lying.
The JSF sensor suite is impossible to "spoof" because it already used 637 NCTR parameters with Block II, and these are multi-spectral parametrics.
In the test ranges used for Red Flag, they have Radar site simulators with antennae and even rockets that fire into the sky to simulate SAMs. As soon as F-35s flew into the box, the sensor suite and threat library called those out as fakes.
They're like telepathic Terminators who scan the database for Sarah O'Connor, cross-referencing her DL photo, and skipping straight to the club without having to manually track down the other matching names in the phonebook.
Don't ask why that aircraft so expensive and need its own maintenance hangar 🤣
India,china and Russian will not understand that concept
9 to 5??? I thought it's 8 to 5 with a 1 hour break around noon... well, when in Rome I guess 🤷...😁
2.18 I recognize myself in this sudents during some of yours technical discussions. Sorry
Talking spelling is wrong
Lmao, stop talking about the f 35 as if it's a capable fighter jet. Nevermind that 3 have crashed in the last 10 months (2 fell off of aircraft carriers) costing over 100 mil each which makes 10 overall lost for over a billion dollars without ever being deployed in combat and for airshows and demonstrations only. 🤷♂️
The F-35 has suffered 6 crashes with only 1 fatality. Given that it has been flying for nearly 20 years that is an amazing safety record. For comparison during the first 15 years of the F-16's life over 50 had been lost to crashes. The Eurofighter and Rafale have a comparable record as well to the JSF, yet I don't hear a single cry about it.
"2 fell off of aircraft carriers." Notice a common thread? Out of the 6 crashes 4 of them were when the F-35 was trying to land, *2 of which were on an aircraft carrier,* which is the most dangerous thing most pilots will ever have to do.
"Without ever being deployed in combat and for airshows and demonstrations only." The F-35 has been in combat since 2018 by the Israeli Air Force.
So a relatively new plane that pilots are still really learning and is being flown constantly by 16 nations has some mishaps? What a shocker. So the common theme here, as with most crashes, is human error.
Here is a Eurofighter Typhoon crashing: ua-cam.com/video/5XdeZpT4i8k/v-deo.html
To put it as it is, Finnish HX program results show that F-35 is the best jet out there in sale, it beat all other Western jets with 44/1 KD ratio too. Quite a performance i would say, the nations it is developed against struggles to fight even against Western 4.5 jets.
I believe you should contrast this with respect to IFF/NCTR in your next video. Up to you. But you are doing excellent work here. It is time to put the "it's a flying pig" crowd down for good. They really have no idea.
I would like to see the ground recognition radar. These are supposed to be close support. Can they do it? How?
Block 4is here ✌️
Interesting .. but how SU57 or others 4.5/5Gen works? I do think it's similar algoritm since there only 1 operator on a plane. If I see on DCS 4Gen fighter its so complicated to engange bogey or switch from non combat mode to gun only or air or ground attack mode.
the airmodels site is worthless, everything is out of stock. Good video though, thank you
I love this freaking channel. 99 percent of channels give the sam3 old info but here u can see so much information about all aspects
I was enjoying your videos, but every time when you start explaining the material reading from or quoting Wikipedia starts to get cringing! I mean... Wikipedia, really?! It's kind of lazy and crappie!
When it is correct...
@@Millennium7HistoryTech And how are you sure it is? Because Wikipedia says it?! Because Wikipedia is known for its credibility, right!?
@@Bulgarian_Rebel I explained how I do research several times.
Great video , the black magic section of the video the inattentive children and the black magic inclusion in the video makes this video a gem for the future of videos
This seems like very good use case for ML algorithms. They could be trained on simulations, radar raytrracing.
Cmon its not all that
so dampster is not making assumptions, just sticking to the basic data classifications then. which yeah in an evolving situation is better than a rigid dataset. certainly combining both as an option might also be nice to do.
Sei un pozzo di scienza per quanto riguarda l'aviazione militare e l'ingegneria. Sei uno delle persone più preparate che vedo. Dovresti provare a collaborare con LiberiOltre.
These videos you are doing on the F-35 are amazing. They show that LM really did go above and beyond with the F-35 (and it shows on the results from Red Flag).
F16 beat F35 at Red Flag.
@@ViceCoin Seriously dude, actually research that claim and realise the context of that battle. It was the metaphoric equal of an F16 Ali at his peak fighting a 1-armed drugged F35 Tyson. And even then it was a split-decision.
It’s even better when you take into the consideration the advancements in military theory. Pushing for rethinking military is not easy even in USA, but a lot happened in last 30 years.
During Gulf War, the Effect Based Operations planning was tested and thanks to stealth/precision it was great success, only confirmed during bombing Serbia. Multi-Domain Operations are in Army doctrine for years,
Big tech and especially airforce, is now working hard on bringing to reality Combat Cloud (or Internet of Battle-Things, as someone called it)
Next step will be connecting services everything into one collaborative system, the Multi-Domain Combat Cloud.
American Industrial-Military Complex creams itself every night dreaming about it.
@@emceha Slower than F4 Phantom, less manuverable than Mig21. Lower readiness rate than WWII fighters.
@@ViceCoin Every single combat aircraft made after 1950 has a lower readiness rate than WWII fighters. They also can't be manufactured in the same numbers, or as cheaply. Duh! Think about it.
Not gonna comment on the rest as you are a hijacked troll account.
Great video. So pretty much this means US military will have ultimate control over all allied nation's F-35 and it's data? In that case does that means everyone will become USAF's "proxy" air force as long as they are aligned to US interests.
6:20 wait till the North Koreans strap Vympels onto An-2s.
I don't know how to easy explain it...
Proceeds to explain it easily.
mmsss :D
Software remains black magic to me, so thank you for simplifying it while being comprehensive to simpletons like myself.
Another informative video.
No need for those irritating sound effects....
Looking forward to the next video. Thank you for some really good information.
The current situation over-seas just puts more emphasis on the tech. advancement the west has over other Air Force's.
Remember when so many detractors were saying that the F-35 was useless when they were complaining about the budget over runs and delays in production ? We’re seeing it’s far from useless.
We are not seeing anything yet.
Until any equipment is tried in a real war against an equivalent $ worth of some other equipment with crews having equivalent $ worth of training, we will not know if it is a good equipment or not by comparison.
@@PaulVerhoeven2 It’s true that the only real test will be an actual conflict but from how it’s been comparing in war games it seems pretty good. It’s more the datalink style of warfare, next gen electronics and stealthiness that is giving it the advantages and not the actual physical performance.
@@556m4 Have the war games followed what I have said, the equivalent $ worth of equipment and training? Or just an equivalent # of jets? Have them been influenced by Lockheed in any way (through Air Force generals getting contracts and/or positions and/or book deals etc with Lockheed)?
I love your content..nothing better than listening to an expert..
As always, great content. Keep it up, some of us just really like this!
Very interesting technology/software solution. It may potentially decrease the dependency of larger, non stealth and thus vulnerable off board sensors like AWACS or ground radars considerably. On the other hand it most likely requires a vast SIGINT and IMINT (IIR/UV) effort to verify the reliability of the probabilistic combat data processing capability.
I'm not certain, but in theory it might be possible to use the same statistical analysis as a decision making aid, that predicts the best course of action in a certain tactical situation. Potentially the F-35 is - if all works as said - one step away from being an artificially intelligent, optionally manned fighter.
First impressions of pilots who flew 4th Gen and now fly F-35s is, "AWACS? We don't need no stinkin' AWACS." They see far more contacts with extreme detail PID where AWACS never could, and AWACS have to stay away from potential skirmish zones anyway, limiting their sensor reach due to curvature of the earth and inaccuracy of that type of Radar.
A 2 or 4-ship of F-35s make AWACS obsolete once they're in the air.
During the Satellite and Strategic ISR feed cycle, imagery and signals are constantly monitored by various platforms, including F-22 & JSF, U-2R, EC-, etc. That all feeds into a living, breathing network.
Once it's game time, F-35s have and continue to provide a robust kill web map that updates attrition, pop-ups, and opportunities.
The air threat attrition is a formality, along with surface-based IADS nodes.
Biggest threats are long range cruise missiles to deny airfields.
very very very interesting !!
Russia: "Target is target"
"But those are civilians"
Russia: "I said target is target"
Iraq enters the chat
Stupid.
'F-35 videos '
Thank you Crow
Its problematic when a large corporation like Lockheed is down on a If you dont like us you hate us level.
I hope that Lockheed Soon opens it's own Insurance company, because i fail to see, how a School Bus in Afghanistan provided 400 datapoints that identified it as a "Legitimate Target". Seems like You are not the only one not believing in "MAGIC".
What?
So cool!
👍
If I am understanding all of this properly then this system is both very useful and very brittle. Rather than having say five tracks for inbound bogeys, type possible fighters the system will read the data from all available sensors and make a judgment call that those bogeys are in fact hostile Su-35s loaded for air to ground.
The big problem I see is the ability to not only spoof a sensor but to spoof and entire network. If an enemy can change the "beliefs" of a class of assets, say their own Su-35s, then they could change the final "hard declaration" of the system. They might do this by masking the aircraft's heat signatures, changing their RCS in some way (not necessarily for the better, just different overall) or even flying in a certain way to mimic a strike package rather than a fighter sweep, viz Operation Bolo. In this case not only would the sweep be misclassified, the spoof could apply to all other Su-35s in the theatre, at least for a certain period.
Remember that it's the same way AWACs and other SigInt aircraft work. It's not like the F-35 is only working from a few pieces of communication. Changing one or two things would simply lower the confidence level. Change more and it might go from a SU-35 to an unknown Flanker derivative. Either way, it would fail Friend or Foe interegation, and not having a civilian transponder (or details not matching) would be a red flag.
It is very difficult to spoof multiple sensors at the same time.
It's more robust, not brittle. Over a decade ago, there were 637 NCTR parameters.
Imagine a hive of autistic sevants and normal geniuses telepathically linked with each other watching a football game from surrounding vantage points in a stadium. Each has their own zoom cameras, but some have 1000x better noses, some have bionic hearing, and others thermal optics.
Each of them has memorized everything known about each player, the cheerleaders, the coaches, and tapped into the team headsets.
If player 37 wears different cleats and changes his deodorant, they're all going to know it. He's still player 37. If he farts, they'll know what he ate for breakfast and factor it into his performance forecast.
F-35s in the MADL net are 100x more sensitive and intuitive than that, relatively speaking.
But all this is just a big computer with advanced software. It could easily be adopted in fx F-15 EX.
The quality of insight and its presentation on this channel is superb. There is nothing else like it online.
I have read that LM wrote off $200B in development costs. Can you confirm or deny this. At 3000 units that is $66M a unit we the taxpayers have subsidized for LM sales. I am sure there are some big bonuses being paid out at LM. I have not gotten mine.
Initial RDT&E for the 3 JSF Variants was $62 Billion, which is normal for a fighter, since most took $22 Billion in equivalent dollars.
$200 Billion is large acquisition money, not RDT&E. Acquisition is supposed to total $428.4 Billion for 2470 F-35A/B/C for USAF/USMC/USN, over the life of the production line.
A total of 865 F-35s have been delivered, but many of those are to partner nations, not all to the US. It's actually more affordable than any other fighter on the market in base cost, operational cost, and program cost.
F35 this, F35 that, yes, it’s a sophisticated networked weapons platform that is part of a complex information gathering system for battlefield analysis in determining, threats and targets for not only the aircraft but other friendly elements in that network. However, the platform ie the aircraft itself, and its survivability for anything other than its core intended role as a BVR networked element is extremely questionable.
As a physical aircraft the F-35 is very competent.
Is it really, I think you need to read up on it’s many current problems. Let’s talk about it’s many roles it’s meant to fill
1) as a BVR interceptor it’s speed is compromised and limited to subsonic due to accumulative damage occurring to its stealth coating and a small air to air stealth weapons package. Bubbling and stealth coating damage is well documented in this regard.
2) as a ground support aircraft at low speeds it’s vulnerable to ground fire and loiter time is extremely short compared to aircraft it replaces along with additional wing hard points reducing its stealth ability when loaded. That’s why the A-10 program was extended.
3) air to ground missions also require additional munitions which reduce its air to air capabilities considerably and its weapons load is smaller than dedicated ground attack aircraft
3) air to air superiority it’s limited weapons bay and problems with its 25mm weapon along with its speed and time on target compromise it again. It’s not designed as as air to air superiority aircraft and it’s at least matched by other current modern aircraft in close combat. F15EX was initiated to support the F35 in this mission role and F22 is vastly a superior dedicated aircraft in this regard
4) as a naval aircraft the iron in its stealth coating has begun rusting, the problems have been identified but the long term effects on its skin panels are unknown as of yet
Along with these identified problems in its missions roles, maintenance costs are already skyrocketing with engine damage occurring in a large number of aircraft, a number of deficiencies in its electronics which are yet to be fixed or classed as never to be fixed, proposed hardware and software scrapped or reduced in capability as either too difficult or too long and expensive to implement or integrate.
that just leaves a really compromised expensive aircraft that can only operate in a friendly skies environment or where AA defences are already compromised. Tech ages rapidly, in a few years newer aircraft will have the same electronics features, be cheaper and have less problems and the f35 will be a technical footnote in history like a zumwalt class destroyer. If you think the F35 will still be a threat aircraft in 2050 and beyond like it is suggested, you are kidding yourself, I can’t honestly see it as relevant by 2030 when loyal wingman aircraft and other 5th gen or even 6th gen aircraft begin testing or become operational.
@@velocitymg 1. This was grossly misstated about the first 6 JSF airframes, not reality. During extended supersonic runs up and down the East Coast, they had tankers on the North and South ends to support a continuous torture test of the airframes. 2 of the airframes, 1 an early F-35B, the other an F-35C, exhibited some heating on the Horizontal stabs around the embedded RF sensors that concerned the engineers who were monitoring the instrumentation. The test pilots tried to duplicate this heat with the other early LRIP F-35s, and could not. All of these F-35s had aluminum structures for those control surfaces and the tail booms. None of those designs were mass-produced because they replaced the aluminum spars and spanners with Carbon Fiber, making them stronger and lighter. There never was bubbling, peeling, or delimitation.
Source: F-35 test pilot Billie Flynn from multiple interviews and one of the pilots who flew then extended supersonic runs during those tests. There is zero documentation of bubbling or compromise of the RAM.
2. All aircraft are vulnerable to AAA and MANPADs when they fly low, not matter the design, which is why the US doesn’t focus on low and slow CAS as much anymore. A-10 is unsurvivable in that profile, for example, so A-10C has transitioned to mainly a mid-altitude contingency CSAR platform employing the same Precision Weapons used on the F-35. F-35s have considerable loiter time and combat radius, better than all of the aircraft they are superseding. F-35A carries 18,250lbs of internal fuel, flies farther than the F-15E. F-15E has far superior mission radius and loiter time compared to the A-10. This is one of the most debunked performance aspects of F-35 series.
All F-35s can carry 8x Small Diameter Bombs in the internal bays without using any external hard points, zero drag penalty. A-10 program has been extended by Congressional interference for generations now, not because the USAF wants it. USAF wanted to shut down the A-10 program already in the 1980s, because they knew it wasn’t survivable against 1970s SAM and AAA threats.
3. Legacy multirole fighters carry mostly external fuel, ECM pods, and FLIR pods, in addition to the actual ATG ordnance. All of those types of stores/systems are integrated into the JSF airframes, with far greater capabilities in each of those areas (fuel, FLIR, Laser Spot Tracker, Electronic Warfare). This means that even with internal weapons bay filled and 2 AIM-9Xs on stations 1 and 11, an F-35 carries more fuel and the same number of A2G munitions as a fully-loaded F-16CM Block 50/52.
That same F-35A can fly farther, can actually go supersonic, and can fly 100-200nm farther combat radius unrefueled than the F-16CM (F-16CM can’t go supersonic when carrying GBU-12s and has limited supersonic performance with other ATG munitions, 800lb ECM pod, FLIR pod, HARM Targeting Pod, 2x 370 Gallon External Fuel Tanks, 2x AIM-120C7s, 2x AIM-9Xs). F-35A can also go into areas of the MEZ where the F-16CM would be shot down.
Air-to-Air for JSF is not air superiority, but air dominance. Air threats are eliminated in ways that not even the F-22 can do. A 4-ship of F-35As carries 24 modern Air-to-Air Missiles that can be employed from BVR, including the AIM-9X Block II+. They unfairly eliminate threats from the air who can’t do anything to counter JSF.
F-15EX was not envisioned to support JSF. F-15EX was pushed by acting SECDEF Patrick Shanahan, who was a 31yr Boeing executive and quickly fired from that job due to conflicts of interest. F-15EX was shoved through onto the USAF, who never asked for it, by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith from Seattle (Boeing). The USAF never wanted F-15EX, and is side-stepping by passing it down to Air National Guard, who also don’t want it.
F-35s have been defeating F-22As in Large Force Exercises since 2017 since the Raptor doesn’t have any mid-to-long range IR detection systems, and has a slightly larger RCS than the F-35s.
4. F-35s don’t use legacy microscopic iron spheres, but Carbon Nanotube RAM embedded in one of the 3 layers of its easy-to-maintain skin. The reddish marks you see all over F-35Cs are from sailors’ boots, who pick up rubber, oil, fuel, grease, and all the accumulation of residue off the flight and hangar decks. That resides actually reduces the RCS.
"Along with these identified problems in its missions roles, maintenance costs are already skyrocketing with engine damage occurring in a large number of aircraft.” - This is 100% inaccurate. The F135 motor series are the most powerful, most reliable, most robust fighter engine ever produced to-date. Maintenance costs have been declining dramatically since introduction to the fleets who operate them, like any other fighter program’s initial introduction.
The F-35’s prognostic autonomous maintenance and diagnostics system management system identifies any potential issues before they happen in the engine, and will de-rate, regulate, and report anything of note to the pilot before it might happen. With previous generation motors like the TF30, F100-PW-100, and PW-200, parts would fly through the aircraft and ignite fuel, or they would suffer compressor stalls, stagnation, Afterburner unstarts, and fire shooting out the intakes.
We lost 143 F-16s with 71 fatalities in its first 10 years of service, for example. Many of those losses were engine-related and the Air Force was not happy about them. Same with the Navy and the F-14A/TF30, or even earlier with the F-111 series in USAF and Royal Australian Air Force service. Lots of real engine problems.
We have had none of this with the F-35 program with the high rate production. There was 1 F-35B that had a deficient fuel tube that was lost in 2018, which was fixed. There was one early F-35A that had an engine failure/fire while still on the ground. The USAF has only crashed 2 F-35As since Dec 2006. That’s an unbelievable safety record. USMC crashed 2, 1 from the fuel tube unique to the B model, 1 from colliding with an aerial refueler. UK lost 1 F-35B due to someone leaving an engine cover inside the intake, or it getting sucked into the intake before take-off on the Queen Elizabeth carrier. USN had 1 ramp strike earlier this year with an F-35C, after flying F-35Cs since 2010. They lost 73 F-14As with 19 fatalities in its first 10 years. 97 total losses and 27 fatalities with the F/A-18 during its first 10 years.
The 800-ish running deficiency list you hear about all the time from GAO and JPO are across 3 airframes, which is actually really small. F-16AM has over 1000 deficiencies alone, and that aircraft is far less complex than the F-16CMs in USAF service, or Block 52s in Greek and other nations’ service. Every single airliner currently in the sky has a long deficiency list. Deficiency lists include things like seat comfort, cosmetic issues, wish lists from pilots and maintainers, and additional capability requests by the users. They are a running tally of the above that never cease.
"that just leaves a really compromised expensive aircraft that can only operate in a friendly skies environment or where AA defences are already compromised.”
So it’s in actuality an extremely robust system of systems, that can and is operating now in the most hostile IADS nets, where anti-aircraft weapons are quite saturated and have been launched at F-35s over one hundred times as of several years ago (Syria). When you build your perspective on a laundry list of erroneous data, you see how you can come to 100% opposite-of-truth conclusions.
mmts mmts mmts blah mmts XD
US pilot: "I see an unidentified RADAR contact !"
ALIS: "track ignored - no weapon clearance."
US pilot: "Please clarify ! Why no track ?"
ALIS: "Information classified ! Please prepare for emergency ejection protocol..."
Female 'mission systems officer' Eliza Nowax on the ground, observing the parachute while steering a modified commercial drone with a stern face: "Yeah, bitch ! That's what You get for cheating on me !"
As far as being 54...
pl go to a endocrinologist and get testosterone replacement therapy, join gym with a trainer..who'll build your tendons before going for muscle training ...do yoga for static loading of joints...and start zone 2 training for cardiovascular system...
no excuses man...look at Joe rogan, he's your age...
Complexity clarified!
Can you please talk about the information overload problems ...ie like looking at a map with 3000 info icons appearing
I asked multiple pilots about that. They said the TGT designate boxes aren’t really overwhelming since the system prioritizes them based on their status as threats, showing them what’s important. My question was how much manual effort they have to input doing TGT selection and filtering. It’s all autonomous and far better at doing that than any human. These were senior 20-25yr former F/A-18C/D USMC Fighter Weapons Instructors who had been to both TOPGUN and the USMC Fighter Weapons course as instructors, very experienced fighter pilots.
… for click bait ? 🤷♂️
I’m tired of hearing about the F35
wow, this looks like Selenskiy's green screen
so they are implementing some kind of fuzzy logic based on a dampster shafer
It has very sound and robust logic, that is extremely flexible and agile in how it processes surface, airborne, and space-borne TGT tracks. All sensor triggers focus the other sensors on those targets from single and multi-ship JSF formations, which can be assessed passively, semi-passively, or actively and combinations of all the above.
Multi-spectral sensor detection and tracking allows for far more signature input variables to be cross-referenced with the threat library, especially from multi-ship tracks. This provides a vastly-superior situational awareness and positive ID of targets that was never imaginable on previous fighters, including the F-22. F-22 never had IR spectrum TGT detection and PID. F-35 has layered IR sensor detection and tracking, fused with the EW suite and AESA. Its forward quadrant DAS sensor and EOTS cover multiple IR wavelengths from different angles, so just from a passive emissions control posture, it has significant TGT detection and PID options. Now imagine 2 or more F-35s whose sensors get triggered to "look over at these contacts”. Each of those F-35s’ sensors will see the same contacts and provide different aspects to check against the threat library, which is then cross-pollinated with each other autonomously. The pilots don’t need to manage these sensors individually, just look out with the Helmet and see color-coded TGT designate boxes with PID, speed, altitude, probably weapons/fuel state, and when they are within weapons parameters.
The initial Non-Cooperative Target Recognition software had 637 parameters in Block II. Who knows what they have in Block III, or what’s in store for Block 4.
The F-35 is a turkey that should have been served roasted 15+ yeas ago, but as we are saddled with it, it seems poop can be polished with enough billions spent on it!
The turkey argument should have died with Pierre Sprey.
How much could the target aircraft spoof the return signal? For example add add something at the frequency of a propeller to make enemy think the jet is a piston engined drone? If it is impossible, then why not add a spinning "propeller pod" to your fighter jet?
The propeller pod adds drag and of course, will break once you go supersonic.
It will show up as a strange store not seen in the threat library, against the existing registered parametrics for that aircraft including:
1. Hi-res multi-aspect RCS shapes and values
2. Turbine fan blade count and RPMs
3. Velocity
4. Known stores/weapons
5. IR signature in Mid and Long Wave IR, fused between the forward quadrant DAS and EOTS (Pilot can zoom for LR visual PID within a certain range)
6. RF emission freq, repetition, and waveform profiles from that specific target
7. Cross-referenced track data from other F-35s and ISR nodes in the net, even showing point of origin airfield, estimated fuel state...
There were 637 parameters for NCTR with Block II. We're well into later Block III JSF now.
Every modern combat airplanes have this, or will soon have it. To the other capabilities and adaptability to the fast changing tech will decide the outcome of a air war. The described capabilities have been present in the Swedish airforce in the JA 37 Viggen since 1978. At that time in a more primitive version of course. Today Gripen E is the most developed modern fighter system of the above type.
US is generations ahead. They have tried and tested platforms.
@@bighands69 in what way? Everyone have tried and tested platforms. Sweden for 44 years. Who have tested longer?
Viggen never had anything remotely close to this. It's embarrassing to even mention it.
JAS-39E also is nowhere near JSF. Finnish Air Force evaluated these systems and JAS-39E didn't even have anything close to Super Hornet Block III. It's one of many reasons why JAS-39E/F failed to meet the basic threshold requirements, and scored the lowest in H-X.
@@LRRPFco52 false! The Finnish choice was political. Today NATO are very eager to take in Sweden. Especially the Swedish air force because they need Gripen E. They have nothing like it. And they have nothing like it Global eye either. They desperately need Sweden in this serious situation.
@@atlet1 Finnish Air Force conducted a longer fighter analysis with H-X than any other nation, since they announced H-X in late 2014. In 2020, Finnish observers asked Gripen E test pilots how the Gripen E performance and sensors behaved at night. The answer: “We haven’t flown it at night yet.” This was after at least 13 years of development mind you. Gripen E was an embarrassment in H-X, out-classed by every other entrant.
S300 S400 S500 S600 🤣🤣🤣🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺👍
HARM AGM-88
1. Aren't all tracks initially unidentified flying or surface objects? They are only identified by fusing more data.
2. Fighters may not have propellers, but UCAVs do. The idea of putting 4 AMRAAMs on a Predator has already been discussed.
For some reason, I keep hearing Chappy from Aces: Iron Eagle III.
No indicators for engine intake covers, ends up taking a long drink in water. So much for sensor fusion...
Oversight will probably be remedied in the future.
One cock-up by ground crew does not mean it is a bad aircraft.
You obviously never witnessed Crusaders and Phantoms being launched in daylight with their folding wings in the raised position.
Laughs in mishaps with the teen fighters. We lost 519 teen fighters with 189 fatalities in their first 10 years of service. Let those numbers sink in a bit before responding.
Hello
Hi
I wouldn't waste your time if I didn't believe it was good information. I don't think it can open the bay when supersonic.
I will check
Supersonic weapons separation tests were done across all 3 variants, over the entire flight envelope back in SDD phase, which was before IOC. The Integrated Test Force conducted 30 weapon separations in 31 days back in late 2016, including AMRAAMs fired on QF-4 target drones over the White Sands Missile Test Range, JDAMs and Small Diameter Bombs dropped out at China Lake Naval Weapons Test Center, and AIM-9X and other weapons fired over the Point Mugu Naval Test Range. Supersonic separation is one of the baseline requirements for weapons employment from JSF, per the gateway before any of them were allowed to declare IOC.
Regular supersonic weapons separation exercises are conducted with the weapons test squadrons and operational squadrons, who fire missiles and drop bombs during rotations and competitions held among various units. F-35As are able to sustain supersonic speeds longer than legacy fighters due to fuel fraction and no/minimal parasitic drag. I’ve personally watched and been part of some of these programs on legacy aircraft, and the pace at which they conducted JSF weapons SDD phase was unprecedented, with far more instrumentation than what we had.
F-22 has also validated its Air-to-Ground weapons from supersonic speeds from inside the bays, also done out of Edwards on nearby test ranges in the Western US.
@@LRRPFco52 OK I accept what you say and I will go back to my source and tell them they appear to be wrong. Thank you for the obvious effort you've put in.
@@mfromaustralia1 I've been tracking the JSF Program from the start, so I remember every milestone. Supersonic weapons release has more interesting implications for air-to-surface weapons. In 4th Gen, accelerating through the Mach to toss AAMs is pretty common for increasing pk because ToF is reduced.
In 5th Gen, it's often better to stay subsonic due to IR signature management. When you go supersonic, aerodynamic friction loads up the leading edges, which increases the detection and tracking ranges for IRST.
Stealth platforms are better managed by maintaining their extremely low IR signatures. Hugging the Mach is often a superior kinematic state to launch BVR missiles from as a result.
@@LRRPFco52 I can't hide my disappointment in my source. Ex F111 pilot and ardent lobbyist (against the F35). Anyway thank you again.
Can the F35 open its weapon bay doors and fire ordinance, when it is supersonic, or not ?
I think it can. I never read they had problems with the supersonic separation.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech ...Well it came up in a submission a few years ago in Australia (an F35 partner) at the Senate Inquiry into the F35 and they dodged the accusation.
The submission came from a civilian with no aviation experience or official military knowledge of aircraft, who then sent the letter to the Australian parliament. It is about as credible as fortune teller with a crystal ball. I believe the man was associated with several conspiracies theories as well. The F-35 has been certified for internal supersonic release of ordance for countless years.
Supersonic separation is a baseline requirement. Not only for A2A missiles, but AAMs while rolling and inverted, and bombs being tossed as well.
"fire ordinance"(sic)
No need to release publications. Munitions, aka ordnance, is an entirely different animal.
I know you’re big on defending China. And with good reason. But the F-35 is a wonder of the world. They’re not even in the game.
Here he is defending the F35
,,, your kid's sling-shot can destroy an F-35.
You do realize the F-35’s powerplant is built upon an engine already capable of swallowing vultures and being completely ok? Not including the lift-fan of the B model.
@@scheldon2244 . FYI: US F35, F22 and F18 are junks😱❗ 😁😂🤣
. 687 units combined US's 100 units F35, 187 - F22 and 400 - F18 in 2 waves of 300+ are all destroyed against 100 units SU27, 4 - SU30 and 2 - SU35 with only 12 units lost😨 witnessed by 5 officers of RAAF😭.
,,, ' It was like clubbing baby seals '😱❗
,,, see @ ua-cam.com/video/27qdB1D0s9M/v-deo.html
@@scheldon2244 . your kid's sling-shot can easily tear the painted-skin of an F-35 or F-22 and rendering it useless,
,,, because it will be more expensive to repair it like buying a new one.
. You can see in Israel lots of it with "skin-tears" are just parked to use as spare-parts for others which are still flying.
@@chitaegandalalake263 The F-35 wasn’t totally invisible to begin with, so don’t act like that’s going to completely change the game. It’s called low-observeable for a reason.
@@scheldon2244 ,,, maybe you can tell that to Erdogan who will not let go of his S-400 and he is ready with his sling-shot too😱❗😁😂🤣
Personally, I would NOT want to fly the F-35. Whatever its alleged advantages, it is clear that it is merely a flying data center and weapons truck and not much else. My concerns about it extend to its horrendous (economy destroying) cost and what sounds like an inability of U.S. and other users to keep it flying. The best fighter is useless if it cannot leave the hangar. I'm so tired of hearing about this turkey. It is a massive error on our part as it puts too much faith in technology and BLACK MAGIC! SMH. 🤮
It’s the safest, most capable combat system ever adopted by air forces. Its costs are actually on-par or less than legacy programs, including development, since there are 3 airframes. Maintenance is so far easier on F-35s compared to any other Radar-equipped fighter, the numbers are dramatic. F-35s are more available than legacy fighters, not hangar queens like the F-14, F-15E, Harrier, and F-22.
F-35A fleet MMHPFH just dropped to 3.5hrs, which is just not a thing normally.
F-16C is 11-14hrs, not including pods.
F/A-18E/F: 14-21hrs
F-14A/B/D was 40-60hrs for reference.
One of the biggest emphases was on leveraging technology to reduce maintenance hours and increase durability across all of the systems. They achieved that in spades, far exceeding anyone’s expectations really. Study actual MMHPFH numbers, not anything in the corporate media networks and their sensationalist headlines to generate ad revenue with click-bait.
In fact, the F35 deserves the amount invested in the project over USD 1 trillion, it deserves the name of the most modern plane, it deserves the name of the most expensive plane.....and because the F35 is also the most expensive SUBMERSIBLE, we can say with serenity that the F35 it really is a big BS.... let's be serious if we are still talking about the F 35 as a reliable plane then WHY 50% of the F35 fleet is grounded 24-7365 ???????? my opinion is that the plane is a big big lie.....honestly why do we pay the amount of 100 million USD, when everyone knows that the Stealth is bullshit???? Stealth delays detection, it doesn't prevent it, so the main advantage of this plane is not what it is advertised to be... otherwise it's all electronics, let's be serious... in a direct confrontation with Russia, not a single satellite works in the first 24 hours, then all this sophisticated equipment is FOR NONE....
Don't be so simplistic. Unless you have full knowledge of what the F35 can do in the extra time it has before detection (you don't), you cannot possibly tell how useful its' stealth capability actually is.
"Stealth delays detection, it doesn't prevent it,"(sic)
Thank you Captain Obvious. Most with at least room temperature IQ knew that four decades ago.
Nowhere near $1 Trillion has been invested in all 3 models of JSF. We haven’t even approached the acquisition budget of around $373-424 Billion. F-35A/B/C fleet is not grounded nor has it been grounded much at all. Availability rates are better than any of the 4th Gen fighters, with far less Maintenance Man Hours per Flight Hour.
JSF is not reliant on satellites for anything. Nice to have, not need to have.
JAS39 is more complex but build to be not more complex to work with. if you change one sytem all outher is not efected like on all outer wer one sytem in so ingrate with all outer sytem gets effected we learned from J35 it had back in 1955 an analogalog an digital link 16l by using a mechanical computer. the JA 37 was mad 100 % already in the blueprint. from that we learned the bad parts of making a to complex system and for every update all sensors ext have to be tested again for buggs etc. what i heard about the F-35 its matches the problem JA 37 had but it was less to reconstruct all of it and think of how to get around all that 100,000 hours of coding just for changing one part on how it could be done. and we did it in JAS39
JAS-39E isn't even close to JSF sensor fusion and large data algorithmic programming. F-35s have way more sensors and a much higher fidelity and bandwidth data link system than what's on Gripen.
JAS-39E uses US Mil-1553B data buses that are 2 generations older at least, compared with JSF databus architecture.
F-35s have about a dozen RF sensors, and 7 IR sensors embedded in the airframe into a closed loop fusion, networked with other F-35s.
The sheer volume and quality of data outclasses the Gripen E sensor suite and its narrow bandwidth legacy data link.
There are also different levels of sensor fusion. Sweden doesn't have the manpower to even attempt what's been going on with the JSF program, let alone possess it.
@@LRRPFco52 that's why SAAB was called in to fix and update the F-35... SAAB have worked with digital data link sens the 50s.
The J35 could pair 4 J35 and a ground station radar back in the 70s and all radar info was charred in real time you could lock on using any of the 5 radars that was paired and the closest on to target could fire with his radar of guided by the outers radar. the EF-2000 and F-35 got that future working in 2018... and that was how J35 and JA37 could have the power to lock on the SR-71 even under havey jamming. and like i said it's a reason SAAB and the Swedish part of BAE System got contract in by northrop grumman to work on the F-35 and SAAB helped build the new training planes. we have done what the F-35 do for over 30years already... and take a look at the JAS39E body most of the digital warfare sensors are build inn to the body itself. you can see the shape of big antennas all over the wing's etc. we still one steep ahad...
@@Moontrue1on1 The SAGE Data Link system used on F-101B Voodoo, F-102A, and F-106A for NORAD pre-date the J-35 Draken's watered-down version. SAGE could control the aircraft remotely while the pilot rode it to intercept, based on multiple ground station antennae with networked data links.
Draken used Hughes fire control radar systems and US missiles built under license, as did J-37 Viggen interceptor variants with AIM-7 & AIM-9 licensed to Sweden.
Engines were Rolls Royce for the Draken, and Pratt & Whitney JT8D modified by Saab Flygmotor for Viggen.
US did Fighter-to-fighter cooperative data link guided missile test & evaluation during AIMVAL at Nellis in the 1970s. That stuff has been kept very hush-hush for ages.
BAE did it on big wing Harrier with AIM-120 in preparation for JSF, working with USAF and USMC.
Saab did not come in to help or fix anything on JSF. The groundwork for networked missile guidance was already laid down on multiple programs, with expanded parameters on JSF with MADL.
@@LRRPFco52 And? what a stupid thing to do. im sure it dint pre-date the J-35 Draken's because Drakeen was the first jet in service to use a digital data link, which is needed to do anything of impotens to... SAAB have been working on the same system sens 1955 generation after generations USA haven't on any of their datalinks it always had different objectives USA have had AWAC so there was no point to dev the same kind of system as Sweden until today. and we have built on it sens 1955... its a reason why the F-35 need the U2 as a middle queen to communicate with other system and JAS39 don't we been there done that with the JA37..
@@LRRPFco52 have a look att the body
when you see that shape inside the body of the wings on the F-35 or any new aircraft your in the same class as gripen...
ua-cam.com/video/n50suTPXXSo/v-deo.html
F35 Junk $cam Fighter could not detect Afghan militants.
... I think you're referring to when all of our jets took-off hastily from Kabul with Afghanis still attached. I can assure you, however: Brandon knew they were there. He just didn't care...
@@trikk9964 US has been involved in 251 conflicts since 1991, none against peer opponents, with no modern defenses.
@@ViceCoin Yes, because there don't exist peer opponents to the US.
@@ArchOfficial Still useless in Afghanistan defeat.
@@ViceCoin They're only paying homage to the Soviets who got their ass ravaged in Afghanistan.
All of this is ok, but after black magic you must be able to hit or run.
F35 can not hit because lack of enough missiles and maneuverability, and obviously can NOT run with a minute of supersonic speed.
Then have a very nice computer but need a dozen of fighters to protect it.
Looks much more like a downsized AWACS instead of a fighter.
I would like to see how to protect that expensive computer in a CAS mission.
Thank you for your effort to explain black magic.
Name me just one legacy fighter that you think can sustain supersonic speed longer than an F-35A (not that this is needed or really wanted on 5th Gen when within IRST field of regard).
Name me one 4th Gen fighter than carries more stowed kills than F-35s (stowed kills is a term used where the probability of kill is so high that each weapon is seen as a kill waiting to happen, unlike on 4th Gen fighters where most of the missiles might end up being used to establish offensive posturing and not hit anything).
F-35s protect themselves better than anyone else can, while remaining basically offensive even inside the threat Missile Employment Zone.
They are networked AWACS, EW, ISR, Stealth Interceptors, and Stealth Strikers all rolled into something that looks like a fighter.
F-35s have superior maneuverability at altitudes where it counts, in ways where it actually counts, which is really not that much in the era of Helmet-cued HOBS missiles, AESA Radars, and advanced BVR missiles that actually work.
For a CAS mission, it doesn’t need to even be seen, while it can see better what’s going on around Troops In Contact (TIC) than an A-10 pilot can with their eyes.
@@LRRPFco52 ALL legacy planes could afford supersonic flight for more than a minute. Even MiG 21 had 5 minutes of fuel to post combustion at Mach 2, oh! F35 only little bit over 1.2 Mach and a minute, not like project 1.6.
All your F35 skills, you should explain to the israelies that hit a bird (syrian S-200) and damage it beyond repair.
F117 are much more stealth than F35 and even F117 was shot down in 1999 by a Buk missile.
The A10 is so unique that is still there in the front, F35 could not replace none of the planes in the project.
Even AF Gen. look at F35 as a Ferrari, Would you drive a Ferrari to a battle? or a tank?
The Navy don´t want F35s and choose to buy MORE F18 Super Hornets.
Do you think you know better than them what is going on with F35?
If F35 were half of your thinks. Did the Navy buy more F18 or buy more F35? Did the USAF reduce the number of F35?
Anyone smart enough to read between the lines could understand that F35 is a BIG FAIL.
To me look like F105 a BIG FAIL.
Thank you for your answer and be fine
@@josevillalba6702 MiG-21 has to be pointed at its destination airfield if it wants to go Mach 2. It only carries 4400lbs of internal fuel and 3000lb of external, with a very inefficient turbojet and poor aerodynamic design.
F-35A carries 18,250lb of internal fuel plus weapons internally, so it can sustain high speeds if the pilot wants to, not that it matters. The exaggerated reports about skin bubbling never happened, and came from 2 of the first 6 LRIP birds, an early F-35B, the other an F-35C, before the airframe construction was finalized with carbon fiber for the booms and tailplanes.
Pilots who came from F-16s say they average 50-80knots faster cruise speeds in the F-35A, hugging the Mach if they want to easily.
F-35 has smaller RCS than the F-117A even with the 3rd generation RAM on the Nighthawk. F-35 also has a smaller RCS than the F-22A. There's a lot of carbon fiber structural materials and RAM used on F-35s, which are RF transparent.
@@josevillalba6702 Israelis have been shot at over 100 times by Syrian SAMs with zero losses, while bombing Syrian sites with impunity. Bird strike does not equal S-200. That was Russian mongoloid propaganda.
If General Brown thinks F-35As are Ferraris, he now has to explain what F-15s and F-16s are, because F-35As have higher readiness rates, and that doesn't include pods for the F-15Es and F-16CMs.
Maintenance Man Hours Per Flight Hour just dropped to 3.5hrs for F-35A. F-16Cs are 11-14hrs. The Ferrari analogy doesn't fit at all.
US Navy cut their Super Hornet orders and even cut their Block III upgrade schedule for SH, after seeing what the F-35C does for them. They finally got a long combat radius back to the carrier after losing the A-6E and A-7E back in the day.
USAF and USN want more spare parts for the existing fleet, before Block 4 F-35s go into production. The demand is extremely high for airframes for Foreign Military Sales.
Whatever sources you're reading, you need to block them because they're full of incorrect information.
@@LRRPFco52 Ok , you are THE RIGHT ONE and even the USAF and Navy are wrong.
About your previous question, I gave you an answer and you don't say anything. You try to imply that the performance of F35 is ok, but is NOT true. Could have a very nice computer but as a war plane sucks.
My friend you are a big FOOL, perhaps was a Santa's reno who impact the israeli F35, or even better was Superman.
The maintenance hours of F35 are much higher and even more with many times long periods of grounded ALL fleet, US and all other countries.
How many times did it happened to F15 or F16?
Air defenses of the russians were proven so good in Syria that the israelies put their brave war planes behind civil planes to atack from lebaneese air space.
The Syrian S200 shoted down at least an israeli F16 and damage many, even with counter messures.
And even more Huties proved how good are S200 shoting down a Tornado and a F15 and even impacting another F15. And not allways using the proper missiles.
Perhaps my sources are bad but you use Disney as a source. I use all sources and after that thinck about what make sense. I gave you sources in US but if you don't believe try to read F35 isues inform. There, in an official paper are the truth that you don't want to believe.
F35 is a machine to do some things and can't do that things, then is a FAIL.
If you are in love with F35 you have a problem. It's only a machine.
That was a ruff one. I’m not that smart