there's a lot of propaganda against this jet but as a test pilot for this plane once said: " let them doubt it". I don't think people understand how to apriciate the complex avionics under a stealth design. amazing engineering
@@Andy-pp5ic We can't start another Iraqi war to test this plane, so this is all we get for the most part (unless a war breakes out in Middle east the US has to join)
The full capabilities of this airframe are to waste tax dollars while being unable to outfight the F-16. One on one, the F-16 can plant the F-35 six feet under, at a tiny fraction of the cost. Anyone who believes Lockheed Martin's corporate propaganda is a child.
@@williamsherman9514 your source is literally a site called 'war is boring'. Doesn't seem legit at all. Coming back to my point, the F-35 has a 20.0W/L in the red flag exercises against F-16's and F-15's, and all this while it was still limited at 7G's. I've heard numerous pilots praise the power of the F-135 engine inside the F-35 which they describe as way more powerful and responsive compared to the F-16 engine. Now if you all add it up, it makes sense that the F-35 wins with ease. The F-16 is very agile but not if it's weaponized. You see, all the F-16 demonstrations you see are stripped F-16's without any weaponry at all. If you happen to weaponize the F-16 it loses almost all of it's aerodynamics. So the F-35 is more responsive, has more firepower, has the same agility when weaponized, has better sensors and has sensor fusion. There's no way the F-16 will win this.
@@calebrmarvin You're sadly & wildly misinformed. The F-35 is replacing fighters for 3 services, and very few F-22s were made. Please do more reading on the subject.
@@calebrmarvin Well actually, it is multi-role. It is a 'jack of all trades, master of none' sort of thing. However, planes like the F22 and F16 are generally better at dogfighting because they are made specifically for the task. The real decision-maker is the pilot though. You could have the best F16, but if they are newer pilots vs an experienced F35 pilot, it's more likely that the F35 will win. That's for you, William Sherman. It's the pilot that matters. (For the most part) @William Sherman
@@williamsherman9514 like i said: SHUT THE F*CK UP. You dont know what youre talking about. The F-35 Would Beat The F-16 and F-22 Anytime, Any Day, In Any Place.
yes, but "US House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith on Friday said it is time to cut the budget of the controversial Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter program, calling it a money-guzzling "rat hole" that does not work well." sputniknews.com/military/202103051082267606-us-house-armed-services-chair-wants-budget-cuts-to-rat-hole-f-35-fighter-program/
Since you brought up the price tag. In Denmark, we've decided to buy 27 F-35A's to replace our aging F-16's. The price at which we're buying those F-35A's are at 20 billion Danish Kroner. That's 740 million Kroner, per aircraft, which is roughly $105 million. That's cheaper than both of the competitors in our fighter competition (The F/A-18E was $122 million per aircraft, and the Eurofighter was $160 million). So not only was the Lightning II the cheapest, but after the results of Red Flag 2017, it also looks like it's the most capable.
All the tech talk in this plane brings home the point that it brings the utmost fear to its enemy. That they would think many times if they would fight or take flight...in war and in peace, its good to have a loud voice and it beats having the biggest stick in your glove. My country dont have harware like these so the big bully stare us down with its hallow threats. If you are a taxpayer and can afford to make one of these, then you should be proud of having one, not all country can create a tech like these much less build one.
Something that really irks me about some of the people who are against the f-35 is that they don't understand that this aircraft isn't meant to replace the f-22, it's part of the hi-lo mix. You've got your more expensive, more capable fighters to do some of the work, and your lower capability, lower cost aircraft to supplement the rest. The two complement each other, and that's what's going on with the f-22/f-35 here.
They still think the A-10 was created by god and is invincible and shit! Just wait till it goes in a high threat environment where there are S300s or S400s
john doe Correct. A-10 was designed for CAS in an airspace where Air Dominance has already been established. However, what about when Air Dominance hasn't been established? What about when the enemy still has IADS, and an Airforce providing CAP that'd chew up any A-10s trying to perform CAS duties? That's when you need the F-35A, which can operate safely in that environment, providing CAS, even while the enemy is doing his damnedest to try and shoot you down with IADS and CAP. Also, it helps that, when the IADS, and enemy CAP has been dealt with, the F-35 has the capability of carrying more stores than the A-10, can loiter for longer, and can arrive on station quicker. Not to mention it has better situational awareness because of it's integrated systems like the APG-81 SAR mode, EOTS, and EO-DAS which will mean less Blue-On-Blue incidents (something which the A-10 is apparently notorious for in Afghanistan, which relies on the old Mk-1 Eyeball and Litening pod).
The F-35 is way more modern, could probably bomb targets way more accurate, and unlike A-10, it could operate in hostile radar territory. The A-10 had the more powerful cannon though, and could get riddled with bullet holes, and even survive hits by SAM's, and make it home with one engine. The F-35 seems way more sensitive with its RAM coating, and sensors. Single engine aswell, if its gone, you're gone.
Maneuvrability, in what accounts to manned combat aircraft, reaches a point where improving it is pointless and it even can become a drawback (either if used or even just as the drawbacks of merely having the features that provide the capability). That's how the latest Ruskie Flankers are best for airshows (followed by F-22 and Eurocanards), but no Cobra maneuver will ever be helpful in modern air combat. F-16 and original Su-27 maneuvrability (they're close) is more than correct, more is barely (if even) useful but in airshows.
despite unasked, that's actually a good point, but the answer is a couple of also good points: the specifications were made in an when they couldn't possible fully forecast the evolution of technology and the future of air combat, and the F-35 is not actually a "turkey" that "can't turn, can't climb, can't run" but it's equally or more maneuverable than the F-16 (which could account for "super maneuvrability" despite not being as spectacular as modern Flankers or the F-22).
All those Russian jets (a) would never try those cobra moves in a real fight. Because it would leave them so low and slow, they would be sitting ducks for any other fighter. (b) Let those hyper-maneuverable jets just try to pull of those moves with a full fuel load, and 6-8 missiles hanging off the wings.(c) With the new high off boresight missiles, pilots can just literally look up to 75-90 degrees to either side, up or down and target and fire a missile.(d) The human body is the limiting factor in this. Until we have unmanned fighters, no use in chasing hyper maneuverability. And finally (f) this isn't like WW2, or even Vietnam. The only reason they had close in dogfights in Vietnam. Was due to Vietnamese fighters, knowing the exact routes taken by US bombers,and escorting fighters, and would ambush them and get in close, cause at distance they didn't have long range missiles like US fighters. And those missiles the US had back then weren't particularly good. Half of them didn't work due to the humidity in that region. Today, radars and all other systems for tracking enemy aircraft, are 20 times as good. And the long range missiles are probably nearly 20 times more deadly. Hasn't been a gun fight between fighters in 40 years. Last one was an Israeli F-15 that shot down a Syrian Mig 21 in I think 82. And every other kill the Israelis got when they nearly took out the entire airforce of Syria, were all missile kills, against what where supposedly more maneuverable aircraft. 80 % of it is the pilot as well. Sorry for the giant run on paragraph. Haven't had my coffee yet. Cheers bud.
not hater but those planes need air conditioned hangar or can't land on field only really flat surface. Swedish planes can't be stored anywhere like sheds and land on typical field farmland etc. Not hater but every thing has weak points , the thing that we learn later .
yes; but "US House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith on Friday said it is time to cut the budget of the controversial Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter program, calling it a money-guzzling "rat hole" that does not work well." sputniknews.com/military/202103051082267606-us-house-armed-services-chair-wants-budget-cuts-to-rat-hole-f-35-fighter-program/
***** Are you sure, cause the F-22 was stopped because it was too expensive to continue, the F-35 is already expensive and so would adding the super hornet.
Kaleb Kraft well the F-35s were grounded several times in the past couple years and I was talking about the Advanced super hornet not the regular super hornet
enator71 what do you mean hornets crashing all over the place? What about that advanced super hornet? Those might replace the hornets so the F-35 can just replace the Harriers and besides F-35s are meant to be strike fighters and the only time they do air to air combat is when there is no other way to escape the enemy
Also like the vid says. Maintaining older aircraft wil cost more. There will be less F35 but do just as much (if not more) damage. And if you opt for a more affordable option because you care about money more than citizen protection then you truly have no hope as some other country will innovate and not be blind and be stuck in old times saying everything is impossible.
As long as nature decides to not be nature and never rain, you can fly, otherwise, nice job, the enemy knows a large section of your air corp is unusable just by checking the weather report. I see no problems here.
still the old phone would be more robust , while new smartphone cracks and breaks when falling on pavement . Not sure about this one but one story talks about older plane from usa that needed air conditioning hangar while other plane was ok in icy conditions or any. and american planes cant land on rough surface , like piece of land , plains ect.
Please air-gap your servers and make sure your Chinese employees don't have god-mode access to locations where they are stored. They already stole a whole bunch - thankfully, their first attempt at producing a fifth-gen fighter (J-20) is laughable - it clearly shows they still have a lot to learn about aerodynamics and stealth. Plus, the Chinese can't produce a jet engine to save their lives.
China went from mechanical radar straight to development of AESA, skipping passive radar technology. Unlike PAK FA, the J-20 got a frameless canopy, just like the F-22 does. And they have a 180kN engine in the pipeline, more powerful than the one currently used - aswell as the one planned - in the PAK FA.
BWade40 yes I did there were alot of power fraises like ground breaking, powerful and advanced. it seamed more like a video to show to Congress men and not to actually show the technology involved
Single Engine. Fancy Schmancy. All kinds of sensors and computers. The latest technology. Expensive beyond belief. How come the F-35 can't beat an F-16 in a close range dogfight? I'll take an F-22, SU-35, F-15 or even an F-18 against this Tub of junk. I hope Trump does the right thing and ceases or greatly reduces production of this endless money pit of a project.
*Single Rifle. Fancy Schmancy. All kinds of tools and equipment. The latest technology. Expensive beyond belief. How come a Marine with an M4 can't beat a Roman gladiator in hand-to-hand combat?*
+GeorgeCee Because its not meant to.Dogfights are a thing of the past,and should one ensue,would result in a 1:1 kill ratio.Read the CSBA's report _Trends in Air to Air Combat: Implications for Future Air Superiority_.It states that the presence of early missile warning systems,HMCS will allow a pilot,if locked on to,to launch a missile at his foe in return as the warning presents him ample time to do so.Once both aircraft have achieved their 'launch and leave' missiles it'll result in mutual kills.Though the report didn't mention the presence of thrust vector capable missiles and greater resistance to confusion of modern IR seeking missiles which can reject false readings,it does lend credence to this analysis. By the way,the so called F-35 that so called lost to an F-16 in a dogfight was an AF-2 test airframe designed to fly in restricted flight envelopes,using the maneuvering F-16 as a reference to ensure it could pull of such maneuvers within such restrictions.Shocking how people can still believe this claim,it was debunked a year ago.Oh and I think Trump isn't stopping the F-35.I believe there was an article on that.
Who told you that? The media? Ask the most experience norwegian F-16 pilot, callsign 'Dolby'. You'll be surprised. Hint: F-35 is superior in every way, except for the cockpit view to your six.
They're not giving other countries technology secrets. These capabilities are already known. There's a HUGE difference in knowing what capabilities a fighter has as opposed to how to replicate it. This video is not telling other countries HOW the F-35 does this -- just showing what it can do. Many other countries do not have the technology to figure out, much less replicate what this fighter does.
there's a lot of propaganda against this jet but as a test pilot for this plane once said: " let them doubt it". I don't think people understand how to apriciate the complex avionics under a stealth design. amazing engineering
still we need real combat data .
Otherwise is just another piece of propaganda.
Yeah Im saying we may never know if is a waste of money OR not
*the soul of hope shines* but i am hoping for the best
@@Andy-pp5ic We can't start another Iraqi war to test this plane, so this is all we get for the most part
(unless a war breakes out in Middle east the US has to join)
And that's just what they will admit to...none of us will ever know the full capabilities of this aircraft.
The full capabilities of this airframe are to waste tax dollars while being unable to outfight the F-16. One on one, the F-16 can plant the F-35 six feet under, at a tiny fraction of the cost. Anyone who believes Lockheed Martin's corporate propaganda is a child.
@@williamsherman9514 hmm so that's why the F-35 won multiple times against the F-16 with ease? I don't think so bud
@@user-ri9dn4vi6i Dunno what YOU'VE been reading ... medium.com/war-is-boring/read-for-yourself-the-f-35-s-damning-dogfighting-report-719a4e66f3eb
@@williamsherman9514 your source is literally a site called 'war is boring'. Doesn't seem legit at all.
Coming back to my point, the F-35 has a 20.0W/L in the red flag exercises against F-16's and F-15's, and all this while it was still limited at 7G's. I've heard numerous pilots praise the power of the F-135 engine inside the F-35 which they describe as way more powerful and responsive compared to the F-16 engine. Now if you all add it up, it makes sense that the F-35 wins with ease. The F-16 is very agile but not if it's weaponized. You see, all the F-16 demonstrations you see are stripped F-16's without any weaponry at all. If you happen to weaponize the F-16 it loses almost all of it's aerodynamics.
So the F-35 is more responsive, has more firepower, has the same agility when weaponized, has better sensors and has sensor fusion. There's no way the F-16 will win this.
@@user-ri9dn4vi6i You can't possibly be challenging the validity of my source. That only shows your ign0rance if you never heard of that publication.
Where do i pre order ?
I think they have a shopify account
Say whatever you want but that is the most epic aircraft I have ever seen
And you believe the manufacturer's own opinion of it? Don't be a child. The F-16 beats the F-35 in any dogfight.
@@calebrmarvin You're sadly & wildly misinformed. The F-35 is replacing fighters for 3 services, and very few F-22s were made. Please do more reading on the subject.
@@calebrmarvin Well actually, it is multi-role. It is a 'jack of all trades, master of none' sort of thing. However, planes like the F22 and F16 are generally better at dogfighting because they are made specifically for the task. The real decision-maker is the pilot though. You could have the best F16, but if they are newer pilots vs an experienced F35 pilot, it's more likely that the F35 will win. That's for you, William Sherman. It's the pilot that matters. (For the most part)
@William Sherman
@@williamsherman9514 like i said: SHUT THE F*CK UP. You dont know what youre talking about. The F-35 Would Beat The F-16 and F-22 Anytime, Any Day, In Any Place.
@@williamsherman9514ok, who asked? And who cares?
“Some say F35 is the most stealthy while some say it’s F22 but deep down we all know that it’s MH370”
*damn*
Lol
Hahaha! Damn!
jeez
PLEASE make F-35Bs with 2 engine's that are both 3d thrust Vectoring and has lasers on top and bottom.🙏🦅🇺🇸
they ant litsening to you'
@@karinareinders4045 he dosent know anything about physics
awesome jet as always and forever
I love the F35 and the narrator's voice is very good!
yes, but "US House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith on Friday said it is time to cut the budget of the controversial Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter program, calling it a money-guzzling "rat hole" that does not work well."
sputniknews.com/military/202103051082267606-us-house-armed-services-chair-wants-budget-cuts-to-rat-hole-f-35-fighter-program/
Good job Lockheed Martin!
Well, it _is_ the single most ambitious project in the history of war, so it's not surprising
Since you brought up the price tag.
In Denmark, we've decided to buy 27 F-35A's to replace our aging F-16's. The price at which we're buying those F-35A's are at 20 billion Danish Kroner. That's 740 million Kroner, per aircraft, which is roughly $105 million.
That's cheaper than both of the competitors in our fighter competition (The F/A-18E was $122 million per aircraft, and the Eurofighter was $160 million).
So not only was the Lightning II the cheapest, but after the results of Red Flag 2017, it also looks like it's the most capable.
Metalhead 93 Should I bother explaining to you roughly how aircraft procurement and life cycles work, or am I going to waste my time?
All the tech talk in this plane brings home the point that it brings the utmost fear to its enemy. That they would think many times if they would fight or take flight...in war and in peace, its good to have a loud voice and it beats having the biggest stick in your glove. My country dont have harware like these so the big bully stare us down with its hallow threats. If you are a taxpayer and can afford to make one of these, then you should be proud of having one, not all country can create a tech like these much less build one.
Something that really irks me about some of the people who are against the f-35 is that they don't understand that this aircraft isn't meant to replace the f-22, it's part of the hi-lo mix. You've got your more expensive, more capable fighters to do some of the work, and your lower capability, lower cost aircraft to supplement the rest. The two complement each other, and that's what's going on with the f-22/f-35 here.
@Blob B yeah
@Blob B which if you combine both?
Nothing can escape
ikr the f22 is SUPPER GOOD
Show us some updated high alpha videos.
uhhhh you aint replacing the good ol A-FUCKING-10 NOW ARE YA????
You're an idiot. Don't comment on shit you know NOTHING about smh.
They still think the A-10 was created by god and is invincible and shit! Just wait till it goes in a high threat environment where there are S300s or S400s
Stormsquad Or when A-10s get jumped by Chinese fighters in 10 years.
john doe
Correct. A-10 was designed for CAS in an airspace where Air Dominance has already been established.
However, what about when Air Dominance hasn't been established?
What about when the enemy still has IADS, and an Airforce providing CAP that'd chew up any A-10s trying to perform CAS duties?
That's when you need the F-35A, which can operate safely in that environment, providing CAS, even while the enemy is doing his damnedest to try and shoot you down with IADS and CAP. Also, it helps that, when the IADS, and enemy CAP has been dealt with, the F-35 has the capability of carrying more stores than the A-10, can loiter for longer, and can arrive on station quicker. Not to mention it has better situational awareness because of it's integrated systems like the APG-81 SAR mode, EOTS, and EO-DAS which will mean less Blue-On-Blue incidents (something which the A-10 is apparently notorious for in Afghanistan, which relies on the old Mk-1 Eyeball and Litening pod).
What about drones?
Cuando USA Tiene
Can F-35 provide CAS to ground troops just like the A-10???
Sim Yong Siang YES
Yep
The F-35 is way more modern, could probably bomb targets way more accurate, and unlike A-10, it could operate in hostile radar territory. The A-10 had the more powerful cannon though, and could get riddled with bullet holes, and even survive hits by SAM's, and make it home with one engine. The F-35 seems way more sensitive with its RAM coating, and sensors. Single engine aswell, if its gone, you're gone.
SuperGeronimo999
With smart weapons and better avionics, the aircraft can maintain a safer distance also which is the case with the F-35.
Sim Yong Siang YES
5:58 Isn't it supposed to be 720 degrees (4*pi) for a "spherical view"?
They'll NEVER be a day that the F-35 will replace a good old A-10.....
yea but they
My favourite jet from the 5th generation.
SU-57 better than F-35 lmaoo
@@erichschneider4759 the comment is 3 years ago bro
@@avery1647 ok cool
@@erichschneider4759 again
WHO HAS MORE MONEY?
oh yeah usa
@@seantaggart7382 cool
God I hope to fly this thing! My future ride!
Dr. Love 1987 u wanna be a future pilot?
Rick Wilosn I hope so.
Same here buddy, same here!
Yall better defend me while I'm in my abrams
Yeah don't worry, with the F-35 it's a garunteed ;)
why upload twice?
EXACTLY. i already wanked to the first one
Marcus Allen wut. they uploaded the video twice....
Should 5th generation aircraft not include hyper-maneuverability?
Maneuvrability, in what accounts to manned combat aircraft, reaches a point where improving it is pointless and it even can become a drawback (either if used or even just as the drawbacks of merely having the features that provide the capability).
That's how the latest Ruskie Flankers are best for airshows (followed by F-22 and Eurocanards), but no Cobra maneuver will ever be helpful in modern air combat.
F-16 and original Su-27 maneuvrability (they're close) is more than correct, more is barely (if even) useful but in airshows.
I did not make the 5th generation aircraft's specification list
despite unasked, that's actually a good point, but the answer is a couple of also good points: the specifications were made in an when they couldn't possible fully forecast the evolution of technology and the future of air combat, and the F-35 is not actually a "turkey" that "can't turn, can't climb, can't run" but it's equally or more maneuverable than the F-16 (which could account for "super maneuvrability" despite not being as spectacular as modern Flankers or the F-22).
All those Russian jets (a) would never try those cobra moves in a real fight. Because it would leave them so low and slow, they would be sitting ducks for any other fighter. (b) Let those hyper-maneuverable jets just try to pull of those moves with a full fuel load, and 6-8 missiles hanging off the wings.(c) With the new high off boresight missiles, pilots can just literally look up to 75-90 degrees to either side, up or down and target and fire a missile.(d) The human body is the limiting factor in this. Until we have unmanned fighters, no use in chasing hyper maneuverability. And finally (f) this isn't like WW2, or even Vietnam. The only reason they had close in dogfights in Vietnam. Was due to Vietnamese fighters, knowing the exact routes taken by US bombers,and escorting fighters, and would ambush them and get in close, cause at distance they didn't have long range missiles like US fighters. And those missiles the US had back then weren't particularly good. Half of them didn't work due to the humidity in that region. Today, radars and all other systems for tracking enemy aircraft, are 20 times as good. And the long range missiles are probably nearly 20 times more deadly. Hasn't been a gun fight between fighters in 40 years. Last one was an Israeli F-15 that shot down a Syrian Mig 21 in I think 82. And every other kill the Israelis got when they nearly took out the entire airforce of Syria, were all missile kills, against what where supposedly more maneuverable aircraft. 80 % of it is the pilot as well. Sorry for the giant run on paragraph. Haven't had my coffee yet. Cheers bud.
For all f-35 haters, 1.5 trillion dollars is the estimated cost for the whole program including all costs to buy, run, fuel, and repair.
not hater but those planes need air conditioned hangar or can't land on field only really flat surface. Swedish planes can't be stored anywhere like sheds and land on typical field farmland etc.
Not hater but every thing has weak points , the thing that we learn later .
@@Andy-pp5ic Which hey im Hopeful
Great video
yes; but "US House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith on Friday said it is time to cut the budget of the controversial Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter program, calling it a money-guzzling "rat hole" that does not work well."
sputniknews.com/military/202103051082267606-us-house-armed-services-chair-wants-budget-cuts-to-rat-hole-f-35-fighter-program/
The 6thG is gonna have LTE...wait till ya see that bad boy..
Every time someone starts cutting cost, somebody else has to pay the difference. I hope its not our pilots !
I should be president and continue the F-22, the Advanced super hornet and the F-35
mrwong11989 So you want a A lot of debt.
nope
***** Are you sure, cause the F-22 was stopped because it was too expensive to continue, the F-35 is already expensive and so would adding the super hornet.
Kaleb Kraft well the F-35s were grounded several times in the past couple years and I was talking about the Advanced super hornet not the regular super hornet
enator71 what do you mean hornets crashing all over the place? What about that advanced super hornet? Those might replace the hornets so the F-35 can just replace the Harriers and besides F-35s are meant to be strike fighters and the only time they do air to air combat is when there is no other way to escape the enemy
ผมอาจจะเป็นคนตรงคนจริงใจ
And the air force says it failed... Bad luck boys
Dentro de poco la fuerza aérea navegará por el espacio fuera de nuestro planeta, orbitando y de ahí a unos lustros se podría hacer viajes estelares
See them soon in Greece.
The United State F 35 The very Smart Fighter for the Warfighter Because the professional technology...
Dudes …. We neeeeeeeed A10’s. Come on
Hello from Ukraine
INDIAN AIR FORCE must buy this plane against China
Combine the F-16 F-15 F-14 AND F-35
This means *freedom*
Corporate corruption*
@@Hellsong89 *FREEEEEEDOOOOM*
*BRRTT*
It's all about satellite carrying nukes.
Hail to the king baby...
UNFORTUNATELY we DON'T HAVE long range missiles but Russia and China does so it doesn't matter that it can see further. It will be hit FIRST😥😭🤬
YEA WE DO but its classifies
when will they learn that there is no way to make a all in one plane without making it expensive and a turkey.
All in one? You mean like the SU35, typhoon, rafale, F15, F16.... yep totally impassable
Also like the vid says. Maintaining older aircraft wil cost more. There will be less F35 but do just as much (if not more) damage. And if you opt for a more affordable option because you care about money more than citizen protection then you truly have no hope as some other country will innovate and not be blind and be stuck in old times saying everything is impossible.
Jack Sutton I'm not saying that we won't need a fifth Jen in the future but it's just to expensive and not a mature tec
Sam George When you say Turkey, you quote Pierre Sprey.
When you do that, you're just as big a moron as he is.
Off you go.
Shirghazay Cowboys I'm not quoting him.
hi
F-35 The John Cena
Americaaa! FUCK YEA!
คือบริษัทเคยมีโครงการกับประเทศอินเดียเครื่องบิน f21 ข้อสนใจอยู่แต่เรื่องเทคโนโลยีต้องแน่นต้องเต็ม
👍🏻 us made , means perfect and high quality
Not many thing made on US soil have such quality. Fighter aircraft and Tabasco are the only things that I can quickly think of.
4.14
As long as nature decides to not be nature and never rain, you can fly, otherwise, nice job, the enemy knows a large section of your air corp is unusable just by checking the weather report. I see no problems here.
The F-35 can fly through rain with no problem
Don't make fool on some Technology
United states state department failed to allure India that their 5th generatio fighter jet is the best thinktank
still the old phone would be more robust , while new smartphone cracks and breaks when falling on pavement .
Not sure about this one but one story talks about older plane from usa that needed air conditioning hangar while other plane was ok in icy conditions or any. and american planes cant land on rough surface , like piece of land , plains ect.
ดูจากแผนที่ประเทศพม่าอยู่ในโซนที่ประชากรหนาแน่นมีความหนาแน่นมากที่สุดในโลกจีนบังคลาเทศอาเซียน 10 ประเทศมันเป็นที่ที่เหมาะสมที่เชื้อกลายพันธุ์จะแพร่ระบาดได้อย่างรวดเร็วก็ควรที่จะจัดการปัญหาเรื่องส่วนตัวความเห็นแก่ตัวของผู้นำ
พูดกันตรงๆเลยนะไม่ใช่แค่ฉันคนเดียวผู้ใหญ่หลายท่านที่อยู่ในเมืองไทยเนี่ยแหละคิดเหมือนฉันเลยอยากจะไปถล่มไอ้พวกโรงงานพวกนี้นะจริงๆมันเกินไปมีแต่เด็กทั้งนั้น
존나 멋있다....
give it ai and it will be invincible.
yolo
Please air-gap your servers and make sure your Chinese employees don't have god-mode access to locations where they are stored.
They already stole a whole bunch - thankfully, their first attempt at producing a fifth-gen fighter (J-20) is laughable - it clearly shows they still have a lot to learn about aerodynamics and stealth. Plus, the Chinese can't produce a jet engine to save their lives.
Juuso Peltoniemi Wut?
China went from mechanical radar straight to development of AESA, skipping passive radar technology. Unlike PAK FA, the J-20 got a frameless canopy, just like the F-22 does. And they have a 180kN engine in the pipeline, more powerful than the one currently used - aswell as the one planned - in the PAK FA.
I'm a Western fighter fanboy but this is literally propaganda telling us about what it can do but not telling us how and why it's important.
Sam George You did watch the video, no?
BWade40 yes I did there were alot of power fraises like ground breaking, powerful and advanced. it seamed more like a video to show to Congress men and not to actually show the technology involved
They explained fairly if they would explain in to full details enemy would just copy
invader Unknown there info is stored on servers. in this age the enemy already knows
You're not very bright then.
Single Engine. Fancy Schmancy. All kinds of sensors and computers. The latest technology. Expensive beyond belief. How come the F-35 can't beat an F-16 in a close range dogfight? I'll take an F-22, SU-35, F-15 or even an F-18 against this Tub of junk. I hope Trump does the right thing and ceases or greatly reduces production of this endless money pit of a project.
*Single Rifle. Fancy Schmancy. All kinds of tools and equipment. The latest technology. Expensive beyond belief. How come a Marine with an M4 can't beat a Roman gladiator in hand-to-hand combat?*
+GeorgeCee Because its not meant to.Dogfights are a thing of the past,and should one ensue,would result in a 1:1 kill ratio.Read the CSBA's report _Trends in Air to Air Combat: Implications for Future Air Superiority_.It states that the presence of early missile warning systems,HMCS will allow a pilot,if locked on to,to launch a missile at his foe in return as the warning presents him ample time to do so.Once both aircraft have achieved their 'launch and leave' missiles it'll result in mutual kills.Though the report didn't mention the presence of thrust vector capable missiles and greater resistance to confusion of modern IR seeking missiles which can reject false readings,it does lend credence to this analysis.
By the way,the so called F-35 that so called lost to an F-16 in a dogfight was an AF-2 test airframe designed to fly in restricted flight envelopes,using the maneuvering F-16 as a reference to ensure it could pull of such maneuvers within such restrictions.Shocking how people can still believe this claim,it was debunked a year ago.Oh and I think Trump isn't stopping the F-35.I believe there was an article on that.
Another moron who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about smh.
Time will tell. Wait and see.
Who told you that? The media? Ask the most experience norwegian F-16 pilot, callsign 'Dolby'. You'll be surprised.
Hint: F-35 is superior in every way, except for the cockpit view to your six.
a 10 is better lol
Its not better
The A10 is great till there is an AA threat.
I hope USA technology can destroy S-300, S-400 or S-500.
Why are we giving other countries are technology secrets ..i dont get it!!
They're not giving other countries technology secrets. These capabilities are already known. There's a HUGE difference in knowing what capabilities a fighter has as opposed to how to replicate it. This video is not telling other countries HOW the F-35 does this -- just showing what it can do. Many other countries do not have the technology to figure out, much less replicate what this fighter does.