Seria ótimo uma demonstração dessa na Ucrânia. O Putin esta esperando kkkk

Well said.

А москва лет 10 уже ,как рекламирует ,что это никчемная вещь ... Врать, не лапти плести ...

@@3109473 а в чем это ведро с болтами так хорош?! Ценником?! Ну да, в этом ему никто не конкурент. Но я так же не видел ни одного видео, где в сравнении самолётов мира, кто-то по всем характеристиках сказал что f35 полное дерьмо. И даже в реальном бою сложно определить какой именно самолёт лучше, потому что человеческий фактор, как и профессионализм играет не малую роль. Поэтому не пиздел бы на счёт Москвы.

@@user-rp6lx1wm5y О! Скрепнутые подтянулись. 🤣🤣🤣 Ага, в мультиках все отлично! И показывать в них X-51A Waverider, выдавая за свою ракету. Ах, да, есть же ещё Кинжал. Жаль Скрепнутым лень почитать, что это на самом деле.🤣🤣🤣

Хорошая мишень для ВКС РОССИИ Пускай летит на украину, покажет на что он способен, но ведь испугается ,ведь собьют тут же, а это плохая реклама

Что,что,а дизайн они делать могут!

😁он похож на гроб с торчащими кусками фанеры вместо крыльев

@@user-yn2fi3qk5k Russian war criminals to be sent to coffins👿💀☠

@@Goodinwoood Russian war criminals to be sent to coffins👿💀☠

Летающая корова... F 22 гораздо круче... Здесь даже двигатель один... А вот дизайн СУ- 57 и СУ-34, вот это настоящий шедевр!!!

Se caen solos Muchos accidentes

@@JoseLopez-oj4pf разпеаренный за бешенные деньги некчемное подобие аэроплана. Не тянет на 5 поколение.

madre mia es tan pesado que para dalcuna vuelta tiene que subir al máximo hahaha que mierda de avion ese

The F-35 VTOL Technology stems from the YAK-141, not harrier

@@buntspecht5180 YAK-141's technology stems from Convair Model 200. YAK-141 copied the same design flaws as Convair Model 200's two hot core engines near the front that resulted in reduced main engine thrust due to hot air ingestion. .Facts from Lockheed's Code One magazine A great deal of misinformation has appeared on the Internet regarding the relationship of the Soviet Yak-41 (later Yak-141), NATO reporting name Freestyle, to the X-35 and the rest of the JSF program. The Pratt & Whitney 3BSD nozzle design predates the Russian work. In fact the 3BSD was tested with a real engine almost twenty years before the first flight of the Yak. Yakovlev was looking for money to keep its VTOL program alive, not having received any orders for a production version of the Yak-141. Lockheed provided a small amount of funding in return for obtaining performance data and limited design data on the Yak-141. US government personnel were allowed to examine the aircraft. *However, the 3BSN design was already in place on the X-35 before these visits* .

@@buntspecht5180 YAK-141 has proven Convair Model 200's design flaws.

@@buntspecht5180 "The F-35 VTOL Technology stems from the YAK-141"(sic) A myth perpetuated by the ignorant and the thieves masquerading as engineers at Yakovlev.

Block iv will be for the F35A and C variant not for B. The only thing that is has against the B variant is its range and payload. It only has half the range of the A and C variant. And it can't add as many weapons. The B stovel was mainly designed for the marines as short vertical take of. It's good to be used off jump jet carriers LHD and islands. Virtually assisting marines as close in air support that can land and take of anywhere without a runway and can bring more fire-power than any attack helicopter can.

America banned Indonesian from purchasing them I don't know why. Even the south Korean new fighter that Indonesia purchasing is banned from some technology that won't be equipped in its new fighter jets because it's Lockheed Martin technology

@@Nathan-ry3yu : Mungkin karena Indonesia adalah mayoritas Islam yang sangat membenci Amerika. Mereka membenci AS karena faktor agama, contoh; masalah Israel vs Palestina, AS vs Irak (mayoritas Islam), AS vs Afganistan. Kalau AS memberikan pesawat F 35 ke Indonesia, bisa jadi Rusia dan Tiongkok mencuri tehnologi F 35 dari Indonesia.

@@Nathan-ry3yu because they’re too close to Japan and pacific coast. And to Alaska. And they just contemplate a little.

its not really meant to be used vertically, however it can but at reduced payload. it is more oriented at short take off or ski ramps, of which it can carry its maximum load.

@@paul123ggggggggg взлет с короткой дистанции это тоже повышенный расход топлива

@@user-iz3xo2mj9h Seems you're out looking for an argument over word play. How detailed in the specs can you get in a youtube comment? You know what i meant and you can just as easily research the numbers you're looking for yourself. but you'll have to find another fool to argue details with.

@@paul123ggggggggg Олежка любит пересчитывать заклепки. Не заморачивайтесь.

Weapons Payload 15,000 lb/6,800 kg

F - Fighter, B - Bomber

Weapons Payload 15,000 lb/6,800 kg Thrust 38,000 lb Max/26,000 lb Mil/40,500 lb Vertical Max - With Afterburner Mil - Without Afterburner

Here's a mind blower. The Japanese improved in this engine thrust.

Nope

А при чем тут МиГ?

Канешо нет.

ЯК-130..(HARRIER) РОССИЯ🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅.......F35

@@user-zu3fz7rf5p А причем тут як-130 это же не вертикалка?

ЯК - 130 да беше с вертикално излитане ПО ЯК- 130🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅(тоя руски самолет на мен ми харесва НАЙ - МНОГО).

Конечно мог. Кинохронику посмотрите.

Only in the movies

Porque es un total, desperdicio absoluto de combustible e ineficiencia extrema.Por ejemplo, tomemos el F-18 Hornet e hipoteticemos que actualmente está enredado en una pelea de perros con el jet de un enemigo a su velocidad de crucero o alrededor de Mach 1. En esta situación, la velocidad de avance del avispón es de 1.250 km/h (347,2 m/s).Por lo tanto, CADA PUNTO en el Avispón, incluido el misil, avanza a una velocidad de 1.250 km/h. Si desea algo que vuele hacia adelante a esta velocidad del lado contrario, debe NEGAR ESTA VELOCIDAD INICIAL LUEGO AGREGAR DE NUEVO LA ACELERACIÓN AL MISIL DESPUÉS DE QUE MATÓ LA VELOCIDAD HACIA ADELANTE Entonces, si quieres que el misil vuele hacia atrás, primero necesitas el misil quemando ese preciado combustible que tiene en su estuche 1.250 km/h hacia atrás para que deje de volar hacia adelante, luego quema más combustible para acelerar otros 1.250 km/h para volver al misil a su velocidad inicial, solo el vector ahora es al revés en lugar de llegar a la nariz del jet Eso equivale a una velocidad de 2500 km/h que podría sumarse al impulso hacia adelante para obtener 3750 km/h en lugar de gastar la mitad de esa velocidad para volar hacia atrás y volver a la misma velocidad, solo hacia atrás. Además, mientras se desacelera, el misil eventualmente alcanzará el punto donde se detiene, lo que significa que entrará en caída libre y se convertirá efectivamente en una bomba de caída libre, perdiendo altitud, lo que solo se suma al problema: el misil necesitará incluso más. de 2500 km/h para recuperar esa altitud perdida y bloquear el objetivo, que para entonces sería lo suficientemente lejos como para que el misil sea ineficaz. SI el combustible dentro del misil dura tanto tiempo. E incluso entonces, si el piloto no está lo suficientemente alto en el aire, el misil caerá al suelo antes de que pueda ganar suficiente velocidad hacia atrás.

@@Martin-zk1jf gracias por tu explicación, tiene mucha lógica... Sin embargo, lo explicaste con misiles, y no precisamente me refiero a eso, con proyectil también se puede disparar atras y ser efectivo... La bala o el galil no requiere de combustible sino de pólvora, y me parece que hay algo que ignoras en tu juicio físico, y es la velocidad del persecutor resta a todo el análisis hecho dado que su velocidad de aproximación cuenta...!

@@richardmanrique1242 claro pasa que si dispara hacia atras desequilibra al avion ,x eso toda las maquinas de guerra helicopteros aviones tienen el armamento, todo hacia adelante

Igualmente no es mala idea ,seguramente el ejercito de eeuu tenga algo asi

It has a engine fan there toward the front to balance the vertical thrust between the front and the back so it can stay level during hover to take off and land vertically.

Saludos! We shall remember your attitude to never leave it without due respect.

Flight Hours 480000+. Fantastic result of aircraft reliability.

Ты гамно, а самолёт хороший)

The F35 B stovel variant was designed for close air support for the the US and UK marines. It's a stealth 5th generation jet with high technology and sensors with electronic attack first sight first kill option. It's a aircraft that can be used in deep terrain without a runway. It's purpose was it can deliver more fire-power than any attack helicopter can and be able to give same versatility but with greater survivability. I'd like to see any attack helicopter be able to fly at mach 1.6 pull 9g turns and drop multiple 2000 pound guide bombs over a target and then disappear from radar. The F35 A/C/B variants is a strike fighter with different roles, as A variant is for airforce. C FOR Carrier based. And B stovel variant is for the marines. they not a interceptor aircraft. The US has F22 F15s for that and are developing a new 6th generation fighter now to replace both F22 and F15s. The US is to bring out the new IV block variant off the F35 that will have new jet engine and better performance newer sensors. And a new radar system. The increase power to push the F35 to be around mach 1.8 to mach 2