6th gen is going to be majority pilotless stealth along with what other stuff they come up with. There will be 6th gen piloted aircraft, but they will be tuned down versions because of g-force (unless that's what they were looking at for 6th gen). Question.. Does a pilotless stealth aircraft with AI mean 6th gen? What is going to be 6th gen?

1¹

You can thank Obama for cutting the funding for the F 22 raptor

you absolutely are an Ace with the hunter-gather-information Game... holy moly.. great job this person has done 🫡....🫡🫡🫱🏻‍🫲🏾🫱🏼‍🫲🏽🙏🏽🫱🏻‍🫲🏾🫱🏼‍🫲🏽🫡

another aircraft that could benefit this system, is the SR-72 Aurora

This and the YF-23

Good luck with that. The F-14D is still classified.

Me: Waiting in DCS... :)

Some F4 systems are still classified to this day.

@@trigger8152 Pretty much everything EW is, even the oldest stuff. Couldn't even get full-scale Vietnam era jamming into DCS because of that.

Unfortunately, cost overruns and bean-counters from both sides of the political aisle are what axed and killed the Raptor production program. Anytime that a totally new technology is introduced (stealth), into the manufacturing process, hiccups should be expected, like in every other aircraft built prior to such technology. The F-16 production, for example, was allowed to work all of the bugs out of the manufacturing process. This wasn't the case with the Raptor especially since it was just considered by many, to be too expensive to begin with. A shame in that, I agree with you on the fact that the F-22 is mind blowing. And this is just based upon the stuff that they've allowed us to read about or actually witness during airshows.

US military made a decision to put all in for the F-35. Continued production for the F-22 was not sustainable with the F-35.

For some reason, the AF brass does not like the Raptor so much. I have never understood it.

@@RenKnight347 The F35 has had similar cost over runs.

It's because there was no near peer adversary for the f22. They thought it was better to move on to the next generation. It was a good call considering China and Russia took 20 years to make anything close to the f22. I'm sad there aren't more but that just means the next one will be better.

Nothing is indestructible

@@into_the_void Wow great insight Viv!

@@InspectahPatio every minute in Africa.... . Is sixty seconds

@@into_the_void u should start your own religion mate

@@into_the_void indescribable is what Hank said not indestructible

Aerodynamics not power

@@isubtothebest6020 No. At this same air show there was a CF-18 Demo, and F/A-18 Super Hornet Demo. The similar maneuvers were performed at much higher speeds and accelerations by the Raptor. It looked effortless.

@@vonpredator speed =power. maneuvers=aerodynamics

I am waiting for su 57 on maks 2023

@@isubtothebest6020 it's not just aero. It's a combination of thrust vectoring, advanced avionics, and massive power. I believe the "stated max thrust" is 70-80k pounds. Without that power it would just fall without enough lift at those slow speeds.

Thanks Juan! Glad you enjoyed the video and the Raptor demo is amazing!

@@PilotPhotog Those guys are true professionals, as well as fine warriors. Enjoy the humpday my friend.

I saw this exact same demo! It was like watching an actual starfighter fly.

is the narrator the guy that used to make Strange Mysteries channel videos?

@@timberwolf27 nope I’m not that guy, just an aviation fan. Thank you though I appreciate that the comment. I put a lot of time into my recording setup and editing.

I hope not, its wasted money. it better to invest into something new.

They have made many updates including improved sensors, radar, helmet mounted targeting systems and much more....and it's worth every penny. No other fighter has a chance. In fact one f 22 battled with 5 f15's and let's just say it' wasn't pretty for the f15. All 5 f15 were destroyed without the f22 breaking a sweat. Russians and Chinese have no clue, they are just full of propaganda to appear that they are just as capable, when in reality they aren't even close (and that's with them stealing some of the f22's tech)

@@FrantisekPicifuk No it's worth it f-22 will soon have helmet mounted sight and infrared search and track

Some developments will make it to the F-22s in service, but don't get your hopes up for radical new technologies. It's just not cost effective to keep a plane that hasn't been in production for over a decade up with all the latest, greatest systems. But it does make sense to use some F-22s as test beds for systems that will be in the next generation aircraft that will replace it.

@@khandimahn9687 Yes, and anyone who has worked in the manufacturing industry totally understands what you are laying down. Besides, the F-35 (all three variants) are desired to be the bread-and-butter for Lockheed Martin in terms of sales abroad....just like the F-16. The Raptor has one and only one customer...the USAF. Highly doubtful that L-M would change its tooling back for F-22s, especially when it was clear that it was much too expensive to begin with, when there would only be just one customer at the end of the day anyways. With that said, I agree with you on the Raptor test bed, most likely more geared towards incorporating things into the F-35 production line or for whatever else is in the planning process to come.

Correct, more up to date digital avionics...better data link hardware and upgrades to allow more sophisticated AA missiles such as the upcoming AIM 260 are part of the enhancement program.

I'm going out on a limb to say I don't think we'll have those delays and overruns in NGAD. They aren't intrinsic to production of a new system. In the WW2 era, some aircraft took years to work the bugs out like the F4U Corsair, and some were service-worthy very fast like the P-51 and B-17. What we've seen in recent decades is very different, a tradition created by the peacetime management culture at the Pentagon. But I see a lot of indications that is changing, and I think there are a lot of things feeding into that change. A big part is thanks to some huge failures or near failures in each service pointing out the problems with the old way (FCS, Zumwalts, F-22). Also, I suspect that though grievously flawed, the movie Pentagon Wars may have had something to do with it by lampooning the kinds of problems that really do occur in the Pentagon, even if they get the specifics of the Bradley's development wrong. By contrast, there has been a lot of publicization of the success of the Have Blue prototype of the F-117 which was so secret that the Pentagon bureaucracy couldn't screw it up. Now, the prospect of the US having to go to war with China is helping make everyone get down to brass tacks and maintain management discipline to implement those lessons. So I think we are seeing something different now, as shown by the B-21 and the new AFV programs in the Army. I think keeping the F-22 around is because it will take time to produce enough NGADs to do the job, and making sure there are enough air superiority airframes on hand if a war breaks out is critical, and maybe even because they hope to have both F-22s and NGADs instead of one or the other.

Thank you so much! I’m a one man shop so your comment really means a lot to me. I’m working on making even better animations so stay tuned!

Much easier to describe a chicken than to actually build one from scratch ...

Isn't it ironic that many things he wrote about in his books are now coming to fruition.

@@scottgrasher5387 its a lot of things, But its not ironic.

what has he been saying? He is an author no? What book are we referring to?

@@The_Lost_Shepherd several of his books actually.

Tooling was not destroyed, however the factory floor tools were removed and stored far away, space was re purpose for the f35. With the f22 tools locked away in warehouse in Arizona/nevada. The f14 tomcat tools WAS destroyed. Maybe that's what your thinking? A side note There will be only 150 f22 still flying in 2028. They have already started bringing those numbers down.

@@Radienleo that l really think you are wrong as all tooling was destroyed nobody took responsibility even box’s with tooling in it where found empty, they couldn’t even make spare parts for the F22 they had to redesign them from scratch that was also was put on KZfaq at the time.

The tailless design being currently floated as the shape of the 6gen fighter most certainly has thrust vectoring. The nozzles look a lot like Raptor nozzles. Also, if you have TVC, you can eliminate conventional control surfaces during stealthy missions, which is a huge boon. Every time a stealth aircraft deflects control surfaces, it violates stealth. If you have TVC, you can lock control surfaces and use only TVC to maneuver. Yes, the nozzles have to move, but this has far less effect on overall RCS than do wing and tail surfaces moving.

@@skyhorseprice6591 NASA has already done work on the F15 with thrust vectoring so they should be way ahead in the field by now, also way ahead of any country that seems to allow other countries to steal the design of many Military weapon developed by any Western Country.

@@Radienleo You are absolutely, 100% correct. “Destroyed” was a poor (and wrong) descriptor. I had literally just read a piece on the Avro Arrow and had destroyed tooling on the brain. It may have also been partly wishful thinking on my part as well. I am still of the opinion that the best plane didn’t win that fly-off and have always harbored some bitterness toward Lockheed and the F-22. As unbelievable as that plane is, I will go to my grave believing in my heart that the YF-23 was the better of the two. But you are definitely right. LockMart did NOT scrap the F-22 tooling once the program was canceled (another decision that I vehemently disagreed with).

Indeed and I mentioned that in the video: at least one F-117 and one F-35C have been spotted with the chrome coatings. Thanks for commenting!

Yep, dog fighting is so Gen 4. Gen 5 is purely he who sees the other and shoots first wins. Is Gen 6 going to be a case of each fighter's drones are way out ahead, spotting the enemy from even further range, communicating that back to the pilot and wait for the command to attack? Add in cheaper Gen 5, and Gen 4.5 fighters, all with ability to receive the drone data, from even further back, for extra fire power. Some drones could be without armament, just purely detection and communication drones, small and super hard to detect; and some could be armed, slightly bigger, but still harder to detect than the manned fighters. So you could end up with layers, the unarmed drones at the front, the armed drones next, the Gen 6 and Gen 5 fighters next, and Gen 4.5 bringing up the rear.

@@dadthelad today it is more effective to fire off loitering munitions for air superiority / area denial, have stealth aircraft fly sead, and 4.5 gen F-15EX missle trucks fire AIM-260 long range missles guided in by AWACS. The doctrine has changed with the adoption of 5th gen information warfare. This is a larger gap in capabilities than when BVR was first introduced with the F14 Phoenix missile. I see this as the generation before we adopt fully autonomous warfare in the skies.

The problem is that the F-35 isn’t best in class as a BVR fighter. That would be the F-22. The raptor has double the munitions payload, a much smaller RCS, more powerful radar, and a higher top speed and altitude (which means greater range for missiles). The F-35 is a great workhorse, but it was never designed as an air superiority fighter and should never be forced into that role. If anything, the USAF should have ordered way more F-22’s and fewer F-35’s.

@@DAAllan82 yes but F-35 has better avionics and much more importantly are more mass producable than the F-22 and its operational cost is better and going down while also being Multirole. F-22 probably wont be completely replaced by F-35. It will probably be replaced by NGAD program

@@connorkimball3064 The program for the F-35 was Joint STRIKE Fighter. It's not built to fight aircraft, it's built to defend itself against aircraft. The F-22 is the air superiority fighter, and the F-35 is the strike fighter.

Probably so, but hope they keep our enemies in the dark about our technology.

there's no probobly to it!!at any given point in time,and this is a statistical truth that you can verify easily,the military industrial complex as a whole,even though theres still compartmentalization between branches,is technologically capable and are at least 15-to 20 years ahead of what the peak of the capabilities that we have on the surface and in the public now...probobly 30 -35 years ahead in same cases,with certain black budget programs

Looks like a "cloaking device" might be a new capability, invisible stealth.

Not probably, absolutely

Most defiantly, did you know the internet was the military use in the late 30s and 40s

We all start somewhere kiddo.

@@pimpinaintdeadho My passion were Dolphins,Baloon, Blimps, Cars and Finally Aircrafts and Singing, I would like to became a Pilot

@@fqeagles21 Then you should focus on mathematics and physics. Physics is a very fun subject.

​@@fqeagles21Thanks for sharing (I think?). Do you also enjoy romantic walks on a moonlit beach? 😂

@@pike100 yeah i'm a romantic Person too

The stealth ceramic coating that can withstand high heat and light damage without reapplying new RAM coating

Although I believe the sprit will hang around for a few years. Its roll will be the 3rd wheel. is it capable? Yes, more than. The issue is speed. Why take 12hrs when 3 meter accuracy can be achieved in under an hr anywhere in the world. Primary “aircraft” will shift from three roles to two. Intercept/air superiority, and CAS (close air support) the air force will lose 1st strike capabilities. Space force will gain this once the x37 or like wise aircraft hit the field. I believe once 1st strike is fully achieved, Spec ops transportation will shift sea and air, to sea and space. We are not developing reusable rockets for Mars 😂 this mission may benefit but Mars isn’t the set goal. America is stepping forward another step. Everyone else is working on 5 we work on 6, even seven maybe.

@@joeyb99 The USAF doesn’t seem to agree with your assessment. The B-2 is being replaced (and supplemented in the short term) by the B-21, which is just an improved and slightly smaller B-2. I think the long range conventional missile strikes you’re describing are a long way away. Yes, there are intermediate range ballistic missiles and hypersonic glide vehicles, but they don’t have anywhere near 3m accuracy, and probably won’t for quite a long time (I expect the US’s LRHW missile to be the best of the bunch but even it won’t have that kind of accuracy). Not to mention it’ll be hard for a nation being attacked to know whether those launches they see on the satellite feed are a nuclear strike or not, so they may respond with a full retaliatory strike. So these longer range missiles will mostly be useful for nuclear strikes. They’ll also be almost as expensive as aircraft and only able to be used once. So I think the ones that will actually be used will be the ones with ranges comparable to cruise missiles (which are still expensive but slightly less so). Bombers will still be needed for quite a while, and no one has yet figured out how to make a stealthy bomber that can fly supersonic for long periods, so the B-2 and B-21 are the best bets. Incidentally, those two aircraft are also much stealthier to long-wavelength radars like the ones America’s enemies like to claim can track stealth aircraft. The enemy claims are overstated, but being more stealthy against those radars is still an advantage. I do agree that eventually things may head in the direction you’re speaking of, but not for a good long while.

@@bluemarlin8138 DOD does things in threes. They see a target they want three ways to reach it. I never made a point about a missile. The slam is the only missile I spoke of and it stopped in the 70-80’s. 3m Accuracy is based on the JDAM. they have successfully tested a two stage JDAM bomb in pod dropped from low orbit. I don’t know but believe that tomorrow orders could come down and with in a week or maybe a mouth we could make this work. Delivery has been capable since I don’t know 60’-70. Not sure it could be reusable like the future but can be achieved. Back to the triad. As we speak the triad is B-2, B52, and B1b future is B-37, B-2/ raider(don’t recall its Nomenclature, and B52. A war will determine right from wrong. Always has. They design it war changes it. Let take China. We need to stop a trust towards Twain or even India lots of friction there. Chinas weakness is supply so what we gonna hit? We have a find blind kill approach. Power, bridges, and air defense. JDAM II we’ll call it falls like it always as. In time that JDAM is replaced with Spec ops. We know we can jump from that height. Tho I believe a pod will be in order. Return you just reveres the order. No this is not capable tomorrow but in our life time yes. Ps. Space force not air force will deliver this punch. It’s the real reason they were born. Strike China

@@bluemarlin8138 we fire Satellites monthly…. No WWIII yet. One of those times you need to think inside the box

Shuffle up the Wildcards, and deal em!

except that's actually much much much _less_ effective. Even back in WW2 it was far more efficient to zoom and boom than to dogfight. Add in stealth and highly effective BVR missiles and it isn't even close. The gun on the F-22 and F-35 is just wasted weight to appease the idiots in the fighter mafia. Thankfully we've kicked them to the curb and can design the NGAD free of their insanity.

I've read on some websites that suggest this is most likely the case

Is this why most disky bois are shin also?

It's probably anti IRST, (infrared search and track) which the Russians use heavily on top of standard "radar"

@@SaladDressing69 Yes. Source: I'm alien engineer.

Mirror coating = magnetic refractive realignment surface. It doesn't just disperse lasers. It's the next gen of stealth.

They've become the villains now, I mean aggressor role to train F35 and F22 pilots

The prototype has flown but it isn’t yet in full production. It would be too hard to hide if it were in mass production. And you don’t want to rush it before the kinks are worked out. The F-22 and F-35 are still better than anyone else’s aircraft, so there’s time to get it right.

@@bluemarlin8138 haha I replied with details and it was deleted. It's in production.

@@steveg8102 repost it, curious

Huh? The F-4 served for decades, and by the time it was being phased out airframes were light years past it.

Did ya hear about the drone.f4 against 4 f22s it was for practice all f22s.had to shoot all 4 of their.missles to take down.tje f4 finally btw f4 can go mach 2.6 the old.raptor stealth coating gets damaged at mach 2

Japan still flying them

@@jeanhaney2203 what???? Please speak English

One of the major issues with the F-22 is coating maintenance, which is likely why we are seeing alternatives being tested. There is also the issue of sensors from 25 years ago not being what they are today or the ability of the aircraft to share data like the F-35 can. The F-14 left early due to per hour flight cost. That's taking some of the Raptor's life, too.

The f 18 has always looked unattractive to me. Unlike the f 15 which is a beast. F22 is much more aesthetic than the f 35. Yf 23 best looking of them all.

This is wrong. It is not mid 70s tech. I also don't believe NGAD will be the leap forward the Raptor was, as the aggregate investment and experience base is not on the same scale (>6% of GDP for long periods of time) and emphasis will likely drift from from pure manned air superiority fighters.

@@nutsackmania as a person who has seen the raptor up close through it's production I can guarantee that it is very old tech. Especially the a models

@@thepilotman5378 And all F-22s ever built are all "A" models btw. There is no F-22B or F-22C... The F-22A Raptor is the only F-22 variant that was developed and put into production.

Though I'm thinking this is simply the test bed for the newest fighter the US has planned.

If it's anything like the lasers I mess with, any change to the way the photons are propagating is almost always instantly recognizable.

It was originally conceived as a defence against the deadliest directed energy weapon, one that fires bolts of highly charged plasma, with devastating effects.....the Klingon Disrupter beam.

I disagree, development yes. Much safer. Combat nope. If it’s not likely but possible that the enemy will have the ability to jam and or cut off the drone from its human command a human will ride along on the mission. Once air superiority is achieved drones will take over. We shouldn’t confuse navigation with decision making. We value the outcome more than human life. If we didn’t conflict wouldn’t be a thing

unfortunately the fixation on drones is a fool's gamble. cyberwarfare means an army or airforce too reliant on drones could be crippled without a single shot fired at them. drones are great for supporting and tactical levels actions in the battlefield but in a strategic sense you are gonna have a hard time using them against a competent foe

I totally agree but also know DOD ain’t that dumb. Drones are a PR move. Our enemies foreign and domestic. Use every died American service members to validate their opinion. They do this by corrupting one of our greatest strengths. Freedom of press. But at the end of the day a red blooded American will always go into harms way. The day we don’t need to anymore will be the day the constitution is the only ruling power of 🌎. Many want to limit the media in hopes to solve this issue. The only problem with this the vary moment they switch from talking to doing they become a traitor. hanging traitors again in my opinion is justice. If you live outside the US then any attack and all attacks upon the constitution or its people should be met with no mercy.

Skynet is coming to fruition...

Gen ? Is an age not a Classification. F4 vs mig 21. F2/14/14/16 yf17 (f/A18 vs mig 23/ (28 if you are a top gun fan/29. Once the dips shit commie bastards collapsed. Thing slowed down. 80’s we’re about deep strike, and asset transport. Speed had reached a high in the 70’s that any faster the aircraft couldn’t be maintained. You can build it but it’s a one time use. Why the Valkyrie never went any were. Few fast flights and you have to reskin. Can’t go fast? Be unseen. Have Blue was the 1st (well the British mosquito was the 1st but Have blue was the 1st designed to defeat radar) as computers came of age and the death of math started we solved the ugly have blue (117) problem. B2 is the same yet bigger and more stable. Then came gen 5. With gen five we started talking about gen 1-4. Before it was prop age jet age, high speed jet age, and stealth age. Gen 5 is computer designed jet age and stealth age combined. Gen 6 is space and hyper speed. Now for you Hollywood people. You may have seen old maverick doing Mach 10. And think wow this is coming… we’ll it’s been around for some time we just haven’t ever been dumb enough to do it in side the Atmosphere. When in space it’s much easier. Could we do it. Maybe will a man ever travel at 10 times the speed of sound inside earths atmosphere. Likely not. The plasma that builds up prevents radio communication. One mm of being off and you dust. Why we cant talk vary well to space craft coming home. We’ve gotten better but still not great. SLAM was a Mach 3-4 low flying cruse missile but it was ify at best (why we walked away) but a nuke ify is doable. Russian accuracy is so bad they have 10 times as we do. Why aim when you can saturate. they are over coming a problem not trying to have the most. Only KZfaqrs brag about the number. Like most internet scientists they are usually off the mark. Now for Drones. I see the drone argument like I see the ufo argument. it a PR thing not a reality. they fly a x-jet and a dip shit hippie sees it and says it must be a 👽, and the Air Force says yeah that’s what it was😂😂😂😂. and they don’t have to explain how safe or unsafe they are being. Drones are like this but on the other end of the spectrum. We are so powerful kill just one of us even tho you didn’t stop us from achieving the goal our media will see it as negative. So they only speak about new drones. Testing drones are safer. But if you’ve ever been in the military you should know that the 1st priority is the mission next come the troopers then equipment then civilians on the battlefield. Why civilians always get the shaft. Logic puts them at the bottom. Lots of people hate war. Yet they benefit from it. Since human records have been a thing war/prep for war has always been the leading push for advance. From concrete to the internet. It came to be cause of war. “War! what is it good for?” Well about 90% of everything you touch. Pick an item I will break down how war helped/made it be. believe it or not Dynamite is one of the few things war benefited from and not the other way around. Nobel hated war. I find it fitting his greatest achievements aided war more that any one human. Once the money flowed he was a war lord. Biggest war lord of all time has a peace prize named after him. 😂😂😂😂 stupid humans. So did he hate war, or did you just believe a dying man’s words? So what is gen 6? It’s the age of time. Anywhere on the earth in under an hr. Hawaii and New Mexico will be the jump off for 1st strikes. Some manned some unmanned. So is mavericks x-craft real. Sure it just doesn’t do it in earths Atmosphere. It goes up 1st. Bombers/strike always comes 1st fighters/interceptor 2nd attack 3rd transport 4th I think attack will be left out of gen 6. Strike will have the ability to do attack if the need arises. Strike and attack are separated by movement. If it’s fixed we call it a strike if it moves easily we attack it. Spec ops travel will be a thing as well. Just think if by 2030 we can land on mars. 2025 we can land on that continent over there. Common knowledge has always been Russia over sells (KZfaq eats this up) America undersells. Why does DOD need to tell you when Hollywood is so desperate to. Freedom of speech working. Added benefits that Hollywood is artsy but sucks at science. Thank you for muddying the waters. I’m cool with my enemy think I can shit lighting bolts. if a few-most dip shit Americas believe it too. So be it.

F22 already can "super cruise"

Tim...Well if you think the USA is not an evildoer I've got a bridge to sell ya..

@@bigstuff52 Im interested in hearing your justification of the US being an "evildoer". Lets hear that fantasy about the US being the big bad

@@cameronspence4977 I'm 72 years old..I spent a year in Vietnam when I was a young man..We went in there to stop the spread of communism,"f"ed everything up and then they kicked our asses out..Just like Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya and Guatemala and Honduras and Tahiti and Venezuela and Chile and I think you get my drift..Look at Ukraine now..They've screwed it all up and they dragged Europe down the rabbit hole with em..

Calm down with the ion propulsion nonsense. Of all the unbelievable things that have been stated about the drone. Using Ion propulsion that effectively inside Earth's atmosphere is probably the most unrealistic.

can confirm that the current LO paint is dogshit. theyll ground the jet in inclement weather due to the amount of maintainance after the sortie, to save man hours

Using Ion propulsion for a kamikaze drone is one of the dumbest things I think I've ever heard. 1. It's not lighter than current propulsion tech for small UAV's 2. It's far more expensive than other propulsion systems and cost is the name of the game for employing small munitions like that 3. It requires vast amounts of energy which could be used for other purposes/systems or to extend the loiter time if the vehicle was powered by an electric motor instead. That space could also be utilized in a gas-powered drone to extend the range as well In summary, it's a terrible path forward for small UAV's because it's expensive, would degrade range/capability, and offers essentially zero benefit other than being much quieter than existing technologies

Your idea is interesting. It's a good theory, and who knows if it is adapted for practice. Some sort of superb RAM coating that will last several missions, then blasted away for recoating might indeed be cheaper and better than the current fragile RAM. Good thinking, I suggest you patent the idea at least...become a patent troll. MCI

@@Mark-lv1ub did you just sign your comment?

Didn't they have the F-117 in Alaska recently for the Northern edge ex ?

Actually the mirror finish is thought to be a defense against visual detection. As the theory is the finish would caused the plane to blend in with the sky. There is a video on here about the F35 being seen on a carrier with the mirror finish. It stated it was most likely the next step in testing. To see how salt air and spray affect the finish.

the mirror coating significantly reduces the heat signature of the plane though (blackbody radiation weakens the more reflective a surface is), and also reflects visual and thermal light to make it more difficult to visually and thermally spot. Imagine how hard it would be to see a mirror in the woods. It also reflects light from lasers and other energy weapons.

@Master_Misanthrope ...F22 maybe older than the F35 but far superior to it across the board. F35 was not meant to replace the F22, it was meant to replace the F16. That should tell you all you need to know about it. Why do you think we never exported the F22 but exported the F35?

@Master_Misanthrope ...BTW, B52, KC135, and U2 all over 60 years old and still flying. F15 is 50 years old and F16 & F18 both over 40 years old and still flying. Why you ask? Continual upgrades keep them relevant. Fun fact: F22 is actually more like 25 years old. First flight was 1997

It's all about the cost. I think the F-22's development is one of the most over-budget fighter programs ever. 700 proposed aircraft down to less than 200 suggests massive mis-management issues, but the air force was probably under contract to guarantee the purchase of the plane. Plus it's an air superiority fighter which I don't think has been in a real-world aerial engagement. Is it an impressive aircraft? Sure, but it's borderline pointless.

@@PlatinumPaladin It’s pointless until war breaks out, but yes it kinda can seem pointless because no intelligent country would actually try to go to war with the US, the thing about having the strongest military means enemies will try to beat you in every way except militarily

@@gio-ko7kf Thanks for the input, Team America. The other thing about having the strongest military is that you can always take the war to those weaker than you. Y'know, just to keep your game up.

@@PlatinumPaladin If you ever go to war with someone your equal, you've already failed.

@@paulhatala7976 That's the mentality of a bully, and arguably there are plenty examples where someone has gone to war with lesser forces and still lost.

Welcome to American Defense Procurement, nothing makes sense.

Yea, and YF-23 was better than raptor soo...

I was thinking that very thing. Some of us wonder if the lessons learned with the YF-23 program, as it had some advantages over the 22, might have trickled up into the NGAD program and the next fighter.

23 was stealthier and the 22 more maneuverable if memory serves. I'd probably pick the 22 and save the 23 knowledge for a future design like they did.

If you’re looking for an air dominance platform, then yes. The two planes have very different mission profiles. Apples and oranges my man.

Also, go watch any 2019 thru 2022 F-35 Demo. The F-35 is now full block 3F, 9G rated, and it can pull some moves you will not expect.

Codename: Blue 😉

If only the better business developed it.