If an F-35 is in a dogfight with an aircraft that can actually see it and is in range to engage, something has gone horribly wrong.

Back in the 80's my wing was transitioning from F-4Ds to F-16s. During air defense exercises we had relatively new 16 jockeys going up against Phantom drivers who had combat experience in Vietnam and constant flights since then. The F-4s kicked butt consistently. Pilot skill and experience is a big factor.

The simple fact is that most of these scenarios are done with the newer plane being restricted from using certain features. This helps create doctrine for the plane should certain systems go offline as well as determining if a failure occurred because of the plane, the pilot, or pure coincidence. It’s worth reminding everyone that there were similar stories about the F-22 losing to an F-14, or when the F-16 lost to a Mustang. I don’t think any of us would consider replacing the bulk of America’s air power with fighter jets from the Korean War.

Honestly, the “glaring red flag” for me was that it was written by David Axe who carved out a niche for himself as against the F-35 early and as often as possible. It was really like he’s an adherent to the Pierre Sprey school of “simplify everything” and “modern is bad”. There were lots of us ridiculed for even the suggestion that maybe the flight software was creating artificial limits and that would be worth investigating as a possible cause.

I think people forget that the F16 was literally designed to be one of the best dogfighters out there. Its raiding capabilities are absolutely insane giving it the power to dominate most jets in guns only fight if its able to stiff arm them into a two circle fight, even giving the f22 a run for its money.

I remember an interview on danish radio several years ago, where the danish test-pilot flying the F-16 explained the whole thing. The F-35 was a prototype and had artificial restrictions in place to ensure not to overstress the plane, which is normal for unknown planes you step up step by step to ensure it is capable of handling the stresses. You don't want to go the other way around and risking the plane and the data gathering.

The F-35 has been in service for so little time that instructors are still teaching themselves to fly it as it can be flown. I loved that you pointed out that one of the most valuable look and shoot attributes of the F-35 was not available to the pilot in the heat of the battle. Thank you for sharing everything in this episode and the details about the software and stealth shielding not being functional because I never picked that up before. It was like the poor F-35 pilot was flying with his pants down around his ankles. LOL The F-16 is also like a second layer of skin to its pilots after being in service for so long. Awesome investigating and fact finding, keep on digging for the details we love from all of you guys at Sandboxx. 🤘😁👍

This channel SERIOUSLY knows its stuff, and makes its information easy to digest as well.

Excellent job of setting the record straight. I remember in the mid-70s many self-proclaimed experts claimed the F-14 & F-15 were only marginally better than the F-5. Later air combats proved their claims wrong.

The F-16 is among many fighters that perform well beyond human endurance tolerances. In fact, Most fighters designed even in the 50s and 60s perform beyond human endurance tolerances. One of the top Vietnamese aces during the Vietnam War was defeated because he blacked out in the cockpit giving the American pilot The kill shot. So at this point in fighter evolution it’s more about the bells and whistles of the weapons and sensor packages on the vehicle than it is the actual performance of the vehicle.

That is why i struggle to have a good discussion about the f-35 with many people over the internet. The f-16 was an absolute pinnacle of engineering and is one if not THE best dogfighter out there, and now seeing all the development of the f-35 platform now is extremely impressive, and as someone who constantly talks to veterans I've had the opportunity to talk with a couple active duty airmen who have flown the f-35. Though the conversation was limited (obviously) they both held massive respect for the aircraft and acknowledged that it was designed for a completely different form of combat. Thank you for a great educational video, I hadnt actually heard of this article before and it was very insightful. Keep up the good work!

I love your clear thinking. No games, analysis that bores through the head games most engage in. Thank you. I am grateful.

Wildcats couldnt beat a Zero in a dogfight either. But we used other methods to down them and wound up with a 6.9/1 kill ratio by mid war.

In Red Flag, the F-35 was put at a disadvantage it'd rarely encounter in real life (to challenge the pilots for training). It still had a 20-1 kill ratio against 4th gen. The old reports of testing an F-35 prototype against an F-16 to tweak its control laws were all about beta testing F-35 software restrictions to see where they needed opening up. That's all that was.

Thanks for the video. You're doing great work.

If it comes down to a close in turning battle the F16 can always dump and pump. Meaning, it can evade (dump speed) via it’s buttonhook escape turn, then re-engage (pump) to get the advantage. The F16 has the tightest turning radius of all the US fighters even versus the Raptor and even versus the YF17 that later became the Hornet. Col Boyd, EM theory, and so on and so forth.

The ending shot with the A-10, F-15 & F-35 flying together was beautiful! 😍

One other thing to keep in mind when people complain about the price of an F-35 is that the price is a "Program" price which includes all spare parts, maintenance and fuel for 50 years. Too many people compare that to the old "Unit" price of an aircraft which does not include the spare parts, maintenance and fuel.

Thank you for the video and analysis. Any platform that is rushed and sees its cost increased is doomed to have problems and issues that might take time to resolve.

thank you for this informative video. Yes. i would love to see a detailed analysis of what went wrong with the air war in Vietnam.

About 2-3 years ago I was listening to an Aviation Week podcast with an F-35 test pilot, and he mentioned when the software 'shackles' were taken off, this was a deadly aircraft.

If you're dogfighting and you're in the F-35, it's because the alien invasion force you're fighting has beaten its way though the 17 other layers of air defense that are networked through the F-35's amazing capabilities and, frankly, all is lost to begin with.

From what I've read/heard about the F-35, it seems like they took the same approach that the Red Baron had that made him so dangerous: it was designed to operate in groups with such close-knit systems between the planes that enemy fighters couldn't get a good shot off at one without making themself entirely vulnerable to the rest.

Great segment Alex as per usual!

I did wonder before you went into details how much of the disparity was due to the fact the F-35 was relatively new and only just coming into operation compared to the F-16 which is a well established aircraft and has no doubt had most of its weaknesses ironed out over the course of its service career.

If you ask seasoned pilots what their favorite jet to fly outside of combat situations. Like just for fun. It's almost always the F-16 . There is a reason why it's the most preferred jet for show teams to pull stunts for an audience. It responds very well to pilot input.

F-16 was my first love, then that horrifically beautiful A-10 snuck in and took advantage of me while I was passed out... that's a touch you don't forget.

Wow! No RAM, Alpha-release software, no helmet cueing, no high-bore off axis, hell why not add luneberg lenses to the F-35 to completely disable all worthwhile functionality. Excellent coverage as always, Alex. Thank you.

I was at one of the red flag events a few years back (mechanic on B variant). The F35 absolutely dominated. I believe we were something like 33-1, and that 1 loss was from a SAM site and the word going around was that one of the rookie pilots just made a mistake.

Great video!

This is actual journalism. Refreshing...

Love your videos, you always go so much deeper than other airpower videos on KZfaq. Love the indepth look at this issue and other issues you cover. another epic documentary!

Good video. I'll also point out that the whole point of stealth is not invisibility like a Star Trek cloaking device, it's to have the F35 see the target before it sees them. Presumably, if a close in dogfight happens, that stealth has somewhat failed. So having the planes start the fight NOT in contact so that they'd have to find the other aircraft would presumably allow the F35 to fire a missile or two before the enemy even knew there was a fight.

Excellent knowledge base - you know your stuff JR

Really good video, first time watching but I appreciate the information density and the essay like structure. Too many channels just seem to ad lib and try to fill up time. Keep it up.

My brother Mike, a professional photographer posted a pic he took of an F-35C at the Air Show at NAS Oceana a couple of weeks ago. In describing his photo, he wrote the following, in part: "Early in its test phase, the F-35 was determined to be quite a dud as a fighter. Tested against a 4th-generation F-16, it could barely hold its own in a mock dogfight against the Viper, but what few knew was its capabilities were reined in, much like holding a racehorse back from what it was born to do… run. There was another problem that was unforeseen… pilots of the new F-35 had all previously flown 4th-generation, and they brought with them habits that did not apply to the new system’s stunning flight characteristics. They were just figuring out they had to unlearn what they had trusted for so long flying F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s, also known as Legacy fighters, because the Lightning wasn’t just capable of making mincemeat of any adversary, it was a gamechanger with immediate power, faster response to pilot input, an incredible angle of attack (AOA), and an ability to slow to less than 100 mph rapidly while still maintaining controlled flight to rapidly swing its nose to a target. The funny thing is, that as new pilots graduate flight school without the habits of the older pilots, they’re learning more about what the Lightning can do. All variants of the F-35, A, B, and C models have advanced integrated avionics (sensor fusion) giving enhanced situational awareness not just to the pilots, but to every Lightning aircraft on a given mission… what one knows, they all know. Red Flag is somewhat like the Air Force’s version of Navy’s Top Gun, but there’s more to it than what the movie portrays. A Marine pilot new to the program in 2016 was preparing to take off in an F-35B from Luke AFB for a Red Flag exercise… it floored him how much information it provided him from the other members of his squadron who were already airborne. He had a Gods-eye view of the fray before he even left the ground. Since then, 4th-generation fighters are now taking part in that sensor fusion data… the weapons they carry can be slaved by F-35s to specific targets. From a pilot’s own perspective at Red Flag: "You never knew I was there," he said with a smile. "You literally would never know I'm there. I flew the F-35 against 4th-generation platforms, and we killed them, and they never even saw us." "If you were to engage an F-35 in say, a visual dogfight capability, the capabilities of the F-35 are absolutely eye-watering compared to a 4th-generation fighter. So, if it's a long-range contact, you'll never see me and you'll die, and if it's within visual-range contact you'll see me and you're gonna die and you're gonna die very quickly." "I can tell you that it is by far the best platform I've ever flown in my entire life, and at that, you would have to take me on my word." - Maj. Gen. Scott Pleus, former CO of 56th Fighter Wing at Luke AFB. 24 years flying the F-16." If you're interested in seeing Mike's photo, look here: www.flickr.com/photos/snapdraggin/52493627310/in/photostream/

In these industrialized wars, a very important factor is cost. How many fighters can you produce? How much does it cost per hour of flight? How much maintenance does it require? Will you exhaust your resources before your enemy does? Also important, how difficult is to train new pilots? It might be the perfect plane for a country like the states with a massive industrial capability and plenty of resources. However, smaller countries like Italy or The Nederlands can find it too expensive to operate. Probably, a modernized version of the F-16 will be a better fighter for them.

Would love your take on the modified F-16 flown by an a.i. recently. Great video, thank you!

Thank you for the thorough explanation here. Really makes sense of what was thought to be a bad situation.

I worked for LM on the F-35 from 2013-2020. Your content is correct. I deployed with the Navy to Fallon NAS where students in Top Gun were required to go up against a fifth gen fighter(F-22 or F-35) before graduation. The F-35 and F-22 are undefeated against every pilot in Top Gun. The F-35 software has now caught up with the hardware. It's not even fair. The F-35 watches you in your 4th gen fighter and takes you out without so much as a reach around. You remember the end of "Silence of the Lambs"? Clarice with a loaded gun in a dark room going against the serial killer wearing night vision goggles? THAT is what it's like for a 4th Gen fighter attempting to go against a F-35 or F-22. Now IF you can see the F-35 outside your cockpit you might have a fighting chance. Lastly the gun in the F-35A is a joke. It's nothing like the A-10. Great video. Brought back memories.

You did a great job at explaining the rest of the story. Thanks.....

Thank you! That was very clarifying!

To add to what you reported. 31 Pilots of various combat aircraft that have flown the F-35 after experience in another jet were interviewed in April of 2016. The interview was conducted by 25-year Air Force veteran John Venable. Venable has 4,400 total hours of flying time and more than 300 hours of combat time over Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan. These pilots had an average flying time of 1467 Hours. They were asked to compare the F-35 to their former jet and rate it on various performance aspects. Of the 31 pilots interviewed, 5 of them were former A-10 pilots with an average flying time of 1,420 Hours. And these pilots were not ordinary A-10 pilots. 1 was a test pilot graduate, 2 were A-10 instructor pilots, and the other 2 were instructor pilot plus** pilots. 20 of the pilots interviewed were F-16 pilots with an average flying time of 1,441 hours. Of these 20, 6 were Top Gun/Test pilot* pilots. 11 were instructor pilots and 3 were Instructor pilot plus** pilots. 4 of the pilots were F-15E pilots with 1,850 hours of flying time. 2 were in the Top Gun/Test pilot* category, 1 was an instructor pilot, and 1 was an instructor pilot plus** pilot. 2 of the pilots were F-15C pilots with an average of 1,085 hours flying time. 1 was in the Top Gun/Test pilot* category while the other was an instructor pilot. * Top Gun is a Weapons Instructor Course graduate. Test Pilot is a Test Pilot School graduate. **Instructor pilot plus have a higher level of certification such as Package/Strike Commander, Sandie, etc. At the time of the interview, the F-35's control laws were still limited to 7 G's. Even with this limitation, the F-35 was chosen over the jet it was replacing. The F-35's that are flying today no longer have the 7 G limit. They can execute maneuvers in excess of 9 G's. I have provided a link at the bottom of the page to the full article. These 3 charts give an overview of the pilot's experience and how they rated the F-35 versus the plane they used to fly. www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/~/media/infographics/2016/08/bg3140/bg-f35a-overview-appendix-table-1-825.jpg www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/~/media/infographics/2016/08/bg3140/bg-f35a-overview-chart-1-600.jpg www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/~/media/infographics/2016/08/bg3140/bg-f35a-overview-chart-2.jpg John “JV” Venable, a 25-year veteran of the U.S. Air Force who served in three combat operations, is a senior research fellow for defense policy at The Heritage Foundation. During his career in the Air Force, Venable served at 16 locations around the world as a forward air controller, fighter pilot, staff officer, and commander. He is the former commander of the celebrated Thunderbirds. He has flown the F-16 fighter jet throughout the United States, Europe, the Pacific, and the Middle East. As the F-16 wing weapons officer for the Air-Land Composite Wing experiment at Pope Air Force Base, North Carolina, he was nominated for the Claire Chennault Award for his work developing “killer scout” tactics, techniques, and procedures. Venable served as staff officer for nuclear policy for Headquarters Air Northwest at Royal Air Force High Wycombe, United Kingdom, from 1996 to 1998. He was heavily involved with the Partnership for Peace program that led to the expansion of NATO. He then was selected to serve as operations officer of the Air Warrior Program at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, providing close air support for the Army’s signature force-on-force exercise at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California. Venable was selected in 1999 to command the Air Force’s Aerial Demonstration Squadron (the Thunderbirds) and was on point for every practice, deployment, and air show for the 2000 and 2001 seasons. Following Air War College in 2002 and 2003, he served on the staff addressing issues that were before the Air Force’s Joint Requirements Oversight Committee. In 2004, Venable took command of the 379th Air Expeditionary Group, Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, the largest combat operation in the Air Force at the time. He led 16 squadrons and 1,100 personnel, flying seven types of aircraft in support of ground and air operations during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Over the course of a year, Venable’s team flew 27,000 sorties, delivering 200,000 passengers, 40,000 tons of cargo, 38 million gallons of fuel to 9,000 airborne receiver aircraft, and dropping bombs on 311 targets -all “without gap and without loss,” as the Air Force says. In his last assignment on active duty from 2005 to 2007, Venable served as a principal adviser and briefer to the Air Force’s chief of staff and director of operations in their roles on the president’s Joint Chiefs of Staff. He retired in June 2007 as a command pilot with more than 4,400 total hours of flying time and more than 300 hours of combat time over Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Venable was born in Birmingham, Ala., and grew up in Alabama, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. He received a bachelor’s degree in business management in 1981 from Ohio University, where he also was a distinguished graduate of Air Force ROTC. He holds master’s degrees in aeronautical sciences from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and in strategic studies from the Air War College. Venable also holds diplomas or certificates from Georgetown University, the Air Force Fighter Weapons School, Air Command and Staff College, Joint Forces Staff College, and the NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany. Source: www.heritage.org/defense/report/operational-assessment-the-f-35a-argues-full-program-procurement-and-concurrent?_ga=2.245119046.2139509302.1533535266-717266456.1533535266

You can also go back to early WWII in the Pacific and high losses of inexperienced US pilots who tried to dogfight the Zero. As soon as pilots learned to avoid the Zero's turning strength and go for high-speed 'slashing' attacks, the kill ratio began to reverse.

Awesome video. I’ve heard these bits separately and it’s nice to have them all wrapped up together. People saying “the F-35 sucks” because it literally wasn’t allowed to do what it was designed to do in the first place. I’d go so far as to say the Axe report was done out of context and in bad faith.

A wise man once said "appear weak when you are strong."

The F-35 was still in the block 1 software. The Block 4 modernization program is set to upgrade the Lockheed Martin-made F-35 Joint Strike Fighter with more powerful computing systems, software updates and new weapons and equipment. Block 1 was a watered down version, not even considered an upgrade. It was set deliberately until the F35 was ready for the next levels. Slowly but surely, the software and hardware upgrades is getting there

Great video and great information as usual, without all the internet BS. Thanks for always finding the truth about what is really happening!

It's like taking a modern computer, disconnecting it from any network, removing all USB ports and then pointing out that it doesn't compete well with a typewriter when it comes to printing letters on paper.

that bucket of old flares was something that the aim 9X never expected to run into... that shit made me giggle out loud

fantastic video, I would love if you did one diving deep into the dogfights of the vietnam war and why they didn't go as planned

The thing that always stands out to me is how conservative and cautious test pilots and test programs in general are when establishing the performance specifications and training standards for brand new jets. Using AF-2 was probably deliberate as they put the F-35 through an establishing program of BFM, to ensure that they don't have more F-35's make fiery potholes in the desert while pilots are trained and the air data is acquired. Compared to F-16, which has has had literal decades of hard flying data and pilot experience to inform it's specs, I am not surprised. Likewise, look at the history of other fighter programs, and the number of air mishaps as they worked out the kinks... I'm definitely on the side of letting F-35 take the slow climb to reaching it's potential.

A lot of people fail to consider that the F-35 has internal weapons and fuel. The older jets have to hang everything from their wings and their internal fuel is pretty limited. So with an actual combat load, the F-35 would likely kick the F-16's ass or at least it would run it out of gas and then chase it away.

I've always thought there's more to the story but never actually researched it, this video finally settles it and confirms my skepticism. Absolutely brilliant video and narration.

The lack of the ability to use hightech targeting systems in a dogfight that is reliant on maneuverability does not change the fact that it lacks the maneuverability necessary in a dogfight to be able to get its nose on target and engage threats effectively.

The F-16 beat the F-35 in the sense that a tank crew will die to a single infantryman if said infantryman is on top of the tank about to throw a grenade in the open hatch. I mean, sure, but holy crap does a lot have to go wrong before this defeat becomes a reality

So the 2015 F35, was basically a development mule, only half complete and G-limited.

Loved seeing the A-10 flying in formation, it's been one of my favorite jets since I was a kid. I hope they don't decomission it.

Easiest thing to say is the f-35 was actually missing half or more of its maneuverable capabilities that make it a superior fighting machine whether it's air-to-air or are

Another interesting and informative video Alex! And yes, I would like to see your airwar assessment in Vietnam!

The F-35 basically moves like 5th Gen Charlie Hornet with excess power. It is not a "rate" fighter like the F-16, as it pertains to BFM. It's an "AoA" fighter, because "rate" fighters are obsolete in the age of HOBS/HMDs. Because of it's power and huge control surfaces, it can "do whatever it takes" to get a firing solution first, or jam the WEZ of another fighter (and weapons) if jumped. Although thermally limited to lower supersonic speeds, it's power gives it acceleration in tight maneuvering within the subsonic/low supersonic regime that has been seriously underestimated.

I believe the point of the external tanks was to show that even with the extra weight, it's far more maneuverable. To give the idea of what an F16 could do if also not weighed down.

8:40 In essence, it was a training maneuver, NOT a combat maneuver.

Thanks for taking the time to properly research and then present the information about this. As always, your videos are excellent. And, yes please, I'd love to hear your analysis of the air campaign during Vietnam. Thanks!

Quoting Out Of The Shadows: RNLAF experiences with the F-35A - Combat Aircraft Magazine May 2018 specifically against David Axe's leaked Y2015 report. _Knight divulged a little more information about flying basic fighter manoeuvres (BFM) in an F-35. 'When our envelope was cleared to practise BFM we got the opportunity to fight some fourth-generation fighters. Remember, back the rumors were that the F-35 was a pig. The first time the opponents showed up [in the training area] they had wing tanks along with a bunch of missiles. I guess they figured that being in a dirty configuration wouldn't really matter and that they would still easily outmanoeuvre us. By the end of the week, though, they had dropped their wing tanks, transitioned to a single centerline fuel tank and were still doing everything they could not to get gunned by us. A week later they stripped the jets clean of all external stores, which made the BFM fights interesting, to say the least_ ---- 1. *Lightest empty weight F-16A MLU air-superiority* model needs to be clean (no weapons, no external tanks) to make visual range dogfight interesting against combat loaded F-35A Block 3F. 2. Dutch has acknowledged early F-35 Block builds being beaten by F-16s with external fuel tanks which are NOT applicable for F-35A Block 3F build. Don't use Block 2A/2B/3i numbers!

Great video. Great info ✌🏼👍🏼

Two totally different mission objectives. Stealth vs. Anti air defense.

Not only did the F-35 have both of its digital wings tied behind its back it still went up against a F-16 a fighter built specifically to dogfight its literally a light fighter which the F-16 has very good rating capabilities

The best way I can describe the f-35 is it is a long range stealth standoff platform, actually designed more to act as a airborne command and control integration aircraft in a much smaller package with ACM capability remember this aircraft carries more sensors than it does weapons and it's very good for what it is actually designed to do

Vertical landing is such a boss move

Putting the F-16 and the F-35 into a dogfight and drawing conclusions out of it was like putting a rooster and an eagle into a cockfighting ring. The rooster is likely to win the match in those circumstances, but put the rooster out on a field and he'll be eagle lunch before he knows it. The F-35 was not designed to dogfight but to blow up the enemy *before* they even realize they're in a fight.

You also have to remember that the quoted top speed for the F-15 and F-16 is without missiles and external fuel tanks. In a real world config they are going to be much slower.

People don't want to admit that smart avionics use and situational awareness is what makes good fighter pilots.

Hey Alex, O finally paid real attention to your year plus old F-35/F-16 dogfight video! First for me! The F-16, since it flew off against the YF-17, has been my sweetheart! The P-51 of the 4th generation fighter group. So,it has a very special place in my heart! The fact that the F-35 will probably never have to dogfight because AWACS and sensor fusion are going to negates the very minor possibilities of having to turn and burn? It's good to know that this aircraft, is able to match my beloved F-16! Is refreshing to say the least! Last year's Aviation Nation airshow at Nellis AFB being case in point? It appears that the ONLY aircraft that can match the F-16? Is the F-22! Thank you for correcting my perception! Love your show Alex! Keep it up!👉🥒🤙

Gentlemen, I'm thinking This is our Panther tank

Best Military hardware channel around. I look forward to watching them.

I think you should have gone into more detail about the software limitations on the flight performance. There’s a video of a female F35 test pilot saying that the software limitations in that test were adding delay to control inputs and limiting max angle of flight control surfaces and limiting max G’s. I’ve also seen accounts from F35 pilots saying it basically flies a bit better than an F16 in terms of turn rate and roll rate, but with smooth as fuck stability. One said it was like playing a video game with how smooth and stable the F35 was flying. That it would quickly get its nose on target and do it with zero turbulence or deviations. The lifting body design that they drew from previous NASA projects and research contributed greatly to the ability to make the F35 small but have good lifting surface square footage

Where I work the F35 has little trouble "winning" engagements against anything, including F22's. It's upgraded engine has given it the ability to rival the F16 in speed and agility in those engagements. Typically, when they are beaten, it's because the playing field was levelled by attaching wing pylons, which makes it very visible. They do the same thing with the F22, and that's why sometimes you'll read how some foreign Air Force jet won. When they do stuff like that it's not to make it a contest. It's to give the agressor pilot training and experience. Something he/she wouldn't get if they just got "shot down" every time they went up. It also gives the F35/F22 pilot training and experience in being defensive.

The most effective way to negate BVR capability is for the ROE to require visual ID. Never underestimate the US ability to give the enemy an advantage.

I wanted to be a fighter pilot when I was young…eyesight wasn’t that good (wore contacts) so I became a Corpsman in the Navy. But watching these videos just brings back those memories of me dreaming about flying a fighter plane…beautiful planes.

Well, this puts me more at ease with this aircraft. Thank you. I was very concerned before, having long since read the Arthur C. Clarke short story, "Superiority", and old enough to have seen such military blunders take place in the past.

This is essentially a prototype corvette on a test track with 4 tiny donut spare tires.

We have an history of being the most ferocious warriors in the world. We needs to back that up and show it.

Alex, I always enjoy your content, but this one is a real stand-out. Setting up the context of this exercise and the subsequent report has been missing from the public enthusiast realm for way too long. Yes, these aircraft are expensive; America has run that way since WW-II. Every new platform from the F-4 onward has had significant teething pains, and the Lightning II is no different. Thanks again for content that really entertains and educates, and BTW, you have some fabulous videos as background to your commentary!

14:05 modern F-16s also have an HMCS and the pilot can also fire the aim9x off-boresight. I'd say the F-35 is rather designed with the premise that modern aircombat isn't decided in close air combat, but beyond visual range, where its superior radar and of course its stealth capabilities are major advantages.

Well, it was an early test prototyp block with G resteictions. Current block 3F smokes gen 4 jets in dogfight using its high AoA capacity.

I remember too well when the king of aircraft, the F22, was 'retired' and 'mothballed' after it killed the F35 every single time they met. So, it was then announced no more tests would be conducted between those aircraft. Australia ordered just the F35 as it didn't have aircraft carriers anymore and did not want VTOLs as they were heavier, thus slower, and its Helicopter Landing Dock ships did not have the heat resistant deck you need for VTOLs. Australia just announced it is not ordering more F35s, originally 100, not sure how many it has already, maybe half? At any rate, the F35 had some design aspects not so suited for a continent sized island; one engine, short flight duration, one pilot. So, hopefully the next order of aircraft covers some of those limitations, especially longer range. Or, we just go with drones and rockets? I am sure a dog fighting drone would be possible, and suitable for launch from the HLDs and almost impossible to beat.

Unfortunately when this test was performed the helmet had not been fully integrated into the flying platform. It was still in development

The F-16 can also take off-botesite shots using it's own Helmet Mounted cueing system, JHMCS. I'm sure the Fighting Falcon wasn't using JHMCS either. The F-15 and F/A-18 have JHMCS too and the F-22 would have had it too if the Raptor program didn't get so extensive.

On the other hand, do you imagine the manufacturer of the F35 admits it's weaker ? they would never do that.

In any case, concepts like Raytheon's Peregrine air-to-air missile which would double the F-35's internal carriage capacity seem like a brilliant move. Limited maneuverability is a moot point when all the aggressors are dead.

As always Brother Alex - outstanding work & presentation. A nice underlining question or comment is why do these kind of things leak out? Often a two part answer. One is the competitors need something to continue sell their wares in the face of a breakout technology. Second is intentional deception to confuse enemy. What you outlined here makes me think the B-21 could have offensive-defensive air capabilities. The B-1 retains a capability to deliver a huge number of air-to-air missiles, does present and future bomber force have similar capability? Keep up the great work. v/r snake

I remember having this argument with a fellow sim pilot and once the truth about the software holding back the F-35 and basically castrating it, there was no denying the intentional mismatch that was created. The F-35 is a BEAST of an aircraft and we're fortunate to have it. When all 3 versions get their gun operational, it will be even more devastating.

Visual perception and the high intensity of radar beams at short range negate the advantage of a lowered radar cross section during a dogfight. The main advantage of stealth technology is that it allows the stealth aircraft to strike from surprise, at the time and place of the pilot's choosing, and potentially attack and withdraw without being noticed.

The problem is that as other countries increase stealth tech, the engagement ranges WILL shrink once again. When that happens would you want to find yourself in a Fat Amy (F35)? So for the short term, the F35 stealth gives it the edge, but that advantage will shrink over time. BTW, once the fighting kicks off the F-15/16 will drop the external tanks. High off bore sight AIM-9 bleeds a lot of speed (energy) out of the missile having to make a sharp turn, slowing the missile and making it less likely to hit. Also, extreme maneuvers are very helpful in evading an incoming missile. Stealth does not mean invisible, it just means you have to get closer to get a solid lock.

Dude, not a pilot, didn't even serve BUT for a semi lay person, I am absolutely hooked. You got a new subscriber. Thanks for making this fun, informative and just plain awesome! 👍🏾

The F-35B wasn't designed to be a dogfighting machine. It was designed to shoot down enemy aircrafts from beyond the visual range.

Hey Raytheon, ... hope you fixed those software issues w/ the AIM 9x

Pretty sure they limited the F-35 in the test to "mid" and "close" range weapons. Had it been able to use all tools in it's toolbox, the F-16 pilot wouldn't even be able to get the words "dogfight" out of his mouth before being shot out of the sky.

That was 6 years ago. The Block 3 upgrades have eliminated these issues. Now the F-35 has upgraded the software, engine performance, and helmet integration is well beyond any 4th generation plane.