It amazes me how people can criticize this plane about problems from years ago that have already been fixed! Most of you have no clue what the hell you’re talking about! Not one pilot that flies the F-35 would go back to his old plane.

Marines fly both, the B and C variant. Each Navy Carrier has, 1 Marine unit that also uses the, C variant. Marines use the, B variant on the Us Navy/Marine Corps light Carreris. Most people think that the US just has 11 Carriers, but....adding in the Light/Marine Corps Carriers, there's actually around, 18 carriers

everyone hating on the F35 i bet they think the A10 is good enough.

Goodshit, that’s badass

It brings 'stealth' to the seas..c'mon do submarines not matter ?

All of us fighter pilots are looking forward to the brand new F-15EX! F-15 Eagle 104 kills 0 losses in air-to-air combat!

Dude your hired department of sales congrats 😂

Good brother

Remember the A-12?

the real badass plane

It better be a masterpiece research and development 1 trillion WTF.

kinda Not Enough UNITS, need to Drive the Prices DOWN! Cut the Phat run Like SpaceX

I can't seen to find anywhere the maximum distance of the F-35C when it comes to missile range. How far can it detect, target and launch a missile and hit?

I guess so.

not to nitpick but the sensor suite has nothing to do with stealth. tho that sensor suite certainly deserves an hour video of its own. too bad we aren't briefed in lol.

Money well spent!

What makes this plane unique? Its huge cost.

The russians hate this aircraft.

One of the last news was it's can't get supersonic per some problems on skin and RCS

America on odd days " f35 is the ultimate " america on even days " f35 shouldn't operate along with s400 because it can get its radar signature "

This jet can't even land. I wonder how many other malfunctions it will have if it ever sees actual combat.

こんにちは。、日本から

Tai sao ko mang duoc binh dau phu:ko can phai son f35 ton kem: de vay bay tot nhat :do ton kem/khi co trien tranh moi son tan hinh ma vuc

If only it could stop crashing on its own

well if the enemy wants to die laughing yes sure, the aircraft doesn’t even need to engage the enemy to crash.

นอกจากเครื่องคิดเลขแล้วเราก็ต้องคิดด้วยว่ายุทธศาสตร์ผู้ใช้ควรเป็นยังไงสำหรับรุ่น a แล้วควรจะเลิกผลิตไปได้เลยมีเฉพาะรุ่น c กับรุ่น b เท่านั้น

The F-35s are proving to be a major economic strain on the Air Force, Navy, and Marines. There are currently no War Ready Engines for the F-35, and there are not expected to be any until 2030. The services have conceded that the aircraft will never achieve the flight hour cost that was projected by the prime contractor and because of that they services have had to make a decision on whether to buy fewer F-35s or fly the F-35s fewer hours, and the choice the Air Force made was to reduce the annual hours from an average of 240 to less than 180. Most pilots don't want to be in F-35 squadrons because it will make it harder to get the necessary flight hours to get hired by an airline when they finish their tour. Instead, many are leaving to go to feeder lines for FedEx and UPS, which has long been the civilian route to getting an airline job. The Navy is currently short about 20% of pilots, and the Air Force has a shortage of about 1000. The Full Mission Availability rate for the F-35 is appallingly low (about 14% for the F-35C) and the mission availability rate on average is about 55% (Full Mission Availability is the ability for the model to fly any mission that it was designed to fly.. The mission availability rate is being available to fly at least ONE kind of mission the model is capable of flying. The problem for the F-35 is that many of the planes that are mission available are not stealth mission avialable, so can only really be used in the same combat mission as the F-18 of the F-16, depending on the service. At any given time, less than 40% of the F-35 fleet is capable of flying a deep penetration stealth mission. The contractor also did not provide the services with the necessary documentation and tools to do depot level maintenance, so this means that the DOD has to depend on the contractor to do major repairs and upgrades, and the contractor was taking an average of 140 days to turn around an aircraft, though at last report, this was down to 110 day. The Depot level maintenance of the Navy and Air Force typically has a 60 day turn around, but that is for more traditional planes. The extremely complex nature of these planes likely means that an 85 day turn around is probably likely, but at the current rate, that may not be achieved for another 4 to 5 years. Of course the current program costs is based on a normal inflation rate, but if inflation lingers, the program cost is likely go go higher than the current 1.7 to 1.8 trillion dollars. While everyone talks about how great the F-35 is, as an airplane, it is fine. As a defense program though, it has been a total disaster. Like the F-22, the F-35 will probably never face a Tier 1 opponent in a prolonged military engagement (the only F-22 kill was a balloon). As for being a deterrent, The Israelis have F-35s, and that did not deter Hamas from killing and kidnapping over a 1000 of its people, and the military might of NATO did not stop Putin from invading Ukraine. We spend trillions of dollars on planes that don't really deter anyone from anything and only ever shot down planes flown by Tier 3 opponents. No US fighter has shot down a plane operated by the Russian Federation, The USSR, or the Peoples Republic of China since 1970.

Is such a joke.

You lost me at "maneuverability"

BVR combat has never proven effective, and empirical evidence shows it’s by far the least effective option used by pilots in air combat, even against incompetent adversaries. The fact that the F-35, is totally unable to operate in a turning fight, and has such a tiny payload, means if it’s unable to hit its targets(s) with BVR missiles that at best, hit their targets 50% of the time, or the situation doesn’t allow engaging BVR (rules of engagment), it is a dead duck. It can’t outrun most near-peer fighters. And that Wall Street marketing propaganda claiming it doesn’t need to point its nose to lock a target is nonsense. Sure, it can fire the aim-9x at a off-bore angle, but its effectiveness exponentially decreases the wide that angle becomes. And again, when it can only carry 4 missiles at most, who’s to say it will even be equipped with aim-9Xs when it needs them. It’s a very useful weapon, but it’s a mistake to try to use it for everything. It’s very useful as a reconnaissance, precision strike, electronic attack, BVR air-to-air weapon. But its limitations means it is not a viable air superiority or close air support weapon. It is best supplemented by a true air superiority fighter and cost-effective CAS weapons. The F-22, and ideally, something like the F-22 for the Navy. For most conventional war, it’s too complex and expensive to operate. So that’s where weapons like the A-10, F-16, F-18 still prove useful. That said, if our military were run strategically, we’d have 500 F-22s, 200 F-35B, 150 F-35A, 150 F-35C, and we’d be fielding an air superiority/fleet defense weapon comparable to the F-22 for the Navy, in at least numbers of 100+.

And still lost to goat herders in Afghanistan

Nobody gonna talk about 1 bird hitting F35's both engines.

Way overpriced and full of issues, I'm so pissed Canada got involved in this pos.

Why? You never answered whether it even returns any positive value against any thoughtful baselines. Wow, listen to all of these big words! Wow, it’s stealthy and fifth generation!! Wow all of these pilots say it’s so great! Yeah, what does any of that mean? Is any of it objective? Were the pilots influenced to give positive reviews, with financial or career incentives? To anyone wondering if the F-35C helps makes us marginally safer vs. alternative technologies-yeah nobody has ever publically answered that question in a scientific, analytical way. Feels like a PR campaign. And the objective tests we have had, by the Pentagon’s office of operational testing, have seemingly been sabotaged and obfuscated. Not really a vote of confidence. One of these things seems to crash every week, and that’s in the rare event they’re even able to fly in the first place. It seems like a monumentally expensive piece of bloatware, failing against old technologies in the few objective tests it has seen. And when actual objective and uncompromised data scientists from the Pentagon have blown the whistle, they were quickly shouted down by a sea of trolls and/or careerist pilots on the payroll of the world’s largest defense contractors. The thing has unimpressive range, can’t turn, has a terribly inaccurate and unreliable gun that carries a tiny number of rounds; it carries the exact same missiles that the planes it’s replacing rely on, but in smaller number; it’s a fraction as reliable or as durable of the older designs it’s replacing and multiple times more expensive to operate; it’s slow, it’s avionics are largely just newer versions of the same technologies we’ve been relying on for a half century, it’s unarmored and its supposed stealth is way overstated. It’s only stealthy from front aspect, it’s not at all stealthy from rear aspect, and while it has a measure of stealth against radar, it has a massive IR signature. Tell me where I’m wrong? Get better missiles, with better sensors, that are able to defeat countermeasures, and are able to actively track targets longer, and have a higher kill rate from farther away and forget the delivery vehicle altogether. If you have missiles that can hit targets reliably, from farther than any enemy can see you or shoot you, it doesn’t matter if it’s a B-52 or Reaper or a F-18E or a F-35C launching the missile…there’s been a population in the DOD and Air Force who have been beating this drum for decades, but they always seem to get shouted down by lobbyists, salespeople and generals, but there’s never a retort of any substance. It’s just-stop asking questions and buy this expensive plane!!

It has malfunctions over and over again, expensive and unpractical. Airforces who were politically forced to buy and operate this disaster of a combat airplane regret it badly

waste of money. Not what was needed. fjb

Good because the A sucked worse than 4th gen.

The reason why the US navy and Airforce are procuring 100 F-15 and FA-18 is because the Generals are well aware of the failures and structural flaws of this aircraft. The problem stems from the fact that testing are still not finished they started full production. Now even after more than 2 decade of production problem still exist. Also upgrade of older F35 to bring it uptp date are expensive as procuring new jets. Even the F22 after decades it stopped production its readiness rate is so low that even the US govermment want to retire it prematurely.

After the multiple incidents of F-35s break downs ,it seems again to be a hugely overprized machine