This plane is 4 ++ gen. Only because it is built off the design of the original 15's. Oh, it is capable

Yep f-22 is essentially an eagle if you look at the designs lots of similarities enough differences though to give it the edge. F-35 gets a bad babe but great ideas were out into that design if it came down to a dogfight fourth gen wise the f-15 or fa-18 are so good on the one circle fights but bvr wise I’d hate being in the 18 doesn’t have the speed like the eagle

@@deadshot4245 Yep those 15's are Blazing Fast!!

We still use F-15s. Not enough F-35s to fill every role.

@@huntclanhunt9697 dedicated missile boats from hell

Include the B-1 carrying hypersonic or cruise missiles and you have a devastating attack force.

F-22 better

i agree a regular F 15 can engage that junk china's J 20

@@jacobeliante4640 F22 is for much different purpose than both f35 and f15, and it is also being retired due to its cost and maintenance

@@treycotter that's why the US just bought over a 100 of them right?

Exactly...

Israel pilot. Great pilot!

@@briancooper2112 more like Belkan Pilot

The pilot admitted later that if the escaping fuel vapors from his destroyed wing hadn't obscured his vision of how little he had on that side of the aircraft, he would have ejected.

Freedom likes the way you think. kill any and all marxists anywhere....yesterday!!!

You can also include ADM-160 MALD, carried by B52 or even A-10. The MALD can be programmed to send out a signature to look like any US fighter to enemy radar.

@@davidsonfitness318 Absolutely! Was just watching YT video about the TALD and MALD, both improvements on the old Quail system that was carried by the B-52 to aid in penetrating defenses by confusing radar operators. Now, just imagine an MALD disguised as an F-15C as air superiority, but actually works as a HARM or possibly a Home-On-Jam anti-radiation missile! Don't need a ton of explosive to disable an antenna, power unit, or control van; I the MALD makes it through the defenses.

@@rpeltier2621 Yeah just use it as a kinetic energy weapon if it doesn't get shot down

@Kitty Cat I didn't say it would be easy.

Thank you Ted, and be sure to check the description- I gave you a shout out for the video idea. Cheers!

@@PilotPhotog Thanks! 🍻 I haven’t looked at your store in a while, you have a ton of new stuff, time for me to do some shopping…😁

But f35 flying this low is just going to get spotted by observer.

Although it is stealth but it still going to make noice that could here as an airplane fly by and the cloud that give off

Thanks for all the information,very interesting.

Add on to that the project to succeed the F-16 that is being called the "F-36 king snake" by the media, the B-21 raider and the NGAD and you have an even greater force to be reckoned with than before!

Yep it sure is. The Pentagon keeps screwing up when it comes to procurement ever since the Cold War ended. In the last 20 years the military budget has been bigger and crazier than the ones during the Cold War yet...what is this getting?

The last thing I heard about this bird is USAF now only wants eighty of them. I would still pick the F-22 or F-35 over it. They are more capable and survivable.

@@Stinger522 Which I agree with you, highly capable and improved 4.5 generation craft (Or whatever they decide to call more advanced non stealth planes.) will have their place in the US arsenal.

@@Stinger522 In a Contested Airspace against an advanced adversary like China or Russia, I would bet my money on the F 22/35. But that kind of warfare is highly unlikely..... So the USAF would need a 4.5 generation jet that is more suitable for Air policing kind of missions.... And to also aid stealth jets as missile trucks.... The F 15 fits both roles beautifully.....

@@dreamhunter2973 basically the F-35 gets F-15 IIs as dedicated missile/bomb trucks to command and guide through contested peer level airspace, the F-35 having the EW and maneuverability superior to the F15 or F16 will allow the F-35 to perform the leader role while acting as a guide and guard dog against other fighters and SAMs, while the F-15s hauling the ordinance closely behind and acting as an extension of the situational awareness

@skubisan To counter Chinese long range stealth fighters? The J20 is not as stealth as the F35 or F22. The F22 is smaller and carries significantly less internal fuel but still has pretty comparable range with or without external drop tanks. The F22 has more space for missiles given it carry’s 8 internally compared to 6 by the J20. That extra internal weapons bay space only takes away from internal fuel capacity.

NGAD looks to be several different aircraft, including both manned and unmanned, working in tandem. This would be one way to deliver more ordnance or engage more targets as "loyal wingman" UCAVs could carry missiles/bombs for manned aircraft to launch. However, due to being relatively expensive, it probably won't be produced in large numbers and also won't enter service until the 2030s, so both the Eagle 2 and Raptor will continue to have an important role to play until then and for sometime afterwards. The Eagle 2 is also replacing the current F-15C/D, so even if/when it stops being used offensively, it will still be used by the ANG for homeland air defence.

@skubisan I was speaking relatively when I said the range is comparable. The J20 carry’s significantly more fuel and is larger than the F22. The AIM-260 will also be operational soon and out range the AIM-120 significantly as well(you nor I know the exact range and speculation is useless so you can’t say wether the PL whatever or AIM-260 will be better). The F22 can carry more missiles at the expense of range. The J20 doesn’t have that unless they’re willing to give up stealth characteristics on an already less capable stealth aircraft. It is a long range but I think the worst case scenario will be increased numbers of sorties to make up for less time on station. You know the F35 exists right? If the US can overwhelm the lackluster Chinese air defense with tons of subsonic cruise missiles then Chinese anti ship missiles won’t pose a threat thus carriers could operate as close as they need. That is just speculation about something very nuanced though.

@skubisan Read my comment again

@skubisanyou act like those anti ship missiles can’t be destroyed before the carriers get in range. You’re choosing to not understand my point. It makes sense and is a very simple concept. Anti ship missiles destroyed equals no anti ship missiles to threaten the carrier. Obviously that is easier said than done but that applies to anything we speculate about on here.

Thanks Tim, much appreciated!

After being a member since nearly the inception of his channel, I’m stunned that it doesn’t get more traffic.

Thank you!

@@PilotPhotog DCS fan I see, I can smell DCS game footage from 100 miles away 🤣

@@saltyfloridaman7163 indeed, some clips are DCS (the F-14) and I do play when I can, the rest are rendered by be and my overworked GPU 😆Thanks for commenting!

@@PilotPhotog have you been wishing that they'd update the F-35 mod to more realistic standards? The F-35 mod in DCS went by pre 2017 data and as a result isn't as agile as new publicly available information shows. An amazing video was created by Hypohysterical's guide to the F-35, and I think you'd do an awesome take on it if you'd ever do a video about battling misconceptions with the truth of the F-35 and its program. I'm sure more people are interested in it now that so many countries have purchased them

Thank you very much!

I think it has to do with the AESA radar, digital fly-by-wire flight control system, the F110-GE-129 engines, and the airframe being built for something like 20,000 flight hours instead of the usual 8,000 or so for most 4th-gen airframes (if the publicly available information is correct). Same exterior as the original F-15s but a totally different beast on the inside with greater structural integrity.

The F-15-EX (aka Eagle II) is only has a superficial resemblance to the original Eagle as nearly all it's internal structure, electronics, fuel capacity and more has been changed so much it practically is a different aircraft. Still, I somewhat agree in that they should have done a variant name, like they did with the F-16 Falcon variant now named the Viper. Perhaps Golden Eagle for the F-15-EX, or the Harpy Eagle. Both eagles are larger birds than your average eagle, especially the American Harpy.

I agree, Super Eagle would’ve been a cool name, however I agree with the Eagle II naming by the 🇺🇸 AF.

I could care less about the Super Eagle vs Eagle II debate, my question is why they haven't given it the F designation yet. EX worked as a prototype designation, but now that they've adopted it in full there's no excuse. The Super Hornet was a much bigger change to the airframe, but they still went to E/F for it!

@@pyronuke4768 Several points: 1) EX stands for Extended (as in Range, etc…), and eXperimental; though usually these are prefixes, not suffixes. Once the aircraft is officially redesigned, the EX should go away as it will no longer be experimental. 2) Super Hornet designation belongs to the US Navy, not US Air Force, and USN designates they see fit, especially with the word Super as the USN always considered itself Super(ior) to the other services (tongue in cheek humor). 3) There is already an F15-E model. The new model is a completely upgraded aircraft with new internal frame, electronics, flight systems, fuel capacity and much more. Only the outward appearance resembles the original F15 aircraft, thus I can understand giving it an Eagle II designation, though I would have preferred something more akin to the F16 Viper or F15 Strike Eagle, such as Golden Eagle or Harpy as I mentioned in a separate reply.

I like the way you think! Thanks for commenting

The Raptor just received a service life extension, which wouldn't make sense unless they intend to follow this up with upgrades to keep it operational for longer. These will supposedly be funded from the money saved by retiring the oldest ~30 Raptors (also announced recently) and repurposing the monies which would've been spent keeping them operational.

Great point!

What are the block 4 enhancements to the F-35 ? Do they apply to all versions, A, B, & C ?

@@CharlesFosterMalloy 0rignaly it was reported the the biggest upgrade would be the Adaptive Cycle Engine for the A and C variants..but now GE has got if adapted for the B model. I don't know if the I model for Israel is getting it. There are electronic upgrades and network upgrades.

@@Matterian Is the new engine ready for mass production and installation now ?

@@CharlesFosterMalloy That I do not know.

@Matterian I web searched it and found this: "What is the decision on the F-35 engine?" "The Air Force is ditching its plans to develop a new engine for its F-35 fleet and will instead upgrade the existing Pratt & Whitney engines so the planes have enough power to use future weapons.Mar 13, 2023" [I wonder if that includes lasers and directed energy weapons ?]

Look into the Silent Eagle program, it sounds like exactly what you want. Every new variant is re classified and once replaced or no longer deemed critical to operation it can be declassified. Moving from 4th to 5th seems almost impossible considering the massive changes to the entire aircraft, but 5th to 6th does seem realistic, though we don’t know enough about 6th gens to really say for sure. Normally though aircraft move within their own generation without moving up

Still not integrated. And giving problems it seems. There is at least 5 years before AIM 260 is combat ready. Today the MRCA meteor is the top long range weapon on any air force. Russian missiles have the range but lack maneuverability and like most Russian things, reliability. The aim 120 has good maneuverability but not enough range.

@@EduSanjuan777 I'd still go with AIM-120D3 as it has a passive seeker. With this even enemy stealth is useless. Meteor don't have this. AIM-260 is new of course it may have problems but until then AIM-120D3 it is.

@@johnsilver9338 when a missile comes at you at mach 5 like the Meteor does, it doesn't matter much if you see it coming. Also the meteor has its own guidance for the final phase which means it can adapt for enemy maneuverability. I honestly think the passive seeker is irrelevant. Also stealth matters when you are launching from afar aka locking with the plane radar. Again if you mean you can lock an amraam without giving your position I get that but that has to do more with the plane than the missile. For me the Meteor is superior to the amraam on every way.

@@EduSanjuan777 You have missed the point of a passive seeker. A missile with a passive seeker will home-in on enemy's radar emissions regardless if its stealth or not. It's an anti-radiation missile. This means 4th gen can target 5th gen as well.

@@EduSanjuan777 AIM-260 may even take it further. It may have infrared homing besides active and passive radar homing. Meaning it can either target the enemy's radar cross-section RCS, or its radar emissions, or its thermal signature. Infrared homing has only ever been used on short range AAM. AIM-260 will be the first BVRAAM to use it.

Unfortunately, Canada doesn't have a good record in deciding on the advanced technologies they need. Canada is a NATO country and as such needs to be prepared to send its forces that are not only NATO compatible but comparable to NATO technology. Not too long ago, Canada was considering "upgrading" its fighters with used older models F-18's from Australia and eliminated the F-35 from as an option. Later Canada eventually decided for a competition between the F-35 and the Swedish Gripen. I think after Finland decided to buy the F-35, Canada was leaning toward the F-35. Canada doesn't have a large defense budget nor does it have sufficient cargo aircraft, refueler, and shipping to move major forces to Europe. In other words, Canada has lulled itself into thinking that it a self-defense force for Canada which doesn't really have any major threats or does it believe it will commit major Canadian forces to a major war. Instead, Canada needs to have a military that can provide significant capability to NATO in the shortest time possible. Currently, the RCAF only has 80 CF-18 Hornets and 18 F/A 18 Hornets and 5 C-117's and 5 aerial tankers. As a NATO member, Canada is obligated to spend a minimum of 2% of GDP on defense. However, Canada only spends 1.39% of GDP which is less than Greece, the US, ?Croatia, UK, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Lithuania, Romania, and France to name a few. Not only that by Canada has included spending in Veterans Affairs, Public Works, and the Treasury Board in calculating its NATO defense spending obligations which is still only 1.39% of its 2% real obligation. So what contribution to defense does VA, Public Works, and the Treasury Board have to NATO defense obligations? When I search for "Canadian Armed Forces" I get returns on compassion, inclusivity, humanitarian missions, Habitant for Humanity, and other woke ads. The primary mission of any country's military is to overwhelm and defeat its enemies as quickly as possible to break their will to fight. Canada sometimes participates in the US RIMPAC exercise in Hawaii, but I don't see any Canadian ships participating in Freedom of Seas patrols with the US, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, UK, Germany, France, India, and the Philippines in the western Pacific. Why? Because Canada only operates 12 frigates, 4 submarines, 2 Arctic patrol ships, 12 costal-defense vessels, and 8 unarmed patrol/training vessels. Wow! that has everyone shaking in their boots. Look, I get it. Canada is not the US. But Canada should be shamed and embarrassed that Latvia spends more of it's GDP for NATO defense than Canada. I served 21 years in the US Marine Corps as an infantry officer with 3 years in combat. I trained with very small Canadian units on exercises. They were OK but in my opinion would not bring much to the fight. Canada sends a couple of F-18's to exercises in Europe, but they contribute almost nothing against a tier one enemy. I've also trained with the UK Marines and the Australians. These are first class fighters. The unfortunate fact is that Canada's military is pretty much a joke except for certain specialized units who are very good. Not sure when Canada is going to wake up to understand that we are in very dangerous environment and get serious about a professional military that can provide significant capability to the fight. Or maybe like Trudeau Canada has just gone 100% woke and gives a rat's flying potato about its obligations to NATO and helping to secure the western Pacific. I used to live in Canada. Great people, beautiful country, but a bat shit woke California-like government that is destroying your country as California is destroying itself and my country.

USAF does not fly the Hornet. US Navy and Marines fly the Hornet and they choose the official names for their aircraft while the pilots of all services provide unofficial names, like Warthog!

@@rpeltier2621 Thanks. That explains everything! 🙂

I could care less what they name it as long as they keep the official designation consistent; we all know it's the F-15F, why they insist on calling it F-15 Eagle II is beyond me.

​@@pyronuke4768 Situation with initial F-5 being named "Freedom Fighter" and F-5E appeared to be "Tiger II" - is even more confusing.

well, remember that the us never typically engaged with long range missiles, it is the advanced MEDIUM range air to air missile after all. the meteor missile has been a european pick for quite some time now and reportedly has well over double the range of the amraam. its just that the us has only recently started considering more extreme ranges in their doctrine. also the difference was always speed, and the bigger difference is, stealth fighters are actively discouraged from supersonic flight, it not only makes them less stealthy overall, but the extreme heat burns away their stealth coating. the f15 has no such concerns, and is free to go at high machs up to their airframes limit, rather than their paints limit. also the whole point of the jamming systems is to disallow the SAMs from making long range shots, your max range doesnt matter if you are blinded and cant aim for the target in the first place.

@@auqanova If you're jamming at 100miles and they're shooting from 350 good luck - of course they probably need some kind of initial targeting data so that might be jammable

F-35's guiding F-15EX's with 12 AIM-260's on each plane is literally unbeatable. And the US is leapfrogging themselves with the NGAD fighter that will be even more advanced than the F-35.