The flogger dominated in Angola. All the losses are bombers, the fighter mig23s have low losses. The f35 is worthless of course.

also the yak38 was supposed to be a temporary solution to wait for the yak41 (yak141) but ussr ceased to exist and it never got to the production phase and stayed as a prototype also fun fact the yakovlev bureau was financed by lockheed martin to try and finish their yak41 in exchanges of the funding the yakovlev bureau handed over all the plans and if you do some reseach you can see that lockheed martin f35 use the same type of vtol engine at the rear with almost the same type of mechanism

The F-35 Lightning 2 is not a bad fighter, actually it is a very good fighter. An extremely ambitious program had problems that have been fixed. Now fixed (as of Feb. 2024) and, over 1,000 have been delivered and the fighter has exceeded expectations!!

@@sebastien3351 That's the manufacturer's sales presentation version of reality. If you squint hard you may be able to find some truth in it. "The F-35 Lightning 2 is not a bad fighter" Yes it is. It relies heavily on stealth. And ALL peer nations today outside of Nato has decent or better antistealth capability. Russian fighters and airdefence can shoot at them with good hitchances at 150km. The stealth was supposed to make them practically impervious down to something closer to spitting range. China's ability is more uncertain, but most likely they can do the same at 80-100km. IRAN can likely do it at beyond 80km. It lacks performance, it lacks agility, it lacks in sensors(comparatively), it lacks in ECM(comparatively)... An F-15 is a clearly better air superiority fighter. "that have been fixed" The CRITICAL flaws have MOSTLY been fixed by now. Overall, about half the flaws have been fixed or mitigated. But in the process of doing that, system performance have repeatedly been negatively affected. "and the fighter has exceeded expectations!!" YES! It is even MORE EXPENSIVE to fly than expected! *lol*

​@@DIREWOLFx75youre saying this in 2024. When low observable, subsonic land attack missiles have litterally flown over Russian S-400 systems near Ukraine.

They always say that until the F 35 finds itself in a merge. F 35 will not do well in visual range. They call the F 35 " Fat Amy " for a reason !

As a multi-role fighter, it excels. I like to think of it as an F-15 replacement!

@@tonygourdine512 99% of engagements happen beyond visual range, the age of the dogfight is over. stop living in WW2/Vietnam.

@@tonygourdine512 yeah but the F35 would delete the other aircraft before it came within 5KM of the F35. You would know this if you had any knowledge of Military Aviation.

so far it's grounded and not combat ready so it actually belongs to the list. F-35 also has been intercepted by Russian Su-35 in the baltics so i really have doubt about it's stealth technology. you can google if you don't trust me

Not EVERY time, but yeah, the MiG-9 definitely suits the list better than the Lightning.

I see your MiG-9 and raise you a Thunderscreech

@@lucasokeefe7935 The people responsible for the Thunderscreech should have been referred to a psychiatric exam.

Bro, the lighting I, THE LIGHTNING 1 IS IN THIS GODAMN LIST! THIS FIGHTER CAN FLY MACH 1 VERTICALLY AND IT'S ONE OF THE BEST AIRCRAFT MADE AT THE TIMES! This list was probably made by someone that don't know about aircraft...

@@Oqualquer sounds like a lesson in propaganda.

@@paullakowski2509 it actually is

@@Oqualquer agreed

@@paullakowski2509sounds like a guy that doesn’t know Jack shit

The Mig 23 too

The F-104, used as originally intended and by a good pilot, is superb aircraft. Sadly, Germany completely messed up the plane and then tried to use it in ways that were essentially the opposite of what it was good at. And yeah, while the MiG-23 was a great weapons platform, as a fighterplane overall, it had ISSUES. Really serious ones. It was a fairly good concept, but when it ended up being massproduced as a more standardised fighter, bad bad bad idea.

@@DIREWOLFx75 the F104 was only bad because pilots were not trained properly to fly it. It had short stubby wings that required very hi take off and landing speeds. If you were transitioning from a slow fighter if that period, it could be a bear to fly. Even the F86 sabre had to be flown a certain way or it would kill you. ( see sabre dance). It had a 10 to 1 kill ratio against the MIG 15. People, get you heads out of your passes.

The most lethal jet to it's pilots was the F-100 Super Sabre. It killed hundreds and hundreds of US pilots. The F-104 was a fine plane, but the Germans used them wrongly. Read about it before coming up with statements that don't hold water.

@@chuckbowen4334 No, the Sabre had a close to 1:1 kill ratio against Russian pilots in Korea. Against Chinese or Korean pilots it had 7:1 ratio or therabout. But in total, regardless of who flew them, the Sabre had a 5,8:1 ratio. Bear in mind that the Sabre's job was to shoot down the MIG 15, whreas the MIG15's job was to shoot down bombers, and avoid fighters if possible. If you are want to know more about the "Sabre Dance" - read about the F-100 Super Sabre, one of the most lethal (to it's own pilot) jets that ever flew. Get your ypur head out of your pass...

Impressive performance. I remember seeing one landing years ago in a high-nose position, almost on its tail. Do you know if it was ever called upon to do battle service?

Awesome Aircraft Less than 1 hand of aircraft could intercept the Blackbird

I also remember it as one of the first fighter jets to super cruise.

@@beornthebear.8220 I heard that, and somebody told me very flatly it couldn't. Since I don't remember my source, I couldn't argue.

My understanding was that the Lightning was great for the air defense of its immediate area. It would have made a great bomber had it been assigned to bomb the end of it's runway.

Yeah, they've basically just picked up on the development issues for the programme for a hugely complex, 5th generation, multiple partner, multi-role, multi-configuration aircraft and not on the capabilities or performance of the aircraft. At least with the others they have looked at the performance, safety and reliability of the aircraft. To put it at no.1 on the basis of the development programme alone is utterly ridiculous.

Because everyone believes the myth that the f35 sucks that was spread by one guy in the fighter pilot mafia who never flew a fucking thing in his life and lied about every single accomplishment he ever had. There's never been any sources that it sucks, because it's fucking classified. No one's even going to get to know how good it is until we know what's even in the fuckin thing in the first place. It's all speculation currently, and the evidence we do have suggests the f-35 program is doing just fine. It's just idiots who think jets still dogfight and need to go mach 10 and do 50 cobra maneuvers in a row to win that perpetuate the myth because they don't understand stealth capability doesn't mean the jet literally goes invisible. It's perpetuated by one guy who's convinced we need all jets to be like the a-10 which is the biggest piece of fucking shit useless CAS that has ever been produced. Again, another myth that guy likes to spread is how great the A-10 is. It's not. Actually Lazerpig has some really REALLY good videos on this subject if you're interested. Go watch the "please shut up about the f-35" video and the "a-10 sucks and I can prove it mathematically part 1 and 2". It's got all the history behind where those myths come from and why they're just myths and not anything to be taken seriously.

@@JoeMochan And you can guarantee that it will fall short on both capability and performance.

@@mothmagic1 So far it's exceeding expectations after many improvements. You show how much you don't know.

how many years ago?

@@ANDREALEONE95 whenever it was in operational service. they did many mock training sessions with the US and the lightning outperformed their fighters

@@ollie7373 Spot on mate. An awesome beast of an interceptor.

Yep!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually , zero...kills.

Yes you arecoeerct.it began to be replaced by the Tornado F3 in 1987 with the last of the Lightnings being retired in 1988

@@damien5748 Still flying at Binbrooke until then, the day's when the crabs (RAF) really did have a force of fighter jets , ex RN myself.

Great point, "worst rocket fighters" doesn't have the same ring does it?

F-35 Lightning II. Barely more maneuverable than the F-16. Definitely more steathy. But I have to laugh when I see photos with pylons and ordinance hung on the wings. What stealth? Would like to know just how much internal stores it can carry and how far.

Speed isn't always good in a fighter, slower speeds make it more manoeuvrable. The A10 Warthog is slow compared to some prop aircraft, but it will turn up it's own exhaust port.

Totally accurate assessment. I worked at Edwards AFB for over 20 years as an Archaeologist/Historian, so I had to learn the history and development of the plane. In reality, the plane was a test bed and trainer for pilots in jet planes. That is why it was quickly replaced by the P/F-80 in 1945

"So, you painted the F-35 as one of the “worst fighter jets” due to its operational costs?" I'll skip the long looong full explanation, but suffice to say, i've made this comparison a few times. In short, you can buy and fly the same number of SAAB 39 Gripen over a period of 20 years for less than a quarter of the cost. And because the F-35 is so maintenance heavy, you will have something like 12 times more flighthours with the Gripen during that time. And that does not include the cost of training up the ground crews. 6 conscripts with 6 months of basic trianing plus 1-2 techies compared to 17 techies and a dozen assistants, with most of the techies needing to be highly trained specialists. Basically, YES, the operational costs of the F-35 are ridiculous. While the above comparison is made because the Gripen is the opposite end of that, you can do it with most modern fighters and come up with the same result, the F-35 is absolutely not worth the cost.

@@DIREWOLFx75 But F-35 can do what Gripen can't.

@@DIREWOLFx75 actually f35 is now cheaper to operate than the f18 super hornet. Which is cheaper than gripen. Oh yeah what did gripen kill. Nada

Then explain why country after country, even those who are geopolitically neutral, choose the -35 over the Gripen?

@@DIREWOLFx75 What kind of Stalinist logic is this? So because you can buy and maintain four Gripens for the price of an F-35 that automatically makes it the better choice? Why haven't autonomous drones been prioritized over piloted aircraft then? They've been in development since the 50s, so why not just fly hundreds of those in a straight line and not care how many get shot down? Oh that's right, because everything you send into the sky needs to come down and I think we can agree that the idea of one F-35 crashing into some poor fucks village is a lot better than having the whole damn place taken out by the wreckage of four flaming Swedes..

The B model is amusingly the one that the designers had to pay a bundle to Yakovlev to be able to finish it... "I get why the F-35 is on the list but it most definitely is not the worst." Try to go back and find the original claims about the F-35. Not the modified ones, the FIRST ONES, the ones that were supposed to define "5th generation", which was later changed repeatedly every time the F-35 failed to achieve the definitions. They specifically created the utterly fake idea of the "fighter generations" just to hype the F-35, and then they had to modify it, was it 11 times or something, because they failed to make it happen. Then there's the maintenance horrors of it... It's not the worst plane ever, but compared to how EXTREMELY it failed to reach the goals that were specifically created just to hype the plane? Yeah, that truly IS epic fail.

@@DIREWOLFx75 actually Lockheed helped develope the yak. So it's the other way around.

@@DIREWOLFx75 actually Lockheed helped develope the yak. So it's the other way around. Also the f35 is the best selling aircraft in the world today. By all premier military forces.

The only TRUE requirement for 5th gens is stealth lol. The only so called "requirement" that the -35 doesnt meet is supercruise but the thing is from the start it was never designed to do that. Mark my words, if the requirement for the -35 was to go Mach 2.5, it would go that fast.

@@shtorm2616 Except ORIGINALLY, the F-35 was SUPPOSED to be a supercruise aircraft. It's why the airframe is designed optimised for it. "if the requirement for the -35 was to go Mach 2.5, it would go that fast." *LOL!!!* No, it most certainly would NOT. Because the marvellous new and improved RAM coating the F-35 uses has problems dealing even with any supersonic speed. Anything approaching mach 2 and the coating would literally start to flake off from the friction and heat!

There is/was nothing particularly unique about intercepting either the U2 or the Concorde. U2's were being intercepted off the Florida coast at 70,000 ft by USAF F-104A Starfighters in the mid-1960's. Intercepting the Concorde in a stern chase is a stunt, nothing more.

And it’s’ total dependence on stealth to survive

@@douginorlando6260 it’s not dependent on its stealth coatings, it is entirely dependent on its sensor fusion or its data link, the MADL.

The MIG 23 is trash

@@kevinstraus1478 because?

Pfffft!! A pilot in a Sopwith Camel could down the entirely useless Mig-23. It's only around in very poor countries that can't afford a toilet to pee in.

The Wright Bros. at Kittyhawk…, Outstanding analogy!

@Christy Li nah, go ask F-35 pilots

🤡

had some issues back in early development, now it’s one of the most capable planes ever

@@LifeForceGenerator uhh.. sure.. sixth gen aircraft overcoming 5th gen.. that’s the whole point of a higher generation..

@@LifeForceGeneratorwe’re literally seeing air forces around the world develop multi-role fighters compared to specialized fighters. India’s AMCA is expected to be multirole. China’s J-20 and J-31 are multirole. Majority of rumors surrounding 6th Gen Fighters expects them to be multirole. Face it, the age of specialized fighter jets are coming to its very end since the cost of developing and maintaining just 1 model… is TOO expensive.

The Canadians bought 66 F-101's from the U.S. in 1961; in the early 1970's they traded the 56 survivors for another batch of 66, which they flew until 1984. They never lost 50% of either batch. The Canadians lost around 40% of their Starfighters, but they also flew the shit out them, more than any other user.

The mig23 was a pile of junk, and the f35 is 20 years behind and a step backwards from the f22. By far the worst fighter is the me163, it was lethal in many ways.

Because its not bad, its good

F-35 is selling well because it's literally the only stealth fighter on the market and because it's being heavily subsidized. Several countries came up with tests specifically to suit the F-35, or fabricated numbers.

Countries are being strong armed to buy F35. Wikileaks proved that with Norway’s F35 selection

"and proof of that is the number of countries that buy it until today" *LOL* No, that's because USA is coercing other nations to buy it. It became EXTREMELY blatant when Norway was testing F-35 vs Gripen. And claimed that they chose the F-35 based on COST advantage. Because sure, counting only purchase price for one plane and purchase cost PLUS full service costs for 25 years AND pilot conversion training costs, is such a valid method of determining costs. And even with that fake comparison, the F-35 was only barely less expensive, lol... "And if you think the F-35 is bad, imagine the planes that were copied from it..." Well that's very easy. NONE. Noone has been braindead stupid enough to try to copy it. "even with all the problems and cost, the qualities of the F-35 stand out much more than its defects" No, they really, REALLY do not. It's not complete junk, but compared to its costs, the REAL costs, not the subsidised pretend pricetag being touted, it is outrageously bad. It has absolutely NOTHING to justify its cost beyond stealth. And how many nations have spent the last 20-50 years developing counters to stealth? Oh yeah, most of the industrialised nations, that's how many. The F-35 is absolutely superb at striking against 3rd rate militaries. Against near peers? Uh, no. The only thing that will help it there is numerical advantage and lo and behold, its extremely high cost of use makes that unlikely to happen.

The F-35 isn't a dogfighter ffs it's a sniper, it's a wonderful Airframe, and all because one Norway pilot talked crap on an early model that had maneuvering restrictions everyone says it's bad, while everyone else except that one guy praises it.

@@taibhse955 *lol* No, that has little to nothing to do with why people talk badly about it. It's an airframe designed for supercruise speed, but is unable to actually fly supercruise during any real kind of mission. It's a "sniper" with an underpowered sensorsuite and an unreliable datalink. So no, it's NOT a sniper. It is literally a bombtruck. Excellent against 3rd rate armies that still doesn't have any kind of anti-stealth ability. But mediocre to ok-ish against most other opposition. It was supposed to be the budget stealth plane and instead, USA can barely afford to have it and the F-22 in service at the same time. Instead of replacing all the teen-fighters, USA is now searching for a budget fighter to take over as the lowend to the F-35s "highend". It's not absolutely terrible in any single way, in many ways it's even quite decent, but alltogether it is a ridiculous level of failure combined into a single aircraft.

Alot of that reputation came from people trying to use the aircraft for undesigned roles..like ground attack.

@@f4ephantom Poor training, poor maintenance, lousy weather. It wasn't the plane, or it's application.

Don't you mean the Barrcuda? The Buccener was a twin jet developed during the cold war!

Not to be confused with the British jet of the same name....

The buccaneer didn't even exist during ww2, what are you on about

Not saying im a genius or better than others, but I have a feeling a large majority of them are very gullible, or mildly stupid at worst.

Grow up.

Didn’t another F-35B crashed again 2 weeks ago? Yea sure it’s a great plane now 😂