F-35 Block 4 : 5 most important upgrades ! 

Too risky Companies overpromise & under deliver 😮 With almost 900 F35 planes already manufactured, the GE option is too risky

YES. The Navy F-35s are the ones that need the block IV first. Also on our ones for our new carriers. UK+UA+US = Victory !

@@JamesLaserpimpWalsh The Ukraine (UA) wont be getting any F-35's, at least not in the next couple of decades

And the heat management would have been great for the Marines and other users of the VTOL version, with much less wear and tear on flight decks and improvised runways.

The F-35 C already has a greater range compared to the A & B Variants.

Did you know that the Earth is curved and to directly "see" a 1300km distant object it needs to be in space? The Space Force will buy that.

Block 4 is scheduled for 2025-2027 IIRC.

Yup very true though I think it’s made for the F22 and the F15 and might not fit in the 35s internal weapon bays

Yeah, F-35 with Meteor and AIM-260 JATM will be lethal. Cuda and Peregrine too.

Near future could be five years Like the F-35 they will have built the 6th gen by the time the F-35 is ready

Nothing else comes close. Not the pitiful joke of a plane known as the su-57, not the non-existent su-75, etc. The F-35 is king, those that hate it are just jealous that they don't have it.

Either way it will probably be getting an engine upgrade because of the new radar and systems requiring more power

I expect them to get it later on. Probably cheaper when the NGAD goes into production because the line will already be there for it. For now focus on upgrading all F-35s to block 4 and in 10 years get them the adaptive engines.

@@ameritoast5174 Agreed.

The less ambitious and less advanced version made by Pratt & Whitney is most likely gonna get chosen. Since the Pratt & Whitney engine is much cheaper, much further along and currently a better fit for the F-35 without major changes in the plane. With that said its capabilities are about half what the G&E engine can do, but again that engine is not yet ready for flight tests like the Pratt & Whitney one is. So everyone expects the F-35 to get the Pratt & Whitney engine, while NGAD and Navy F/A-XX will get the G&E engine.

@@TK199999 The F35 already has an engine. That's not a planned change for Block 4.

idk if were working on a 7th gen fighter just another 6th generation fighter that will be as crazy as the f22 was when it came out.... its really sad when you look at all the new russian/ hell even European planes they all try to copy the f22 or call it the "f22 killer" which is really sad tbh lmao the f22 came out in the early 90s imagine trying to compete with a plane that came out 3 decades ago.... come on russia/the entire rest of the world yall gotta do better. America #1 and always will be!

If they are developing the 6th and 7th gen at the same time then the word Generation lost all its meaning.

@@TheBear710 the Brits and Swedes are working on a 6th gen aircraft called tempest

@@jameson1239 it looks like a f22

@@TheBear710 first off it really doesn’t and secondly that’s because that’s like the only way to have a stealthy aircraft that’s why all stealth aircraft look similar

Good for you Mr.Spacely

I think money was the biggest factor, especially considering that both services need money for 6th gen, as well as the Navy needing money for Columbia class subs, Constellation class frigates, Ford class carriers. The AF was willing but they weren’t going to do it alone, because they’d have to cut more money from elsewhere.

I think it was money, in the report they put out cost was the biggest factor. They also said the issue was partially the F-35 B but others were asking why not just give the F-35 the ECU upgrade and A/C get the GE adaptive engine needed in the SCS. It really is a no brainer, the engine was almost done.

@@teddy.d174 What's most ironic is that I think this engine was also being designed for the NGAD.

They just can't help but be wasteful and foolish. These expanded capabilities would probably lead to saving money in the long run due to the platform being viable for longer with its increased capabilities. But let's save a couple bucks today right...

Probably money and also the biggest reason might be reliability. Just how reliable are ace? Maybe on gen fighters when more testing on reliability is done but currently the current engine is pretty good. P&w is less expensive and probably more reliable

Was that a joke or not?

This video was slightly misleading listing a bunch of shiny new tech which isn't the real significance of Block 4. The F-35 is getting new tech all the time with each Block upgrade but Block 4 will be a major re-design of both hardware and software which sets it apart from the others.

I can think of 2 reasons. 1. The meteor is available now and the others aren't ready yet so it wouldn't be a problem to use them for a bit. (Or at the very least get familiar with it so if they need to use it for some reason, they can.) 2. (Probably the biggest reason too.) The US isn't the only country operating the lightning 2. Other countries have purchased and are operating it. Countries which use the meteor as its main AA missile.

Some F-35s users prefer the Meteor hence why its was added

Aim 260? There’s a few reasons, some where already said, but meteor is a European missile. It works the European defense industry. There are politics in that. More over, they have them in service and in numbers, and to top it off, it’s effective. It’s one of the most advanced missiles in service, a range higher than the aim 120d, nearing the pl 15 range. Variable thrust, it’s a great missile. Peregrine sounds cool and all but it’s not out yet and let’s be skeptical for a second. I WANT peregrine to work. I view 2 things happening, smaller missiles with similar ranges to todays missiles will be developed and will be used by stealth fighters for 2 reasons, in bvr, it sees an enemy well before being seen itself, so they’ll be able to get into their own weapons range before the enemy can target them, and they’ll be able to carry more internally. Non stealth aircraft’s will be equipped with linger ranged missiles as to continuously try to out range an opponent. That being said, it just be noted that bvr may not be just through radar missiles. I hear f18 block 3 can be fitted with a very powerful irst that may track an aircraft 100 miles away. Stealth or not, it doesn’t matter against ir. If that ir signal can be used ti guide a missile, stealth aircraft’s may be at risk. That’s off topic though. Advanced as the aim 9xii are, it’s not the premier ir missile anymore. What I mean is that while it’s great, it’s not something only the US has. I used to be very patriotic with American equipment. I saw a hypothetical video of the f22 and it said “in this scenario the French rafales would be taken out while the f22 are sitting right next to them. I though the rafale was shit, however it’s not, all countries weapons follow basic principles and it’s all science and technology based, nationality bears no part in weapon effectiveness and underestimating adversary weapons or non-US origin weapons gets you killed. To get back on track, pl10, r74(modern r73), and iris are all similar weapons with similar dimensions and capabilities. The US will not use meteor, but that doesn’t mean all things that aren’t US made ain’t be used by America. Jsm isn’t American I believe, and it’s being integrated. The way the engine turns the fan in the B variant is British origin(rolls Royce) and the way the nozzle exhaust can be tilted down may be from Soviet design inspiration(yak 141). It’s a weapon pylons it can use depending on mission isn’t American but Dutch too. Likewise, American components are found in European shit. Airbus is made in France and other countries but I don’t believe it’s engines are entirely French. Saab griphen also used a lot of US/UK equipment and software like radar and system fusion. It’s gun is the 27mm Mauser which is German. It’s engines are of American design

Lockheed Martin is going to ceritfy meteor missile probably for european users with operational range 200km and no escape zone 120km.When they relished that they are gonna do it my country decided that we are going to buy 40 block 4 F35 using meteors and other American made weapons.Thank you USA🇺🇸❤🇬🇷

do you mean AESA RADAR, or something that doesn't exist?

I agree, the F-35 A and C version should have recieved the adaptive engine at the very least. Money was stressed as the biggest factor for the them choosing the ECU upgrade. That upgrade should have been used in the B version alone.

@@rickjames18 $6B in development before teething issues show up and an extra 1000lbs of weight to fix a cooling issue is not the move right now; it'd be a completely different engine program. The F-35 doesn't need more in the name of range either, it already outranges just about everything on internal fuel alone as per the contract requirements, and pilots have stated being able to loiter as long or longer than certain models of the F15. The upgrade will come, just after a decision is made on the provider for NGAD first because the engine needs to fulfill that fighter's needs before retrofitting the F-35 with it.

@@forzaelite1248 The issue of range is so important not particularly with regards to other fighters but with regards to naval aircraft having the range from the carrier to enter the fight without the carrier being in range of anti-ship missiles. The greater the range the greater the distance the carrier is from the enemies capabilities. The increase in range with the GE engine is pretty impressive.

@@forzaelite1248 I will agree that is a lot of money and likely to go up but this engine technology will be necessary for future platforms as well. It also makes a big difference in the block 4 upgrades. There seems to be an issue with the current engine. Something to do with overheating if I remember right. Yeah, I guess we could wait for a decision but I hear the NGAD engine is a completely different program. So not sure if that will have change the equation. I could be wrong but I just read an article about the NGAD engine being developed and from my understanding it wasn't the adaptive engines. As for range, all we hear about in the pacific is range, and how range is the biggest issue. Getting planes from carriers to the battlefield. That is another reason for the increased interest in the Stealth drone tankers. I mean, the distances in the arena are huge. So, range seems to be more important in this case regardless of how good it is when compared to others.

@@rickjames18 The issue with overheating is because the power and cooling requirements have doubled above what the contract originally stated and are to double again; it takes more bleed air than before so the engine has to run hotter. It reduces the overhaul times from 2000 to I believe 1600, but assuming the jets flew 300 hrs year (that's a lot) they'd still have about 5 years before overhaul time, which is more than enough time to get the new core fitted. The Air Force has mentioned before that there's a direct link between the AETP and NGAD engines mostly due to the variable cycle aspect; the intention was always to develop it for NGAD first then fit it to the F-35 later on. If they really needed more range out of the F-35 they could always slap on external fuel tanks; the wings can hold 4 of them and they're design to retract after dropping to stay stealthy. In either case, the single engine and 18k lbs. of fuel gives the C a combat range of 760nm, that's almost twice the Super Hornet with 2 tanks. Even the A variant has a combat range close to the Eagle and pilots have mentioned being able to out-endure them. It can be improved sure, but given the relative peacetime the program has more pressing matters to deal with, namely getting block 4 fielded and developing the adaptive engines for NGAD. Everything in due time.

There's a price for everything..

They will have to pay for these upgrades. If the upgrades are installed on the airplane from the very beginning then it will not be as bad as it will if they already have a flying plane which will then have to undergo depot level or higher maintenance to install the new tech.

It's not Windows 10, it's an airplane.

Not to mention there will probably be upgrades which are US specific.

@@mill2712 Very true.

It does fine with external fuel tanks.

@@Thetequilashooter1 then that is less munitions it can carry

@@samburdge9948 It carries most of its ordnance internationally anyway.

Alot about this jet is hype, nothing more, at 1.5 trillion, I think? Lockheed needs to sell this jet badly, and it has lots of big problems yet, no fighter aircraft in the world is as perfect in what it is supposed to do, I have hear that this jet can beat every other fighter in the world, and that's just wrong and is all hype just to sell it and means nothing, the only way to prove that the f-35 is as good as they say is to have the f-35 defeat other modern fighters in real arial combat, until then the f-35 is just hype nothing more until proven.

@@user-ls5zb2dx5j Well, first up, let's address the numbers the F35 is racking up in war games? Do they matter? Yes, they do, and why is this so? Well, in the Vietnam era, we all know the story about top gun school. They took pilots and made mock war games to train those pilots. So, the kill ratios went from about 3:1 to 8 or 9 to 1. In other words, what they practiced and learned in those war games WORKED in the real world. Same goes for the Falklands war. Turns out about 1 year before the Falklands war, luck would have it that the British Harrier pilots had a chance to fight against USA F15's (this occured in Germany). Turns out the Harrier pilots BEAT the f15's!!! Once again what worked in war games worked in real world air battles. Then the same goes for Desert Strom. They practiced during war games, and WHAT they learned and did worked in the REAL world combat. So, now we seeing the F35 in those war games wiping the floor against 4th fighters, and in fact the F35's are eating up even f22's like taking candy from a baby. So, once again, I fail to see based on past history of how well a fighter performed in war games will not translate into real world results. In other words, based on past history and how such fighters did in war games? In all cases I can find, the results transferred over to real world performance, and thus I expect the f35 do continue this tradition. So, past history shows those war games ARE valid! >> at 1.5 trillion, Well, not so fast!!! The F35 is the lower cost and lower priced fighter right now. Most nations can't afford say a F15 (125 million each), or a Typhoon (again about 120 million each). So these high end priced fighers are too expensive, so nations go with lower cost single engine fighers. This explains why the F16 sold in HUGE numbers. (it was MUCH lower cost then the high end priced fighers - nations can't affoard those). So, they buy F16's or now a lower cost single engine fighter like the F35. F15: 125 million each. (they start at 88 million each, but with combat packge, they are 125 million each) Eurofighter/Typhoon: 120 million each Rafale: 94 million each Gripen JAS 39 E/F:85 million each F35: 77.8 million each. So, as you can see, the above explains WHY the f35 is the best selling fighter in 40 years (easily out selling ALL OTHER fighter jet sales combined!!!). So, most nations can't afford f15 or those high end priced fighters, so they are going with a lower cost F35. A single engine figher, lower cost, and lower priced since that is all they can afford to buy. But, what about that 1.5 trillion cost? Well, such a number is of little use UNLESS we compare to other fighter jet programs. First up, they NEVER quoted other fighter jet programs that way (life time program cost). but, lets do that: That number is created this way: Number of F35's purchased X unit cost + Number of F35's flying X 1 year cost to fly X 70 years So, lets do that with the F16 program. You get this: F16: total program cost (2023 dollars) 3.1 Trillion F35: total program cost (2023 dollars) 1.5 trillion. So, as you can see, the F35 program is LESS cost then the F16 program. What about R&D costs? Well, the F16 program was to cost 5 billion dollars. but, like most programs, they had huge cost overruns, and an additional 7 billion was required. (total 13 billion) The F35 development program has been quoted anywhere from 50 billion to 80 billion. hey, lets not play games and go with 80 billion. So, we get this: F16 R&D: 13 billion (1973 dollars) F16 R&D: 83 billion (2023 dollars) F35: R&D: 80 billion (2023 dollars). However, the F35 resulted in 3 airframes - including the challenging and complex F35 B "STOVAL" model (the vertical landing varient of the F35). So, some how, Lockheed managed to build 3 VERY different versions and airframes for the F35, advanced stealth, and ALL FOR LESS than the ONE f16 program!!! And program cost to date for the F35? They not even spent 400 billion as of yet. And that INCLUDES the 80 billion R&D and ALSO includes delivery of OVER 800 F35 made! (that is more then Eurofighter, more then Rafale, more then F18 supers!!!). And keep in mind that a F35 costs less then a F15 or Typhoon or f18 to fly per hour. It costs about the SAME per hour as a F16 (them both being single engine lower cost fighters helps a lot). In conclusion: The F35 is a lower priced figher to buy. The F35 program cost is LESS then the F16 program. The F35 development costs were LESS then the F16 program, but the program resulted in 3 very different airframes, one for Air Force, one for Navy, and one for the Marines. and all of this was done at LESS cost then the ONE f16 program!!! And based on past history of war games going all the way back to the famous top gun school? And wars that followed? How well such fighters did in those war games MOST certainly did translate into real world results with real air combat battles.

@user-ls5zb2dx5j Most of what you said is incorrect.

That's what I've been trying to tell em.

The F-35 airframe is expected to endure for what it's designed to be, which is a universal "do everything" aircraft that's not supposed to specialize in anything. Unless and until stealth becomes obsolete, the airframe will be a nice compromise that will never need to be changed. That's where NGAD will fill a different role, instead of being a compromise NGAD will be built with the bleeding edge of whatever it takes to beat other aircraft in an air to air confrontation. And if that NGAD design is insufficient, then a new, future NGAD will be built to replace it.

I agree but the knife fight in the proverbial phone booth is virtually unfeasible these days. It's BVR snipers like F22 and ungraded F35s and with some F15 EX Eagles none of their flight packages would never arrive. It's nice the Sukois can do Cobras in the air but when they stall out and forward flight but AMRAAM going pitbull would mail them and of course meteor.

Maul not mail lol

I agree, the decision was short sighted. They could have at least installed the new adaptive engine on the A and C. The funds needed and the B version from my understanding are the biggest issues.

Delusional.

Only Russian and Chinese 5th planes are obsolete

GE’s option sounds great and it will significantly boost the f35 performance, but currently it probably costs to much and let’s be real, how politically sensitive is the fighter since I doubt many people are aware it’s problems are being worked out and is now the most advanced fighter, but it’s also risky. It may be reliable but what’s more reliable than an engine design adapted from a 40 year old one that’s been battle tested.

AFAIK new stealth coatings are not a part of any Block upgrade, existing aircraft just get them as part of a regular maintenance schedule.

They have determined that it has its own role, not necessarily replacing others. You are right they way over promised and under delivered; however, it is finding its own role. AI controller and distributed c&c will be one of its new roles, in my mind.

I don’t think f16 block 70 will replace the f16 block 50s in mainline active service. It just became a thing, but who’s it aimed for? It’s made for people who are unable to afford or can’t buy gen 5 things while having the advanced sensor suits to a limited degree of 5th gen fighters. Older f16s can be upgraded to that standard and the f16 itself is very cheap to operate and maintain. I don’t believe the U.S. has any plans to use it for these reasons. It uses a different engine so they’ll need to redo all their f16 logistics and it uses a different radar so they’ll also need to get more radars. That being said, with all of those stuff being made in the US and I’m mass production, they could redo their stocks, but that’s billions for everything an f35 can do but less while not offering the flexibility stealth provided at a cheaper but still noticeable price tag if several billions to upgrade and stockpile things for f16 block 70. F15ex is going to be a missile truck but it’s cheaper to operate than the f35 and also has its own highly avionics. They’re simply larger aircrafts and can carry more ordinance. You don’t need stealth if you’re dripping very king range cruise missiles like jassm which the f35 can’t carry internally and less and the f16 is the smallest of them all so it will also be unable to carry a lot of cruise missiles. F18 has limited stealth characteristics but it will still show up before weapon launch authorization since it’ll be detected from over 150 miles out. I’m not aware if jsm will be used by the navy or has anti ship weapons but lrasm also won’t be able to fit in the weapons bay I believe, maybe block 4 will have room, but the f18 can have its avionics replaced and hold its own againsts other fighters. It’s cheaper too. F22 are expensive and with block 4, other than wvr rights what can an f22 really do that an f35 can’t while also being more expensive. And A10s work where there aren’t any AAM, otherwise they’ll be dead before they even enter the battlefield. And who’s to do sead? F16s? Even with aagmer, it’s very risky. F35s on the other hand can easily do jt and then switch into cas or air superiority roles

Having worked in maintenance for a little bit, planes get grounded more often than you think; fleet-wide is a bit of a different story, but like they were on the F-35 the fixes are pretty straightforward and there are aircraft on the ground being worked on all the time both in the military and civilian side of things. You just don't hear about them on other aircraft because everyone's busy trying to confirm their opinions that the F-35 is a waste of money for whatever reason. The fact of the matter is, you're probably _never_ going to see where it makes the difference, and that might be why everyone's so skeptical. That information's classified, and what little they do make public is beyond the public's realm of understanding. In every department its better than most aircraft: Mach 1.6 with a combat fuel and weapons load, more fuel than a Raptor on a single engine for 700nm combat ranges on internals alone, a sensor suite unmatched by anything in existence atm, etc. All of these developments were as a result of engineering them for the next gen; if they were done as upgrades for the previous gen, they'd be restricted by previous gen cooling capabilities and tactics and could never pull the kind of 22:1 kill ratios the F-35 does at exercises. Upgrades to the legacy fleet are more out of political pressures and fleet age. The Air Force in particular never actually requested the F15EX for example, but the Pentagon went ahead with it anyways even though they've stated all they want is more F-35s. The A10 upgrade program might as cost as much as an F35 to actually do, the F16V was mostly intended as an export fighter, and the Block 3 Super Hornet fell through because the F-35C just does its job and more. These things have been planned for the next 70 years, and although they don't ever go smoothly, rocks in the road aren't a sign to turn back. I recommend reading or watching accounts from people closer to the program like some of the test pilots and current pilots who've flown it to get an idea of what it's really like to use, because as far as I can tell the media is content to make money off of clickbait titles about the program being bad rather than reporting genuinely. Hopefully you'll start to see things a bit closer to their perspective and then things may make more sense.

@@forzaelite1248 I thought the navy was still procuring f18s and upgrading some to block 3 standard which should be comparable to rafale f4. I think they tried selling it to India but they’re going with MiG 29k(whatever variant). Also, what is f16v? Is it block 60/62? 70/72? I’d imagine it would be block 60s since the uae or some other middle eastern country funded rnd for f15ex(not specifically the ex but the f15ex comes from the production line they paid for) and f16 block 60 and 70

@@majesticface3631 Boeing is stopping production of Super Hornets in 2025 as the Navy is fully commiting to NGAD and the F-35; there may be a couple Block 3s in the wild. The F16V is Block 70/72, it mainly upgrades the displays, radar, and adds conformal fuel tanks. It's mostly meant for export to countries who can't get the F-35 tho bc the AF, Marines, and Navy are all committed.

Not accurate.

Probably wouldn't if it would rather supercruise..

Cry turk because you kick out 😂😂😂

@@user-so8nc4br7z i explained facts about it.... you made fart hellas(s) boy

@@TURKWING oh..I am sorry I didn't know that you do tests on the f35..for a moment I thought you repeating the butthurt turkish nationalist propaganda for their failure..I am pretty sure that you build spaceships as well..forgive my ignorance

@TURKWING Facts about what you have no idea what F u talking about , have u been in one of those jets or even seen one u think something that cost over 100 million dollars is going to be shit well not in America maybe china or Russia but not the USA , stop hating on USA just cause Turks didn't get the F35 you wanted to be kissing Putin's ass so tell Putin to give you jets 😂😂 America is #1 and it will always be #1🇺🇸💪🏻🖕🏻 and the entire world knows that. Our technology is like 40 years more advanced than the rest of the world 😂😂 @TURKWING

Huh???

LMFAO, It's not like this is classified info 😂

The F-35 is intended to be an export fighter. If it's too expensive, other nations won't buy it. Besides, it's not like the US, NATO or any other country that flies the F-35 has to worry about another nation with engine tech half as capable as what GE, P&W and RR can produce. Russia's engines perform but really high performing engines fly very short distances and are high maintenance. China's fanjet engine tech is a mixture of 5-30 year old technology and very unproven, no threat at all to match up with West aircraft including the F-35. China's aircraft would have trouble just matching up against the F-16.