Top Gun Maverick is WRONG
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 04. 2023
- If you're an organization that would like to partner on a video, reach out to hasard@hasardlee(dot)com
Every 100th person wins a PATCH 👉 www.professionalsplaybook.com...
SUBSCRIBE for regular videos▶ / hasardlee
HOW TO CONNECT
LinkedIn-- / hasardlee
Instagram-- / hasardlee
Facebook-- / hasardlee
Email--hasard@hasardlee(dot)com
🎙 Listen to the Podcast-- www.professionalsplaybook.com...
Interesting how flying a fighter jet evolved from dogfighting and close range combat to operating an invincible flying supercomputer.
So I'm Thinking Reverse Launched Missle For Tailing In Dogfight,Armed Landing Gear For The Merge And Missle Defense,Bigger Air Brake Systems (Stagnated Slide Panels)
And A Rocket Launcher System Hooked Up To The Ejection Seat.
Bit like the telephone really. Also everything else.
@@emmanuelponce6380 so I’m not the only one that thought that a singular reversed fox2 would be good
@@Wally_Wombat689 you are one of two people that have. It wouldn't work.
Clint Eastwood’s stolen Firefox had rearward missilery.
"Why didn't they use F35s?"
For the same reason they didn't use B-2s... they wanted a dogfighting movie, not a slaughterfest
They didn't use the f-35 platform because the f-35 is a single cockpit aircraft which was not suitable for the Maverick/rooster dynamic
@@saiyamang5397
But Mav and Rooster were in different planes
@@screenname8267 absolutely, my mistake... It wasn't just about mav rooster it was about the other team members like Bob and Phoenix... This was explained by the director in a TV spot, I will try to find a link for you.
@saiyamang5397
I get it, really.
But my point stands.
They wanted a fight, they wanted action, and they wanted a callback to the F14 with 2-man planes.
The F-35 would not have given any of this -they may as well use the B-2, it has the same impact.
@@screenname8267the B-2 may not always be the best option here. Sure, it is near impossible to detect and could probably destroy this target easily, but the issue is that it is slow. The top speed of the bomber is a little over 600 mph, while the tomcat can easily go more than 2.5 times faster. This isn’t even taking into account the 5th Gen fighters they have. Sure, you could run air support in the form of a 22 or 35, but those don’t have the same flight range as the B-2, even with external fuel tanks. Plus, external tanks increase the radar cross section. Also, the B-2 can’t launch from a carrier, meaning it has to be launched from a base within its flight range. You could do a midair refuel, but it has to be after the target is destroyed and the bomber is clear of danger.
However, I am not sure if what Maverick said in the movie is true, how the GPS blockers made it so the 35 couldn’t fly the mission.
I also highly doubt the US would send the 22 given it only has around 150 airframes. Loosing one would be a blow to the US.
Top Gun wasn't trying to get it right. Top Gun was trying to entertain. It's a movie, not real life.
Lol 😂 Exactly
I would push back a bit by saying that a huge part of the marketing for this movie was about how "real" it was. Not just that we're using real planes (even though plenty of them were fake), but that this is what real pilots would do.
In fairness that sort of talk has been standard marketing for movies for the last few decades, but yeah they did try to boast about the authenticity of their film.
@@ChromedbustopThat’s not the point they’re trying to make. They’re just saying that if the audience wanted the highest degree of realism then they’d go watch a documentary. While the marketing did push the realistic aspects of the film they did so in the context of the movie being a Hollywood production. As in they cared enough to make it feel as authentic an experience FOR THE AUDIENCE as possible.
@@sergkr2d2 we're not really in disagreement because we're not really talking about the same thing.
What you said is accurate, but what I was saying is that if you put an emphasis on realism (again, not unique to this film. Many movies do that with their marketing) then yeah, you're going to get people who might say "it's not THAT authentic".
Yes, we all know full well that films take artistic and dramatic license when deciding what to do in a movie.
My point is that the attention to realism came in large part from the filmmakers themselves who made the decision to make that a point of marketing emphasis.
Like people didn't really care that Independence Day wasn't realistic with it's planes, because that film never said "Oh this is how real fighter planes would engage alien space craft"
@@ChromedbustopIn a word, what you're saying is "correct".
F35 is so invisible, the Pentagon cant find it.
F-35B did the next step in F-35's invisibility capacities - it became a submarine as well.
Japan, UK & US can confirm.
Best comment! 😂
@@ashnazgthrakatulukii1165 Best safety record of any current combat aircraft. Keep coping.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The Su-57 is so stealthy, the Russian government can only find ten of them!
“If it's a fair fight then your strategy sucks”
Exactly
-Sun Tzu, The Art of War
@@shadowtiger2363dog fighting is for idiots that want to die and lose the war kid.
@@shadowtiger2363🤓🤓🤓
@@shadowtiger2363lmao
Maverick says in the movie: "Great, looks like a job for the F35s" when they explained the mission to him. Even Maverick thought stealth was the answer to the mission
Except the canyon would fuck with the F35 computers also stealth DOES NOT make aircraft invisible it make the aircraft look like a small bird on radar.
@@zacharyradford5552 No, at some angles the vehicle will be undetectable by other aircraft. Plus a small bird wouldn't be a big enough blip to be able to accurately engage. Stealth forces you to get close to the enemy, and at that point the aim-9x/AMRAAM will kill you
WE GOT THIS MISSION.. "Mission is to risk the lives of all our best Naval Aviators...
Other Guy: Hmmm... Hey, Lets send in 2, 2 man Scout Teams or Special Recon Element to laze the target.. and fire 2 tomahawk missiles or jdams to fuck shit up!!.. OMG.. ABSOLUTELY GENIUS!!
@@zacharyradford5552 this is dumb dude. Stealth can make an aircraft Invisible, however it only does so with certain tech against certain radar systems.
And please explain to me how the computer of an f-35 would be rendered non operable by mountains
@@datb0013 the mountains wouldn’t render it inoperable, the radar jammers in the mountains would, actually watch the film before commenting.
Top Gun does NOT get the fighter jet concept wrong, it simply was a story written without stealth because of the lack of a 2 seater F-35, to make a movie about an aging fighter pilot, in a jet that worked into the storyline.
100%. Comment section and video shows that context isn't important to those baiting clicks with this vid and those typing away in the comments.
The comments are arguing from a Watsonian perspective, which is addressed in the film by saying there are no f 35s available. You are arguing from a Doylist perspective which the majority of commenters are uninterested in because they don't care about the filmmaking so much as the story
@@ironninja259 no, I'm arguing from a factual reality position which the movie stems from.
@@troyezell5841 that is what Doylist means, out of universe reasoning
@@ironninja259 I understood what you meant but I'm stating it in a manner that doesn't appear as condescending and simplified. It is not my intention to say that you are being condescending, but sometimes it's not necessary to use overt literary language to explain something or use terms the common person doesn't understand. Yes, I consider that overt, not necessary. I should have clarified that, certainly. Please understand, I'm not attacking you, your point was true.
Top gun and what they got wrong: the f-35 doesn’t dogfight
Also top gun: not having a single f-35
a lot on the carrier
Exactly!! 😂😂😂
Fr
@@sonofothofn1736 you dumb?
If you have five F-35s they can join together to form Voltron.
Thank you so much for this truly excellent comment. You cracked me up. :D
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Form feet and legs! Form arms and torso! And I'll form the head
I kinda want a f35 based Robotech fighter model now…
That’s awesome
Fighters evolve from being a brawler to being a sniper.
Well said!!!
That's warfare evolution in general really
No it went from a beautiful display of skill with honor and respect for your adversary, to clicking a button on his radar ping without being able to look him in the eye and give him a chance to fly back to his family.
A power hungry government’s wet dream.
@@cryptoworldpeace2974 Evolve or die..Iike the cavalry and infantry formations. 😂
If you want honor go join the UFC or something.
@@skepticalmagos_101 your crying laughing emoji really highlights your philosophical rhetoric on evolution, sir.
There is no honor in western life anymore.
They literally say in the movie that the mission was essentially for the F18 super hornet due to the terrain and how low the F18 needed to go to achieve the mission.
Yeah but it's a bullshit movie reason
This video is talking about a 5 Gen fighter, TGM was using E/F Supers.
The 5th gen fighters referred to were enemy hence the reason it was said that the enemy had levelled the playing field.
That’s crazy because Tom cruise was in exactly zero F35’s throughout both top gun movies.
f-18s, 14s, etc, any aircraft 4th gen or later really is 99% BVR not close range dogfighting
He couldn’t go in one because the cockpit is classified
The reasons why Tom Cruise didn't use F-35's for Top Gun: Maverick has its roots in production issues, not story issues. If the movie crew had the ability to use F-35's to fly in the movie, they would've absolutely done so.
@@StrikeNoir105E they might have, but Tom cruise really wanted those inner cockpit shots, which the navy refused because the inside, mostly the display, is classified
@@bigbonziboy2822 and also there is only one seat
That is all true but in the movie they were flying F-18s so they weren't trying to say F-35s can dogfight
True, but if you see comments sections on the F-35, people are always complaining about it with regards to dogfighting. People just don’t understand, so videos like this need to be made.
Yeah I agree, it's not F35 used by top gun movie. It's F18 vs SU.
F-35 CAN dogfight. Have you guys seen Harier dogfight? Have you guys seen how in a dogfight, a LITERAL hover capability would render any turn rate moot because one can just stay on spot and aim its nose at the enemy and fire? Not to mention F-35's 360° awareness, and 360° missile lock and fire capability? Dogfighting is useless against the F-35 precisely because it can lock and fire wherever the enemy is: there's no Blindspot on it. Not to mention the power-to-weight ratio is MONSTROUS compared to many jets, hell, it has higher P-W ratio than the F-22. F-35 would not lose in any turning or power fight because it literally can hover and has very powerful engines
@@jerryalbus1492 yeah no, the f-35 b variant has the vtol ability but it’s not capable of hovering mid air. It still needs a runway to takeoff. Google is one click away
@@GlockGotti it literally doesn't need runway to takeoff. It makes it VERY fuel efficient but if necessary it can vertically takeoff. Not to mention that it can actually hover mid-air, but then again, it is not fuel efficient at all, it damages the turbine blades, and anyone who would actually use that capability to dogfight is a retard that should never be allowed anywhere near military equipment (the sheer idea of dogfighting in this era is retarded so go figure).
Pilots who've flown everything generally say they'd want to be in an F35.
The greatest weakness is the lower weapon load out.
Unless you're using external pylons
Unless you're using the new drones they have approved to data link to the f35 and the 6th gen fighter when ever that turns up.
The plan have atleast one drone to f35 in inventory. Each drone carrying same load as an f35. Apparently they can have more than one drone going forward. The air forces next gen plan apparently having upto 8. But none of this is out yet. The drone should (we will see) be late 2020s.
Aliens: He said invisible. [maniacal laughter]
In Top Gun, Maverick and Rooster saw the 5th generation fighters up close. No stealth advantage was used because the enemy pilots didn't know if they were friend or foe. By the time they realized they were enemies it was too late. This ended in the enemy pilot getting caught up in the moment and just chasing them down instead. It was even said in the movie "If they knew who we were, we'd be dead already."
Except that the F-14 has a better radar range and is considerably faster than the Su-57. The Su-57 is not a stealth aircraft. If the F-14 has good long range missiles, it can shoot it down from a distance.
@@bluemarlin8138 forreal dude? You are missing the point. The movie explains it, what the pilot said is also true but unrelated because the pilot obviously didnt watch the movie but uses his expertise to create generalities
@@bluemarlin8138dont forget the f14 in that final scene was barely working, Maverick and Rooster didn't even have radar on and the Felons would have shot them down if they knew they were enemies before they even realised.
Kids... this movie is not realistic... maaaaaybe, maaaybe the first kill would hav been possible.. and the rest of the dogfight is bs
@@bluemarlin8138perhaps faster when clean (without missiles and drop tanks) but even with older engines i bet su-57 is faster with combat load. Also this movie is fantasy set in the universe where su57 is already fully operational and mass produced so that in mind those su57s are equipped with aesa radars with apsolute superiority over f-14s radar.
Well that's a good thing he was flying an F/A-18 Super Hornet and never an F-35 Lightning-II.
Actually In a picture on his memories, There were pictures of him being an F-35 pilot
Even then what he says still kind of applies. Modern fighters dont really actively engage in dogfighting anymore, despite their capability to. Its just obsolete given the dominance of AMMRAMs and other radar guided missiles. And even if you do get into dogfighting range, as a dogfight must be in close proximity, infrared guided missiles exist. So what is the point of dogfighting anymore unless both belligerents are just out of missiles and must rely on their cannons.
What a loser,right?
The thing is if you have yo dogfight in todays jet fighter, that means you already fucked up, a dogfight today is the same as a knife fight in a world where everyone carries a sniper rifle
It’s actually an F/A-18C super hornet 🤓
The mire advanced we make our planes, the more advanced the enemy makes their anti-air missiles
In the movie they said they can't use f 35 in this mission💀 megaminds "this is a mission for F/A-18 and laser guided bombs"💀💀💀💀
I worked on F35 for LM in the early 2000's. After seeing the movie my wife asked me about the movie explanation of why they couldn't use the F35, I told her they would definitely use F35 in a mission like that and the real reason they weren't in the film was that the Navy wouldn't allow them to film in the cockpit and there are no 2 seat F35's to put the actors in.
The F35 is too expensive and I don't think the Navy uses F35s...........
@@boostjunkie2320 there are three variants of F35. The air force is A, marine VSTOL is B, carrier variant is C.
@@MrJacksjb Yes I know that already
@@boostjunkie2320 so you know there is a carrier variant but you don't think the Navy uses F35's? I'm confused.
@@MrJacksjb Yes I knew there are 3 different variants but I knew that top gun doesn't use the F35....The Navy actually has a lot F35s...
It's not the plane, it's the pilot! Now we know it's mostly the plane. The movie was super fun regardless if it was not a true real life story. It's the movies!
Pilots make a huge difference for when things don't go to plan.
The real thing about this short is that these are either f22 or f35 fighter pilots, not f18 pilots like the maverick movie. They dont have the understanding of radar or the fighting of the aircraft
And didn’t they use F-18s in the recent movie?
I remember having a convo with pilots at an air show once about which plane would've been the better pick between the YF23 an F22. It was interesting to say the least
-Pops flares against radar guided missiles
-Pulls 9gs with external fuel tanks
"Topgun was so real!!"
It didn't get it wrong at all. The director, cast & crew, and real-life pilots explained all of this both in the movie and in behind-the-scenes footage. The reason they used the F/A-18s was--*first and foremost*--because they are a 2-person aircraft wherein they could film the actors as if they were flying the plane. From there, they needed a plausible reason within the canon of the film to use the F/A-18 over the F-35. The reasons were using the F/A-18's superior agility and maneuverability at elevations below radar detection. So yeah, it wasn't some gross oversight. There was (clearly explained) reasoning.
There was also the GPS blockers that prevented longe range missiles from stealth planes from hitting the target. Only short range missiles could effectively target the facility.
@@pmpowalisz not only that, but also the fact that F-35s do not have external pods, and the penetration bombs they used had to be guided by laser pods, that's the main reason in the movie for using F/A-18s, Es and Fs
@@NikkOcello17 The F-35 has an EOTS in the nose, what are you talking about. It's literally a built-in targeting pod.
@@pmpowalisz So the F-35 couldn't drop a laser-guided bomb and lase it in with the EOTS in the nose? The movie is cool but that's not at all how the US would hit a hardened bunker in the mountains lol.
The logistics of the movie required the 2 seat F18, so I get that. The in-movie reasoning for not flying the F35 is wrong and hand wavy. (jammers)
I give every movie some leeway when the realistic alternative is no movie. The F35 (or B2) would just insta strike the AA, radar and target, but that's boring.
In the movie they use F18s. That explains the TopGun thing. It is explained in 1 sentence why they don't use the F-35 though. And they participate for the sake of 1 take off from a carrier, in the opening. But never in dogfight.
Nothing about the dogfights in top gun ate remotely even in the smallest way real
Let’s face it though, in no real world scenario would top gun 2s mission be flown that way. They would have used the whole air wing. You would have had SEAD missions to take out the SAMs, there would have been an F-35 fighter sweep to deal with the Felons, Fighter Escorts, the bombing aircraft to target the facility, you would have had AWACS, Tankers, CAP fighters, rescue helos, probably ASW helos as well if you assume the “unnamed hostile nation” is Iran. It would have been supported by the ships in the task force, so tomahawks probably would have still been used on key points. All in all, nearly every plane and pilot would have been in on the strike. Or they could have gone stealth strike. 2 Air Force B2s with a flight of F-22s in escort and boom.
@@speed150mph The F-22s would have been a better choice for escort to fight enemy aircraft. But that's an Air Force fighter jet.
@@speed150mph the facility was ingrained in a mountainous area surrounded by GPS blockers which ruled out long range weapons from stealth aircraft. Only short range missiles could have effectively targeted the facility. A whole air wing performing seed missions against the many SAMs would had given the enemy enough time to excavate the facility of all important gear, equipment, and personnel. The movie’s mission was actually created by actual naval pilots who was asked to come up with the toughest mission they could think of. The movie including it’s main protagonist said that this mission was very abnormal.
@@pmpowalisz missles arent gps guided theyre laser guided...
Imagine top gun 2 just two jets firing some missiles from miles away and the movie ends
I was a helo SAR Swimmer in the mid 80’s on Enterprise. Capabilities of the airwing have improved dramatically. Although I still love the F-14 Tomcat
" Football" reference is the most American thing in this explanation.
You don’t know very much about the world, do you?
@@jb76489 the scholar of university of CZcams is here to educate. Mr all knowing to save the day.
@@DemonOfRazgriz 1/10 there was an attempt
Want to try again?
It works with both types of football
@@jb76489 attempt on what? Football?
I just keep thinking that they said the Phantom F4 didn’t need a gun.
Interesting factoid here is that the NV MIGs actively targeted the F4s and other non dedicated fighters, but disengaged as soon as they ran into F8s.
The gun issue was not the reason the F4 phantom didn't preform well in Vietnam. The reason it didn't preform well was poor training. The reason why the top gun program exists at all is to remedy poor pilot training during Vietnam.
Missiles are also significantly better than they were 50 years ago
You can’t just compare 1st and 2nd generation Air-to-Air missiles with 4th generation, it’s a mismatch on a gigantic level. Even then, if two aircrafts got into a merge, holy hell, both of the pilots messed up as it is not part of any modern fighting doctrine to enter knife-range.
Modern air warfare doctrine revolves around sniping adversarial aircraft.
@@kiro9257 Mistakes were made then and mistakes will be made now as well as in the future. That's the point.
@@Tinfoil_Hardhat maybe also because the f-4 phantom was designed for dogfights
F35 still practice dogfighting tho. There are F35's at Top Gun nowadays. Source: I'm in an F35 squadron
F-35s fr got the War Thunder hud
We are currently invisible to our opponent's radar. But when our opponent is also invisible to our radar then dogfighting will return.
Or radar systems had another breakthrough and need another stealth system ot material.
They're going to switch to weather balloons.
You're not playing ace combat just run away?
IRST and TV sensors are not affected by "stealth".
The ranges are inferior to modern radars, but nowhere close enough for dogfighting to occur in most situations
Dogfighting is not applicable in modern air to air combat, when have planes cruising at Mach 1 and have air to air missiles that can hit a target 10-100 kilometers away...
Sounds like that pilot had only heard about the dogfighting in the movie but didn’t actually watch the movie.
that was my first thought too
Exactly. No one thinks that top gun is real life. Plus the first movie took place 30 years ago before the raptor or f35 even existed lol trash video
100%
indeed
Exactly
They only used the Hornets because the movie needed action and a good plot.
It's great distance a part until the Toes tell you to visually ID the enemy before you shoot. We had the same capability in Vietnam for distance weapons, and superior aircraft to keep out of harms way, bit the ROEs negated them.
What this guy wanted to say is: “now missles are capable of hitting at 300 miles away so we don’t need to dogfight anymore”
He's saying we can't (dog)fight that's why we are a (autonomous) drones launching platform.
That's what the geniuses thought during the Vietnam Conflict. An F-5 Phantom WITHOUT GUNS because missiles were the high tech options. I read most or all F-5 pilots wished for a gun and needed a gun during a combat situation.
83 nmi with an AIM-120D. 120 nmi with an AIM-260 or Meteor. But they can all be dodged by fighters at ranges beyond 30 nmi if detected.
@@kbaer3038those geniuses were right. The Phantom achieved a 15 to one kill ratio in Vietnam in air to air combat and only 16 out of 147 kills by Phantoms were achieved with guns. Of the rest, nearly as many were achieved by maneuvering alone and the rest were missile kills. After Vietnam every air to air kill except for one helicopter in Desert Storm was a missile kill.
Except now we have 60 years of data to back that up. Instead of basing it on a new immature technology.
Dogfights in WW2: Trying to outmanuver your opponent to get behind him
Dogfights in the modern era: Quickscope sniping from KM away.
365 No scope, still waiting to hear how F35s T-bag the enemy at Mach Jesus.
I was gonna say, wouldnt they just use a B-2 to just drop a bunker bomb on it lol
A kilometre away is the biggest understatement ever
@@VegaFic WTF IS A KILOMETER 🦅💥🇺🇸
Gen-5 as well as 4 fighter jets can literally destroy there targets from 50 kms away.
Also, speed of older jets is greater than newer ones but newer ones are advance with better weapons , most importantly they advanced highly in to Stealth capabilities.
You can't outrun a missiles neither manviour them Because they will explode Immediately after they lose targets
It's also because the F-35 is a multi-role, non-dog fighting centric fighter meant for BVR (beyond visual range) engagements. While other Gen-4 aircrafts like the F-16 were meant for dogfighting, I mention this because a better comparison to the F-18's in Maverick for a Gen-5 fighter is the F-22 which was crafted much more as a dog fighter with thrust vectoring, causing it to basically have a cheat in close dogfighting scenarios, and actually has even greater stealth capabilities than the F-35
Not very exciting to watch a movie where a plane blows up buildings from 100 miles away while flying in a straight line.
The Air force takes the saying "I see you but can you see me?" and "You can run but you can't hide." very seriously
Or "I'll beat you with one hand". (F15 losing a wing and hardly noticing)
@@marchammond05 wasn't that Israel
The Air Force is John Cena
@@Inspadave no the Airforce is not John Cena
I'd like to say " You cant run or hide " because if it came down to it the F22 Raptor could run em down before they hide.
They said this in the movie though if iirc. They mention something about maverick being the one/last pilot to get into a dog fight.
For fifth and sixth gen planes, any stealth platform really, dog fighting is pretty much obsolete. Third and forth gen planes still dog fight but even they are moving past that due to upgraded avionics, sensor suites, and guided high speed long range munitions.
Bro, you asked the people's help find the F35😂
The F35 and others like it is (mostly) invisible for now but like all military tech things will evolve and get more advanced so at some point they will be visible again probably sooner then most think.
Nope
Something odd is that the older radars can "see" stealth jets better than our new radars, but neither of them can really get a lock on them to shoot a missile.
@@jackalope8568I mean this is actually a russian propaganda piece even if you don't know it. The only time stealth aircraft have been shot down was opening its bomb bay doors. That was an f111. Quite an old Stealth aircraft. Also its bomb bay doors are open for about 0.5 of a second. So quite a luck that radar pinged in that window.
No normal sized radar for the battlefield can pick up stealth aircraft. Maybe if you constructed an absolutely huge one I mean you could see it from space. Definitely could but that's somewhat easy to blow up with mass cheap drones overwhelming air defence.
@@murphy7801 1 - it's not propaganda, s-400 can easily see the stealth aircraft, just not launched at them
2 - it was a F-117, not F-111. F-111 isn't even a stealth aircraft
3 - the bomb bay opens for longer than 0.5 secs, idk where you got that info from
4 - get some information from sources that are not AI generated pro US propaganda 🤡
Short and simple explanation: they did not have the money to use an f-35
The closing add statement got me for a sec there,thought I had a Chance to win an F-35 frl😅😂😂
Top gun didnt get it wrong cus the F-18 still fights like that. Top Gun wasnt about the F-35. Click bait title.
The f18 does not fight like that... dog fights are a thing of the past.
@@t.i2147yeah because that movie is about dogfights... right?!
@@t.i2147 so let's pretend this didnt happen? czcams.com/video/XEm75grzVNg/video.html
@@t.i2147 the last time someone said dogfights are a thing of the past they came up against highly maneuverable migs with guns that had a field day
@@jollyrodgergaming3579you mean vietnam right? You want me to explain why youre wrong or would you prefer to stay ignorant?
For everyone talking about how stealth is not as good anymore or making comparisons to Vietnam, literally every major power is developing or building stealth aircraft. Every nation wants them, for good reason.
They are good not just as good as is hyped about.
@@philognosis6409 And yet governments are spending millions to make their own stealth aircraft (or buy F-35's), and we already have nations like Turkey and South Korea making their own F-22-like stealth aircraft (and South Korea still bought F-35's even after they already committed to making their KF-21's). Because they see that if they don't evolve with the times, they're going to be left behind if a shooting war was to begin.
@@philognosis6409 so your alternative is getting one shotted 100km away because you have no stealth?
Every country wants it but only a few are able to achieve
@@eats4cheaps305 its not invisible its just LESS visible. The whole concept was not proved yet in real combat with technically comparable opponent. Not abstract 1 to 1, but real battlefield, with ground air defences and AWACSes. I believe lots of engineers and tacticians can't wait for the first case to analyse every minor aspect and measurable number of this confrontation. It should have advantage but we can only assume its value so far
Yes, we have heard that before! Tell me Sir, when you are behind the first island chain and all comms but EHF are denied, what will you see!?
If you are in a dogfight something went very wrong.
Thats exactly what Tom Crusie says in a scene. As good as they are, they have only been doing high level bomb runs…
Except for many hours of training and almost yearly NATO exercises designed to simulate a full scale air war.
I heard somewhere that in modern air combat, if the enemy can see you face to face, you are dead.
But how can the enemy see if he's dead too then? Makes no sense
Crazy how for your typical person how much modern air combat has to be simplified to be understood. Something like BVR combat is so abstract that many probably wouldn’t believe it’s real, and to portray that in a movie it would probably need to be framed as some sort of artsy horror movie.
only invisible until su57 enters the airfield
The fact that the F14 managed to flare an R-73 in rear aspect
It ain’t dog fighting anymore, it’s who can dodge the missles first
@asdafdsgsgdfd "Aggresive Spanish Guitar Noises"
Missiles cannot do much in a close quarters fight. They need time to arm, a gun/cannon doesn't.
@DeadManWalking yes, but within 1700feet/500m range they are very much useless since they need time to arm the warhead (the MAR range). Here guns/cannons work instantly.
@DeadManWalking People like me ? Maybe it's because I actually had my daily life in the RDAF and dogfighting has always been a very crucial part of pilot training here because RDAF never had the BVR capability until MLU (Mid Life Update) came around on the F16. Till then pilots had to get in close with AIM 9L (Lima variants) as the primary AA missile, and that missile wasn't high off boresight, so the training for the merge and gun kill was vital. Even now with BVR capabilities and getting the F35, gun training is still crucial. Any pilot wants to defend himself and a gun/cannons gives him/her that last line of defense to get away from a fight alive. Isn't a gun/cannon worth a pilots life as a last resort ?
Dogfight may not be the primary any more, but god help you if you get into this situation and cannot defend yourself because you either wasn't taught or given the tool to defend.
And yes I know about the F4, and I also know that F4C with SUU-16 and F4D with SUU-23 gunpods made some significant kills also.
@DeadManWalking you are not getting the point are you. Isn't a pilots life worth a gun for last defense ?
Yes the F35A has limited ammo, but it still has it and if that can save the pilots it's worth every bullet. I am aware the F35B and F35C don't have internal guns, but gunpods are still made for them depending on the mission at hand.
Several 5th gen designs are still retaining the gun because of the risc of a merge.
Wasn’t that the thinking when they built the F-4 Phantom …. all the way up until they put a gun back on the jet?
The F4 and the missiles were capable of destroy targets out side of visual range but the systems couldn’t tell what target they were locking. So they had to check if its an enemy fighter or a friendly fighter
F-22: "You're lucky I'm on your side."
I live next door to Eglin and get to watch them fly patterns all day in the 35s. It's funny to see tourists pulled over on the side of the road, trying to record them flying 😂. Movies also make this all look nonstop exciting- there's a ton of dull, boring, level flight looking for targets, setting up locks, radar control, lasing, etc etc etc. 😅
So I'm Thinking Reverse Launched Missle For Tailing In Dogfight,Armed Landing Gear For The Merge And Missle Defense,Bigger Air Brake Systems (Stagnated Slide Panels)
And A Rocket Launcher System Hooked Up To The Ejection Seat.
Ech÷™w×™€√je shi yr h÷™®i r c✓}™hat shv to sug
I miss Niceville, but not the F-35 Screaming Migraine. 😂
@@eodmax85 I live out near the test range so every once in a while we get an earth shaking thud that rattles the windows followed by the distant roar of a jet. It's a great way to enjoy your morning coffee lol.
And this is why you still need to practice close combat. It is super cool that a tech advantage lets you just win, but always be prepared to lose that advantage.
The F-35 is basically a flying super computer. If the occasion ever arose where an F-16 and an F-35 got up close and personal without the Lightning taking it out from halfway across the ocean, the F-16 will take it in a dogfight.
Aircraft fights back then: highly intense action. Dodging and shooting. Cool maneuvers
Aircraft fights now: *presses button* „target hit“
The F14 is still in my opinion a better platform than the f18. A lot of influence or things learned from the 14’s has appeared in todays Raptor and a few others . The 14 did not have thrust vectoring nozzles so the pilot had to split his throttles and use his feet like in the movie to get the plane to turn quicker. And the 14 was faster than an 18 . I’d easily take on any F18 pilot today in my old Tomcat and in a true dogfight I can do more than him !!
@@brianross4190 also looks better
It’s really cool how far advanced are military is, and we barely know the tip of it
Fancy jet prevented from flying in stormy conditions
A game of who can locate and fire furthest
In the movie he flew an F-18 Hornet and they made a point of choosing the F-18 instead of the F-35 because it was better suited for the mission
*because it was better suited for shoving actors in the back seat and filming.
Now tell me, why is it better suited?
if this was real life, that job would have perfectly fit the F-35
@@dangersnail5839 Because a movie needs to happen and having 4 planes fly in all badass like and fly out is more exciting than F35 solved our problem with little to no risk. Y'all really are pretentious with your "This fictional movie made by Hollywood isn't realistic."
@@JeremyCuddles Then they shouldn't use realism as part of the marketing campaign like this movie did.
With basically every major power developing and arming themselves with beyond visual range missiles, and also building tons of early warning aerial, ground and naval radars, the winner of air combat is basically whoever detects and shoots first.
This is why stealth planes have an advantage. They are not completely invisible per say and countries with multiple radar detection methods will eventually detect every stealth planes. But you still have a distance advantage (perhaps even hundreds of miles)over fourth gen aircrafts before getting spotted and you can fire the missiles first. Assuming the data link is good, stealth will win.
Love how the level of plot armour increases throughout the movie, with the final fight having Maverick and Rooster with immense plot armour against 5th gen fighters which couldn't have been defeated in any way.
I spoke with a retired Norwegian f16 pilot, and he told me one thing the movies got wrong. The pilots would never remove their mask to talk. The microphone is in the mask so it's pointless.
Top tier video, ngl used to kinda hate the f35 but it’s grown on me especially cuz the base by me has transitioned to them so it’s awesome seeing them fly
So I'm Thinking Reverse Launched Missle For Tailing In Dogfight,Armed Landing Gear For The Merge And Missle Defense,Bigger Air Brake Systems (Stagnated Slide Panels)
And A Rocket Launcher System Hooked Up To The Ejection Seat.
Why like its a goof plane
Well, its a case of the dreadnought effect, a huge leap forward in technology so great that it defies conventional wisdom and completely rewrites the rules of modern war. The F35 seems like crap to the world of the past because it wasnt designed with yesterdays war in mind.. its designed for the war of tomorrow.
@@garyslayton8340 it's an absolute monster of a plane that's single handedly rewritten the rules of air combat.
@@Typexviiib - I’d say that the F-22 was the one that rewrote the rules since it was the first stealth fighter jet. Imagine you’re the “head of state” for an unfriendly nation, all of a sudden, that squadron of supersonic fighter jets flying escort for your private jet may as well be unarmed prop planes for all the good they’d do against an enemy they have no chance of seeing coming or retaliating against. When every single defense measure (RADAR, AA, SAM, electronic jamming) that you’ve spent the last century in order to keep your aircrafts protected in the sky suddenly become useless against an enemy you can’t see and could potentially come at you from anywhere, the game has definitely changed.
The dogfight died in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war where the less experienced Iranian pilots were able to achieve the one of the first over the horizon air-air kills. The air-air dogfight died when Iranian pilots were able to shoot down Iraqi fighter pilots without them even knowing Iran was even there. I just wanted to share a cool fact about the death of the dogfight
wow thats intersting but its death is sad in some way lol
Your wrong...
while you are correct about the technological advantage of iran airforce, note that the iranian pilota were trained by united states with much more flight hours than their oppoents who were trained in soviet style but the tables turned as soon as iraq got mirages which brought the advantage of technology for them
@@chunkemonke1405 Your right. Iraqi Mirage F-1s apperantly did bring down a few Tomcats. And obviously that meant a dogfight in which case AIM - 54s were useless at that point. I might also add that US F-15s got very close and personal with Iraqi Mig-29s in the first Gulf War and dogfights have also taken place over Ukraine very recently..
And yet the F14s had to dogfight to down all 4 of the Libyan fighters.
Bruh they are talking about F 35s and top gun, and they literally use the F 18s in the movie and the F 14. Those things are literally made for dog fighting.
They weren't flying F-35's though, they flew F-14's and F-18's
They’ve been saying dogfighting is done for 60 years.
It has been done for the last 40.
@@Pulkz The most recent air-to-air kill scored by an American aircraft came in 2017, when a U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet shot down a Syrian-flagged Su-22
And wait until 2 opposing jets with stealth technology can’t see each other with radar. It’ll be close proximity all over again.
@@andrewhill1415 They shot that Su-22 down with an AMRAAM, this does not count as a Dogfight.
And they were right
@@andrewhill1415wont happen. The closest countries to stealth gen 5 are jokes. Once they get gen 5 we will have gen 7.
You mean that a movie made just for entertainment purposes with actors playing make believe ISNT REAL?!?
I'm so glad you told us this, I had no idea fictitious movies weren't based in reality.
Ffs.
Dude, there are folks that still think dogfights are still the way to go
Yeah movies get so much shit wrong when they can just do a little research.
@@stagger9660 perhaps you still don't understand the basic concept of 'make believe'.
Did Anthony Hopkins have to actually eat people to play the role of a cannibal?...
@@stagger9660It‘s on purpose. Aircraft launching missiles at each other from 100 kilometeres away would make for a pretty boring movie.
Nah it's real, Tom Cruise did this and the Iranians are pissed, they just filmed him doing it and thought "Fuck it, let's make a movie"
Depends what plane you against.
An f-16 can beat an f-35 in a dog fight but the 35 could destroy it miles before the 16 could even see it.
okay but what IF someone sneaks up on you ?
Then you're already dead
Detecting while not being detected is the key to victory.
An F16 will beat an F35 in a dogfight. Start them 50 miles apart and the F16 will never even know the F35 was there.
But as soon as a boat is lost at sea and needs help, its all of a sudden, looking for a needle in a haystack.
This poor old man didn't notice that they were flying F-18s, and many F-18s are still in service.
They still fight bvr, everyone does
The context is about misconceptions of modern air combat, normal people aren’t aware that standard missile systems of today can travel hundreds of miles to a target. Mostly because that isn’t shown in entertainment like movies because quite frankly it’d make for a boring movie
Obviously they are in service but if you are doing something as important as in the movie than you can bring out the f-35s
Always great information! Will catch up with you one day on base 😅!
He is talking about, F-35 the most advanced fighter jet, till date, but in movie it was F-14, Tomcat, against fifth generation fighters, In reality it's not possible to fight with fifth generation fighters
What an F-35 Pilot who has a Lockheed Martin job lined up after retirement would spit out.
Yeah and he's right. Funny how having experience in modern air combat enough to get a job in the business of making modern combat aircraft tends to give you a fairly qualified opinion
@@Dr.CaveCurinas so how did the serbs radar observe, track and shoot down the "invisible" F117??
A common misconception is that stealth makes you invisible, it does not🤦♂️
uhhhhhh no it is very much nota misconception unless youre dumb, noone thinks it literally makes you invisible, everyone knows its refering to stealth against radar, which is all it needs to be when youre not going to be in visual range in the firat place
That’s cool and all until the funny albatross on your radar locks you because you’re not actually invisible to radar
When Maverick lost his F35, F 18:
This is what was said 50 years ago. Before the Vietnam conflict." Dog fighting is a thing of the past ". They were wrong. That's why the navy created " top gun". History has a tendency to repeat itself. Militaries will be able to find ways to defeat or confuse even the best technology. Dog fighting will never go away.
You mean the program where they trained pilots on how to better use their missiles?
Amazing how far technology has come. Love the zap design too
So I'm Thinking Reverse Launched Missle For Tailing In Dogfight,Armed Landing Gear For The Merge And Missle Defense,Bigger Air Brake Systems (Stagnated Slide Panels)
And A Rocket Launcher System Hooked Up To The Ejection Seat.
@@emmanuelponce6380 So I'm Thinking You're Crazy
Top Gun didn't use a F-35, because it wouldn't have fit the movie... They used a F-14 in Top Gun and a F/18 Super Hornet in Top Gun 2
This is simply epic, thank you so much for sharing Hasard.
Yeah, my dream is to fly the F-35 in the RAAF, currently in airforce cadets, your channel is useful and inspiring, thank you!
Keep goin im jealous
Incredibly unfair advantage... which is the exactly the way it needs to be
Wow who would have guessed that sherlock
Dude just discovered military strategy
Unless your enemy has enough ballistic missiles to turn the airbase into a heap of rust :-)
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 which is why aegis exists.
Yes, if you find yourself in a fair fight than your tactics suck.
How many times in history have we believed that technology made dogfighting obsolete - only to have to relearn how to dogfight from scratch, again?
saying that its invisible is a massive overstatement, unless that thing is made out of pixie dust or something
Basically it’s hard to pick up on radar. If it flies overhead you’ll know
it's mostly invisible on radar
it's basically a sniper
F117 was said to be invisible but was shot down by a sovet 1960es AA
@@ngt84
1: It was flying on the same exact path it had been for a while
2: it had no jamming planes escorting it
3: the SAM radar turned on at the exact right time to shoot it down
@@ngt84 Flies 1,300 sorties and gets shot down exactly once.
Air to air combat today more closely resembles submarine warfare. You find your enemy's location when they're miles away, and get radar lock before launching a missle. Your plane is able to recognize radar waves and can tell you when you've been locked onto. Whoever wins might see a distant flash from the exploding missle. But the real battle takes place on the head up dislpay like a game of battle ship. The skills of a stock floor trader on a computer, with the strategy of a submarine captain.
I'd love to see the fancy dogfighters in top gun faced with a BVRAAM or AMRAAM lol
I believe in future everyone will be so stealthy that only visual identification works and IR, radar guided weapons are near useless due to the countermeasures the enemy has, or just throw as many planes you can and hope one wins
Stealth can be beaten. Its constantly evolving to try and stay ahead of tech that is made to detect stealth planes. Its pure fantasy to think everything will be invisible in the future.
cat and mouse
EODAS.
Not familiar with the f35s das?