Advanced, stealthy, single-engine: There is nothing the F-35 Lightning II can’t do. In 2021, two F-35A aircraft successfully released B61-12 Joint Test Assemblies, comprising functional non-nuclear components and simulated nuclear components, from an altitude of 10,500 feet. It took approximately 42 seconds for the bomb to reach and hit the designated target on the range.
Check out these top picks for you:
• This is America's GAU-...
• Meet the JDAM: America...
• MQ-4C Triton: The Larg...
🔔 Subscribe !
/ usmilitarynewsmn
CHAPTERS
00:00 The F-35 Lightning II is now a Nuclear Bomber
01:15 B61-12 Joint Test Assemblies
02:20 Netherlands' F-35A jets NATO certified for nuclear deterrence
03:00 A Tactical Nuke
04:14 Stealth and Precision
05:51 F-35 as Bomb Truck
07:58 A Legacy of Innovation
🔖 OUR SOCIAL MEDIA!
---------------------------------------------
📲 Facebook ► / usnmil
🐦 Twitter ► / usmil_news
Thanks
US: so the F-35 is the most advanced aircraft in the world what else do we need Oppenheimer: I think you forgot something
Also I love these videos 👍
LMAO! How about Oppenheimer: "Hold my beer!" 🤡
🎉
US: make a movie?
Wait, we'd have to steal our script from Britain and France and then refuse to pay our bills until one left our big club and the other glowers, makes their own, and then we sheepishly say sorry for being gits....😉😜 History, not actually in films...
Hello from the Netherlands, I just recently learned that apparently our air force F-35A pilots are now also trained for nuclear operations (using American bombs) 2:20. We are a small country and thus limited in our military capabilities. Nevertheless, we play a key role in the global economy! The possession of such weapons is a sensitive issue here. As a NATO partner from the very beginning, we are also expected to contribute our fair share. Without modern alliances and unity, many countries would be in a precarious situation. Security and prosperity come at a cost.
Indeed - F R E E D O M I S N O T F R E E .
I was in the Netherlands while at a concert last Sept.. You guys are so nice.. Everyone i met was super nice. Love the country and the people.
Always was the case. Every NATO airforce which does not officially have tactical nukes has aircraft capable of using them as a backup measure. Same goes for navies and their missiles and torpedoes, by the way. NATO interoperability includes alliance-wide contingencies for this sort of thing.
At the cost of the security and prosperity of the suckers not in the club :p
🇳🇱🤜🤛🇺🇸
I hope we never actually have to resort to nuclear weapons... The F-35 is bad ass enough.
If things get out of control The F 35 is our last deterrence Of defense it is small invisible to radar
@@mm72213 how they know if stealth jet really invisible to radar. as of know they test using their own radar not other country radar.
how is it badass. It can carry a maximum of 4 missiles. And cant even fly mach 2
Nuclear war will never happen because every big corporation will loose everything.
@@waynereloaded87before the gulf war people said that the Bradley fighting vehicle hardly had any armor. That it was a sitting duck and a useless vehicle. Well what did we find out about armor in the gulf war?? Was it that the Bradley was a weak waste of money? No. We found out that anything on the battlefield that gets hit by a main battle tank round is destroyed, no matter how thick it’s armor. The Bradley turned out to be one of the best fighting vehicles ever put into the field because it’s fast and light and technologically advanced. The armor didn’t matter at all. You say that F35 only holds 4 missiles and can’t go Mach 2. When missiles fly at Mach 4 and can pull a sustained 30gs what’s the difference between Mach 1.6 and Mach 2? A plane with a pilot onboard is never going to out run nor out turn an s400. The game has changed. Keep up.
With the size of nuclear bombs since the 1990's I'm sure the F-35 has always been a platform for delivery success. But there are hyper speed rockets that could deliver without putting the pilot or if they have a RIO in danger.
Look up ‘first strike’ and what that could mean. You’re welcome.
@@sqwk2559 I'm sorry you don't know my background. I'm fully aware of first strike and all of it.
You only need roughly TWO kinds of nukes: (#1) "strategic" ICBMs that travel up to Mach 26 --- or up to 9 times as fast as the F-22 flying with afterburners --- carrying up to around 14 MIRVs (each MIRV, released from the ICBMs at terminal velocity or half way, having up to 500 KILOTONS. ICBMs are land based; and then there's the Trident 2/Trident D5 that both the US Navy and British Royal Navy carry.... each Trident 2/D5 or SLBMs may also carry up to 14 MIRVs (90KT each) or 8 MIRVs (up to 500KT each)... Or. (#2) "tactical" B61-12/13, gravity bombs --- with "variable yields," depending on the particular "tactical" needs/targets, with each having up to 340 KILOTON blast yield. Or minimally, around 1 KT blast yield. As a reference point: the smaller fission-based nuke bomb, first one, dropped on Hiroshima, had a 15 KILOTON blast yield. The larger, 10,000lb "Fat Man" FUSION bomb dropped on Nagasaki had a 21 KILOTON blast yield. That means if an ICBM can carry up to around 14 MIRVs and each MIRV can have up to 500KT blast yield, each MIRV has over 23 times the blast yield of FAT MAN. That means the US doesn't need more than a few hundred ICBMs and the 500+ tactical B21-12/13 carried in the F-15, F-16, F-22, F-35, B-1, B-2, B-21, B-52, etc. As the video noted, the "nuclear bomb sharing program" also allow Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Italy to carry those B61 bombs, too.... So, then, Russia can keep 5,000 to 6,000 nukes & they would simply make her ECONOMY WEAKER, because nukes are very expensive to produce and to maintain and Russia, despite being 90% as big as the US and China combined, in land size, has only 50% of the economy of the state of California... and it WILL GO BANKRUPT ---- like what happened to the USSR (when it had up to 30,000 nukes) ---- if it channels too much of such a small economy into a non-consumable/non-usable military weapon like NUKES.
@@sqwk2559he plays war thunder
Why would a 35, a single seater, have a RIO lmao
God I love America! People really have no idea how powerful our military truly is.
F-35 gives up on hyper war (to neutralize adversary's First ☢️ Strike) in favor of First ☢️ Strike.
Eurasia can take all the kooky air platforms uncle buck can dream up, but without runways that birds walking.
@@augustusomega4708Isnt the f35 capable of vtol so it doesn’t need a runway?
@@augustusomega4708 bro its VTOL it doesn't need a runway lmfao. 🤣🤣💀💀🤡
@@autizmo3730 I guess the B1 bomber you just lost in CO was VTOL too, straight down. Clowns laughing is sad 🤣
Ok tell me you didn’t get excited when you heard the F35 can go “beast mode” 😈🤘
And now with faster more powerful engine upgrades…plus nukes 😮😮😮
Sure it's still an expensive shit box
@@xwarmangle20/1 red flag
It's as expensive as the f15 @@xwarmangle
I'm not often a fan of military tech.... but damn is the F-35 amazing.
Nah, it's not.
@@xwarmangle? Play war thunder? Lol
I don't know what it is but something about the canopy closing on that F-35 at 2:25 looked so badass! 🫡 🇺🇲
badass dont win battles little chipmunk, cheerfulness is your only defense.
@@augustusomega4708haha you’re such a goofball
At last timing is right. Excellent job
*Excellent videos*
The us probably has the best technology ever
They buy military equipment from canada
Cost a fortune to maintain them.
@@acupoflegowe also buy new stealth destroyers from Italy.Contrary to limited thinking we understand the rest of the world is a wealth of knowledge and skill!
@@acupoflego The Americans build their own military equipment's. Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and General Dynamics are the 3 top 4 weapon and equipment systems supplier
@@j.a.3138 Northrop Grumman and MBDA
Appreciate it
Been like this for a long time. How fast do you think the f15 is?
It's horrible that we must maintain a large military, but seeing as we must I'm glad it is the best
Lets see it in combat, versus other fighters!
“Did that bird just drop a nuk-“
when i first saw this thing in a naval game i called it the “boat buster” simply because of all the bombs and weapons
The F-35 has no other role and can't do the job of any other aircraft, so now they'll try nuclear bomber. Um, ok.
Food for thought considering one mysteriously went “missing”…
So if the origin of the bomb will be unknown on delivery because the delivery method is stealthy, what could go wrong?
"Advanced, stealthy, single engine". I think "single engine" is not an advantage.
I didn't realize that the F-35 along with other US aircraft could actually carry their own nuclear payload in hostile territory nice.👍 No wonder why China is a scared of the US, any American aircraft could be carrying nuclear payload that could destroy a city within 24 hours. It would be hard for your enemy to know which aircraft carries the nuclear payload if every single US aircraft in the the United States Air Force was capable of carrying nuclear missiles.
Amazing how humanity evolved. We got so fed up with eating down the food chain that we fell in love with developings tools to help us eating horizontal towards other sides of the chain. lolz.... I hope we all have the most powerful weapons to deter and when needed, try to defend the species, rather than to invade countries like when US did so in recent years except those when DT is in the house.
The real fear is the nuclear subs XD. In some cases not even American radars can ping them without our own subs coming to the surface. We have a small but lethal 14 known in operation. That could be just about anywhere and each balistic stealth sub could have 4 nuclear long range cruise balistic missiles with a radius of nearing 1500 miles. (China on most fronts is a little less than 100 miles from the ocean. ) Where things get nutty though is if the US called in the full strike package. AGM-129A's aka Advanced cruise missiles can loaded 12 a piece onto the B52H we have in the current service is 76. So if you do the math. A true full force of the US military in action with annihilation and not reconnaissance like in Iran and Afghanistan. The true ballistic force of the US would be a total strike package of about 968 nuclear cruise missiles. This would be enough to probably level the great wall, turn Bejing into glass and wipe North Korea if they were involved geographically from the face of the earth. And South Korea would probably turn into an island if the US resorted to that kind of fire power. XD.
The us is also afraid of china lol
The pilot flying that one😮
Nice video 🎉🎉
Nothing the F-35 can’t do you say? 🤔 How about out perform an F-22 in dogfighting? 🧐
probably the only thing it cannot do since most tests have shown the 35 is unable even though it can detect the 22 to compete with the 22 in dog fighting but it out performs the f15s and f16s ironically enough
It can't beat an f16 at dogfighting
Now we just need to figure out how to give the F35 extended range and it suddenly becomes scarier than hypersonic missiles.
"Beast mode" seems like a nearly useless option. Maybe it's technically possible for the F-35 to carry extra weapons externally, but I think it would always be preferable to keep the F-35 in stealth mode, and let it designate targets for an F-15 or a B-52. Keep the weapon carrier in the skies of the neighboring country and never even give the SAMs a chance to get lucky.
Rockstar Games watches this and will add this to GTA Online, like the orbital cannon, but in a jet...
The f35 and f22 have been out for years and they’re making it out to be new. Imagine all that actually new stuff they keep hidden. Hell they probably have a fully sentient fallout 4 style AI
oORAH, DAMN RIGHT💪
What is the point of nuclear weapons if nobody can actually use them, unless it's to fend off an alien invasion or Godzilla?
They are a deterrent.
it's a nuclear deterrent. unless someone is dumb enough to launch a nuke, the f-35 will never have to use them. but god help them if they do.
To have more wide spread options if there ever was a possibility of a nuclear war :) more aircraft carrying such weapons gives them more flexibility and advantages.
It has been. The B61-Mod-12 and the lengthening of the F-22 and F-35 IWBs was part of the mating and approved to deploy process. Even the media was surprised when the “tail-kit” appeared in vids. No one (almost no one) expected the rockets creating spin to flank the sides of the delivery vehicle. Lomfl
the cool thing about modern made nukes is there's no fallout. the problem is we have a shitload of old ones so if someone decides to use a new one..
i love the B2 because it can carry B83
why is the b61-12 limiting the maximum yield to 50 kt, instead of the 340-400 kt range currently available?
It's a tactical nuke, they're more or less designed for smaller targets. So instead of a whole ass city, think a military base.
@@ThatMuricanGuyyeah bruh Little Boy and Fat Man were smaller than 30 KT. Those b61 are leveling cities no problem
Wait til you hear about nuclear hand grenades
Ever notice how bouncy jets are when being propelled off the carrier? The F14 actually braced down a little before propulsion
It's a known defect on the early Carrier variant. The front strut is too loose under compression. There are shots where the bounce is so violent it dislodged the pilots 500k dollar helmet that is linked to all the guidance systems. Its been, or is being, rectified.
The russians better watch their empty threats ,or theyll see the F-35 upclose hahahahaha
Two things I would like to point out: 1 just because the weapon is nuclear, don't be thinking Hiroshima sized nukes or anything like that. Nuclear weapons are used all the time as they produce a large yield for a small payload, but its important to keep in mind that those yields are still relatively small in this usage. Conventional explosives level of small most of the time. 2 There is an age old saying that if you make something that can do everything then it won't be able to do anything very well. This is the problem with the F35 that so many diehard fans of the craft don't even think twice about. If the plane is marketed as a jack-of-all-trades then its a master of none. It is good at stealth, but people don't realize how much it sacrifices for that for that aspect.
1 I see your argument and profoundly disagree. The nuclear aspect of these planes is not to be taken lightly due to the risk of sudden and catastrophic escalation, even with low yield payloads comparable to the largest conventional bombs. Since the actual nuclear threshold has never been crossed since 1945, we have no idea how the escalation dynamic and strategic calculus would play out, particularly when many of today's world leaders or would-be leaders present with psychological issues and do not appear to be entirely rational actors (Putin the psychopath, Trump the narcissist, Biden and Sunak also seem to lack strategic empathy and have been doubling down on some very questionable decisions lately). Furthermore, "Hiroshima sized nukes" were physically very large due to being fission only and hence much less efficient use of fissile material compared to a thermonuclear (fusion powered) Cold War or contemporary nuclear weapon. Even a "tactical" nuclear weapon available today is a thermonuclear weapon at least on par with Fat Man or Little Boy, in fact these B61 gravity bombs have a dialable yield up to 400 kilotons. Due to the precise targeting of modern weapons, anything over 100 kilotons is overkill, easily enough to completely level a global megacity. The delivery method is basically irrelevant once the nukes start flying, the extent of the escalation remains uncertain. The blasts could easily kill 100's of millions, but the effects of nuclear winter have been simulated with up-to-date computer models and shown to be much worse than the Cold War predictions of the '80s. It would take fewer than 100 such nuclear strikes on combustible targets to inject enough soot into the atmosphere to block out the sun for at least a year, resulting in nuclear winter and global famine, let alone the total devastation of the belligerent nations and worldwide radioactive contamination. The US and Russia each have around 6,000 nukes in storage today with around 75% available at short notice, a fraction of the height of the Cold War but still enough in the event of total Armageddon to destroy every major city in the world 3 times and block out the sun for 10 years. This would cause almost every nation on Earth to run out of food and undoubtedly the end of modern civilisation. A single F35 could quite easily be the beginning of the end of it all.
Nuclear weapons are used all the time? Hahaahaha. Also, they said the tactical nuke droppd by an f35 could be twice as powerful as hiroshima so try listening
The more I look at this the more I begin to realize the F35 was meant to replace the aging F16 and the new 6 generation stealth fighter that the air force is working on is meant to replace the F22 along with another one being developed to replace the F15 as well.
Such an awesome aircraft
Terrifying that such a small bomb is so powerful
3:00 is the point. Tactical nukes. Using a dialed down strategic nuke as a tac nuke is prob gonna end up in all out war because you can't tell what the hell it is until it hits.
Well, every time any other nation has raised the point of NATO's doctrine of "first use" of nukes, the conversation in western media and politics always gets shut down.
@@wyldhowl2821 One thing for sure, the level of political correctness and virtue signaling in the political sphere is what is going to be the undoing of the US and NATO. If they want to be an effective counter to Russia and China, then they are gonna have to let the military guys do their damned job, and not be hamstrung by public opinions which are far disconnected from reality.
That makes no sense. If it could be anything, why would thr enemy assume the worst
@@YampaYak-vd1xo I mean, if you launch a ballistic missile with a reduced yield, the enemy is still going to see a strategic nuke heading their way. They will respond accordingly.
Around 7:30 in this video, it looks like a 35 could jettison the hardpoints. This is what I hope the designed those hardpoint mounts to do.
wouldn't be surprised. "Bombs away, carriers away, see ya!" *disappears from radar*
Shoigu, where are the antidepressants ?!
Thought it was the joint built striker??
This one I missed, not anymore. Thanks U.S.Military News. 👍🇺🇸
“We have now entered the find-out phase”
> F-35: exists and sucks dozens of billion dollars from budget > Pentagon: "How can we justify the costs for taxpayers?" > Lockheed Martin: "Hey bro, now u can mount nukes on it, like with every previous fighter" > Pentagon: "THAT'S REVOLUTION!!!!!"
Im genuinely terrified we are starting to get closer to ace combat timeline
Wow its so powerful
It was B-61 certified in 2021. A couple years late with this news
Why does the A have a gun but the C doesn't? Like, is the Air Force compared to Navy mission that different for one to need a gun and the other not? Or, is it more USAF just felt like they needed it even though it's kind of dead weight these days?
F-35C and all other carrier aircraft don't have the luxury of dedicated aerial refueling aircraft. The most they can get is from an F/A-18E/F that can be configured to provide a small amount of fuel as a mini aerial tanker. A cannon is largely dead weight, and that space could be better used for more fuel
Delaware, San Fran, DC, Portland, LA, Michigan, Boston…?
I kinda thought it always could.
Thank you for not saying “newkyaler.” 🙏
Might sound dumb. Isn't a gravity bomb just a regular same size bomb? Why do planes have to be cleared to carry them when they already drop the same size bombs.
Come mess with us bro 😎 we chillin in the usa 🇺🇸
Thats, honestly terrifying for a few reasons. 1. The US wont develop something that has no potential use case. In other words, they do envision a scenario that would necesitate the use of tactical nuclear weapons 2. Tactical nukes arent like the conventional nukes. Conventional nukes can strike anywhere, anytime and nuke anything. So the only way to defend against such a threat is to completely nuke the enemy (im sure everyone is familiar with MAD. However, tactical nuclear weapons are a lower tier. You cannot completely destroy your enemies instantaneously everywhere with it. Thus MAD doesnt exactly apply to it. This would mean that countries would be much much more likely to utilize them. Good thing is that its unlikely that america would use tactical nukes first since america's conventional military is already incredibly sound. And anyone else who could use tactical nukes would now think twice now that a very capable platform has the ability to strike with a tactical nuke.
We'd all better hope and pray a "tactical" nuke is never employed in anger. It would be the beginning of the end of us all.
What makes an aircraft nuclear capable (or not) ? I would think if you can hang it physically, you can drop it, or do I miss something ?
The fact that it can hold, fly and drop them
@@NorwegianCollector_ I thought so, but apparently that was a major factor for chosing F35, so there has to be something else...
Interesting, I thought the B1B had to have all of its hard points and wiring harnesses removed and destroyed that made it compatible with nuclear payloads due to an agreement between the US and Russia. Maybe that expired?
in the mean time, britain is still using the lancaster :) lol
Don't be fooled about our equipment people forgetting our top pilot's are training usa and all nato without our skilled military us be nothing. All the goods and no idea so we get brits too help lol
Will the B and C variants also get nuclear capability?
all 3
Really need to be specific -- only the 2 seaters are nuclear capable due to the requirements the USAF has for nuclear activation. (Permissive Action)
The f35 is obsolete as F15Ex is replacing that program… new research in updating the F15-Ex with stealth plasma . The 15-Ex carry 3 times more payload capacity than beast mode f35 lightning .
😆"Stealth Plasma"... good one!
Didn't one of those planes just mysteriously disappear recently?
Not recently. It was found in South Carolina awhile ago.
Has it not been from the beginning?
One did my homework for me ...
B1 and B52 still operational AND testing new model nuclear weapons? thats when you know international tensions have the potential to heat up a bit in the near future.
Awesome 😎 God Bless America 🇺🇸 ❤
2070? DAMN
There is nothing that the F-35 can't do? Well, it can't supercruise.
All those addtional pylons are gonna make it none too stealthy a waste of its intended design
The B61 nuclear glide bomb fits into the internal weapons bay on the F-22.
@@jqmachgunner2577 yes but the beast mode is tacking more on an deafts the same reason for the internal bay you miss the point
That's what I'm talkin about. I thought it was already certified, but whatever.
It's sad that life came to this to secure survival when working togheter was feasable .
Is there a 2 seat version of the 35A? If not then it's capable but the 2 man rule for nuclear weapons would prohibit it's use!!
Cool jets. I just pray and hope a nuclear war doesn't occur in my lifetime
Proud to be American!!!!!!!
So in otherwise we could strap it to a pipper?
They have been testing this for the past 5 years, and years before that with the fa18 and f16s, cause in a battlefield you don’t really need an expensive high yeild fission bomb that will atomize everything within a 1-2 mile radius. So low yeild nukes are a must, and ye have had “tactical nukes” for decades now it’s not new
There you go tell the world our secrets. Great.
And the F-22 is even better
The F-16 has been able to do this since day 1. The F in its name can also be a B, its an omnivore.
Best thing is the F-16 is so agile it can fly up it's own asshole while also drinking Jeremiah Weed.
Anytime soon the robots will be the battalions like star wars
It’s been since it was Built.
Thank god! 🇺🇸🇺🇸
now?! always were, certain types.
imagine if he goes missing again .... or if it dives from an aircraft carrier again ^^3
I thought it was when made lol. Hell the f16 can be
why are we talking about nukes again? we have some thick ass heads
"legalize nuclear bombs" -F35
Scary part is this plane is truly stealth is it proven already
F 35 can drop gravity bombs for 100+ millions? What an achivement!
Keep coping, America ruled this world.
@@CalvinHsuChenwhat world are you talking about
I think Fat Amy could use a nuke and set it up as a hyper mach weapon.
"How did that bee on the radar just launch a nuke?"
There would be nobody in America to ask that question if it did.
thing is it doens't show on radar until within the range or by the time bomb bay doors open and close if you do pick it up well thats already the end, unless something goes wrong with its stealth such as drop tanks not dropping etc
Well that not mutually ensured destruction anymore. That's just destruction
how does making aircraft nuclear capable works?
If an aircraft can carry, fly and successfully drop tactical nuclear weapons i would assume its considered nuclear capable