Le Pentagone perd un F-35 : le Mythe de l'Avion Furtif

Hello, my friends, I'm going to tell you about the F35 that recently crashed in the United States with this incredible story where the pilot was found, but the plane was not for many hours. First of all, I'm not in the car because I'm simply traveling. So I don't have immediate access to a vehicle before I make the video from here. So the story of the F35 is quite incredible because the pilot was flying at 2,000ft, and then he decided to eject. The plane continued to fly for quite a while, probably several minutes, and it fell about a hundred kilometers from where the pilot was found. So the pilot ended up in a garden. After activating his ejection seat, he went back to the house, knocked, asked to use the phone, and together they called 911, the emergency number. There's a call circulating online that's quite interesting because the operator on the other end of the line is having trouble understanding what's going on, which is quite worrying because the guy didn't tell her, I'm a green guy. I'm from Mars. In that case, we could have understood his reluctance. The guy was very clear. He was ejected from a plane. The plane fell somewhere. I mean, there's nothing special he's saying, but she's really having trouble understanding, understanding what's going on, how a pilot is on the ground and all that. Now, the plane that crashed, an F35, was described as a stealth plane. So I'd like to tell you something. A stealth plane is a figment of the imagination. There's no such thing as a stealth plane. That is to say, if you look at the military throughout history, whether in tanks, on foot, or in boats, they have always wanted to make themselves as invisible as possible. So they wear camouflage. They are careful not to use lights, not to give off too much heat and all that. And then ultimately, in an airplane, it won't change. We try to ensure that the airplane has the smallest possible footprint in the least visible sense, giving off as little heat or infrared as you like, making as little noise, and then having the lowest possible radar signature. But the problem is that these are heavy, powerful planes. It's not easy to hide this type of object. So initially, the idea of this stealth plane was born at a time when radars were perhaps not as efficient as they are today. Let me give you an example. Today, we can sometimes analyze electromagnetic noise coming from deep space, and then we use computer batteries sometimes. At one time, there was an organization that allowed, through a client, a small application that we installed to lend the computing power of our computer to this organization that analyzed these flows that arrived from deepest space in the hope of detecting something, an anomaly, a statistical anomaly, something a little unusual that might betray a distant presence or a very rudimentary form of signal. So the idea with respect to detecting aircraft, we are in the same story. We have an aircraft that flies, you know, stealthy. We have radars that will scan the area with electromagnetic waves that will inevitably hit this aircraft there. Then everything then depends on the performance of the radar. Everything depends on the computing capacity that we have with this radar. If you take an old crappy radar from the 1950s, saying that it's never been maintained that its antenna is rusty and that pigeons have built their nests on it and all that, maybe this radar is so bad that it would detect a Boeing 747. But if there's a Cessna 172 flying by, well, it wouldn't see, would hide in the noise, in the electronic noise of the radar and the interference of the radar and its circuits. So for this radar here, this aircraft, the Cessna 172, would be a stealth aircraft. Do you see the thing? But if we improve the performance and we get to a modern, nominal radar, the Cessna would no longer be stealthy. Do you see where I'm going? So there's a kind of race between those who want to make an aircraft with the lowest possible radar signature, but those on the ground are using increasingly sophisticated radars with increasing computing capacity that are capable of analyzing the slightest anomaly on the return to try to detect what is there. Okay, so potentially detecting an aircraft that would be considered stealthy over time. Who will win? Who will win in this? Probably the radars. And I think they have largely won this game in reality, because the radar is on the ground. There is no limit. There is no limit in terms of the number of antennas that it can deploy in a radar system, in terms of computers that they can attach to this radar so that they can detect in real time the slightest anomaly that comes from a given asim, and expecting that there are aircraft that have a weak signature, then detect the aircraft in question. So our F35, it is just a parenthesis on the stealth aircraft. And if you look at the goal of being stealthy, what is it? Whether it's in an airplane or something else, or a tank or something else, what's the goal? The goal is that the enemy doesn't see you coming. The one you're attacking doesn't see you until it's too late. Okay, that Way he can't defend himself against you. If you look at the doctrine, one of the elements of the Russian defense doctrine, they developed hypersonic missiles. It's not supersonic, it's hypersonic. It means there's a definition. I think they're capable of going at least at a maximum of 5, 5 times the speed of blood, and can go at speeds of 8 kilometers, for example, very, very fast. Why didn't they develop missiles that are simply stealthy? Why didn't they create stealthy missiles? Because they know that the race for stealth is a dead end, that if they can build a stealth missile today, they are investing in it. All of this takes years. And probably by the time they have finished developing it, it will no longer be stealthy at all, because radars have also advanced by a generation. Okay? They have developed hypersonic missiles. The advantage of the hypersonic missile is that, well, you will see it. You know, it comes with a bang. It does not try to hide at all, but it comes so fast that you do not have time to evacuate, you do not have time to respond. You do not have time. You do not have time to do anything because it is extremely fast. So what they want is visibility. You do not care. You will see it. You will see it, but you will see it. But you will not be able to do anything because it is too fast. You won't be able to intercept it. It will fall on you before you have time to react, to do anything. Do you see the difference? So let's go Back to our F35. Our F35. It sees at 2,000ft, the pilot ejects. The plane flies for several minutes and falls in a field. It was later found. At first, everyone made fun of the United States. Everyone made fun of them because they said they lost the plane. There were even people who tried to sell a 935 on eBay. All that, well, everyone made fun of them. Now people were surprised how the American military could lose an F35. Let me tell you something. The Pentagon, like all American administrations, must regularly audit. It must conduct an audit and inventory. When it comes to the Pentagon, since it's a huge, sprawling administration, you have to know that Langar's industry in the United States is perhaps one of the leading providers of funds in the country. The problem is that they have huge audits that easily cost up to half a billion dollars to do an audit, because it takes thousands of inspect who come in and go through everything, who go through the inventories, who go through everything, the accounts and everything. You have to know one thing. The Pentagon has never had an audit in its history. Every time the audit results in absolutely catastrophic results. So it's not that The Pentagon loses a 935. That's surprising. The Pentagon doesn't know where 61% of its assets are. 61% of its equipment. Its assets, whether they're movable or immovable property, weapons, planes, tanks, boats, computers, anything. We don't know where 61% of the Pentagon's assets are, okay? We think that's roughly the case because they still have a budget of almost 1 trillion per year. So we're talking about 800 billion per year, roughly. And if we take the cumulative effect of everything they've lost, we're at 3.5 trillion in assets, okay? As they say in English, the Pentagon doesn't know where they are, okay? So you can imagine that it's a machine. It's a real African pump. I would say that even before the Pentagon is a war machine, it's probably an African pump. 61%, more than half of these assets have completely disappeared. OK? So the fact that NF35 disappeared and they don't know where it is isn't really something extremely surprising given the Pentagon's management. So the plane was found later. Now, it fell in a field because you see, it could have destroyed a city in September. It could have caused a lot of damage if it had fallen on people. So thank God for a blessing that day. It ended up in a vacant lot, but it could have ended extremely badly. Now, what surprises me a little bit in this story is that, remember the Italian plane that crashed recently in September? We have a plane flying in formation, very low altitude. Suddenly it breaks the formation, so it starts to fall like an iron. Quite simply, it's likely that he lost an engine because these are planes that fly very badly. They need power all the time. They don't glide very well. And if they are at low altitude, if there is an engine failure or a bad maneuver and the pilot stops the engine, or if he gets a bird in his nose and all that between the moment the engine fails, stops, and the moment the plane touches the ground, they have time to count to three. And then we see it. The plane falls flat on its face, the pilot ejects, the plane hits the ground and then explodes and goes up in a fireball several hundred meters away. And for the pilot, it's a tragedy because he killed a little girl on the ground. It's true that the pilot, I imagine, would rather be dead than alive. But what I'm trying to tell you is that typically, if you look at the cases that have been filmed of pilots who eject, you generally have the pilot who ejects and then the plane hits the ground. Sometimes, and most often the plane hits the ground before the pilot. You have the plane crashing and you see the pilot who is gently descending at the end of his parachute. This was a very particular case where the pilot was probably on the phone and the plane was still in the air, which is very curious, because what does that mean? He had a situation that was serious enough, urgent enough, to force him to eject. We understand. So here his life is in imminent danger, There is danger at hand. He has to act, he has to do something. So he's going to eject, and in the end, well, the plane falls 100 kilometers away. You see, we wonder. We could wonder, but that's not what I'm wondering about. We could wonder if the guy didn't overreact a little, if he couldn't, if he shouldn't have given the plane another chance. Because if it's capable of flying 100 kilometers, I'll say he could have found a Runway 20 kilometers away. Oh, that could have done the trick too, huh? I'm just saying that you have to understand things. The F35, which is bought by many Europeans, which is very surprising because in the European Union, and particularly in France, we keep talking about the Franco German partnership, we keep talking about our European partners. We keep all the problems are seen through the prism of Europe. That means when we hear Macron speak, for example, we get the impression that Europe is a reality. But when we look at the level of orders that are being placed, well, European countries are not necessarily buying fighter jets from each other. There are several European countries that are buying American planes, which is quite crazy, because by doing so. By doing so, they are putting themselves under American control. Because when you have American weapons, well, you shouldn't think that you could be free to use them as you wish. There are conditions that come with them. By the way, I'll tell you a story in passing. We're just digressing a little. If you notice, these days, comac, the Chinese manufacturer of the Airbus, if you like, it's an aircraft that wants to compete with the Airbus. Well, it's taking orders like crazy. The last time I checked, he sold 12 billion worth. That figure was released two days ago. He may have sold 20 billion. Today he's selling machines. So we can always joke and say, yeah, well, it's a kind of poor copy of the Airbus made in China. A copy, you know, is always possible, right? We buy an Airbus at 320, we put it in a hangar, we use laser systems that scan it in three dimensions. I mean, after a few hours we know the profile of the wings to the nearest millimeter, we know everything about everything. And then we can start manufacturing them. It's a possibility. I'm not saying that the Chinese don't also have their own technology, don't have their own merits, but I know that they have a very proven tendency to copy a little bit of Western technology. So they are creating, putting in a Chinese Airbus. So at the beginning we can always say yes, but maybe it won't have the same performance, maybe it won't have the same range, maybe it will consume more fuel, maybe it will be less comfortable, maybe God forbid, they will crash one or two. Well, you see, you know, you know, even Airbus, when they launched the 320, there was a little bit of damage, shim, there was the other one that crashed in the waves and all that, the Air India, we talked about it, those guys who were on the approach and then, and then who let the plane fall like a snail and who miscalculated their trajectory. So I would say that when introducing a new device, or in particular new technology, we have to expect a bit of delays in it. We are talking about a beta version somewhere. But what I am saying is that in the long term, to completely catch up, even if there is a delay today, I suppose, I suppose it is more likely due to a negative preconceived opinion of this industry in China. And if it turns out they have made a lot of efforts and it is already very competitive, in the years to come, it can only improve. And by working quickly, potentially in five years, in 10 years, we will have an extremely credible competitor to the ERB US. What will make it more credible than the ERB US on a geostrategic level, for example, that is to say today, Russia has bought Airbuses, they cannot maintain them. Why? Because they had a problem. You see, we talked about it a bit in the media, with Ukraine and through Washington and all that. We know this story. But Europe says, well, if you're not in Washington's good books, we sold you Airbuses, but we don't sell you the maintenance that goes with them. We're blocking the parts and all that. Now these are civilian machines. That means we could potentially kill people with this kind of attitude, because if they continue to use them, we could end up with crashes One day, there you have it. By the way, there was their airline that ended up in a field to the applause. It's true that I was skeptical. The pilots took selfies with them. They're already in a glorification mindset, they probably have medals and everything. But personally, just like that, in my opinion, I'm not saying that it's the best attitude on earth, but if a school pilot with an Airbus and then ends up in a vacant lot walking around the plane looking for a bit of a phone network, I don't consider that a success story just like that. I would say on the surface, well, if you look closely, maybe there are reasons to be a bit shy. But at the time like that, seeing the guys with the flight attendants and all that, taking pictures of themselves for posterity, it's true that it left me a little dubious about the country's aeronautical culture. But let's get back to the story of comac. The story of business today is an aircraft that can be sold with a geostrategic guarantee. That means when you sell it, we do business. And the Chinese are known for that. We don't have the history of blocking or not delivering. We don't have that history. Like the French for example, who can sell you frigates, take the money and then one day they don't want to, because they don't have that history with Chinese, they are a bit more focused on business, they are a bit closer to their words. So that alone, just this detail that I am giving you could be something that could justify a purchase price even higher than the irb. US people would pay more. Because if I sell you this plane, you can use it for the next 30 years. I guarantee you that you will be at peace, I will never block your parts. Whereas the Airbus, well, you buy it. If tomorrow you have to leave with a temporary tenant in Washington, well, you will no longer have the parts. You see, that's it. So I was saying all this to say that the Westerners, or rather the Europeans, are buying the F35 when it is an aircraft that is not necessarily finished. It has a lot of electronics and it would have been a civilian aircraft, the F35 would not have flown. It has officially, when we look in the specialized magazines of Air and Defense and all that, we is talking about dozens of computer bugs in certain critical features. They had a bug where there is a system that manages the pressurization of the cockpit, the air pressure in the cockpit, it blew out several pilots ears. They have a bug where when flying very late at Night with poor visibility. The pilot has a helmet with a sort of visor that receives external night vision and everything through the ticket, through the aircraft systems. Well, there are pilots, they found themselves with green lines everywhere. They could not see anything at night. And there are other bugs, they will not go into detail which even threatened the pilot's life. And I wonder if it was not on the occasion of the manifestation of one of these bugs that the pilot decided to think perhaps of his wife, his children. Then he said to okay, I'm ejecting the Pentagon. Anyway, more than half of their equipment, they don't know where it is, huh? We're not a plane ready there. There's only wasteland where there are forests or other things. I swing by, I call the police, they're nice, they take me home, and that's it. It might be possible. And that's maybe what happened in his head. We don't know. But trust. I know that trust is not an option because we've shared, you know, there are anecdotally, we're not very far from 150 bugs in reality on the, on the F35. Even if the Pentagon, the American companies admit a dozen or even not without even detailing them all, you know, because it's a bit secret, because. Why is it secret? Because it gives a little bit of the limits of this plane. It shows a little bit of its weak points. So he prefers not to talk about it. But it's a plane that has designs, designs of bugs at all levels that are not fixed, that are carried over from version to version of software. So there you have it. It's not really a surprise. It's not really a surprise. I think that the Europeans who have bought them suffer from exactly the same problem. And often these bugs will cause a crisis of confidence where the pilots do not feel completely comfortable in the aircraft. They are perhaps a little more willing to make an emergency landing or we saw that with helicopters at one time, to make an emergency landing anywhere anyhow, or to eject because they feel that the aircraft is doing strange things. There you have it, my friends. That was just a little story that goes off in all directions. Thank you for listening so far and I'll see you in a next video. I'll probably talk to you about. I'm working on an accident involving an atr. Something quite stupid. Part of the pilots. Well, I shouldn't use the word stupid, not on this channel, but a mistake that's frankly quite unforgivable. If we're just among ourselves, like this. It's not. It's a mistake. Yeah. No engine. They stopped. They stopped the wrong engine. You know what I mean? No engine. They stopped the engine that was running. And so they found themselves stranded with a broken engine. It's not a prosperous situation. I'll tell you about it in a future video. See you soon, my friends.