Iran releases video claiming to show they have hit an F-35

[yoshy]

Iran claims to have hit an F-35 with an unspecified anti-air system. Iran made the same claims in 2025 (articles from their state media: 1, 2, 3). Those claims were never substantiated in any way. However, this time they have released a video along with their claim, and the US also confirmed an emergency landing of an F-35 without specifying the reason. From CNN:

A US F-35 fighter jet made an emergency landing at US air base in the Middle East after it was struck by what is believed to be Iranian fire, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

Capt. Tim Hawkins, a spokesperson for US Central Command, said the fifth-generation stealth jet was "flying a combat mission over Iran" when it was forced to make an emergency landing. Hawkins said the aircraft landed safely and the incident is under investigation.

Sandboxx News released a video on YouTube discussing the footage. The host reasons that a hit from an S-300 or Bavar-373 anti-air missile would likely cause significant damage or destruction of the plane, but if the F-35 was flying low enough for some reason, it would be in range of Iranian Majid Air Defense Weapon Systems or even MANPADs (Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems). Both of those are significantly less powerful explosives which would make it more likely for the F-35 to still be operational after a hit.



This forum has extensive experience dealing with thermal imaging. Does the video look legitimate? When the missile explodes, the F-35 basically fades into background, but it can still be seen flying intact if you look closely after the bright explosion. Is it expected that the missile explosion would be so hot that the F-35 would fade into the background?

 

[Ravi]

Is it expected that the missile explosion would be so hot that the F-35 would fade into the background?

It is a matter of dynamic range of the IR cam system used. Generally the dynamic range of IR systems is rather small, compared to VIS systems. So when a very hot item is in view, the other items (less hot) will dim accordingly.

 

[Gary C]

Iran claims to have hit an F-35 with an unspecified anti-air system. Iran made the same claims in 2025 (articles from their state media: 1, 2, 3). Those claims were never substantiated in any way. However, this time they have released a video along with their claim, and the US also confirmed an emergency landing of an F-35 without specifying the reason. From CNN:

A US F-35 fighter jet made an emergency landing at US air base in the Middle East after it was struck by what is believed to be Iranian fire, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

Capt. Tim Hawkins, a spokesperson for US Central Command, said the fifth-generation stealth jet was "flying a combat mission over Iran" when it was forced to make an emergency landing. Hawkins said the aircraft landed safely and the incident is under investigation.

Sandboxx News released a video on YouTube discussing the footage. The host reasons that a hit from an S-300 or Bavar-373 anti-air missile would likely cause significant damage or destruction of the plane, but if the F-35 was flying low enough for some reason, it would be in range of Iranian Majid Air Defense Weapon Systems or even MANPADs (Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems). Both of those are significantly less powerful explosives which would make it more likely for the F-35 to still be operational after a hit.

MANPADS seems unlikely as there is no reason for an F-35 to be exposed below ~20,000 over Iran right now. To have been damaged over Iran but still able to return to base leaves a great many unknowns.

Have you done a search for an earlier dated use of this video without the graphical overlay?

 

[yoshy]

MANPADS seems unlikely as there is no reason for an F-35 to be exposed below ~20,000 over Iran right now. To have been damaged over Iran but still able to return to base leaves a great many unknowns.

Perhaps over-confidence or poor planning led to a similar situation where an F-117 was shot down over Serbia. In that event, US F-117s kept flying the same route every night, so a skilled Serbian anti-air operator was able to target the F-117 because they knew where and when to look for one. Pilots will fly lower for bombing runs if they assume they have total air dominance. Like you said, there's "a great many unknowns".

Assuming it was an anti-air missile, perhaps it detonated farther away from the F-35 than it appears due to perspective, and that is why the F-35 was able to return to base. A direct hit from an AA missile would have downed the plane almost surely, but proximity damage from an explosion just far enough away could damage the plane enough to force return to base but still be able to fly.

Have you done a search for an earlier dated use of this video without the graphical overlay?

I have not done so myself but have not seen any comments, tweets, articles, etc that found the video to have been reused. How would you recommend searching for that?

 

[JMartJr]

I have not done so myself but have not seen any comments, tweets, articles, etc that found the video to have been reused. How would you recommend searching for that?

I, too, would like to know, could be a useful skill to tack on. If it feels off topic here, perhaps over in Practical Debunking?

 

[Hevach]

The F-35 can sacrifice stealth for payload in what Lockheed unironically calls "beast mode." In stealth mode it can carry two missiles or bombs in closed internal bays, but in beast mode it carries four wing mounted pylons for additional weapons.

https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-features/raaf-flies-f35as-in-beastmode-for-the-first-time.html

In 2017 Lockheed produced a graphic highlighting the difference between stealth mode, whereby the F-35A is equipped only with internal weapons, and the so-called 'beast mode', where it carries a full complement of internal and external weapons.

In stealth mode, it can carry 5,700lbs internally, while in 'beast mode' it can carry a full 22,000lbs, of both air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions.

"This design feature allows Australian F-35As to be adapted to suit the threat environment and operational requirements," says Mathew Harper, commanding officer of 35 Sqn. "This mode would most likely be used in less contested environments where rapid employment of ordnance is prioritised over maximising the F-35A's stealth capabilities."

We don't know which mode the F-35 that was hit was flying in but "less contested" and "rapid employment of ordnance" both sound reasonably applicable in Iran. Iran has aging air defenses and hardly any functioning air force, and the difference between two bombs and six is a lot in what is largely a war of missiles and drones rather than unit-to-unit fighting.

A lot of the weapons that might be loaded on those pylons have larger radar cross sections than the whole plane does in stealth mode, the F-35 is functionally no longer a stealth aircraft when it does this.

Also the F-35 isn't a magic invisible plane. That's supposed to be the F-22. The F-35 is more of an all purpose warplane than a specialized stealth plane.

 

[Gary C]

Perhaps over-confidence or poor planning led to a similar situation where an F-117 was shot down over Serbia. In that event, US F-117s kept flying the same route every night, so a skilled Serbian anti-air operator was able to target the F-117 because they knew where and when to look for one. Pilots will fly lower for bombing runs if they assume they have total air dominance. Like you said, there's "a great many unknowns".

Assuming it was an anti-air missile, perhaps it detonated farther away from the F-35 than it appears due to perspective, and that is why the F-35 was able to return to base. A direct hit from an AA missile would have downed the plane almost surely, but proximity damage from an explosion just far enough away could damage the plane enough to force return to base but still be able to fly.

Possible but undecidable with the available information.

I have not done so myself but have not seen any comments, tweets, articles, etc that found the video to have been reused. How would you recommend searching for that?

Trim off the text added by the various posters, use Google lens. With so much coverage of the war, you may have a lot of pages to search.

 

[yoshy]

The F-35 can sacrifice stealth for payload in what Lockheed unironically calls "beast mode." In stealth mode it can carry two missiles or bombs in closed internal bays, but in beast mode it carries four wing mounted pylons for additional weapons.

https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-features/raaf-flies-f35as-in-beastmode-for-the-first-time.html


We don't know which mode the F-35 that was hit was flying in but "less contested" and "rapid employment of ordnance" both sound reasonably applicable in Iran. Iran has aging air defenses and hardly any functioning air force, and the difference between two bombs and six is a lot in what is largely a war of missiles and drones rather than unit-to-unit fighting.

A lot of the weapons that might be loaded on those pylons have larger radar cross sections than the whole plane does in stealth mode, the F-35 is functionally no longer a stealth aircraft when it does this.

Very good points! I completely forgot to consider the possibility of having a loadout with the extra external ordinance. A few days ago, I happened to see a reddit post of the F-22 being tested with stealth fuel pods and external IRST (Infrared Search and Track), which should have jogged my memory of the F-35 having the option for additional external ordinance. The actual change in RCS is classified of course, but from some googling, I am seeing simulations and speculation all agree the increase is significant, possibly up to 1 or 2 orders of magnitude. It would make sense to have started using low stealth loadouts in areas where the US and Israel have total or near total air dominance, and it's possible the US Air Force incorrectly assessed the area where this F-35 was flying.

Also the F-35 isn't a magic invisible plane. That's supposed to be the F-22. The F-35 is more of an all purpose warplane than a specialized stealth plane.

The F-22 is a wonder of engineering. The F-35 is one of the stealthiest planes in existence, but the F-22 is estimated to have an RCS an order of magnitude smaller. Literally smaller than a bee!

hardly any functioning air force

RIP F-14

Cool pic of one possible beast mode loadout, adding 6 external missiles/bombs:

And the F-22 with the stealth fuel pods I mentioned above. The US F-35 does not have any drop tanks deployed yet (Israel might have added them on their F-35I but I'm not sure on that).

 

[yoshy]

Trim off the text added by the various posters, use Google lens. With so much coverage of the war, you may have a lot of pages to search.

Thanks for the tip!

 

[yoshy]

Iran released another video, this time claiming to be of an F-15, and the footage appears to be from the same type of system that recorded the F-35. Once again, the video cuts off abruptly, likely because in the last few frames, we see the tracking box get fooled by flairs, and there have been no reports of a damaged F-15. The F-15's flares were likely effective, allowing the F-15 to escape undamaged.

This does lend credence to the F-35 footage, imo. The fact that it's an F-15, which is extremely non-stealthy, having the highest estimated RCS of any US fighter jet in operation, means the US is quite confident regarding air superiority or dominance. F-15 are often used as "missile trucks" or "bomb trucks" (missile truck for anti-air missions, bomb truck for ground attack), which is similar in concept to the F-35 beast mode - they are equipped with a ridiculous loadout, except even more so in the case of the F-15 since stealth isn't a concern at all. For ground attack missions, the F-15 can carry up to 24 (!!!) munitions. Since they feel comfortable flying a jet with an RCS the size of a school bus, I think it's reasonable to deduce that the US have been flying riskier missions with F-35 as well.

The F-15 was designed as an air superiority fighter, not a multi-role like the F-35 was always intended to be, but it can be used extensively for ground attack as well. Iran doesn't appear to be flying any of their air force anymore. They futilely tried in the beginning of the war. For example, the first air-to-air kill of an enemy jet by an F-35 was an Iranian Yak-130, an outdated jet that had no hope in the modern skies. (F-35's first a2a kills were drones.). Most other jets lost by Iran were destroyed on the ground before they could take off.

The above is speculation from someone who is NOT an expert. That's why I come here

The amount of munitions on a bomb-truck-loadout F-15 is so large that it's kinda funny to see. And I'm not sure if the following pic is even up to the max loadout for bomb truck mode.