I think he means this:

lol… That’s US Airways Flight 1702

True, but others have multiple flying samples already.

There are examples on both sides:

M4 vs Tiger in WW2 = Numbers won but poor maint & tactics played a large role

Multiple battles in Vietnam = Tech won

ME vs Israel in multiple conflicts = Tech won

M60/M1 vs T-5x/6x/7x in Iraq = Tech won

just to reach the same range as F-16, the F-35 has to load up max internal fuel while suffering poor maneuverability etc etc.

Except that it takes a clean F-16 get anywhere near a combat loaded F-35. A combat loaded F-35 spanks a combat loaded F-16 in every scenario even if by some miracle the F-16 get’s close enough for a WVR fight to occur. There is no contest.

Besides, the purpose of the massive internal fuel load of the F-35 is not range, but surviving to get to the target (ie keeping a VLO RCS).

combat configuration = 2×2000 lbs bombs, is that so ?
what is 6 AAM then ? non combat accessories ?

The results are the same, the F-16 has to load up with max external fuel to just reach the same range as the F-35 while suffering poor maneuverability, massive RCS, etc.

F-35 range is short as it is,

You have a funny definition of “short”.

In combat-config (ie 2x2k bombs), the F-16 has to carry BOTH CFTs and EFTs to get the same range. Good luck maneuvering with all that baggage.

The Superhornet would need CFTs to even come close, but it does not have those.

The main advantage, when it comes to range & the F-35 is that it does not have to trade gas for weapons since it’s basic combat range does not include EFTs (which Israel is working on).

I have no doubt that sometime in the future that DDM-NG will give it some kind of EODAS-like tracking, but that will require upgraded software.

btw, Since the sensors are on the tail, it’s can’t detect or track anything underneath the airframe.