Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

GTX said:
Given it's very limited reported use I don't think it has made much impact what-so-ever.
Click to expand...
Well, Kiev power station(too well defended for large strategic LACMs) begs to differ.
Unlike the F-35(which, despite several combat situations, has literally nothing to point to as "its" success).

So I would be careful of what-so-ever.
 
Ainen said:
Well, Kiev power station(too well defended for large strategic LACMs) begs to differ.
Unlike the F-35(which, despite several combat situations, has literally nothing to point to as "its" success).

So I would be careful of what-so-ever.
Click to expand...
Can you expand on this? Links?
 
Bruno Anthony said:
To replace the numbers of planned F-35s
Click to expand...
How did this get to be about replacement of F-35s? That is something that won't be an issue for another 20 - 40yrs.

You commented that "...the -35 just seems to get further and further behind and entire alliances are dependent on it. Too much shoved into this one basic airframe in my opinion."

To which I responded that "Consider the fact that some 21 countries have either purchased and are operating or are awaiting their F-35s. I seem to think that all of the air staff making the recommendations might know a thing or two about the capabilities vs other options on the table." - by which I am referring to the fact that despite some in the media/on forums trying to paint the F-35 as a failure/problem aircraft, those who make the decisions to buy aircraft in the Air Forces, and whom have better access to facts than those in the media/forums, are still lining up to buy (21 countries so far) - hardly a failure.

Your response to this that "There aren’t any and there won’t be any." which I take to mean that you are implying that there "aren’t any [other options on the table] and there won’t be any." doesn't make sense when the F-35 has been up against the other options I listed in numerous cases to date.

I still don't get to where the "5,000 of them?" comment comes from.

If you are talking about future F-35 replacements then this is hardly the thread for that...and besides it is something for 20 - 40yrs in the future.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Makes you wonder if it'd be possible to just swap the guts out with the ATP-SE hardware.

Annoying difficulty of LO aircraft, gotta build in any new tech instead of bolting on a pod like 4gen planes do.
Click to expand...

When will the VLO Sniper ATP be made.
 
GTX said:
And which combat situations would those be?
Click to expand...
There are 3 big cases where F-35 did take part in combat operations, as of yet.

First is the Gaza campaign - hard to tell what it did there, but murky Israeli comments together with at least one photo with AMRAAMs(!) don't exactly inspire (decreasing war crime potential isn't an achievement for a combat vehicle).
Second is Red Sea intercepts and strikes in Yemen - no additional value over 4th gens in the latter (even typhoons do it just fine), lower value than them in former (2 sidewinder limit, as it turned out, matters).
Third is the recent Iranian strike intercept - where again, F-35 didn't do anything special. Lack of full integration between main optic (EOTS) and a2a modes for an integrated package until block 4 is quite damning here - how did they even manage not to integrate them?
Yes, EOTS of course can work like any other pod...but while it would be an achievement for a Russian aircraft, everyone else (literally) have them.

One may rightfully say, that none of those situations play to F-35 strengths, which is true.
But it already had where it could potentially shine - but didn't.


You, however, argue that Su-57 didn't have a combat impact whatsoever. As you can see, it already did - literally the moment it entered something similar to normal operations. It did significant harm and raised alarm in Ukraine.

More painful still is that this capability (delayed specialized weapon integration) is the largest complaint about modern F-35.
 
Ainen said:
There are 3 big cases where F-35 did take part in combat operations, as of yet.

First is the Gaza campaign - hard to tell what it did there, but murky Israeli comments together with at least one photo with AMRAAMs(!) don't exactly inspire (decreasing war crime potential isn't an achievement for a combat vehicle).
Second is Red Sea intercepts and strikes in Yemen - no additional value over 4th gens in the latter (even typhoons do it just fine), lower value than them in former (2 sidewinder limit, as it turned out, matters).
Third is the recent Iranian strike intercept - where again, F-35 didn't do anything special. Lack of full integration between main optic (EOTS) and a2a modes for an integrated package until block 4 is quite damning here - how did they even manage not to integrate them?
Yes, EOTS of course can work like any other pod...but while it would be an achievement for a Russian aircraft, everyone else (literally) have them.

One may rightfully say, that none of those situations play to F-35 strengths, which is true.
But it already had where it could potentially shine - but didn't.


You, however, argue that Su-57 didn't have a combat impact whatsoever. As you can see, it already did - literally the moment it entered something similar to normal operations. It did significant harm and raised alarm in Ukraine.

More painful still is that this capability (delayed specialized weapon integration) is the largest complaint about modern F-35.
Click to expand...
Incomplete post. First combat use of the F-35 was in 2018 when Israeli F-35I struck targets in Syria completely unmolested from Syrian S-300 and Russian S-400 SAM systems. USMC used the F-35B in combat for the first time over Afghanistan that same year. First combat use by the USAF was in 2019 when F-35As were used to strike ISIS targets in Iraq.
 
GAO report:

Some highlights:
* If TR-3 is not qualified in April 2024 (I havent heard that it was) then in June 2024 Lockheed Martin will exceed their maximum capacity for parking undelivered F-35's at its various production facilities. The exact number of currently undelivered aircraft is classified. LM claim they can inspect and deliver 20 aircraft a month once the change to TR-3 is approved but the highest previously achieved monthly inspection and delivery rate was 13, even if it achieves its claimed delivery rate it will take over a year to fully clear the parked backlog.
* P&W did not deliver any new engines to the F-35 Assembly lines on time in 2023 with an average of each engine being 2 months late, an increase from 97% late with an average of 1 month delay in 2022. This isnt really affecting production though due to the delays in TR-3 causing a delivery backlog.
* Test fleet consists of four aircraft that are all over 10 years old and experiencing maintenance issues, one has been long term out of service so they are behind on weapons integration work, again due to being unable to test the new TR-3 software this isnt impacting the schedule too severely but a backlog of integration work is building up that will all hit at once once TR-3 is approved. To alleviate this they are building 4 additional test aircraft which are semi-instrumented and will be available from 2026 while a complete fleet renewal of 9 instrumented test aircraft is planned for delivery between 2029 and 2034 in batches of 3 (6 ordered so far) though this will leave a gap in 2028 & 2029 where no fully instrumented test aircraft are in service.
* Engine cooling upgrade is required from 2029 when planned post Block 4 capabilities will start requiring it however its not planned to be in service until 2030 with 2032 a more realistic in service date.
* New problem, the F-35C landing gear drag brace is experiencing more force during landings than it was originally designed for which could lead to a landing gear collapse, after 1300 landings it should be inspected every 200 landings until a permanent fix is developed.
* The issue with cracking of the panels around the F-35A internal gun due to pressure experienced on earlier lots has returned, this isn't due to FOD. The panel should be inspected for cracks everytime the gun has been fired, a replacement more durable panel will be live fire tested during 2024.
* The EOD window panel is experiencing poor durability in sandy environments (I thought this panel was made of factory grown sapphire!!??). Work to qualify a replacement window will take place in 2024.
* Some F-35 canopies across all models have experienced delamination of the external coating. A temporary fix was implemented in 2019 with a canopy vent hole to reduce pressure difference between layers but too small to de-pressurise the cockpit. In 2022 a secondary canopy supplier was qualified for A and C models and they are looking to qualify a secondary supplier for B models during 2024.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
I don't remember anything bad about su-57 in Ukraine. There is not enough of it, but it just started its production run - it's simply young.
Also we don't know that much, other than that by 2024 it clearly has its LACM integrated, unlike the F-35 (which waits for block 4, and its internal jsow-er died anyway).
On the other hand - we don't know for sure what else is (or isn't) integrated there. And it's again somewhat unfair to f-35, which is far more exposed.
Click to expand...

The whole not being exposed bit is key, but Russian claims about it are short on proof. We know that it has once, while being escorted by two SU-35's, launched X-69's over friendly territory. This is not particularly impressive. By similar standards, the US could claim that the F-35 can utilize any Block 4 weapon it has live fired at least once.

Ainen said:
Well, Kiev power station(too well defended for large strategic LACMs) begs to differ.
Unlike the F-35(which, despite several combat situations, has literally nothing to point to as "its" success).

So I would be careful of what-so-ever.
Click to expand...

Which is not exactly much to brag about. As per Wikipedia: On 16 April 2024, President Zelenskyy said that “Eleven missiles were launched towards the Trypillya [thermal power] station, upon which the electricity supply in the Kyiv region depends. We managed to intercept the first seven, but the remaining four hit Trypillya. Why? Because we had zero missiles left. We have exhausted all the missiles that were defending Trypillya”. Literal Shaheeds got through.

Finally, I believe that not even the Russians have claimed that the X-69's in question were launched by SU-57's and they are primarily launched from non-stealthy aircraft.

Meanwhile, the F-35's actually do have documented combat success. We have on-board video footage of them shooting down Houthi drones and low-flying cruise missiles using both AMRAAM and AIM-9X. This also demonstrated the link between EOTS and A2A modes, which while not at full Block 4 levels yet, does already exist.

There is also proof of them conducting ground attack with JDAMs and EOTS-designated laser-guided bombs. Finally, we have detailed evidence of testing and large-scale combat exercises. More importantly is operating and piercing S-300 defended areas as mentioned above.
 
NTKV said:
Finally, I believe that not even the Russians have claimed that the X-69's in question were launched by SU-57's and they are primarily launched from non-stealthy aircraft.
Click to expand...

So they launched several AS-22 Kazoos which I understand are the Russian equivalent of the Storm Shadow/Taurus cruise-missiles.

As for those Russian missiles getting through and severely damaging the power-station well hopefully the aid-packages on their way will give the Ukrainians much needed replacement SAMs very soon.
 
red admiral said:
On different aircraft. You might as well add TIALD and Pave Spike to that list.

But don't let get that in the way of your F-35 / LM bad narrative
Click to expand...

The reason why I omitted TIALD and Pave Spike was because they weren't around when F-35 was being delivered to the UK...the other 3 were.

And it wasn't an 'F-35/LM bad narrative'......merely an observation that Advanced EOTS will very much not be 'Advanced' by the time it could enter service if anyone actually ordered it....which based on the news of Advanced EOTS out there appears to not be happening....so LM may need to refresh their approach to gain traction.

If you're going to sell a fighter aircraft and market it as the most advanced out there you're going to need to keep one of the key systems regularly refreshed so that its not obsolescent when purchased...given the pace of change in the world of optics it most definitely will be....and also calls into question its long term supportability.

Every single F-35 having a laser designation pod is in many ways a huge advantage. For normal fighter fleets there is never enough targeting pods to go around, even in the most well resourced air forces. Now you can have a fleet where every aircraft has it baked in. But....if that internal solution is obsolete and cannot generate the imagery necessary to meet tight ROE it goes from being a massive advantage to a huge disadvantage as there is no qualified external pod, and an internal upgrade takes a long, long time....

The DAS sensors on F-35 appear to be truly 'plug and play', replaceable in normal first line maintenance and many operators have already contracted for the upgrade. But none have contracted for Advanced EOTS....
 
WatcherZero said:
* If TR-3 is not qualified in April 2024 (I havent heard that it was) then in June 2024 Lockheed Martin will exceed their maximum capacity for parking undelivered F-35's at its various production facilities. The exact number of currently undelivered aircraft is classified. LM claim they can inspect and deliver 20 aircraft a month once the change to TR-3 is approved but the highest previously achieved monthly inspection and delivery rate was 13, even if it achieves its claimed delivery rate it will take over a year to fully clear the parked backlog.
Click to expand...

I think based on production and the numbers placed in storage last year that by the end of June it will be c140 F-35 parked up...
 
timmymagic said:
AS-22's direct Western equivalent would be more like SLAM
Click to expand...

I was referring to the advanced variant which I suppose would be the AS-22B which if you've seen photographs of does have a resemblance to the Storm Shadow and Taurus cruise-missiles.
 
GTX said:
still don't get to where the "5,000 of them?" comment comes from.
Click to expand...
I thought I was pretty clear I was referring to that there’s no alternative at this point to the f-35 should it be canceled. It’s all the way with the f-35.
 
I suspect all internal designators are going to lag behind their podded equivalents. It’s simply a much more invasive integration that always will be more expensive in time and cost to swap out, and design freeze of changes to the initial aircraft or its upgrade spirals will necessarily freeze any forward advance of the sensor.
 
Bruno Anthony said:
I thought I was pretty clear I was referring to that there’s no alternative at this point to the f-35 should it be canceled. It’s all the way with the f-35.
Click to expand...

Well only the first thousand or so will be built below Blk 4 standards.
 
Bruno Anthony said:
I thought I was pretty clear I was referring to that there’s no alternative at this point to the f-35 should it be canceled. It’s all the way with the f-35.
Click to expand...
It certainly was not clear.

Either way. there is no chance of F-35 being cancelled now.

Countries do have alternatives: Typhoon, Rafael, Gripen, F-15, F/A-18E/F etc etc...they just don't want them since the F-35 is far better. As has been proven in competition after competition.
 
GTX said:
It certainly was not clear.

Either way. there is no chance of F-35 being cancelled now.

Countries do have alternatives: Typhoon, Rafael, Gripen, F-15, F/A-18E/F etc etc...they just don't want them since the F-35 is far better. As has been proven in competition after competition.
Click to expand...
My mistake on lack of clarity I guess.
Post in thread 'Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)'
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...ii-joint-strike-fighter-jsf.17732/post-680067

Competition after competition of static RCS testing the f-35 won hands down. In terms of aeronautical performance, the f-35 lost at engine start up.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom