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

Quite right too, politics and the military should be kept well apart have we not learned from the T.S.R.2 days? It looks like we have not after all those years.
 
FighterJock said:
Quite right too, politics and the military should be kept well apart have we not learned from the T.S.R.2 days? It looks like we have not after all those years.
Click to expand...
Good luck with that. They have always been interlinked.
 
Sferrin said:

So they're going to save 300,000 by ditching the rolling vertical landing capability. And that's the F-35Bs fault? So they'll have to drop what, one or two weapons into the drink to piss away that 300,000 "savings". Blame stupid politicians.
Click to expand...
Kenny Loggins will have to change the words to, "They got you dumping off the deck..."
 
GTX said:
Good luck with that. They have always been interlinked.
Click to expand...

„War is simply the continuation of political intercourse with the addition of other means”

I think that was the phrase Clausewitz coined. And it certainly also pertains to military procurement in the modern sense.

I apologize for the off topic remark, it just always comes to my mind when I see people arguing for or about a "separation" of military matters from politics, as military matters are the practical application of political decisions and goals.
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
> in accordance with US law

What
Click to expand...
I don't think this was ever in question. Israel paid a substantial premium to integrate their own capabilities.

That being said, F-35s differ for each country, primarily through variant differences (like F-35A, B, or C) and country-specific modifications, such as different electronic warfare systems or weapons integration.

While the core hardware is often the same, international F-35s can have tailored capabilities, with a notable example being Israel's customized F-35I.
 
Forest Green said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1992569643597525437
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1992569643597525437?s=20
Click to expand...
I'm doubtful a three-cycle engine will offer a meaningful improvement. To improve fuel efficiency you need to increase the bypass ratio, which you can do by increasing the diameter (impossible due to size constraints) or shrinking the core (impractical as that basically implies a full redesign).
My guess is most of the numbers are coming mostly from improved core tech/higher inlet temperatures, with the three stream thing being more of a red herring.
 
missile_man said:
That being said, F-35s differ for each country, primarily through variant differences (like F-35A, B, or C) and country-specific modifications, such as different electronic warfare systems or weapons integration.
Click to expand...
Other than F-35I (and who knows by how much exactly), the entire point is that they're more or less same.
Differences at this point are negligible, and eventual ones, as of now, are minimal(drag shute, potential sidekick addition for iirc Japan)
 
Ainen said:
Other than F-35I (and who knows by how much exactly), the entire point is that they're more or less same.
Differences at this point are negligible, and eventual ones, as of now, are minimal(drag shute, potential sidekick addition for iirc Japan)
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
missile_man said:
I don't think this was ever in question. Israel paid a substantial premium to integrate their own capabilities.

That being said, F-35s differ for each country, primarily through variant differences (like F-35A, B, or C) and country-specific modifications, such as different electronic warfare systems or weapons integration.

While the core hardware is often the same, international F-35s can have tailored capabilities, with a notable example being Israel's customized F-35I.
Click to expand...
Whats "US law" about this? This was my initial question.
 
While more thrust, range, or better yet, both, are welcome, it is clear what F-35 needs most now, and will need more of in the future, is cooling.
 
missile_man said:
I don't think this was ever in question. Israel paid a substantial premium to integrate their own capabilities.
Click to expand...
My memory isn't good on this one but I think the US paid Israel to pay for this integration through its annual aid. For a brief moment, Israel said "we rather take that aid and buy more f-15 instead"
 
Defense Minister Martin Pfister has repeatedly stressed that he will respect the referendum. Switzerland is allowed to spend a maximum of six billion Swiss francs on the new F-35 fighter jets.
Click to expand...
Exactly this amount was narrowly accepted in 2020 for 36 aircraft. But the US is now demanding up to 1.3 billion francs more. They do not recognise the fixed price communicated by Switzerland.
Click to expand...
The number of pieces is to be reduced from 36 to 30 jets for the time being in order to comply with the cost roof.
Click to expand...
However, the abandonment of six jets would only be temporary. According to matching sources, Pfister wants to have ten more F-35s procured in a few years. He would deal with domestic political resistance and at the same time meet those who call for stronger air defense.
Click to expand...
(Browser translation needed)
https://www.nau.ch/politik/bundesha...will-f-35-flotte-vorerst-verkleinern-67068545There is a German description for this kind of move. The word-for-word translation would be farmer shrewdness.
 
Ainen said:
Other than F-35I (and who knows by how much exactly), the entire point is that they're more or less same.
Differences at this point are negligible, and eventual ones, as of now, are minimal(drag shute, potential sidekick addition for iirc Japan)
Click to expand...
You are correct, they're more or less the same.

I was just offering some insight that some may not be aware of. Even PAC-3, THAAD, HIMARS, etc, all have some level of specialization per the CLIN.

It can software, hardware or both.
 
Training_Dummy said:
While more thrust, range, or better yet, both, are welcome, it is clear what F-35 needs most now, and will need more of in the future, is cooling.
Click to expand...
As already stated in the thread, Honeywell is hoping to provide an UN-invasive solution, but Collins has been a reliable partner and shouldn't be discounted. I don't have anything to do with LM Aero, but I prefer looking at the results oriented solution, rather than being sold on the "less invasive" solution.

https://www.collinsaerospace.com/wh...6FbXIOy-y2daBfE9A1lcXixc37g9sJg8aAp0WEALw_wcB
 
Last edited:
donnage99 said:
My memory isn't good on this one but I think the US paid Israel to pay for this integration through its annual aid. For a brief moment, Israel said "we rather take that aid and buy more f-15 instead"
Click to expand...
Israel pays for F-35s primarily through U.S. military aid, with the U.S. government providing funds through a Foreign Military Financing program.
 
VishnuOsiris said:
No dispute, just looking for expert clarification:

Regarding Israeli F-35s, I recall a Jerusalem Post article, which reported the IDF had integrated their Spice weapons for internal carry. But given the source...

Of more interest is similar reporting that the IDF had overlayed the F-35 software with their own native command/control layer. One that would allow more rapid integration of Israeli-made weapons. At least, this was the way this capability was described by Defense Update. This would of course offer numerous benefits, apparently dancing around Lockheed's IP.

Speaking of Lockheed IP, is it remotely possible that the IDF gets a pass from Lockheed to meddle with their software if the DoD cannot? I might assume this would be a case of Lockheed looking the other way out of discretion, but I hear bad things about assumptions.

Real question: Are there actual known mods to F-35Is that allow them to operate uniquely as compared to other fleets? If so, could these mods be applied elsewhere? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Israeli F-35s are configured to not depend on the ALIS (Autonomic Logistics Information System) for maintenance.

This allows for faster integration of new systems and weapons and independent depot-level maintenance.

In short, Israel's almost constant state of combat readiness requires faster maintenance than ALIS can provide them.
 
EmoBirb said:
> in accordance with US law

What
Click to expand...

EmoBirb said:
Whats "US law" about this? This was my initial question.
Click to expand...
Since 2008, there has been a US law requiring that the government must report to Congress on every US military sale to the Middle East region stating that it does not upset Israel's "qualitative military edge" within the region. It doesn't necessarily mean that any version of any weapon sold has to be worse than the comparable Israeli one, just that it doesn't give e.g., Saudi Arabia a military advantage over Israel.

Legal Requirement to Maintain Israel’s Qualitative Edge https://share.google/6FAy63PGnT06kWQcL
 
I have mostly avoided Gripen E comparisons because it is not a serious conversation. US operators alone have roughly 1,000 F-35s delivered or on backlog. Sweden has one Gripen E in service. Not one wing, not one squadron. One aircraft!
Click to expand...
That.
 

Attachments

  • F-35BiOT-Shirt.jpg
    F-35BiOT-Shirt.jpg
    32.7 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:
And how many Block 4 F-35s are flying around exactly? With its reduced scope, I might add.
https://defence-industry.eu/lockhee...r-3-delays-and-engine-modernisation-failures/
Edit:
You are making fun of the availability of one aircraft and use this as an argument for the superiority of another. Than I would expect, that the development process & mission/combat readiness of this other aircraft should be right on track. But it isn’t.
If the argument is, that an unfinished F-35 is still superior, in most scenarios, over the Gripen E....that would be something, I could agree on.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
That.
Click to expand...
To be fair, you can have this as a serious conversation; there are older planes, there are newer planes, there are larger planes, there are smaller planes.
It's just no one in recent swedish and indiancanadian twitter war does, and given the former artistic...fervor of gripen pr team - i wonder if it's even possible, and it's visible how people who actually can write solid arguments - go into outright shitposting.
 
had said:
And how many Block 4 F-35s are flying around exactly? With its reduced scope, I might add.
https://defence-industry.eu/lockhee...r-3-delays-and-engine-modernisation-failures/
Edit:
You are making fun of the availability of one aircraft and use this as an argument for the superiority of another. Than I would expect, that the development process & mission/combat readiness of this other aircraft should be right on track. But it isn’t.
If the argument is, that an unfinished F-35 is still superior, in most scenarios, over the Gripen E....that would be something, I could agree on.
Click to expand...

This is a fair point, the comparison online seems to be between what an F-35 could be in 2035 for most operators fleets vs. what Gripen E, albeit in tiny numbers' is now...

I still think F-35 would be superior on most measures...but comparisons should be like for like...

However....for Canada buying new production years away that comparison would be moot...
 
timmymagic said:
This is a fair point, the comparison online seems to be between what an F-35 could be in 2035 for most operators fleets vs. what Gripen E, albeit in tiny numbers' is now...

I still think F-35 would be superior on most measures...but comparisons should be like for like...

However....for Canada buying new production years away that comparison would be moot...
Click to expand...
To be fair, it's easy to stand on the outside looking in and have a critical point of view.

I don't have anything bad to say about the Gripen, but it's simply not in the same league as the F-35. I'm not sure there is another in the same league.

Even without TR-4, the F-35 is far and beyond anything our near peer adversaries have. Not even close.
 
@Ainen : well I think it comes down to responsibility. Any serious manufacturer should differentiate themselves from individuals and social media trends that ill-represent their hard owned achievement in a travesty of a marketing campaign.

The Gripen is a great airframe. It´s simply not up to what the staccato of empty words and candy rhetoric* have stated recently. Funny fact, is that I have always been on the opinion that Canada owning something like a Gripen, if it came at a realistic market price, and in complement to the F-35, would be great to supplement the defense of Canada vast spaces. Just like could have done a modern F-104 or M2K. But then, defense posture nowadays are built on the long term. And in 20-30 years from now, the odds are great that sustaining the F-35 would be cheaper than anything else in production today. It´s just industry metrics and the evolution of air warfare.

*Not everything is to be advertised like a soda
 
Last edited:
Exactly zero block 4 f-35's are operational now. But no one ordered block 4 aircraft so that they'd be flying around right now conducting operations in 2024/2025. Block 3 aircraft were doing that however. And doing well.

That said, TR-3 aircraft are being delivered now. About 250 of them actually. And they expect the training/ops restrictions there to be lifted in early 2026 so in a few weeks to a few months from now. Most of the countries who have yet to order the F-35 or are considering ordering more, will not receive them this side of 2030. When they do receive them, in the early part of next decade, they will receive them with majority of the block 4 capability (at least parts of it that is exportable) installed and with more weapons cleared than what they presently have or options that they had had they chosen a 2020s delivery for the aircraft. If the block 3F configuration was appealing to them for the 2010s and 2020s, then an early 2030s operational block 4 configuration would be even better.

The Gripen E/F program is more than a decade old and has gone head to head with the F-35 on multiple campaigns. If Block 3F already wiped the floor with it, Block 4 is only going to widen that gap. It is also worth remembering that unlike the French Rafale, Russian or Chinese fighters, and even the Typhoon to a lesser extent, the Gripen E/F does not really alleviate sovereignty or U.S. dependency concerns given its reliance on an American engine. This obviously doesn't take away from the platforms' capabilities but just shows that a 4th gen platform, and the smallest 4th gen platform at that, has historically struggled head ot head against a fifth gen fighter in the aircraft procurement competitions where both have competed head to head especially when the fifth gen platform (F-35) has a strong backing from the US operators with more than 1,000 aircraft fielded or on backlog and hundreds of more expected over the next decade.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Shouldn't LM be paying penalties to HM's government for late delivery?
Click to expand...
Article makes it clear that because of the way purchasing is handled by JPO that individual operators cannot charge LM for late deliveries...has to be handled centrally by JPO. Who as usual will probably let LM off the hook...

The 'good' news is that there are now photos in flight of everything bar the last 6 aircraft at Fort Worth..by circa mid-26 this should translate to at least 40 a/c in the UK. Still unclear, fully, what is happening with the 3 orange wired test aircraft with 17 TES at Edwards, that MoD was investigating being brought up to a 'combat' capable standard, the 3 later aircraft that were going to replace them as test airframes and the single standard F-35 that was deployed with 17 TES at Edwards (and obviously missing the lost aircraft that was recovered to Marham, that is presumably being used as ground instructional by now).
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom