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

[Blitzo]

No doubt but if LM are willing to put money in to study it then there should be no complaints.

Well, the amount of money lm is putting to it is one matter, the commitment of a proper customer like the US military is something else entirely imo

 

[Mark Nankivil]

AvWeek article on "what ifs" for F-35 development... Mark

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/...25&utm_medium=email&utm_rid=CPEN1000002247608

 

[Scott Kenny]

The C is also a 7.5G jet not a 9G jet and that is likely a factor again of the bigger wing.

But isn't that due to the brutal carrier landing forces that are also in play?

As in, a C that never touched a carrier could be cleared for 9 gees?

 

[Reddington777]

We already know the current plan for F-47, four tranches of 75 aircraft.

This is news to me. Where did you hear this from? I've never seen a single sources say this explicitly. Hunter talked about "tranches" in march this year but gave no numbers and did not say how that is supposed to relate to Allvin's 185+ number. I have no idea where the 300 number came from either, though it could be a good estimate of total numbers. There's no information either way of whether 185+ will be the total count across all tranches, or some subset of that per tranche or whether there's going to be further procurement of more iterations after the 185 (or that those iterations will still be called the "F-47" or not).

So unless I'm misinformed and there's been some official confirmation of how procurement will go, it still seems like the details are entirely up in the air and open for interpretation. It could be really small at 185 (in which case you'd be right to want to buy an upgraded F-35) or that it could be 185 + further procurement of iterations after that. Just between the two manned 6th gen fighters and whatever future iterations there are if any, there might well be enough to cover the high end fight. As for the low end fight ...

The F-35 is still receiving exquisite systems today and the cost as remained relatively stable.

That's not wrong, but it would still depend on how extensive the upgrades are and how much appetite the three branches have for said upgrades relative to their un-upgraded blk4 F35s. Adding better sensors is probably relatively manageable. Outer mold line stuff? I don't know about it enough to say either way. But a second engine? There's no way that's not going to cost more.

Numbers wise, the original F-35 entered service to replace F-16s, F-15s, harriers and A10s across the board. What would an upgraded F-35 replace? The air force certainly isn't going to replace every single non-upgraded one 1 for 1 since an vanilla F-35 is more than enough to handle the low end fight. So unless the three branches want to swell their manned fleet by non-insignificant numbers, then I'm not sure an upgraded F-35 will be bought in the same numbers as the vanilla F-35 is being bought at.

I'm not saying it will happen. just that it remains an option.

I still hope it will happen. I think LM developing these upgrades is both good for LM and good for the force. LM gets to continue maturing its tech to compete in future F-47 re-competitions while the overall force gets something hopefully the size of an F-22 to be more effective against adversaries.

I just don't think it's going to be an interim solution to anything nor should it be considered as such. At no point in time should this be considered a replacement of either 6th gen fighters or any other priorities. But I'm just preaching to the choir here. When LM finalizes it's envisioned upgrade and pitches it to congress, moron congressmen and vermin media clowns are going to start asking "why can't we just buy more F-35 pro/plus and cancel the F-47 / F/A-XX instead?"

 

[Sferrin]

Disagree. F-47 is never going to be procured in the numbers of the F-35. The projections have always been in the 300s or so. Obviously a war may influence that.

What LM would be worried about is the concept that was studied during the NGAD pause partially discussed here,
https://www.twz.com/air/air-force-f...-its-heavy-fighter-program-may-be-in-jeopardy

Pardon my French but what a fucking joke. If the DoD is too stupid to manage to get the F-47 and F/A-XX into service they all deserve to be fired. They think this "light weight" POS is going to be a viable substitute? I swear to God it would make more sense if our DoD were run by China at this point.

 

[Reddington777]

Pardon my French but what a fucking joke. If the DoD is too stupid to manage to get the F-47 and F/A-XX into service they all deserve to be fired. They think this "light weight" POS is going to be a viable substitute? I swear to God it would make more sense if our DoD were run by China at this point.

This was a long time ago during the NGAD review lol. They (at least for now it seems) didn't go ahead with that.

In this respect, I agree with @Ozair. I think having a "lighter fighter" may be a good option for affordable mass in the future. An upgraded F-35 might fit the bill as a supporting "lighter" fighter.

Having a fighter between the size of an F-35 and F-22 would be ideal for this. Size wise, maybe you could call it a "light" fighter although it's most certainly going to not be light. Maybe something like the J-35 - twin engines, medium sized with 6 A2A missiles or a smaller complement of A2G munitions, that costs maybe as much as an F-35 or a little more.

It'll give you the affordable mass to complement your high end assets while being more capable than the F-35 and maybe use most of the same sensors as the F-35.

 

[Deltafan]

https://www.reuters.com/business/ae...icking-with-f-35-jets-sources-say-2025-08-07/

 

[Scott Kenny]

Having a fighter between the size of an F-35 and F-22 would be ideal for this.

You do remember that the difference in weight between the F-35A and F-22A is only ~15,000lbs, right? F-35A is one chonky boi.

"A fighter between the size of an F-35A and F-22" is the F-35C.

 

[Reddington777]

You do remember that the difference in weight between the F-35A and F-22A is only ~15,000lbs, right? F-35A is one chonky boi.

"A fighter between the size of an F-35A and F-22" is the F-35C.

I think I was referring more to internal volume in places that count - like a bigger radome, ideally two engines and enough internal space for 6 amraams. So maybe F-35C's weight class, but more spacious internal space for stuff.

 

[Ozair]

But isn't that due to the brutal carrier landing forces that are also in play?

As in, a C that never touched a carrier could be cleared for 9 gees?

My understanding is structural strengthening at the outer wings. To get the C wing to 9G would require more structural weight for a wing that already has 45% greater area that the A. The C is already 5500lbs heavier and a reasonable portion of that would be wing weight as well as carrier strengthening. End result though is the C only carries 1.5klbs of fuel over the A.

Even with the big wing the A would still have the same transonic acceleration issues.

This is news to me. Where did you hear this from? I've never seen a single sources say this explicitly. Hunter talked about "tranches" in march this year but gave no numbers and did not say how that is supposed to relate to Allvin's 185+ number. I have no idea where the 300 number came from either, though it could be a good estimate of total numbers. There's no information either way of whether 185+ will be the total count across all tranches, or some subset of that per tranche or whether there's going to be further procurement of more iterations after the 185 (or that those iterations will still be called the "F-47" or not).

So unless I'm misinformed and there's been some official confirmation of how procurement will go, it still seems like the details are entirely up in the air and open for interpretation. It could be really small at 185 (in which case you'd be right to want to buy an upgraded F-35) or that it could be 185 + further procurement of iterations after that. Just between the two manned 6th gen fighters and whatever future iterations there are if any, there might well be enough to cover the high end fight. As for the low end fight ...

There is a graphic in one of the threads here which shows the plan.

That's not wrong, but it would still depend on how extensive the upgrades are and how much appetite the three branches have for said upgrades relative to their un-upgraded blk4 F35s. Adding better sensors is probably relatively manageable. Outer mold line stuff? I don't know about it enough to say either way. But a second engine? There's no way that's not going to cost more.

No concept is calling for a second engine, that is fantasy stuff.

Numbers wise, the original F-35 entered service to replace F-16s, F-15s, harriers and A10s across the board. What would an upgraded F-35 replace? The air force certainly isn't going to replace every single non-upgraded one 1 for 1 since an vanilla F-35 is more than enough to handle the low end fight. So unless the three branches want to swell their manned fleet by non-insignificant numbers, then I'm not sure an upgraded F-35 will be bought in the same numbers as the vanilla F-35 is being bought at.

F-35 was slated to replace F-16, AV-8, F-18 and A-10. F-15 was meant to be the F-22. Issue is the build rate to date hasn't been per plan and the USAF now plans to operate F-15E and F-16 past 2040. Hence in USAF service the F-35 is unlikely to get near the original 1700+ planned so a follow on would still have ageing 4th gen platforms it could replace besides early blk F-35.

I still hope it will happen. I think LM developing these upgrades is both good for LM and good for the force. LM gets to continue maturing its tech to compete in future F-47 re-competitions while the overall force gets something hopefully the size of an F-22 to be more effective against adversaries.

Even the current F-35 is an overall more useful aircraft to the USAF than the F-22. While it doesn't have the speed and perhaps WVR performance it has range and payload advantages as well as greater interoperability with allies which are key factors for a Pacific fight.

I just don't think it's going to be an interim solution to anything nor should it be considered as such. At no point in time should this be considered a replacement of either 6th gen fighters or any other priorities. But I'm just preaching to the choir here. When LM finalizes it's envisioned upgrade and pitches it to congress, moron congressmen and vermin media clowns are going to start asking "why can't we just buy more F-35 pro/plus and cancel the F-47 / F/A-XX instead?"

Ha yes the same comments that have plagued the F-35 it's entire existence..

 

[Reddington777]

There is a graphic in one of the threads here which shows the plan.

Yeah. Looked hard for that and didnt find it in the F47 thread either. Until I see it and I can check where that came from, Im not inclined to believe it came from credible sources.

Of course you arent obligated to prove anything to me, but thats where im going to leave this conversation.

The rest I have nothing further to add.

Edit: yep I re-read and searched the F47 thread and didnt find anything about 75/ tranche

 

[Ozair]

Yeah. Looked hard for that and didnt find it in the F47 thread either. Until I see it and I can check where that came from, Im not inclined to believe it came from credible sources.

Of course you arent obligated to prove anything to me, but thats where im going to leave this conversation.

The rest I have nothing further to add.

Edit: yep I re-read and searched the F47 thread and didnt find anything about 75/ tranche

It is pre F-47 but I also cannot be bothered to find it...

 

[joshjosh]

Question about the F-35 IWBs if anyone knows: is there any margin of space for slightly larger AAMs while carrying the same loadout? The bays are sized for 4 AMRAAMs or 6 with sidekick, but how much bigger could those AAMs be while still fitting the same quantity internally? Assume the new AAM is not just fatter or grossly misshapen in order to fill more volume, but is larger in a way that is actually conducive to increased range. I'm wondering if JATM could have been larger had it been sized for F-35 IWBs only, rather than F-22 IWBs as well.

 

[Arjen]

https://aviationweek.com/defense/ai...-tariffs-prompt-swiss-calls-abandon-f-35-deal

Swiss lawmakers are urging the country’s government to reexamine the purchase of Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters after U.S. President Donald Trump slapped punitive 39% trade tariffs on the country.
[...]
Switzerland is now paying the highest tariff rate of any European country. While the Swiss government claims that the impact of the tariffs will not be drastic, the Swiss media says the U.S. is the largest importer of Swiss goods and tariffs could have a significant impact on the country’s manufacturing base.

Some lawmakers want the government to change course not only on the F-35 buy, but also the acquisition of the Raytheon Patriot air defense systems the country is purchasing in a bid to hit back at the Trump tariffs.

"The procurement of the F-35 has inevitably returned to the political arena and must be reexamined," Swiss National Councilor Hans-Peter Portmann, a representative of the Zurich Canton, told a Swiss daily newspaper. He said it is “unacceptable” that the U.S. demands higher prices for the aircraft and punishes Switzerland with exorbitant tariffs.

More at the link.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Question about the F-35 IWBs if anyone knows: is there any margin of space for slightly larger AAMs while carrying the same loadout? The bays are sized for 4 AMRAAMs or 6 with sidekick, but how much bigger could those AAMs be while still fitting the same quantity internally? Assume the new AAM is not just fatter or grossly misshapen in order to fill more volume, but is larger in a way that is actually conducive to increased range. I'm wondering if JATM could have been larger had it been sized for F-35 IWBs only, rather than F-22 IWBs as well.

I wonder if you could incorporate some sort of folding fin design if you could go to an 8" diameter missile body versus the 7" of the current AMRAAM.

 

[NMaude]

https://aviationweek.com/defense/ai...-tariffs-prompt-swiss-calls-abandon-f-35-deal
More at the link.

Perhaps the Swiss should make it very public (So as to attract Trump's attention) that Trump's tariffs idiocy is jeopardising a possible F-35 sale to the Swiss airforce which would cost LM money, that might him change his mind (Such as it is).

 

[Ozair]

Perhaps the Swiss should make it very public (So as to attract Trump's attention) that Trump's tariffs idiocy is jeopardising a possible F-35 sale to the Swiss airforce which would cost LM money, that might him change his mind (Such as it is).

Probably not, he doesn't like single engine aircraft...

 

[Scott Kenny]

I wonder if you could incorporate some sort of folding fin design if you could go to an 8" diameter missile body versus the 7" of the current AMRAAM.

Or just see if you can clip another 1/2" off the fin tips.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Or just see if you can clip another 1/2" off the fin tips.

What is the size difference between the AIM-120 and the AIM-260?

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Ozair]

What is the size difference between the AIM-120 and the AIM-260?

I don't think we know exact dimensions for the AIM-260 other than AMRAAM sized.

 

[Training_Dummy]

What is the size difference between the AIM-120 and the AIM-260?

Enjoy the Day! Mark

If -120 fits, JATM fits

 

[B2Blain]

Question about the F-35 IWBs if anyone knows: is there any margin of space for slightly larger AAMs while carrying the same loadout? The bays are sized for 4 AMRAAMs or 6 with sidekick, but how much bigger could those AAMs be while still fitting the same quantity internally? Assume the new AAM is not just fatter or grossly misshapen in order to fill more volume, but is larger in a way that is actually conducive to increased range. I'm wondering if JATM could have been larger had it been sized for F-35 IWBs only, rather than F-22 IWBs as well.

They are really tight. I am surprised they can get third AMRAAM per bay.

 

[Scott Kenny]

What is the size difference between the AIM-120 and the AIM-260?

I don't know that it's ever been said in open sources.

Pictures suggest smaller fins on the 260 than on 120, but same diameter.

But since the current yardstick for missile size is the clipped-fin AIM-120C, [edit] I feel confident saying that an 8" diameter missile could fit into the same volume as an AMRAAM with 1/2" shorter fins.

 

[galgot]

https://aviationweek.com/defense/ai...-tariffs-prompt-swiss-calls-abandon-f-35-deal
More at the link.

But wait, it gets even better :
https://www.watson.ch/international...nde-fordern-kauf-von-noch-mehr-f-35-kampfjets

To please Trump: Swiss military associations call for purchase of even more F-35 fighter jets

The Federal Council apparently wants to accommodate the US in the customs dispute by purchasing additional military equipment. Military companies think this is a good plan. From their point of view, Switzerland should accommodate the US, particularly with regard to the F-35 fighter jet.

How should Switzerland respond to the US tariff hammer? For the left, one thing is certain: the Federal Council must counterattack – and cancel the purchase of US-made F-35 fighter jets. But even among the bourgeoisie, there are voices loudly calling for Switzerland to retaliate with its own arms policy.

Colonel Stefan Holenstein, President of the Association of Military Societies of Switzerland (VMG), questions the two Federal Council candidates at the VMG hearing on the sidelines of the spring session...
Stefan Holenstein, President of the Association of Military Societies of Switzerland.

As a last resort, “we cannot rule out backing down and opting for the Rafale produced in France instead,” said Andrea Gmür, Lucerne Center Councilor and President of the Council of States Security Policy Committee, on Radio SRF.

These considerations are not well received in military circles. Stefan Holenstein is convinced that countermeasures in terms of armament policy are “not only untenable and misplaced, but also completely ineffective against the US.” The militia officer chairs the Association of Military Societies of Switzerland (VMG), which includes associations of officers and non-commissioned officers, for example.

Holenstein not only calls for the F-35 purchase to be upheld, but also demands an increase in the fleet. Instead of 36, Switzerland should procure 48 fighter jets – a third more than planned. This is to persuade US President Donald Trump to lower the customs duty.

Switzerland should also back down in the dispute over the fixed price of the jet. At the end of June, Defense Minister Martin Pfister announced that the procurement could cost up to 7.3 billion Swiss francs instead of 6 billion. The Americans called the fixed price agreed upon from Switzerland's perspective a “misunderstanding.”

Officer Holenstein sees the customs crisis as an opportunity. The association has long been calling for more fighter jets and a significantly higher army budget. With 12 additional jets, the air force's endurance could be significantly extended, he argues. A win-win situation for Switzerland and the US – but at a very high price. ( !!)

Holenstein does not see it as a problem that Switzerland would be sending the wrong signal by backing down in the fixed-price dispute. Much more important, he says, is that Switzerland would be showing its European partners that it is serious about the long-overdue rearmament and is making its contribution to the global security architecture.

“We cannot simply say goodbye to America, either economically or politically,” says Holenstein. The Federal Council also considers abandoning the F-35 out of the question. It is apparently even considering further arms purchases from the US in order to appease them. “Arms purchases are important for relations with the US,” said Defense Minister Pfister at the weekend on the sidelines of the Swiss National Shooting Festival. Holenstein is also particularly in favor of purchasing US ammunition.

Military organizations are critical of the fact that the Federal Council is only now developing a Plan B—and that President Keller-Sutter did not have it ready during her phone call with Trump. “There's no point in arguing now,” says Holenstein. “Instead, we must show goodwill and position ourselves as a strong trading partner.”( ) (aargauerzeitung.ch)

Apart from stating the obvious, such as the fact that having more aircraft is better than having fewer (no shit...), this is how to demonstrate that this type of contract no longer has anything to do with the qualities or defects of a particular fighter jet, and that in this case it is more like ***** sugar coated in political and economic jargon, with the victim reassuring itself as best it can that paying the racketeer even more will spare her pride.
It reminds me of people who fall for online scams and refuse to admit it because that would force them to face up to their own stupidity.

 

[FighterJock]

So it looks like the Swiss cannot make up their minds about what to do with the F-35 galgot, this whole thing about how to retaliate after the US puts trade tariffs on just gets crazier and crazier.

 

[Forest Green]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1955630525709697126

 

[Arjen]

Portugal and Spain are having second thoughts about buying F-35s:
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/13/trump-tariffs-allies-f-35-00508201

Spain, in the wake of a row with Washington over NATO’s new 5 percent defense spending goal, ditched its multibillion-dollar purchase of the stealthy F-35 fighter jet.
[...]
Spain’s decision not to pursue the F-35 could steer billions toward the Eurofighter Typhoon — made by the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and Spain — and the Franco-German Future Combat Air System, a next-generation stealth fighter and drone system slated for the 2040s. Spanish officials cited the need for industrial sovereignty, stronger European supply chains and more reliable partners.

Such moves are also politically useful from some European countries. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s response appeals to the government’s left-leaning base, according to a senior EU official granted anonymity to discuss sensitive political dynamics.

“For Sánchez, it’s just very convenient to play Trump’s victim,” the person said.

The Swiss deal to buy 36 F-35 jets squeaked through a 2021 referendum with just over 50 percent support, and new tariffs reignited the political fight. Swiss lawmakers pushed to cancel the purchase when U.S. tariffs hit 39 percent, but the government on Wednesday reaffirmed its intent to buy the jets and ordered a review. A decision is due in November. Swiss officials said they can’t pin down a final price because the U.S. has not agreed to one, leaving the contract open to swings in inflation, higher raw material costs and customs duties — which could add as much as $1.6 billion.

Other prospective buyers, such as Portugal, have delayed decisions amid doubts over U.S. reliability.

More at the link.

 

[TomcatViP]

For all those that have lost their piece of bread down the cheese fondue, here is a good read on the Swiss F-35 contract controversy, with contract lawyers analysis.

Le cabinet A&P apporte plus de précisions. En plus du contrat proprement dit, la Suisse a signé une «Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA)», dans laquelle il était question d’un prix fixe. Mais dès la première page du contrat, il est indiqué que ce prix n’est qu’une estimation. De plus, selon le cabinet A&P, dans la section 4.4.1, la Confédération a reconnu que «le gouvernement suisse paiera au gouvernement américain le coût total des objets du contrat, même si ces coûts dépassent les montants estimés dans la LOA».
—--------////******'////------_________

A&P provides further details. In addition to the contract itself, Switzerland signed a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA), which stipulated a fixed price. However, the first page of the contract states that this price is only an estimate. Furthermore, according to A&P, in section 4.4.1, the Confederation acknowledged that "the Swiss government will pay the U.S. government the full cost of the contract items, even if these costs exceed the amounts estimated in the LOA."

https://www.24heures.ch/achat-des-f-35-le-prix-fixe-promis-na-jamais-ete-garanti-792976470721

 

[BonPlan2]

View attachment 780684

lacks one information : the number of birds lost.....

 

[BonPlan2]

A fighter between the size of an F-35A and F-22" is the F-35C.

only a wings change.
The frame size is the same. so... no.

 

[GTX]

lacks one information : the number of birds lost.....

Why would you publish that?

 

[Scott Kenny]

only a wings change.
The frame size is the same. so... no.

Charlie models carry 1500lbs more fuel and are 5500lbs heavier empty than an Alpha, +7000lbs loaded weight.

The MTOW difference between an F-35A and an F-22 is 66k versus 83k. Guess what the middle of 66 and 83 is? 74.5. 66+1.5+5.5=73

 

[Forest Green]

Landing gear usually has to be beefier for CATOBAR planes.

 

[JetBrain]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1958271365225603228

View: https://x.com/ConflictTR/status/1958271365225603228

 

[timmymagic]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1958271365225603228

View: https://x.com/ConflictTR/status/1958271365225603228

It's always a bit desperate when things like that are pushed out...its rare to say the least. Why is it desperate? Because you don't know the circumstances of the training exercise, what scenarios they were practicing. The French and the Indian's seem to be the worst for breaking the Omerta around publishing....

 

[Ozair]

It's always a bit desperate when things like that are pushed out...its rare to say the least. Why is it desperate? Because you don't know the circumstances of the training exercise, what scenarios they were practicing. The French and the Indian's seem to be the worst for breaking the Omerta around publishing....

Its more desperate to post it in the F-35 thread. Why not put it in the Rafale thread or also post it in the Super Hornet and Finnish Hornet threads because those airframes were also shown...

 

[GTX]

Posting here only since it is already in this thread. A practical analysis:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs35iE_OGFo

 

[JetBrain]

Its more desperate to post it in the F-35 thread. Why not put it in the Rafale thread or also post it in the Super Hornet and Finnish Hornet threads because those airframes were also shown...

I have provided the link. Nobody stops you from doing that.

 

[JetBrain]

It's always a bit desperate when things like that are pushed out...its rare to say the least. Why is it desperate? Because you don't know the circumstances of the training exercise, what scenarios they were practicing. The French and the Indian's seem to be the worst for breaking the Omerta around publishing....

I just posted the news about the F-35 without any comments. So why are you so desperate to defend it?

 

[JetBrain]

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-500th-f-35-now-on-duty/

At 500 airframes, the F-35A continues to be the second most common type in the Air Force fleet, behind the F-16.

If the service returns to buying its typical rate of about 48 F-35s per year in fiscal 2027—and F-16 retirements continue at their current rate—the F-35A will become the most numerous fighter in the fleet by 2030.