Replies

Many think the F-35 is not a good aircraft. You have been lied to again. Image a fighter when you put the helmet on and can see 180 degrees without the obstruction of the aircraft. What is your advantage?

I would think that technology could be added to any airframe. I'm expecting something more than that from the F-35. It had better be bringing a quantitative edge that is unique to it.

It had better be bringing a quantitative edge that is unique to it.

Is surviving hundreds of SAMs quantitative enough?

The F-35 has three major advantages over previous fighters. It has low signature, which is pass-fail in a high-threat environment (those with normal signatures just die). And, as has been done repeatedly since 1945, the Russians (Soviets) are equipping proxy nations with very high-tech weaponry.

It also has "Sensor Fusion", and while that can be retrofitted, avionics are the single biggest cost in any modern fighter - much more so than the cost of the airframe. Sensor fusion is incredibly effective - perhaps more so even than reducing observables. However, if you did retrofit the avionics, an F-15/16/18 would cost essentially as much as an F-35. Both of those capabilities (low observables, sensor fusion) are derived from those developed for the F-22, which also has the breakthrough technology of supercruise.

And the F-35 has incredible range (for a fighter). An F-35 on internal fuel can fly farther than an F-15/16 with external tanks. Of great importance, that allows the F-35 to fly missions to places where the threat would preclude aerial refueling and your options would be a heavy bomber (which most nations don't have) or IRBMs (which look like a nuclear attack and could cause more problems than they solve).

The only non-retrofittable factor is the low signature, and perhaps it would have been better to give up on the range or use less-capable avionics to keep the cost down. There were lots of trade studies on that, and the militaries of many nations weighed in on it. They made their decision, and the only counter arguments are in favor of aircraft that don't exist (e.g. an F-15 with notional F-35 avionics, and 'pixie dust' to reduce the signature.)

“I would think that technology could be added to any airframe.”

Possibly, although integrating all-aspect imaging IR sensors isn’t trivial. It’s much harder with a stealthy platform.

“I’m expecting something more than that from the F-35. It had better be bringing a quantitative edge that is unique to it.”

It’s more than a quantitative edge, it’s a qualitative edge. The combination of reduced pilot workload, better situational awareness, advanced sensor fusion, advanced networking, world-leading radar, VR helmet, and stealth combined together far outmatch any other strike fighter today.

Stealth alone is a game changing capability - and the US and it’s allies are the only ones with operational stealth aircraft.