The 10 Reasons the F-35 Lightning Fighter Will Dominate 21st Century Skies

The Blaze ^ | 22 Dec 2011 | Buck Sexton

[mandaladon]

The F-35 is set to become the dominant fighter plane of the U.S. and its allies in the 21st century.

A conglomerate of aerospace industry leaders (Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems and Pratt & Whitney) have combined manufacturing, engineering and technological capabilities to develop the F-35 Lightning.

While the Joint Strike Fighter program has been incredibly expensive, here is a look at the final product– and 10 reasons why it is a true fifth generation multi-role air superiority fighter.

1) Mission Flexibility

The Basic F-35 design is multi-role, but in addition, there are three variants that add mission specific capabilities. The three models are CTOL: conventional takeoff and landing, STOVL: short takeoff vertical landing, CATOBAR: catapult Assisted Take Off Barrier Arrested Recover (aircraft carrier launched).

As Lockheed Martin writes, “attack any target, any time, with the freedom to operate anywhere on Day One of a conflict. By integrating different capabilities, the fighter brings a “quantum leap in lethality and survivability.” 2) Travel In Packs

The Air Force will buy 1,763 conventional models and the Navy will take 680 short takeoff and carrier models, according to Business Insider. So the U.S. can put a lot of these hyper-advanced planes in the sky at one time. 3) Silent But Deadly

With embedded antennas, aligned edges, internal weapons and fuel, and special coatings and materials, the F-35 uses stealth to pick and choose engagements without getting pinged by enemy defense systems. 4) All Our Friends Want Them

Britain, Canada, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Turkey, Italy, and Austria will contribute $4.8 billion apiece to development and intend to purchase 700 aircraft. Other interested countries include Singapore, South Korea, Finland, Spain, Greece, and Belgium, and Israel.

[mandaladon]

[em2vn]

Our version or the one Obama will make sure the Chinese have?

[Sequoyah101]

I see Buck has an ample supply of Wacky Backy to write this claptrap.

Buck has a new Ferrari in his driveway. I think it is painted Lockheed.

Buck needs to stick to political science and go back to Amherst.

“Before joining the Blaze, Buck served in the U.S. Intelligence Community for six years, specializing in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency. He has field experience in the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa.

Buck has a B.A. in Political Science from Amherst College. He is a native of New York City, where he currently resides”

This airplane is a POS. The pilot load is too high for an attack airplane, it doesn’t go far enough on a tank of fuel and it doesn’t carry enough stuff to be material.

[Eye of Unk]

Its a 21st century Brewster Buffalo.

[RightOnline]

Turkey? Are you kidding me? They’re headlong towards being a completely Islamic “republic”. Fuhgedaboutit.

[wally_bert]

I had forgotten about that failure that I read about in books about the Battle Of Midway as a kid.

[lowflyn]

Jack of all trades - Master of none.
You can’t do everything to a superior level with one tool.

[bjorn14]

Yeah...maybe if anybody can afford it.

[Vroomfondel]

SONOBUOY PING!

Click on pic for past Navair pings.

Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.

[Nowhere Man]

The F-35 screams “junk” to me. It is a waste of money, I’d take an F-15, F-16 or even an F-4 over an F-35 anyday.

[tophat9000]

Really?...ask the Finns

[Eye of Unk]

I think the upgraded F-18 Super Hornets have a future, or not?
The F-15 is a very good platform, last I heard the main wing spar situation has it boggled down quite a bit though.

[pallis]

I’m looking forward to the day we make more F-22s.

[Eye of Unk]

The F-35 comes off to me like one of those 100 blade Swiss Army knives.

[PGalt]

Thanks for posting. Looks good. Interesting comments here and at theblaze.

[oldplayer]

The problem with the F-35, like many things, ends up being Congress. The military knows what they need, but everything has to be tweeked to satisfy Congressmen around the country. Each district it seems, has to build a part or sub-assembly for the plane if it is to get Congressional approval.

Then the politics really starts, over $$$$. You end up with something as unwieldy and costly as the Space Shuttles proved to be, and for the same reasons.

Nonetheless, this craft will exceed the expectations of the naysayers, prove to be useful and will be modified in service to become better. It's just a shame the engineers, pilots and brass couldn't have had a totally clean sheet of paper to work with. And too bad the Navy/Marines couldn't have had a plane designed from the outset for their needs and the Air Force one for their needs.

Oldplayer

[Nowhere Man]

I think the upgraded F-18 Super Hornets have a future, or not?
The F-15 is a very good platform, last I heard the main wing spar situation has it boggled down quite a bit though.

I think the Super Hornet is what the F-18 should've been. The F-15 is a tried and true airframe, I'd like to add in some "Silent Eagles." I think trying to make a fighter be able to do everything is a tall order to the point to where it will not be good for anything. I think the F-15, F-16 and F-18 mix is a good enough, although if I had my druthers, I'd add in some F-20's. I'd rather stick with the known and proven then design from the bottom up and hope it works. If you think about it, jet fighter performance has really plateaued from about 1960 to now although you still have some improvements in stealth, but I think stealth is highly overrated. The true improvements from 50 years ago to today are in computers and avionics, but deep down it comes down to the pilot in the cockpit.

[Vince Ferrer]

Turkey? Are you kidding me? They’re headlong towards being a completely Islamic “republic”. Fuhgedaboutit.

Not only are they buyers, they are also manufacturing parts for it.

[Vince Ferrer]

Reason 11: With the way the world economy is heading, anyone who can afford two or three of these will be a superpower.

[The Theophilus]

If you think about it, jet fighter performance has really plateaued from about 1960 to now

To get past that plateau they will need to remove the carbon-based element from the cockpit, the human body can only handle so many Gs and way too much of the plane is dedicated to the pilot. Drones are the future - Just ask Iran.

[Tainan]

Agree on the F-22a Raptor. More versatile a/c. Damn shame it fell to politics:

[norton]

"Really?...ask the Finns"

Sorry, but that comment says volumes about the Finns and nothing about the Buffalo, or Fokkers, or anything else they had to fly against either Germans or Russians.

[tanknetter]

Agree on the F-22a Raptor. More versatile a/c.

The Raptor OWNS the skies. But the F-35 is much more versatile.

[Tainan]

Great debate topic indeed:
high altitude operation vs low altitude maneuverability
armament load vs stealth package(which yes - I know they both have)
single pilot vs crew of 2

IMO it all comes down to contract politics. For 85% of the requirements I, personally, think the F-22a Raptor is the better a/c.

I also prefer the .45acp and like the Corvette. But its an endless debate where each side has some very good supporting points.
Merry Christmas

[USNBandit]

Better for 85% of the requirements? What requirements are those?

The primary requirement for the F-35 was the ability to carry two by 2,000 lb. J-weapons, in a stealth (internal carriage) configuration. F-22 doesn't have the magazine to do that.

[Oztrich Boy]

Really?...ask the Finns

Yeah, but the Finns bought the basic model, without power windows, power steering, air-con, and soft Cor-r-r-r-r-r-in-the-on leather seats.

[tanknetter]

Really?...ask the Finns

It should be noted that a Finnish Buffalo (s/n BW364 or BW393 - sources differ) is considered to be the high-kill airframe of all time, with 42½ kills credited to pilots flying it. It should also be noted that Finnish Sq. Lentolaivue 24 achieved 459 Soviet aircraft kills for 15 losses while flying Buffaloes. Overall Finnish Buffaloes achieved 477 kills for an average of almost 11 kills per Buffalo.

Now, while this all doesn't show the Buffalo as some kind of superplane, it does demonstrate that every aircraft has advantages and disadvantages, and what it can do in the hands of well-trained and motivated pilots schooled in how to exploit its good qualities.

The F-35 is not an interceptor or "pure" fighter (like the F-22). It's a multi-role platform designed to perform well over a wide range of missions and scenarios. In that, and with F-22s flying top-cover, it's going to be an absolute world-beater.

[Nowhere Man]

To get past that plateau they will need to remove the carbon-based element from the cockpit, the human body can only handle so many Gs and way too much of the plane is dedicated to the pilot. Drones are the future - Just ask Iran.

I think you really never will take the pilot out of the plane. I don't think artificial intelligences or remote controlled planes will ever totally take over. I keep thinking of the old Kurt Vonnegut story he wrote in 1958 ("The Manned Missiles") where unmanned planes and missiles were so good, they countered each other and battles ended up in a draw. This forced the idea of putting pilots back into airplanes and even the idea of kamakaze missiles piloted by humans.

I'm not that concerned about Iran having our drone, it happens since it is a risk we take, basically it is a model plane on steroids. You can crack open any electronics magazine and/or book from the 1950s (or before) and get a bunch of amateur radio operators (or any electronics hobbyists) together and build one. My father remembers seeing the ones we had in the 1950's, one had a two cycle engine and a wooden propeller IIRC. Before I get anyone's dander up, I think the tack we need to take is to see if we have someone that purposely flew it in there to give them the drone or maybe somehow it take skyjacked by remote control or hacked into. Even so, if we use them, there is always a chance the bad guys can get a hold of them through various misfortunes, maybe there should be some sort of self destruct, I dunno. I lean towards the idea that it was given to them, given the inept leadership we have.

[DesScorp]

A $150+ million dollar bomber... that will be built in small numbers because of the high price tag... isn’t going to dominate anything but our budget.