My concern is that we are paying a colossal price for technology that will probably be countered by simpler, cheaper technology in the near term. There is no long term for a plane that does not perform as well as an older version fighter if the stealth is compromised. Note that the F-117 was withdrawn from service completely. This is because newer, networked radars could easily find it and the plane which flew only subsonic was a sitting deck for any World War Two fighter. The B-2 is being superseded by a newer version that must fly close to the ground. Why, you might ask, should a stealth aircraft fly close to the ground? Because it stealth is already greatly reduced by existing networked radars and will likely be useless long before the end of the plane-s combat life. So, we are over-paying for something that will not be of use for very long. Then, having spent the money, what will we be able to put into the air to defend against fleets of obsolete but still deadly enemy planes?
It's amazing how well it holds its own in air to air considering its primarily a ground attack aircraft.
Every fighter has its strengths and weaknesses - the F35 weaknesses have been overplayed and very few have commented on its strengths, for good reason. The stability of the F35 and its remarkable precise and controllable handling well into high angle of attack regime is a huge plus.
The F35 is a superior weapons platform. What it may or may not lack in raw capabilities at the edge, it compensates for in user friendliness, usability and effectiveness in practical situations.
Disruptive advances in air defense systems are a major concern and very realistic threat. F35 does have a vision of what that future might look like in a high threat, highly networked airspace occupied by piloted and semi autonomous drones and carrying advanced weapons and countermeasures to deal with the threats
Its a pretty darn good vision.
Future weapons and fuel load outs for an individual F 35 may not be limited to what can be loaded onto the airframe and may not even originate from the same location. If you think about it, the concept provides some novel and intriguing ways to counter both air to air and ground to air threats
Any new or updated fighter or strike fighter airframe will incorporate much of the F 35 avionics functionality and thats where the money goes so costs will be similar for alternatives if we kill F 35
At its heart, F35 is a first day ground attack aircraft intended to decapitate enemy air defense and C3 systems and eliminate high threat weapons systems before they can be used against our troops - or our civilian population for that matter.
On day 2 forwards its whatever it needs to be including a pretty nice mini AWACs for other earlier generation aircraft
Its like 2or3 F117s on steroids combined with 95% of an F-16 with some features lifted out a number of science fiction movies and thats not a bad place to be.
Its primary limitation will always be internal fuel capacity. Short legs in full on stealth mode will dog the plane for its entire operational life but this can be dealt with. FWIW, this same problem limits most of the competing aircraft as well
Why the heck are we bothering with manned craft at all?
Swarms of microdrones are the future.
The F117 in question “won the lottery”...NATO and the mission ops planners set the F117 up.
The tactics learned and taught at TTR and subsequently used in DS were ignored, no, they were dismissed and the rest is history...S/S 0806 was a gift from the Clintons to our enemies.
The F117 was incorporating newer technologies to offset said advances in radar and increase survivability before it was placed into flyable storage. In fact, several aircraft are maintaining flight operations to this day.
“Note that the F-117 was withdrawn from service completely”
Not a fair comparison. The 117 was slow, subsonic only. Not very maneuverable at all, and only could carry two bombs. nothing else. No external hard points, no gun, no nothing. It was slightly more capable than a technology demonstrator. With stealth compromised it had almost zero utility. That is not true for the F-35. Yes, losing stealth might reduce it down to parity with non-stealth fights, but it hardly makes it useless.