Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
It's not over until the fat lady sings.
If the result is the opposite, then we can draw parallels to the Swiss tender, where a premature "leak" said the Rafale won.
It was said that a Rafale can do the job of 2 to 3 M2000 depending the type of M2000 (more range, more load, better weapon system, higher survivability, higher servicability).
The U.S. Air Force Has Doubts About the F-35
And they aren't being too subtle about it. By Alex Hollings December 6, 2021Here's What You Need to Remember: While the result is a highly capable aircraft that can engage targets from over the horizon and even make older jets in its vicinity more deadly, the F-35 has been seen as a failure by critics who point to it as an example of government acquisition gone awry.
The U.S. Air Force is thinking about starting from scratch on a new, lightweight fighter that could ease the financial burden brought on by the troubled but capable F-35.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter may be the Air Force’s “quarterback in the sky,” but it’s also expensive to operate and, to date, still riddled with issues. Now, the Air Force is kicking off a month-long assessment of the branch’s tactical aviation requirements with the intention of potentially fielding an all-new fighter that boasts some of the capabilities found in the F-35 and F-22, but with a significantly smaller price tag. This new fighter would not replace the F-35, but would instead be used in place of 4th generation fighters like the F-16 Fighting Falcon.
Despite the polite language, this subtle statement is a bit of a bombshell. For years now, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin have touted the incredible capability of the F-35 despite its setbacks. The aircraft is expected to replace the F-16 as America’s workhorse fighter, with the U.S. planning to order more than two thousand of them before its production run is complete… But developmental problems and cost overruns have prompted a chorus of critics who say America’s fighter of the future is more about politics than capability.
The Air Force has already begun purchasing a slew of new old fighters in the 4th generation F-15EX, which will replace aging F-15 Eagles in the branch’s inventory. Some have suggested doing something similar with the F-16; purchasing updated iterations of the famed fighter to fill roles that don’t require a stealth aircraft. Brown, however, dismissed that idea–saying instead that a new fighter needs to be developed that leverages some 5th generation capabilities, but comes in a simpler, cheaper package.
What’s the problem with the F-35?
The F-22 Raptor was the world’s first operational stealth fighter, and introduced the world to what we’ve come to know as the 5th generation of fighter aircraft. Initially, the Air Force intended to purchase 750 Raptors to replace its fleet of F-15 Eagles as America’s premier air superiority fighters, but decades-long conflicts in the Middle East ultimately prompted the program’s cancelation. After delivering just 186 F-22s to the Air Force, Lockheed Martin would go on to cannibalize the supply chain and facilities once dedicated to the Raptor to their next high-profile stealth aircraft, the F-35.
However, 14 years after the F-35 first took to the sky, it has still not been authorized to move into full-rate production thanks to a litany of bugs and issues that have plagued the aircraft program since its inception. In fairness to Lockheed Martin, the defense contractor leading the F-35 program, the aircraft itself was truly without precedent when development started.
Like the F-22, stealth was an intrinsic part of the F-35’s design, but the aircraft surpasses its Raptor sibling in the realm of data fusion and pilot awareness. The F-35 can take data feeds from sensors all around it, including land-based assets, ships, or drones, and blend all of the information with its own suite of on-board sensors. The result is a single, streamlined view of the battlespace that pilots can access directly through their heads-up displays and augmented reality headsets. Pilots can even look directly through the bottom of their aircraft using the F-35’s pilot display and on-board cameras while flying at night. Some have gone so far as to describe the F-35’s “God’s eye view” as similar to using cheat codes on a video game when compared to its 4th generation predecessors.
While the result is a highly capable aircraft that can engage targets from over the horizon and even make older jets in its vicinity more deadly, the F-35 has been seen as a failure by critics who point to it as an example of government acquisition gone awry.
The Joint Strike Fighter program originally aimed to save money by fielding a single new fighter that could meet the needs of the Air Force, Navy, Marines, and foreign allies. Lockheed Martin’s X-35 ultimately won out over Boeing’s X-32 for the contract, and almost immediately thereafter, issues began to surface. The new F-35 would be split into three trims: The F-35A would be used with traditional runways for the Air Force and many foreign allies, the F-35B would offer short-take off and vertical landing capabilities for the Marine Corps, and the F-35C would come with broader, foldable wings, reinforced landing gear, and a tail hook for operating off of the Navy’s carriers.
However, after designing the F-35A, Lockheed Martin’s engineers realized that converting that design for the F-35B would end up making the fighter more than 3,000 pounds too heavy. Solving this quagmire delayed the program by 18 months and added a sizeable $6.2 billion to the program’s price tag. It would be the first of many problems to arise along the F-35’s path to combat operations.
Today, the F-35 is closer to what was originally envisioned than ever before, despite a notable list of issues that remain unaddressed. The aircraft truly is a force of military-aviation nature when in the fight according to pilots who participate in large-scale war games… but the high costs associated with the F-35 don’t stop at the factory.
Even with all of the F-35’s headaches addressed, one more looming problem remains–the price of operating the aircraft. Thanks to state-of-the-art stealth technology and radar-absorbent coating that needs frequent touch-ups, the F-35 costs around $44,000 per hour of flight. Compare that to the expected $20,000 per hour for the F-15EX, and you start to realize just how pricey the Joint Strike Fighter really is. With an operational lifespan of around 8,000 hours (compared to 20,000 in the F-15EX) and the figures climb ever higher–as it will take more aircraft to fly the same number of hours when using an F-35 instead of an advanced 4th-gen jet like the Eagle.
Put simply, the F-35 may be incredibly capable… but it’s also incredibly pricey. For many of the combat operations America conducts, the F-35’s advanced capabilities really aren’t all that necessary. As General Brown said, it’s like driving your Ferrari to work every day. You can do it… but it doesn’t make a ton of sense.
Could a new fighter solve these problems?
The billion-dollar question here is really whether or not developing another new fighter could result in an overall reduction in cost without creating a reduction in capability. It seems feasible that firms like Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, who are both currently responsible for stealth aircraft in America’s stable, are better suited now for the challenge of developing an economical stealth fighter than at any time in the past. The F-22 Raptor began production in 1996 and the F-35 started ten years later in 2006. With more than a quarter-century of trial and error under their belts, building a new fighter wouldn’t be as uphill a climb as the previous efforts were.
The acquisition process could also be significantly improved. Many of the most prominent issues the F-35 faces come as a result of the Pentagon’s decision to begin procuring F-35s before testing was complete. That led to many aircraft being delivered that are not at all combat-ready, forcing the force to choose between allocating funds for new F-35s, or for fixing their old ones.
It seems all but certain that new fighter acquisition would not seek to mash the needs of multiple forces into a single fuselage, and further, that the firm developing and building the aircraft would be more accountable for how they spend. Boeing has already begun courting Pentagon contracts with the F-35’s debacle in mind, often offering fixed-rate contracts that would see the firm owning extra unforeseen costs, rather than the taxpayer.
And to be clear, even Lockheed Martin has advertised that they could build a better jet for less. In 2018, they proposed a new aircraft to the Japanese Self Defense Force that would couple the strengths of both the F-22 and F-35 for a smaller price tag than either.
It seems clear that the aviation industry could build a cheaper, if slightly less capable, stealth fighter. If that is indeed the case, General Brown may just be onto something.
What would a new stealth fighter mean for the Air Force?
Brown’s suggestion of a 5th generation “minus” fighter speaks to the common vernacular surrounding fighter jet generations. Aircraft like the F-15EX are sometimes called 4th-gen+ or ++ fighters because they offer some capability that’s more common among the 5th generation of fighters, so it stands to reason that a stealth fighter with a bit more 4th generation capability might be a 5th-gen– (or minus).
It seems likely that the new fighter would leverage a stealth design, but likely wouldn’t be quite as stealthy as the F-35 or F-22, both of which require near-constant maintenance of their radar-absorbent coating to stay as sneaky as possible. A new jet would likely be intended to go longer between coatings, while still offering a big increase in stealth over decidedly non-stealth jets like the F-16. As such, the new fighter would need to carry ordnance internally like the F-35 and F-22 while minimizing its radar cross-section, but would likely operate often with external pylons for additional munitions in uncontested airspace.
The new light weight fighter would fill multiple roles, from air-to-ground operations to air superiority ones–just like the F-16. In fact, despite the F-16’s reputation as a highly capable ground attack aircraft, it was invented specifically as a lightweight fighter tasked with dueling enemy jets–and a new lightweight fighter may be very much the same.
This new fighter would not replace the F-35, but would rather absorb many roles in less contested airspace that the F-35 may be able to handle, but are better suited for cheaper aircraft. That could mean minimizing the amount of hours, and in turn, upkeep, each F-35 logs per year. It would also increase the Air Force’s capability set, offering another strike option between older platforms like the F-15 and F-16 and high-dollar jets like the F-35 and F-22.
The F-35 itself, however, could find itself in a similar predicament to the F-22. America has just 186 Raptors, and as each one ages out of service, there won’t be new F-22s to replace them. If Lockheed Martin similarly stopped F-35 production, America may be left with the just 250 or so jets they’ve taken delivery on thus far. Of course, such a pivot would likely take months or even years to play out, so the total numbers would probably be higher.
Of course, that too seems unlikely thanks to the political insulation the F-35 program has garnered by spreading production out across most of America’s 50 states. Lawmakers voting for a reduction in F-35 orders would effectively be voting for job losses among their constituents, prompting some to call the F-35 program “too big to fail.” Whether we like it or not, all our eggs may be in the F-35’s basket.
The Air Force has reportedly already built and tested a concept for a “6th generation” fighter, so it seems possible that a less-advanced prototype could manifest rather quickly. For now though, only time will tell.
Finland Is Reported to Pick F-35 Jets in $11 Billion Tender
Finland is set to pick Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 fighter jets as part of a 10 billion-euro ($11.3 billion) tender to replace soon-outdated war planes that are key to defending the Russian border, according to a report in local media.
www.bloomberg.com
Seems to be a good definition of Rafale
The Rafale is also very expensive. By default, all TE jets should be excluded.
To make this new jet work, what they need is literally an LCA/Gripen class jet powered by a 100-110KN engine. Anything bigger than that over smaller numbers would still make it expensive.
Ah, the nation French delusion. It's time for you guys to become FCAS fanboys. Otherwise it will fade away. I know you guys think defence decisions are made, based on what is written on a forumSeems to be a good definition of Rafale
Last edited:
Is it me or somebody else as well? Missiles on external pylons don't look appealing on F35s. They seem liked two different objects welded together on odd angles. Without external ordnance it does look quite good. To make things clear from get go, this observation is limited to only visual asthetics only, not talking on technical aspects.
FCAS is doomed to either be crap or get canceled before too long. The Germans insist on repeating all the mistakes that made the Eurofighter a failure.
I don't often compliment the British, but I do have this to say for them: after the experience of the Tornado and the Typhoon, they learned not to repeat their past mistake, and so the Tempest program is free from the deleterious "participation" of the Germans.
I don't often compliment the British, but I do have this to say for them: after the experience of the Tornado and the Typhoon, they learned not to repeat their past mistake, and so the Tempest program is free from the deleterious "participation" of the Germans.
For some reason Franco German encounters end acrimoniously. It's been true from the time of Napoleon till date. I wonder how are they managing their differences in the EU. Equally Germany seems to have a better opinion of UK than it does of France. That's precisely why Hitler made overtures to Churchmouse & Rudolf Hess undertook an ill advised unilateral mission to the UK.
OTOH all Anglophone nations seem to despise France. Australia is the latest example of such tough love. Out here too members from Canada UK US & Australia seem to have taken a shine to the French. I wonder how much of it has to do with the French selling eau de toilette as parfum.
The Irish too owe the Jerries a lot, isn't it Paddy? @BMD
OTOH all Anglophone nations seem to despise France. Australia is the latest example of such tough love. Out here too members from Canada UK US & Australia seem to have taken a shine to the French. I wonder how much of it has to do with the French selling eau de toilette as parfum.
The Irish too owe the Jerries a lot, isn't it Paddy? @BMD
Don't forget blogs.Ah, the nation French delusion. It's time for you guys to become FCAS fanboys. Otherwise it will fade away. I know you guys think defence decisions are made, based on what is written on a forum
Too many cooks spoil the broth in general really.
Lesson from the EAU (US dixit) : to buy correctly F-35 first buy rafale ...
breakingdefense.com
The UAE is buying the French Rafale. What does it mean for the F-35? - Breaking Defense
Considering that French-UAE negotiations have dragged on for a decade, it is difficult to see the sudden agreement for so many aircraft at such a pivotal moment as coincidental.
breakingdefense.com
Lesson from the EAU (US dixit) : to buy correctly F-35 first buy rafale ...
The UAE is buying the French Rafale. What does it mean for the F-35? - Breaking Defense
Considering that French-UAE negotiations have dragged on for a decade, it is difficult to see the sudden agreement for so many aircraft at such a pivotal moment as coincidental.
The UAE is buying the French Rafale. What does it mean for the F-35?
Considering that French-UAE negotiations have dragged on for a decade, it is difficult to see the sudden agreement for so many aircraft at such a pivotal moment as coincidental.
BEIRUT: When the UAE surprisingly announced a $19 billion deal between Abu Dhabi and Paris for the acquisition of 80 Rafale fighters last week, it caught the military world by surprise. Now the question experts are hashing out is what impact, if any, the Rafale agreement will have on the UAE’s unofficially-frozen efforts to procure the American F-35.
Regardless of which side of the argument one comes down on, it is clear that the agreement with France is at least somewhat a message to Washington that the Emirates have options should the Biden administration continue to block movement on the F-35 procurement.
“This is a clear sign that the UAE will not cancel its 5G contract with the Chinese and expect the US to continue holding the F-35 deal for now,” a knowledgeable UAE military source told Breaking Defense.
The UAE will be the first to operate the F-4 version of the Rafale outside France. With improved capabilities including upgraded radar sensors and front sector optronics and helmet-mounted display, the aircraft will be fitted with new weapons like the Mica NG air-to-air missile and 1,000-kg AASM Air-to-Ground Modular Weapon.
“After the Mirage 5 and Mirage 2000, this Rafale contract consolidates the strategic relationship that binds our two countries and the satisfaction of the Emirates Air Force, a long-standing and demanding partner of our company,” Eric Trappier, Chairman and CEO of Dassault Aviation said in a statement.
The deal did not emerge entirely from thin air, as the two sides have been negotiating on and off since the late nineties. The deal would have taken place if the UAE had not had two conditions: the first is to have a version of the Rafale that can carry American-made weapons, not only French or European, and the second to make the Emirati model of the Rafale a platform for continuous development. Dassault did not agree on both terms so the Emiratis withdrew from the negotiations in 2011.
The UAE Air Force then turned its attention to other promising rival aircraft such as the F-15E, Typhoon and Super Hornet, but also began to focus its attention on the F-35 fighter — seen as a long shot for years, but finally ok’d by the Trump administration. Sources say the Biden administration has been holding up movement on the F-35 agreement in order to pressure the UAE to abandon ties with China’s Huawei corporation.
“Today, the UAE got what it initially asked for,” said Kuwaiti defense expert Ali Al Hashim, “plus a very warm welcome from Paris.”
There was a belief the UAE would threaten to sign on to Russia’s Su-75 Checkmate in order to push Washington to move forward on the F-35 deal. Instead, they reached into the past and pulled the Rafale agreement out of a hat.
“Considering that French-UAE negotiations have dragged on for a decade, it is difficult to see the sudden agreement for so many aircraft at such a pivotal moment as coincidental,” said Brandon C. Patrick, a Mid-East defense analyst. “The UAE may be hoping to signal its impatience or its motivation to finalize the deal.”
That doesn’t mean the Rafale deal is a pure political play, however. There are real reasons for the UAE to want to invest in both.
“Combined with the 50 F-35’s currently on order with Lockheed Martin, these 80 Rafale amount to a total replacement of the more than 130 F-16’s and Mirage 2000’s that comprise the current Emirati fighter fleet,” Patrick said.
As it stands, most the UAE’s 138 mission-ready fighters are US-made, with 80 F-16E/F’s and some 53 French-made Mirage 2000-5D/E. So, “UAE acquisition efforts over the last two years [flipped] those numbers, with French-made tails now comprising the majority of the UAE fighter fleet,” Patrick noted.
Even though Washington and Abu Dhabi enjoy broadly good relations under the Biden administration, the state’s leaders are concerned with the US withdrawal from the region.
“This perception was further reinforced by US withdrawal from Afghanistan,” said Gawdat Bahgat, Professor of national security at the National Defense University’s Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies. “That’s why the UAE senior leaders have thought to mend fences with regional rivals including Turkey and Iran and deepen relations with Israel.”
While it may send a message to Washington that the UAE is not sole-source beholden, Bahgat is skeptical that the Rafale agreement will preclude the F-35 moving forward. “The UAE still maintains close military and strategic ties with the US, but does not put all its eggs in one basket,” he said. “So, the Rafale jets deal is part of this strategy.”
Certainly, the US has more reservations over cooperation with Beijing than with Paris. “An important challenge that the UAE faces is the compatibility of these weapon systems from different countries,” he added.
Ultimately, the US and UAE are strong partners with mutual interest in continuing their defense relationship, “and the F-35 is integral to that goal,” added Patrick.
But now that the UAE is getting the latest version of the Rafale, providing the Air Force with some 5th generation capabilities, “it might push the Americans back to renegotiate the F-35 deal with more ease conditions,” believes Al Hashim.
What remains to be seen however is “whether this trend continues in other areas of defense procurement, and what that portends for the US-UAE defense relationship, if anything,” Patrick said. “US weapons technology has long been a symbol of status and capability in the Gulf region.”
This new move by the UAE may signal a shift in that perception, “an improvement in some Gulf states’ perception of European fighter technology, or both. In either case, US policymakers and Lockheed executives are certain to take notice,” he concluded.
For its part, the UAE is sticking to the line that the Rafale is not a replacement for the F-35.
“The signed contract with France is not a substitute for the US F-35 ongoing discussions,” Maj. Gen. Staff Pilot Ibrahim Nasser Al Alawi, UAE Commander of the Air Force and Air Defense, told UAE’s news agency WAM. “It’s rather a complementary to our Air Force capabilities as we continue to develop our air defense systems and seek new products and advanced technologies as part of our overall National Security Strategy.”