US clears F-35 sale to Romania, bolstering NATO’s eastern flank
The approval of the $7.2 billion deal for the fifth-generation fighter comes as NATO allies are worried about Russian aggression.
www.defensenews.com
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
www.defensenews.com
UAE does not plan to re-open F-35 fighter jet talks with US
By ReutersSeptember 14, 20244:44 PM GMT+2Updated 2 days ago
DUBAI, Sept 14 (Reuters) - The United Arab Emirates does not expect to resume talks with the U.S. about a multi-billion dollar deal for F-35 warplanes, irrespective of who is elected to the White House in November, a senior UAE government official said on Saturday.
Reuters reported on Friday that the UAE was planning to resume negotiations to purchase F-35s and armed drones if Donald Trump wins a second presidential term, according to several people familiar with the matter.
Trump had signed off on a deal to allow the purchase to go ahead in the final days of his presidency in 2021, but the UAE suspended talks at the end of that year, unable to agree terms with the Biden administration.
The UAE has long sought the most advanced fighter jet, built with stealth technology allowing it to evade enemy detection.
If the U.S. did approve the transfer, the UAE would be only the second Middle East state, after Israel, to operate F-35s.
The UAE official said on Saturday the same factors that caused it to suspend the talks in 2021 have not changed and the government does not plan to re-open negotiations.
"Our position remains unchanged and we do not anticipate discussions regarding the F-35 being reopened for the foreseeable future, irrespective of the outcome of the upcoming US elections," the senior UAE official said in a statement to Reuters.
"Technical requirements, sovereign operational restrictions and cost/benefit analysis led to the reassessment at that time, and those considerations underpin our ongoing position."
The official did not comment on the possibility of fresh talks to purchase armed drones.
Pratt's New Software Aims to Extend Life, Enhance Performance of F-22 Engines | Air & Space Forces Magazine
Pratt & Whitney hopes to keep the F-22 relevant by better tracking when parts and maintenance are really needed, and through 3-D printing.
www.airandspaceforces.com
Its great to see you inventing as much about the future as you do about the present. really expanding your horizons.
its interesting that they are working so hard to get back into the "trash" F-35 and the F-35 program "built on sand" one would think Turkey would be happy to have "escaped"
Turkey seeking way back into F-35 program | eKathimerini.com
Turkey is seeking a solution to re-enter the American F-35 fighter jet program after being kicked out over its acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 missile system.www.ekathimerini.com
Turkey is seeking a solution to re-enter the American F-35 fighter jet program after being kicked out over its acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 missile system. To this end, Ankara is pushing for the inclusion of an amendment in the 2025 US defense budget (NDAA) that would allow it to avoid sanctions over the S-400.
Ankara has been pursuing an intensive behind-the-scenes-diplomatic push in recent months to find a formula that will allow it to purchase F-35 jets from the US, changing the goals of its defense strategy. According to sources, its has entirely reversed its stance on the S-400 and now appears eager to make any concessions to satisfy Washington, and thus submit a formal request to the US State Department for the fifth-generation fighters.
wakey!! wakey!!
its amazing to me that we have gone from "the Rafale is going to win in Switzerland!" to "but, but, the greeks haven't ordered the F-35 just yet!!" only to once again watch them just order anyway. so we arrive back at my original question that you retored with this jewel above. Whom are you trying to convince? and what is the point of such posts?
Last edited:
"The purchase of the first 20 jets along with additional support will cost some $3.5 billion, Greek officials said."
F-35 comes in under budget once again. if the price is doubled to reflect another 20 F-25s that is still $7 billion compared to the $8.6 billion you quoted.
good job with your attempt to once again create doubt with a deal that everyone else knew was inevitable and tried to tell you. The french desire to hold onto the failed argument until total humiliation is achieved is very fun to see.
so I guess then F-35 "Defeated" the Rafale? perhaps the UAE isn't much more than an outlier? I don't understand the purpose of these posts, they seemed designed to destroy and strain credibility. Why are you picking these hills to die? I genuinely don't understand.
and yet the F-35 is more credible than its competitors. what a mystery I hope the French never try to solve.
Nothing new, except if you have a source.
They intend to buy, but nothing inked so far.
No.
It is the pizzo for all the NATO country to pay a little space under the big USA umbrella.
You will see in the future that F35 will become anothe F104 drama. A financial and operationnal one this time.
This is exactly what I am talking about! the Greeks will then get something "inked" and you will move the goal posts again to "but they haven't built a single Greek F-35!"
eventually the first Greek F-35 will roll down the line and we will hear "but it hasn't flown yet!"
Then the Greek F-35 will fly and you will say
"but it hasn't landed in Greece yet!" then eventually the Greeks will stand up their first squadron and declare it operationally ready and you will say "but they haven't been in combat yet!"
Then the Greeks will do some mission with them and you will say:
" but that is not real combat!!"
So once again I do not understand the point and logic in these arguments and why the objective is constant denial and why you and your friends here think that is an effective way to go. Is the objective to be wrong as many times as possible over a longer period of time? help me understand please.
we have herciv who makes things up and actually denigrates the Rafale as a part of the "collateral damage"
bon plan who can't keep his story straight and has no comprehension of the F-35 program at all despite all the posts about it
and picdelermirand who tells us that the Rafale can't even beat the F-35 on marketing. Marketing of course being the easiest to fix and change
my favorite part is the insistence on the F-35s inferiority which makes the losses of the Rafale to the F-35, and the Gripen of course even more comical. Once again what is the objective of the constant prostration and self-induced humiliations? is it a part of French culture? do you think you are running an effective propaganda campaign that is changing any minds? is there an objective or do you just act up in general on the F-35 thread? who do you think you are fooling exactly?
This is my favorite, especially now that herciv is attempting to shift the narrative and you keep contradicting him. perfection! lets just add "international diplomacy" and "power projection" as two more categories that the Rafale/France fails in. (along with the marketing)
I still don't understand how telling everyone you are the weak horse somehow improves your reputation and position but I hope you never stop and most of the French posters here are completely unaware of seeds they sow. If Dassault is as smart as the French posters here, no wonder they lose, and it doesn't have much to do with Umbrellas. Dassault and France has shown a constant need to fail at the basics.
I would have changed the Rafale marketing since every French poster here tells us that is why Rafale loses to F-35 (and Gripen), but I suppose continuing to lose on such a simple fix has its own charms.
I enjoy it personally. Tell me again how helpless you are. the F-35 dominated you in international competition you say? 3rd place behind the Gripen? oh do tell!
That might be meaningful if early reports on the F-35 weren't so positive, and if the French didn't have such negative opinions on every other fighter aircraft out there that isn't a Rafale or a Mirage variant anyway. The French give little respect to every other aircraft, and of course loath the Eurofighter so the F-35 is hardly unique. Its not a risk to say that any other fighter purchased that is not Mirage or Rafale the French will be unhappy with and claim its a debacle. In your minds everything that isn't a Rafale is an F-104 so nobody cares what you think.
yes the Australians should have just done all these things. including buying squadrons of non existent NGADS. its just so simple! maybe when you are done running the Indian Air Force you can run the RAAF. Canada is basically doing what you suggested above and its cost us greatly, not just in money but lost time and personnel. The AESA upgrade for the F-18s is indeed a capability addition, but despite it the USMC is still planning to retire their hornets in 5 years. the AESA upgrade is not being used to extend the combat usefulness of the Hornets, it is because their radars are so old there are no longer spare parts to sustain them until 2030. Canada joined this upgrade to keep the F-18 force viable at all. meanwhile Australia has already divested their hornets, has F-35s, and has overhauled their entire Air force with tankers, AEW, Growlers etc (only a fool thinks fighters and fighters alone compose a modern air force) and yes, they do plan on doing block IV F-35 and Australia is directly involved in Block IV F-35 and may be doing the conversion themselves. Australia is its own model that is worth looking at in a positive way. The comparison for F-35 should be Canada. We are a decade behind and can not magically make that time up. Australia is in a much stronger position in nearly every way.
your whole post is glib and shows no understanding of the situation as it is. even the idea of "spending billions to upgrade F-35s is a sad waste, but spending billions to upgrade decades old hornets with no future is smart!" don't let your desire to complain about the F-35 cloud basic logic please.
and don't try to convince us that a decades old hornet with a new AESA is superior to a not block IV F-35. Australia and Finland for that matter were smart enough to not throw more money into an aircraft that was on its way out the door, unlike Canada which is doing exactly that. We are upgrading aircraft (and the upgrade is not cheap) that we plan on scrapping anyway because they have no future in the end. its extremely difficult to look at the CF-18 replacement debacle and endorse something like that for Australia. Australia has multiple squadrons set up Canada is upgrading hornets and hopes to get their first F-35 in 2026, and retiring their old hornets by 2032. the AESA upgraded wasn't even announced until 2018. Didn't start until 2020, and the RAAF retired their hornets in 2021. so your timeline doesn't work either. Canada is finally getting their first batch in 2024.
Canada’s CF-18 Hornet fighter upgrade programme reaches IOC - Airforce Technology
Canada is upgrading its legacy CF-18 fleet in a two-part programme to bridge the gap until the arrival of new F-35 fighters later this decade.
www.airforce-technology.com
The idea that anything less than a Block IV F-35 is useless against the Chinese is such a stupid statement that one wonders if it wasn't the brain child of LM itself and now propagated and blindly parroted by those who should understand at least some gray area, especially in air forces where no F-35s of any type are present...
sure they will, sport. because that is how air forces work
Last edited:
you just forget a small little thing : USA is 7th more bigger than France, not to speak of Sweden.
The diplomatic influence of USA is even more bigger. So it's not a surprise then succeed in selling it.
F35 is a diplomatic tool before beeing a weapon.
I think for years that a lot of country will regret this purchase, with years... another F104 saga.
False.
I think F22 is really a game changer.
F/A 18 is (was) a nice machine (when SH18 is deceiving).
The south Korean KF-21 approach is smart, and I'm sur it will be a technical success if not a commercial one (i don't see the same future with KAAN...).
F35 is too complex, with a B variant that pull down the 2 others, and with a weapon system too ambitious at the beginning, so never tune, so with late developpment made on sand. That's all.
The F16 maestria is lost.
The F-35 is basically a mini, single engine F-22 with better avionics. F-35 obviously doesn't have the raw physical performance of the F-22 but nothing else does either. "Game changer" is a frequent description of the F-35 as well, but then again the F-22 is non-exportable and no direct threat to French interests, while the F-35 has dominated territory that France covets. its little wonder that the vitriol in this threat goes so heavily to the F-35 via certain French poster and despite the fact that the F-35 and F-22 are made by the same company... in order to keep things as simple as possible, they basically just took the F-22 and "shrunk" it to fit the JSF requirements. the X-35 even used an F-22 engine.
oh well, let the double standard continue.
no mention of Gripen or Eurofighter? how curious. just keep repeating "made on sand" and eventually I'm sure it will stick.
research the early years of the "lawn dart" and the F-35 is very much following the F-16s footsteps, right down to complaining the aircraft was too ambitious and would never work. history repeats. Canada picked the F-18 because the F-16 didn't even have Sparrow capability. That basic capability came later on.
Then why are we measuring F-35 as a weapon? This is what I mean by the confused and contradictory nature of French critiques.
The French poster choose to ignore the evaluations and comparisons that are put together in the competitions that show Rafale to be lacking and instead just cry "politics" that is not what it is occurring.
its not just a matter of "diplomacy" Rafale is losing in direct tactical comparison to the F-35. The French seek to forget and obscure this key factor. Perhaps it would be worth noting of course, if Rafale won the top spot, and the F-35 took 2nd place, and the US squeezed so that the F-35 won anyway, you would have a good point. however that is not happening. the F-35 is winning the evaluations to start with. Gripen actually placed ahead of Rafale in Finland. In Switzerland the F-35 won by a wide margin, it was not even close. Diplomacy is simply an excuse.
your entire narrative is "built on sand"
as has been pointed out, the Rafale is allowed to lose, but it must be fore preapproved French reasons. Its acceptable for the Rafale to lose based on politics, but its a not acceptable for the Rafale to lose for tactical reasons by the French standards. what I am pointing out and thus "breaking the rules" is that the F-35 is beating the rafale based on direct tactical comparison, and that is anathema to the French "rules" I have bad news but the Rafale is not just losing to the F-35 because the US has more diplomatic pull, and that is not even news. it has already been stated multiple times already. The Swiss evaluated that the F-35 was the best aircraft at the best price. There is no need to use diplomacy at that point, the result speaks for itself. (and no it is not "marketing" either)
the Rafales problem is not "diplomacy" or the size of the United States, the problem is that in multiple official evaluations the F-35 has scored higher than the Rafales. The Rafale is not a bad plane, but the issue for the Rafale is that it is not as good as the F-35. in the end that is the inconvenient and unavoidable truth. This is the need for "distraction action" and overcompensation by so many French posters in the thread
you already said that, and you are entitled to your opinion, most countries are very happy with the F-35 though, so I wonder if such a saga will ever arrive. I think people buying F-35s and being happy with them is the substance of French nightmares because it would mean that people don't regret their decision, and are fine with not having Rafales, rather than the hopes of many French people that all of NATO will apologize to France, drop to their knees are cry into their hands that they did not buy the Rafale, which all of their evaluations found to be more costly, and less capable.
Basically it can't supercruise, basically it hasn't the same agility, basically its avionic is not tune.
You know why?
Because it was studied as an attack fighter, to replace A10 and F16 in CAS role (to explain its sugar piece shape) and they tried to change it as a fighter to replace exported F16.
We never had the parameters of these eval.
The sole real leak was 2011 Swiss eval, unfortunately withour F35, and the looser, Gripen, was choosen !!!!
In the last swiss eval sudenly the simulation hours can replace real flights.... It is biaised, and you know that.
Exactly for the same reason that f-35 failed in UAE and not The Rafale : Geopolitics.
UAE dont want to suffer the US way to see the world.
Greece want to keep a choice and so choose to have both fighters.
Europe choose mainly the F-35 because they want the US umbrella to stay in Europe.
The F-35 has better avionics than F-22, was never designed to be a super cruiser and would require thrust vectoring to get the same kind of agility which would add a lot of cost, besides I already conceded that the F-22 in terms of raw performance was better so why are you arguing?
Joint Strike FIGHTER was always going to be a fighter, and was always designed as an F-16 replacement, one can simply look how many F-16 using countries signed on to the JSF as a program before X-35 was even picked. I don't understand why we are "arguing" about this? you seem to have problems with basic history, as if the F in JSF stood for something else and then was later switched. its very similar to the "nostalgia" vision you used with the F-16 earlier. The F-16 was a complicated international program, went over budget, suffered delays, exceeded the individual aircraft "not to exceed" price (LOL), suffered fleet wide groundings, had troubles with the gun, was the centerpiece of frequent negative GAO reports, fights over workshare, nations barred and kicked out, first used in combat by Israel... it all sounds pretty familiar to me. except that the F-16 suffered far more crashes and accidents. Rather than being "another F-104," the problems with F-16 were resolved to the point where even you either forgot about them or were never aware of them in the first place. now people thing the F-16 is a near perfect machine, and the F-35 is nothing like it.
The F-35 beat the next closest competitor by a wide margin and it wasn't just flight simulator hours, and you know that. Its taking one thing and using it to discredit the entire rest of the report. even if the F-35 lost on flight hours, its still won in nearly every other area.
and remember your entire arguement was "muh diplomacy" while ignoring the reports that show the Rafale as underperforming against the F-35.
you can read a summary of the initial swiss decision here. flight hours or not its pretty damning
Air2030: Federal Council decides to procure 36 F-35A fighter aircraft
Current information from the Federal Administration. All press releases from the Federal Administration, the departments and offices.
www.admin.ch
diplomacy is just the "hot and ready to serve" universal French excuse.
the French ignore the quantifiable reasons they did not win against the F-35 and instead just claim "diplomacy" its an act of subterfuge that hides the truth. maybe if you yell "diplomacy" enough times people will forget there was a 2 year evaluation done at all.
The French hive mind makes up its 2 or 3 excuses and then serves them as needed forever. this protects them from reality. There is no need for "diplomacy" when the F-35 sweeps the evaluation.
Fighter aircraft: F-35A offers highest overall benefit at lowest cost by far
All the candidates met the requirements set for the evaluation. For both the fighter aircraft and the longer-range GBAD system, the candidate promising the highest benefit was also the one priced the lowest. In the case of the fighter aircraft, this candidate is the F-35A. With 336 points, it showed the highest overall benefit and was the clear winner with a lead of 95 points or more over the other candidates. This aircraft scored best in three of the four main criteria evaluated:• In terms of effectiveness, the F-35A achieved the best result because it has a marked technological advantage over the other candidates: it includes entirely new, extremely powerful and comprehensively networked systems for protecting and monitoring airspace. The F-35A is able to ensure information superiority; this means pilots benefit from a higher situational awareness in all task areas when compared with the other candidates. This is especially true for day-to-day air policing.
What is more, the F-35A is the only aircraft that has been designed from the ground up to be especially difficult for other weapons systems to detect. The resulting high survivability is a great advantage for the Swiss Air Force.
In addition, because the F-35A is comparatively easy to operate and is able to provide information superiority, it requires less training and has a better ratio of flight to simulator hours. Because of this, the F-35A requires about 20% fewer flight hours than other candidates, and about 50% fewer take-offs and landings than the Air Force’s current jet aircraft, which the F-35A will be replacing.
Finally, it can be assumed that as the newest of the weapons systems evaluated, the F-35A will be able to sustain its technological lead well into the future. Given the planned service life of 30 years, this is a major advantage over the other candidates.
I think its funny that in all of the above the only think the French decided was untrue was the flight hour part. I would think that the "marked technological advantage over other candidates" or "information superiority" or "high survivability" would have raised some French eyebrows, but I guess that is just a fact everyone accepts. even if price was not a factor, the F-35 performed better than Rafale. meaning if the F-35 cost as much as the Rafale does, the F-35 would still be picked. even if we factor out the simulator, the F-35 still wins on cost, making the French whining just another meaningless footnote.
at least you are finally admitting its politics and not some bizarro stilted "they buy this, but not that, and that must mean this and that" strange "logic."
the truth finally came out. Very different from what you claimed earlier. have we given up on the petty and strange non-sequiturs?
in the end the political lens and "umbrella" comes back to the fact that France is being beaten in Europe. the UAE sales are great. no doubt about that. but at the same time it is not Europe. And as the French empire abroad shrinks and suffers France is turning its eyes to ruling the European continent as its new empire. That is why you talk about the umbrella France provides. The world sees, we know what France is up to.
look out India!! France is looking for new colonies to rule!!
it doesn't explain the high placement of the Gripen in these evaluations and ignores the evaluations essentially all together.
The endless French excuse of "diplomacy" or "politics" doesn't hold water because it forgets the evaluations. The evaluations are the tactical comparison between the aircraft themselves, diplomacy is a very small factor (talking about "offsets)
The French mindsight is that the Rafale is tactically perfect so it must be "outside factors" like politics and diplomacy. the Rafale is good but the F-35 beats it, and we have the papers there to prove it and it was not just a one time occurance. the Swiss were very tactful in that they never name who the "next closest competitor is." for all we know its the EF Typhoon, or likely the other gringo offering the Super Hornet or a combination of all competitors. the diplomacy argument falls short yet again when we see the Gripen doing better than Rafale in Finland. or is Sweden a really big country with a super big defense umbrella too!?
the big question is rather than the French attempting to save face in the F-35 thread with excuses everyone can see through, is "what can be done to "fix" the Rafale to make it more competitive" and its not the Trumpian way of talking about America's "bigness"
In this story there is a direct contradiction to the claims by the posters here, the F-35 far from winning on "diplomacy" actually won on the technical specifications, and there was a complaint that not enough political or economic consideration went into the F-35 choice.
www.swissinfo.ch
suffice to say that French excuses not only fail to be true but are seriously unconvincing as it is, and since it has been 3 years, the initial "guesses" by the French of what went wrong in Switzerland should be reassessed rather than repeating the same tired falsehoods.
Fighter jet purchase “worrying” but legal, says Swiss audit body
Switzerland’s procurement of F-35A fighter jets from the United States is declared lawful by parliamentary auditors.
www.swissinfo.ch
suffice to say that French excuses not only fail to be true but are seriously unconvincing as it is, and since it has been 3 years, the initial "guesses" by the French of what went wrong in Switzerland should be reassessed rather than repeating the same tired falsehoods.
5th gen according to own LM definition :
- Stealth
- Sensor fusion
- Super cruise
- F16 like agility
- Affordable.
F35 is short on super cruise and agility at least.
some government actions during the process were “worrying” or “inappropriate”.In this story there is a direct contradiction to the claims by the posters here, the F-35 far from winning on "diplomacy" actually won on the technical specifications, and there was a complaint that not enough political or economic consideration went into the F-35 choice.
Fighter jet purchase “worrying” but legal, says Swiss audit body
Switzerland’s procurement of F-35A fighter jets from the United States is declared lawful by parliamentary auditors.
suffice to say that French excuses not only fail to be true but are seriously unconvincing as it is, and since it has been 3 years, the initial "guesses" by the French of what went wrong in Switzerland should be reassessed rather than repeating the same tired falsehoods.
All is said.
LOL.
Have you a single source ?