Posted on September 22, 2008 - by Venik
The Joint Strike Fighter Dilemma
As Australia is considering buying a hundred Lockheed-Martin/Boeing F-35A fighter-bombers for USD 83 million a piece, reports have emerged that the much-advertised stealth aircraft was comprehensively defeated by Sukhoi Su-35 in August 2008 during classified computer-simulated war games in Hawaii conducted by the USAF with participation from other NATO members. While Pentagon and Lockheed-Martin officials hotly dispute the reports, at least four RAAF personnel and a member of Australia’s Defence Intelligence Organisation were said to have witnessed the simulation. The West Australian newspaper reported earlier this month that F-35s have been “clubbed like baby seals” by the simulated Su-35s.
Lockheed-Martin F-35A Lightning II
Originally, Australia opted for the most “basic” version of the JSF – the F-35A, which lacks short or vertical takeoff/landing capability. Over the past few years the cost of this aircraft ballooned some 54% to $83 million for each aircraft bringing the total cost of the program, should Australia choose to go forward with it, to USD 16 billion. To put this amount in perspective, the latest Sukhoi Su-35 costs about $65 million and the Su-30M retails for less than $45 million. An article in Jane’s Defence Weekly by noted combat aircraft expert Pierre Sprey and defense spending analyst Winslow Wheeler was highly critical of the JSF:
“It is too fast to see the tactical targets it is shooting at, too delicate and flammable to withstand ground fire and it lacks the payload and especially the endurance to loiter usefully over US forces for sustained periods as they manoeuvre on the ground.”
On the other hand, pitting the F-35 against the Su-35 is a bit like comparing apples to oranges. The American aircraft was designed primarily as a light strike aircraft with air-to-air capability, while the Russian Su-35 is a heavy air-superiority fighter with ground attack capability. The Su-35 is faster, has longer range, higher payload, and it can carry a greater variety of weapons than the F-35. And for every F-35 you can buy two Su-30Ms or one Su-35 with about USD 20 million to spare. While Australia’s South-East Asian neighbors are buying Sukhois, Canberra has its eyes set on overpriced Lockheed products. For some time now Australia has been trying to get the US to lift export ban on the F-22, which would be a much better match for the Russian-made jets but comes at a mind-boggling cost of USD 138 million.
Sukhoi Su-35
Australia is too deeply entangled with the US military-industrial complex to make the right choice here. If Washington lets them, the Australians will buy the F-22 – the most expensive production fighter aircraft ever built – and, if not, then RAAF will be flying the “baby seals”. It is interesting that Australia even joined the JSF project in the first place, considering that it had no need for STOVL capability but has a requirement for maximum range in excess of 1,500 nautical miles, which F-35 cannot deliver. However, politics takes precedence over common sense wherever Australia’s defense strategy is concerned. And so Australia is betting on Lockheed’s “stealth”, which, apparently, is not a big problem for Sukhoi’s powerful new radars.
Popularity: 42% [?]
Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts
Related posts:
- Sukhoi Stealth Fighter’s First Flight
- TNK-BP oligarchs aim to take BP’s place in Rosneft joint venture
- Russia ‘helping’ China with fighter jet technology
- Secret files from 70s reveal Trident strike needed ‘to kill 10m Russians’
- Russia and Venezuela strike nuclear power station deal
Visit My Website
September 23, 2008
Permalink
I think the Australian Air Force knows better than you about whats good for them or not.
Reply
Venik Reply:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Of course they know better than I, but their hands are tied by their politicians. They know they are not going to get Sukhois or Typhoons, but they don’t want to settle on the JSF, which they don’t need. And so they are trying to get the F-22, because that’s the only US-made alternative and Australia is stuck with Lockheed, no matter what overpriced monstrosity the latter produces.
Reply
Venik Reply:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Here’s an exercise you may find somewhat enlightening: get a map and mark the locations of RAAF’s bases. And now see how far the F-35A will reach from any of these bases with its 1100km combat radius vs. F-111 with 2150km combat radius. Do you see how F-35 is not a replacement for the F-111? Forget the Sukhois and fighters in general, what RAAF needs is a strike aircraft with useful range, not a little island-hopper that can bomb fish off the coast of Australia.
Reply
September 23, 2008
Permalink
[...] which, apparently, is not a big problem for Sukhoi’s powerful new radars. https://venik4.com/?p=2881 Looks like this F-35 thing is a piece of junk. __________________ Suffering becomes beautiful [...]
September 24, 2008
Permalink
[...] Posted by The_Watcher The Joint Strike Fighter Dilemma https://venik4.com/?p=2881 Looks like this F-35 thing is a piece of junk. Dogfight scenarios aren’t a realistic sceanario. [...]
Visit My Website
September 27, 2008
Permalink
Hi Venik
Speaking as an Aussie in contact with local aviation experts I think you have a good grasp of aircraft issues and Australia’s peculiar strategic needs.
As you say Australia is stuck with Lockheed as the only source of new fighter aircraft. We are already buying 24 Super Hornets but they are seen as just 4th generation interim fighters.
Typhoon, Rafaele are out because they are not American and Flankers are out because Russia is not trusted and Hey the “Free World” needs an enemy
I’ve written an article about the F-35 and the numerous Texans of Lockheed’s Pentagon here http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7401
Note that the F-35 is mainly built in Texas – the President’s state. A new President may find the F-22, mainly built to beat Flankers, to be the better post-Georgia pick.
Peter Coates
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/
Reply
Venik Reply:
September 27th, 2008 at 6:00 am
Good article. The US will definitely try to rush Australia into accepting the F-35 deal before Bush leaves office. From the very start, the entire JSF concept seemed strange for the US. It can’t replace the Thunderbolt – not even close to being in the same class; it can’t replace the Harrier, not until it loses the fat and can actually demonstrate realistic VTOL. And as a replacement for the F-16, the F-35 is just too expensive.
The Russians are building their own “JSFski”, but their version will be far more practical. For starters, it will have two engines and much better survivability. The VVS, being realistic with available time and money, settled on STOL requirement. And at the moment Russia doesn’t really need a VTOL aircraft (not until it figures out what type of aircraft carriers it needs).
In case with Australia, one only needs to look at the map to understand that the F-35 is not what RAAF requires. But neither is the F-22. For all its impressive stats, its overpriced and overrated. If Australia’s concern is with its neighbors to the north, it needs a supersonic bomber/ASW. Something along the lines of Su-34 or Tu-22M3. Or F-111
Reply
Visit My Website
October 21, 2008
Permalink
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/press_releases/2008/0919ae_f-35settingrecordstraight.html
The people who made this claims dont even know basic things like the fact f-35 has capability for external weapons, that the claimed thrust-to-weight ratio includes fuel sensors or combat load…and so on and so on…
And the exercise they mentioned, the August 2008 Pacific Vision Wargame, did not even include air-to-air combat…LOL
SU-35 and all others 4th generation fighters are Sopwith Camel´s now just deal with it…you Russians have a “Russia > USA” obssesion dont you?
Fictional plasma stealth, Father of All Bombs (an hoax), laser canons before the US, prototype weapons that are over-glorified, and so on and so on and so on…remember Captain Chekov from Star Trek and his “…of course i know Captain, it was invented in Russia!”
Reply
Venik Reply:
October 21st, 2008 at 11:12 pm
You did not really expect Lockheed to validate the claim that their “baby” lost to a big rusty Su-35, now did you? I mean, if Lockheed admits that there is even iota of truth to this information, they might as well just lay off 40,000 employees working on the JSF program and convert the company into IT support business.
It may come as a surprise to you, but, yes, lots of things were invented in Russia. That’s why the US had the biggest arms race in history against Russia and not, say, Australia or France. Seriously, if every American soldier can shoot death rays out of his ass, why even worry about the Russians? You just send one “invisible” B-2 to bomb the crap out of Moscow and the war is won.
I think its time for the Americans to face the truth: your military hardware is overengineered, overpriced, and overrated. I guess this is the result of eating too many Big Macs and fighting various impoverished Third World countries for the past sixty years.
Reply
Zeka Reply:
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 am
AHAHAH!!! The people who made this claims dont even know that the thrust-to-weight ratio includes combat load, they were comparing it to a f-105!! Just this “mistake” says it all! This was pure Australian politics BS, this was already proven.
The difference between the West and Russia is this:
In the West, if the fighter doesnt meet the requirements heads will roll and contracts will get cancelled.
In Russia, they grab decades old thermobaric bombs, rename it to “Father of All Bombs” (LOL), claim it was made with nanotech (LOL), make bs claims about its power and release a completly fake video of the bomb being “tested”.
As for your pre-fabricated cliched insults…The stupid fat americans make that micro-processor your computer uses…Russians cant build a 1980´s 486 Intel processor.
You have nukes (given to you by communist spies) and thats about it.
Go back to your hilarious “Hunt for the Sabre” stories and your Plasma Stealth´s and all that
You Russians are obssesed with that “Russia > USA” and because of that ultra-nationalist induced inferiority complex you always end up making an ass out of yourselfs.
“…of course i know Captain, it was invented in Russia!” – Pavel Chekov
Reply
Visit My Website
October 22, 2008
Permalink
Australian Defense Minister:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/25/2373632.htm
“It wasn’t an exercise about one platform against another, it was an exercise about other matters that I can’t really discuss publicly,”
LOL!
Reply
Venik Reply:
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:51 am
Why are you getting so worked up? Do you work for Lockheed? Using “LOL” in every other sentence doesn’t prove your point. Just shows you’re twelve. Maybe you find a conversation subject that’s more relevant to your age.
Reply
Visit My Website
February 21, 2009
Permalink
Dutch and Norway airforce recently said the f35 eclipsed all others and have joined the f35 bandwagon. Must be because they are “submissive to the Empire” eheh.
This whole “f35 was clubbed” thing was BS.
Now get back to glorifying upgraded 1970´s airplanes with new names to give the impression they are new with those hilarious “4+++th Generation” designations.
Do all Russians have an inferiority complex? And why do all Russian super-nationalists live all in Canada, USA or UK?! Isnt Russian supposed to be Nº1 ? eheheheh
russians…
Reply
Venik Reply:
February 22nd, 2009 at 7:14 am
As we all know, the future of combat aviation depends on the decisions made by Dutch and Norwegian air forces. If the mighty Dutch air force picked the F-35, then, for sure, this must be the best fighter aircraft in the world. Why else would they have chosen it?! eheheheh
Reply
Visit My Website
May 10, 2009
Permalink
Dear venik:
Thanks for the valuable info. Can you also discuss the f22 raptor? Is it worth the price? What about the pakfa, what type of stealth method will it use? Also please add articles related to the Iranian missile program.
Reply
Visit My Website
May 13, 2009
Permalink
As American citizen I hate to admit the sad truth but USA will end up with a collapse of its own like soviet empire in 1980′s and 90′s. All we make is overpriced military hardware. There is no real economy here anymore, Lockmart Pentagon smoke and mirrors. Regarding f-35, to fat for air combat. Scrape the ice off a mig or sukhoi and its ready to go with performance to beat an overpriced f-35 or 22 hangar queen. USA needs to build a simple, cost effective, performing design. The lie that the f-35 was originally supposed to be.
Reply
Visit My Website
October 10, 2009
Permalink
Whether it is tolerant to others is something that is ancillary to those. ,
Reply
Visit My Website
October 13, 2009
Permalink
If you have an interviwer ask ridiculous questions, the job is not for you. ,
Reply
Visit My Website
October 23, 2009
Permalink
That is a matter of pure chance. ,
Reply
Visit My Website
May 24, 2010
Permalink
As an Australian taxpayer, I think the Australian Government really needs to seriously consider counsilling JSF, as it can no longer be seriously considered a air-superiority fighter. And now that the US Navy and Marines seriously debating canselling their order all together (they have already reduced by half the proposed number) and consentrating on developing the super hornet. The UK has also scaled back on number that it intended to buy.
So as the number of aircraft in production is scaled back, the high the cost that each unit will be.
The other disturbing aspect about the JSF program is that owner countries will not be able to individualise their aircraft i.e. develop the aircraft to meet their strategic needs, and that all part, upgrades and future developments must be done through Lockheed Nartin.
Which means LM will dictate the owner countires needs and not the purchaser.
I also understand that the JSF is also likely to be rather expensive to fly and maintain. Even the USN & MC are predicting that the aircraft will probable spend more time on the ground than in the air.
I really do believe that the JSF is rapidly becoming a white elephant. I mean if the USN, the primary buyer for the JFS can’t afford to opporate the JSF, then I can assure you that no one else will be able to either…
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
August 18th, 2010 at 12:00 am
I’m sure your opinion on the F-35 is duely noted by your politicians given you can’t even spell a basic, common word.
Reply
Venik Reply:
August 18th, 2010 at 1:56 am
If military aviation was merely a matter of correctly spelling words, every proud owner of MS Word would have been an accomplished aircraft designers.
Reply
Visit My Website
July 23, 2010
Permalink
[...] Now all we need is for another aircraft manufacturer to come up with similar research results. The Joint Strike Fighter Dilemma As Australia is considering buying a hundred Lockheed-Martin/Boeing F-35A fighter-bombers for USD [...]