defense

Is Any Country Satisfied with the F-35 Fighter Jet?

The F-35 program is a process that is closely followed and will be closely followed by individuals, institutions and organizations that are directly or indirectly related to the F-35, who buy/use this aircraft, who will buy and want to buy this aircraft, who see it as an adversary/threat, who are hobbyists in aviation and aircrafts. It is also a project/program model from which serious lessons can be learned, and these lessons can be learned at great cost or for free. In other words, following the F-35 program closely will definitely bring positive material, scientific and moral gains to nations and individuals.

Which Country is Happy with the F-35 Fighter Jet?

This is my second article on the F-35 Jet Fighter. For my first article, please see. Ref.-1.

Why are we following the F-35 so closely? They excluded Turkey from the partnership, what do we care about the F-35?

This question may be rightly asked by our readers. We have to explain.

Because we will follow the F-35 very closely;

- This aircraft is the most important representative of the 5th Generation Jet Fighters and is the most expensive project in the history of all US Defense Projects, which has been of great interest to the military aviation world since the early 1990s. (See Ref.-2 for Jet Fighter Generations).

- It is an aircraft that is closely followed not only by program partner countries such as Turkey (we were subsequently removed from the program), but also by hostile geographical countries in terms of the threats it will pose to them.

- The F-35 is also a systems demonstrator, a program that should be closely followed by aviation experts and authorities who want, indeed are obliged, to monitor the high defense technologies used in this category of aircraft.

- In summary, the F-35 program is a process that is closely followed and will be closely followed by individuals, institutions and organizations that are directly or indirectly related to the F-35, those who buy/use this aircraft, those who will buy and want to buy this aircraft, those who see it as an adversary/threat, and those who are hobbyists in aviation and aircraft. It is also a project/program model from which serious lessons can be learned, and these lessons can be learned at great cost or for free. In other words, following the F-35 program closely will definitely bring positive material, scientific and moral gains to nations and individuals.

The F-35 Project started with nine international program partners: the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, Turkey, the Netherlands, Australia, Norway, Norway, Denmark and Canada. Turkey was removed as a program partner under CAATSA sanctions for procuring the Russian S-400 air defense system. The program continues with eight partners.

Israel, Japan, South Korea, Poland, Belgium and Singapore have also become F-35 users through Foreign Military Sales (FMS).

The largest users of the F-35, the US Air Force (F-35A), Marine Corps Air Force (F-35B) and Navy Air Force (F-35C), were not satisfied with the performance of the aircraft they received, and this was highlighted in US Congressional audit reports (see Ref.-1).

What were the satisfaction levels of other users? According to information from open sources that can be taken seriously, the situation is presented below.

Australia:

Australian F-35 program status;

Variant to be procured: F-35A

Ordered 100 aircraft

Received: 10 aircraft

Flight hours flown: 1,900+

There's a problem with Australia's brand new fighter jet - it's not reliable. As a result, it flies about 25% less than it should. Fewer flights means fewer well-trained pilots, but it also points to other problems lurking in the background.

Australia is not happy with the F-35.

Why did Australia buy these jets?

Australia's plan was to buy about 72 aircraft in total. The F-35 was to replace the air force's aging F-18 Hornet fighters and F-111 bombers. At first, a short-range stealth fighter seemed more than enough. But by 2010, with China on a steady rise, it turned out to be a bad strategy. In retrospect, it was a major mistake to treat the F-35 as a mere replacement aircraft without assessing the changing strategic environment. By then, however, too much money had been invested in the F-35 program to be diverted. Subsequently, F-35 development was delayed and the first tranches of the Australian fleet were not ready for deployment in operations until December 2020.

Growing problems

Australia was a partner in the F-35 program. Building the aircraft proved more difficult than expected and this inevitably led to higher costs. Much of the money that should have been spent on building the maintenance support system was spent on fixing the aircraft's ongoing hardware and software problems.

Continuous upgrades at enormous cost

The US Air Force is concerned that, similar to the Australian program, older F-35s are now overwhelmingly expensive training aircraft. Most of the Australian fleet is scheduled to be upgraded to be largely similar to the US fleet, but this will cost even more money. It may seem strange to have to pay extra to upgrade the configuration of a brand new aircraft on delivery, but that's not the whole problem.

Australia's newest F-35s (and upgraded older ones) use Block 3F software, a digital operating system designed by Lockheed Martin. Keeping up to date has turned out to cost at least as much as the jets themselves.

According to US war scenarios against China and Russia, the software of the US and Australian F-35s was inadequate against the systems of these potential adversaries. This means that Australia's F-35s don't look as good as the potential enemy. It seems Australia is paying to lose the air battle. The only solution: upgrade to another model. So what is the solution to these seemingly intractable and eye-wateringly expensive problems? Lockheed Martin is advocating a major operating system software upgrade: Block 4. It may not be surprising to hear that this is currently years overdue and is expected to be delivered in 2027 or later. It is also significantly over budget.

After all, Australia sees the F-35 as depicted in the cartoon below:

Canada:

Canada is also an F-35 program partner. From the outset, it considered the aircraft to be underperforming, particularly in terms of range, limited air-to-air capability and, above all, too costly. Canada clearly sees the F-35 as depicted in the cartoon below.

Japan:

Japan F-35 program status;

Aircraft Variant: F-35A/STOVL

Total Order: 105 F-35A

Aircraft Delivered: 13 F-35A

Dissatisfied with the F-35, Japan wants to upgrade or acquire an aircraft like the F-22 Raptor. It is also pursuing a national aircraft project that could satisfy its needs (F-3).

South Korea

South Korea also complains of low "combat-ready F-35" rates and excessively high maintenance and sustainment costs.

Israel:

The Israeli Air Force has named the F-35I Adir, which means "Mighty" in Hebrew.

Why Is Israel's Version of the F-35I Really Special?

While the Israel Defense Air Force certainly has the firepower necessary to project power around the world, the country wants to focus primarily on regional threats posed by Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist actors. For this very reason, Israel has modified its F-35 variant to accommodate regional command and control networks and high-tech data links, enhancing the connectivity needed to address asymmetric threats.

Israel has always needed a strong military force capable of deterring its neighbors, whom it considers enemies. But the asymmetric threats Israel faces require more deterrence than ground attacks. Terrorist groups and Iranian-backed militias pose unique threats to Israel that are very different from those posed by conventional forces. This environment includes the risk of being targeted by mobile ballistic missile launchers from Iran or shorter-range rockets from Lebanon and Gaza. The air-to-ground strike capabilities provided by the F-35 allow Israel to defeat these asymmetric threats without having to rely solely on its defenses.

It is likely this challenging environment that prompted Israel to convert its Joint Strike Fighters to its own variant of the F-35I Adir fighter jet. In developing its specialized F-35 variant, Israel took into account its specific needs and regional threats.

The F-35I's intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities allow pilots to detect and target mobile rocket launchers often used to attack Israel.

Israel's F-35I Adir utilizes the advanced technology of all F-35As, while incorporating Israeli computing, surveillance, command and control and data link systems designed to counter regional threats. In particular, the Israeli variant is designed to address asymmetric threats such as mobile rocket launchers and other weapons used by terrorists and militant groups. Data links allow Israeli pilots to communicate with friendly ground forces and locate surface-to-surface rocket and missile launchers.

Israel needed a fighter that could meet the unique challenges it faces in the Middle East. The Adir F-35I variant will do just that. But Lockheed-Martin has mostly refused to allow major country-specific changes to the F-35, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars that non-US F-35 users have contributed to the development of the aircraft. Given the additional costs and delays of creating country-specific variants, and the fact that Lockheed is struggling both to produce F-35s quickly and cheaply enough and to produce hundreds of spare parts, there is of course an efficiency-based rationale.

But Israel has managed to make an exception. Although Tel Aviv was not an investor in the development of the F-35, it nevertheless quickly signed up for the program with an initial order for fifty units. There is also an agreement with Israel for the production of F-35 wings and sophisticated helmet sets. Moreover, depot-level maintenance (the most intensive maintenance) of the F-35I Amir will be carried out at a facility operated by Israel Aviation Industries, rather than at a Lockheed facility abroad. This will make a positive contribution to the F-35I's sustainment costs.

While the first nineteen aircraft that Israel receives are essentially standard F-35A fighters, subsequent aircraft will be true F-35Is modified to integrate Israeli-made hardware. The aircraft is equipped with an open architecture Israeli Command, Control, Communications and Computing (C4) system.

The Lightning's advanced flight computer and logistics system has become a point of contention with many F-35 users. Non-US user air forces want to have more access to the F-35's computer source code to intercept, upgrade and modify the system as they see fit, but Lockheed does not authorize full access for both commercial and security reasons.

Uniquely, the Israeli F-35Is will have an Israeli-made C4 program running "on top" of Lockheed's operating system. One of the F-35's core capabilities comes from its superior ability to absorb data from its sensors and share it with friendly forces. The C4 information system is an important capability for Israel in terms of compatibility with data links used by friendly Israeli air, naval and ground forces, and in tracking the location of enemy surface-to-surface rocket launchers and surface-to-air missile systems.

The Israeli C4 system will also allow the Israeli Air Force to install defensive avionics systems, such as Israeli-made data links and radar jamming pods. Methods already exist to detect stealth fighters, including long-range infrared sensors, electromagnetic sensors and low-bandwidth radars (although all have significant limitations), and more advanced technologies such as quantum radar are under development.

Conclusion:

Based on the "open source" information I have analyzed extensively so far, my summary of F-35 user satisfaction is as follows:

- US Air Force (F-35A); dissatisfied (low combat readiness, high acquisition cost, extremely high maintenance and sustainment cost).

- US Marine Air Force (F-35C); dissatisfied (low combat-ready aircraft rate, high acquisition cost, excessively high maintenance and replacement cost).

- US Marine Corps Air Force (F-35B); dissatisfied (low combat-ready aircraft rate, high acquisition cost, extremely high maintenance and replacement cost).

- Australian Air Force (F-35A); dissatisfied (low combat readiness, high acquisition cost, excessively high maintenance and replacement cost).

- Canadian Air Force (F-35A); dissatisfied (low combat readiness rate, high acquisition cost, extremely high maintenance and replacement cost).

- Japan Air Defense Force (F-35A); dissatisfied (inadequate systems/capabilities, low combat readiness, high acquisition cost, extremely high maintenance and replacement cost).

Surprisingly, we found a user country that is happy and satisfied with the F-35;

Israel is the only country that will use the F-35 (F-35I) independently from the US, with its own software and logistic support system independent from the US.

- The Israeli Defense Air Force (F-35I) is a happy F-35I User (Actually, they also complain about the high unit cost, but that's as far as it goes!)

Let us assure our readers that if we have access to reliable sources to measure the satisfaction of other user countries, we will make an assessment of them as well.

Unfortunately for the users, the F-35 is currently a "flying (or rather, non-flying) dollar-grinding machine".