6 ms·

The case is every US partner who purchase F35s is now dependant on US and more aligned with US interests. That remains true even if magic anti-air missile tech

The case is every US partner who purchase F35s is now dependant on US and more aligned with US interests. That remains true even if magic anti-air missile tech makes F35s vunerable in the coming years because broad adoption of F35s also killed gen5+ competitors who couldn't sell at scale. We see Korea, Japan + EU countries trying to restart their own fighter programs now because dependency on US especially with FX can become onerous and they all want their own share of future export pie now that RU arms exports is dimished.

wil421 4y ago
How many “new” partners did the F-35 win over? There are lots of countries using the F-16/18 etc. I think there were even times the US had a conflict where the adversary had US fighters.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  Fair point, but IMO increased dependancy is more about joint developement and getting level 1/2/3 partners emeshed into the program's supply chain. Side effect is tying up development resources in partner programs while undermining other competing programs. Hollowing out foreign competitors also benefits F16/18 exports due to lack of viable gen4/4.5 alternatives. Maybe that was inevitable due to US tech leadership, but I think the geoeconomics is a big reason why F35 is "successful" regardless of technical merits. At minimum DRM means US won't ever fight adversary F35s.
sudosysgen 4y ago
Anti stealth air to air isn't really magic and the DoD itself foresaw stealth no longer being a decisive advantage against peers by 2025. It's just a matter of a larger, lower wavelength phased array radar in an integrated air defence system and a dual-mode preferably imaging seeker on the missile itself. Then there is also the issue that it's now viable to track airplane from geostationary orbit (really) and to deploy satellite swarms in low earth orbit which will probably be applied to air defence within a decade if it's not already done.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  Exaggerating for effect, but I think the tech you described for most nations relative to developement capabilities is basically magic, and most F35 partners will be relatively secure in their back yards. Realistically we're talking about PRC assembling those pieces together (especially Jilin/Gaofen tier space infra) in short/medium term. I've doubts they plan to export the system, except perhaps to MENA. Hence I think geoeconomics of F35 program is a huge success despite technical / future proofing merits, that likely won't be issue outside of peer warfare for decades. Concern of course is we might have peer warfare sooner.
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    While this is true, China exporting these is not outside of the question (theres even been talking of exporting the J-31), and I don't forsee China being the only country to do this - I'd imagine in the medium term India to develop similar technology to counter China and to try to resell it. Another thing about satellites is that you could plausibly sell them as a service, much like US AWACS and semi-commercial satellite imagery in Ukraine. At the same time, the F-35 itself is still not a finished product, it's still missing many of its core features such as full sensor networking and it's unlikely to ever be fully integrated at this pace (which the article doesn't mention - the software side of the F-35 program is still a disaster that doesn't seem to be improving as much as promised. Recently there's been chit chat about dependency hell and spaghetti code and the inability to even integrate new weapons platforms without breaking other subsystems) Beyond this, it's not clear that the F-35 represents that much of a leap against non-peer opponents. I'd say technically the program is still an overall success, but it's not really clear that it provides anything like a decisive advantage in any plausible situation.

wil421 4y ago

How many “new” partners did the F-35 win over? There are lots of countries using the F-16/18 etc. I think there were even times the US had a conflict where the adversary had US fighters.

dirtyid 4y ago
Fair point, but IMO increased dependancy is more about joint developement and getting level 1/2/3 partners emeshed into the program's supply chain. Side effect is tying up development resources in partner programs while undermining other competing programs. Hollowing out foreign competitors also benefits F16/18 exports due to lack of viable gen4/4.5 alternatives. Maybe that was inevitable due to US tech leadership, but I think the geoeconomics is a big reason why F35 is "successful" regardless of technical merits. At minimum DRM means US won't ever fight adversary F35s.

sudosysgen 4y ago

Anti stealth air to air isn't really magic and the DoD itself foresaw stealth no longer being a decisive advantage against peers by 2025. It's just a matter of a larger, lower wavelength phased array radar in an integrated air defence system and a dual-mode preferably imaging seeker on the missile itself. Then there is also the issue that it's now viable to track airplane from geostationary orbit (really) and to deploy satellite swarms in low earth orbit which will probably be applied to air defence within a decade if it's not already done.

dirtyid 4y ago
Exaggerating for effect, but I think the tech you described for most nations relative to developement capabilities is basically magic, and most F35 partners will be relatively secure in their back yards. Realistically we're talking about PRC assembling those pieces together (especially Jilin/Gaofen tier space infra) in short/medium term. I've doubts they plan to export the system, except perhaps to MENA. Hence I think geoeconomics of F35 program is a huge success despite technical / future proofing merits, that likely won't be issue outside of peer warfare for decades. Concern of course is we might have peer warfare sooner.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  While this is true, China exporting these is not outside of the question (theres even been talking of exporting the J-31), and I don't forsee China being the only country to do this - I'd imagine in the medium term India to develop similar technology to counter China and to try to resell it. Another thing about satellites is that you could plausibly sell them as a service, much like US AWACS and semi-commercial satellite imagery in Ukraine. At the same time, the F-35 itself is still not a finished product, it's still missing many of its core features such as full sensor networking and it's unlikely to ever be fully integrated at this pace (which the article doesn't mention - the software side of the F-35 program is still a disaster that doesn't seem to be improving as much as promised. Recently there's been chit chat about dependency hell and spaghetti code and the inability to even integrate new weapons platforms without breaking other subsystems) Beyond this, it's not clear that the F-35 represents that much of a leap against non-peer opponents. I'd say technically the program is still an overall success, but it's not really clear that it provides anything like a decisive advantage in any plausible situation.