IDN TAKE: Why India Should Buy the F-35 Lightning II

[Immanuel]

This thing will only work against poorly equipped air defense force .Any decent air defense force like China will try to jam this ability so the JSF is limited to its own DAS and other sensors .We have to take the worst case where our forces will operate in a electronical hostile environment where the enemy is trying to jam the communication and other active sensors.Add to that F 35 is going to be a maintenance headache just like the F 22 which for every hour of flight requires 22 hours of maintenance that is going to effective the availability of our force.It can carry only 4 medium range missile and no WVR missile in steath mode and as a bomber it can carry only 4 bombs which is small payload .IF a war break out against china and pak at the same time this plane is going to disaster .

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/719/f35missles.jpg

6 A2A missiles is the current case, 3 A2A missiles in one bay spotted recently used to be 2. Birds will carry 6 A2A missiles soon enough + 2*1000lbs bomb. 4*500 lbs bombs or 2*2000 lbs bombs, JDAMS/Paveways or 2*CBU-105SFW, or upto 8*SDB. Not bad at all. See with a weapon like CBU-105SFW, it can target upto 40 moving target with a single bomb, so its also important what it carries. Thanks God all bombs are not created alike With a couple of CBU-105SFW, 80 moving ground targets for the taking. It is more effective than a single Rafale is without going nuclear.

The F-35 needs half the amount of hrs needed for F-22. With critical failure on flight of 4.5hrs, took around 12 hrs of maintenance. Not bad at all. They are trying to the number down. Keep in mind its stil a test aircraft

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/feature/5/151303/a-look-at-f_35’s-true-o&s-cost.html

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/you-can-track-your-f-35s-at-alis-maintenance-hub-04368/

 

[Chinmoy]

ts electronic warfare ability is not in its ability to jam enemy electronics but in its sensor fusion and net centric warfare and China has doctrine made specifically to counter that.Its ability to jam enemy radar is limited.As for T 50,it was made as a stealth fighter hunter as a result it has a lot of passive and active sensors along with jammers plus the performance so it more likely to survive .What we do get in F 35 is sensor fusion and ability to share the info with every one in real time and if put effort in AMCA it can have similarly performance.But since this the only strength of F 35 and against china it loses that strength.Plus there is the maintenance issue .The technical readiness of Su 30 fleet is 50% is the highest in our force but F 35 is such a complex machine ,10 times that of Su 30 that it technical readiness will never be greater then 15% that will be a problem.

I do agree with you over here. That's why I have told that it would be good in defensive role rather then an offensive role in a high security air zone. Now jamming a RADAR is nothing like building a wall and blocking the radio waves. We all do know that one cannot completely blind a RADAR. There are still some gaps remaining through which you could be detected. So penetrating any defence with a high density of jammer and taking out any enemy is a far shot. No matter how much stealth you do incorporate. But while defending your area where enemy could not bring down a whole lot of system to effectively blind you out is an easier prospect.

As far as cost of maintenance is concerned, you are bang spot on.

 

[Bahamut]

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/719/f35missles.jpg

6 A2A missiles is the current case, 3 A2A missiles in one bay spotted recently used to be 2. Birds will carry 6 A2A missiles soon enough + 2*1000lbs bomb. 4*500 lbs bombs or 2*2000 lbs bombs, JDAMS/Paveways or 2*CBU-105SFW, or upto 8*SDB. Not bad at all. See with a weapon like CBU-105SFW, it can target upto 40 moving target with a single bomb, so its also important what it carries. Thanks God all bombs are not created alike With a couple of CBU-105SFW, 80 moving ground targets for the taking. It is more effective than a single Rafale is without going nuclear.

The F-35 needs half the amount of hrs needed for F-22. With critical failure on flight of 4.5hrs, took around 12 hrs of maintenance. Not bad at all. They are trying to the number down. Keep in mind its stil a test aircraft

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/feature/5/151303/a-look-at-f_35’s-true-o&s-cost.html

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/you-can-track-your-f-35s-at-alis-maintenance-hub-04368/

It good that now it carries 6 BVR missile but still no WVR in stealth mode.Plus pilot train to fire 2 missile at at a target ,in case a failure or one missile being defeated.So that 3 shots.Compare to PAK FA 10 to 12 including 2 WVS. Plus the sensor of JSF are primary made for air to ground not air to air.Add to that AIM 120 come no dual seeker or different seeker like Russian missile.
Still F 35 requires 11 hr of maintenance for 1 hr of flight.Due u think IAF with all the planes operates can do that .This aircraft have no common part with any type in IAF and no common weapon.The helmet is custom build at 600,000 and if its fails the pilot cannot fight back as there is no backup and is full errors .The display by camera on helmet for back of the aircraft is not very clear resulting in mistake in speed , distance and sometimes even position of enemy. The improvement will cost more money and delays .Plus to use this jet ur tactics will have to change and that take year and lots of flights.At present each aircraft is only able to fly 4 sorties each month compare that to what air combat training is 40 sorties a mouth.Rafael is safer bet .PAKFA will be used were stealth is required.Plus we get some ToT. Rafael give more flexibility also it is good in air to air combat.

 

[Bahamut]

I do agree with you over here. That's why I have told that it would be good in defensive role rather then an offensive role in a high security air zone. Now jamming a RADAR is nothing like building a wall and blocking the radio waves. We all do know that one cannot completely blind a RADAR. There are still some gaps remaining through which you could be detected. So penetrating any defence with a high density of jammer and taking out any enemy is a far shot. No matter how much stealth you do incorporate. But while defending your area where enemy could not bring down a whole lot of system to effectively blind you out is an easier prospect.

As far as cost of maintenance is concerned, you are bang spot on.

For defensive role we can have more SAM.It will deal with threat faster and are more efficient and easy to maintain.Stealth is actual on planning your flight to avoid radar ,fly low and fast ,no active sensors and perfect radio silence.This is more on training and good piloting .Stealth can be detected and destroy at long range if the do not fly with correct tactics and tactics require time to develop and that means more flight and if ur aircraft is maintenance heavy ,u get incomplete tactics ,poorly train pilot which is a disaster for defense force.A good pilot in a bad plane is better then a bad pilot in good plane.A defensive force need aircraft that can take off and eliminate target quickly, less maintenance so it can fly more sorties . F 35 is good at none .

 

[Chinmoy]

For defensive role we can have more SAM.It will deal with threat faster and are more efficient and easy to maintain.Stealth is actual on planning your flight to avoid radar ,fly low and fast ,no active sensors and perfect radio silence.This is more on training and good piloting .Stealth can be detected and destroy at long range if the do not fly with correct tactics and tactics require time to develop and that means more flight and if ur aircraft is maintenance heavy ,u get incomplete tactics ,poorly train pilot which is a disaster for defense force.A good pilot in a bad plane is better then a bad pilot in good plane.A defensive force need aircraft that can take off and eliminate target quickly, less maintenance so it can fly more sorties . F 35 is good at none .

I have already mentioned these points earlier in this thread on why we should put our bet more on T-50 then F-35. The base is that, we need a fighter which along with being stealthy should be able to pack a punch in close combat scenario. One which is super maneuverable and as you mentioned, low on maintenance. Stealth is something which is too overrated at current time. There is nothing like an invisible aircraft.

But I am again here for tech and innovation. F-35 has brought some new innovation with it as well as T-50. So instead of lobbying for one platform or other, we should discuss the pros and cons of both the systems and on how to improve on these.

Moreover, you cant rely on your SAM only for defensive role. You need to have someone, who could kick the ass of the intruder by taking the fight up close and personal :biggrin2:.

 

[charlie]

I have a question for you guys.

Given the things both of you have mentioned, how come F-22 came out as an excellent platform, and F-35 turned out to be a very expensive disappointment?

I understand cost might be one issue.

F22 was one aircraft, F35 has 3 variants and that too it is a collaborative effort compared to F22 which has no non US parts.


If we take power plant as an example in F35, then they have 3 different version of Pratt& Whitney F135(100,400&600 or 700) and then there was contract won by GE/RR and that variant called F136. F22 just had Pratt& Whitney power plant and this is just one example.

F22 is just serving air force but F35 is going to serve more services & more countries. Different services has different requirement, so it's going to take more time then developing F22.


I think more bigger problems are still to come once it’s deployed with different countries subsystem in other countries then there will be a lot’s of issues showing up.

 

[Pulkit]

I have a question for you guys.

Given the things both of you have mentioned, how come F-22 came out as an excellent platform, and F-35 turned out to be a very expensive disappointment?

I understand cost might be one issue.

Its not just cost .

F-22 was a disaster in itself but that was not at the cost of the weapon i.e. aircraft.

in F-35 they tried and put everything in one place which cannot be made possible as there are various things conflicting each other.
Vertical take off was not the requirement of the Air force but Navy or other forces which lead to a bulky middle body.

They have put a lot of high tech into it to defect friend or foe . to counter missiles etc etc...

But in F-35 they are relying completely on the stealth of the weapon and as we all know it is not possible to completely remove the trace of its existence yet.

on the other hand F-22 has a much better stream lined body which helps it to do really difficult turns .


F22 was a failures in terms of its cost both acquisition and maintenance.

F-35 is not what was aimed they never wanted to give the advantages an aircraft has when it can climb turn accelerate but to customize it in terms of every force they were forced to leave a few major things....

F-22 is much better than F35 but F22 is not economic .


Edit:



@Bahamut has shared his views on this above and I agree to it.

 

[Zebra]

Its electronic warfare ability is not in its ability to jam enemy electronics but in its sensor fusion and net centric warfare and China has doctrine made specifically to counter that.Its ability to jam enemy radar is limited.As for T 50,it was made as a stealth fighter hunter as a result it has a lot of passive and active sensors along with jammers plus the performance so it more likely to survive .What we do get in F 35 is sensor fusion and ability to share the info with every one in real time and if put effort in AMCA it can have similarly performance.But since this the only strength of F 35 and against china it loses that strength.Plus there is the maintenance issue .The technical readiness of Su 30 fleet is 50% is the highest in our force but F 35 is such a complex machine ,10 times that of Su 30 that it technical readiness will never be greater then 15% that will be a problem.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...adron-ready-for-combat-400-billion-later.html

Davis said he also hoped to boost the new planes' readiness rate beyond the current fleet average of 70 to 75 percent.

the DOT&E Report on the F-35 program published in January 2015 determined that the plane has not, in fact, reached any of the nine reliability measures the program was supposed to achieve by this point in its development and that the Joint Program Office has been re-categorizing failure incidents to make the plane look more reliable than it actually is. Further, the complexity of maintaining the F-35 means that, currently, none of the Services are ready to keep it in working order and instead “rely heavily on contractor support and unacceptable workarounds.” DOT&E found that the program achieved 61 percent of planned flight hours and that the average rate of availability was as low as 28 percent for the F-35A and 33 percent for the F-35B. The program created a new “modeled achievable” flight hour projection “since low availability was preventing the full use of bed-down plan flight hours.” According to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Financial Management, in FY2014, each non-test F-35 flew only 7.7 hours per month, which amounts to approximately one sortie every 5.5 days—for combat purposes, a sortie rate so low as to be crippling. Mean flight hours between removal (MFHBR) have increased, but are still only 59 percent to 65 percent of the required threshold. DOT&E found that mean corrective maintenance time for critical failures got worse for the F-35A and the F-35C over the last year. Structural cracking is also proving to be a recurring and enduring problem that is not yet resolved.

1) Can you post that report part here on DFI and its link please.

2) http://news.investors.com/business/...mal-readiness-rates-air-force-wants-speed.htm

Air Force F-35's Readiness Rate Barely Reaches 60%

Anyway, earlier I said wait for some time.
Its too early to judge F-35.
Too much negative publicity going on.

 

[Zebra]

I do agree with you over here. That's why I have told that it would be good in defensive role rather then an offensive role in a high security air zone. Now jamming a RADAR is nothing like building a wall and blocking the radio waves. We all do know that one cannot completely blind a RADAR. There are still some gaps remaining through which you could be detected. So penetrating any defence with a high density of jammer and taking out any enemy is a far shot. No matter how much stealth you do incorporate. But while defending your area where enemy could not bring down a whole lot of system to effectively blind you out is an easier prospect.

As far as cost of maintenance is concerned, you are bang spot on.

If I am not wrong, F-35 can tackle S-400. Its been designed to do that.

 

[Bahamut]

If I am not wrong, F-35 can tackle S-400. Its been designed to do that.

It depends more on the men behind the machine .S 400 has very advance radar that can easily find and track F 35 and the speed of the missile( some being hyper sonic) makes counter measure less effective.
F 117 that was shoot in Serbia.That was 1980 tech and F 117 was more stealth then f 35 and radar tech has increased.The only hope will be jammers but I do not have much info one them but newer Russian missile use a different tech called laser fuse that is more immune to jamming.

 

[Bahamut]

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/everything-wrong-with-the-f-35-3b62e8b3b432
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/co...hink-america-can-afford-the-f-35-8dcc1e0ce29e
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/f-35-still-years-away-from-being-ready-for-combat-2924e1b23fb8
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fo...ghter-the-best-case-is-still-bad-830fdf0abd48
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how-much-does-an-f-35-actually-cost-21f95d239398
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fo...ghter-the-best-case-is-still-bad-830fdf0abd48
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how-much-does-an-f-35-actually-cost-21f95d239398
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/f-35-still-years-away-from-being-ready-for-combat-2924e1b23fb8

http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...adron-ready-for-combat-400-billion-later.html
The link for report
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2014/pdf/dod/2014f35jsf.pdf






1) Can you post that report part here on DFI and its link please.

2) http://news.investors.com/business/...mal-readiness-rates-air-force-wants-speed.htm


Anyway, earlier I said wait for some time.
Its too early to judge F-35.
Too much negative publicity going on.

 

[Bahamut]

http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2014/pdf/dod/2014f35jsf.pdf
the link for report

 

[Immanuel]

It good that now it carries 6 BVR missile but still no WVR in stealth mode.Plus pilot train to fire 2 missile at at a target ,in case a failure or one missile being defeated.So that 3 shots.Compare to PAK FA 10 to 12 including 2 WVS. Plus the sensor of JSF are primary made for air to ground not air to air.Add to that AIM 120 come no dual seeker or different seeker like Russian missile.
Still F 35 requires 11 hr of maintenance for 1 hr of flight.Due u think IAF with all the planes operates can do that .This aircraft have no common part with any type in IAF and no common weapon.The helmet is custom build at 600,000 and if its fails the pilot cannot fight back as there is no backup and is full errors .The display by camera on helmet for back of the aircraft is not very clear resulting in mistake in speed , distance and sometimes even position of enemy. The improvement will cost more money and delays .Plus to use this jet ur tactics will have to change and that take year and lots of flights.At present each aircraft is only able to fly 4 sorties each month compare that to what air combat training is 40 sorties a mouth.Rafael is safer bet .PAKFA will be used were stealth is required.Plus we get some ToT. Rafael give more flexibility also it is good in air to air combat.

Well you shouldn't worry much about what it can do now. Aim-9X block 3 will be integrated internal by FOC. As for the APG-81, its a multimode AESA radar and just as good in the air as on the ground, it can provide better coverage than most aircraft with AESA. No one ever promised it to be Air superiority fighter, its obvious its more a bomb truck. 11 hrs per flight hr is average among most modern fighters, actually Rafale has roughly the same, so does the EF. Aim-120 will be replaced by the CUDA next decade and Aim-120D is pretty good at the moment. Besides in the Indian context we can integrate I Derby-ER & Python-5 just like the Israelis will on the F-35. The Helmet was full of errors but the new version available of March this year is quite fixed and they still have around 4 years to fix any pertaining issues.

Sure the improvements cost money but they are not ours to bear. They are still willing to sell F-35 for roughly 100 million. Well tactics will evolve just like they still have to evolve on the Tejas, this is not an excuse to shun the F-35 just like the Tejas. All such things take time. No new aircraft comes with an hand book on tactics since day 1. Also I am not asking to buy it now, order it in 2020 FOC version for the Indian Navy, they will good aircraft for the Naval air arm.

Well They have plenty of Test aircraft flying, that matters, because they have all such tests they discover all issues everything from sensors to materials to maintenance. Benefit of such an extensive test program means more bugs are detected before FOC and well that's the goal of testing. Post FOC a regular F-35 will fly 240 hrs a year like the US Navy or AF requires.

 

[Bahamut]

Well you shouldn't worry much about what it can do now. Aim-9X block 3 will be integrated internal by FOC. As for the APG-81, its a multimode AESA radar and just as good in the air as on the ground, it can provide better coverage than most aircraft with AESA. No one ever promised it to be Air superiority fighter, its obvious its more a bomb truck. 11 hrs per flight hr is average among most modern fighters, actually Rafale has roughly the same, so does the EF. Aim-120 will be replaced by the CUDA next decade and Aim-120D is pretty good at the moment. Besides in the Indian context we can integrate I Derby-ER & Python-5 just like the Israelis will on the F-35. The Helmet was full of errors but the new version available of March this year is quite fixed and they still have around 4 years to fix any pertaining issues.

Sure the improvements cost money but they are not ours to bear. They are still willing to sell F-35 for roughly 100 million. Well tactics will evolve just like they still have to evolve on the Tejas, this is not an excuse to shun the F-35 just like the Tejas. All such things take time. No new aircraft comes with an hand book on tactics since day 1. Also I am not asking to buy it now, order it in 2020 FOC version for the Indian Navy, they will good aircraft for the Naval air arm.

Well They have plenty of Test aircraft flying, that matters, because they have all such tests they discover all issues everything from sensors to materials to maintenance. Benefit of such an extensive test program means more bugs are detected before FOC and well that's the goal of testing. Post FOC a regular F-35 will fly 240 hrs a year like the US Navy or AF requires.

Navy it take sense ,they will suit with MIg 29K providing the air defense as it low maintenance and high performance and and F 35 attacking .But if we buy we should make sure that the entire maintenance be done in India with limited ToT like the radar and DAS,it will help in AMCA .India was also instructed in E 2D so it can make a good attack combo.But as for air force ,that not good for them.A few F 18 as backup can be taken if maintenance problem of F 35 is full solve.
As for Tejas,there will no drastic change in tactics as performance is nearly the same as Mig 21 if not bit better.Take a few F 35 if we get a ToT deal.

 

[manutdfan]

Hahah bomb truck with above average sensors, name another aircraft save some AWACS that have such long range sensors with such specs. I never said it will be world class dogfighter, I only said the F-35 will have unparalled sensory and situational awareness when it comes flying and fighting. Cockpit visibility issue is due to large head rests, this will be fixed.

No one ever promised it to be Air superiority fighter, its obvious its more a bomb truck.

Wow! finally you have accepted that the F-35 is just a bombtruck. Good for you, i know it's not been easy.

I stand vindicated. Damn it feels so good. Excellent work @Bahamut @Kharavela @Pulkit @Chinmoy

All the crap about parity doesn't really matter the Russians have been doing with China for years, grow up and realize every nation is concerned most with self interests.

As for India becoming a client state, how does it matter. Have you been asleep for the last 8 years? 10 C-17s, 12 C-130Js, 22 Apache, 15 Chinooks, 12 P-8Is, potentially 16 S-70Bs. All with options for more we could end up seeing over 3-4 sqds of Apaches more, around 123+ MH-60s or S-70Bs, more Chinooks. There is talk of Chinook or Apache line in India. What about 125 Engines for Jag re-engine or 120+ GE engines for LCA Tejas. What about the LM2500 GE engines on the INS Vikrant. We already are a client state. In such short time if this doesn't show that we are a client then I don't understand what will.

Yeah why bother with the geopolitics crap? Anyway it's way beyond your comprehension. And no I haven't been asleep it's just that you started following world history much later than me and your understanding of it is limited to pretty much post 9/11. Pardon me as I didn't mean to break the limbo you are currently living in.

Well tactics will evolve just like they still have to evolve on the Tejas, this is not an excuse to shun the F-35 just like the Tejas. All such things take time. No new aircraft comes with an hand book on tactics since day 1. Also I am not asking to buy it now, order it in 2020 FOC version for the Indian Navy, they will good aircraft for the Naval air arm.

I'm a fair guy and I believe in giving credit where it's due. Frankly this is the only para where I totally agree with the author. Well he believes that I'm not in touch with the ground reality but I'll let this one slide.

And since totally I agree with only this particular para I would like to contribute to it. The F-4 Phantom II which was the savior and dofighting star of the USAF in the Vietnam War was originally built as a missile carrier. It was severely criticized for being too heavy to dogfight and for its unreliable avionics & weapons. So blinded was the USAF by its belief in the concept of BVR that earlier variants which entered the war didn't even have a cannon. They were retrofitted only when the mounting losses became too significant to be ignored. Although the F-4 was never as agile as the MiG-21 its success can be attributed mainly to the ingenuity of its pilots who innovated tactics based around its superior thrust and excellent handling. Also with each new variant the F-4 became a more capable and agile fighter.

Similar analogies can be drawn to the case of the F-35 too. I have spewed enough vitriol against it. Who knows with further weight reduction, slight revisions to airframe and more powerful engines it might even stand a decent chance against its more maneuverable/agile counterparts? As I have mentioned earlier nothing can replace the brain in the cockpit and ultimately everything depends on him/her.

That being said I do agree with the author of captioned post that it would be a good addition to the Indian Navy but in small numbers. F-35 in conjunction with MiG-29K would be a very potent fleet air-defense and anti-ship platform. The F-35 would be the stealthy eyes & ears whereas the MiG-29K would do the heavy lifting. However in no way should it be interpreted as a justification for its acquisition by the IAF where the operational requirements are completely different.

Well looks like it's pretty much case closed for me and I won't have any more reasons to post counter-arguments on this thread.

 

[Zebra]

It depends more on the men behind the machine .S 400 has very advance radar that can easily find and track F 35 and the speed of the missile( some being hyper sonic) makes counter measure less effective.
F 117 that was shoot in Serbia.That was 1980 tech and F 117 was more stealth then f 35 and radar tech has increased.The only hope will be jammers but I do not have much info one them but newer Russian missile use a different tech called laser fuse that is more immune to jamming.

That is why I said again and again, wait some more.

And I already posted a video for F-117. I posted it twice.

 

[Zebra]

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/everything-wrong-with-the-f-35-3b62e8b3b432
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/co...hink-america-can-afford-the-f-35-8dcc1e0ce29e
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/f-35-still-years-away-from-being-ready-for-combat-2924e1b23fb8
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fo...ghter-the-best-case-is-still-bad-830fdf0abd48
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how-much-does-an-f-35-actually-cost-21f95d239398
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fo...ghter-the-best-case-is-still-bad-830fdf0abd48
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how-much-does-an-f-35-actually-cost-21f95d239398
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/f-35-still-years-away-from-being-ready-for-combat-2924e1b23fb8

Nothing new.

Try on each and every F-35 thread, you will find many posts like it.

But the reality is.................. the most troubled variant F-35B got announced as ready to deploy for operations.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/f-35-fighter-declared-ready-to-deploy/article/2569354

 

[Zebra]

Navy it take sense ,they will suit with MIg 29K providing the air defense as it low maintenance and high performance and and F 35 attacking .But if we buy we should make sure that the entire maintenance be done in India with limited ToT like the radar and DAS,it will help in AMCA .India was also instructed in E 2D so it can make a good attack combo.But as for air force ,that not good for them.A few F 18 as backup can be taken if maintenance problem of F 35 is full solve.
As for Tejas,there will no drastic change in tactics as performance is nearly the same as Mig 21 if not bit better.Take a few F 35 if we get a ToT deal.

Now we got a Mig-29K which all of sudden become a low maintenance aircraft.

 

[pmaitra]

Who knows with further weight reduction, slight revisions to airframe and more powerful engines it might even stand a decent chance against its more maneuverable/agile counterparts?

I do not foresee F-35 with more than one engine.

 

[Bahamut]

Now we got a Mig-29K which all of sudden become a low maintenance aircraft.

Compared to F 35 it is easy to maintain.