The question is as strategic as a few others. This can be seen by looking at Google "Sputnik F35": the well 639.000 results (including a third on the "defect" and a fifth on "costs") make it clear that from the parts of the Moscow Kremlin someone believes the spread of this multirole single-seat fighter fifth generation a ... very bitter cabbage and no scruples to arouse the people of social media against the choice of favorable governments. How to give him wrong? Even the part that once would have been called "Atlantic" would make false cards to get rid of the S400s.
The writer reserves the right to return to the F35 theme (and later on S400) with a series of answers to questions open to readers. Meanwhile, let's enjoy a rundown of different positions, favorable, doubtful or contrary, all argued.
I am in favor of FXXUMX because ...
... allowed the first European Air Force to launch a fifth generation aircraft in line. In light of the old and new dangers that will need to be addressed in the future, even immediately, it has been a wise choice. (DD)
... allows us to enter into new programs (eg, the English Tempest program as protagonists) in light of the "war" that the "French cousins" have begun against us the reduction in the number of specimens is the result of the "insufficient" vision of the yellow government -green from the geo-political point of view. (DD)
... has allowed us to become part of a small group of nations that can boast aviation of a higher level, even if I believe that the membership of the program was too ambitious for a country like Italy and that we have however condemned to refrain from modernizing other equally important military instruments. I find myself in line with Britain on the one hand, France, Germany and Spain on the other in pursuing a program for sixth generation fighters involving national industries. Furthermore, the repositioning of the US administration, which no longer considers the alliance with the European countries as important in the past, makes it essential to be as independent as possible in a decidedly strategic sector such as defense. (CM)
... the F35 is certainly an aircraft with few equals. If anything, one wonders if Italy can really afford two sophisticated hunting lines (Typhoon and F35), when aeronautics from richer countries like France and Germany, with major defense budgets, have chosen the "mono" line ( Rafale and Typhoon), with enormous logistical advantages ... But saving can be: the Aeronautics can do very well without F35B; maybe better to give two or three more to the Navy (15 are a little hypothesizing a use of thirty years). With 30 F35A in Amendola and 30 in Ghedi and some aircraft (5 / 6?) For the attrition rate we would still have a remarkable attacking force. We would produce 84 airplanes instead of 90, saving the Faco, but saving a billion, to be poured on other no less important Defense programs (Arrow 2, Dart 2, Camm, Vulcano, etc.). (MC)
... I certainly believe the aircraft is a great machine and projects the air force into another dimension and into a future where technology will be increasingly indispensable. In addition, in Italy, Tornato and Amx Ghibli are going towards their operational end because of their age. It is undeniable that their purpose must coincide with the purchase of a new aircraft and undoubtedly in my opinion it is an exceptional machine and fits perfectly for the current need of the aeronautical weapon. Having a plane so undoubtedly brings unquestionable tactical and technological advantage, the fulcrum pilot of the plane is sent back to the flight management and to the data collection to be shared with other maritime and terrestrial structures, moreover the stealth technology and the weapon systems make it a formidable war machine in air-to-air and air-to-ground combat. This aircraft is certainly an opportunity not to be missed, which would make our borders safer, but also our armed forces increasingly employed in the most disparate operating theaters and would elevate us to top-level partners with other European armed forces. I ask myself a question, however, why not integrate this formidable airplane with the excellent M-346 Master, perhaps focusing the purchase of the F-35 for those departments carrying out deep attack missions or SEAD missions replacing the Tornado and maybe leaving the Tasks of the good Ghibli being an excellent platform for close air support. So I imagine an air force with EF-2000 Typhoon, F-35 Lighting II and M346 Master (or F / A) with a more calibrated F-35 distribution and with an eye to the Made in Italy product of excellence. (SC)
... only the "Situational Awareness" that this air platform guarantees to the pilot to consider it is not a simple opportunity, but a wealth to be proud of. Pilots with thousands of hours at the controls of F / A-18A-D Hornet, F-16A-B Fighting Falcon / Viper and F / A-18 Super Hornet were amazed by the maneuverability and operational capabilities of this amazing war machine ( we are not ashamed to say that it is a means designed for war!). I think it is really regrettable that for a blind and stupid ideology all the key events linked to the F35 have been censured and we continue to do the impossible not to mention this fifth generation aircraft, as if it were some kind of taboo. For example, how many in Italy know that we were the first in Europe to have obtained the "Initial Operational Capability"? But we know in certain salons and in some press that we prefer to emphasize (even with incomprehensible satisfaction) the negative primates that our country collects. (TO.)
... seems to be a strategic asset that can change the approach to the war tactics of the near future, not only in the sky. And maybe even the strategy (concept of "air swarm"). Given the technical capacity of the producers there were very few doubts in this regard. What should make us think is, in my opinion (in order):
- The ostracism until the media sabotage attempted by various detractors pro-Russia, especially at the technical level, which have found a bank in a wide audience ... One thing that has to turn on, in my opinion, some spy of attention. Politically there is, it is part of the democratic dynamics, that there are those who are in favor of cutting military spending until the elimination of the entire FFAA: you expect it (as Kafka wrote). What you do not expect is that journalists of national newspapers and not only support the thing, and even come to solicit agreements for the purchase of aircraft and Russian weapons. I skip the autarchical proposals for decency, such as the navalization of the M346. A comic thing if it were not tragic.
- Politically the government is caught in the middle of a very difficult ford crossing, since it seems clear (at least I hope ...) that the F35 is an attack aircraft. This determines the unmasking of precise geostrategic and economic motivations, dictated by the need to project our more or less armored light infantry and our ships, in places designated in the near future to supply us with gas and oil, as well as guaranteeing some essential naval routes. This truth may not please those who, in the government, only see the defense of national borders, at most, as the purpose of our FFAA. As well as the one that sees Italy essentially determined to participate, willingly or not, in any NATO operation. Hence the necessary technical integration. But let me understand.
- Technically speaking, once again we are waiting for Israel to verify the real capabilities of this US system / aircraft, as almost always happened in the past, making it challenge the new Russian AA systems installed in Syria, which all describe as deadly but that to date they seem to have knocked down no one. However, I fear that soon we will have something to talk about. To date, we know that F35 has participated in a couple of missions successfully, and that it is almost establishing a record of operational reliability, and that in the Red / Green flags it has massacred aggressors. (AS)
... I believe that Italy cannot give up on such a project, considering that it is one of the countries that is at level 2 of participation in the JSF program and due to the instability in the Mediterranean area in particular. Leaving aside the aspect of the workers employed and the related world of the companies involved, which should be granted a separate space, I believe that it is time for our political apparatus to finally indicate what the guidelines are for facing the challenges in the industrial and technological sector. concerning the concept of defense. If this is not taken into consideration we would be forced to see our armed forces repair the holes in Rome as indicated by the 5-star Movement. (MS)
... waiting for participation in the so-called sixth generation European fighter is still hoping for the book of dreams when we know well that on the one hand we have the current government and on the other that the German francs do not want us and that the Americans have in reserve for the future the real sixth generation fighter that we Europeans will never be able to match. I have always been in favor of the F35: I could not bear the reduction in number from 131 to 90 and more than once I wondered if it was not better to build at least another 15 F35 in the B version with vertical take-off to be assigned to the Air Force so that this Armed Force had 90 fighters and not only 75. I speak, however, of the book of dreams with a "pacifist" government like the one we find ourselves today. (GS)
... concerns our internal politics, geopolitics in Europe, NATO and direct relations with the USA, our security and intelligence, our economy and finally our industry as a growth of our know-how .
I have doubts ...
… About the ALIS system especially as regards the lack (until now) of backups. In an era of possible cyber war I consider it a dangerous flaw for the management of the fleet and missions. Even the dependence on a system in the "hand" of others even if allied does not reassure me. Furthermore, the reduced number considering training and maintenance does not guarantee adequate coverage of Tornado, AMX and Harrier replacements. (GC)
I am against it because ...
... now even the Pentagon admits it, today's news, of course, they say it blurring the corners, between the lines, but the failure between the huge expenditure in relation to the results is undeniable. Even today, when Israel uses it in operational missions, it has to "predict" F16 as "bodyguards", which says so much about how potentially vulnerable it is to being a 5-generation fighter ... after all the time spent and the astronomical expenses. (AS)
... citing Pierre Sprey, the engineer who designed F16 and A10 talking about F35, one thing is the needs of a fighter, the other are the needs of a boarded fighter, more are the needs of aircraft for SEAD missions, other are the aircraft for the electronic war, more are the planes for the CAS. It is not possible to find a single compromise, for a single aircraft, so that it fulfills all these roles.
... it's a bad hunt, as it is not agile and not very manoeuvrable.
... is not suitable for tactical air support because it is too fast, consumes too much fuel, is too flammable, has little payload, is too vulnerable to anti-aircraft and is easy to break down.
... it's a bad fighter, because the internal hold is too small, with external loads it has a high RCS.
... the stealth paint is soluble to atmospheric agents, especially humidity and salinity.
... its maintenance is linked to Alice, an IT system dependent on fragile satellite telecommunications.
... it is not invisible, on the contrary it is perfectly visible to the low-frequency radars of the Chinese and Russian air defense.
... it is slower, less armed and less manoeuvrable, than the Russian and Chinese Sukoi.
... it is very vulnerable at the end of the IR infrared pods of the Sukoi, having FXXUMX the very hot afterburner.
… Then has problems with: the helmet, the 5sec delay of the cameras, serious defects in engine reliability, obsolete IR sensors, avionics bugs that force the restart of computers in flight, as well as structural problems after 4000 hours of flight. (MN)
... we buy an aircraft produced in the USA with little industrial returns for Italy, to the detriment of European products with important economic returns for us. But above all, we buy an item that we will never have control of, the ignition keys remain in the hands of the US. In short, a harakiri. (PC)
... for now it is an airplane, slow, not very maneuverable, not very armed (both for the role of fighter and even more of fighter-bomber) suffering from enormous reliability problems at all levels, from the helmet to the engine passing through the tanks.
... the structure of Alis and the mission system implies a total renunciation (of Italy) of sovereignty over the plane.
... the economic repercussions are totally disproportionate to the investment. (LM)
I leave the conclusion to two readers very "inspiring":
The craziest aircraft in the world: F35 ITALIA. They wrote about everything and more. Personally I am in love, as well as the technological aspect, is the industrial construction that has illuminated me the most in the world; I explain: the project is born of American technology the first two partners are the British and the Italians, other Dutch friends, Canadians, Turks, Australians, Norwegians and Danes. This is the initial group. Reflection: Germans and French where are they? There are not two industrial protagonists in the project with a strong political weight. The question arises: why? Perhaps to develop European projects? Or maybe not to be bound by the Americans? The aircraft upgrades depend on the United States which are the only ones, apart from Israel with its F35I, to have the key. Something broke in the cristian club? In my opinion, yes; "American" group and French-speaking group, this clarifies many things at the European level: the quarrels between Italy and France, the now binary Brussels abandonment, the behavior of politicians. F35 an airplane that has illuminated the world, has cleared the camps, now we know who wants to get rid of it and why. Why give so much technological advantage to Italy the only European assembler country? Why leave us STX? If we look only at a national context, this plane maybe we do not need it, but if we want an international Italy it is necessary. If I am an Eskimo and I want to give my tribe a F35 and I know that they build it in Italy, since it is the best known technology and the Italians know how to "do" maybe even know "make" other technological products, maybe ships and helicopters We do not burn this opportunity: it's easier to design a UAV starting from a F35 than a F104 and let's not forget that the Westland has arrived and that the US presidential helicopters are ("they had to be", ed) by Leonardo ... (L.)
Dear Online Defense, I think I'm an average reader, with non-specialist skills in the defense sector, but interested in the subject.
Instinctively I would be led to think that investing in technology is always advantageous but I think I have a few solid elements to think about.
The question has always been posed as F35 or not, convenient or not, or better this or that.
I never had the opportunity to read an article that would illustrate the global defense model expected and how this is modified by the presence of high-tech aircraft.
For example, having F35 will allow us to invest less in armored artillery, soldiers or logistics?
Will it allow us to have a smaller number of aircraft or will it provide us with acquisitions of know-how that independently of the induced linked to the Cameri plants impacting production sectors?
Should we evaluate different weapon systems like ground-based missiles?
What is really needed for the protection of interests outside national borders?
I think all these elements have to come into play in the global evaluation and I hope I can finally understand more.
Obviously with the hope that the decision makers are wise and free from conflicts of interest. (LM)
Photo: US Air Force
