F-35: Designed for a war that still does not exist

The fighter, which still retains a certain appeal in Europe, receives support in Asian countries and it seems that the orders of the JSF can grow over the years precisely in the Region.

Beyond the consents obtained and the contracts subsequently reduced, the feeling is that few, outside the American borders, are really supporting the program. But beyond the fierce criticism, the future certainly appears: the Lightning-II, in the end, will be in service with a dozen large Allied air forces. Needless to deny it.

Cost increases, inevitable political repercussions and negative projections on orders placed by the military: these are the main enemies of the JSF. And while orders appear to be made with the dropper, the unit price for each individual fighter continues to increase as well as the costs of research, development and production start-up. The leavened costs, apparently out of proportion, then trigger the policy resulting in the cancellation of previously signed orders. Further increase in the final price and consequent reduction of the fleet with inevitable embarrassment among international partners.

Are we facing a deadly spiral that will forever end the F-35?

Absolutely not, and we explain why.

F-35: the low-cost alternative to the F-22

The F-35 cannot be suppressed because in the light of the negative experiences it had with the B-2 Spirit and the F-22 Raptor (photo on the right), Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon are working together to ensure the vital sustenance of the platform. All branches of the US military, beyond the orders of the partners, will acquire an impressive number of JSFs.

It would be fair to say that fighters sold abroad, to date, are irrelevant in the survival of the fighter. The result is a plane that many would like to have canceled, but which will sail the skies.

No matter how much the low-cost alternative of the F-22 will cost: the F-35 will fly. And beyond the technical aspect and the criticisms (rightly for charity, but we are always in an experimental phase with reduced production) that are afflicting the hunt, the policy should tone down the situation, knowing what is really happening.

The most common alternative in the mouth is that the F-35 can really be replaced by the much cheaper in-service fighters. And it's true. Initially, the operating costs of the F-35 will be higher than those of existing aircraft. F-15, F-16, F / A-18 and A-10 to date are able to perform most of the missions that the F-35 will conduct.

The best coverage against the failure of the F-35 program would have been the investment in the modernized versions of existing aircraft, which would then continue to carry out traditional missions that do not require the specialized skills of the F-22 or the F-35. This option, however, was discarded by Congress and the Pentagon who invested every resource in the JSF.

F-35: what have I been designed for?

The F-35 was designed to excel in contexts that emphasize the Beyond Visual Range (BVR), in information-intensive environments connected to the network. If they work as promised, the aircraft's capabilities will be truly remarkable.

According to the F-35 detractors, the fighter will be online without any of the distinctive features of the combat platforms, but if it really works, it could even do without it. It should be noted that the future F-35 does not mean that it will carry out the missions initially planned by the designers.

History teaches. The success of combat aircraft sometimes transcends their real project. In fact, designers and politicians are rarely able to speculate on the operational demands of the war that will or will be needed in the 2040 a fighter hunt. That is why, in times of peace, to imagine a platform of the future is a very difficult task.

The P-40 Warhawk for example. One of the best attack aircraft of World War II, but initially conceived as an air superiority fighter.

The P-51 Mustang (photo)? It became the best fighter bomber of World War II bombers, a mission not even imagined by the military until a few months before.

The scary Messerschmitt Me 262? Fortunately for the allies, Hitler wanted it in line as a Schnellbomber fighter-bomber, invalidating its clean lines and its performance. In fact, in 1944, Nazi Germany could not afford large-scale production that could counteract Allied superpower. When, however, the 262 entered service as an interceptor, it was painful for the allies.

History, as we know, is cyclical. During the Cold War, fighters designed to bring down Soviet bombers, were employed in air superiority and as fighter-bombers with moderate success. The F-15 and the F-16, for example, designed for air superiority, have often acted as bombers.

Even the beloved F-14 Tomcat, the US Navy's specific missile platform, was readjusted for bombing.

The Harrier? Designed to operate in post-atomic contexts with runways destroyed by Soviet nuclear warheads.

The F-35 was not designed on the failures of previous fighters (as happened for the post-war Vietnam production), but to operate in a context that does not yet exist. The F-35 was designed for the war of the future, but it will probably be used in roles that its designers don't even imagine.

Today it is a plane built in peacetime, but designed for tomorrow's fights.

F-35: the future  

The F-35 will have a future, but it would be appropriate to understand the role it will have in future strategic assets. The ideal operational theater of the F-35, in fact, does not yet exist and probably will still be a few decades before it takes shape, but the hunt could be decisive and represent that coveted "Game Changer".

The Lightning-II version with short take-off and vertical landing could really be a plus point in the supersonic fighter scene. The thought goes to the Falklands war and the role played by the Harriers. But considering all the problems of the F-35, it would be advisable to also evaluate the advantages that such an asset will receive. In fact, even if China and Russia have increased their capacity to dispose of specialized personnel, it is unlikely that it will match that of the United States in recruiting and training pilots. Great pilots can make discrete cells into superb aircraft.

No country in the world, then, can compete, military history teaches, with the logistic genius of the United States. Despite the complexity of the F-35, the fighter can always count on a sublime logistic apparatus. Wherever in the world it will be deployed, the F-35 will always have equipment, spare parts, maintenance and crews.

Finally, a common mistake is to evaluate the F-35 (we are always talking about what will fly for the USA) as a single platform. The American F-35, on the other hand, was designed to close the circle that started with the Raptor. The JSF, in fact, should be seen in a large system consisting of F-22, B-2 (and future bombers), the Zumwalt classes and numerous other combat platforms.

The European F-35 Lightning II, on the other hand, will fly with Typhoons and Rafales, for the next 50 years. The die is now drawn. Too much money invested by the United States to cancel the program and, probably, this is a lesson that must be kept in mind for the next generation bombers or other programs already contracted by the US Defense.

Perhaps, thinking in hindsight, the United States would have had to focus on the Raptor fleet and not limit itself to those exemplary 167 by virtue of a world stability that has proved too far down. But the war of the future is hardly predictable and in the battles of tomorrow, the F-35 could still do extraordinary things.

Franco Iacch

(photo: Lockheed Martin / US DoD)