28mm Fanatik,
Thanks for the article.
There's a few things I've always found dubious with some of these arguments:
1. Proliferation of advanced "double digit" Russians SAMs has not really happened unless we're talking China and Russia.
Average SAMs still utilised by most potential enemies are SA-2/-3/-6s as used by Iraq and Yugoslavia and which were obsolete by late 1960s (SA-2) and late 1970s (SA-3/-6).
Hence F-16/-15/-18 is still completely useful in 99% of situtations.
And hanging off ordnance of an F-35 just gives you a slow F-16/-18.
As for war against Russia/China, F-35 is too slow and short ranged. Remember land bases are conventional ballistic missile fodder in a WWIII scenario.
This is why the Brits brought all those Harriers in the 1970s/80s and why Russian jets were designed with rough airfield performance and why the Swedes (and Singaporeans) design highways that can double up as airstrips.
2. F-35 EW pod is on backburner so it won't be able to do jamming. This puts the Marines in a bit of a bind as they don't want EA-18Gs to replace EA-6Bs.
3. USAF's commitment to EW is pretty poor – they've just proposed cutting 7 out of 14 EC-130 jammers and a quarter of E-3 AWACS fleet, even though vast majority of current tactical fighter fleet is 4th generation.
Not to mention retirement of EF-111 and cancellation of E-10, EB-52 etc.
So for a service aiming to fight against super advanced opponents, they've been gutting their main source of advantage.
Obviously USN and USMC have different opinions on the matter. USMC are noteworthy because they planned to retain EW squadrons even though they were going to an all stealth fleet.
3. F-22 communication/data sharing capablities don't really exist (though there are planned upgrades). It's one of the reasons the US claimed F-22s weren't sent to Libya in 2011.
4. F-35 cannot carry AGM-88 Anti-Radar Missiles in internal bomb bay.
Hanging them off wing pylons turns F-35 into a slower F-16.
In fact hanging anything off the wings just gives you a slow F-16.
And hanging stuff off wings is necessary as F-35 bomb bay is limited.
5. The whole concept of stealth aircraft emitting electronic frequencies seems completely counter intuitive.
6. Aerial refuellers are still non-stealthy. Latest Chinese (J-20) and Russian (T-50) stealth jets are large and assumed to be long range just like current Su-27/30/32 Flanker series.
Shooting down slow moving non-stealthy tankers is one way of shutting down F-35s (and indeed has been identified by such analysts as RAND Corporations).
I always thought F-35 was designed with "Baghdad 1991" in mind.
It's overkill for Serbia 1999/Iraq 2003/Libya 2011 or Afghanistan.
At the same time I don't think it's been designed around WWIII style conflict against a large and capable opponent.
Baghdad 1991 was in many ways the death of an era. Without Soviet support, there was never going to be the massed deployment of SA-XX type AD systems backed up by large numbers of MiG-29s and Su-27s.
Instead the number of countries with any sort of air defence is in terminal decline.
Most that do have such systems have obsolete gear. Even most NATO countries don't have a fully integrated Air Defence System.
Hence F-35 should've been an F-117 replacement – a specialist penetration aircraft. Inded it should've been the FB-22 which was also cancelled..
F-15/-16/-18 replacement should've been either a truly multirole F-22 or something with stealth elements but overall emphasis on multirole combat including speed and maneouvrability.
The Marines certainly don't need stealthy F-35s for most of their missions, nor do they need 100% STOVL capability. But boys like their toys