The scandalous reputation of the new F-35 is not inferior to its famous ancestors: the crooked Starfighter and the Convair B-58 superbomber with the self-explanatory name Hustler. Among the terrible crimes incriminated by the F-35, there are weak flight characteristics, an incredibly high cost (like a piece of gold of the same mass), endless problems with equipment and electronic filling …
Critics and spiteful critics of the JSF project cite typical failures and failures that are inevitable during the "break-in" and operation of a new machine as arguments, but for some reason they ignore the real drawback of JSF. The winged machine was ahead of its time! And she did it in the worst possible way: many of the announced technologies have not yet gone beyond the scientific laboratories - while the planes are already massively stamped at a plant in Fort Worth (Texas).
Most of the promising F-35 systems (radars with AFAR, optocouplers, elements of stealth technology) could be successfully integrated into the design of 4+ generation aircraft. Real life examples: F-15SE Silent Eagle and F / A-18 Silent Hornet. A couple more efforts of the designers, and they could be equal in combat capabilities to the F-35.
Why was it necessary to carry out expensive R&D to create a new platform, if in terms of its performance characteristics the F-35 is hardly superior to its ancestors? Why were asymmetric approaches not considered - such as the Swedish SAAB J-39 Gripen? Instead of the notorious "stealth", the Swedes prioritize the "survivability" parameter - a complex of means of detection and active jamming, which, according to the Swedes, allows Gripen to operate confidently in the enemy's air defense zone.
The Americans took the most obvious and costly path, deciding to build a new yubersplane and surprise the world with it. They had money and technology. And they succeeded. Today, the F-35 stealth fighter-bomber is the most advanced and mature aircraft in its class, both in terms of technology and combat capabilities.
Eleven countries around the world (Great Britain, Canada, Norway, Israel, etc.) have already chosen the F-35 as a promising fighter to upgrade their Air Force. The result of aggressive advertising and direct coercion of allies to purchase American military equipment. But was there anything to choose from? Which of the modern multi-role fighters could compete with the F-35 - with equal cost and the same combat capabilities? The answer is … a dumb scene!
Scandals, intrigues, investigations…
1. Vertical races
Of the three modifications of the F-35, only one (F-35B) is a VTOL aircraft. Specific fighter aircraft of the Marine Corps, designed to operate from forward airfields. Both structurally and in purpose it is a completely different machine, even outwardly different from the "base" F-35A. Unification in detail: 81% with the F-35A and only 62% with the deck F-35C.
F-35A and F-35B. Serious differences are visible even to the naked eye
The F-35B was ordered in a limited series of 500 aircraft (15% of the planned number of F-35s). The main part of the JSF program consists of F-35A fighters, whose take-off and landing characteristics are no different from other combat aircraft. That is why the following myth turns out to be untenable.
2. At the heart of "Lightning" is the Soviet Yak-141
How can a VTOL aircraft of the mid-80s and a modern fifth generation fighter be similar? Only because both aircraft are heavier than air. The goal of the JSF program (stealth multipurpose fighter-bomber) is far from the topic of VTOL aircraft. The F-35B "vertical" is only a side line of the program and bears little resemblance to the rest of the Lightning family.
Yak-141
About the similarity with Yak. The F-35B uses a different design with a lift fan (instead of two lift jet engines on the Yak-141). Both fighters have only similar outlines of the stern and the deflected nozzle of the main engine - this is what confuses the minds of young conspiracy theorists. At the same time, the vertical tail of the F-35 with two inclined keels is dictated not by the need for vertical take-off, but by the requirements of stealth technology.
3. A versatile plane is bad
Versatility? The maximum is the unification of units and parts within one family of combat aircraft (base, deck and "vertical").
If by "versatility" is meant the ability of fighters to perform strike missions, then history knows many successful examples of multipurpose aircraft - F-84, Phantom, MiG-21, Mirage-III, F-15E, Su-30, Rafale … Crazy the thrust of jet engines works wonders - the combat load of modern fighters is several times higher than that of the four-engine "Flying Fortress" (with the same take-off weight of ~ 30 tons). Grasp bunches of bombs and a container with sighting equipment under your wing - and any of the Raphales and Sushki will turn into a lethal bomber. The F-35 was no exception.
Eurofighter Typhoon
4. Replacement of ground attack aircraft
The F-35 family will replace all fourth-generation multirole fighters - F-16, F-15E, F / A-18, the AV-8 Harrier-II vertical, and even the A-10 Thunderbolt anti-tank attack aircraft. But how can a supersonic fighter replace a subsonic armored attack aircraft equipped with a powerful 7-barreled cannon?
Instead of a NURS salvo and cannon bursts - one 113-kg SDB gliding bomb or Mavrik missile. Instead of courageous flights under the fire of MANPADS and anti-aircraft machine guns of the Basmachi - high-precision weapons strikes from an unattainable height. To eradicate "those dissatisfied with democracy", light anti-guerrilla attack aircraft (such as "Cessna Kombat Caravan") are already being used. The rest of the functions of the A-10 should be taken over by attack helicopters and drones. The Yankees are restructuring their own air force, distributing tasks between classes of combat aircraft and removing outdated and ineffective equipment from service.
5. The F-35 makes its way through the sky only for the benefit of the beastly power of the F-135 engine (c)
Max. The takeoff weight of the F-35A is 30% more than that of its predecessor F-16 (29 versus 22 tons), and its engine develops 40% more thrust (13000 kgf without afterburner versus 8000 kgf). At the same time, the F-35A and F-16 have an equal combat load (declared - about 8 tons).
Direct evidence of the flawed aerodynamics and performance characteristics of the Lightning. Otherwise, what was the allocated load reserve spent on?
F-16I
The internal fuel tanks of the F-35 exceed 10,000 liters of kerosene - double that of any fourth generation fighter. The Lightning does not need PTBs to perform most of its missions, while other fighters are forced to occupy their hardpoints, thereby increasing their RCS, drag and reducing combat load.
The F-35 is equipped with a built-in sighting and navigation system for work "on the ground" - with thermal imagers, laser rangefinders, target tracking sensors and a missile line of sight correlator. Everything that conventional fighters carry in overhead containers as part of their payload.
Finally, there are internal bomb bays, S-shaped air intakes and elements of stealth technology. As a result, the figure 8 tons appeared in the tables. Only these are no longer suspended tanks and PNK, but real bombs and missiles.
6. The swallow flies
All fighters of the fourth-fifth generations are twins in their flight characteristics. The minimum differences of 10-20% in the values of the rate of climb, thrust-to-weight ratio and wing load are leveled by the position of the aircraft in space, the combat load, and the pilot's qualifications. The only exceptions are exotic fighters with engines with a deflected thrust vector, but their real combat capabilities are determined not so much by OVT as by the presence of outboard weapons. Any bomb or rocket on an external sling imposes its own severe restrictions on aerobatics (overload / thermal heating) and degrades the carrier's flight characteristics.
In the air, the F-35 will not only not yield to fourth-generation fighters, but should have an advantage due to the internal weapons bays, where the missiles are not afraid of thermal heating and where they do not create additional resistance in flight.
7. Emergency
150 built F-35s, 7 years of operation, not a single fighter lost in flight accidents. But Lightnings are operated in the harshest conditions, far beyond laboratories and test benches. They fly day and night. Take off and land on the decks of ships. Used for mass pilot training.
Contrary to rumors and pseudo-expert claims, JSF shows a fantastic level of reliability. Lockheed Martin specialists methodically test the car in all possible modes and eliminate the identified deficiencies.
And if a couple of years ago it seemed that the F-35 was "losing the battle", now it is becoming obvious: a powerful combat vehicle is being born overseas. The Pentagon stopped showing any interest in projects of deep modernization of existing fighters and completely focused on the JSF program. The trend was picked up by the allies - orders for the F-35 are growing, while its main competitors (projects F-15SE, F / A-18E / F and F / A-18 International Roadmap) are rapidly losing points and flying out of tenders.
