The Lexington Institute is at it again.
They are still trying to push the idea that the F-35 program has a future. They keep grabbing at straws.
They claim the F-35 is capable against modern threats, when in fact it is not survivable.
The Lexington Institute doesn't understand that even the alleged biggest buyer of the F-35 (USAF) has no way to afford the aircraft.
The Lexington Institute does not understand that serious engineering problems are what is holding the great dream of mass production behind. They would have us think that the problems are minor and fixable. Build away; even if it means $30 billion in mistake jets.
The Lexington Institute is now so desperate and willing to do anything to sell the F-35 to anyone who will listen that they are adding the Syria situation to their flimflam routine.
The problem with that idea is that Syria has an obsolete air defense system.
This means that a few squadrons of Block II Super Hornets could plink these systems away in short order.
So what if Syria suddenly grew advanced fighters and advanced long-range surface-to-air missile systems? These kinds of threats are not (and never were) part of the game plan for the F-35. The F-35 requirement assumed that the F-22 would clear away these kinds of problems. Simply because the F-22 has the ability to survive in such an environment.
The Lexington Institute is quick to blame Obama for cancelling the F-22 but nowhere in that discussion is a clueless Gates; a joke of USAF leadership; or help by Lockheed Martin alumni who did not want to see budget competition for their grand Forth Worth, F-35 cash cow.
Maybe the Lexington Institute should try doing something more suited to their limited talents. Perhaps selling insurance to the gullible or maybe used cars.
An air campaign against Syria may or may not be launched for various reasons. The F-35 will not be a deciding factor in that air campaign. Just as important: the F-35 will not be capable against advanced threats and for anything else, is too expensive to use versus the tools we already have.
What is surprising is that anyone would need the Lexington Institute to pontificate on air power theory. They are not capable of bringing any useful knowledge to the discussion.
5 comments:
"They claim the F-35 is capable against modern threats, when in fact it is not survivable."
This article makes big assumptions about F-35 RCS and admits to not having access to classified data. I don't know how authoritative it can therefore be.
Further, it speaks largely about S-Band radars (2-4GHZ). With legacy SAM systems using these bands of radar, it would not make sense for the F-35 to not have a proper RCS reduction in these bands.
LMT must be bankrolling Loren Thompson. Otherwise, his comments remain unexplainable. Cancel the F-35. Restart production of a larger upgraded F-22 with IRST. Then you get your stealth fighter capable of handling future threats, in 5 years, not 15 years as Admiral Venlet is claiming if we dare to cancel the F-35.
"This article makes big assumptions about F-35 RCS and admits to not having access to classified data. I don't know how authoritative it can therefore be."
Seeing as those with all the super access to the program progress and capability have been wrong for years and the source of that report (APA) have been more accurate on F-35 program risks (time and again) your question is in fact interesting.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Lexington Institute is nothing but a glorified advertising firm masquerading as a military think-tank and hired by Lockmart to push their agenda.
At this point under best circumstances the F-35 will not be ready for military operations anytime in the near future, and many in the defense world are now privately conceding that IOC will now be somewhere around 2020 or even beyond.
Dr. Feelgood and his merry band of sycophants will continue push the F-35 since they are getting paid big money to due so. As usual there are NO real opinions or facts presented in this latest article which consists primarily of lies and the usual dose snake oil.
Should be renamed Lexington Prositute. No thinking in this "think tank" they say what they are paid to say, period.
Post a Comment