I would like to point out that the F-35I worked as advertised over Iran.
I had been, repeatedly, told that it was an expensive boondoggle that was no better (and likely worse) than an F-16C Block 50.
I can think of a couple nation's sphincters that should be clamping about now.
Related: The F-35C is useless because using it from carriers in a marine environment is too harsh on the stealth coatings and they can't be maintained.
What about all those F-35B flying from short-deck carriers?
Not mentioned.
That's odd.
i thought i saw that isreal used them to hit targets in iran...but doesn't isreal take everything we sell them and make it better, thought i read that somewhere a long time ago...panzer guy
ReplyDeleteWell, they certainly do a lot more realistic live fire testing of it...
DeleteTo be fair, this event is definitely data, but only one data point.
ReplyDeleteOne surprise raid is happenstance.
Iran, and whatever air defense they've cobbled together since 1979, is far from a peer or near-peer adversary.
And Israel certainly isn't revealing what other TTPs they employed, nor telling the whole story on the raid.
I suspect there was a lot more in play to guarantee success than the tech of one undeniably troubled weapon system.
Sweeping conclusions about the Thunderjug project should therefore probably be withheld.
It should be noted that Israel evidently isn't going back for more, either.
If F-35s ever go up against China or Russia, OTOH, that'd be a different story.
But if that ever happens, there will be far more serious conversations going on.
The best case counter position to "fat amy works" continued to be that it was no better than a "far cheaper" F-16C block 50. The worst case was that it was not even that good.
DeleteDid I even imply anything else? If not, why this tangent?