“The ministry says the F-35A also was the cheapest, because the competing Eurofighter Typhoon and Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet would have needed modification for flying-boom inflight refueling.” – Aviation Week

That such an asinine comment could be made in public casts doubt on the seriousness of the whole process. Even if Japan for operational and training reasons wanted to stay wedded to one AAR system, putting a receptacle into a medium-heavy fighter is not exactly rocket science and the nonrecurring costs would be insignificant in the context of the whole program. I never read that it was a big problem with the F-4, 50 years ago…

As for the drag question – if there’s a simple summary of what the area rule tells you, it’s “avoid rapid increases in cross-section area over the length of the airplane”. The F-35 c/s peaks very quickly in the first third of the overall length.

Spud – Given that a three-order-of-magnitude difference between an RCS-treated conventional fighter and an F-35 is likely to be moonshine, except possibly at a 90-degree beam aspect, it’s not so much a “generation” as a trade. RCS is reduced but at a substantial cost.

Whether it is worth it is a complex and scenario-dependent discussion. If it’s worth in in some areas, but not all, may lead towards a mixed-fleet solution. The US has been attempting to drive towards an all-stealth force for 25 years at immense cost. Result so far: an aging USAF/Marine force, and a huge future commitment.

Mr Farlie

A rambling 1300-word forum comment that talks about “paranoia” and says:

“various people have taken the road of accusing me of lacking integrity, lacking in disclosure of non existent relationships, of being a shill for the govt”

Now, I am well aware that “being paranoid doesn’t mean that the ******s aren’t out to get you.”

However…

Spud – Of course the F-35 is a 5th-generation fighter, because that is a LockMart-generated term, filched from the Rooskies, that has been defined to mean “any non-bomber with a semblance of a bowtie RCS”. If there are other unique attributes common to the F-35 and F-22, please share.

Exclusive video shows USG/LMT marketing strategy in Japan in all its subtlety:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYuIEa5DvJs

Clarification – Carrel is a former SwAF boss.

If the Nikkei report is correct, and a conclusion has been reached and leaked to the media less than a month after the bids went in, there is only one viable explanation.

Japan realized all along that (having been denied the F-22) that it had Hobson’s choice. The Super Hornet was there on paper, but as long as the program of record has the type retiring in 2030-35, with major upgrade funding cutting off long before that, it’s not really a contender.

After the bids were in, however, LMT proudly announced that it had offered Japan a final assembly line as part of an industrial package (can we say “offset”, boys and girls?) that will make dutiful, fee-paying partners green with envy. The Typhoon was used, and very well used, as a stalking-horse.

Now, are we surprised that leaks show the pre-selected airplane to be the best? Can any intelligent carbon-based life-form be surprised by that?

As for the F-35 partners, they start to look more and more like the guy who just signed up for full sticker, plus paint sealant, upholstery protection package and extended warranty, and turns round to see his neighbor buying the same model for $3000 under invoice and premium sound system.

By the way, I don’t think any F-35 “haters” (silly word that it is) predicted a Typhoon win in Japan.

DJ – BAES (and UK researchers) have found that prolonged monocular use is fatiguing. Also, latency is a big fat issue (and a problem is that doubling the linear resolution of the sensor = 4X data).

Although one important issue is that technology has moved on. Q-Sight and Gentex Scorpion both use optical waveguides – with just a piece of flat glass in front of the eye, directly attached to the image source. No smoke (from hot high-intensity optical sources), mirrors, fat prisms or vizors.