So why is 7.5G so important, in a arena cleared by the F-22 and dominated at long range with AMRAAM? I still see no case for the A model

Whats wrong with the Israeli tankers? to strike Iran would include about 30 fighters and support tankers. SEAD along the way, sead on the way out. No need to ‘surrender’ in A-stan!
Irans responses are limited, any thing too over the top will induce operation Iranian freedom, launced from Iraq ans A-stan simultaniously, maybe a Amphib assualt to open a 3rd front. all very justified in response to any assymetrical warfare. would bring about 5 CVBGs into the picture, and a very interesting air war over the gulf, but leaning heavily in favour of the US and its allies.

wanderlei- regarding 50 MiG-29s, why would they do more for the Iranians then they did for the Iraqis? As long as one of the Tomahawks first targets is C3 facilites, the MiGs wont get up to much.

Hi Wanderlai,

I think that their air defenses won’t last long. Possibly Israel will attack and then Iran will react giving opportunity for the US to finish the job. It saddens my heart. I’ve done all that I can to try and make Iran aware but without any success.

What the?

are you joking or what?

Israel could easily beat Irans air defences(not without loss, but not hard), and strike a target easily. I expect as much soon on their nuke sites.

But why all this talk of dogfighting? the F-35 fans would have us believe the F-35 will destroy all aircraft in its way, and avoid the same with it stealth. If this is the case, why the need for super dooper ACM capabilities-the C could do a better job.
If this is not the case, does this mean the F-35s stealth is not what its cracked up to be?

ppp- yes, based on CURRENT costs, the A is cheaper than the C. but if you take the number of A models and add to the C, and drop the As remaining testing, the end unit price of the C would be BETTER, as well as savings from a less complicated production line and cheaper spares acquisition, and the better aircraft.

19kilo10- I’m pretty sure I agreed with you last time…..if not I apologize, as this has always been my feeling.

3 models of the same aircraft is just dumb

While Im 50/50 on if the B would be cut, it would strengthen the programto do so, and actually CHEAPEN the F-35C which would be bought in much greater numbers.

I think the USAF will be the greatest supporter of the F-35B-cause if it gets canned, they may as well standardise the whole force on F-35C and drive costs WAY down

Obviously you don’t understand. Carriers approach from a distance then launch a Air Strike and then quickly retire……….

No, that is outdated single carrier mentality. In sufficent numbers, 4-6 CVNs in a racetrack at full capacity could have 240-360 F-35Cs, With 24 over the fleet and 24 over the FEBA at all times. this sortie rate may not be sustainable, but only has to be long enough to establish a big enough beach head and capture a airfield. very do-able- and you dont need the 24 for fleet defence airborne(they could be on ALERT5)-what about the much vaunted AEGIS ships? 10-20 AEGIS ships in said racetrack is a very good SAM envelope, and frees up more fighters for strike. the next war wont be fought like the last one, and whoever fights it like it is, will lose. OFFENCE will rule.

No, I understand carrier warfare just fine, but this idea of them being in cotton wool is ridiculous- if they are to keep out of range of the threats, what good are they? Too much effort in putting two birds up, one to AAR the other one?! I’m not suggesting they have signal lines to the gator ships, but being 50-150 kms away. enough aircraft will provide a good screen and FEBA coverage, and be far enough away, but close enough. WAR IS RISK. VICTORY NEVER COMES WITHOUT SACRIFICE. the likelihood is that in a peer nation war, even a CVN could go down.