Although their “analysis” seems to be not much rooted in reality I think they have at least one thing right; the F-35 have too short legs for operating efficiently in the asia-pacific. It does not help to say “well the a/c it’s replacing have even shorter legs” (as F-35 fanboys tend to do).

For the Asia-pacific they should have developed something that was somewhat bigger and with even longer range. If it was bigger it could probably also have fitted more stuff internally, which I think also the asia-pacific scenarios could benefit from.

However for most other places and scenarios the F-35 is more than adequate for the next 50 years or so (assuming it becomes cheap enough to be bought and operated in sufficient quantities, that’s the other big question mark).

The rest is mainly noise as far as I can see.

Some things I found odd

The gunpod is primarily for A2G and is certainly not “standard F-35B LO air superiority load-out”. Given that, how did the gunpod affect maneuverability and detection range?

Published info from the mfg says <=35km for detection range, let alone identifying it as a F-35. No way in hell you ID it at 76nm (140km) which is greater than 4x the listed detection range.

Forget tracking it till you get to 20km thanks to your short ranged laser rangefinder.

In the same spirit as above, forget an IRST at 96nm. They could do it safely with radar & ESW at that range however.

Lastly, it seemed to not treat the F-35’s LPI radar any differently than the SU-35’s and did not talk about the F-35’s jamming capability at all.

OLS IRST info here –> https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/ols-35-irst/

So you found all those things “odd” but not this one?

Instantly the F-35s’ EW suites classify the bandits as Su-35s and tags them as hostile from around 350 nautical miles away 

Pretty amazing to not only detect but also classify the Su-35 350 nautical miles away! Seems that in addition to the amazing F-35 sensors the Russians are clueless when it comes to controlling their EM emissions from their latest and greatest fighter…

http://nsnetwork.org/cms/assets/uploads/2015/08/F-35_FINAL.pdf

In this paper, we assess the capabilities of the F-35 and show how the aircraft is
mismatched to meet emerging threats. Considered alongside the exorbitant cost of the
program, this capability mismatch entails that it would be unsound to maintain a fullscale
commitment to the F-35 program and that alternatives to the full program should
be studied and, ultimately, selected.

What!???

We would especially like to thank David Axe, Winslow Wheeler, Mandy
Smithberger, Pierre Sprey, Larry Korb, Kate Blakeley, and Bill Hartung for reviewing drafts of
the paper and providing valuable feedback that immensely benefited this work.

ah, that explains it… 🙂

Edit: many gems here, for instance:

Thus, the F-35 will find itself outmaneuvered, outgunned, out of range, and visible to
enemy sensors. Going forward, full investment in the F-35 would be to place a bad
trillion-dollar bet on the future of airpower based on flawed assumptions and an
underperforming aircraft. To avoid such a catastrophic outcome, Congress and DOD
should begin the process of considering alternatives to a large-scale commitment to the
F-35. Staying the present course may needlessly gamble away a sizable margin of
American airpower at great expense and unnecessary risk to American lives.

As I stated in my previous post, I see only two real competitors for the HX fighter program; the SAAB JAS 39E/F Gripen and the Lockheed Martin F-35A(C?) Lightning II.

https://corporalfrisk.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/replacing-the-capabilities-of-the-f-18cd-hornet-the-major-candidates/

normally intel would pick up a build-up and the air force would disperse before hostilities break out, as a standard procedure.

Is the Finnish air force dispersed now?

There is currently a build-up happening. Tension has been high for quite some time, with simulated attacks on Sweden and the Baltics, etc.

Russia also has intel on what’s happening in Finland.

One way to do it could be to “increase the heat” to a level where the Finnish do disperse their planes. Now, for how long will they stay dispersed? What are the costs? Imagine that after some months Russia turn down the heat; at a certain threshold Finland will let down the guard, reduce the level of alertness, and send the planes home.

That’s when a strike may happen. Or it may not.

Finland is a small country, has a border with Russia, and the Russkies will know whether the a/c are dispersed or not. They will know when the a/c go home, and they will know when to surprise…

NATO is halving the number of fighters for QRA in the baltics:

“Recently there were no airspace violations. Russian aircraft were escorted many times but we avoided violations. Taking that into account, the decision was made based on a rational use of resources.”

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/international/europe/2015/08/04/nato-halves-baltic-air-policing-mission/31139949/

a plane marginally bigger (heavier) than the F-22 with variable geometry wings, all-aspect broadband radar stealth (flying wing).

Active IR stealth; an active cooling system coupled to sensors that allows the system to keep the skin close to air temperature.

Visual stealth: Metamaterials are used in the skin, can be programmed to change color in a fraction of a second (chameleon-skin); sensors detect the colors of the surroundings and match automatically.

At low speeds the wing is fully extended, and the plane is operating in “stealth mode”; at low speeds the IR stealth is highly effective. Range is highly impressive due to a combination of a light-weight airframe with big wing-span and the 6. gen engine that allows optimal efficiency at low speed.

At high speeds the wing is reduced. The variable-cycle engine allows supercruise at Mach 2.0. IR stealth is less effective at high speed however you can’t have it all.

All the usual stuff; GaN AESA (conformal), EODAS operating in 3-4 wavelengths (visible light 2 IR frequencies etc.), GaN AESA for EW/EA, sensor fusion, etc.

To top it off, built-in laser instead of the old cannon.

The new engine will be key to develop the 6. gen. fighter.

All of the above should be “simple”, but for the active IR stealth and the visual stealth…

In a leaked report from June, it seems there is a recommendation to reduce the number of Norwegian F-35 unless there is a massive increase in the defence budget…

The currently plans call for 48 F-35 + 4 training F-35, for a total of 52.

It is suggested that even if the Defence budget is grown by 0.5 per year, one should still reduce the number of F-35. It is suggested that money “saved” by reducing the F-35 number, should instead be put into buying a replacement for the Orion P3s that we currently got. The implication is of course that unless we reduce the number of F-35, we will not be able to replace the Orions (and we need to cut a number of other capabilities too).

The MOD refuse to comment on the leaks of course — the final report is due to be delivered in October. I think it will be an interesting discussion…

Defence is becoming too expensive for small countries. Thankfully we are part of NATO…

Link: (in Norwegian) https://www.aldrimer.no/norge-bor-kjope-faerre-f-35-enn-planlagt/