Marcellago- I’m not entirely sure why you had such a strong reaction to someone countering your opinion.

Myself, and others were trying to explain why the 5th generation US aircraft operate on the same “side” in exercises as European so called “4.5 generation “. It simply isn’t about finding out what aircraft is better.

I very much doubt I misunderstood your posts ( despite the language barrier), as you repeated it several times over the last few pages. I’m sorry I don’t agree with your opinion on the purpose of NATO exercises like Atlantic trident. However, please don’t assume it’s about defending the F-35, that would be a mistake on your part. It IS about clearing up your misunderstanding of the purpose of exercises, whatever your views on the F-35, Rafale, Typhoon.

Nothing paranoid about it at all. Your views are clear, i disagree with them based on what I know and have read. That is the point of forum discussions, if you have information to counter what I have said, please share. If you are offended simply because i don’t share your opinion, I’m sorry by you need to have thick skin when you post.

Edit- i went back and read all your posts from the start of the discussion about exercises in order to make sure I wasn’t misunderstanding you. There are several contradictions and simply wrong assumptions in your posts;1. Yes the F-35 was a shooter in exercises, as several poster corrected your assumption. 2. Yes, the Typhoon, Rafale, and F-22 have faced each other in exercises. 3. As with the F-22, early exercises with the F-35 will focus on integrating them with allied forces (yes I see that you stated that, but then repeated how the F-35 has only faced “heritage” fighters). The “fun” dact exercises will come later. 4. No airforce is worried their latest fighter is inferior based on an exercise, generally even allies aren’t going to expose the full capabilities of radar and EW systems in those types of exercises (why do you think every other Red Flag is generally US only?)

Maybe precisely for the reason you cited or for its real contrary: no one want to put him/herself (many Nato MoD are actually women) in the position of being forced to admit that the money spent on its latest uber-costly plane (it apply to all the whole lot) were somewhat wasted or that their own defence industry actually propone a plane that it is markedly inferior to the adversary (or than a.t.c. doesn’t offer the advantages promised for its extra cost)

Your essentially looking for western airforces to hold exercises to justify your personal confirmation bias. Just as with your hope for all 4.5, 5th generation aircraft manufacturers to release time to climb-accelerate to supersonic numbers to demonstrate what you view as a critical parameter for fighter aircraft, you now want allies to hold exercises pitting the latest fighters from Europe and U.S. in some sort of “Battle Royale” to prove superiority.

Needless to say, that isn’t going to happen. Right now, the focus is on integration. It is critical for the F-35 and F-22 to be inoperable with allies. They want to test the proper force mix, comms, mission sets and how to utilize each aircraft to the best advantage. Later on, as more F-35 units are added, they will likely become the “fifth generation red air” representing advanced adversaries. That isn’t the concern right now, integration is. There aren’t any LO fighters in service outside of the U.S. (and perhaps the limited IOC of J-20 with China).

http://breakingdefense.com/2017/05/f-35a-will-fly-at-paris-air-show-jsf-boasts-high-readiness-rates-in-europe/

87.5 mission capable rate.

Any information on the dimensions of the LCAAT model? The stated cost goal of the air vehicle was 3 million dollars. Interesting concept. An ISR/Strike drone capable of swamping IADS.

A PAC-2 GEM costs more than 3 million.

Let’s put the thing straight: in the exercise in question a mixed force of Typhoon, Rafale, F-22 and f-35 has beaten a mixed one made by legacy ones like F-15E and T-38 (there I’ll would call for Heritage, not just Legacy) with IADS support.

It seems that the F-35 have actually not performed any (simulated) killing, just passing info to the Typhoons via Datalink.

That is incorrect. According to one of the reporters who flew with “red air”, in at least one scenario the F-35 and the Typhoon were tasked with escorting the strikers, a mixed force F-22 and Rafale.

No where does it claim that the F-35 didn’t perform any simulated killing. Your confusing what has been stated in several exercises, the F-35’s are asked to provide targeting to blue air after expending their own weapons.

It has been stated multiple times about both the F-22 and F-35, their magazine depth is a limiting factor. They often expend their weapons and are still tasked with staying on to provide coverage in exercises. The USAF is looking at several ways to address this issue: arsenal planes, F-15C with expanded external carriage, and smaller munitions.

And that you can tell from your home in Chicago or Los Angeles? you have no idea about this part of the world..

I do, but that isn’t the point. Your confusing public support (predicated on economic impact) with that of the governments that have become very aware of Russian “activities”. Needless to say, given your predilection for all things Russian, it might be you who are out of touch.

In any case, Merkel has turned decidedly more hostile toward Russia, and seems to be rethinking the gutting of German armed forces. In that context, the F-35 is being considered as a replacement for the Tornado. Whether you see the need or not, Germany does.