via Diplomat.
But if we evaluate the contribution of the drone not in isolation, but rather as part of a system-of-systems for air dominance, its utility becomes clearer. Stealthy F-35s operate in contested environments, identifying and tracking targets, with the UAVs supplying the missiles that the JSFs can’t carry on their own. Even the payload challenged F-35B can contribute in this context; having as many F-35s in the air as possible increases the clarity of the picture offered to pilots and commanders.Read it all here.
Indeed, this is precisely the type of aerial warfare that the developers of the F-35 envisioned. Although this vision has been part of the Joint Strike Fighter program for some time, it has not, for whatever reason, been articulated clearly to the public. Our public conversation still struggles to conceptualize specific weapons as part of a larger system, rather than with respect to their individual characteristics. This hardly means that programs such as the F-35 or the UCLASS should be above criticism, but it does suggest ways to add nuance to the critique.
Robert is halfway there but stumbles at the one yard line. The concept that was lined out by the Navy Chief of Air Warfare is just that. The parts that we flesh out that concept with are whats in question.
The same concept that was outlined can be fulfilled at a much lower price by using the F/A-18 and the F-14 sized UAV. Its been said that the F-22 has even better stealth than the F-35. Want to get real bang for your buck? Have a flight of F-22 penetrate enemy airspace providing targeting data to your UAVs. The F-35 was designed in the late 90's. Its been in development for over 10 years. Are we really suppose to believe that it will be more stealthy than a UAV that is built sometime in the next 5 to 10 years?
Its the concept that is the key. We have many other tools that we can use at less cost than the F-35 to make it a reality.
And that's where Robert went off the rails.
Fact. The F-35 was first designed 20 years ago.