via Breaking Defense...
“The F-35 was fundamentally designed to go do that sort of thing [take out advanced IADS]. The problem is, with the lack of F-22s, I’m going to have to use F-35s in the air superiority role in the early phases as well, which is another reason why I need all 1,763. I’m going to have some F-35s doing air superiority, some doing those early phases of persistent attack, opening the holes, and again, the F-35 is not compelling unless it’s there in numbers,” the general says. “Because it can’t turn and run away, it’s got to have support from other F-35s. So I’m going to need eight F-35s to go after a target that I might only need two Raptors to go after. But the F-35s can be equally or more effective against that site than the Raptor can because of the synergistic effects of the platform.”Wow.
Did you catch that?
This is the first time that the USAF has admitted that the Rand Reports assessment of the F-35..... "Can't Turn, Can't Climb and Can't Run" is actually spot on.
The little war fiction at the beginning of the article was cute, but consider this.
The Rand assessment was based on the F-35 facing SU-27 family of airplanes. How do you think it would fare against the like of the PAK-FA or the J-20? Have you noticed that we have not received any updated assessments against these threats?
I'm guessing here, but the tea leaves indicate that the F-35 is facing some pressure behind the scenes when it comes to numbers to be procured. Hostage saying "another reason why I need all 1,763" is in my mind telling. The cuts are coming, the death spiral is here...and just like Amos finally getting out of my beloved Marine Corps I couldn't be happier.
