Pentagon official declares F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ‘not capable of unsupported combat’

IT IS six years behind schedule and billions of dollars over cost, but this might be the final nail in the coffin of Australia’s new jet fighters.

IT WAS supposed to be Australia’s next generation fighter, a weapon capable of destroying and outrunning any enemy. Six years on from a $1 trillion investment, it appears incapable of both.

Plagued by glitches and behind schedule by half a decade, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter might have just received the final nail in its very expensive coffin.

Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation, declared this week the most expensive defence program in our country’s history would struggle mightily in a “dogfight” — a term used to describe the aerial battle between aircraft — despite every assertion to the contrary from Washington and Canberra.

“The F-35B Block 2B aircraft is not capable of unsupported combat against any serious threat,” Mr Gilmore said, according to Aviation Week.

That declaration should come as a giant red flag for the Australian Government but no real surprise to critics who have long insisted the F-35 is a flop, a flying supercomputer that will be outdated before any Australian pilot ever takes the controls.

The F-35 Lightning II is Australia’s next big weapon but it’s so far failed to deliver.

It’s not the first time a formal critique has been levelled at the F-35. A test pilot wrote a seething review of the stealth aircraft in January last year.

In the simulation, the F-35 pilot was trying to “shoot down” the F-16, while at the same time doing its best to evade an attack. The pilot declared the F-35 was no match for the much older version.

“Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” he wrote.

“Instead of catching the bandit off-guard by rapidly pull aft to achieve lead; the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution.”

It wouldn’t be such a problem if Australia hadn’t committed so much to upgrading its weaponry and if the aircraft weren’t sold as the ideal dogfighter and strike aircraft combination.

The Lockheed Martin-built aircraft will arrive in Australia at a cost of $15 billion. In the US, it’s priced at more than $1 trillion.

Australia has already purchased two Joint Strike Fighters. An additional sixteen aircraft are expected to be purchased by 2019. NewsCorp wrote in January that the F-35 is “too big to fail”. There are no fallback options.

During the aircraft’s development, builders have encountered a host of problems. Among them are issues with the planes’ drive shaft, visibility and fuel tanks. Critics say the real problem is that the F-35 tries to be all things to all people to the detriment of overall performance.

They say it has limited capacity to carry bombs externally and a tiny hidden internal weapons arsenal.

So strong has the backlash against the F-35 become that Canada withdrew from the nine-nation deal as a recipient in October. During his election campaign, new Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Canada wanted to remain a strong member of the coalition against Islamic State but “there are many other fighters at much lower price points that we can use that have been proven”.

Australia’s first Lockheed Martin, F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, making its inaugural flight.

The other problem is that aircraft emerging in Russia and China are less sluggish, more nimble and do not have the limitations that the F-35 appears to have.

Retired Air Force wing commander Chris Mills has become so disenchanted with the F-35 build that he last week declared Canberra should lobby the US for F-22 Raptors instead.

“Air combat is the most important single capability for the defence of Australia, because control of the air over our territory and maritime approaches is critical to all other types of operation in the defence of Australia,” Mills wrote in a submission to parliament.

For their part, the Australian Government has stood by the investment. Last year, then-prime minister Tony Abbott said he was not deterred by negative reports on the fighters’ development.

Lockheed Martin, the American-based global aerospace, defence, security and technology company, defended its product. They said teething problems were to be expected.

“As a reminder, the F-35 program is still in its developmental phase,” a spokesman said.

“This is the time when issues are expected to be discovered and solutions are implemented to maximise the F-35’s capability for the warfighter.”

Originally published as Pentagon official declares F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ‘not capable of unsupported combat’