Post

Conversation

The F-35 discourse is the single greatest gap between media narrative and battlefield reality in modern defense. The program costs $2 trillion over 94 years. That number gets cited in every article, every congressional hearing, every Elon Musk tweet calling it an “obsolete jack of all trades.” And the criticisms of program management are real. Block 4 upgrades ballooned from $10.6B to $16.5B. Full mission capable rates sit at 36% for the A variant. Deliveries were halted for an entire year from July 2023 to July 2024 over software issues. So on paper, it looks like a boondoggle. Then you look at what happens when the thing actually flies in combat. Israeli F-35Is have now conducted thousands of sorties across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iran. In October 2024, over 100 aircraft including F-35s flew a 2,000-kilometer round trip into Iranian airspace, destroyed S-300 air defense batteries and missile production facilities, and returned with zero losses. They flew through airspace covered by the exact Russian systems that were supposed to make this aircraft irrelevant. The F-35I scored the first F-35 air-to-air kills against Iranian drones in 2021. First missile shootdown in 2023. First combat missions all the way back in 2018. By June 2025, Israeli F-35s were flying into Iran with conformal fuel tanks, no aerial refueling, hitting nuclear facilities. Iran claimed they shot several down. The IDF denied it. Every F-35 came home. The $2T number covers 2,456 aircraft through the year 2088. That works out to roughly $82M per airframe at current flyaway cost. A single Gerald Ford-class carrier costs $150B. The math on the F-35 looks different when you price it per mission, per sortie, per year of capability delivered against peer-level air defenses. This tells you everything about how defense procurement actually works versus how it gets covered. The program management is genuinely bad. The readiness rates are genuinely concerning. And the combat record is genuinely undefeated. All three of those things are true at the same time. The people who only read GAO reports think it’s a disaster. The pilots who fly it into contested airspace keep volunteering to go back up. 1,300 aircraft delivered across 19 countries. Zero combat losses. The boondoggle just keeps winning.
Quote
Cynical Publius
@CynicalPublius
For years I have been reading about how the F-35 is a stupid, vulnerable boondoggle. Yet it appears to me that the system is flying over airspace covered by the most advanced air defense systems Russia and China have to offer, yet it is completely invisible, untouched, and
David Watson 🥑
Post your reply

People are comparing: 1) a system that ultimately works but is billions over budget and many years behind schedule 2) a system that ultimately works but is not as much over budget and not as much behind schedule The second option is actually an option.
I dont think the F35 sucks. I just dont think it beating the Iranian air defence is much proof of its capabilities though. Literally every example you have is a third world country using third rate Russian material without any experience or good leadership.
A Ford-class aircraft carrier costs around $13B, not $150B. The number you quoted doesn’t is roughly the cost of the whole program, for 10 ships.
It’s the ultimate case of sticker shock meeting a math problem. 94 years is basically an eternity, but those headlines sure do love a trillion-dollar buzzword!
I wouldn't call Iran "Peer" level defenses, or even near Peer. For what it's worth, the F35 is doing exactly what it was designed to, flying circles around cold war era systems in widespread use by hostile regimes. I do think they'll be much more vulnerable against China/Russia
Misleading. 2088? Inflation adjust those numbers to present day. No matter how good it is, it was not worth the cost.
That just means we got lucky. Management boondoggles have cost the US a ridiculous amount of money, which is directly tied to our national security. We can’t keep going into debt
Can you explain 94 years? Or was that hyperbole....I'm assuming it is, but curious if there was an off chance of them working on some "idea" for that long that they never implemented before somehow
"combat record undefeated" - that's because it hasn't faced a peer or even near peer adversary The US probably could have achieved the same result spending far less against the goat herders
Same complaints about the M2, Apache, f16 and f18 in the 80’s and those performed well too. F18 was the loser in the f16 competition and had terrible range and is still flying missions with little losses
The "truth" might not be known for decades. F35's have absolutely performed well in combined operations with special forces, drones & cruise missiles taking out Air Defense infrastructure (radars & launch sites) before inbound aircraft arrive. How well do they perform alone?
Let's not get lulled into over confidence. The "Russian systems that were supposed to make this aircraft irrelevant" still could, when not operated by a 3rd world army. Maintenance & Operations of systems in the 3rd world is very poor.
The readiness rates are because of the stealth skin wearing out fast. Until they can make it last long it is what it is
Sorry, but fighting Iran doesn't count. Come up against a near-peer adversary like China then we'll see how the F-35 stacks up.
Narrative is powerful thing . Think most of these sorties are against country which was under sanctions and military was severely restricted. We will judge when it take on comparative Power
Military analysis too Gupta? You are a machine with many talents. And that's the real story everyone is missing.
It was originally supposed to be a $600B program for 6,000 aircraft, replacing F-16s, F18s and other legacy aircraft around the world. It ballooned a bit… Kudos to the B-21 team.
Hard to take your analysis seriously when you claim a Ford-class carrier costs $150 billion.
There's still no evidence any F35 overflew Iran. Whether in the 12 day war or currently.
Given anyway huge military spending of USA the real military option was to extend F22 program . Modify it, make it cheaper and more capable.
Literally only bc they flew over countries with outdated anti-air tech lmao. Any modern 4th gen jet can do that. If they were used against russia or china they'd have numerous losses. Classic indian propagandist simping for america and israel.