600: RISE OF COMBAT DRONES: IMPLICATIONS FOR TRADITIONAL AIRPOWER

 

The rapid advancement of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), known as drones, has revolutionised modern warfare. Once primarily used for reconnaissance and surveillance, drones have evolved into sophisticated combat platforms capable of executing precision strikes, electronic warfare, and logistics support. The proliferation of combat drones challenges the dominance of traditional airpower by altering strategic doctrines, operational tactics, and force structures. This article explores the rise of combat drones and their profound implications for conventional airpower.

 

Armed variants of the Predator, such as the MQ-1 and MQ-9 Reaper, demonstrated the feasibility of unmanned precision strikes, ushering in a new era of aerial warfare. Since then, countries such as China, Russia, Turkey, and Iran have rapidly developed their combat drone capabilities. Technological advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), sensor miniaturisation, and autonomous navigation have expanded combat drones’ capabilities. Modern drones can operate autonomously, engage in complex swarm tactics (where multiple drones coordinate their actions in real-time), and integrate with network-centric warfare systems. A list of major combat drones is appended.

 

Key Advantages of Combat Drones

 

Combat drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), have rapidly transformed modern military operations. They offer a range of significant advantages that enhance strategic effectiveness and operational efficiency. These advantages are critical for established military powers and smaller nations looking to improve their defence capabilities.

 

Cost-Effectiveness. One of the most prominent advantages of combat drones is their cost-effectiveness. Traditional manned aircraft, such as fighter jets and bombers, involve substantial financial investments in production, maintenance, fuel, and the continuous training of pilots. These high operational and training costs make them financially burdensome, especially for nations with smaller defence budgets. Combat drones, in contrast, are much more affordable to produce, operate, and maintain. This makes drones an attractive option for military forces seeking advanced technology without the prohibitive expenses of traditional aviation.

 

Reduced Risk to Human Life. The ability to operate drones remotely means that military personnel are not physically present in the combat environment, which significantly reduces the risk to human life. Manned aircraft often place pilots in high-risk situations, such as hostile airspace, where the threat of anti-aircraft weapons, enemy fighters, or surface-to-air missiles is constant. This feature makes drones especially valuable for missions in high-risk zones, such as counterterrorism operations, surveillance of enemy positions, or strikes against heavily fortified targets. By minimising human casualties, drones ensure mission sustainability and allow forces to continue operations with fewer limitations.

 

Persistent Surveillance and Endurance. Unlike manned aircraft with limited flight durations due to fuel constraints, combat drones can remain airborne for extended periods, often hours or even days. This endurance allows drones to conduct continuous intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations over extended periods without returning to the base for fuel or rest. Drones can loiter over targets for extended periods, tracking enemy movements, gathering intelligence, and relaying data to commanders. This constant flow of information improves situational awareness and allows military forces to remain proactive rather than reactive in their operations.

 

Precision Strike Capabilities. Modern combat drones are equipped with advanced targeting systems, enabling them to conduct precise strikes with high accuracy. This precision is made possible through advanced sensors, cameras, and laser-guided munitions, which enable drones to accurately identify and engage enemy targets such as vehicles, facilities, or personnel, even in complex environments. Precision is critical in counterinsurgency operations, where avoiding collateral damage is crucial for maintaining local support and reducing the risk of civilian backlash.

 

Operational Flexibility. Another significant advantage of combat drones is their operational flexibility. Drones are highly versatile and can be deployed in various roles, from surveillance and reconnaissance to electronic warfare and decoy operations. They can serve as support platforms for ground troops, relaying intelligence, providing airstrikes, or conducting search and rescue missions. Drones can also be used in electronic warfare, disrupting enemy communication systems or jamming radar signals. Additionally, drones can serve as decoys, drawing enemy fire or confusing adversaries about the location of critical assets. This adaptability makes drones valuable assets in numerous military operations, enhancing their utility in diverse combat scenarios.

 

Drone Usage in Recent Conflicts

 

Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. This conflict saw extensive use of drones by Azerbaijan, which utilised both tactical drones for surveillance and loitering munitions for precision strikes. Azerbaijan’s use of Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones (a medium-altitude, long-endurance tactical unmanned aerial vehicle), alongside Israeli-made drones, played a crucial role in undermining Armenian defensive positions and disrupting supply lines. Drones provided real-time intelligence and executed targeted airstrikes, significantly impacting the battlefield dynamics. The success of drones in this conflict highlighted their role in modern warfare, showcasing their effectiveness in both reconnaissance and offensive operations and marking a shift in how airpower is utilised in regional conflicts.

 

Ukraine-Russia Conflict. In the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, drones have become pivotal for both sides. Ukraine has relied heavily on drones for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), and precision strikes. The use of Turkish-made Bayraktar drones has garnered international attention due to their success in targeting Russian artillery and supply lines. Russia, in turn, has deployed both reconnaissance drones and loitering munitions such as the Lancet drone. Drones are crucial in this conflict, offering both tactical advantages in real-time battlefield awareness and as weapons of deterrence. The conflict exemplifies how UAVs transform modern armies conducting warfare on the ground and in the air.

 

Israel-Hamas War. During the Israel-Hamas conflict, drones played a significant role in both offensive and defensive strategies. Israel utilised advanced unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) like the Hermes 450 and the Heron TP for surveillance, reconnaissance, and precision strikes, targeting Hamas military infrastructure, leaders, and weapon caches. Drones enable real-time intelligence, improving the effectiveness of airstrikes while minimising collateral damage. Hamas also deployed drones, often for reconnaissance and surveillance, but with increasing sophistication in attacking Israeli targets. The conflict highlighted the growing reliance on drones for modern warfare, as they offer cost-effective, high-precision capabilities in asymmetric conflicts.

 

U.S. Counterterrorism Operations. Combat drones have been central to U.S. counterterrorism operations, particularly in regions like the Middle East and North Africa. The U.S. military has employed drones for targeted strikes against high-value targets, including terrorist leaders and militants affiliated with groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator have provided surveillance and precision strike capabilities without the risk of piloting manned aircraft in hostile environments. These operations, while effective in neutralising threats, have raised ethical and legal concerns about civilian casualties, sovereignty violations, and the long-term strategic consequences of drone warfare.

 

Future Trends in Drone Warfare

 

AI-Driven Autonomy. AI-driven autonomy in drone warfare will revolutionise decision-making, enabling UAVs to analyse data and execute missions independently. This reduces human intervention, enhances speed, and improves operational efficiency, allowing drones to make real-time tactical decisions and adapt to changing battlefield dynamics without relying on constant human oversight.

 

Swarm Tactics. Swarm tactics involve deploying many drones that can communicate and collaborate autonomously to overwhelm targets. This approach maximises impact, confuses enemies, and complicates defence strategies. Swarms can be used for offensive operations, like saturation attacks, and defensive roles, such as countering incoming threats in coordinated formations.

 

Hybrid Manned-Unmanned Operations. Hybrid manned-unmanned operations combine human decision-making with autonomous drone capabilities, enhancing flexibility and situational awareness. Human pilots can control UAVs while receiving support from AI systems that automate data processing and mission planning. This synergy allows for optimal control and strategic execution while reducing the cognitive burden on operators.

 

Miniaturisation and Stealth. Miniaturisation and stealth technologies are enhancing drones’ ability to operate undetected. Smaller, quieter UAVs with reduced radar signatures can infiltrate enemy defences, gather intelligence, or carry out strikes without being easily intercepted. These advances improve tactical flexibility and extend the operational range of drones in contested environments.

 

Implications of Combat Drones on Traditional Airpower

 

The rapid advancement and proliferation of combat drones, also known as unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs), have fundamentally reshaped the landscape of air warfare. The increasing integration of unmanned systems has now disrupted what was once a domain exclusively dominated by manned fighter jets, strategic bombers, and attack aircraft. While traditional airpower remains indispensable in major military operations, combat drones introduce new doctrines, alter strategic calculations, and challenge long-held assumptions about air superiority. From cost-effectiveness to survivability, from force projection to counter-air missions, the implications of drones on traditional airpower are profound and multifaceted.

 

Changes in Force Structuring. This cost-effectiveness has allowed major and minor powers to expand their air combat capabilities without requiring massive budgets. Countries that could not previously project significant airpower can now field substantial drone fleets, effectively democratising access to aerial warfare. Moreover, drone attrition is far more acceptable than the loss of a piloted aircraft, further changing the strategic calculus. Traditional airpower relies on highly trained pilots, whose combat loss affects military effectiveness and carries significant political and moral weight. The expendability of drones means that military commanders can take more significant risks, leading to more aggressive and flexible operational doctrines.

 

Changing the Nature of Air Superiority and Aerial Combat. The rise of combat drones challenges traditional definitions of air superiority. Historically, air superiority was determined by the ability of manned fighter aircraft to establish dominance over enemy airspace through superior manoeuvrability, advanced sensors, and beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagements. However, drones are now increasingly capable of carrying out air-to-air missions, raising questions about the future role of manned aircraft in achieving air superiority. For example, the Loyal Wingman concept, which pairs autonomous drones with manned fighter jets, represents a hybrid traditional and drone-based airpower model. In this setup, manned aircraft act as command-and-control nodes while drones perform high-risk tasks such as dogfighting, electronic warfare, and decoy operations. Similarly, China is developing drones like the FH-97, modelled after the U.S. XQ-58 Valkyrie, which can operate as autonomous wingmen to piloted aircraft.

 

Changes in Traditional Fighter Combat Tactics. Small, agile drones can operate in swarms, overwhelming enemy defences in ways that traditional aircraft cannot counter easily. Countries such as China and Russia are actively developing swarm drone technology that could neutralise enemy air defences and fighter squadrons by sheer numbers. In such a scenario, traditional air combat tactics based on individual or squadron engagements may become obsolete, replaced by algorithm-driven swarm warfare where AI-driven drones execute complex attack patterns beyond human reaction times.

 

Evolution of Air Defence Systems. The rise of combat drones has forced rapid changes in air defence systems. Traditional air defences, such as surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, were designed to counter high-speed, high-altitude threats from fighter jets and bombers. However, drones present an entirely different challenge, as they are often smaller, slower, and fly at lower altitudes, making them difficult for conventional radar systems to detect and track. Countries have responded by integrating counter-drone capabilities into their air defence networks. Integrated air defence systems, such as Israel’s Iron Dome and Russia’s Pantsir-S1, have been adapted to target drones with high-precision missiles and rapid-fire auto-cannons. Additionally, electronic warfare (EW) has emerged as a crucial element in countering drone threats. Many modern air defence systems now incorporate jamming and spoofing capabilities to disrupt combat drones’ communications and GPS navigation, rendering them ineffective. Despite these adaptations, drones are still proving to be highly disruptive. The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict demonstrated how drones could systematically dismantle traditional air defences. Azerbaijani forces used Turkish and Israeli drones to destroy Armenian SAM sites, rendering their conventional air defence network ineffective. This shift suggests that air defence will increasingly rely on layered, AI-driven networks capable of simultaneously countering manned and unmanned threats in future conflicts.

 

Alteration in Roles and Tasks. Traditional airpower doctrine has been built around fighter jets for air superiority, strategic bombers for deep penetration strikes, and Battlefield air support (BAS) aircraft for ground engagements. However, combat drones are altering these roles in significant ways. In battlefield air support missions, drones have already proven their effectiveness. The MQ-9 Reaper, for example, has been widely used by the U.S. military for BAS missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Unlike traditional BAS aircraft requiring significant logistics and support, drones can loiter over a battlefield for extended periods, providing persistent surveillance and rapid strike capability. This persistence gives ground commanders real-time intelligence and strike options that traditional aircraft cannot match. In strategic bombing missions, drones are also beginning to make their mark. While heavy bombers like the B-52 or B-2 Spirit lack the payload capacity, swarming drone tactics could compensate by overwhelming enemy defences with multiple smaller precision strikes. China’s WZ-8 high-speed reconnaissance drone and the U.S. RQ-180 stealth drone suggest that drones may soon take over many roles traditionally assigned to strategic bombers.

 

Shift in Human Role. Additionally, the increasing use of AI in drone operations is shifting the human role in air warfare. While traditional airpower relies on human decision-making, AI-driven drones can process vast amounts of battlefield data in real time, react faster than human pilots, and execute missions with minimal human intervention. This shift raises ethical and operational questions about the future of autonomous air warfare, particularly in conflicts where rapid decision-making can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

 

The Future of Manned Aircraft in a Drone-Dominated Battlefield. While drones are rapidly transforming air warfare, it is unlikely that traditional manned aircraft will become obsolete in the near future. Instead, airpower will likely evolve into a hybrid model where manned and unmanned platforms work together. For example, the U.S. Air Force’s Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program envisions a future where advanced fighter jets operate alongside AI-driven drones in a coordinated battle network.

 

Evolutionary Process. Stealth fighter jets will still be critical for high-end air combat against technologically advanced adversaries. While drones offer many advantages, they still face limitations regarding autonomy, electronic warfare vulnerabilities, and adaptability in complex combat scenarios. Human pilots bring strategic thinking, adaptability, and situational awareness that AI-driven drones cannot fully replicate. That said, as AI and drone technology continue to improve, we may eventually see a shift where manned fighters become command platforms rather than frontline combatants. Future air battles may be fought with autonomous drone swarms controlled by human operators from standoff distances, reducing the need for pilots to engage in direct combat.

 

Conclusion

The rise of combat drones represents a paradigm shift in modern warfare, challenging the supremacy of traditional air power. While manned aircraft will likely remain relevant for the foreseeable future, their role is shifting toward command and control rather than direct engagement. As drone technology continues to advance, the future of air warfare will likely be defined not by individual dogfights but by networks of autonomous systems operating in concert with traditional manned platforms. In this evolving landscape, the key to maintaining air dominance will be successfully integrating drones into traditional airpower frameworks, leveraging human and artificial intelligence to maximise combat effectiveness. 

 

The increasing integration of drones necessitates a revaluation of military doctrines, investment priorities, and force structures. The future of air warfare lies in a balanced approach that leverages the complementary strengths of both manned and unmanned systems.

 

Please Do Comment.

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References:-

  1. Boyle, M. J. (2015). “The Drone Age: How Drone Technology Will Change War and Peace.” International Affairs, 91(1), 67-84.
  1. Horowitz, M. C., & Fuhrmann, M. (2018). “Droning On: Explaining the Proliferation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.” International Security, 43(2), 7-47.
  1. Zenko, M. (2010). “The Proliferation of Drones.” Council on Foreign Relations Report.
  1. Byman, D. (2013). “Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s Weapon of Choice.” Foreign Affairs, 92(4), 32-43.
  1. Gartzke, E., & Lindsay, J. R. (2019). “The Influence of Drones on the Nature of Warfare.” Security Studies, 28(2), 245-281.
  1. Scharre, P. (2018). “Drones and the Future of Warfare.” Center for a New American Security (CNAS).
  2. Mehta, A. (2021). “How China’s Drone Strategy Is Shaping the Global Military Balance.” Defence News.
  1. Heginbotham, E. (2019). “The Role of Unmanned Combat Systems in the Indo-Pacific.” War on the Rocks.

 

  1. Johnson, E. (2020). The Integration of UAVs in Modern Air Combat: A Strategic Perspective. [Doctoral dissertation, King’s College London].
  1. Thompson, J. (2018). The Changing Face of Aerial Combat: Drones Versus Manned Aircraft. [Master’s thesis, U.S. Naval War College].
  1. Indian Ministry of Defence. (2022). Drone Policy and Integration in the Indian Armed Forces.
  1. RAND Corporation. (2018). Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems: A Comparative Assessment.
  1. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). (2021). The Impact of Military UAVs on Contemporary Warfare.
  1. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). (2022). The Future of Air Dominance: Evaluating the Role of Combat Drones.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

599: F-35 OFFER

 

Video bytes on the issue of F-35 US offer to India

 

  1. F-35 Offer and the Indian need.

 

2. F-35 Capabilities and Comparison in brief.

 

3. Strategic and Contractual Aspects.

 

Please Do Comment.

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

597: F-35 INCIDENTS: PART OF EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS OR CAUSE FOR ALARM?

 

MY Article was published on the EurasianTimes Website

on 12 Feb 25.

 

On January 28, 2025, an F-35A Lightning II fighter jet crashed at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska during a training exercise. The pilot experienced an in-flight malfunction but ejected safely. The accident has caught the world’s attention. As a possible follow-up, the US has called off the F-35 air display during the forthcoming Aero India 2025.

 

The F-35 Lightning II, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, is the world’s most advanced multirole stealth fighter, used by several nations for various air combat missions. With its sophisticated technology, the F-35 was designed to be a revolutionary leap in aerial warfare, offering advanced stealth, sensor fusion, and unprecedented combat versatility. However, despite its promise, the aircraft has had its share of incidents that raise questions about its safety and operational readiness. Are these incidents simply part of the evolutionary process of integrating a complex new weapon system, or do they point to deeper, systemic issues that could undermine the fighter’s effectiveness in the long term?

 

A Brief Overview of the F-35 Program. The F-35 program began in the late 1990s as part of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) initiative, which aimed to develop a next-generation aircraft that could serve the needs of multiple branches of the U.S. military and those of allied nations. The F-35 comes in three variants: the F-35A (conventional take-off and landing), the F-35B (short take-off and vertical landing), and the F-35C (carrier-based). The aircraft boasts advanced stealth features, an unparalleled sensor suite, and the ability to operate in highly contested environments. The F35 development program faced delays, cost overruns, and technical challenges in the earlier phases of its deployment. Nevertheless, the aircraft has entered service with multiple air forces and naval fleets, including the U.S., the U.K., Israel, Japan, and others.

 

Notable Accidents and Incidents. Over the years, some accidents and incidents involving the F-35 have raised concerns about its safety. Some of these accidents have been relatively minor, while others have resulted in significant damage to the aircraft or loss of life. Notably, the F-35 has experienced problems with its engine, landing gear, and software systems. Overview of F-35 accidents and incidents, according to open media sources, is as follows:-

 

  • 19 May 20. A U.S. Air Force F-35A from the 58th Fighter Squadron crashed during landing at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The pilot ejected and was rescued in stable condition. The accident was reportedly attributed to a combination of pilot error induced by fatigue, a design issue with the oxygen system, the aircraft’s complex and distracting nature, a malfunctioning head-mounted display, and an unresponsive flight control system.

 

  • 29 Sep 20. A U.S. Marine Corps F-35B collided with a KC-130 during air-to-air refuelling over Imperial County, California. The F-35B pilot was injured during ejection, and the KC-130 crash-landed in a field without deploying its landing gear.

 

  • 12 Mar 21. During a night flight near Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona, a round fired from the belly-mounted 25mm gun pod on an F-35B detonated shortly after leaving the barrel. The pilot was uninjured, but the aircraft was grounded for maintenance for more than three months.

 

  • 17 Nov 21. A Royal Air Force F-35B crashed during routine operations in the Mediterranean. The pilot was safely recovered to HMS Queen Elizabeth. The crash was determined to have been caused by an engine-blanking plug left in the intake.

 

  • 4 Jan 22. A South Korean Air Force F-35A made a belly landing after all systems failed except the flight controls and the engine. The pilot landed the plane without deploying the landing gear and walked away uninjured.

 

  • 24 Jan 22. A U.S. Navy F-35C suffered a ramp strike while landing on the USS Carl Vinson and was lost overboard in the South China Sea. Seven crew members were injured, while the pilot ejected safely and was recovered from the water. The aircraft was recovered from a depth of about 12,400 feet with the aid of a remotely operated vehicle.

 

  • 19 Oct 22. An F-35A crashed at the north end of the runway at Hill Air Force Base in Utah. The pilot safely ejected and was unharmed. The crash was caused by errors in the air data system from the wake turbulence of a preceding aircraft.

 

  • 15 Dec 22. An F-35B crashed during a failed vertical landing at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth in Texas. The government test pilot ejected on the ground and was not seriously injured.

 

  • 17 Sep 23. An F-35B crashed after the pilot ejected over North Charleston, South Carolina, following a mishap during a training flight. The pilot was unharmed, and the wreckage was found the following day.

 

  • 28 May 24. A developmental test F-35B crashed shortly after take-off from Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. The pilot ejected and was reportedly injured.

 

  • 28 Jan 25: An F-35A crashed at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska. The pilot was reported uninjured.

 

Focus Areas. The F-35 program has provided several valuable lessons learned from its accidents and incidents. These lessons span design improvements, pilot training, maintenance practices, and operational considerations. Some of the key takeaways are as follows:-

 

    • Improved Pilot Training and Situational Awareness. The complexity of the F-35’s systems requires advanced training to ensure pilots can effectively handle the aircraft in emergencies.

 

    • Enhanced Mechanical and System Design Improvements. The F-35’s advanced technology provides unprecedented capabilities but has led to integration and system reliability challenges. Hardware and software fixes are periodically needed to address these.

 

    • Aircraft Maintenance and Logistical Support. Aircraft maintenance plays a critical role in ensuring aircraft safety and reliability. Maintenance-related issues have been a contributing factor in a few cases.

 

    • Design Flexibility and Rapid Response to Failures. The ability to quickly address design flaws and technical failures is critical for maintaining the aircraft’s operational capability.

 

The Evolutionary Process: Accidents as Part of Development. From the perspective of aviation development, accidents are not uncommon. History is replete with examples of military aircraft programs that experienced growing pains. Technical issues and mishaps are expected early in any new aircraft’s operational use, particularly with as many advanced features as the F-35. The F-35 is a highly complex system, and as with any cutting-edge technology, teething problems are inevitable. The F-35’s early struggles might be necessary to perfect a revolutionary design. In this sense, the F-35’s accidents can be considered part of the normal process of advancing a new weapon system toward full operational capability.

 

Cause for Alarm: Systemic Issues and Risks. However, the continued incidents involving the F-35 cannot be entirely dismissed as part of the evolutionary process. As the aircraft enters full-scale service across multiple countries, the sheer number of accidents and technical problems may suggest deeper systemic issues. Moreover, the safety concerns surrounding the F-35 could have strategic consequences. If accidents continue to occur significantly, it could undermine the aircraft’s ability to perform in combat scenarios, potentially putting both pilots and missions at risk. The loss of an aircraft, particularly in a combat zone, could have severe consequences for the military.

 

Balancing Optimism with Realism. The F-35’s complexity is its greatest strength and weakness. While providing cutting-edge capabilities, the aircraft’s advanced systems also create a dependency on maintenance crews, spare parts, and software systems. If any of these elements fail, it could lead to operational delays or mishaps. A continued lack of readiness or failure to address recurring technical problems could strain military resources and decrease confidence in the aircraft’s long-term viability. While the accidents involving the F-35 can be seen as part of the normal evolution of a complex and cutting-edge aircraft, the continued problems cannot be ignored. The F-35’s development mirrors the typical challenges of revolutionary military technology, but the program must move quickly to address the emerging issues.

 

The question remains: will the F-35 overcome its growing pains to emerge as the next generation of air dominance, or will it be remembered as a cautionary tale of technological overreach and mismanagement? The answer lies in how effectively the program addresses its ongoing challenges and whether it can evolve from a series of accidents into a proven, reliable asset for the world’s military forces.

 

Please Do Comment.

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

Link to the article on the website:-

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/f-35-stealth-fighter-a-tech-blunder-or-revolutionary/

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

References:-

  1. U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: DOD Needs to Address Affordability Challenges. GAO-20-505, 2020. https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-505.
  1. Congressional Research Service (CRS). F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Background and Issues for Congress. R44124, 2022. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44124.
  1. Axe, David. “The F-35: A Story of Delays, Cost Overruns, and Controversy.” The National Interest, 2020. https://nationalinterest.org.
  1. Air Force Times. (2020, October 5). Investigators find that the Eglin F-35 crash resulted from a tired, distracted pilot and an unresponsive tail glitch. Retrieved from airforcetimes.com
  1. 29 September 2020: F-35B Collision with KC-130 in California. USNI News. (2020, September 29). Marine F-35B Crashes After Collision with KC-130 Over California; All Aircrew Recovered Safely. Retrieved from usni.org
  1. 12 March 2021: F-35B Gun Pod Detonation near Yuma, Arizona. Military.com. (2021, March 24). Marine Corps F-35B Damaged After Round Fired from Jet Cannon Detonates. Retrieved from military.com
  1. 17 November 2021: RAF F-35B Crash in Mediterranean. Avweb. (2021, November 22). Forgotten Intake Plug Downed RAF F-35B. Retrieved from avweb.com
  1. 4 January 2022: South Korean F-35A Belly Landing. Defense News. (2022, January 6). South Korea Grounds F-35A Fleet After Belly Landing. Retrieved from defensenews.com
  1. 24 January 2022: F-35C Ramp Strike and Loss Overboard from USS Carl Vinson. Navy AirPac. (2022, January 29). Investigation into 2022 F-35C Crash Aboard Carl Vinson Complete. Retrieved from airpac.navy.mil
  1. 19 October 2022: F-35A Crash at Hill Air Force Base, Utah. Air Force Judge Advocate General (AFJAG). (2022, October 19). F-35A Crash Investigation Report. Retrieved from afjag.af.mil
  1. 15 December 2022: F-35B Crash at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth. Military.com. (2022, December 16). F-35 Crashes on Runway in North Texas After Failed Vertical Landing. Retrieved from military.com
  1. 17 September 2023: F-35B Crash Near North Charleston, South Carolina. 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing (2nd MAW). (2023, September 18). 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing Releases Investigation into F-35B Crash. Retrieved from 2ndmaw.marines.mil
  1. 28 May 2024: Developmental F-35B Crash at Kirtland Air Force Base Kirtland Air Force Base. (2024, May 28). F-35B Fighter Jet Crashes Near Albuquerque International Sunport. Retrieved from kirtland.af.mil
  1. 28 January 2025: F-35A Crash at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. Associated Press (AP). (2025, January 29). F-35A Crash at Eielson Air Force Base; Pilot Reported Uninjured. Retrieved from apnews.com

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

English हिंदी