Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion




Looks like LM & the US have collectively sold the Swiss a deal something similar to a Swiss cheese. To top it all , Carrot Top has levied the highest tariffs on the Swiss of any country in Europe .

Good for both - LM & the US , I say . The Swiss revel in ill gotten gains. You're totally justified in taking them for a ride sweetie. No shame in cheating cheats . Ja ? @Innominate
 

The first delivery of F-35 fighter aircraft for the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) is set to take place at the end of 2026, the Ministry of Defence (Mindef) said. In a statement on Sept 12, Mindef said the fifth-generation stealth planes will form part of the RSAF’s future fighter fleet, which will comprise F-35A, F-35B and F-15SG fighter jets.
 

Air Force Fighter Roadmap Projects Slow Growth for F-35 Fleet

Nov. 10, 2025 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force only asked to buy 24 F-35s in its fiscal 2026 budget, but doesn’t expect to sharply increase its usable fleet of Lightning IIs for at least a few more years, according to the new fighter roadmap it provided to Congress. That roadmap also calls for the overall fighter inventory to dip for two more years before starting to rebound.

The congressionally-mandated fighter plan, “Long-Term USAF Fighter Force Structure,” was dated August but only recently made public. It shows a fighter inventory profile forecasting several years of very slow growth in the F-35 fleet, with a net 39 per year being the peak. Previous to fiscal 2026, the Air Force had bought as many as 48 per year.

Charts in the Air Force’s report shows an inventory of 344 F-35s in the new “Combat Coded Total Aircraft Inventory” category, which replaces Primary Mission Aircraft Inventory, in fiscal 2026. The new metric counts all the fighters the Air Force has, while the previous yardstick didn’t count airplanes that were considered backup inventory or attrition reserve. The new CCTAI figure for the F-35 rises by only 39 aircraft in fiscal 2027, and increases by only 18 in FY ’28. After that nadir, the rebound is slow, with only 32 net F-35s added in FY’29 and 39 in FY’30. That still doesn’t bring fleet growth to where it was in FY’25, when the service asked for 48 new F-35s.

The change in the fleet size doesn’t exactly equate to numbers bought, as some aircraft are lost through attrition, others may go into long-term modification and rework and are unavailable for use, and some early F-35s are retired. The Air Force’s actual buying plans were withheld, available only in a classified annex to the report, and its fiscal 2026 budget request did not include out-year plans.

Total Aircraft Inventory numbers “do not represent procurement targets but are the desired overall USAF possessed inventory on the ramp,” the Air Force said in report text explaining its charts.

“Recapitalization of aging platforms due to early lot obsolescence (e.g. F-35) diminishing parts availability (F-35 and F-15E) and other factors will drive procurement of aircraft above the TAI requirement,” the service said.

The Air Force is setting a priority on upgrading F-35s with the Technical Refresh 3 and 4, while the TR-2 modernization “will fall behind,” it noted.

Moreover, the TR-2 version’s capabilities “will drive eventual replacement of those aircraft due to low utility for the USAF, compared to newer-block fighter aircraft.”

The Air Force explained its low annual buys of the F-35 in the 2010s as due in part to preferring to wait for the fully-realized Block 4 version, which had all the capabilities the service wanted from the Lightning II. The Air Force said it preferred to wait, rather than face a large bill to later retrofit those earlier jets with Block 4 capabilities.

In the reconciliation package earlier this year, in which the F-15EX and the F-47 both received billions in extra funding, Congress added no funds to boost F-35 production.

The total fighter inventory roughly matches the pattern for the F-35, with 1,271 fighters overall in FY’26, dropping to 1,271 in FY’27, bottoming out in FY’28 with 1,215, then rising in FY’28 and ’29 to 1,250 and 1,304, respectively.

The report said the service needs to increase its fighter fleet to 1,558 jets by 2035, which it said can be done if it “maxes out” F-35 production to 100 a year and increases F-15EX acquisitions by 36 per year, versus the currently-planned 24.

Those first few years of the roadmap sees the divestiture of the A-10 by the end of FY’27 and the sharp reduction in the F-15C/D and F-15E fleets. The F-15C/D fleet drops from 42 in FY’26 to 21 in FY’29, and those aircraft remain as “Platinum Eagles” serving as homeland defense jets into the early 2030s. The F-15E Strike Eagle fleet falls from 133 in FY’26 to 78 in FY’28, and hovers there through the end of the decade.

The F-15EX fleet is the only other named aircraft showing an increase, rising from 27 available in FY’26 to 111 by the end of FY’30.

The Air Force assumes it will be allowed to divest some 32 of its oldest and least-upgraded F-22s, leaving a fleet of 134 jets from FY’26 into the 2030s. The F-16 fleet remains at 488 aircraft throughout the same period.

No figures were supplied for how these numbers will be offset by bringing on the new F-47, data for which is also restricted to the classified annex. Even so, the Air Force said in the report that those figures “are still being determined.”

The report did not include Collaborative Combat Aircraft in its tallies of fighter jets, saying CCAs, when they become available, will be “additive” to the fighter inventory.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: john0496

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter pogramme in crisis: rising costs, TR-3 delays and engine modernisation failures

After years of uninterrupted cost growth and mounting implementation problems, the programme to modernise the avionics of Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter aircraft to the TR-3/Block 4 standard has already exceeded its planned budget by more than six billion US dollars and is five years behind schedule. In an attempt to curb this process, the Pentagon plans to reduce the scope of the modernisation, which will result in the installation of a downgraded TR-3/Block 4 package in the fighters.

The United States Department of War (Pentagon) is currently implementing a programme to upgrade the avionics package of F-35 fighter aircraft to the Block 4 standard. It is also preparing to launch a programme to modernise the Pratt & Whitney F135 engines installed in the F-35.

The Block 4 upgrade includes the installation of new avionics components as part of the TR-3 (Tech Refresh 3) package as well as new avionics software. Under the TR-3 package, the fighters will receive a new onboard computer from L3Harris, a new version of the cockpit multifunction display, an upgraded Northrop Grumman AN/APG-85 radar, an upgraded version of the AN/AAQ-37 electro-optical distributed aperture system known as the Next Generation Distributed Aperture System (NGDAS), and new components of the BAE Systems AN/ASQ-239 electronic warfare system. The operation of these components is to be supported by new 40-series avionics software (40R0X). The TR-3/Block 4 package replaces the previously installed TR-2/Block 3F avionics package in F-35 aircraft.

The engine upgrade programme consists of two components: ECU (Engine Core Upgrade) and PTMU (Power Thermal Management Upgrade). The ECU involves modernisation of the engine core, which consists of the power module and gearbox, while PTMU concerns the upgrade of the power and thermal management system.

According to the latest report published in September this year by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), both the avionics and engine upgrade programmes are showing limited progress. Deliveries of F-35 aircraft equipped with TR-3 packages will not begin earlier than 2026 – three years later than originally planned. Moreover, these aircraft will still not receive the full avionics software, meaning their combat capabilities will remain limited. Meanwhile, production of components necessary for the engine upgrade process will not begin earlier than 2031–2033.

On 29 September this year, the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth USD 24.29 billion for the delivery of 296 F-35 fighters built under production Lots 18 and 19. Deliveries of the first aircraft from these lots are scheduled to begin in 2026. The previously negotiated Lot 18 included 145 aircraft: 48 F-35A for the USAF, 16 F-35B and 5 F-35C for the USMC, 14 F-35C for the US Navy, 15 F-35A and 1 F-35B for international programme partners, and 39 F-35A and 7 F-35B for foreign customers under FMS (Foreign Military Sales). The current contract increased the number of Lot 18 aircraft to 148. Lot 19 also includes 148 aircraft: 40 F-35A for the USAF, 12 F-35B and 8 F-35C for the USMC, 9 F-35C for the US Navy, 13 F-35A and 2 F-35B for international partners, and 52 F-35A and 12 F-35B under FMS.

The average cost of a single F-35 is expected to be USD 82.4 million. This price excludes the engine, as engine procurement is contracted separately by the Pentagon with Pratt & Whitney. Including the engine, the cost of a single F-35 will increase by approximately USD 20 million. Meanwhile, finalisation of contracts for engines built under Lots 18 and 19 has been delayed by six months and is now expected in spring 2026.

Rising programme costs

In 2001, the Pentagon estimated that the total cost of development, testing and procurement of 2,470 F-35 fighters in all three variants would amount to USD 233 billion. Over subsequent years, these estimates were revised several times. In March 2012, the figure was stated as USD 396 billion, representing not only an increase of USD 163 billion but also a breach of the so-called Nunn-McCurdy Act. This legislation requires the Pentagon to notify legislators when the cost of a defence programme exceeds its budget by 15 per cent or more. Since 2012, programme costs have been revised four more times. By December 2022, estimated costs had risen to USD 442.3 billion. In December 2023, the Pentagon announced that the total programme cost would rise to USD 485.2 billion, comprising USD 87.4 billion for development, research and testing, USD 398.8 billion for procurement, and USD 4 billion for construction and infrastructure investments. Compared to 2012, this represents increases in all three categories of USD 32.2 billion, USD 58.1 billion and USD 0.8 billion respectively.

The F-35 programme office has also announced that the estimated operating cost of 2,470 F-35 fighters up to 2088 (77 years) will amount to approximately USD 1.58 trillion. Combined with development, procurement and operating costs, the total programme cost is therefore expected to exceed USD 2 trillion.

Reduction in the scope of TR-3/Block 4 modernisation

Seven years after its launch, the cost of the Block 4 avionics upgrade programme is expected to reach USD 16.5 billion. The Pentagon originally planned to spend around USD 10.6 billion on the upgrade in fiscal years 2018–2024. In 2020, this was estimated at approximately USD 14.5 billion. Development and procurement of TR-3 hardware components and development of avionics software are expected to cost around USD 1.9 billion.

Since its inception, the TR-3/Block 4 upgrade programme has been part of the overall F-35 production programme. Under the defence budget act for fiscal year 2024, legislators required the Pentagon to separate the TR-3/Block 4 upgrade as a main subprogramme. As a result, it will receive its own budget and schedule, independent of the main F-35 programme. This process is due to be completed by the end of the current year, giving legislators greater insight and control over expenditure and enabling easier monitoring of progress.

Delays and cost increases in the TR-3/Block 4 upgrade are linked on the one hand to problems finalising the avionics software and on the other to delayed deliveries of hardware components, many of which still require further refinement.

In January 2023, test flights began of an F-35A aircraft fitted with some TR-3 package components. However, due to the immaturity of the avionics software in the so-called reduced 40R01 version, only part of the planned tests were completed by the end of 2023. These revealed significant software instability, requiring further corrections. As a result, in July 2023 the Pentagon suspended acceptance of F-35 fighters, forcing Lockheed Martin to store completed aircraft. Although exact figures were not disclosed, more than 100 F-35 aircraft were placed in storage. Acceptance resumed only in July 2024, with the Pentagon ultimately agreeing to accept fighters equipped with the downgraded TR-3/Block 4 package and 40R01 software. These aircraft do not possess full combat capabilities and are suitable only for training flights. By May 2025, the Pentagon had accepted 174 F-35 aircraft with the downgraded TR-3/Block 4 package, including all aircraft previously stored by Lockheed Martin. In July 2025, the process of installing expanded avionics software in these aircraft was due to begin, enabling limited combat capability. At present, the Pentagon does not plan to install TR-3/Block 4 packages on F-35 aircraft already equipped with the TR-2/Block 3F avionics package. Consequently, over a thousand currently operated F-35s will not be upgraded.

Lockheed Martin admitted that all issues with the onboard computer installed under the TR-3 package were resolved only by mid-2025. The unit had to be refined to meet programme specifications, as it did not fulfil requirements, and issues with insufficient component quality also had to be addressed. The NGDAS system has still not been finalised and remains in the testing and validation phase, which is due to be completed in 2026.

By mid-2024, it was expected that the fully functional target avionics software, designated 40R02, would be implemented in spring 2025. However, in late January 2025, Lockheed Martin admitted that achieving full operational capability of the TR-3/Block 4 package with 40R02 software would not be possible earlier than 2026. According to the GAO report, the F-35 programme office now plans to introduce an incomplete version of the TR-3/Block 4 avionics package. The specific capabilities to be reduced have not yet been disclosed. Implementation of this “scaled-down” package is planned for completion by 2031. Any potential expansion of capabilities will only be possible in the mid-2030s. While the precise scope remains unknown, the costs of the TR-3/Block 4 upgrade are certain to rise yet again.


Delayed aircraft and engine deliveries

Over the past few years, both Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney have been delivering aircraft and engines with increasing delays.

By May 2025, the Pentagon had accepted 80 aircraft, including 74 that were due for delivery in 2023 and 2024. Lockheed Martin still has to deliver 20 aircraft scheduled for 2024. The negative trend began in 2018, when of 91 F-35s built, only 53 were delivered on time. In 2019, 118 out of 134 were delivered on time. In 2020, only 70 of 120 were delivered on time; in 2021, 120 of 142; in 2022, 70 of 141; and in 2023, only 9 of 98. In 2024, due to the Pentagon’s suspension of acceptance, none of the 110 completed aircraft were delivered. Whereas in 2022 deliveries were on average 22 days late, in 2023 the figure rose to 61 days, and in 2024 reached 238 days.

One of the main factors behind these delays is the late delivery of certain components and parts by subcontractors. However, the problem also affects parts produced by Lockheed Martin itself. A notable example is the leading-edge flaps of the wings, whose delayed delivery since 2023 has been a major factor impeding production. The shortage of parts results in an accumulation of incomplete aircraft awaiting delivery. According to the programme office, in February 2025, 52 incomplete aircraft were unable to leave the production line for this reason. The Defence Contract Management Agency (DCMA) reported that at the beginning of 2025, Lockheed Martin was awaiting more than 4,000 different parts and components required to complete F-35 production, including around 1,600 parts used in the TR-3/Block 4 avionics upgrade programme.

Logistical and material problems may become the main obstacle to scaling up F-35 production. According to Lockheed Martin, production is soon expected to reach a maximum of approximately 156 aircraft per year, a level to be maintained over the next five years. However, the company is currently unable to build even 150 F-35s annually, let alone deliver them on schedule.

In 2024, Pratt & Whitney delivered all 123 engines produced after the deadline. The same situation occurred the previous year, involving all 137 engines built. In 2022, only four of 127 engines were delivered on time, and in 2021 just six out of 152. The average delay was 22 days in 2022, rising to 61 days in 2023 and reaching 238 days in 2024.
As with the aircraft, these delays stem from problems with timely delivery of components by subcontractors, as well as engines failing initial quality checks and manufacturer testing. Pratt & Whitney also suspends deliveries if any quality issues are detected in installed components. Lockheed Martin maintains a certain buffer stock of engines, meaning that for now, delayed engine deliveries do not affect the fighter production process.


Ineffective financial incentives

The GAO report criticises the policy of the F-35 programme office, which financially rewards Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney despite their failure to deliver products on time.

Under Pentagon contracts, manufacturers earn a fixed percentage of the price of each delivered aircraft or engine. The contracts also include clauses allowing the programme office to award bonuses if quality performance improves, deliveries are on time, or if producers demonstrate initiatives leading to reduced prices. In the event of performance deterioration, penalties may be imposed, reducing base profits by a set percentage. Such penalties were applied when the Pentagon suspended aircraft acceptance due to the unfinished avionics package, reducing payments to Lockheed Martin by USD 5 million per aircraft, later lowered to USD 3.8 million as the programme progressed.

However, in terms of delivery timeliness, manufacturers are rewarded even when deadlines are significantly exceeded. In 2021–2022, under Lot 13, Lockheed Martin delivered 93 F-35s, 29 of them late, with an average delay of 20 days. Despite this, the manufacturer received a timeliness bonus reduced by only 7 per cent. Under Lot 14 (2022–2023), 77 of 96 aircraft were delivered late, with an average delay of 65 days, yet the bonus was reduced by just 35 per cent.

The situation is similar for Pratt & Whitney. Bonuses are paid if engines pass quality inspections, are built according to schedule and delivered on time, with delivery timeliness being only one of several factors. Under Lot 14 (2021–2022), 80 of 82 engines were delivered late, resulting in a 44 per cent reduction in bonuses. Under Lot 15 (2022–2023), all 89 engines were delivered late, yet bonuses were reduced by only 11 per cent. Under Lot 16 (2023–2024), all 66 engines were delivered late and bonuses were reduced by 63 per cent.

GAO stresses that there is no mechanism incentivising manufacturers to improve performance and that the current reward system has the opposite effect. For example, contracts for Lots 15–17 allow bonuses if delivery delays do not exceed 75 days, with reductions starting only after an additional 15 days. Thus, only if Lockheed Martin begins delivering fighters with a 90-day delay can it expect bonuses to be reduced, though not entirely withheld.

Delayed engine upgrade programmes

The Engine Core Upgrade (ECU) programme began in March 2023. The F-35 programme office commenced analysis of options to increase engine power while improving its ability to generate electricity and cool increasingly advanced avionics systems. The upgrade is intended to extend engine service life and maintain combat capability of the F-35 beyond 2029. It is also key to implementation of the TR-3/Block 4 avionics package and its future versions, as these will exacerbate the problem of insufficient power and cooling capacity of the F135 engine. The ECU upgrade will not alter the external dimensions or overall configuration of the engine, allowing it to be applied across all three F-35 variants.

As early as May 2023, GAO recommended that the ECU programme be separated as a major defence subprogramme to improve management and pace of implementation. The first Preliminary Design Review (PDR) was conducted in February 2024, with the second completed in mid-July 2024. Despite positive outcomes, no development and test schedule was established at that time, nor was the necessary material base for testing created. In September 2024, JPO awarded Pratt & Whitney a USD 1.3 billion contract for the risk reduction and technology maturation phase of the ECU programme, to be completed by the end of 2026. Only then can the first contract under the subsequent development phase be awarded. GAO notes that two key turbine technologies intended for use have not yet been fully developed. If the first development-phase contract is awarded in 2027 as scheduled, production of upgraded F135 engines will likely begin no earlier than 2031.

The PTMU programme is even less advanced than ECU. It includes several initiatives aimed at modernising subsystems such as the Power and Thermal Management System (PTMS), responsible for distributing cooling air for avionics components, the fuel temperature management system, and the power generation system. At the beginning of 2024, the programme office considered various options, including upgrading existing subsystems or developing entirely new ones. Ultimately, in December 2024, Lockheed Martin was awarded a USD 107 million contract to analyse available options and identify potential technologies, with the analysis to be completed by December 2026. Only after this will the JPO decide on specific upgrades or modifications. The development phase of the PTMU programme may begin no earlier than 2027, meaning production of new components would potentially commence only in 2033. The total costs of both programmes remain unknown, though development and testing phases are estimated at approximately USD 4.5 billion, with additional costs for production and installation of required components.
 
Every time we update the progress report, it's slightly worse than before. Now it's the PTMU that can't be delivered before 2033. My 2031 estimate was too optimistic, especially since the software hasn't had its final say (or rather, its final problems!).

Even so, 1,000 F-35s will not be upgraded and will therefore have reduced engine life and increased MCO costs.

The worst thing is that the programme is now falling behind by more than a year every year, which means that if management is not improved, it will never be completed!
 
"At present, the Pentagon does not plan to install TR-3/Block 4 packages on F-35 aircraft already equipped with the TR-2/Block 3F avionics package. Consequently, over a thousand currently operated F-35s will not be upgraded."
:ROFLMAO:
More or less all of the australian F-35
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
So let me get this right, You are quoting ,,,,1765190683242.png,,,Who write really nice things about the Rafale,

They are casting fear and doubt about block 4 updates to TR-2 aircraft

Luckily there is google for those that aren't trolls


The entire Block 4 upgrade will be retrofitted to all Australian aircraft, though the timing and budget have not been disclosed. Combined with other assets such as Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft, Super Hornets and Growlers, they will take the combat power of the RAAF to a whole new level. With the use of KC-30A air-to-air tankers it will be possible to conduct operations throughout Southeast Asia.

It is likely that the Block 4 work will be performed locally. Asked to quantify the value of the entire F-35 program to Australian industry, the company said: “Lockheed Martin is proud to partner with the RAAF as the industry leader and original equipment manufacturer in Australia, providing unparalleled experience, expertise and success in leading the design, production and sustainment of the F-35 Lightning II.”

“Through our longstanding partnerships with Australian industry, Lockheed Martin is delivering the F-35 Lightning II production and sustainment capability in Australia,” it said. “This has brought more than $4.6bn to Australian industry and created thousands of Australian jobs.”

 
  • Like
Reactions: spice
So let me get this right, You are quoting ,,,,View attachment 48215,,,Who write really nice things about the Rafale,
It's strange, I searched their website and didn't find anything special about the Rafale. I only found information that has also been reported by other media outlets and is not controversial.

They are casting fear and doubt about block 4 updates to TR-2 aircraft

Luckily there is google for those that aren't trolls

No, they faithfully report excerpts from official GAO reports and let the reader draw their own conclusions. They never express their own opinions; they are journalists, after all, not weapons systems specialists.


I see that we are not committing ourselves too much, and that is just as well because if it were possible, the Pentagon would not have decided on this:

At present, the Pentagon does not plan to install TR-3/Block 4 packages on F-35 aircraft already equipped with the TR-2/Block 3F avionics package. Consequently, over a thousand currently operated F-35s will not be upgraded.
The Pentagon believes that upgrading a thousand F-35s is not justified, while you think it is worthwhile to do so for 74 F-35s: we will see in the future who is right!

Ah, there is also another factor: my article is dated 23 November 2025 and yours is dated 28 May 2024. As the F-35 programme continues to deteriorate, it is reasonable to imagine that optimism (sic) was greater last year than it is this year.
 
The Block 4 upgrade includes the installation of new avionics components as part of the TR-3 (Tech Refresh 3) package as well as new avionics software. Under the TR-3 package, the fighters will receive a new onboard computer from L3Harris, a new version of the cockpit multifunction display, an upgraded Northrop Grumman AN/APG-85 radar, an upgraded version of the AN/AAQ-37 electro-optical distributed aperture system known as the Next Generation Distributed Aperture System (NGDAS), and new components of the BAE Systems AN/ASQ-239 electronic warfare system. The operation of these components is to be supported by new 40-series avionics software (40R0X). The TR-3/Block 4 package replaces the previously installed TR-2/Block 3F avionics package in F-35 aircraft.

So are they testing some 6th gen tech on F35 platform.
 
I am going to talk to you about Nunn–McCurdy for Block 4 and the FMS procedure. The reasons for this discussion are that the F-35 programme has entered a critical phase with the TR-3 / Block 4 upgrade. This modernisation is already showing a cost overrun of more than $6 billion compared to previous estimates, a delay of at least five years on the initial schedule, aircraft deliveries blocked or delayed because of TR-3, and now we have the Pentagon's decision to make Block 4 a separate major sub-programme within the F-35 programme.

This is where the Nunn-McCurdy Act and the GAO come into play.

The Nunn-McCurdy Act (1982, incorporated into Title 10) is a US law designed to limit cost overruns in major defence acquisition programmes (MDAPs).

Nunn–McCurdy Amendment Nunn-McCurdy Act (10 U.S.C. §2433)

It defines two levels of ‘breach’ (threshold violation):

Significant breach:
+15% on the unit cost compared to the current baseline or +30% compared to the initial baseline.

Critical breach:
+25% on the unit cost compared to the current baseline or +50% compared to the initial baseline.

In the event of a critical breach, the law requires:

Formal notification to Congress, a review of the programme, in principle cancellation, unless the Secretary of Defence certifies that:
  • the programme is essential to national security,
  • there is no credible, less costly alternative,
  • the new cost estimates are realistic,
  • the programme's governance has been corrected.
In practice, programmes are not always cancelled, but must be ‘repaired’, cut back, re-profiled or re-scoped.

What the GAO is doing with TR-3 / Block 4

Recent GAO reports on the F-35 are very clear about the evolution of the programme mentioned at the beginning of this post.

This is important because, as long as Block 4 was ‘just an evolution’ of the F-35, its cost overruns were buried in the bulk of the main programme.
By transforming it into a major sub-programme, it becomes visible in the accounts, subject to its own Nunn–McCurdy thresholds, and therefore punishable in the event of further slippages.

The separation of Block 4 is not only a monitoring tool, it is a prerequisite for being able, if necessary, to reduce or cut back the scope.

The GAO has already noted that the new Block 4 sub-programme is planned with less capability than originally anticipated, a delayed schedule and costs that remain uncertain.

A total halt to Block 4 is unlikely for one simple reason: without extensive modernisation, the F-35 would be technically obsolete well before the end of its service life. However, several factors make a reduction highly likely:
  • Massive and repeated cost overruns have already been observed, with no new consolidated estimate before the end of 2025.
  • Delays are increasing faster than the passage of time: each year slips by more than a year.
  • Dependence on other delayed sub-programmes:
  • F135 engine upgrade (ECU)
  • improvement of the thermal management system (PTMU)
which, according to current reports, will not produce any effects before 2031–2033.

Strategic context
Increasing prioritisation of the Indo-Pacific, budgetary pressure, political will to cut back on programmes that are running off course.

Block 4 will not be cancelled, but scaled back with some capabilities postponed to a later Block 4.x, others abandoned altogether, and deployment limited to only part of the fleet, spread out over more than a decade.

This is exactly what the GAO suggests when it refers to a ‘reduced-scope Block 4’ and capabilities postponed until after the engine upgrade.

How FMS (Foreign Military Sales) really works

FMS is a mechanism whereby the foreign customer does not sign with Lockheed Martin, but with the US government (via an LOA: Letter of Offer and Acceptance).

A few key points:

The framework is primarily political and intergovernmental, not commercial in the traditional sense. LOAs always include wording such as ‘delivery subject to U.S. Government availability, budget, priorities...’

In practice, there is no standard mechanism for international legal recourse such as commercial arbitration:

  • no standard CIP/ICC clause,
  • no private arbitration tribunal provided for by default,
  • disputes or disappointments are settled through diplomacy, not through conventional lawsuits (except in very specific cases, which are examined on a case-by-case basis by lawyers and rarely favourable to the foreign customer).
In short, FMS customers are not just buying an aircraft, they are buying dependent access to a weapons system whose development depends entirely on:
  • the US Congress,
  • US strategic priorities,
  • and the programme's budgetary health.
Consequences for FMS customers of the F-35 (including Japan, Israel, etc.)

All FMS customers follow the same basic pattern: the United States is the political, budgetary and technological leader, and the customer is dependent for major upgrades (TR-3, Block 4, modernised engine).

This applies to NATO countries: Finland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Poland, etc.

Non-NATO countries: Switzerland (FMS + specific agreements), major non-NATO allies: Japan, South Korea, Israel, Australia, etc.

On a technical level, if Block 4 is reduced/spread out, there will be a prolonged gap between the promised standard and the standard actually delivered; the likely coexistence, in the long term, of several ‘classes’ of F-35s:
  • aircraft remaining at the TR-2/Block 3F standard,
  • aircraft partially TR-3 with an incomplete Block 4,
  • a few prioritised fleets (US, Pacific) receiving capabilities earlier.
Recent reports from the GAO and American think tanks already mention a fragmented Block 4, capabilities postponed until after 2030, and a final cost that is still unknown.

Politically and legally, an FMS country (Finland, Switzerland, Japan, Israel, etc.) cannot legally demand delivery of a Block 4 ‘as presented in the 2018 brochures’. It can complain, request compensation (training, support, prioritisation of deliveries), but cannot impose strict compliance with a standard that has itself been redefined by Congress and the Pentagon along the way.

If the United States decides that certain Block 4 functions are too expensive and will never be finalised, FMS customers will have to live with it.

This applies to Japan, a key strategic partner in the Indo-Pacific, Israel, which has a very special status (local modifications, ‘F-35I’) but remains dependent on the software and hardware base provided by the United States, and all European customers, for whom the F-35 is purchased precisely on the promise of these Block 4 improvements (new sensors, enhanced electronic warfare, new weapons, etc.).

What this really means for FMS customers

The separation of TR-3/Block 4 into major sub-programmes makes it possible to formally reduce the scope of Block 4 without calling into question the existence of the F-35 itself.

The Nunn–McCurdy Act and pressure from the GAO are forcing the Pentagon to once again justify massive cost overruns or cut capabilities in order to stay within a politically acceptable budget.

FMS customers of the F-35 (Europe, Japan, Israel, Korea, Australia, etc.) find themselves automatically exposed to additional delays, uneven standards, and partial capabilities compared to the initial promises, with no real legal recourse, just room for political negotiation.

In short, the question is no longer:

Will the F-35 have Block 4 as planned? but rather: What reduced, staggered and differentiated version of Block 4 will each customer ultimately receive, and when?

This is a point that the parliaments and public opinion of the purchasing countries have not yet fully grasped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screambowl
So are they testing some 6th gen tech on F35 platform.
LM lost the 6th gen comp, They have the 6th gen tech, They are proposing a F-35 upgrade using this tech, Like Boeing did for the Super hornet, when it lost the 5th gen F-35 comp

They can get the F-35 to 80% 6th gen of the F-47 at half the cost


@pic oil They haven't announced their timeline for the update to the US fleet, The euro trash interpreted this as not upgrading 1,000 aircraft, just the usual trolling of the best available aircraft
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: screambowl
@pic oil They haven't announced their timeline for the update to the US fleet, The euro trash interpreted this as not upgrading 1,000 aircraft, just the usual trolling of the best available aircraft

The upgrade depends on the Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) – a step that preceded the upgrade and outlines plans for installing a new computer in the plane, along with the software architecture that will power it and handle all the added capabilities that come with Block 4. Without TR-3, Block 4 simply cannot function.

The U.S. Air Force’s F-35 Stealth Fighter Block 4 Crisis​

 
LOL 🤣 A great leap, You have understood that the TR-3 hardware is at the base of block 4 and the existing TR-2 will be updated in due course

Rafale only needs a new coat of paint to be classed as an update, You wouldn't understand how technical this stuff is, Are we going to do this for every update?