1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

F-35s and the Iranian threat

Reader comment on item: End U.S. Aid to Israel
in response to reader comment: money will not destroy Iran's nuclear facilities

Submitted by Michael S (United States), Aug 18, 2016 at 15:36

Hello, myth

I am not an expert on military affairs; but there are some pertinent articles on the Web, as to why Israel is investing in F-35 fighter-bombers:

1. New need for stealth

"The timing of the arrival of the Stealth aircraft to Israel is especially auspicious. A high-level Israeli military figure told Al-Monitor last week on condition of anonymity, "Batteries of surface-to-air S-300 missiles produced by Russia have already reached Iran." He added, "Although they are not yet operational, we expect them to become operational in the near future."

The arrival of the F-35 to Israel — simultaneously with the supply of S-300 missiles from Russia to Iran — preserves Israel's qualitative edge over Middle East skies. "In most cases, the F-35 is able to elude the radar of the S-300," a high-placed military source told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity. "This is a big challenge for us, but we are up to it. The Stealth [aircraft] was built for exactly this purpose and will give us freedom of movement even against this new development."

2. Tactical superiority

"Some high-ranking Israeli air force members have already flown simulation flights on the sophisticated F-35 simulator system. "We are in a completely different league," one of them told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity. "The flight included dogfights against an octet of advanced, non-F-35 aircraft, and the Stealth [aircraft] won hands down."

-- http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/08/israel-air-force-prepares-for-receiving-f-35-jets.html#ixzz4Hi8p4wSz

3. Range.

Google lists the range of the F-35 at 1,379 mi, without providing details. Tehran is 993 mi. from Tel Aviv. Assuming a "go-and-come-back" range of 689 mi. for the fighter-bomber, it might seem that Israel is still coming up short. The "bombing" range is longer than that, though, because missiles launched from the plane add to the miles. Also, Israel is reasonably friendly with countries near Iran, such as Saudi Arabia, which have their own issues with the Islamic Republic. The IAF can extend the range of the jets as well, of course, by mid-air refueling, and by adding detachable wing tanks. The latter can be ejected at a safe distance, so as not to compromise the stealth of the aircraft.

4. Payload (similar to current capabilities):

"Even the rumors that the F-35s have a more limited weight-carrying capacity (for armament) than their competitors have been disproved. When the F-35 flies while reducing radar footprint (maximum stealthiness), it can carry two tons of bombs and another four air-to-air missiles, exactly like the F-16. When it does not reduce its radar footprint, the F-35 is capable of carrying six tons of bombs and four missiles, exactly like the F-15."

-- http://www.siasat.pk/forum/showthread.php?479637-What-new-F-35-jets-mean-for-Israel%92s-air-force

Other reasons for Israel's upgrade to the F-35 "Adir" are also given in the above article.

Israel is seriously threatened by Iran. Not only can Iran have its own nuclear weapons within months of deciding to produce them; but Russia and Turkey have been making moves toward a triple alliance since the failed coup in Turkey. Russia now has basing rights in Iran, from where it is flying bombers into Syria; while at the same time, the US seems to be withdrawing from its bases in Turkey. This withdrawal reportedly includes some 60 tactical nuclear weapons there, which Turkey wanted to get control of:

http://www.debka.com/article/25613/Rushed-evacuation-of-US-nukes-from-Incirlik


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submitting....

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (30) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
money will not destroy Iran's nuclear facilities [95 words]mythAug 16, 2016 20:40231441
F-35s and the Iranian threat [539 words]Michael SAug 18, 2016 15:36231441
It's Not About The Money - It's About Loyalty In Spite of the Money [337 words]M ToveyAug 10, 2016 15:50231279
Rejection history of US aid [104 words]PezDispenserAug 3, 2016 02:53231165
U.S. weaponry benefits whom? [16 words]Lee WelterJul 31, 2016 15:47231104
I love Israel and that is why I do not want Mrs Clinton in the White House [164 words]PrashantJul 29, 2016 12:41231031
Support for trump [39 words]TonyAug 12, 2016 06:14231031
1Name-calling is unproductive [83 words]Michael SAug 16, 2016 02:51231031
3Further compelling reasons to stop the aid [328 words]EricJul 29, 2016 10:06231029
2Wanna make a deal? [120 words]There is NO Santa ClausJul 28, 2016 22:38231015
The United States has a military presence and gives aid all around the world yet has few friends. [135 words]LynnJul 28, 2016 12:44231007
1Trump regarding Israel and Nato [36 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
SteinJul 27, 2016 19:09230984
1Trump wants to strengthen NATO [231 words]Michael SJul 31, 2016 04:03230984
US END AID TO ISRAEL [124 words]RafiJul 27, 2016 11:50230973
Stopping aid to Israel is a suicidal genocidal proposition [21 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
AlanJul 27, 2016 07:35230966
Agree, with caveats [180 words]TirtzaJul 27, 2016 04:35230961
Joke [127 words]Charles NutterJul 27, 2016 04:00230959
3unrealistic suggestion [388 words]danteJul 27, 2016 02:28230958
1Just a great ROI. [65 words]stevenlJul 27, 2016 00:14230956
The Sooner The Better [58 words]Liz WagnerJul 26, 2016 20:41230946
Partially disagree [121 words]Peter StollJul 26, 2016 20:40230942
No Deal May Be Better Than Latest Deal [101 words]DaveJul 26, 2016 19:08230938
a different approach [121 words]Laurie KursJul 26, 2016 16:59230916
ONLY if aid money were cut to Israel's enemies... [7 words]Carol NeilsonJul 26, 2016 13:46230905
Fascinating two comments [225 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Ron ThompsonJul 26, 2016 13:15230903
Yes indeed Mr. Netanyahu talks... [61 words]SHmuel HaLeviJul 26, 2016 11:13230893
Not foreign aid, subsidy to major US defence contractors [179 words]Josiah RotenbergJul 26, 2016 10:37230892
Well, maybe [95 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Solomon2Jul 26, 2016 10:33230891
1What is Bandow 90/91 correct policies? [28 words]Nancy BrennerJul 26, 2016 10:08230890
yes !! [5 words]Anne JulienneJul 26, 2016 08:32230887

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to F-35s and the Iranian threat by Michael S

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2018 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes