Outgunned on NGAD, Lockheed doubles down on F-35
Bested at the next-generation US fighter competition, Lockheed Martin is betting big on turning the F-35 into a 'fifth-gen-plus' fighter — retrofitting tomorrow's tech into yesterday's jet to stay in the game.
This month, multiple media sources reported that Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Taiclet announced that the defense giant will not challenge the US Air Force's decision to award the US$20 billion Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter contract to rival defense contractor Boeing.
The company said it plans to integrate technologies from its unsuccessful NGAD bid into upgraded versions of its F-35 and F-22 fighters.
During an earnings call, Taiclet said Lockheed aims to deliver '80% of sixth-generation capability at 50% of the cost' by transforming the F-35 into a fifth-gen-plus fighter. Enhancements will include stealth, passive infrared sensors and advanced tracking and missile systems — some already in development under the F-35 Block 4 upgrade.
Lockheed executives said the company intends to export some of these improvements, subject to US government approval. With a projected global fleet of 3,500 F-35s, Lockheed hopes its upgraded jets will offer a cost-effective alternative to the yet-undefined, potentially multi-hundred-million-dollar NGAD aircraft.
The NGAD decision, announced in March 2025 by US President Donald Trump, leaves Lockheed temporarily sidelined from all publicly known advanced fighter programs. The US Air Force confirmed Boeing offered the 'best overall value' for NGAD.
Naval News mentions in a March 2025 article that under the Next Gen 2.0 OML Coating Program, the F-35 would receive a new mirror coating designed to improve maintainability and survivability, critical for the harsh corrosive maritime environment involved in aircraft carrier-based operations.
Further, David Cenciotti and Stefano D'Urso mention in an August 2022 article for The Aviationist that the mirror coating could hide the F-35 from infrared search and tracking (IRST) systems or protect the aircraft from low-power lasers.
In terms of propulsion upgrades, John Tirpak mentions in an October 2024 article for Air & Space Forces Magazine that the F-35 Engine Core Upgrade (ECU) is intended to increase the durability and life expectancy of the F-35's Pratt and Whitney F135 engines, which has suffered in recent years due to increased and new equipment installed on the aircraft.
Tirpak notes that the ECU upgrade supports the cooling, performance and electrical power requirements for the F-35's Block 4 upgrade.
While the F-35 is different from most US fighters as it was designed with an Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) IRST system from the start, the Advanced Electro-Optical Targeting System (A-EOTS) upgrade offers improved resolution, multi-spectral range, greater reliability and reduced costs per operating hour.
In addition to A-EOTS, TWZ reported in January 2023 that the new AN/APG-85 radar, which is most likely a gallium nitride (GaN)-based system, could drastically increase the F-35's radar range and resolution and support more dynamic electronic warfare tactics.
Combined with the Distributed Aperture System (DAS) that provides F-35 pilots a 360-degree view through the aircraft, the A-EOTS + AN/APG-85 + DAS combination can give the aircraft a substantial 'see-first shoot-first' advantage.
New armaments, such as the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (JATM), could give the F-35 a substantial range and lethality upgrade over the legacy AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) in US military service, though much of the secretive weapon's capabilities are classified, as stated by TWZ in a February 2025 article.
However, integration constraints mean upgrades will be evolutionary, not revolutionary – the F-35 must work within the physical and technical bounds set years ago. For example, the US Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E) FY2024 Annual Report mentions that integrating the Technology Refresh-3 (TR-3) avionics upgrade, essential for Block 4 mission capabilities, has encountered substantial hardware and software issues.
According to the report, these problems forced the program to delay the delivery of aircraft equipped with TR-3, resulting in newly produced planes being placed in long-term parking due to inadequate mission systems software performance.
It says the F-35's existing TR-2 architecture's constraints compounded these issues, limiting the scope of feasible enhancements and highlighting inherent limitations established by legacy design choices.
The Asia Live mentions that some analysts say sixth-generation fighters involve fundamental design changes that can't be replicated by upgrading existing platforms, such as the F-35.
According to the report, these include airframe shapes for better stealth, adaptive engines for optimized performance and a 'digital first' architecture designed with AI integration from the ground up.
In addition to those challenges, the F-35's reliability issues, if not addressed, would leave upgrades pointless. The US DOT&E FY2024 Annual Report says that the US F-35 fleet falls short of several reliability requirements defined in the Joint Strike Fighter Operational Requirements Document (JSF ORD).
It states that in FY23, the F-35A, F-35B and F-35C did not meet key thresholds for mean flight hours between critical failures (MFHBCF), which measures how often serious failures occur that prevent mission completion or compromise flight safety.
Additionally, the report mentions that trends in the mean time to repair (MTTR) and mean corrective maintenance time for critical failures (MCMTCF) have shown little improvement, indicating ongoing difficulties in maintaining aircraft readiness.
Lockheed Martin's push to retrofit the F-35 with some sixth-generation technology could make it a viable alternative for other upcoming sixth-generation aircraft.
For instance, the UK's Future Combat Air System (FCAS) received a red rating in the country's Annual Report on Major Projects 2023-2024. According to the report, a red rating means the success of the project appears to be unachievable, with major issues appearing unmanageable or unresolvable.
Further, in an April 2023 article for the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), Justin Bronk mentions that the UK-Italy-Japan Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) is unlikely to produce a product more competitive than the F-35.
The GCAP is a component of the UK's FCAS. The former is an international collaboration, while the latter is a UK initiative that aims to leverage its partners' technology and industrial expertise for advancement.
While Bronk points out that the F-35 is far from a perfect program, decades of US expertise and investment in state-of-the-art sensors, weapons, electronic warfare, stealth, constant upgrades and retrofitting have produced undeniable results.
He mentions that every air force that has tested the F-35 versus European or US competitors picked the F-35, as its ability to operate in contested airspace is unparalleled. Bronk assesses that if the GCAP is built in the 2030s, it would not compete with current-generation F-35s.
However, Lockheed Martin's evolutionary approach towards the F-35 program may not be sufficient against adversaries who prefer technology leapfrogging. Even with 3,500 F-35s eligible for the fifth-generation-plus upgrade, China may have already flown prototype sixth-generation fighters and could be gearing up for serial production, making such improvements too slow, too little and too late.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
3 hours ago
- Asia Times
Why Japan should decline Trump's F-47 offer
Trump's surprise F-47 fighter pitch to Japan exposes the deep tensions between alliance loyalty and Tokyo's growing pursuit of strategic autonomy in a world of contested tech, arms sales and sovereignty. Last month, Asahi Shimbun reported that US President Donald Trump pitched Boeing's F-47 sixth-generation fighter jet and the C-17 transport aircraft to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba during an unexpected phone call. Trump, who reportedly praised US military aircraft, casually asked Ishiba whether Japan was interested in acquiring US-made fighters, noting that the F-47—believed to be named in honor of Trump as the 47th US president—would replace the F-22. Officials say the topic arose because Ishiba had previously shown interest in the C-17, prompting speculation that Trump viewed Japan as a potential defense customer. Despite Trump's remarks, Japan remained cautious, citing challenges in pilot training and maintenance as key challenges. Japan is concurrently developing a fighter jet with the UK and Italy, complicating procurement decisions. The call, which took place before Japan's trade negotiator left for the US, defied concerns that Trump would pressure Japan on tariffs. Instead, Trump appeared eager to discuss his Middle East trip and reinforce personal ties with Ishiba. Some analysts have suggested Trump sought a receptive audience amid criticism of his regional strategy. The two leaders agreed to meet during the upcoming G-7 summit in Canada, where discussions on trade and security could further clarify Japan's defense priorities. Trump's F-47 pitch underscores Japan's dilemma: whether to invest in a high-tech, alliance-dependent jet that risks eroding its strategic autonomy or hold out for sovereign capabilities that may arrive too late. In a 2025 Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) report, Sadamasa Oue argues that Japan must acquire sixth-generation fighters in line with its shift from anti-airspace intrusion measures to offensive counter-air operations alongside potential adversaries such as China, which is developing next-generation fighters, including the J-36 and J-50. Sixth-generation fighter capabilities broadly feature extreme stealth, flight efficiency from subsonic to multi-Mach speeds, 'smart skins' with radar, extremely sensitive sensors, optionally manned capability and directed-energy weapons. However, Brandon Weichert argues in a May 2024 article for 1945 that the advent of autonomous systems could make another expensive manned warplane system, such as the F-47, wasteful. Weichert contends that as drone technology advances, it gradually takes on the characteristics and capabilities of manned systems. He says that the current crop of fifth-generation aircraft, such as the F-35 that Japan already operates, continues to be upgraded to keep pace with evolving threats from near-peer adversaries. In line with that, Breaking Defense reported last month that a 'fifth-generation plus' F-35 could have optionally manned capability as part of upgrades that aim to bring the aircraft to '80% sixth-generation capability' at 'half the price.' Trump's F-47 pitch highlights Japan's struggle to balance its reliance on alliances with the need for strategic independence, especially as delays in its Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) raise concerns about the UK and Italy's commitment to the trilateral project. The Japan Times reported last month that Japan is growing increasingly doubtful that the GCAP program will meet its 2035 target date and could be pushed into the 2040s due to a perceived lack of urgency from the UK and Italy. However, the US has a checkered record of sharing sensitive fighter technology with Japan. Mario Daniels points out in a July 2024 article published in the peer-reviewed History and Technology journal that during the FSX jet fighter controversy in the 1980s and 1990s, the US withheld advanced fighter jet technology from Japan due to fears that sharing dual-use technology would erode its economic and military superiority. Daniels says at the time, US officials increasingly viewed Japan as a formidable high-tech competitor whose access to US aerospace know-how could empower its civilian aircraft industry to rival Boeing. As a result, he notes that the US initially imposed export controls, which were originally devised for the Soviet bloc, against Japan. He says these controls black-boxed critical systems, such as software, radar, and composite materials, to prevent irreversible technological transfer and preserve US strategic advantage. Further, Christopher Hughes points out in a March 2025 article in the peer-reviewed Defense Studies journal that as Japan moves up the defense production ladder into more sensitive technologies that could compete with the US, the latter could increase demands on the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) to buy its equipment to strengthen interoperability and alleviate trade frictions. Hughes pointed out that Trump was transactional in managing the US-Japan alliance, insisting that Japan purchase possibly overpriced US equipment in politically motivated deals for security guarantees, even if that hardware may not align with Japan's defense requirements. Japan's changing arms export policies may also play into US concerns about getting outcompeted by Japan in weapon sales. In March 2024, the Associated Press (AP) reported that Japan's cabinet approved a plan to sell future GCAP next-generation fighter jets co-developed with the UK and Italy to other countries. 'In order to achieve a fighter aircraft that meets the necessary performance and to avoid jeopardizing the defense of Japan, it is necessary to transfer finished products from Japan to countries other than partner countries,' said Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi, as quoted in the report. However, maintaining strategic autonomy when it comes to critical capabilities could be a significant factor in any Japan decision not to acquire F-47s. 'The desire to retain significant sovereign capabilities in each of the three (Japan, UK, Italy) nations… is being reinforced by the concerns around the US's behavior,' says Andrew Howard, director of Future Combat Air at Leonardo UK, as quoted in a Financial Times article last month. The F-35 is a case study in how the US maintains control over exported military hardware. Brent Eastwood writes in a March 2025 article for 1945 that rumors have persisted about a 'kill switch' being installed in exported F-35s, which would act as a means to veto geopolitical behavior that is against its interests. While the US F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) states that no such kill switch exists, Stacey Pettyjohn warns in a March 2025 Breaking Defense article that the US could cut off maintenance networks, suspend spare parts shipments and stop critical software updates. Without those, Pettyjohn said the F-35 could still fly, but it would be far more vulnerable to enemy air defenses and fighters, and without US spare parts and maintenance, its international operators would struggle to keep the jets flying. In a world of contested skies and transactional diplomacy, Japan's next jet won't just define its airpower—it will define its strategic independence.
Asia Times
6 days ago
- Asia Times
How to read Vietnam's F-16 purchase
HO CHI MINH CITY – Vietnam is reportedly poised to purchase F-16 fighter jets from the United States, a deal that would mark a profound shift in Vietnam's defense procurement strategy away from long-standing dependence on Russian weaponry and toward a more diversified and geopolitically calculated approach. A 1945 report says that the acquisition, although no numbers have been revealed, is expected to be for at least 24 aircraft. The report says if and when F-16s are combined with other US platforms Vietnam desires, including C-130 Hercules transport planes, 'it could all add up to the largest defense arrangement ever reached between the two nations.' This development comes as Vietnam faces growing challenges, both economically and strategically. In early 2025, the Trump administration announced steep 46% 'reciprocal' tariffs on Vietnamese goods, including textiles and electronics, citing trade imbalances and currency manipulation. This trade pressure, combined with intensifying US-China competition and a waning Russia, places Vietnam at a critical juncture in balancing its foreign and defense policy. For decades, Vietnam's air force has relied on Soviet- and Russian-made fighters—MiG-21s, Su-22s, and Su-30MK2s. These systems served Vietnam well through the Cold War and into the early 21st century. But today, that dependency presents real risks. Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine and its resulting diplomatic and logistical isolation have slowed its arms production and disrupted global defense supply chains. Maintenance, spare parts and modernization have become increasingly difficult to secure. Vietnam, like many Southeast Asian states, is now seeking to reduce overreliance on a single supplier. Enter the US-made F-16—a versatile, cost-effective, and widely used fighter jet. While it is not the most advanced aircraft in the US arsenal, its interoperability with allied systems and relative ease of integration make it an attractive option for countries in transition. Still, Hanoi's decision is about more than hardware. It reflects a broader strategic recalibration. Vietnam's foreign policy doctrine—especially its 'Four No's' principle (no military alliances, no foreign bases, no siding with one country against another, and no use of force in international relations)—emphasizes independence and multilateralism. The F-16 purchase fits within this framework, allowing Vietnam to modernize while avoiding the perception of falling into Washington's orbit. Rather than signaling alignment with the US, the deal is better understood as an assertion of Vietnam's strategic autonomy. By engaging with multiple defense partners—including Israel, India, Japan, South Korea, and several EU countries—Vietnam is positioning itself as a regional power with options. The regional context is crucial. Southeast Asia has become a theater of strategic maneuvering, with China asserting itself through economic influence and military presence, particularly in the contested South China Sea, where the two sides have overlapping claims. At the same time, the US has sought to reestablish its credibility as a security partner. Countries in the region are not choosing sides, but rather hedging—building ties with all powers while maintaining sovereignty. Examples abound: Indonesia is purchasing French-made Rafales and US F-15EX aircraft. The Philippines is deepening its military cooperation with the US while also acquiring Indian BrahMos missiles. Thailand historically flies US and European fighters but is pursuing Chinese-made submarines. Vietnam's calculated move fits this pattern. It seeks to preserve peace and stability while signaling its willingness to adapt. The F-16 deal also opens doors for future cooperation in areas like pilot training, intelligence sharing, logistics and joint exercises—all without violating Vietnam's core principles. Domestically, the move carries mixed perceptions. Older generations, with deep memories of Soviet support during wartime, may feel uneasy. But younger Vietnamese—especially in urban centers—tend to be more pragmatic, economically focused and wary of China's regional assertiveness. For them, alignment with modern, capable partners like the US represents an investment in national security and global relevance. Russia's response will likely be muted. Its own economic and military constraints limit its ability to retaliate diplomatically. Moscow may instead try to retain influence via energy deals and symbolic gestures. But its long-term hold on Vietnam's defense market appears to be loosening. For Washington, the deal is a quiet diplomatic win. It shows that America remains a viable partner, even for countries with a history of ambivalence. Yet, US policymakers should temper expectations. Vietnam is not becoming an ally—it is engaging on its own terms. Washington should respond not with pressure but with consistency and respect for Vietnam's strategic logic. Ultimately, this deal represents more than a military upgrade. It is a reflection of a new strategic maturity. Vietnam is navigating a complex, multipolar world with deliberate ambiguity. By buying F-16s, Hanoi is not choosing the US—it is choosing leverage, resilience and the space to shape its own future. In an age where great-power competition often demands binary choices, Vietnam offers a compelling alternative: sovereignty through balance. Its evolving foreign policy serves as a case study for other nations seeking to survive—not by taking sides but by maximizing options. Johnny Thai, a pseudonym, is a Vietnam-based geopolitical analyst and independent commentator specializing in Southeast Asian strategic affairs, US-China relations, defense diplomacy and Vietnam's evolving foreign policy posture.
RTHK
22-05-2025
- RTHK
Canada discussing joining US 'Golden Dome' plan
Canada discussing joining US 'Golden Dome' plan Donald Trump unveiled his Golden Dome missile defence shield design in the Oval Office on Tuesday. Photo: Reuters Canada has been holding "high level" talks with its southern neighbour about joining US President Donald Trump's proposed "Golden Dome" missile defence system, Prime Minister Mark Carney said. "We are conscious that we have an ability, if we so choose, to complete the Golden Dome with investments in partnership [with the United States]," he said on Wednesday. "And it's something that we are looking at and something that has been discussed at a high level." Trump wants a system that can defend against a wide array of enemy weapons – from intercontinental ballistic missiles to hypersonic and cruise missiles and drones – asking for it to be ready in about three years, near the end of his second term in office. But it faces significant technical and political challenges. Carney warned of new and increasing missile threats "that in the not too distant future could come from space." "We take those threats seriously," he said. Canada and the United States are partners in continental defence through the North American Aerospace Defense Command. At the same time, Ottawa is looking to diversify its trade and security partnerships after once strong Canada-US ties have frayed. It recently announced a review of a major purchase of US-made F-35 combat planes and signed a deal with Australia to develop Arctic radar systems. Carney said his government is also in talks with European allies on "becoming a full partner of ReArm Europe," an initiative to bolster European defense capabilities and industry. (AFP)
