- June 19, 2019 at 17:16 #4158
The F-35 jet is most expensive and advanced combat aircraft in history, integrating conventional weapons systems with modern technologies in an unprecedented fashion. The plane has been touted as an example of the future of military aircraft design, with over 8.2 million lines of software as part of its composition. As a multirole aircraft able to engage surface targets and enemy airborne threats, the F-35 also had the advantage of introducing a measure of uniformity to the air forces of principle NATO members; while there are three variants each designed for conventional, VTOL and carrier-based operations, using the same design across different nations and services will reduce the plethora of different aircraft currently fielded by the West. This is especially true for the United States military, which has in service a large variety of different airframes, some of which have only one specific role and date back to the latter years of the Cold War. The F-35, therefore, is also attractive to countries with smaller defence budgets, since its multirole nature does not necessitate the purchase of fleets of task-specific aircraft.
However, while revolutionary, complex, and operationally versatile, the F-35 has been plagued with problems ever since its early production stages.
Its highly technical design has resulted in a massive price tag: the UK’s first-wave order of fourteen aircraft cost 2.5 billion pounds, but the overall project has been described as being “$163 billion over budget and seven years behind schedule”; the F-35 was originally supposed to be declared combat ready in 2012, but it has taken until this year for the first squadrons of F-35s to become operational.
Further issues were identified during combat trials, in which the plane was soundly out-performed by F-15 and F-16 aircraft, two Cold War-era planes the F-35 is set to replace. In addition, military journalist Mark Urban writes in his 2015 book The Edge: Is the military dominance of the West coming to an end? that due to its high price, the F-35 will be fielded in fewer numbers than the aircraft of previous generations, a point supported by the lower numbers at which F-35 variants have been purchased by the US Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps compared to earlier designs. Urban describes how in a hypothetical war with China – which could be expected to deploy large numbers of aircraft of older design – in the Pacific and South China Sea, F-35 squadrons would still have to leave the skies in enemy hands; even if the US aircraft enjoyed a high win-loss ratio, they would run out of munitions long before they ran out of Chinese planes to dogfight with. Coupled with this is the fact that any F-35 aircraft lost would cost approximately $90 million to replace; F-15 and F-16s, meanwhile, are bought a unit cost of $15 million and $30 million respectively. Indeed, the sheer cost of the F-35 programme caused some doubt in the British Minsitry of Defence in 2018 over whether or not to proceed with the order placed by the UK for several hundred aircraft for both the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm. Defence Minister Gavin Williamson proposed buying cheaper but proven aircraft from Europe in the form of Eurofighter variants.
A 2018 US Department of Defense study identified several areas in which the F-35 was failing to live up to expectations, the study being later leaked to Bloomberg News. Amongst the listed problems were issues such as the service life of each aircraft being as low as 2100 hours as opposed to the predicted 8000, but perhaps the most alarming were deficiencies in the F-35’s cyber defences.
This was also noticed by Dan Grazier from the Project on Government Oversight: “The fully integrated nature of all F-35 systems makes cybersecurity more essential than for any other aircraft. Legacy aircraft already in service are equipped with software-enabled subsystems, and while a hacker could penetrate the GPS system in a legacy system, because the subsystems are not fully integrated, a hacker could not also access the communications system, for example. The F-35 is inherently far more vulnerable.”
Meanwhile, the US General Accountability Office discovered that the Department of Defense had not protected the software used to control the F-35’s weapons systems. Given the fully integrated nature of the F-35, everything from communications systems to avionics is connected, and disrupting one system could hinder the functioning of the others. “A successful attack on one of the systems the weapon depends on can potentially limit the weapon’s effectiveness, prevent it from achieving its mission, or even cause physical damage and loss of life,” said the GAO team.
Along with Russia, China has been accused several times of hacking data pertaining to the F-35 and its predecessor, the F-22, for use in its own J-20 and J-31 strike fighter programmes. However, a shocking report by Sky News revealed this week that a Chinese-owned company has been producing circuit boards that are installed in F-35 aircraft to operate its lighting, engine, fuel and navigation systems.
The company in question, Exception PCB, is based in Gloucestershire, England, but was bought by Shenzhen Fastprint, a Chinese corporation. Exception PCB dismissed any concerns raised by several cybersecurity experts, claiming that measures are taken to protect sensitive British and American data from their Chinese owners, but this has been met with some skepticism. As Sky News reports: ‘Clark Ince, a director of Hallmark Electronics, another printed circuit board manufacturer in the UK, said firms make boards according to a design given to them by their customer…[he said that] it is also possible to embed technology such as a chip without a customer’s knowledge into a circuit board that could affect the way it functions.’ Lockheed Martin, the company overall responsible for producing the F-35, was unable to confirm that there are no other third-tier companies involved with the project that are Chinese-owned.
Bob Seely, a British Member of Parliament and reserve soldier who co-authored a paper about concerns over the Huawei company and its involvement Britain’s 5G mobile network, said: “I think it’s breath-taking. It’s not a question of ‘is this bad’? It’s a question of ‘how bad is it?’”
As military technology continues to advance, undoubtedly other weapons systems will become as integrated as the F-35; electronic systems already make up significant portions of the design of tanks, armoured vehicles, self-propelled artillery pieces, and – of course – drones. But with China’s growing economic dominance, it is highly unlikely that Exception PCB will be the only company in the long military production supply chains that has some connection to Beijing. Defence against hacking, therefore, while already prominent, will arguably become as important as supplies of ammunition, fuel and armour plating. Given that the West has already failed badly in this instance, a rapid re-evaluation of its entire military industrial complex is warranted.June 24, 2019 at 15:57 #4188
Good article Timothy. This is an eye opener to a lot of things, the war is no longer with machines. Its mixed with with the electronics now days where you have to think about your cyber security safety. its not easy to hack this kind of things. But with the wrong hands, like people who didn’t bother to learn how to use it safely or traitors that can easily just give them an easy access.
June 24, 2019 at 16:09 #4189
- This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by OmarAltamimi.
Its so fascinating and rather alarmingly, that even a country that seems to be develop doesnt take cyber security as a real threat specially when it comes to weapons. That just shows me that cyber security should be a subject in our kids acadimcs curriculum so we can educate the next gen for a very yound age cos its as important as math if not more.
Well written thanks for the articleAugust 19, 2019 at 17:42 #5321
It’s been featured on our medium: https://medium.com/@cybersecurecentral/the-woes-of-the-f-35-from-our-forums-a3d10ab0885fOctober 26, 2019 at 23:18 #5731Anonymous
All is well and dandy with the F-35, but here’s some food for thought. Would it not be wiser for the government to disperse such hefty amounts on issues such as poverty, unemployment, infrastructure enhancement, etc..? You know, things that actually help their own people move forward and lead better lives all around? Taxes in the U.K. are ludicrously high, and if you ask me, choosing to spend them on hight tech murder machines is not only irresponsible, but also evil.November 1, 2019 at 17:42 #5791
Typical left wing ideologue, always screaming about countries that dispense currency for military advancement and achievement. Stop being so sensitive and learn your history buddy. The U.K. would not be the great and prominent country that it is today had it not been militarily successful and developed its wealth and resources through power and conquest. Sorry, but it’s just the way of the world. Being harmless and incapable of defending oneself in life gets you eaten by the wolves. Now image the same for a country, surely you can come up with a scenario that wouldn’t look to pleasing for the people of the U.K. Or would rather the government just halt all military spending and distribute those resources while holding hands and chanting Kumbaya?November 12, 2019 at 10:19 #5984
No left-wing ideologue I, if indeed it is me to whom AnneChristine addressed their comment; indeed, my own politics are very much to the Right – rather radically so, in many ways. My own advice to the government would be to increase military spending drastically – the British Army (in which I briefly served, as it happens) has been cut to criminally low numbers in recent years. I’m against this in principle due to regimental histories being destroyed etc, but it seems especially unwise with an increasingly bellicose Russia and China throwing their weight around. I’d just like to see our planes manufactured by our own industry without any influence from definite rivals and potential enemies. I’d not have trusted the Spitfire or Lancaster in the 1940s if some of the parts had been manufactured in Germany.November 17, 2019 at 01:01 #6006
TimothyOgden, I believe she was addressing her comment to the “Anonymous” person who preceded her in commenting, as that is the typical left wing ideological babble that you hear from modern day snowflakes. On another note, I agree with you absolutely. I also believe the government should radically increase military spending and the the British army has in fact been downgraded as opposed to the past. Just facts you’re speaking there mate.November 18, 2019 at 19:42 #6065
AnneChristine, Imagine how much more successful and prominent it would have been had it not been hell bent on colonising and warring with countries, and instead focused its efforts and resources on developing itself across the board. I really refuse to believe that countries can only come into prominence through war and death. Destruction does not build great countries, it is merely, destruction. There are far greater woes than that of the F-35.November 26, 2019 at 12:16 #6165
No matter what the English do, they will never catch up to the military advancement and prowess we have over here in the U.S. American grit and steel beats them all.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.