TEL AVIV and JERUSALEM — Critics contend that the planned Israeli money for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, estimated at about $2.75 billion for the first 19 aircraft, could be better used upgrading conventional, non-stealthy aircraft with long-range, high-speed stealthy weapons and sensors with the range to support such attacks.

Analysts suggest that attack helicopters and intelligence-gathering aircraft should be developed with a similar formula using cheap commercial airframes and advanced sensors. The compromise between supporters and opponents is likely to be an Israeli Air Force (IAF) that flies far fewer JSFs than had been planned.

“The [shrinking] force structure problem points us toward fewer, but more sophisticated platforms,” says Air Force Lt. Gen. Dani Halutz, former chief of the Israel Defense Force. “The F-35 fits this trend exactly. If its performance is as advertised, it will allow us to cope with a shrinking budget and force size. It also could permit development of an operationally useful combination of stealthy and non-stealthy aircraft. They could pave the way for conventional aircraft in extreme operational situations.

“We should be using single aircraft or two-ship formations instead of the standard four-ship,” Halutz says.

“We have to think of ways to change some structural habits and traditions that will make better use of equipment because it is more costly, and we can’t afford to stay with the old concepts.”

Nonetheless, the price tag remains a major point of contention.

“The cost is huge and there are other needs,” says retired Army Maj. Gen. Giora Eiland, a former head of the national security council of Israel and the current chairman of a committee investigating the flotilla incident off the coast of Gaza. “If we continue to use the very advanced [versions of the] F-16 and F-15 and upgrade some of the systems, we could save so much money that we could buy other important systems like ground-based missiles. And you can use more [air-launched] standoff weapons because they have extreme precision and a very long effective range. You don’t have to put all your effort into the aircraft.”

Some believe that national security trumps price. “I think the F-35 is mandatory for the IAF,” Halutz says. “How many is another issue. What do advanced airplanes mean to the rest of the fleet? They pull the rest of the fleet up by creating a new culture, doctrines and concepts of operations.”

One attraction of the fifth-generation F-35, with its stealth and supercruise, is that each of them will be able to replace more than one fourth-generation aircraft. But those who have analyzed such needs say there must not be too much force-structure reduction.

“Even the most sophisticated machine can’t be two places at once, so there is still a need for critical mass,” Halutz says. “The trend is to squeeze the force size below the numbers you need to create the necessary impact on the battlefield.”

Credit: Lockheed Martin