"Absolutely faboulous - Pet Shop Boys": perfect article in every aspect. The content, the storyline is not just astonishing - it is mind blowing. It is so good to read such beautiful English compositions without the usual overcomplicated western style. Thank you for sharing this article.
I would like to know if the F-35 fleet reliability claims are in line with other advanced jets, eg in incidents per thousand fllight hours or per hundred jets in the fleet, or whatever metric is being used?
I guess that the A variant is the least troublesome due to simpler construction, and it should be treated as a different airplane, because it's numbers might skew the average for the B and C variants?
The primary metric is MFHBCF - Mean Flight Hours Between Critical Failures. A version has relatively lower such failures than the B and C version. Moreover, the definition of what constitutes failures is liberal for the F35s relative to, say, a Gripen (4th Gen). Gripen's failure MFHBCF is ~8, but Gripen's counts minute failures also. Rafale and Typhoon (between 4 and 5th gen) are ~20 hours. I don't have the data on Su-57. Maybe Tom knows.
Until recently the only other 5th Gen jet in service was the F-22. Then a few years ago the J-20 entered service but the PLAAF isn't sharing any data on its reliability.
Why did it not go to Diego Garcia or Oman, er because it was a 100 miles from Thiruvananthapuram when it had issues. Testing India’s radar network, if so it would have left by now. But has not because it has mechanical issues. Imperial or colonial this that and the other, really? Yes the F35 has reliability issues, that is the story. Some interesting points but ultimately a a bit of a puff piece IMO. Ultimately, the UK Navy looks a bit rubbish.
What was it doing 100 miles from Thiruvananthapuram, in your opinion? Because the Royal Navy still hasn’t told us - not officially, not plausibly - even after nearly a month. All we’ve heard are vague newspaper reports about a ‘normal sortie.’ But how is that normal? I’d swallow it, sure - but only with a really fine smoothie, followed by a hard gulp.
You are measuring from Thiruvananthapuram. When you should be counting from Prince of Wales. Because it was not supposed to be doing any business at Thiruvananthapuram. So what was it doing at Thiruvananthapuram to begin with? HMS would / should have been farther out. And if it wasn't then that's an even bigger red flag. So yours is a good point, but it is even more implicatory of the lurking suspicion. the HMS was earlier, i.e. before the "emergency" engaged in military exercises with the Indian navy. It looks like it lingered after the exercise? This is an open question. Summarily, if both the ship and the plane was close to Trivandrum, then that's an alarm bell. If the ship was near Oman etc. and the plane flew that close in, then that's a red flag too.
Most of it comes across as trash that nationalists on our side want you to believe. Let's say it all happened. What are the hints that you are relying on? Other than the question of why it landed in India, and it's a logistical nightmare, I see only unnecessary jargon and speculation/conspiracy theories. I have little experience with radars and stuff, and all this sounds very implausible. All this crap about bricking-sensor fusion etc, sounds very implausible. And even if it is true, how do you know? And, of course, for an article making such tall technical claims, the sourcing is thin. I mean, don't cite news articles when making claims like this?
It shouldn't have been there, it shouldn't have bricked, everyone appears to be unconcerned. When states are studiously unconcerned it means there's more going on than meets the eye.
Could be completely unrelated to the theory posted here, but something is deffo amiss.
People who cannot do a Fourier transform should not talk about EW. The part where it goes on about civilisation this and that, it is so cringeworthy. This substack was an interesting place for ukraine updates, but if it is going to platform such nonsense then I would better unsubscribe.
“If you can’t derive Einstein’s field equations, don’t talk about nuclear weapons.”
"If you don't know how to code, don't use social media."
But, it's kinda too bad, that all of that doesn't hold a candle to 'If you don't understand the civilizational context, no amount of understanding anything else, including geo-strategy, is going to help.' There's too little, not too much of civilizational context here. Peripheral, actually.
Here we are talking about a technical aspect, not history/geopolitics, where you can smuggle in civilisational arguments. If you don’t understand FT, there’s no way you understand anything about how radars and EW work.
Einsteins field eqn are classical equations for space time, you don’t need to know them for nukes. You can talk about proliferation risk etc without knowing all the technical aspects, but can’t analyse say how close iran is to a nuke. Your views on technical expertise do align well with your writing. There’s a reason why indians have become a joke to people outside. Too much talk, no substance.
(Not to say that there aren’t technical successes on our side, its just that people who don’t have any respect for expertise just wants to blow everything out of proportions to fit their “civilisational agenda”. Now that we are here, lemme ask you, as an indian to fellow indian, why did you have to go to king’s college to discover our civilisational heritage?
I went to King's because I was invited at their taxpayers' expense. So I earned foreign exchange and learnt a thing or two about their strategic approaches towards us.
As to the rest of your comment, you are too far removed from figuring out the "games nations play". You see only a plane. But you don't see the sky around it.
Sure. You have a seat in south block, where numerous undersecretaries brief you on technical aspects and the “games”. We normal people outside the system can’t have access to that sort of intelligence and hence can’t understand the games or our civilisation. Let’s end it here.
It's very interesting that the most vicious comment on the civilizational vector, pound-for-pound came from "an indian to fellow indian", and far less so from 'foreigners' themselves. I guess, being "Indian" doesn't guarantee, "Indian-ness". Or, unless we claim that the two are one and the same thing, irrespective of and to the sheer exclusion of everything else.
Very interesting to have my indianness questioned. When you run out of analytical arguments, smuggle in civilisation arguments. When others don't buy it, call them un-indian.
it should not come as surprise when Indians, who know what indian history, society and state is, and who care about it's wellbeing will call out the trashy arguments first.
Nationalistic trash story. What a load of crap. Tell you what. You live with your russian rubbish which had loads of accidents and be content. Lol..... so desperate needed Rafales..... india procurement is a joke. So please...do us a favour and stop with this BS.
If I think hard about what you say, actually, I too am ashamed of our Fabian Nehruvian Socialist past that was thrust upon India by the British. All that you say followed and calcified. It's a big ship and takes time to turn around. Ofcourse external forces acting on the ship also try to keep the ship from turning around.
Except Singapore, S. Korea, and Japan show that conleted societal transformation and development can be achieved in ~25-40 years. Eventually the "well we were colonized by X country" excuse will wear thin... Especially 75+ year later.
"detected on the way in". Sorry, I don't buy it. That could be as simple as the pilot radioing in a distress signal and requesting permission to land. Sure as hell any self respecting nation, who let it be known have never EVER embellished any of their military achievements,
capabilities or prowess 🤣🤣🤣, would say yeah we tracked it in. Sure 😉😉😉
In no way meant to denigrate your qualifications or your authorship. But please, can you source this statement "Detected by the IAF’s IACCS network" and then let's decide whether we can trust it
This is from Indian Air Force's official communique on the "detection". Specially, "On having declared a diversion off an emergency, the F35B was detected and identified by the IAF's IACCS network and cleared for the recovery."
Great! So now we can debate do we believe the IAF's statement? Have they been known to exaggerate or obfuscate the truth in the past? I'd be wary of believing this statement, especially when it comes to detecting stealth.
I am ready to have a comprehensive debate. Not just on the track record of the IAF but on the track record of the British and the US too. In any case your disbelief works well for us.
The statement does nothing to substantiate your assertion that this incident in any way proves or disproves the effectiveness of Indian air defense radar network vs stealth.
The jet had reflectors deployed AND declared an emergency. This is a detection profile that isn't much different from a Boeing 747, as in the air defense network didn't need to be involved at all. Commercial air traffic radar would have been sufficient.
Very interesting write-up, thanks Shashanka. I haven't heard a single word about this story in our sector of Earth (Central Europe) and it raises intriguing questions. "Something" happened, and it is very difficult to see through the fog. But still I appreciate India acting calm and see India as very important geopolitical force, although for whatever reasons ignored by many.
Tom likes India, so you get this patriotic article about Indian capabilities to detect, jam, ghost kill and re-route F35 planes.
I doubt very much India caused this plane to malfunction. As the article says, this plane has many issues with reliability and operational readiness. It "blue screened" and landed where it could.
Or the ship encountered terrible weather and the jet had to divert to an airfield with zero support infrastructure or access to diagnostic tools so it waited for the under strength RAF to cobble together a support team....
This article contains enormous amounts of speculation and rumor mongering.... Indian EW killing an F-35. Next the HAL Tejas will be a Mach 3+ stealth jet with 300km+ missiles.
Amusing that the author doesn't have a peep to say about the Tejas program, the AMCA or TEDBF....
It sounds like the start of a good book. Too bad LeCarre is dead. But...if there is any truth to the article it has probably given quite a few NATO planners and MIC execs in the States, a heart attack.
How would you know? Read the subtext: Did you hear a British or American serving top brass say categorically, 'India did not penetrate the F35's stealth capabilities.' But the British press did so and vociferously. Or, that's inconsequential.
The F35 remains at the forefront. No other aircraft can match the F35. If any disruptions occur, they will be analyzed by those responsible, and corresponding measures will be developed and made available as an update. If it is found that India has compromised certain radar technology, this too will be taken into account and addressed through corresponding updates. The software of the F35 is highly advanced and can be modularly and agilely expanded and improved. No reason to panic. The next software updates will certainly recognize this situation and respond accordingly. And please simply repeat: 'Out of mistakes one learns' (if it was indeed a mistake)
I largely agree. Maybe, this was what the test was all about. To learn how far the Indian radars can go. Better learn in the clarity of peace then be jolted in the fog of war.
Let's assume the article was titled 'The Development of New F-35 Features is Delayed'. That already sounds different, doesn't it? As usual, articles with a very dominant 'name' title catch the reader's attention. However, the content only states that delivery will not be completed on time and the new releases of the aircraft come with software that does not meet all agreed-upon requirements. Just for information. All software projects consist of multiple phases. These are always iterative and also transient. In software projects that involve risks to humans, even more phases are added to neutralize or minimize the risk. To define a roadmap and production schedule, estimates are provided. These estimates are almost always inaccurate and often lead to time delays. What this means is that not all features will be completed on time. Therefore, some less important features will be delivered later. However, the topic is quite extensive, and I'll simplify it to clarify the point. One thing is clear: work continues. There are still many features to come in the future, and there is a reason to improve this process. And that's what the responsible people will do
Half-way through this I have to check if I am indeed on Sarcastosaurus page. Because this whole article feels like something I would find on russian forums where almighty russian EW systems routinely cause panic and make western electronics play tetris graphics on radar screens. I've waited only for a sentence mentioning that F-35 actually started a count-down for explosion when someone tried to open the canopy...
Completely agree. Does the F-35 has issues with availability and maintenance? Yes. So will any other stealth aircraft yet we don't hear a thing about the Su-57 and J-20 because Russia and China don't publish ANYTHING negative about those jets. Nor will China about the J-35, J-36 and J-50....
"Absolutely faboulous - Pet Shop Boys": perfect article in every aspect. The content, the storyline is not just astonishing - it is mind blowing. It is so good to read such beautiful English compositions without the usual overcomplicated western style. Thank you for sharing this article.
Thank you for the appreciation!
Thanks sir for this article, i feel inread a "ghosts in the shell" scrip. Not for be non posible, gor the scalede in ew doctrine
Interesting piece.
I would like to know if the F-35 fleet reliability claims are in line with other advanced jets, eg in incidents per thousand fllight hours or per hundred jets in the fleet, or whatever metric is being used?
I guess that the A variant is the least troublesome due to simpler construction, and it should be treated as a different airplane, because it's numbers might skew the average for the B and C variants?
The primary metric is MFHBCF - Mean Flight Hours Between Critical Failures. A version has relatively lower such failures than the B and C version. Moreover, the definition of what constitutes failures is liberal for the F35s relative to, say, a Gripen (4th Gen). Gripen's failure MFHBCF is ~8, but Gripen's counts minute failures also. Rafale and Typhoon (between 4 and 5th gen) are ~20 hours. I don't have the data on Su-57. Maybe Tom knows.
Thanks.
So, what are the published numbers on F-35 variants regarding reliability?
Until recently the only other 5th Gen jet in service was the F-22. Then a few years ago the J-20 entered service but the PLAAF isn't sharing any data on its reliability.
Why did it not go to Diego Garcia or Oman, er because it was a 100 miles from Thiruvananthapuram when it had issues. Testing India’s radar network, if so it would have left by now. But has not because it has mechanical issues. Imperial or colonial this that and the other, really? Yes the F35 has reliability issues, that is the story. Some interesting points but ultimately a a bit of a puff piece IMO. Ultimately, the UK Navy looks a bit rubbish.
- Why did it not go to Diego Garcia or Oman?
- Because Thiruvananthapuram was easier to pronounce.
🤣
What was it doing 100 miles from Thiruvananthapuram, in your opinion? Because the Royal Navy still hasn’t told us - not officially, not plausibly - even after nearly a month. All we’ve heard are vague newspaper reports about a ‘normal sortie.’ But how is that normal? I’d swallow it, sure - but only with a really fine smoothie, followed by a hard gulp.
FYI, the two divert fields the article suggests, Oman and the Maldives, are roughly 2,400km and 700km from Thiruvananthapuram, respectively.......
You are measuring from Thiruvananthapuram. When you should be counting from Prince of Wales. Because it was not supposed to be doing any business at Thiruvananthapuram. So what was it doing at Thiruvananthapuram to begin with? HMS would / should have been farther out. And if it wasn't then that's an even bigger red flag. So yours is a good point, but it is even more implicatory of the lurking suspicion. the HMS was earlier, i.e. before the "emergency" engaged in military exercises with the Indian navy. It looks like it lingered after the exercise? This is an open question. Summarily, if both the ship and the plane was close to Trivandrum, then that's an alarm bell. If the ship was near Oman etc. and the plane flew that close in, then that's a red flag too.
Most of it comes across as trash that nationalists on our side want you to believe. Let's say it all happened. What are the hints that you are relying on? Other than the question of why it landed in India, and it's a logistical nightmare, I see only unnecessary jargon and speculation/conspiracy theories. I have little experience with radars and stuff, and all this sounds very implausible. All this crap about bricking-sensor fusion etc, sounds very implausible. And even if it is true, how do you know? And, of course, for an article making such tall technical claims, the sourcing is thin. I mean, don't cite news articles when making claims like this?
Agreed. This article is extremely heavy on speculation.
Thanks Shashanka, nice writeup of this mystery.
Thanks Sasha, for the motivation.
There is no mystery. Plane broke down, and landed where it could.
They'll fix it and fly away or they'll transport it to a place where they can fix it.
It shouldn't have been there, it shouldn't have bricked, everyone appears to be unconcerned. When states are studiously unconcerned it means there's more going on than meets the eye.
Could be completely unrelated to the theory posted here, but something is deffo amiss.
People who cannot do a Fourier transform should not talk about EW. The part where it goes on about civilisation this and that, it is so cringeworthy. This substack was an interesting place for ukraine updates, but if it is going to platform such nonsense then I would better unsubscribe.
Yeah! And I like you too!
And here are more rhetorical flourishes for you:
“If you can’t derive Einstein’s field equations, don’t talk about nuclear weapons.”
"If you don't know how to code, don't use social media."
But, it's kinda too bad, that all of that doesn't hold a candle to 'If you don't understand the civilizational context, no amount of understanding anything else, including geo-strategy, is going to help.' There's too little, not too much of civilizational context here. Peripheral, actually.
Here we are talking about a technical aspect, not history/geopolitics, where you can smuggle in civilisational arguments. If you don’t understand FT, there’s no way you understand anything about how radars and EW work.
Einsteins field eqn are classical equations for space time, you don’t need to know them for nukes. You can talk about proliferation risk etc without knowing all the technical aspects, but can’t analyse say how close iran is to a nuke. Your views on technical expertise do align well with your writing. There’s a reason why indians have become a joke to people outside. Too much talk, no substance.
(Not to say that there aren’t technical successes on our side, its just that people who don’t have any respect for expertise just wants to blow everything out of proportions to fit their “civilisational agenda”. Now that we are here, lemme ask you, as an indian to fellow indian, why did you have to go to king’s college to discover our civilisational heritage?
I went to King's because I was invited at their taxpayers' expense. So I earned foreign exchange and learnt a thing or two about their strategic approaches towards us.
As to the rest of your comment, you are too far removed from figuring out the "games nations play". You see only a plane. But you don't see the sky around it.
Sure. You have a seat in south block, where numerous undersecretaries brief you on technical aspects and the “games”. We normal people outside the system can’t have access to that sort of intelligence and hence can’t understand the games or our civilisation. Let’s end it here.
It's very interesting that the most vicious comment on the civilizational vector, pound-for-pound came from "an indian to fellow indian", and far less so from 'foreigners' themselves. I guess, being "Indian" doesn't guarantee, "Indian-ness". Or, unless we claim that the two are one and the same thing, irrespective of and to the sheer exclusion of everything else.
Very interesting to have my indianness questioned. When you run out of analytical arguments, smuggle in civilisation arguments. When others don't buy it, call them un-indian.
it should not come as surprise when Indians, who know what indian history, society and state is, and who care about it's wellbeing will call out the trashy arguments first.
Hopefully, the work you did to earn that seat was of an entirely different caliber than this article
I agree.
That chip on your shoulder is huge.
You're all over the place in your responses. Chill.
Nationalistic trash story. What a load of crap. Tell you what. You live with your russian rubbish which had loads of accidents and be content. Lol..... so desperate needed Rafales..... india procurement is a joke. So please...do us a favour and stop with this BS.
If I think hard about what you say, actually, I too am ashamed of our Fabian Nehruvian Socialist past that was thrust upon India by the British. All that you say followed and calcified. It's a big ship and takes time to turn around. Ofcourse external forces acting on the ship also try to keep the ship from turning around.
Except Singapore, S. Korea, and Japan show that conleted societal transformation and development can be achieved in ~25-40 years. Eventually the "well we were colonized by X country" excuse will wear thin... Especially 75+ year later.
Human capital was already at a very high level in those countries. Unfair comparison. China is a better example.
"detected on the way in". Sorry, I don't buy it. That could be as simple as the pilot radioing in a distress signal and requesting permission to land. Sure as hell any self respecting nation, who let it be known have never EVER embellished any of their military achievements,
capabilities or prowess 🤣🤣🤣, would say yeah we tracked it in. Sure 😉😉😉
The Government of India or the Indian Air Force has made no claims. It's just me. Flying my analytical kites and stress-testing the scenarios.
In no way meant to denigrate your qualifications or your authorship. But please, can you source this statement "Detected by the IAF’s IACCS network" and then let's decide whether we can trust it
This is from Indian Air Force's official communique on the "detection". Specially, "On having declared a diversion off an emergency, the F35B was detected and identified by the IAF's IACCS network and cleared for the recovery."
URL: https://www.facebook.com/IndianAirForce/posts/a-royal-navy-f-35b-fighter-recovered-off-an-emergency-landing-at-thiruvananthapu/1055503673426121/
Great! So now we can debate do we believe the IAF's statement? Have they been known to exaggerate or obfuscate the truth in the past? I'd be wary of believing this statement, especially when it comes to detecting stealth.
I am ready to have a comprehensive debate. Not just on the track record of the IAF but on the track record of the British and the US too. In any case your disbelief works well for us.
The statement does nothing to substantiate your assertion that this incident in any way proves or disproves the effectiveness of Indian air defense radar network vs stealth.
The jet had reflectors deployed AND declared an emergency. This is a detection profile that isn't much different from a Boeing 747, as in the air defense network didn't need to be involved at all. Commercial air traffic radar would have been sufficient.
The British F-35B might have had it's radar reflectors installed
How about just having its transponder switched on😂😂😂😂
Very interesting write-up, thanks Shashanka. I haven't heard a single word about this story in our sector of Earth (Central Europe) and it raises intriguing questions. "Something" happened, and it is very difficult to see through the fog. But still I appreciate India acting calm and see India as very important geopolitical force, although for whatever reasons ignored by many.
Thanks for the very encouraging words. Thanks to such sources that haven't been censored, yet, you get additional perspective.
Uhhh, give the BBC a look. It was a story on its homepage for a few days.
Did Sarcastosaurus' substack get hacked? Compared to what's normally to be found here, this belongs in the junk mail.
Agreed.
Tom likes India, so you get this patriotic article about Indian capabilities to detect, jam, ghost kill and re-route F35 planes.
I doubt very much India caused this plane to malfunction. As the article says, this plane has many issues with reliability and operational readiness. It "blue screened" and landed where it could.
Or the ship encountered terrible weather and the jet had to divert to an airfield with zero support infrastructure or access to diagnostic tools so it waited for the under strength RAF to cobble together a support team....
For 22 days?
100%
This is positively Russian levels of conspiracy theory mixed with "our weapons are the strongest".
This is not the writing of a serious defense analyst.
I sadly agree. Enormous speculation and near Russian tier "this radar is A STEALTH KILLER" writing.
This article contains enormous amounts of speculation and rumor mongering.... Indian EW killing an F-35. Next the HAL Tejas will be a Mach 3+ stealth jet with 300km+ missiles.
Amusing that the author doesn't have a peep to say about the Tejas program, the AMCA or TEDBF....
It sounds like the start of a good book. Too bad LeCarre is dead. But...if there is any truth to the article it has probably given quite a few NATO planners and MIC execs in the States, a heart attack.
How would you know? Read the subtext: Did you hear a British or American serving top brass say categorically, 'India did not penetrate the F35's stealth capabilities.' But the British press did so and vociferously. Or, that's inconsequential.
There probably isn't.... At all.
The F35 remains at the forefront. No other aircraft can match the F35. If any disruptions occur, they will be analyzed by those responsible, and corresponding measures will be developed and made available as an update. If it is found that India has compromised certain radar technology, this too will be taken into account and addressed through corresponding updates. The software of the F35 is highly advanced and can be modularly and agilely expanded and improved. No reason to panic. The next software updates will certainly recognize this situation and respond accordingly. And please simply repeat: 'Out of mistakes one learns' (if it was indeed a mistake)
I largely agree. Maybe, this was what the test was all about. To learn how far the Indian radars can go. Better learn in the clarity of peace then be jolted in the fog of war.
The F-35's software development is a significant problem: https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2025/02/f-35-programs-software-development-isnt-getting-any-better-pentagon-report-finds/402725/
Let's assume the article was titled 'The Development of New F-35 Features is Delayed'. That already sounds different, doesn't it? As usual, articles with a very dominant 'name' title catch the reader's attention. However, the content only states that delivery will not be completed on time and the new releases of the aircraft come with software that does not meet all agreed-upon requirements. Just for information. All software projects consist of multiple phases. These are always iterative and also transient. In software projects that involve risks to humans, even more phases are added to neutralize or minimize the risk. To define a roadmap and production schedule, estimates are provided. These estimates are almost always inaccurate and often lead to time delays. What this means is that not all features will be completed on time. Therefore, some less important features will be delivered later. However, the topic is quite extensive, and I'll simplify it to clarify the point. One thing is clear: work continues. There are still many features to come in the future, and there is a reason to improve this process. And that's what the responsible people will do
Half-way through this I have to check if I am indeed on Sarcastosaurus page. Because this whole article feels like something I would find on russian forums where almighty russian EW systems routinely cause panic and make western electronics play tetris graphics on radar screens. I've waited only for a sentence mentioning that F-35 actually started a count-down for explosion when someone tried to open the canopy...
Completely agree. Does the F-35 has issues with availability and maintenance? Yes. So will any other stealth aircraft yet we don't hear a thing about the Su-57 and J-20 because Russia and China don't publish ANYTHING negative about those jets. Nor will China about the J-35, J-36 and J-50....
Is this just a story, or like his upcoming book, part fiction and part reality?
Ahaha I'm guessing 10-20% reality and then rest is conjecture and speculation with a hint of science fiction.