Recent military engagements between Israel and Iran have cast a spotlight on the capabilities of advanced military aircraft and air defense systems. While state-of-the-art stealth technology, such as that used by American B-2 bombers, might appear paramount in modern air warfare, the effectiveness of such assets is often predicated on prior actions that shape the operational environment. This was evident in June 2025, when Israeli operations dramatically altered the landscape over Iran.
Israel conducted two significant joint air force and special operations missions: Operation Days of Repentance in October 2024 and Operation Rising Lion on June 13, 2025. These strikes, occurring weeks after Iran launched missiles at Israel and culminating in a large-scale assault on dozens of Iranian military and nuclear sites, including the main uranium-enrichment facility at Natanz, were anything but tit-for-tat responses.
Retired Air Force Lieutenant General David Deptula, who helped plan the Desert Storm air campaign, stated that the initial October 2024 operation was principally aimed at reducing Iran’s air defenses in anticipation of a more robust strike. This strategic approach underscores a fundamental principle of modern air war: achieving air superiority is the crucial first step before larger, non-stealthy forces can operate effectively.
The star of these Israeli operations was the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, specifically Israel’s modified variant, the F-35I Adir. This aircraft, despite facing criticism for development costs and competition from unmanned alternatives, proved its value. Adir fighters conducted the all-important initial stealthy forays deep into Iranian airspace, successfully evading detection and targeting critical elements of Iran’s air defense network.
Iran possesses modern and formidable anti-aircraft defenses, including Russian-made S-300 and potentially S-400 ground-to-air missile batteries. These systems, along with command-and-control networks that feed radar readings to command centers, were likely primary targets for the Israeli F-35s. Destroying these “eyes” of the system effectively blinds the defender to incoming threats.
Inside the F-35 cockpit, pilots are immersed in a data-rich environment, with visual displays projected onto helmet visors and a large touch-screen monitor providing a complete, moving, spherical, 360-degree picture. This sensor fusion allows pilots to detect enemy fighters or ground-to-air missile batteries well before they are in visual or targeting range, enabling rapid assessment of threats and decision-making regarding engagement or evasion.
Israel has maintained that it did not lose any of its F-35 Adir fighters during these operations. The success of these missions, particularly Operation Rising Lion on June 13, where Israel claimed no plane losses or casualties while killing key military commanders and nuclear scientists, speaks volumes about the effectiveness of their planning, technology, and execution.
However, in a contrasting narrative, Iran made a significant claim. On June 14, 2025, amid the exchange of attacks, Iranian state media reported that its air defense forces had successfully shot down Israeli F-35 fighter jets. Press TV quoted the Iranian Army Public Relations Office stating that an F-35 was shot down in western Iran, with the pilot’s fate unknown.
Earlier, IRNA had reported the downing of two F-35s the day prior. Thus, Iran’s consolidated claim, according to some reports, including Tasnim media, was that a total of three F-35 jets were downed and two Israeli pilots captured, one reportedly female. This would mark the first-ever combat loss for a fifth-generation stealth fighter, a significant technical and strategic event if true.
The response from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) was swift and definitive. IDF spokesperson Avichay Adraee dismissed the Iranian reports as “completely unfounded” and accused Iranian media of fabrication. Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani, another IDF spokesperson, took to X to label the reports as “Fake News,” asserting, “Iran didn’t shoot down any Israeli fighter jets. They are trying to create a fake victory narrative and it’s not going very well.”
The F-35 Lightning II, produced by Lockheed Martin, is widely regarded as the most advanced multirole stealth fighter. Its design emphasizes a low radar cross-section (RCS), sensor fusion, advanced electronic warfare systems, and precision strike capability. These features collectively make the F-35 exceptionally difficult to detect and target, especially for older air defense systems.
For a nation to successfully engage and destroy an F-35, it would theoretically require a combination of advanced capabilities. High-frequency radar systems, multi-spectrum tracking methods (including infrared or passive radar), signal triangulation, and precise timing would be necessary to potentially detect the aircraft, particularly by exploiting angles where its stealth capabilities are reduced or brief moments of vulnerability, such as when weapon bay doors are open.
Iran operates Russian-made S-300 systems and claims to have developed the Bavar-373, which it describes as domestically produced and modeled after the Russian S-400. While modern, the effectiveness of these systems against a fifth-generation stealth aircraft like the F-35 remains untested in combat scenarios. The F-35 was specifically designed to operate effectively in environments defended by such systems.
Unless Iran has developed a new, previously unknown radar technology capable of consistently tracking low-observable aircraft or employed a highly ingenious tactic, the claim of downing multiple F-35s is viewed with considerable skepticism by many experts. The lack of verifiable evidence from Iran, such as clear photos, videos, or radar logs of the alleged shootdowns or wreckage, further contributes to this skepticism.
Interestingly, reports from Iran’s Press TV described a tactic for the alleged shootdown over Tabriz that echoes historical strategies used against stealth or high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft. According to this account, Iran deliberately set up decoy air defense radars to mislead Israel, luring them into a false sense of security after the initial strikes. Then, as Israeli aircraft purportedly became more relaxed, Iranian radar systems were suddenly activated, catching the F-35 by surprise.
This described ambush-style tactic draws parallels to methods used decades ago. During the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999, a US Air Force F-117A Nighthawk stealth jet was shot down. Yugoslav forces, under the command of Lt. Col Zoltán Dani, utilized short bursts of their Soviet-era S-125 Neva/Pechora (SA-3 Goa) radar systems to avoid detection by American anti-radiation missiles. They also reportedly predicted flight paths and timed radar activation when the F-117A was close and potentially more detectable, such as when its bomb bay doors were open. Within seconds of activation, missiles were fired, resulting in the first-ever confirmed combat loss of a stealth aircraft.
Another historical precedent for exploiting aircraft behavior and timing radar activation comes from China’s experience in 1962 against U.S. U-2 reconnaissance aircraft flying over its territory. The U-2s were equipped with Radar Warning Receivers (RWR) that would alert pilots when tracked by missile radar, allowing them to evade. Chinese radar operators tracked U-2s using radars on different frequencies that didn’t trigger the RWR. When the U-2s were within range, they would suddenly switch on the missile guidance radar and fire quickly, giving the pilot minimal time to react. This tactic proved successful, leading to the downing of multiple U-2s.
Applying such a tactic against an F-35 would still face significant challenges compared to the F-117A or U-2. The F-35 is a far more advanced aircraft with better stealth characteristics across multiple angles, sophisticated electronic countermeasures, and superior situational awareness provided by sensor fusion, potentially making it more challenging to catch by surprise even with timed radar bursts.
However, the principle remains: stealth technology makes an aircraft low-observable, not invisible. Radar cross-sections can vary with angle, and the F-35 is generally most stealthy from the front. As the Iranian account suggests, timing radar activation to coincide with the aircraft being in a less stealthy aspect, perhaps flying overhead and being tracked from the side or rear, could theoretically increase the chance of detection and lock-on.
Beyond technology and tactics, intelligence plays a decisive role in modern air warfare. Israel’s success in its recent operations against Iran appears heavily reliant on extensive and precise intelligence. For the past 40 years, Israel has focused its intelligence efforts intensely on Iran and its proxies, particularly Iran’s nuclear program. This long-term focus has apparently cultivated deep human and electronic intelligence networks.
Retired General Raymond Thomas, a former commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, highlighted the depth of Israeli intelligence penetration, stating, “I think we all appreciate the Israelis have an extraordinary intelligence infrastructure already in country. I think they’ve completely permeated Iranian intelligence, Iranian security.” He suggested this allowed pinpoint targeting, such as knowing the exact location of targeted commanders or scientists.
A retired Army general also noted the long history of cooperative U.S. and Israeli Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), emphasizing the importance of fusing multiple intelligence disciplines – imagery, electronic intelligence (RF collection), and sustained analysis. This fusion creates a level of transparency regarding the adversary’s networks and movements that allows for strategic planning, such as identifying the key nodes in an air-defense network that, if attacked, can bring the whole system down.
Israeli special operations teams were also likely involved on the ground in Iran. Their roles could range from directing air attacks to specific targets, locating mobile missile launchers, providing rescue in case of downed aircraft, or even executing strikes themselves, perhaps using small drones. The example given by a retired senior officer about knowing a general was on the 11th floor of a specific building illustrates the level of precise targeting intelligence required for operations like the killing of key military leaders and scientists.
The vulnerability of Iran’s military and government structures, according to one former senior U.S. defense official, is partly self-inflicted, stemming from years of corruption and poor management where promotions prioritize loyalty over competence. This official described Iran as a “fundamentally dishonest regime” that had been “drinking their own whiskey,” leading to “enormous holes in their air defenses to begin with.” This suggests that factors beyond technology, including human elements and organizational weaknesses, significantly contributed to Iran’s inability to effectively counter the Israeli strikes.
While the F-35’s performance in the Israeli operations against Iran underscored the continued relevance of manned aircraft, some analysts foresee a future dominated by unmanned systems. However, retired Air Force Lieutenant General David Deptula cautioned that the transition will take longer than many anticipate, arguing that artificial intelligence still has a significant way to go before it can match the capability of a human mind within a highly capable sensor-shooter aircraft.
Iran has undoubtedly faced a significant setback and humiliation due to the scale and effectiveness of the Israeli strikes. While the air cap Israel established over Iran may be too expensive to maintain indefinitely, and requires cooperation from neighboring countries for forward basing, Israel has demonstrated its ability to rapidly dismantle Iran’s air defenses. This leaves Iran vulnerable in the near term.
Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Marc Sasseville described the strategic outcome, stating that Israel can now potentially “operate with impunity over the enemy’s capital and there’s nothing they can do about it, because they can’t shoot you down. They probably don’t even know what you’re doing, and you can attack at your leisure.” This assessment highlights the temporary but decisive air supremacy achieved.
Ultimately, the conflicting narratives surrounding the F-35 shootdown claims highlight the ongoing information warfare that accompanies military conflict. While Iran seeks to project strength and manufacture a narrative of victory, Israel aims to maintain its image of air dominance and technological superiority. As of now, the independent verification necessary to substantiate Iran’s claims remains absent, and many experts remain highly skeptical, pointing to the lack of physical evidence or credible third-party confirmation.
The episode serves as a potent reminder that even the most advanced military technology operates within a complex interplay of strategy, tactics, intelligence, and human factors. It underscores that achieving dominance in the skies requires not just superior platforms but also the ability to fuse intelligence, exploit adversary weaknesses, and execute coordinated operations with precision. Whether the F-35 was truly challenged or if the claims are purely psychological operations, the incident prompts continued analysis of how stealth technology is countered and the future trajectory of air defense.
