Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 9 of 29 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 270 of 870

Thread: F-35A for Japan

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Piff View Post

    How would that look?
    Like a complete new aircraft. Not feasible for such low numbers.

    Cheers

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,854
    Exactly, like a whole new aircraft and it would presumably lose efficiency with the F414. But you never know, such a hypothetical F-35J version might just spur a domestic F-35D version. I just don't see it happening. And the F136 just isn't coming back.
    Go Huskers!

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Cantabrigia
    Posts
    1,009
    Quote Originally Posted by kev 99 View Post
    Seems like a fairly reasonable ban to me.
    And that nicely illustrates the problem with all on-line fora – what one man (or what one moderator) thinks is a reasonable ban, another man may see as an over-reaction.

    For example, in this forum a rather nasty insult aimed at me (which probably caused great amusement to forum members who know me in the outside world) was allowed the remain, while a posting of mine suggesting that a moderator may have over-reacted to what seemed to me a trifling incident was speedily deleted. In both of these cases, I and one or more of the moderators obviously subscribed to different standards.

    Personally, provided that a discussion remains reasonably on topic and avoids 'ad hominem' attacks, the less that the rusty sword of interdict is used, the happier I am.
    Last edited by Mercurius; 2nd January 2012 at 15:24.
    Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

  4. #244
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurius View Post
    And that nicely illustrates the problem with all on-line fora – what one man (or what one moderator) thinks is a reasonable ban, another man may see as an over-reaction.

    For example, in this forum a rather nasty insult aimed at me (which probably caused great amusement to forum members who know me in the outside world) was allowed the remain, while a posting of mine suggesting that a moderator may have over-reacted to a trifling incident was speedily deleted. In both of these cases, I and one or more of the moderators obviously subscribed to different standards.

    Personally, provided that a discussion remains on topic and avoids 'ad hominem' attacks, the less that the rusty sword of interdict is used, the happier I am.
    Fair play, I much prefer the moderation style on DefenceTalk because the forum lends itself to a great deal less hysteria and general forum infighting than you get on here.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,014
    i've always missed people getting banned on this forum.

    As I said, I think its better if the discussion here is limited to just that, rather than people's arguements elsewhere in cyber space.

    Hopefully we can all move on now...

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by kev 99 View Post
    Fair play, I much prefer the moderation style on DefenceTalk because the forum lends itself to a great deal less hysteria and general forum infighting than you get on here.
    Well when only one opinion is allowed of course there is less infighting, I no longer contribute to Defensetalk for that exact reason.

    I notice this forum is full of robust debate, alive and well and...... full of Defensetalk members!, the last post in Defensetalk regarding the JSF was 6 days ago.. Hmmmmm.....< insert tumbleweed image>

    Perhaps that might tell you something - I guessing not

    The banning quoted suggests that people find somewhere else to do it and then you follow them!!, and then have the cheek to hijack the JSF thread and turn it into a I'm holier than thou fest.


    Mods may I suggest - a short ban is in order here to stop the JSF for Japan thread being hijacked by these interlopers who wouldn't stand for it on the site they are mods for

    So are we back on topic? if not can you continue it here:
    Tumblweed town
    it has been 6 days after all
    Last edited by Jwcook; 2nd January 2012 at 21:35.
    John Cook
    Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by MadRat View Post
    Exactly, like a whole new aircraft and it would presumably lose efficiency with the F414. But you never know, such a hypothetical F-35J version might just spur a domestic F-35D version. I just don't see it happening. And the F136 just isn't coming back.
    ...and the twin engined F-35 would look like?......AMCA anyone?

    Interestingly, Osamu Fujimura, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, announced last Tuesday that a decades-old ban on arms exports would be relaxed, opening the way for Japanese companies to participate in the international development and manufacture of advanced weapon systems.

    This long awaited move could have far reaching implications for Japan’s struggling domestic defence sector with foreign contractors hoping to share the increasing costs and technical challenges of developing military platforms and will bring welcome relief for many hundreds of smaller manufacturers vital to Japan’s military aerospace manufacturing sector, especially with some arguing that the F-35 purchase could trigger the collapse of Japan’s defence industry.

    According to 'The Keidanren' (Japan’s biggest business lobby), hailed the long-debated relaxation as an “epoch-making” development. Domestic contractors such as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries have formidable manufacturing clout (the latter has already indirectly participated in the Indian Navy's IAC programme through a joint venture in design, construction and management techniques with Cochin Shipyard LTD).

    So the question is whether the Japanese F-35A purchase is merely a stop-gap, as ATD-X development is still going ahead?- either way, I'm sure India would love to see investment & participation of MHI et al in the AMCA.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,016
    It certainly reinforces the idea that Eurofighter gave the JSF a good run for its money in Japan, the Japanese were able to extract every last concession from the winning bidder.

    But those concessions may have an impact.

    Things to consider:-
    The Japanese could have relaxed the self imposed ban anyway.

    The preferential treatment of the Japanese may in fact alienate some of the partners who have paid up front and now expect manufacturing contracts, I think the previously stated "best price bidder wins work" isn't being implemented a fairly as some partners expected, and the large changes that have and are still to come in the program have damaged some relationships.

    There is a caveat in the Japanese order that the delivery's must commence at a certain date, we shall see if that date is hard and fast or if its a rubbery one like Australia negotiated.
    Plus are the deliveries allowing for a "still work to be done" JSF's with promised fixes at a later date included in the price or is it a fully working block X delivered on XX/XX/XX remains to be seen.


    Cheers
    John Cook
    Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,060
    Japan is not part of the partnership and therefore will not get any contracts that would normally go to the Partner countries. What will happen is that the partner countries that have component contracts will likely see those go up (for the parts not made in Japan) for the entire life of the program (original build and spare parts). Win-Win for everyone.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  10. #250
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    Japan is not part of the partnership and therefore will not get any contracts that would normally go to the Partner countries. What will happen is that the partner countries that have component contracts will likely see those go up (for the parts not made in Japan) for the entire life of the program (original build and spare parts). Win-Win for everyone.
    So exactly what will the Japanese export for the JSF? (IIRC wings were mentioned)

    What percentage of parts for the JSF are the partners producing? or are other non partners producing a significant % of JSF parts?
    John Cook
    Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

  11. #251
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,060
    Any part that Japan builds for the F-35 is coming from the LM/P&W portion of the pie. LM/P&W are giving up a piece of their own pie in order to increase the overall build numbers.

    What parts this covers is not known at this time.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  12. #252
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    656
    I thought that all partner work is on a "best value" basis. Spudman, can you show contract language that allocates work to partner-nation contractors for the life of the program?

  13. #253
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwcook View Post
    It certainly reinforces the idea that Eurofighter gave the JSF a good run for its money in Japan, the Japanese were able to extract every last concession from the winning bidder.
    You lost me there...?

    How many competitions has F-35 lost so far?


    To me, it seems that F-35 is expected to become hugely capable, and that's why countries are ordering it, in spite of all the delays, increase in cost, etc.

    Unfortunately for the Eurocanards there is a small window of opportunity that is closing rapidly, when the F-35 gets ready the sales of 4.5 gen fighters are going to fall even further...

  14. #254
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,060
    LO, only companies from partner nations get to bid on contracts for the JSF. Currently only SDD contracts have been signed and no long-term FRP contracts have been signed (so the exact language of them in unavailable).

    LM was able to get around this for Japan due to them giving up a piece of their pie.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  15. #255
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by mrmalaya View Post
    i've always missed people getting banned on this forum.

    .
    ouch... that is a great loss for you

  16. #256
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    You lost me there...?

    How many competitions has F-35 lost so far?
    The Japanese were always disposed to a US solution, however they were given a credible alternative in the Eurofighter, thus they were able to wring every possible concession from the JSF offer, something Australia could learn from and they could have gotten some "extra pie" from LM too.


    Re how many competitions has the JSF lost, better question to ask how many production aircraft are serving with the customers as promised 10 years ago...and when they will actually be delivered.

    Winning and delivering are two different things, and the former depends on the latter before it can be counted.
    John Cook
    Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

  17. #257
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,331
    It looks to me like they (defencetalk members) are crediting themselves with high military ranks which I doubt they actually hold. A General, Brigadier General and a Major General all on the same page

    Quote Originally Posted by Jwcook View Post
    Well when only one opinion is allowed of course there is less infighting, I no longer contribute to Defensetalk for that exact reason.

    I notice this forum is full of robust debate, alive and well and...... full of Defensetalk members!, the last post in Defensetalk regarding the JSF was 6 days ago.. Hmmmmm.....< insert tumbleweed image>

    Perhaps that might tell you something - I guessing not

    The banning quoted suggests that people find somewhere else to do it and then you follow them!!, and then have the cheek to hijack the JSF thread and turn it into a I'm holier than thou fest.

    Mods may I suggest - a short ban is in order here to stop the JSF for Japan thread being hijacked by these interlopers who wouldn't stand for it on the site they are mods for

    So are we back on topic? if not can you continue it here:
    Tumblweed town
    it has been 6 days after all
    This forum needs a like button.

  18. #258
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwcook View Post
    The Japanese were always disposed to a US solution, however they were given a credible alternative in the Eurofighter, thus they were able to wring every possible concession from the JSF offer, something Australia could learn from and they could have gotten some "extra pie" from LM too.
    I'm not sure what extra pie you had in mind. The Aus government's and industry's strategy for the local aerospace industry seems very focussed on two sectors (i) maintenance, support and repair, and (ii) being world class in the design and manufacture of components and assemblies for large global programs. In that context, participation as a F-35 development partner seems to be ideal. What would local assembly achieve, beyond increasing the cost of Australia's aircraft?

  19. #259
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by Jō Asakura View Post

    Interestingly, Osamu Fujimura, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, announced last Tuesday that a decades-old ban on arms exports would be relaxed, opening the way for Japanese companies to participate in the international development and manufacture of advanced weapon systems.
    Could be interesting. As the RAN and JMSDF are the only operators of large (c 3,500+ t) conventional submarines, it will be interesting to see if there is any cooperation with the Collins replacement. After the Kockums experience, I don't know whether the ADF necessarily wants to parter with another Euro supplier offering a scaled up version of a small Euro-style boat.

    And with the C-130 rapidly becoming "too small" I suspect the C-2 has a market.

  20. #260
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwcook View Post
    Re how many competitions has the JSF lost, better question to ask how many production aircraft are serving with the customers as promised 10 years ago...and when they will actually be delivered.

    Winning and delivering are two different things, and the former depends on the latter before it can be counted.
    For sure it is delayed, and price is going up. But still, in spite of that, countries are flocking to the F-35. Does it not make you wonder why?

  21. #261
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwcook View Post
    I notice this forum is full of robust debate, alive and well and...... full of Defensetalk members!, the last post in Defensetalk regarding the JSF was 6 days ago.. Hmmmmm.....< insert tumbleweed image>

    Perhaps that might tell you something - I guessing not

    The banning quoted suggests that people find somewhere else to do it and then you follow them!!
    Hardly, I've never contributed to the JSF debate on either that forum or this one.

  22. #262
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    656
    Loke - Since when is two a flock?

    The nations that have joined the program or added commitments in the past decade are Israel, which gets its airplanes for free, and Japan, which had a choice of JSF; the SH, which the US says will be retiring from the mid-2020s onwards; and a drastic break with an alliance.

  23. #263
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by LowObservable View Post
    Loke - Since when is two a flock?

    The nations that have joined the program or added commitments in the past decade are Israel, which gets its airplanes for free, and Japan, which had a choice of JSF; the SH, which the US says will be retiring from the mid-2020s onwards; and a drastic break with an alliance.
    What about all the partner nations who signed on? They also had the choice of going with EF, Rafale, or Grippen, but chose to sign on to and stay with the F-35 program.

  24. #264
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    656
    Tribes: "Flocking to" is not the same as "Have not dumped".

    Also, those nations signed on at delivery dates, and acquisition and operating costs, that were attractive but not real, and at a point where alternatives appeared equally immature.

  25. #265
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,014
    And in some cases have chosen to operate Typhoon alongside the F35 rather than choosing the F35 over Typhoon...

    (And think carefully before coming back with something about cutting Typhoon numbers to buy the F35, because we all know there is more to it than that)

  26. #266
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by kev 99 View Post
    Hardly, I've never contributed to the JSF debate on either that forum or this one.

    My apologies to you - The sentiment remains the same - just remove the "You" to from the sentence and replace with a "They" .
    John Cook
    Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

  27. #267
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by LowObservable View Post
    Tribes: "Flocking to" is not the same as "Have not dumped".

    Also, those nations signed on at delivery dates, and acquisition and operating costs, that were attractive but not real, and at a point where alternatives appeared equally immature.

    They may well flock off all together if the death spiral doesn't change real quick.
    John Cook
    Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

  28. #268
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,073
    Quote Originally Posted by LowObservable View Post
    Tribes: "Flocking to" is not the same as "Have not dumped".

    Also, those nations signed on at delivery dates, and acquisition and operating costs, that were attractive but not real, and at a point where alternatives appeared equally immature.
    OK, poor choice of words by me... however it does not change the facts; that none of the partners have pulled out, in spite of all the delays and cost increases, and two non-partners have signed on, in spite of the delays and cost increases. To me that says that there is still a strong belief in this program and in the F-35.

    Of course if the delays keep piling up there is a breaking point but I think we are still far away from that.

    BTW Norway is in the process of re-winging several of the old F-16, perhaps anticipating further F-35 delays...?

  29. #269
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Tribes View Post
    Could be interesting. As the RAN and JMSDF are the only operators of large (c 3,500+ t) conventional submarines, it will be interesting to see if there is any cooperation with the Collins replacement. After the Kockums experience, I don't know whether the ADF necessarily wants to parter with another Euro supplier offering a scaled up version of a small Euro-style boat.

    And with the C-130 rapidly becoming "too small" I suspect the C-2 has a market.
    C-2 is a head-on competitor with A400M, & the P-1 is the nearest thing out there to the P-8.

    Japanese arms exports will still be very restricted, but NATO & other friendly countries, such as Australia, will be eligible, & joint ventures such as the Collins replacement have been specifically mentioned as being welcome. I suspect the biggest impact to start with will be in dual-use equipment & components, though.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  30. #270
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    BTW Norway is in the process of re-winging several of the old F-16, perhaps anticipating further F-35 delays...?
    Increased use and higher than normal payloads that was planned for, not anticipated delays.

    http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...vice-life.html

    “We use the planes in a different way than we used to. They have taken off and landed with heavy loads of bombs, and that causes extra wear and tear,” Hoelsæther explains.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES