What do you base that on? Sounds very unlikely to me.
F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter
- Thread starter SABRE
- Start date
- Status
France is offering licence production of Rafale to India. Why not Japan?
Last edited:
The Indian MRCA requires that the 19th aircraft and thereafter be built in India.
Does Japan have that same requirement or is it being offered??
Most newer fighter aircraft are built from sub-assemblies anyway. I doubt that there will every be 100% local production in any case. It's still a bit murky if "assembly" or "built" is termed as kits can be used from abroad. I feel the term "local content" is more accurate. Even then, perhaps only a smaller percentage (less than 50%) is closer to reality for a sophisticated fighter aircraft as even subsystems will be required to be imported from abroad.
Does Japan have that same requirement or is it being offered??
Most newer fighter aircraft are built from sub-assemblies anyway. I doubt that there will every be 100% local production in any case. It's still a bit murky if "assembly" or "built" is termed as kits can be used from abroad. I feel the term "local content" is more accurate. Even then, perhaps only a smaller percentage (less than 50%) is closer to reality for a sophisticated fighter aircraft as even subsystems will be required to be imported from abroad.
Offered. I don't know for sure what Japans requirement is, but IIRC every fighter type JASDF has bought since the F-86* has been built, or at least assembled, in Japan. I expect they'd want at least local assembly, & to put some of their own kit in it, as with the F-15J - 12 imported, 8 assembled from knocked-down kits, 203 locally-built with many components & sub-assemblies locally made, & some indigenous avionics.
*Last F-86 built was in Japan.
As far as I know, the Typhoon has always been next in line behind the F22, it suits Japan's needs more comfortably than the F35. Not sure whether that has changed or not, but a single engined, ground attack oriented aircraft isn't what Japan wants. It is also too late for Japan to get much in the way of industrial benefit now, with the work shares already divided up. The most they'd get is local assembly and a platform without much room for customisation. At least Typhoon offers plenty of chances to beef it up.Intrestin article in the Australian Newspaper,on Japan easing weapons exports .Is Japan seriousely contenplating the JSF?
Japan poised to ease its ban again on export of weapons | The Australian
Japan has given up on trying to gain access on Purchasing the F-22 Raptor.
The JSF would have to be the second choice for the JASDF.The reason being its the only other 5th generation Aircraft besides the F-22.
Japan would replace its F-4,F-15, F-1 and F-2 with another aircraft,possibly JSF.
What would this mean for the JSF consortium?
Japan having a very technologically advanced industry would be seen as an asset on the JSF team IMHO.Japan would need approx.200+ Aircraft to replace ageing Aircraft.
This would be great News if the JASDF chose to purchase the JSF.
Seems like The JSF futuer is looking brighter,hope India will seriousley look at the JSF.
"The average cost of the F-35 is estimated at million, although Lockheed Martin claims more international orders and new manufacturing methods could bring that below million"
How can they have a price for JSF if no orders have been placed?
What do the members think of JASDF purchasing JSF?
Thanx
The French are offering it to India and they are getting desperate for exports now, if Japan showed any interest in it, I doubt they'd say no. But like I said, it doesn't fit Japan's needs. If they are going for a single engined aircraft, they'll get the F35.
I wasn't aware that Japans needs were to buy a significantly inferior aircraft.
They want an aircraft that can travel the furthest, detect the enemy the further away and engage the enemy with the highest level of survivability.
It would need a lot of beef added to compete with the F-35. I cant think of any mission profile where the Eurofighter would perform better.
Perhaps the Typhoon would be superior for air shows?
Joking apart: I am a bit surprised that Japan and South Korea seem so sceptical to the F-35 -- does anybody have an explanation? Perhaps linked to things like ToT and industrial offsets, or lack thereof? Or are there other reasons?
V
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The F-35 isn't "ground attack" optimised any more than the Typhoon is "air to air" optimised. Both are designed for MULTIROLE operations, it is a significantly flawed argument, typical of the utter nonsense sprouted by the detractors of the aircraft, to describe the F-35 as "ground attack optimised".
As for single engined fighters, how many engines do the JASDF F-2 fighters have each?
My remarks seem to have been mistaken for F35 bashing. I like the F35, i'm glad the Royal Navy/Air Force are buying them, I was simply pointing to the arguments (that I read somewhere else, not actually my own opinion for the most part) for the Eurofighter to be favoured in Japan over the F35.
The article stated that Japan wanted a 2 engined aircraft (who cars what they have now, that's what they want) for long range patrols over the ocean. They also wanted something that wouldn't seem to offensive (more suited for defensive purposes instead i.e air to air role). That's why the f22 is perfect for them. The F35 may be superior in many ways to the Typhoon, but it may be that it doesn't fit the brief as well as the Typhoon.
Most of the articles i've read on the F35 suggest it IS optimised for the air to ground role, but saying it's optimised doesn't mean it can't perform the air to air role (unless you believe those Australian reports). If I remember correctly part of it's design brief was to replace the A-10, even though it won't.
And the current Eurofighter (in service now) are optimised for the air to air role, which is why Britain had to rush certain upgrades to make them useful for Afghanistan before tranche 3 is available.
It is most likely a question of "availability" vice "releasability". Both Japan and ROK already enjoy a lions share of ToT. Just look at their Aegis, ASW, and AWACS systems. I feel that the F-35 may not fit into their acquisition timeline, e.g. they need these sooner than later. The same sort of situation happened to Brazil's F-X2. Brazil was keen on the F-35, but it just did not fit into the FAB acquisition schedule.Perhaps the Typhoon would be superior for air shows?
Joking apart: I am a bit surprised that Japan and South Korea seem so sceptical to the F-35 -- does anybody have an explanation? Perhaps linked to things like ToT and industrial offsets, or lack thereof? Or are there other reasons?
V
Well, some news reports seem to indicate otherwise:
Avionews
If the issue for S. Korea is acquisition timelines, why are they planning on building their own? It will not be ready before the F-35.
Regarding Japan:
Japan poised to ease its ban again on export of weapons | The Australian
This however seems to indicate that for Japan timelines may be a real issue:
Asia Times Online :: Japan News and Japanese Business and Economy
What I found very interesting however:
Perhaps one option for Japan could be to purchase F15 Silent Eagle and use as a stop-gap while they devlop ShinShin? Or will they pick the "easy way out" and simply purchase F-35s... They could still order some more F15 as stop-gap of course.
V
Regarding ToT: Even Tier-one partner UK has not been too happy about ToT arrangements for F-35. It could be that other countries that enter the collaboration at an even lower level may feel the same... And ToT for e.g. ASW or Aegis is no substitute for ToT on a 5. gen stealth fighter.
V
Grand Danois
Entertainer
The ITARS row between UK/US was about being able to legally integrate weapons and, if the need should arise, modify their F-35Bs on their own. Not about ToT.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Ah I may be out of touch. I was assuming Typhoons could be available earlier than F-35, but of course with the Israeli FMS in mind... I assume this would require some JSF partners to give up some of their allocated slots?
I'd still contend Typhoon has more attraction as a sheer industry project. And it could be developed into an excellent CMD fighter. An end-to-end new AESA (not Captor-E) plus carries a lot of missiles and CFTs. With the geographical layout of Japan and potential threats it should fit quite nicely.
From what I've observed from previous JASDF procurements, it seems that they want their planes to carry Japanese weaponry and electronics. Would the Eurofighter Consortium or the JSF partners be amendable to those requirements, I note that the UK had some difficulties with obtaining the source codes to the JSF to allow local modification.
The UK sorted out the ToT issues a couple of years back now, when the US finally agreed to transfer the source codes. Haven't heard about any other issues.
Wasn't that all based around the transfer of the source code?
As i said, the UK sorted that out eventually, but it may still be an issue for the other partners who haven't invested so much in the program, but based on what has been going on with the Israeli procurement it could be a big problem getting locally made stuff into the F35. Apparently there isn't much room to add stuff in either. Typhoon on the other hand does have a lot of potential to be upgraded, the money just hasn't been invested in it.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
No. Not transfer, use of.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The articles you read are most likely based on rubbish put out by APA, Bill Sweetman on ARES or some of the fools who post at a certain air force magazine based website.
They have different agendas, but definitely agendas. APA are a commercial rival (in their own minds) to L-M and anything they print ss tainted by that fact and the rest are so enamoured of the Euro-canards (and rightly so, they are fine machines for their intended roles) that anything else must be derided into the ground.
They are constitutionally incapable of believing anything (including F-22 depending on the topoc) can possibly exceed their beloved's capability...
As to F-35, yes part of it's intended role was to replace some of the A-10's capability, so does the F-16, yet the same slander isn't presented against it.
The F-35 will be a superb striker and it will be lethal A2A combat aircraft, very similar to the intended roles that the F-16 and F/A-18 perform, but obviously much more capable. Very similar also to the intended roles that the Euro-Canards are designed to perform, with a few obvious differences...
As to Japan's requirements, I will wait and see what happens before offering my opinion. There are simply too many different possibilities.
Personally, if they want a maritime patrol capable fighter aircraft, I see few better options than the F-35 in years to come. The USN is seemingly not concerned about single engined operations and no-one operates fighter aircraft over water, more than they do...
ToT does not have to be exclusive to the type of weapons system acquired. A customer country may acquire a fighter aircraft, but some of the ToT may be in submarine construction or satellite communications.
It also assumes that JSF suffers no delays.
Two Eurofighter partners would be willing to give up delivery slots (there is a precedent), & there's slack in the production schedule. I don't understand why Abraham said that he thought F-35 would be available sooner.
- Status