Japan Opts for F-35

www.bbc.co.uk...
www.reuters.com...

Japan's choice of the F-35 comes as a shot in the arm for Lockheed Martin's F-35 programme, which has been restructured twice in the past two years and is expected to boost the odds that South Korea will follow suit with its own order for 60 fighters. Japan will pay 9.9 billion yen per fighter including backup parts in the initial stage of procurement.

"This programme badly needed an endorsement like this, particularly one from a technically respected customer. But there are still many complications, especially price tag and work share demands," said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the U.S.-based Teal Group.

Good news for LockMart.

That good i thing Canada is getting 40 to 50 i think
Neice to know we are getting something that not going to be out of production
before we get our

Ok here it is
www.cbc.ca...

It's mainly interesting because of the cost overruns and delays. Japan obviously thinks the program is still worth an investment, which is good news for the program (and perhaps bad news for tax payers across several nations).

PR

Japan Selects Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II

www.lockheedmartin.com/news/press_releases/2011/1219ae-japan-selects-f-35.html

FORT WORTH, Texas, December 19th, 2011 -- The Japan Ministry of Defense has announced its selection of the Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] F-35 Lightning II as the Japan Air Self Defense Force’s (JASDF) next generation fighter aircraft, following the F-X competitive bid process. The F-35A conventional takeoff and landing variant (CTOL) was offered by the United States government with participation from Lockheed Martin. The initial contract will be for four jets in Japan Fiscal Year 2012, which begins April 1, 2012.

"We are honored by the confidence the Japanese government has placed in the F-35 and our industry team to deliver this 5th Generation fighter to the Japan Air Self Defense Force," said Bob Stevens, Lockheed Martin chairman and chief executive officer. "This announcement begins a new chapter in our long-standing partnership with Japanese industry and builds on the strong security cooperation between the U.S. and Japan."

Global participation is a centerpiece of the F-35 program and essential for its success and affordability through economies of scale. The program is comprised of nine partner nations: the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway. The United Kingdom and Netherlands have ordered test aircraft, and Italy and Australia have committed long-lead funding for their initial operational aircraft. In October 2010, Israel selected the F-35A as the Israel Air Force’s next generation fighter and is scheduled to receive the F-35 through the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales process.

The F-35 Lightning II is a 5th Generation fighter, combining advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility, fully fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced sustainment. Lockheed Martin is developing the F-35 with its principal industrial partners, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems.

Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security company that employs about 126,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation’s 2010 sales from continuing operations were $45.8 billion.

And, here, I thought the Japanese were some of the few with any sense left.

So... let me get this straight .... 9.9 Billion yen is... about 127 million per airframe.

I thought this was supposed to be.... you know... an affordable aircraft?

It's like 70% of the F-22's cost. And the damned thing isn't even really out of the prototype stage.

Well, whatever... I hope it serves them well... I'm too addicted to Fairy Tale and the Naruto series to have them fall into enemy hands.

Well, the F-22 isn't available to them so we can't really make that comparison (that it holds true for the USAF is a whole other can of worms). And you know as well as I do that the several billion dollar contract pays for more than just the airframes. That figure is going to include extra powerplants, parts and logistical support. There are going to be offsets, local manufacturing, etc. True individual unit cost is going to be rather less than that figure (not to say that it would be cheap) -- Lockheed is saying unit cost will average 65M.


Comparatively, Switzerland just signed off on a 3.3 billion USD contract with Saab for only 22 of the Gripen NG. The eight or nine billion USD estimated for 60 F-35's in the Japan deal looks pretty good.

I'm not a big F-35 booster. I have serious problems with the way the program has been run. But this is somewhat reassuring and good news for the countries that have already committed.

I kinda thought that Mitsubishi was making Japan's military jets...?

Anyway, I would have thought there would be no problem finding a Japan based company to develop and supply the Japanese defense force with a technologically advanced and competitive product. I guess I'm a tad surprised.

Crazy...

...why didn't they talk to the Russians to get a slice of PAK-FA T-50 action ??

The T-50 is clearly a better aircraft and will probably be a lot cheaper when it goes into full production IMHO.

I think this is more of a financial deal than a procurement of a viable weapon platform, corporate welfare for Lockheed.

reply to post by Cosmic4life


Mainly due to cheap Russian and Indian labour - so far they are putting $6 bilion each into the project - given the corruption endemic in both countries do you really think that will suffice, won't be over-run, and will deliver $12 billion in value??

I don't.

Russian products invariably look better on paper than they end up being in real life - I don't doubt the PAK will be the same.

Japan needs to opt for cleaning the ocean's instead of worrying about a f-35

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I think we will agree to disagree.

Sukhoi make great aircraft, Su-27 through to Su-35,Su-47, even some of their Soviet era stuff was to be feared by the West.

The PAK-FA T-50 is expected to cost $65 million per unit, it's multi-role, has a large payload and has a navalized version in development, clearly it's a better choice.

I hear the South-Koreans are giving it serious consideration, 600 will be available for export, first come first served.

Cosmic..

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
Crazy...

...why didn't they talk to the Russians to get a slice of PAK-FA T-50 action ??

The T-50 is clearly a better aircraft and will probably be a lot cheaper when it goes into full production IMHO.

I think this is more of a financial deal than a procurement of a viable weapon platform, corporate welfare for Lockheed.

Each T-50 is expected to cost around $100,000,000 so the F35, regardless is considerably cheaper. Also the T-50 is really more comparable to the F22 with its twin thrust vectoring engines and super cruise ability. I find it somewhat amusing that before the Russians had thrust vectoring technology they claimed it was over rated and not the best way to maximize maneuverability. All of the 5th gen fighters have their strengths and weaknesses on paper and the F22 is the only currently deployed system so that is where my money will be for the time being. Of course it is American so as always; "haters gonna hate".

Originally posted by algaedyne

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
Crazy...

...why didn't they talk to the Russians to get a slice of PAK-FA T-50 action ??

The T-50 is clearly a better aircraft and will probably be a lot cheaper when it goes into full production IMHO.

I think this is more of a financial deal than a procurement of a viable weapon platform, corporate welfare for Lockheed.

Each T-50 is expected to cost around $100,000,000 so the F35, regardless is considerably cheaper. Also the T-50 is really more comparable to the F22 with its twin thrust vectoring engines and super cruise ability. I find it somewhat amusing that before the Russians had thrust vectoring technology they claimed it was over rated and not the best way to maximize maneuverability. All of the 5th gen fighters have their strengths and weaknesses on paper and the F22 is the only currently deployed system so that is where my money will be for the time being. Of course it is American so as always; "haters gonna hate".

Ok I'll bite..

..firstly the F-22 is not for export and there are only 187 of them, it is a good aircraft, just not as good as the T-50.
The T-50 has X-band and L-band Radar as well as improved IR detection, it can see the heat coming from the F-22, it has a larger HUD and bigger displays and carries a more powerful arsenal of weapons.
The T-50 is multi-role and has a navalized version in development.

The F-22 is called an air dominance fighter, but actually it is an Interceptor, it fulfills the same role as the F-106 used to ie protecting US airspace, it relies heavily on it's stealth and radar, it's not the best dogfighter.
The best dogfighter is the Eurofighter Typhoon, nothing can out-turn a Typhoon in a Knife fight.

The F-35 has potential but actually needs larger wings, it has a high wing loading which compromises its agility, it's expensive for what you get...one engine.

And lastly you completely ruined your post by adding the boastful American epitaph "Of course it is American so haters gonna hate"

Your right..America is the master race and the rest of us are just Asshats..

Cosmic..

My earlier point with the F-35 comparing to the F-22's cost is simply that of the scope of the project. The F-35 was -supposed- to be a light strike aircraft utilizing the technologies already pioneered on the F-22, which was already getting its golden feathers clipped due to high per-unit costs and expectations that it would not be procured to full inventory requirements.

The JSF arose out of the F-22, in many ways. Following the collapse of the USSR, the ATF program ran into serious political trouble. What, out there, needs to be countered with an armada of advanced, expensive air superiority fighters? This lead to chimerization of the F-22 airframe - the additional of those (laughable) weapon pods to expand its mission role are merely one example of the fight to keep the F-22 alive in the political scene.

The idea with the JSF was to standardize the inventory - to replace everything from the F-5 to the F-18 Charlies. Not just on our side, but on the export side of things, and to share the costs of development across several nations and across hundreds of airframes. Since most of the technologies were already pioneered on the F-22 - it was presumed this would be a rather cost-effective manner to go about supplying an advanced aircraft to supplement the existing inventory of aircraft, pending development of more specialized and expensive aircraft (basically attempting to delay the onset of the development of specialized next-generation aircraft).

The result is what anyone with functioning brain cells should have been able to predict. An absolute mess. How Lockheed managed to screw the development of this aircraft up so horribly is beyond any permissible logic. They forgot what made aircraft like the F-16 and the F-18 successful in their light fighter categories, and decided to try and develop an F-117 with curves and air-to-air capabilities; rather than developing a light fighter with air-to-ground capabilities.

That entire development team should be beat with a fishing rod. Somewhere along the way, they let the marketing team take over development. That's like letting waitresses take over the kitchen of a restaurant (give cooks a choice, and we'll turn our restaurants into a buffet faster than you can say 'Chinese').

My point.... why, on God's... frustrating... planet ... is the F-35 70% of the cost of an aircraft that pioneered the technologies it uses? ... Particularly when the F-22 has a far more complex set of avionics and structural packages?

I'm not thinking of any good reasons, and have the sneaking suspicion someone needs to be demanding some explanations while tearing up some Lockheed Executive's office with a baseball bat. I would be absolutely livid with that development team - and the only thing keeping them from being demoted back to conception would be the fact that it would take longer to hire a new development team and bring them up to speed than it would to let the existing chuckle-heads keep working. But there would be a public crucifixion in the hangar - I don't know who - but By God... there would be one.

If you haven't caught on... that's a very dramatic and literal sense of humor... but, honestly, words cannot describe how the F-35 project has shamed the field of aviation.

As for the T-50: Honestly, I think that aircraft will be very temperamental depending upon where its parts are made. If I were to use the quality control standards present in American, Japanese, and other "western" powers to build the aircraft - I am sure it would be a spectacular aircraft that, kinetically and aerodynamically compete favorably with the F-22 (LO-wise and avionics wise... probably not - though the IRST module of the T-50 will be a boon). The issue is that the quality of manufacturer is, likely, going to vary between the countries undertaking construction of the aircraft - which will have mixed results in the end.

As for TVC - it's not really all that necessary. TVC is useful in situations where you have low airspeed and high angles of attack - basically destroying the effectiveness of control surfaces and rendering your trajectory a ballistic one. If your airspeed is low enough for TVC to be a factor in your merger - you are likely going to die in a real world setting - F-22 or Sopwith Camel (well, actually - the Camel would break apart at the airspeed a heavy jet fighter stalls at... but you get the idea - slow = dead).

So, the Russians were correct in stating that it was not a cost-effective implement, and it will not come standard on the T-50, either - last I heard.

reply to post by algaedyne


You do realise that Russia applied thrust vectoring to conventional fighters long before the USA had the F-22, don't you?

The reason Japan buys American fighters is nothing to do with whether they are superior or not, it is because they cannot see anything else from that far up America's arse, and thus it has ever been.

Europe was in the same boat following the Marshall plan when the mainland European countries, Germany, Holland, Belgium etc were 'obliged' to buy the F-104 Starfighter in favour of the superior BAC Lightning.

Some think the trick was repeated when the same countries replaced the F-104 with the F-16, though I think the right choice was made that time, however it came about, as only the French Mirage 2000 was a viable alternative and we wouldnt want that level of success to swell their heads any further

It would also be a mistake to consider TVC only as a manouvering tool, trials have shown that the Typhoon would benefit from shorter take off and landing runs, increased climb rate and lower sfc at altitude with the TVC model of the EJ200. I do believe that Rolls Royce is the source of this info though, as they had to find justification for the project because the Typhoons agility is already top notch, just for balance