Kiloalpha
-
Posts
549 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Kiloalpha
-
-
Just saw this. Implications could be huge, if Japan is willing to pay the tooling/restart cost for an F-22A while we bring online an upgraded F-22 as a result. The question is, will Congress/CSAF/DoD ever be able to tear their eyes away from the F-35 to seize the opportunity?
Lockheed Should Restart the Raptor Line If Japan Wants An F-22-F-35 Hybrid
Geopolitical trends, security concerns, and industrial and combat aircraft capability needs, could give birth to an American-Japanese Raptor 2.0.
By Tyler Rogoway
Osakabe Yasuo
Reuters has published a report that came as little surprise to us at The War Zone regarding Tokyo's interest in having Japanese industry work with Lockheed Martin to develop a semi-indigenous fighter that combines the best attributes of the F-35 Lightning and F-22 Raptor.
The Reuters report states in part:
"Lockheed has discussed the idea with Japanese defense ministry officials and will make a formal proposal in response to a Japanese request for information (RFI) after it receives permission from the U.S. government to offer the sensitive military technology, said the sources, who have direct knowledge of the proposal.
The decision on whether to release parts of the highly classified aircraft designs and software to help Japan stay ahead of Chinese advances will test President Donald Trump’s promise to overhaul his country’s arms export policy.
The proposed aircraft “would combine the F-22 and F-35 and could be superior to both of them,” said one of the sources."
USAF
Although Japan has put forward notional Raptor-like designs, what they could also be talking about here is merging the higher kinematic performance and low-observability of the F-22 with the F-35's smarter attributes—including updated avionics, mission computers, and sensors—as well as new lower-maintenance skin coatings. We at The War Zone have posited exactly this, writing the following in a 2016 article dubbed 'Just Allow The F-22 To Be Exported To Japan Already':
"Japan always wanted the F-22—badly. But nearly two decades ago, congress barred the super-fighter from being exported to anyone, including America’s closest allies. This act slashed Japan’s F-22 dreams, although they kept asking.
Times have changed, and with Japan facing down a drastically more aggressive and advanced Chinese military—one that has territorial ambitions in direct conflict with Japan’s own claims. The tension has manifested in the air-to-air realm, with Japan intercepted a whopping 199 Chinese aircraft between April and June of this year, and those intercepts are getting more aggressive.
Combined with threats from North Korea, this new reality has been taken very seriously by Japan, which has put in place aggressive initiatives to upgrade existing fighter aircraft and acquire new ones with greatly enhanced lethality.
The F-22’s technologies are also no longer experimental. In fact, they are decades old. In many ways, the exportable F-35 is more technologically advanced than the F-22. At this point, the export ban on the F-22 is more of a protectionist tool to bolster the F-35’s production numbers than a national security play.
But now a $40 billion tender is being put forward by Japan to indigenously develop or import a new super fighter design. Although Mitsubishi’s X-2 technology demonstrator has just taken flight, it is just that: a technology demonstrator. Despite inaccurate press reports that the X-2 is a prototype, there's is no guarantee it will make it into production in the coming decade. Think of it more as a Bird Of Prey than a YF-22.
The USAF is finally looking at restarting the Raptor production line, but the chances of that happening are almost nil, because doing so would directly challenge the F-35 program. And although the F-22 is the only existing fighter that can actually fulfill Japan’s $40 billion tender, it will likely be shot down by Lockheed, the USAF and congress. Meanwhile, Japan is already an F-35 customer, with 42 of the jets on order.
This sounds crazy but there may be an opportunity here for Japan to foot the cost of restarting F-22 production, which is supposedly the major barrier keeping the USAF from buying more Raptors. However, the reality is that a dollar spent on a new F-22 is a dollar taken away from producing more F-35s. So although the increasingly positive platitudes from high-up USAF officials have hinted that they would love to have more F-22s, the abstract effects of doing so are politically unpalatable.
Anything to protect the F-35—and I mean anything.
So what we will probably end up with is a situation where a major US defense aerospace prime contractor, let’s say Lockheed Martin, works with Japan’s Iron Triangle supported defense industrial base to build, well, pretty much an F-22, although not an exact copy. This will come at far higher cost than just restarting the line, but doing so will not endanger the F-35’s budgetary supremacy within the USAF and the Pentagon as a whole.
This has actually been done before to a certain extent, see the Mitsubishi-Lockheed F-2, Japan’s semi-indigenous F-16. These jets, of which Japan bought a similar number of around 100, ended up costing well over $100 million each when they could have just bought advanced block F-16s for a third of that price and left comparatively little capability on the table.
It all sounds pretty stupid, doesn’t it? Here there is a real opportunity to get the F-22 back in production and likely in an upgraded fashion with more advanced and serviceable avionics and other components, potentially all on Japan’s dime. The USAF could piggyback the JASDF order and bolster its fleet of just 183 F-22s (of which only about 125 are combat coded at any given time) for largely the unit cost alone. But this super-logical offering will likely never happen, because nothing can endanger the F-35, both from a manufacturer’s point of view and Washington’s.
Japan is slated to make its “F-3” fighter choice in the summer of 2018 so there is still a couple of years for Washington to come to its senses and make an about-face on its F-22 embargo, although I wouldn't hold my breath."
Fast forward a couple years and the F-35 program has progressed past the point of no return and President Trump is looking at pretty much any opportunity it can to boost sales of weapons to allied nations. With this in mind, the chances of such an initiative actually happening have increased dramatically. The biggest question is does Japan have the financial capacity to take down such an expensive project, especially considering other new competing priorities. These include everything from acquiring a cruise missile, to setting up Aegis Ashore ballistic missile defense batteries, to fielding F-35Bs on its helicopter carriers.
The $366M Mitsubishi X-2 technology demonstrator took its final flight last year after a relatively short life. Apparently, technical difficulties impacted the program and it was clear that Japan would need a deep foreign partnership in order to field a stealth fighter that could also benefit Japanese industry:
What's also new is that the USAF has completed a study that looked into what it would cost to put an updated F-22 back into production. The basic findings were:
-Approximately $50 billion to procure 194 additional F-22s
-The total includes an estimate of approximately $7 billion to $10 billion for non-recurring start-up costs and $40.4 billion for aircraft procurement costs
-An estimated cost of $206 million to $216 million per aircraft (the last F-22 produced had a unit cost of $137 million)
That cost may be too high for the USAF to stomach, but for Japan, it's highly unlikely they will be able to field something superior to an updated F-22 for anywhere near less. It's also likely that once the U.S.-specific politics of putting the Raptor back into production are removed from the equation, the cost of doing so would drop.
Lockheed Martin
Lockheed just rolled-out Japan's first of 40 F-35s on order.
But if Japan is willing to buy an updated Raptor instead of developing a near identical but still unique design, clearly doing so would present a mutually beneficial opportunity. If the U.S. would become a minority stakeholder in an F-22 production line restart of sorts, with the intent on buying a number of airframes to bolster the USAF's undersized and cherished F-22 fleet, then the opportunity could work out for both parties.
Once again, the F-35 lobby will be strongly against such a move even though the F-35's future is now assured. Any fighter dollar given to another program is one less spent on it, but the possibility that the USAF could acquire a Raptor 2.0 of sorts without bearing the vast majority of the non-recurring restart and development costs is an incredible proposition. If Japan is looking to buy a couple hundred fighters and the U.S. was to add onto that order, the unit cost for each jet would plummet as well.
As for Japan, it would benefit by realizing lowered unit costs, technology transfer, and also by being a key supplier for certain components of the jets built for both Japan and the United States. The potential to export the jet could also be an added benefit, but this would likely be curtailed by the U.S. in order to protect F-35 sales abroad. But above all else, Japan will be able to lower its risk substantially by buying into an existing and proven airframe, improving upon it, and will benefit from the full backing of the U.S. government and industry in doing so.
USAF
Don't think for a second that Japan is not willing to pay through the nose for a semi-indigenous modified fighter design with deep industry offsets. The F-2 ended up costing nearly the price of an F-35A today, and even then its radar proved to be highly problematic. Japan could have bought late-block F-16s for nearly a third of the price of each F-2 while realizing only minimal negative impacts in terms of some capabilities.
Also, keep in mind Donald Trump's extremely close relationship with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Approving Japan to get 'the very best' while also lining the pockets of big defense contractors seems like a very attractive proposition for Donald Trump. And it seems pretty clear that when it comes to weapons export to Japan, Trump is willing and ready to give Abe what he wants.
We will watch how this story develops closely, but if the Pentagon was smart, they would embrace an upgraded F-22 restart with Japan, and if Tokyo is willing to foot the majority of the bill for doing so, the USAF would be nuts not to take advantage of it.
-
1
-
-
-
Fair winds and following seas
-
14 minutes ago, 17D_guy said:
Not a Demo, but lets not act like 2-4 aren't pinnable on the "Conservatives" currently in office.
Trust me. I know better than anyone that Repubs are just as culpable.
I'd contest #2, but grant you 3 and 4.
-
50 minutes ago, drewpey said:
Politically speaking the military is an echo chamber. So many republicans go around making snide remarks about democrats because they think everyone in ear shot has the same views they do. I've sat quiet for many years, and now I'm to the point where I'm willing to engage with most folks on politics if they want to openly talk about it. I'm finding that the military is filled with a lot of loud and politically uninformed people. I have yet to flip someone politically, but I have found that educating people of the facts, and explaining the democratic stance at least softens their views, and makes them realize there is in fact some common ground for D, R and yes...even Libertarians to agree on. Those in charge just want to divide us, say that Democrats want open borders (not true), to turn us into socialism (not true), run up huge debt (not true) and to gut the military (again, not true). They benefit from the fact that those that listen to them aren't going to seek out the truth in their words and actions (and also that Democrats suck at unity and messaging, but we're working on it).
Those that become more entrenched in their views and use their interactions with me to verify their preconceived notions of democrats weren't going to do so differently if I used flowery language. I guess I could be gentler for some of you, but it might be better for everyone if people (as the republicans say) stop being snowflakes.
I'm your huckleberry. Give me facts to support your key points you made in the following post:
1. Democrats aren't for open borders and open immigration
2. Democrats aren't advocating socialism
3. Democrats haven't ran up huge debts
4. Democrats don't want to "gut the military" -
Well, you're going to get people like @Duck and @BashiChuni, giving their completely valid and "right" responses to your question. It's a completely subjective question, man. Two people can work the same job, with the same pay and the same perks... but come home at the end of the day and feel vastly different. That's life. No one is going to tell you anything here that you don't already know, or can't google already.
At an absolute bare minimum, you need to be visiting Guard/Reserve/AD bases in your area. Talk to every person in a bag that you see. Ask questions, pick their brains, learn the lessons that they have to offer. Gain as much experience and info as you can and then sit down with yourself and hash it out.
-
1
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, 1111 said:
Even though we may not agree on the way forward, thanks for being civil about it.
Yeah, but but the fact that they made it a point to prioritize education should be the spirit of the kind of folks we want here. How many of us who are second, third generation of migrant families who may not have gotten this opportunity if we had some of the skills barrier we are trying to employ?
Btw, I think we will just create a new “bottom” when we get there. Our lack of civility at the top levels (blues and reds) is astounding. And it starts and is worst at the top.
Ideas should be shared, challenged, understood and most importantly... respected. I'll chat about this stuff with anyone, because 9/10, I'll learn something and that makes the whole thing worth it.
I agree, that's a solid point. But, as with so many statistics and numbers, correlation doesn't equal causation (just because it looks related, doesn't mean it is). In fact, the article itself mentions this "The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 made it easier for Africans to enter the U.S., but mostly as students or highly skilled professionals — not through family sponsorships, Klineberg said.". Kind of makes sense that we'd have more educated Nigerians than Americans (by percentage), if the only reason they're allowed in is to get a degree... doesn't it? To answer your question directly, yes. We should bring in people who want to learn, grow and contribute.
-
22 hours ago, Philipe said:
I'm currently 12 sorry about my age but I'm really wanting to know what i need to get into the air-force. I have Polytheistic kidney disease and i want to know if that's a problem. And what degrees do I need to get into the air-force. I want to be a Fighter Pilot. So please help me with this. I will respond asap.
And here I thought polytheism only applied to hearts/minds, not kidneys...
I assume you're talking about Polycystic Kidney Disease. If so, you need to focus on being healthy. It will help your chances years from now when you start planning for a career as a fighter pilot.
Until then, read anything and everything that interests you. You have to be smart to become a fighter pilot, and books make you smarter. Never give up hope, and ALWAYS ask the prettiest girl to dance.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, gear3green said:
How competitive are A-10 units compare to other fighter units?
Not hard at all. Inside tip, when writing your cover letter... always mention Rep. Martha McSally and say that she's someone you look up to. She's HUGE in the A-10 world.
-
2
-
8
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, nsplayr said:
Peace talks were breaking out? In what alternate universe was that happening? France and others want to restart peace talks in Geneva, but I also want to do two chicks at the same time. Doesn't mean it's gonna happen anytime soon.
Also, false flags do typically involve chemical weapons attacks against children now that I think about it...that'll really throw the investigators off the trail of who did it!
If our IC says they believe Assad was responsible, I for one believe them. Everyone on here who serves should have a professional position of believing IC assessments unless proven otherwise - we bet our own lives on it.
Doesn't mean they can't be wrong or haven't been wrong in the past, but we are on the same team here. These are our intel folks making the assessment. Blows my mind how many AD guys are conspiracy theorists toward our own government and then strap on jets to back up policies made from those very same intel assessments.
Worth reading instead of wasting your time on the Ron Paul conspiracy video.
https://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2017/04/269543.htm
Also this statement and Q&A with Tillerson and McMaster.
Mark the day and the hour. I agree with nsplayr 100%.
All of this False Flag conspiracy sh!t has to stop. Seriously. It's bad enough listening to Ron Paul say how ending the drug war will magically solve the illegal immigration crisis (hint: it won't).
I, for one, think the missile strike was a good call. It serves many purposes. It tells Syria that we're not tolerating their crap any more. It tells Russia that they can't just cover up the massacre of innocent people in Syria... but most importantly, it sends a message to the Chinese premier (currently in Florida) that the US is no longer a paper tiger, and Lil Kim might be next.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Ulysses said:
I heard some sort of rumor about old Nighthawks being fixed up and used as stealth aggressors. Any truth to that?
Sent from my LG-H810 using Baseops Network Forums mobile app
Yep. They park them right next to the Roswell UFO and the PAK-FA we stole from the Russians.
-
2
-
-
14 hours ago, redshift2020 said:
You guys want to know the opinion of someone who is not in the military? Those female marines and sailors only have themselves to blame. Two generations ago making videos of sexual acts was simply not something that you did and to be honest if they never wanted others to see their nasty then they should of never allowed themselves to be filmed, taken the pictures themselves (selfies and sending them around), etc.
Basically they want to be a sloot and then wonder why the man didn't respect them. No man respects a sloot, we dont wife sloots and certainly don't bring them home. That's why the pics were shared on a private FB group.
End of the day the V is the more valuable commodity and they have an obligation to protect it. It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. The only ones responsible are the women who shared the pics expecting that they would never be seen by another soul, that's stupid and that's not human nature. Especially when you're not with that crazy chick anymore and you show your buddies how much of a freak she was for a laugh.
They want to take what makes a man a man. The sooner the military stands up to these crusading feminist and just say what needs to be said to them, "take responsibility for yourselves!" The better.
I honestly don't know why the DoD (including USMC, AF, and USN) wants to turn it's house upside down to placate a bunch of raging feminist because some sloots made a bj video or send snaps of her snaps. It's so STUPID!Dont tell me, that Brock Turner rapist dude from Stanford got a BaseOps account.
You need help my friend. Where I come from, you'd get the sh!t beat out of you for talking like that about women.
-
2
-
-
40 minutes ago, daynightindicator said:
Think again: Will circular runways ever take off?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-39284294
Weird concept, not sure how I feel about it
Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network ForumsAt first you say "no", but then you look at it from the scientific side and it does make some level of sense.
However, that banked circle produces its own series of problems with landing... and if a crosswind makes it over into the "bowl" while a plane is perfectly at 90 deg, (relative to the wind) with one wing in the air exposed? Flip city, potentially.
-
-
15 minutes ago, ThreeHoler said:
I heard similar from someone high up at HAF. If you read the Senate markup you'll see that the Senate shot down the $48K because they didn't believe there was a retention problem.
This. Senators don't care about the true manning state, nor is any self serving GO/O-6 going to tell them the sky is falling. Fiddling... while Rome is burning.
-
2
-
-
38 minutes ago, Hopefulflyer389 said:
Thanks Kilo! Always the shining beacon of hope. What about my combined scores of Academic, Verbal, and Quantitative only adding up to 105? Doesn't it need to be be a total amount of 150 or so to commission? Thumbing through the regs right now.
I haven't crawled through the AFIs, but fairly sure the only minimum AFOQT scores are Verbal 15, Quant 10, Pilot 25 and CSO 10 (for Pilot applicants). No combined scores have been mentioned to me, but someone else might know otherwise.
Here's the verbiage taken directly from the BaseOps page:
"All candidates must have a minimum score of 15 (Verbal) and 10 (Quantitative). These are absolute minimums and not waiverable for categorization even if you were able to get a waiver to get into the POC. Pilot candidates must have a minimum score of 25 (Pilot), 10 (Navigator) and cumulative 50 (Pilot + Navigator). Also, your AFOQT Pilot score will factor into your PCSM score. Navigator candidates must achieve a minimum score of 10 (Pilot), 25 (Navigator) and cumulative 50 (Pilot + Navigator). Also, you will receive up to 15 maximum OM points from your AFOQT Navigator score."
-
36 minutes ago, tk1313 said:
Someone is welcome to correct me, but I still think Reserves can hire just like guard units. The unsponsored board thing is a separate entity where you get picked up for a slot, fill out your dream sheet either before or during UPT and/or talk with units you want to fly for during that time, then finish UPT and accept the offer you most desire.
Guard does seem more open about hiring. I think the unsponsored thing is what people do when they are more focused on getting into an airplane faster and worrying about what they fly later.TK nailed it. AFRC does and can hire independently. The BUFF/BOne guys are good/recent examples of this. Most of your average heavy units in AFRC will direct you towards an "Officer Accessions Recruiter" in their area who helps them organize the paperwork and vet applicants. That same recruiter can prepare and send you forth for the unsponsored board if you so choose. So, I'd call that area recruiter... or find a number for the Ops desk and go that route.
-
3
-
-
19 minutes ago, congressman said:
Depends. Intel committee deals with the defense side of it which I am not on. I'm am on a committee tho which has jurisdiction over cyber issues. This is a tough nut to crack as it's privacy and free market vs the defense hawks. I'm a defense hawk
What's the status on the military releasing their stockpile of M1911's to the CMP so they can be sold to the public? If you got that one accomplished, you'd be re-elected for the next 10 years, minimum.
-
2
-
-
7 minutes ago, FlightTime said:
I'm not sure what "valuable information" you're referring to. You should reread his comment history. Seriously.
He's in UPT. He wants info on airframes and associated lifestyles. Actual pilots in those airframes have commented with information that could be helpful in the future. Hence the term "valuable information".
Unless you know about the lifestyles of every airframe in the Air Force... In which case, by all means. Enlighten us.
-
7
-
-
4 minutes ago, FlightTime said:
I'm a little late to the fight here but dude, your engrish is f'ing terrible.
Seriously guys?
On your second post, you're going to bash someone who asked an honest question and by all accounts... has helped contribute valuable information to the forum?
Seriously? Indeed.
-
11
-
-
-
-
Ho, maybe these quotes will chill your whiskey.
“If in order to kill the enemy you have to kill an innocent, don’t take the shot. Don’t create more enemies than you take out by some immoral act.”
“We’ve backed off in good faith to try and give you a chance to straighten this problem out. But I am going to beg with you for a minute. I’m going to plead with you, do not cross us. Because if you do, the survivors will write about what we do here for 10,000 years.”
“We will move swiftly and aggressively against those who resist, we will treat others with decency, demonstrating chivalry and soldierly compassion for people who have endured a lifetime under Saddam’s oppression. You are part of the world’s most feared and trusted force. Engage your brain before you engage your weapon."
Granted, it's not the "bow and apologize to everyone" diplomacy that we've seen over the last 8 years. But, it is diplomacy. In my opinion, the right kind.
Oh, and he said this when asked about why he banned unnecessary briefings under his command. “PowerPoint makes us stupid.”
A man after my own heart, this one is.
-
9
-
-
My favorite:
-
6
-
Japan to Front Cost for F-22 Restart?
in General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Kiloalpha
Good point, that’s a viable option as well. Personally I’d love to see a Black Widow flying under an allied banner, but the bill for getting that up and running will probably be a lot higher than simply pulling the F-22 tooling out of storage and getting suppliers lined up. Wonder how much T&E would have to be done to make the F-23 a reality in 2020?
What sucks is that we’re basically going to handicap ourselves waiting for the NGAD... instead of seizing the opportunity to buy a 5.5 gen Raptor off the backs of the Japanese. All because of the JSF and the MIC. Sounds like it could be a repeat of the Marines not getting in on the Rhino buy, because the JSF was supposed to be coming.