This is a quote lifted from T5C by one of the industry defence journos (not a Broadsheet journo paddling in Defence matters)

 

 

I dunno about that. I reckon they would have bigger guard dogs and longer chains at US bases.

Point taken GF, but the f-35 cost has exceeded 85 million and is still rising.

I still dont see how it is possible for some individual or an establishment of a foreign nature to steal F-22 tech from Australian airbases. I mean its not likely that a radar or airframe will go missing overnight from Amberley anymore likely than it is at a Us airbase and/or establishment.

the f22 was never meant for export?....if what i have read on other sites  i.e.f16.net,the usaf already had the planning in place to sell the f22 to australia,even to the extent they had a dvd/power point presentation just for the raaf[no i cant confirm this but it comes from reliable sources]. of course mr obey did not agree and it was canned.....which means if any consideration at all is given to the sale of the f22 today that much of the leg work has been done....of course this would be a modified version....also if i remember correctly export f35s will also be dumbed down,but to what extent remains to be seen.Now what would be the use getting modified f22s?/...just like the f35 im pretty sure they would decrease the stealth ability but as for much? the f35 is to have a more capable radar/avionics than the f22,so no need to change that much....atm i cant see many changes other than stealth,which would still leave one of if not the best air dominance fighter in the region if not the world.....if they did reduce the stealth i cant see it reduced any more than the f35s.....i wonder if we were allowed a reduced f22 we could barter the price as we are not getting the whole hog?. it seems to be the flavour of the day to say the f111 is not an a2a [obviously] and should be replaced with the f35....personally i believe the f22 is an excellent replacement for the f111 [once weapons integration is complete] giving us a day one door breaker needing no escorts[previously f111 role] while maritime goes to the f18 fleet[what they were born for] and or f35..looking at time frames [if f22 is possible] then maybe around 2020 delivery for the f22,to replace our current f18a/b...i cannot see any logic, apart from money,for having a single f35 fleet as this is just really playing with fire in regards to groundings ala f15....if we have a capability gap losing the f111 then what will we have with a fleet wide grounding of the f35???i suppose there are plenty of cessnas about ot fill the gap 

I'm not convinced, based on their track record, the USAF would be as supportive/enthusiastic about a sale to Japan.

The bottom line is this. They won't be exported. The F-22 production line's fate is in the hands of whoever wins in November.

Synopsis:

1. The F-22 is currently not to be exported, period. I don't care what moonshine and science fiction you read.
2. The Sparky Australia will get is the exact base model C the USAF will get. Each enduser will specify what he wants and LockMart will supply it in the Sparky to the enduser's local needs. This means that some endusers will use British weapons or German weapons or ALL weapons depending on what the enduser wants to integrate. There will be no derated Australian Sparkies. Your nation calls for both the British and the American EW and weapon interface packages aling with the software and avionics  Its in the Consortium agreement which is a TREATY. Britain will get its Sparky B model to British specs. Turkey will get its Turkish model, Australia will get its Australian model. This is like the F-16  program where each user customizes his bird in the program.

The rest of your misinformation  has already been covered in depth -especially on this particular forum and especially in THIS thread.

Herald. 

1.never said will be exported,i said if any consideration is given.....a bit like your "currently"...the usaf wanted to export the f22 before  mr obey had a say then they are your science fiction mob....

2.yet to be convinced,still havent heard if we get the codes or not...

3.THIS thread,unless i am missing a page,does nothing of the sort....depending on whom or what sources you there is the f22b could be anything from an export model to a 2 seater multi....of course would never happen..

Consideration was NEVER given, period. Just because Mister Obey wrote the roadblock law, don't assume that it isn't US POLICY. US law covers a lot of political necessities. Our Congress knows what its duties are.... sometimes: or at least Mister Obey does as advised by the USAF.

 Reread GF and me, CAREFULLY, this time.

3. ok i read gf CAREFULLY...one line....rest is a quote from a jurno[unless that is gf alias]

2.never tried to call you a liar...dont know what u are on....troll city

1.hmmm read carefully... i said if consideration IS given not was given.....must have got lost in translation

beepa, have you read all the other comments that anumber of us have made about F-22 availability?

this is not a simple military retail event.  I am not opposed to the aircraft, but I have made my reservations very very clear because the debate in australia had been hijacked by the clown club and biggles set.

 

Fitzgibbon was given a get out of gaol card by Gates.  He also made it very clear 24hrs later about his belief that it would be "difficult".  Believe me, when a politician or a someone front ending a news conference says "difficult" he he prepping the ground for a "no".

 

Its is up to Congress - its not an executive decision.  The last time a US pollie said that the US would react positively to an Australian request for the F-22 was in 2004.  (I was in the room with 450 other witnesses supping on fine wine and eating  glazed duck)  That man had a job change within 3 months.  ie he got the bullet.

Obey is a Democrat - if the US changes Govt in Nov (and that is looking highly likely unless the Dems self implode completely) then he is going to have more clout - not less.  If F-22's have been stymied under a very pro Australian US Govt due to Democrat intervention - what do you think the chances are under a Democrat led Government which is dominated by people who strongly believe that the US should not be selling tier 1 technology?

 

The phurphy thrown out about Australia not beinh japan so it would be easier ignores the political reality of global politics.

 

Japan is critical to the US in a bid to moderate and contain China and Nth Korea - they've also gained access to other tier 1 technology way ahead of australia prev, so they're not in a "witheld" basket (eg Aegis, AWACs, shared hypersonics, hi speed comms, digital processing etc.....).

 

If Japan seeks it, then automatically the Sth Koreans will also feel entitled - they after all have allowed the US to have a presence on their soil since the Korean peninsular cease fire was enacted.  They also have gained access to US tech before Australia.

 

The ongoing mythology that Japan and Sth Korea are in a different basket and this Oz has a better chance is just nonsense.  It does not fit the political reality.  Either way, if one gets up, the other 2 would legitimately claim an chance to get up.  Can you in the clear light of day even remotely consider that the F-22, which the USAF wants more of, would permit allies to have a production run ahead of their own priorities?  At the current build rate we would not get the F-22 anyway as   the USAF is not going to break order.  USN is happy to include us into their production run so that out buy interruption is minimised.

 

Quite frankly, the ongoing public commentary in australia from the vocal naysayers who get airplay is plain amateurish.