The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 24, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: BAE pitching Typhoon as F-22 eludes
maruben    6/12/2009 6:00:08 PM
Friday, June 12, 2009


BAE pitching Typhoon as F-22 eludes
Europeans make move amid U.S. export ban on stealth fighter


By JUN HONGO
Staff writer
Japan should consider adopting the Eurofighter Typhoon as its next mainstay fighter jet even if the U.S. lifts its ban on exporting the stealthy F-22 Raptor, representatives of a U.K.-based defense and aerospace company said Thursday in Tokyo.

The Air Self-Defense Force is eager to replace about 50 of its aging F-4s with the high-tech F-22 for its agility and high stealth capabilities.





But recent reports indicate Washington is unlikely to sell its latest and greatest airplane to just anyone, while others say the ¥25 billion plane is too expensive.

Andy Latham, BAE System Inc. vice president in charge of Typhoon exports, told reporters that since the Typhoon costs only about ¥10 billion, it presents "an effective non-U.S. solution" with significant benefits for Japan.

The Typhoon, made by a consortium of European manufacturers, is already used by the air forces in Europe. Although export of the F-22 would be strictly controlled to prevent its military technology from falling into the wrong hands, Latham said selling the Typhoon will take a "no black box approach."

The biggest difference between the two planes will be the "ability to offer Japan's industry a significant package of work," he said, explaining that the consortium could allow licensed manufacturing of the fighter in Japan and integration with Japanese equipment.

As for the Typhoon's lack of stealth capability, however, BAE System's Craig Penrice said stealth technology should not be considered an issue.

"Stealth is not the silver bullet answer that some might have you think," the former Royal Air Force pilot said, adding that the Typhoon has overall countermeasures against radar detection, including reduced infrared emissions.

By comparison, stealth is "not cheap, not low maintenance and not fully exportable," he said.

In total, Tokyo is considering six candidates to replace its F-4EJ fighters, including the U.S. F-35, which is still under development.

BAE has been pitching the Typhoon to Japan for years, although Tokyo and Washington have a strong defense alliance that leaves little room for non-U.S. bidders, Latham said.

Despite recent reports indicating the U.S. is unlikely to provide the F-22 to Japan, Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada said Tuesday the fighter "remains an option that will be pursued."

Japan's strong interest in the aircraft is based not only on its capabilities but also on its compatibility with the U.S. Air Force, which the ASDF would work closely with in the event Japan is attacked.

Some observers also say Tokyo is eager to update its aircraft with the most up-to-date fighter available so it can claim air superiority over China, which is continuing to build its military power.

Japan's current mainstay fighter is the U.S.-designed F-15 Eagle.

P-3C patrols start
Kyodo News
A Maritime Self-Defense Force P-3C surveillance plane made its first patrol Thursday over the pirate-infested Gulf of Aden off Somalia, the Defense Ministry said.

The aircraft is one of two P-3Cs dispatched last month on the first overseas mission by MSDF patrol planes. They are supporting the two MSDF destroyers that have been patrolling for pirates in the gulf since late March.

The P-3Cs will gather information on suspicious ships to pass on to the destroyers and the commercial vessels they escort. The information will also be conveyed to navy vessels from other countries operating in the area, according to the ministry.

After arriving in Djibouti late last month, the P-3Cs had been conducting training flights. The aircraft are using the international airport in Djibouti as their operational base.

The destroyers have been escorting Japanese-related commercial vessels.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   NEXT
SlowMan       6/15/2009 2:13:32 PM
@ prometheus

> the SAM system you describe are not so formidable

SM-2 is not so formidable?

> there is no way such a conflict would be allowe dto break out, I think we can disgard that particular scenario.

Unfortunately, Asian war planners are not precluding that particular scenario, because that particular scenario is very real to them. There are a whole set of war plans to carry out such war by both sides.

@ JFKY

> there's no way thta in today's world Korea and Japan fight.

There is a vicious 50-year old territorial dispute between them. East Asia isn't like Europe at all, where there is no NATO-like stabilizing force in the region and every country has territorial dispute with its neighbors.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Slowman   6/15/2009 2:38:42 PM
> there's no way thta in today's world Korea and Japan fight.

There is a vicious 50-year old territorial dispute between them. East Asia isn't like Europe at all, where there is no NATO-like stabilizing force in the region and every country has territorial dispute with its neighbors.
 
No there's a protracted dispute....a VICIOUS dispute is what happened in the Balkans.  People being unhappy for 50 years is not "vicious."
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    The thing I worry about.   6/15/2009 2:58:28 PM
I don't worry too much about the number of F22's *1). The fact that I don't see new fighter plane designs being started already makes me nervous.
 
What worries me is that some moron in an authority position is gonna say "We can do everything with UAV's" and cancel/screw up the only manned fighter program left, without any new fighter programs forthcoming. This will seriously damage/destroy the US fighter plane industry to the point that you may not recover the lost "know how" in the future.

The we can do everything with UAV's message is a very appealing one to sell to politicians, because it promises that they can take military actions without the price of risking pilots. The freedom to do foreign military strikes without any repercussions at home, what narcissist politician is not tempted by such a deal, even if it is BS? The companies selling will know it is BS, but since they make money on it, they will not tell it is BS of course.
 
*1) Because I really suspect I'm being lied to about how good the F22 is and suspect a rip off.
 
Anyone who has designed anything knows how difficult it is to design something that is 2 to 3 times as good as an existing average design. Anyone who has designed anything knows how impossibly difficult it can be to design something that is 2 to 3 times as good as a top notch design.
 
Now when I see excersizes where the F22 gets a kill ratio of 108 to 0 they are basically telling me that the F22 is at least a 108 times! improvement over the F15. Without using any new, previously unheard of technology I might add. (stealth technology dating back to the 70's and 80's). Now either I believe that the designers are that superhumanly good, or I suspect that the excersize was rigged. Occam's razor says the second option is most likely.
 
The interesting thing is though that I have read that the F35 is a "relatively" well run program "according to Pentagon standards" cancelling or messing up that program would be a bad IMHO.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe1    F-35 the next best option.   6/15/2009 6:25:45 PM
There is no chance that Japan will get the Raptor, so if it wants a true 5th genaration fighter, with full stealth tech. and the next best thing to the Raptor, it should go for the F-35. The Lightning may not have the Raptors A2A capabilities but it is much better than the Rafale, Gripen, SH, or any other 4+ genaration fighter out there, including the Typhoon. The Typhoon, as good as it is in A2A operations, is still a fighter that belongs in the category of other 4th genaration fighters. If the Japanese want the next best thing then they do not have to look far, there is no comparisons between the F-35 and the other options available to Japan.
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector    Bekaa Valley   6/15/2009 6:43:30 PM

I don't worry too much about the number of F22's *1).
*1) Because I really suspect I'm being lied to about how good the F22 is and suspect a rip off.
Now when I see excersizes where the F22 gets a kill ratio of 108 to 0 they are basically telling me that the F22 is at least a 108 times! improvement over the F15. Without using any new, previously unheard of technology I might add. (stealth technology dating back to the 70's and 80's). <deletions>

You can't kill what your systems can't see or hit.  I believe F-22 is at least as powerful as has been advertised.  0.02

v^2


 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    FJV reply   6/15/2009 6:44:37 PM

I don't worry too much about the number of F22's *1). The fact that I don't see new fighter plane designs being started already makes me nervous.

What worries me is that some moron in an authority position is gonna say "We can do everything with UAV's" and cancel/screw up the only manned fighter program left, without any new fighter programs forthcoming. This will seriously damage/destroy the US fighter plane industry to the point that you may not recover the lost "know how" in the future.

If you look back at the history of just about any design. They are built to deal with some specific requirement. That fighter development enthusiasm is waning is an indication of the demand. It's just not that high. Meanwhile, you see a new UAV every five minutes. This is because their unique characteristics and capabilities are what's in demand. If you look, many of the same design houses that make our fighters and building UAVs now. So it's not that we will lose talent. It's just being applied where it's most needed.




*1) Because I really suspect I'm being lied to about how good the F22 is and suspect a rip off.

 

Anyone who has designed anything knows how difficult it is to design something that is 2 to 3 times as good as an existing average design. Anyone who has designed anything knows how impossibly difficult it can be to design something that is 2 to 3 times as good as a top notch design.

Now when I see excersizes where the F22 gets a kill ratio of 108 to 0 they are basically telling me that the F22 is at least a 108 times! improvement over the F15. Without using any new, previously unheard of technology I might add. (stealth technology dating back to the 70's and 80's). Now either I believe that the designers are that superhumanly good, or I suspect that the excersize was rigged. Occam's razor says the second option is most likely.


What you are doing is applying a linear methodology to a non linear situation. If you take todays GSX-R1000 and the one from say...2002. It is not 2 to 3 times as powerful. But if you put those two bikes on the track, more often than not, if not always, it will win. This is because the marginal/moderate advantages have a disproportionate effect. Another analogy is Kobe Bryant. Good, but is he 4x better than LeBron James team? No, but the things they are better at make the Lakers much more likely to win games and this is reflected in the stats. It's the same in war.



-DA 

 

 

 

 

 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    FJV reply   6/15/2009 6:47:34 PM
Another analogy is the F-117. Not any faster or maneuverable than most conventional designs. But it is far more likely to be able to penetrate into and survive a modern IAD all other things being equal as a benefit of it's LO characteristics. War is about the little things. Just one advantage can make a lot of difference.


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    FJV reply   6/15/2009 6:47:38 PM
Another analogy is the F-117. Not any faster or maneuverable than most conventional designs. But it is far more likely to be able to penetrate into and survive a modern IAD all other things being equal as a benefit of it's LO characteristics. War is about the little things. Just one advantage can make a lot of difference.


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       6/15/2009 7:14:34 PM










What you are doing is applying a linear methodology to a non linear situation. If you take todays GSX-R1000 and the one from say...2002. It is not 2 to 3 times as powerful. But if you put those two bikes on the track, more often than not, if not always, it will win. This is because the marginal/moderate advantages have a disproportionate effect. Another analogy is Kobe Bryant. Good, but is he 4x better than LeBron James team? No, but the things they are better at make the Lakers much more likely to win games and this is reflected in the stats. It's the same in war.










-DA 





 



 



 



 





Hate to say it, but I agree with DA here. I would go so far as to say that Koby is NO better then LeBron. Koby just happens to have the better supporting cast. Take Lebron and stick him on the Lakers and Koby on the Cavs and you would have had the exact same outcome in the playoffs as we did. Look at the Lakers for the last ~7 years since Shack left. Koby was there all along but they sucked and did NOT win squat. He had no supportin cast. Like LeBron now.
 
Same would apply to military hardware I would suppose. One piece of equipment without the proper supporting cast and it may very well be average. At the right pieces along with it and it now becomes a total game changer.
Dang that hurt lol
 
Beazz
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    FJV reply.   6/15/2009 9:41:05 PM
I hate nonsense analogies when plain English us better.
 
The F-22 scored 108-2 because of several factors.
1. It has an absolute energy advantage over most of its adversaries at high altitude of at least 1.2x: it can fall on you. .
2. Dittto velocity at super-cruise. it can run you out of gas-forcing you into reheat.
3. It can dogfight MACH 1+, while you can't.
4. It gets forst look with radar since it sees you 2x-5x tomes farther than  you can see or track it.
5. It fights clean while most of its enemies are pylon draggy .
6, The LO is just a small part of hundreds of little thing  advantages.
 
I've just mentioned the five most obvious. 
 

 
Herald
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

LB    Demand vs Requirements   6/16/2009 6:33:23 AM
France in the 1930s demanded a lot of tanks with 1 or 2 man turrets and not enough anti tank and anti aircraft guns.  The USAF demanded an air superiority fighter without a gun in the 1960s.  Just because the demand for actual fighter planes is "waning" does not mean the requirement will not exist in a future conflict.
 
Furthermore, one might observe that Japan, South Korea, and Israel all currently have a demand for a new air superiority fighter and that the F-35 does not meet their requirements- the F-35 not being being designed for that role.  These nations all perceive that in a possible future conflict they will be fighting a potential enemy with an actual air force.
 
In fact all three are contemplating building their own new fighter design optimized for air to air in response to not being able to purchase their first choice in platform- the F-22.
 
 



I don't worry too much about the number of F22's *1). The fact that I don't see new fighter plane designs being started already makes me nervous.



If you look back at the history of just about any design. They are built to deal with some specific requirement. That fighter development enthusiasm is waning is an indication of the demand. It's just not that high. Meanwhile, you see a new UAV every five minutes. This is because their unique characteristics and capabilities are what's in demand. If you look, many of the same design houses that make our fighters and building UAVs now. So it's not that we will lose talent. It's just being applied where it's most needed.

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       6/16/2009 9:31:32 AM

France in the 1930s demanded a lot of tanks with 1 or 2 man turrets and not enough anti tank and anti aircraft guns.  The USAF demanded an air superiority fighter without a gun in the 1960s.  Just because the demand for actual fighter planes is "waning" does not mean the requirement will not exist in a future conflict.

 A better historic fit us the USAAC that demanded a heavy bomber and poured all of its money into strategic bombing and forgot ther rest of the air war mission which was reconnaissance, battlefield air support, and aur superiority. Ut took THREE YEARS un a conventional war to fux thoise mistakes.

Furthermore, one might observe that Japan, South Korea, and Israel all currently have a demand for a new air superiority fighter and that the F-35 does not meet their requirements- the F-35 not being being designed for that role.  These nations all perceive that in a possible future conflict they will be fighting a potential enemy with an actual air force.

SEAD and DEAD means denual of the air to enemy fighters as well as striking AAA and SAM networks. The last time I looked there wasn't a UCAV smart enougfh to dodge SAMs, flak, or A2A missiles. Now you can do that with robots at 3x to 4x  the cost in robotic aircraft lost to the manned aircraft you need but who can afford a 7000 robot air force at $50 million a bird?  (That's what a robot intgerdictor strike aircraft costs, don't kid yourself- just $ 5 million less than the manned bird and only 1/3 as effective in REALITY..) 

In fact all three are contemplating building their own new fighter design optimized for air to air in response to not being able to purchase their first choice in platform- the F-22.

Gee, I wonder why?


I don't worry too much about the number of F22's *1). The fact that I don't see new fighter plane designs being started already makes me nervous.




I worry.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/16/2009 12:01:43 PM

SEAD and DEAD means denual of the air to enemy fighters as well as striking AAA and SAM networks. The last time I looked there wasn't a UCAV smart enougfh to dodge SAMs, flak, or A2A missiles. Now you can do that with robots at 3x to 4x  the cost in robotic aircraft lost to the manned aircraft you need but who can afford a 7000 robot air force at $50 million a bird?  (That's what a robot intgerdictor strike aircraft costs, don't kid yourself- just $ 5 million less than the manned bird and only 1/3 as effective in REALITY..) 



Boeing X-45A Unmanned Aircraft Demonstrates Autonomous Capability

ST. LOUIS, June 24, 2005 -- A Boeing [NYSE: BA] X-45A unmanned aircraft completed its 52nd flight recently, demonstrating its ability to adapt to a realistic and changing wartime operational environment.

During the test flight, a Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS) X-45A departed from NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., climbed to 29,000 ft. and entered the base's test range. While flying the mission, several simulated Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) emitters were activated and the unmanned aircraft autonomously created its own flight plan to remain out of lethal range of the simulated SAM sites. Always managed by the pilot-operator, the X-45A then attacked its simulated priority ground target and showcased the ability to suppress enemy air defenses. Once the aircraft had conducted a simulated battle damage assessment, the X-45A safely returned to Edwards.

"The X-45A proved it could autonomously react to a dynamic threat environment while engaging a priority target," said David Koopersmith, Boeing J-UCAS X-45 vice president and program manager. "Onboard planning and decision capabilities like these will make our next unmanned system, the X-45C, a highly survivable platform for the warfighter."

The first X-45C will be completed in 2006, with flight-testing scheduled to begin in 2007. It will be 39 feet long with a 49-foot wingspan, cruise at 0.80 Mach at an altitude of 40,000 feet, carry a 4,500 pound weapon payload, and be able to fly a combat radius of more than 1,200 nautical miles. The software used and tested on the X-45A may be offered as a candidate for functionality in the development of the J-UCAS Common Operating System.

Boeing began its unmanned combat aircraft program in 1998. The following year, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the U.S. Air Force chose Boeing to build two X-45A air vehicles and a mission control station under the J-UCAS Advanced Technology Demonstration Program.

Winner of a 2005 Flight International Aerospace Industry Award, the J-UCAS X-45 program is a Boeing/DARPA/Air Force/Navy effort to demonstrate the technical feasibility, military utility and operational value of an unmanned air combat system for the Air Force and the Navy. Operational missions for the services may include persistent strike; penetrating electronic attack; suppression of enemy air defenses; and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.


 
That's already been publicly demonstrated.

-DA 
 
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    F117 and stuff.   6/16/2009 1:43:02 PM
The F117 had stellar performance against the Iraqis. But when it was used against 4th rate Serbs, the enemy managed to shoot one down with an obsolete SAM system. Against a top notch 1st rate opponent the results I would expect be worse.
 
Then the F117 was unexpectedly withdrawn from service. Makes me wonder if it was due to the fact that details about the Serb shootdown became too widely known among potential enemies.
 
I expect similar with respect to UAV's, stellar performance against lightly armed illiterate goat herders, not so stellar performance against someone who know how to do a half decent job. Against top notch enemies "let's not go there".

The F-22 scored 108-2 because of several factors.
1. It has an absolute energy advantage over most of its adversaries at high altitude of at least 1.2x: it can fall on you. .
2. Dittto velocity at super-cruise. it can run you out of gas-forcing you into reheat.
3. It can dogfight MACH 1+, while you can't.
4. It gets forst look with radar since it sees you 2x-5x tomes farther than  you can see or track it.
5. It fights clean while most of its enemies are pylon draggy .
6, The LO is just a small part of hundreds of little thing  advantages.
 
A modernized f104 with a better radar, modern engine and thrust vectoring would have the same advantages you mention against F15's. Hardly advantages that need "state of the art" technology not posessed by potential opponents. The US is lucky in that Russia and China are more interested in rousing nationalism with their new designs, than in something that works. Not impressed and not interested in "discussing" F22 further.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    FJV reply   6/16/2009 1:50:46 PM
Out of thousands of combat sorties, we've lost a SINGLE F-117. JUST ONE. Fractions of a fraction of a percent. If a UCAV can duplicate that performance against a near peer then we are in good shape!


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy