More problems for Japanese aviation industry < link >

 

Roughly two dozen fighter parts makers are quitting business due to lack of new orders and delays on F-X. This is considered a grave concern for Japanese DoD, which wants to preserve local aviation industry suppliers and loss of them is considered a national security threat. This puts extra pressure on the Japanese DoD to select Typhoon, which is available for license production, over F-35, which is not available for license production.

British Procurement Minister's flying over to Tokyo to negotiate the sales term of Typhoon. < link >

 

British Procurement Minister's claiming that Typhoon's cheaper than F-35.

The Typhoon would be much cheaper than the F-35, but it wouldn't be able to do the job of multirole fighter as well.  It would, however, be a good choice for replacing the F-4, which would leave the F-2 with the majority of strike duties.

 

That said, the article is crap.  Apparently the author forgets that, while the US is overrepresented in the JASDF, the service flies a number of its own designs--until recently, the F-1/T-2 (which was built with Anglo-French tech), the T-4, the MU-2 series, the C-1, and US-1 amphibian.  The JMSDF's P-3 replacement is homegrown; the JGSDF's OH-58 replacement is likewise homegrown.  The Japanese use their own weapon designs, and if the F-2 is based on the F-16, it would be like claiming the Kfir is French because the Israelis used the Mirage as a basis.

 

His comments on the Japanese airline industry is ill-informed and little more than a sales pitch for Airbus.  If Airbus hasn't done well in the Japanese market compared to Boeing, it was because until the A380, Airbus didn't have a high-density aircraft like the 747.  Sure, it had aircraft of equal range in the A330 and A340, but both are fairly recent developments, while widebodies like the 747, L-1011, and DC-10/MD-11 series were out before Airbus had even got the A300 off the ground.  You're not going to be able to cram as many people into an A300 or even an A330 as you can in a 747, which is why JAL and ANA use 747s for their high density routes.  There's nothing wrong with the Airbus designs, but they weren't available when Japan's domestic and overseas airliner market exploded in the mid-1980s, whereas Boeing had three widebodies available alone (the 747, 757, and 767).

 

It may be true that the Japanese bought more from the US than any other country, but part of that is postwar politics (the close relationship between the two countries during and after the Occupation) and part of it was that the Japanese didn't want what Europe was selling.  The JASDF really wanted the Viggen back in the late 1970s, but the Swedes wouldn't sell, so the JASDF shrugged and bought the F-15 instead.

 

More than likely they'll choose Typhoon, and they'd be right to do so, no matter who is in charge.

 

The Japanese use their own weapon designs, and if the F-2 is based on the F-16, it would be like claiming the Kfir is French because the Israelis used the Mirage as a basis.

 

 

The development of the Japanese F-2 depended on huge amount of extra-assistance from the US side. Several times people from General Dynamic had to come here to help our local team to fix many things.

I am not sure but I can not recall any action by Dassault to help directly the design, construction and production of the Kfir in Israel by sending its own staff.

Sadly our local talent needed more help from the US to accomplish their goals than the expected one when the tasks and works of design and construcction were assigned and divided between the US and Japan teams.

It's not just that the japanese didn't wanted the US being involved in the F-2, they were actually pursuing their own design, a delta/canard fighter, before the US applied pressure and forced them to base a new aircraft on an existing type. Even the Tornado was considered but rejected and LM is involved in the production of the F-2 and holds quite some rights, so the situation is definitely different to that of the Kfir.

 

I have to disagree that the Typhoon wouldn't be able to perform as a multirole fighter, it certainly will be capable to perform a broad range of missions if related weapons are integrated and given the current delivery schedule of the JASDF the Typhoon should be multirole capable enough to complement the F-2, if that would be actually required.

The military acquisition strategy of JSDF doesn't make sense most of the time. Probably because the military conform to what industry want them to buy, not the other way. For example, why do JMSDF buy those neutered flattops? Why JGSDF approved develop and production for 35mm SPAAG? Why do JMSDF throw away subs that still has 20 year service life (if put in the right hands)? I see the whole F-2 project not too far away from industry mismanagement. JASDF had better just bought F/A-18E/F to fulfill the mission. F-2 is not a bad plane, but it is not designed based on original mission requirement. It is rather the result of bureaucratic choice than actual mission requirement. It is wrong to choose F-16 engine and aerodynamics as the base to develop a multi-role fighter that focuses on anti-ship mission from the beginning. One engine solution is wrong for a fighter that will mostly operate feet wet. Had they chosen with two F404, with upgrade option of F414, JASDF would be buying more to replace F-4EJ now. There are a lot other nuances about Japanese military acquisition. Simply name a few: Type 90 production, Type 74 chassis, Type 96 FOGM, Type 64 rifle (and it's propellant reduced ammo) and perhaps some destroyers with almost no air-defense. I don't know how they've been gotten away with that for so long?

 

Don't get me wrong. I think Koreans aren't making much sense either.

 

The Kfir has very little relationship to the Mirage III.  It has different avionics, different aerodynamics, different weapons load, and a different engine.  The Mirage III has a multimode radar.  The Kfir didn't until the C.10 upgrade.  The Mirage III was designed as an interceptor.  The Kfir was designed for low-altitude strike.

 

They're both deltas, but there the relationship ends.  You may be confusing the Denel Cheetah with the Kfir--the Cheetah is indeed an upgraded Mirage III, retaining the same basic design and engine.

 

 

@ YelliChink
> For example, why do JMSDF buy those neutered flattops?

Japan currently cannot have aircraft carriers because they are currently classified as an offensive weapon thus banned by the peace constitution. Japan requires the reclassification of aircraft carrier as a defensive weapon by the US State Department to own them.

Having "helicopter carriers" that are more like the real thing between each iteration(Oosumi -> Hyuga -> 22 DDH)  is Japan's way of slowly building up its case for real aircraft carriers and reduce resistance from its neighbors.

> Why do JMSDF throw away subs that still has 20 year service life (if put in the right hands)?

So that they could bring those subs out of retirement to instantly double their submarine fleet strength to 36 units in the event of a war.

> JASDF had better just bought F/A-18E/F to fulfill the mission.

Super Hornet wasn't available in the 80s.

> It is rather the result of bureaucratic choice than actual mission requirement.

It is a result of a diplomatic compromise between the US and Japan. At the time, Japan was recording a massive trade surplus against the US and the US was threatening various forms of trade sanctions against Japan, so Japan had to give into American demands.
> It is wrong to choose F-16 engine and aerodynamics as the base to develop a multi-role fighter that focuses on anti-ship mission from the beginning.

From what I understand, there was no "force" involved, but I doubt I'm going to convince SlowMan of that short of using a sledgehammer.

 

The USN could take on the SDF and win, but it would be one nasty fight.  Sounds like something out of Silent Service, or as it's better known, "Why didn't I just rent hentai and get a better plot?"