Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Stealth jets would replace aging F-4 fleet

Kyodo News

The Defense Ministry is making arrangements to select the F-35 as Japan's next mainstay fighter jet, sources at the ministry and the Self-Defense Forces said Sunday.

The ministry will embark on the full acquisition process in December and prepare to make budgetary requests for the stealth plane in the fiscal 2011 budget, the sources said.

The ministry is looking to buy 40 of the next-generation jets, which can evade radar and are estimated to cost about ¥9 billion each.

The move apparently means priority has been put on strengthening air-defense capabilities as neighboring China makes efforts to enhance its air force by developing its own next-generation aircraft, analysts said.

The ministry, however, may postpone budget requests for the F-35 until fiscal 2012, due to a view in the government that a contract should not be concluded before the jet's actual capabilities can be confirmed. The F-35 is set to be deployed in the mid-2010s.

The F-35 is being jointly developed by the United States, Britain, Australia and other countries. Japan is not participating because doing so would conflict with its principle of banning weapons and arms-technology exports.

Japan initially wanted to acquire the U.S. F-22 stealth jet to replace its aging collection of F-4EJ fighters, which are still used alongside F-15s and other planes, but the United States prohibits the export of the F-22, and plans to halt production have already been announced.

Japan passed on other models, such as the U.S. F/A-18 and F-15FX and the Eurofighter, which is made by a consortium of European manufacturers.

The plan to acquire the F-35 is likely to be incorporated in new defense policy guidelines and a medium-term defense buildup plan to be adopted in December 2010.

The government led by the Democratic Party of Japan decided in October to delay its adoption by a year, partly to reflect the policies of its coalition partners.

F-16.net Sponsor

I half wonder if they will put this on hold now that there is the slight possibility of an exportable Raptor... Shrug

I thought they were pretty committed to the F-2...

npeterman18, where does this 'slight possibility of an exportable Raptor' information come from?

Read my thread under the F-22. It comes directly from the FY 2010 Defense bill signed on October 28th

npeterman18, good find! I have no interest in reading about F-22 because Australia is not going to buy any F-22s. Smile

This 'export version' F-22 work has been done in the past (APA website has info about it) but there are snags of course. Australia buying a bunch of JSFs keeps me busy keeping up with all the guff about JSF. My particular interest would be then in the JSF-B and CVF for RN FAA because.... just like the F-22 for export it is one of those ideas that will not die (despite naysayers for now) for the future RAN. So it goes....

Somewhere on their website is a recent example with much older examples in archives:
"APA News and Media PageJames Pethokoukis - Reuters - 25/06/2009 - US Senate bill seeks study on export F-22 version. Tom McInerney and Paul Vallely - HumanEvents.com - 24/06/2009"

http://www.ausairpower.net/media.html

I must say, that while I have no real knowledge on the RAN or the FAA, I think that with India purchasing new carriers, INS Vikramaditya from Russia, and 3 new indiginous Vikrant class carriers, that it is time for a Pacific nation like Australia to develop a greater naval aviation capability. Is the new Canberra class (I think thats what its called) going to be -35B capable?

npeterman18, A GOOD 'fred' Smile

to follow would be this one regarding your question "Is the new Canberra class (I think thats what its called) going to be -35B capable?" Short answer is 'YES - but...' Realistically it would take a third specially fitted LHD from Spain to be built for RAN to operate JSF-Bs flown by RAAF but all that is in distant future most likely (if at all). As the thread here makes clear this plan is not in foreseeable future (but I like to look ahead anyway): [Spanish Navy intend to operate JSF-Bs from same ships in their fleet.]

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-12631.html

This thread meanders a lot (mostly about USMC stuff and ski jumps) yet there is gold in it nevertheless if you are interested. Skip over the stuff not relevant to your interest.

In a nutshell, AFAIK Australia does not see India as a rival but a partner. India builds up their Navy to counter Chinese expeditionary new Navy buildup. Australia intends to build a more substantial Navy over time. The two new LHDs are part of that effort; however they are geared to Navy/Army helo ops with the 'ski jump' fitted because it was too expensive to take it off.

Anyhow, I have seen pictures of what is obviously a helicopter carrier in JMSDF service, although they call it a destroyer, is there any chance we may be seeing-35Bs wearing the Rising sun some day soon?

Japan talks about possibility of a JSF-B buy as we speak AFAIK. Japanese flat deck destroyers look like RN 'through deck cruisers' of old. Just a name for political purposes game. I like to think of new RAN LHDs as 'through deck cruisers' because that name is so familiar. Smile

Similar news story to thread starter above here:

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ ... 123a1.html

________________________________

Perhaps OLD info now about Asian Carrier buildup:

Asia bent on acquiring aircraft carriers (02nov09):

http://www.upiasia.com/Security/2009/11 ... iers/2837/

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 23, 2009 - 08:44 AM Posts: 97

npeterman18 wrote:

Anyhow, I have seen pictures of what is obviously a helicopter carrier in JMSDF service, although they call it a destroyer, is there any chance we may be seeing-35Bs wearing the Rising sun some day soon?

They're not suitable as a fixed wing combat carrier.

1 The decks aren't treated or designed for hot exhaust systems (STOL/STOVL)
2 The bunkerage isn't designed for fixed wing combat aircraft
3 The lifts are in the wrong locations for sustained fixed wing combat air (it might be ok for Majestics or Collosus Class, but its not even remotely close for modern requirements)
4 The lifts have to be rated to carry fixed wing combat air (see 3) Happy to be corrected on this, but my understanding is that even though some lineart includes FWCA they are the wrong specs and dimensions to do so)
5 The lift dimensions have to meet the specs to carry fixed wing combat air. (see 3 and 4)

having a flat deck does not make a fixed wing combat aircraft "aircraft carrier" designed for proper combat roles.

the Hyugas may be ok to run as temporary jeeps, but there is no way that they can do any sustained combat air in any meaningful fashion.

The next larger design however is a different construct and issue all togther.

Good post, Corsair.

Quote:

The Defense Ministry is making arrangements to select the F-35 as Japan's next mainstay fighter jet, sources at the ministry and the Self-Defense Forces said Sunday.

While not shocking and no doubt widely anticipated, this is definitely Breaking news. This would indicate a sure mil-to-mil strategic relationship being sustained despite latest political adjustments. 'F-35' constituting a 'Strategic Synergistic Partnership' more than anthing, especially given the levels of definitive policy making being conducted, prior to mature design 'capabilities/performances being confirmed', let alone known pricing and scheduling.

Quote:

The ministry is looking to buy 40 of the next-generation jets, which... are estimated to cost about ¥9 billion each.

In today's current USD, this publicly 'floated price' being advertised by Defence as such, is roughly $101.5M. Now here's where things get interesting... Is this price being expected for FY11 merely Basic Flyaway (at about a 22% discount to FY10 F-35A's Basic Flyaway)? I'm pretty sure JPO is not misleading Defence into thinking FY11's 'Total Flyaway' won't be $101M for a 1st release block III (which would be closer to $147M unit incl a 22% FY11 decrease)?? And even more likely not the cost being expected here, is the 'Price' to be negotiated and actually paid for (per unit) by Govt in any budget year; e.g., more along the lines of the Unit Procurement Cost (including the initial spares required for a specific weapon system's operational purchase). This actual 'final' unit 'product' cost could be 'sweet hearted' for preferred FMS and/or to an extent hidden in the broader defence budget, of course, but when making Political/strategic decisions, we should only be intelligent and supportive enough to realize and accept/weigh this over any tactical/cost-effective factors out in the open, is all.

Quote:

The ministry, however, may postpone budget requests for the F-35 until fiscal 2012, due to a view in the government that a contract should not be concluded before the jet's actual capabilities can be confirmed.

IMHO, a prudent 'tactical/cost-effective' compromise - if that's the solution evaluated in the end as the one for which most likely to be opted.

spazsinbad wrote:

Japan talks about possibility of a JSF-B buy as we speak AFAIK. Japanese flat deck destroyers look like RN 'through deck cruisers' of old. Just a name for political purposes game. I like to think of new RAN LHDs as 'through deck cruisers' because that name is so familiar. Smile

Similar news story to thread starter above here:

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ ... 123a1.html

________________________________

Perhaps OLD info now about Asian Carrier buildup:

Asia bent on acquiring aircraft carriers (02nov09):

http://www.upiasia.com/Security/2009/11 ... iers/2837/

The Invincibles decks were strengthened for Jet aircraft. The Harrier would probably damage the DDH's deck and the F-35B might just blow a hole in it.

double post

For more about comparisons amongst the JMSDF 16DDH, 18DDH, 22DDH, 24DDH, &c, and the other amphibious assault ships of other navies, try the thread "JMSDF 16DDH", at
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showth ... mp;page=11
to which I contribute.

BTW, for years, I still don't understand why Israel and Taiwan didn't procure STOVL fighters, esp the Harrier series, since their air bases are very vulnerable to hostile surface-to-surface missiles?

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Japan gearing up to acquire F-35 fighters