Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

And to open production, even for an export-optimized version, meant the F-22A was cheaper for the USA. Can't have that, can we?

F-16.net Sponsor

aaam wrote:

icemaverick wrote:

I learned a long time ago to stop paying attention to people's words and to pay more attention to their actions.

-Countries are lining up to buy the F-35 even though it's not officially on the market yet. On the other hand, the Rafale has been on the market for over a decade and only now could the French pick up an export customer. And make no mistake about it, a big part of why the Indians chose the Rafale is because they were able to get a good price and a good ToT deal on it. They knew how desperate the French were.

-Even though the Indians chose to buy the Rafale, look at their next generation air superiority fighter. It's going to be the PAK-FA/FGFA. Does this aircraft more closely resemble the F-22 or the Rafale? India does not consider the Rafale to be a 5th gen aircraft and that's why they are developing one with the help of the Russians.

-The Chinese are also developing a next generation fighter aircraft. To me, it looks more like a Raptor than it does a Rafale. The Chinese are obviously more impressed by the Raptor than the Rafale.

-The United States developed the Raptor at very considerable expense. They could easily offset a lot of the costs by exporting it to a few friendly nations (Israel, Japan, Australia, South Korea etc.) But instead, they chose to keep it to themselves. That tells me that they really do have a pretty impressive fighter on their hands and it is worth the massive expense. Compare that to the French, who desperately tried to sell the Rafale to anyone who was trying to buy.

The Rafale is a good 4++ gen multirole aircraft. I think it's basically a highly modernized F-16. It can do a lot of things better than the F-16, but there's nothing it can do that the F-16 can't. It will serve France and its exports well. But it's not going to be a world beating air superiority aircraft. Rafale fan boys can boast all they want, but at the end of the day, the actions of the world's leading air forces tell you what they think about the Rafale. They have access to more information than anyone on these forums. If the Rafale were really as good as the F-22, then everyone and their mother would be trying to buy it.

One quick note. It's not so much we chose to keep it to ourselves, it's that some Congressmen got an actual law passed making it illegal to sell the F-22 to anyone. Australia wanted it , Israel wanted it and Japan wanted it to the extent they claimed they were willing to cover any costs caused by a break in production. However, since it's against the law for the US to sell the Raptor abroad, all that came to naught.

I know that we like to bash our politicians and all...I complain about how moronic the folks in Washington are as much as the next guy. But in this instance, I think there is a reason we chose not to sell the Raptor to even our closes allies. I think we really do have some revolutionary technology here. We would rather spend a huge sum on each aircraft rather than subsidize the costs by selling it to the friendliest of countries.

icemaverick wrote:

aaam wrote:

icemaverick wrote:

I learned a long time ago to stop paying attention to people's words and to pay more attention to their actions.

-Countries are lining up to buy the F-35 even though it's not officially on the market yet. On the other hand, the Rafale has been on the market for over a decade and only now could the French pick up an export customer. And make no mistake about it, a big part of why the Indians chose the Rafale is because they were able to get a good price and a good ToT deal on it. They knew how desperate the French were.

-Even though the Indians chose to buy the Rafale, look at their next generation air superiority fighter. It's going to be the PAK-FA/FGFA. Does this aircraft more closely resemble the F-22 or the Rafale? India does not consider the Rafale to be a 5th gen aircraft and that's why they are developing one with the help of the Russians.

-The Chinese are also developing a next generation fighter aircraft. To me, it looks more like a Raptor than it does a Rafale. The Chinese are obviously more impressed by the Raptor than the Rafale.

-The United States developed the Raptor at very considerable expense. They could easily offset a lot of the costs by exporting it to a few friendly nations (Israel, Japan, Australia, South Korea etc.) But instead, they chose to keep it to themselves. That tells me that they really do have a pretty impressive fighter on their hands and it is worth the massive expense. Compare that to the French, who desperately tried to sell the Rafale to anyone who was trying to buy.

The Rafale is a good 4++ gen multirole aircraft. I think it's basically a highly modernized F-16. It can do a lot of things better than the F-16, but there's nothing it can do that the F-16 can't. It will serve France and its exports well. But it's not going to be a world beating air superiority aircraft. Rafale fan boys can boast all they want, but at the end of the day, the actions of the world's leading air forces tell you what they think about the Rafale. They have access to more information than anyone on these forums. If the Rafale were really as good as the F-22, then everyone and their mother would be trying to buy it.

One quick note. It's not so much we chose to keep it to ourselves, it's that some Congressmen got an actual law passed making it illegal to sell the F-22 to anyone. Australia wanted it , Israel wanted it and Japan wanted it to the extent they claimed they were willing to cover any costs caused by a break in production. However, since it's against the law for the US to sell the Raptor abroad, all that came to naught.

I know that we like to bash our politicians and all...I complain about how moronic the folks in Washington are as much as the next guy. But in this instance, I think there is a reason we chose not to sell the Raptor to even our closes allies. I think we really do have some revolutionary technology here. We would rather spend a huge sum on each aircraft rather than subsidize the costs by selling it to the friendliest of countries.

I fear you give the folks in Disneyland East too much credit. It's not a matter of "we" chose not to sell the Raptor. There are any number of cases where we choose not to sell something. For many years, the F-14 was simply not cleared for export (the Shah was a special case). You couldn't get it if you wanted it. Certain systems and subsystems we have are not cleared for export. State won't authorize it, or DoD has a policy not to allow it to be offered, etc. Frankly allowing Australia, who has always stood by us, or Israel, who really needs us and with whom we are involved in a number of joint efforts, to have a version of the Raptor would not compromise our security or technology to a dangerous extent (not too sure whether Japan could keep it secure). This wasn't the case here. Some pontificating Congressmen got an actual law passed forbidding its analysis period, regardless of what State or DoD might think is the right thing to do (same trick was pulled to keep those C-5As that were no longer economical to maintain from being retired).

aaam wrote:

One quick note. It's not so much we chose to keep it to ourselves, it's that some Congressmen got an actual law passed making it illegal to sell the F-22 to anyone. Australia wanted it , Israel wanted it and Japan wanted it to the extent they claimed they were willing to cover any costs caused by a break in production. However, since it's against the law for the US to sell the Raptor abroad, all that came to naught.

Uhhh...yeah...No. There was no law passed specifically prohibiting the F-22 from being sold through FMS.

The Obey Amendment specifies that the USAF funding approved to fund the acquisition of the aircraft may not in any way be misappropriated or re-appropriated to fund exportation. In other words, any funds needed to make, market and produce an export variant would most likely have to come from the manufacturer. The aircraft specifically falls under the Arms Export Control Act meaning, like any other arm, it would have to receive approval to be sold under a FMS. If it was Obey's intention to target the aircraft itself, he failed as a law maker.

Sorry, Australia never "wanted" it, that was an APA wet dream.

aaam wrote:

icemaverick wrote:

aaam wrote:

icemaverick wrote:

I learned a long time ago to stop paying attention to people's words and to pay more attention to their actions.

-Countries are lining up to buy the F-35 even though it's not officially on the market yet. On the other hand, the Rafale has been on the market for over a decade and only now could the French pick up an export customer. And make no mistake about it, a big part of why the Indians chose the Rafale is because they were able to get a good price and a good ToT deal on it. They knew how desperate the French were.

-Even though the Indians chose to buy the Rafale, look at their next generation air superiority fighter. It's going to be the PAK-FA/FGFA. Does this aircraft more closely resemble the F-22 or the Rafale? India does not consider the Rafale to be a 5th gen aircraft and that's why they are developing one with the help of the Russians.

-The Chinese are also developing a next generation fighter aircraft. To me, it looks more like a Raptor than it does a Rafale. The Chinese are obviously more impressed by the Raptor than the Rafale.

-The United States developed the Raptor at very considerable expense. They could easily offset a lot of the costs by exporting it to a few friendly nations (Israel, Japan, Australia, South Korea etc.) But instead, they chose to keep it to themselves. That tells me that they really do have a pretty impressive fighter on their hands and it is worth the massive expense. Compare that to the French, who desperately tried to sell the Rafale to anyone who was trying to buy.

The Rafale is a good 4++ gen multirole aircraft. I think it's basically a highly modernized F-16. It can do a lot of things better than the F-16, but there's nothing it can do that the F-16 can't. It will serve France and its exports well. But it's not going to be a world beating air superiority aircraft. Rafale fan boys can boast all they want, but at the end of the day, the actions of the world's leading air forces tell you what they think about the Rafale. They have access to more information than anyone on these forums. If the Rafale were really as good as the F-22, then everyone and their mother would be trying to buy it.

One quick note. It's not so much we chose to keep it to ourselves, it's that some Congressmen got an actual law passed making it illegal to sell the F-22 to anyone. Australia wanted it , Israel wanted it and Japan wanted it to the extent they claimed they were willing to cover any costs caused by a break in production. However, since it's against the law for the US to sell the Raptor abroad, all that came to naught.

I know that we like to bash our politicians and all...I complain about how moronic the folks in Washington are as much as the next guy. But in this instance, I think there is a reason we chose not to sell the Raptor to even our closes allies. I think we really do have some revolutionary technology here. We would rather spend a huge sum on each aircraft rather than subsidize the costs by selling it to the friendliest of countries.

I fear you give the folks in Disneyland East too much credit. It's not a matter of "we" chose not to sell the Raptor. There are any number of cases where we choose not to sell something. For many years, the F-14 was simply not cleared for export (the Shah was a special case). You couldn't get it if you wanted it. Certain systems and subsystems we have are not cleared for export. State won't authorize it, or DoD has a policy not to allow it to be offered, etc. Frankly allowing Australia, who has always stood by us, or Israel, who really needs us and with whom we are involved in a number of joint efforts, to have a version of the Raptor would not compromise our security or technology to a dangerous extent (not too sure whether Japan could keep it secure). This wasn't the case here. Some pontificating Congressmen got an actual law passed forbidding its analysis period, regardless of what State or DoD might think is the right thing to do (same trick was pulled to keep those C-5As that were no longer economical to maintain from being retired).

The thing is, even in Washington logic, it doesn't make sense to not sell the Raptor unless it really is all that. Surely, LM would want to export the aircraft and they would lobby to do so. I can't really think of any other motivation for us to not export the aircraft other than we really think we have something special.

Sure we could export it to foreign countries, but given how aggressive the Chinese are with their espionage, there's no guarantee our allies could avoid compromising vital data. We're having a hard enough time as it is keeping data on the -35 and -22 secret. I can only imagine that it would be much easier for the Russians and Chinese to steal the info from Israel or Australia.

I think stealth tech really is a major trump card. We've invested A LOT of money into this tech and we've been fielding operational stealth aircraft for 30+ years now. This is one area where we really seem to have a big leg up on the competition and I think we want to ride out that advantage as long as we possibly can.

I think we're well poised to exploit this advantage. For much of the Cold War, Russian tech was roughly on par with our own. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union, their defense R&D collapsed. The Chinese on the other hand still have a maturing defense industry. They still can't even manufacture many vital aircraft components.

By exporting the Raptor, we run the risk of our rivals significantly narrowing the gap that currently exists. Given how China is rapidly expanding both economically and militarily, we certainly don't need to give them any help.

Also keep in mind that the F-35 was designed to be (and a lot of money spent to ensure) exportable. This means that it is very difficult (or dare I say impossible) to reverse engineer it's most important part; its source code.

This is not the case with the F-22. As such, a lot of time & money would have to spent to re-develop the F-22's avionics to be export friendly.

Well ada does have some advantages, obfuscation notwithstanding.

As for F-35, it isn't impossible, just very expensive. If France, Germany, Israel, Japan, PRC, UK or Taipei get access to a F-35 platform undergoing lengthy "maintenance," they can through core logging essentially reconstruct a complete set in source format. At least the base for the platform delivered and studied. I can see the Israelis in collaboration with and funding by the Turks actualy attempting such a project. 0.02

velocityvector wrote:

Well ada does have some advantages, obfuscation notwithstanding.

As for F-35, it isn't impossible, just very expensive. If France, Germany, Israel, Japan, PRC, UK or Taipei get access to a F-35 platform undergoing lengthy "maintenance," they can through core logging essentially reconstruct a complete set in source format. At least the base for the platform delivered and studied. I can see the Israelis in collaboration with and funding by the Turks actualy attempting such a project. 0.02

I believe they already have something similar. Personally, I suspect that it will end up utilizing a lot of F-35 tech. The concept renders I've seen (though am unsure about their source) look like a single-engine, F-16-sized Raptor.
wikipedia.org/wiki/TFX_(Turkey)

checksixx wrote:

Uhhh...yeah...No. There was no law passed specifically prohibiting the F-22 from being sold through FMS.

The Obey Amendment specifies that the USAF funding approved to fund the acquisition of the aircraft may not in any way be misappropriated or re-appropriated to fund exportation. In other words, any funds needed to make, market and produce an export variant would most likely have to come from the manufacturer. The aircraft specifically falls under the Arms Export Control Act meaning, like any other arm, it would have to receive approval to be sold under a FMS. If it was Obey's intention to target the aircraft itself, he failed as a law maker.

According to the Congressional Research Service (RS22684), "...the export of the plane is now prohibited by U.S. law...", and, "...Congress has prohibited the use of appropriated funds to approve or license the sale of the F-22 to any foreign government". What this says to me is not just that funds can't be used to develop and produce an export version, but that funds can't be used even to just approve or license an export version even if it existed. That's pretty much a ban on exporting or selling the F-22.

Also, don't forget at one point Japan was even at least talking about funding an export variant itself. That still wouldn't allow the variant to be sold to them under the law.

aaam wrote:

According to the Congressional Research Service (RS22684), "...the export of the plane is now prohibited by U.S. law...", and, "...Congress has prohibited the use of appropriated funds to approve or license the sale of the F-22 to any foreign government". What this says to me is not just that funds can't be used to develop and produce an export version, but that funds can't be used even to just approve or license an export version even if it existed. That's pretty much a ban on exporting or selling the F-22.

Also, don't forget at one point Japan was even at least talking about funding an export variant itself. That still wouldn't allow the variant to be sold to them under the law.

It is just as I stated. It doesn't really matter what it say to you specifically, but rather what it says period. It specifies the funding allocated to USAF procurement of the aircraft. In other words the USAF funding for it cannot be used for any other purpose than purchasing the jets and upgrades/support/etc. Its that simple. They never had to prohibit the export of the jet...munitions export laws already do that without having approval to export the jet (or whatever munition you want to export). I would suggest you read the actual legislation.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 vs rafale