F-22's biggest problem.....

a reply to: mbkennel

I am sure Zaph will correct me here if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the "export-ability" of the F-22 vs. the F-35 comes down to DFARS/ITARS. When the F-22 was under production, numerous items on the platform were NOFORN. This classification dictates that no foreign contact can be made with this item. That mean that a certain widget (from engineering design phase, through materials acquisition, to production, and finally install and operation) is restricted to U.S. nationals only.
With the F-35 there are very few (to no) items under this designation. It is not so much that the controls were released, as much as the design and execution was planned to involve foreign actors in the mix.

And think of this. What would be easier for a foreign state to duplicate. Current tech or stuff that is almost 30 years old. IN a strange way, the older tech is actually more in danger of copy by near-peer state competitors.

originally posted by: Imperium Americana
a reply to: mbkennel

I am sure Zaph will correct me here if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the "export-ability" of the F-22 vs. the F-35 comes down to DFARS/ITARS. When the F-22 was under production, numerous items on the platform were NOFORN. This classification dictates that no foreign contact can be made with this item. That mean that a certain widget (from engineering design phase, through materials acquisition, to production, and finally install and operation) is restricted to U.S. nationals only.
With the F-35 there are very few (to no) items under this designation. It is not so much that the controls were released, as much as the design and execution was planned to involve foreign actors in the mix.

And think of this. What would be easier for a foreign state to duplicate. Current tech or stuff that is almost 30 years old. IN a strange way, the older tech is actually more in danger of copy by near-peer state competitors.

Ok, if that's the case and those designations were already in place then why did Congress...AT THAT TIME... have to make a separate law to ban it's export?

a reply to: nwtrucker

Because even with NOFORN we have crews from the RAF flying our aircraft, including the B-2.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: nwtrucker

Because even with NOFORN we have crews from the RAF flying our aircraft, including the B-2.

Sorry, but I don't see the connection whatsoever.

What I do see is there was no specific 'law' banning export of the B-1, B-2, F-117. Regulations/rules/ other legislation likely covered the issue.

Yet one was drafted and approved via Congress for the F-22. If there were designations regarding export of specific technology, and it would be stupid if there wasn't, it would already be covered! Violation by a major would result in loss of work from the gov't and would be ruinous.

I know I don't know much and I must be stupider than even I believe, but none of this logically explains why the F-22 and the F-22 only...

a reply to: nwtrucker

All three of those are either far too expensive, too difficult to maintain, or redundant for any of our allies so there was no reason to have a law. There was no reason to have a law before the F-22.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The f-35's stealth tech It's also much more manageable for less advanced air forces I believe.

a reply to: bra1nwash

Yeah, it's very easy to maintain from what I hear.

a reply to: mbkennel

A lot of people when they discuss this also forget the context of the times as well. We like to talk about how industry and the military shape politics, but politics also does its own shaping as well.

1. In the early 90s, the only customer who had the money and was expressing interest in the Raptor was Japan. Remember that the Japanese were still considered a bit of a boogie man then. They had been hurt by the real estate bubble, but in 1995, no one predicted two decades of stagnation for the Japanese economy and very few were predicting the roaring last half of the 90s for the US. Concern was the Japanese might take our tech from the 22 and make it better to out strip us. How many remember the now amusing Ralph Peters book 'War in 2020?' So, Congress made sure there was no way for Japan to eat us, whether it was necessary or not.

2. During the 90s, we also had the whole mantra of 'the end of history.' If we just stopped exporting weapons, if we just started talking, the world would be a better place because all the large actors were reasonable people who could sit down to compromise. So, limit the high end export of weapons, and it will help stop the wars. We see the folly now of that, well, all but the most ardent anti military folks do. Some of us knew that was silly back then, but...it was a thing. Anti proliferation wasn't just for nukes...

Interpreting the past is a dangerous thing. We almost always make judgments based on current thoughts and values...and we almost always miss a lot of context. And context matters. A lot.

a reply to: anzha


OK...Then assuming these last few posts reflect the context of the era and the explanations are accurate, then IF Congress decides to go with a Raptor run and the stealth coats have been already upgraded with the F-35s version, or will be(?), Japan is in our good books again....Might not the ban be lifted....possibly...in that circumstance.


Different time, different Congress-and President.

a reply to: nwtrucker

But Japan won't be interested any more. They do not want to risk the problems with the US congress changing its mind. They will want to go with their F-3.

Besides, Congress is not likely to revisit that decision. There are plenty of other political bits to fight over.

Besides, the F-22 line is dead and will remain so. Truthfully, this is starting to sound like Avro Arrow talk. oy.

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: nwtrucker

But Japan won't be interested any more. They do not want to risk the problems with the US congress changing its mind. They will want to go with their F-3.

Besides, Congress is not likely to revisit that decision. There are plenty of other political bits to fight over.

Besides, the F-22 line is dead and will remain so. Truthfully, this is starting to sound like Avro Arrow talk. oy.

Ouch. Well, Canadian beer IS better than Aussie beer.......

USAF need to tell manufactures to build the best they can imagine at a set cost and let them compete. Bet we get a bad azz fighter for a great price. No rules just bring your best.

originally posted by: Xeven
USAF need to tell manufactures to build the best they can imagine at a set cost and let them compete. Bet we get a bad azz fighter for a great price. No rules just bring your best.

That in not how procurement works. Ok you tell them to bring their best. What is the cost you want to fix? 100mil? 50mil? You want a fighter, a bomber, a fighter-bomber? You want speed, stealth, speed and stealth? Pilot or no pilot? Is this for the Air Force or Navy?

You will need to answer some questions that the bidder will ask; and you will need to ensure that all parties to the bid process receive the same answers and copies of questions asked (verbatim) from all parties.

Oh can't forget your internal stakeholders (i.e. the guys and gals who will actually fly the aircraft) are going to want a say in the selection and search criteria. After all you are a procurement specialist not a fighter pilot or an engineer.

Congratulations! You just created a Request For Proposal (RFP). Well since you now have an RFP. Your are going to need to stick to a formal bid and selection process. And since contracts are ripe for corruption there are Federal standards you need to stick to. An example of that is a certain computer company offered me 10% of the contract value in gift cards as a "thank you". The contract was for $1.25 million.

You see where I am going with this? I work with contracts that are only in the multi-million dollar range and it is crazy complicated. There is a reason why the DOD procurement people are considered to be some of the best in the World.

originally posted by: Imperium Americana

originally posted by: Xeven
USAF need to tell manufactures to build the best they can imagine at a set cost and let them compete. Bet we get a bad azz fighter for a great price. No rules just bring your best.

That in not how procurement works. Ok you tell them to bring their best. What is the cost you want to fix? 100mil? 50mil? You want a fighter, a bomber, a fighter-bomber? You want speed, stealth, speed and stealth? Pilot or no pilot? Is this for the Air Force or Navy?

You will need to answer some questions that the bidder will ask; and you will need to ensure that all parties to the bid process receive the same answers and copies of questions asked (verbatim) from all parties.

Oh can't forget your internal stakeholders (i.e. the guys and gals who will actually fly the aircraft) are going to want a say in the selection and search criteria. After all you are a procurement specialist not a fighter pilot or an engineer.

Congratulations! You just created a Request For Proposal (RFP). Well since you now have an RFP. Your are going to need to stick to a formal bid and selection process. And since contracts are ripe for corruption there are Federal standards you need to stick to. An example of that is a certain computer company offered me 10% of the contract value in gift cards as a "thank you". The contract was for $1.25 million.

You see where I am going with this? I work with contracts that are only in the multi-million dollar range and it is crazy complicated. There is a reason why the DOD procurement people are considered to be some of the best in the World.

Back before "Globalism" in defense industry corporations, they used to have National pride and interest in making sure the USA had the best, was superior and could defend itself. Now these defense industry Companies are ALL about the profit. They used to drive ingenuity and now they sit back and rely on some dated Government brass to figure out what our Military needs.

Put it in their hands and let them compete and figure out what we need and that will force the corporations to compete at ingenuity again.

Tell them we need them we need the best most lethal versatile fighter possible at this $$$ and tell them to bring their best to the table. We will get more doing that. Right now when you have old government men define what we need and have them bid on it, we lose ingenuity in that process. Not saying old men don't have something to give but common man these old generals don't have insight on all the emerging technology. Even younger government people get in a box through their training that limits ingenuity.

We need companies that care about National pride again, who care about the American people again.

Nah.

1. Giving Japan the F-22 could have (had) a destabilising effect on the region, possibly triggering an arms race.

2. Another concern has been that Japan would leak F-22 info to China.

originally posted by: moebius
Nah.

1. Giving Japan the F-22 could have (had) a destabilising effect on the region, possibly triggering an arms race.

2. Another concern has been that Japan would leak F-22 info to China.

Huh? Both points seem....a stretch...

The Chinese are already developing their stealth platform amongst a host of other areas. they're already racing to catch up. The F-22 wouldn't change that one iota.

The second? Really? Why do you think they're developing their own 5th gen. fighter??? To it give to the Chinese??

a reply to: Xeven
Yeah, we just need to pull in LockMart and Boeing and tell them to make us a plane for X dollars and everything will be just peachy.

You cannot gripe on one hand about profit motive and then essentially advocate outsourcing strategic weapons programs.
If you are going to predicate your responses on the basis that:

A) Contractors care nothing about our national interests or the American people.
B) Have no concept of emergent technological innovation/s.
C) That the military is a system that stifles innovation/s.
D) That the decision making process of systems procurement is run by: “…dated Government brass…” without “...insight on all the emerging technology.”

Then I am afraid that we will be unable to have any shred of a decent discussion.
It speaks to a lack of understanding as to the ACTUAL technological basis with in the military and the defense contractor sphere, the ACTUAL process for systems procurement, the ACTUAL capabilities of military personnel, the ACTUAL goals of both military procurement personnel and the contractors, and the ACTUAL capabilities of current systems.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

The second? Really? Why do you think they're developing their own 5th gen. fighter??? To it give to the Chinese??

Perhaps not intentionally, but from Chinese espionage. That is certainly why Taiwan will never get something like that.

a reply to: mbkennel


From what I've read, it's easier getting/stealing our technology from us....

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: nwtrucker

The second? Really? Why do you think they're developing their own 5th gen. fighter??? To it give to the Chinese??

Perhaps not intentionally, but from Chinese espionage. That is certainly why Taiwan will never get something like that.

I don't think Taiwan is interested in buying F-22s. First off, Taiwan's military budget is only about $10 billion US a year, with nearly half of that going to personnel. Taiwan can't afford a fighter that goes for more than $100 million a pop.

Second, the new DPP government in Taiwan is committed to supporting indigenous defense projects and reducing the amount of foreign military hardware Taiwan buys.