It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lockheed to Offer new Fighter to Japan Using Hybrid of F-22 & F-35 Tech

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: moebius

Well, if you're requirement is really an F-22 equivalent then I doubt you'll be happy with what the pricetags are when you see the numbers crunched for your run of 100 replacement airframes. Because there isn't a line open on one right now for you to piggy back on. Even worse if they want substantial workshare.

I bet they end up teaming with Boeing to SLEP their F-15's into an XJ-block while they extend their F-35 buy.

They'll end up with most of the work being done by domestic firms as well as domestic avionics, which will cost more than letting Boeing do it, but arguably is an investment into their own industries.

Then they'll keep seeding indigenous industry with advanced studies to keep them relevant until they can bring the price down on the "next-gen" project as it matures.
edit on 4-10-2018 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Sooo....with Japan now buying 100 more F-35s, whither the F-3?



posted on Nov, 27 2018 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Like I said, they'll probably slowroll any F-3 program and SLEP the newer F-15's while they expand their F-35 buy. They can't afford to go alone on a 5+ gen platform. They'll let their own firms work in tandem with the US and UK while they figure out what they want and can afford. If Europe ever gets serious about dividing up workshare and consildating programs, that's a good opportunity for them to try to wedge in.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Y'know.

I have to wonder about the assumption Japan can't afford the F-3. Japan now has an economy half the size of the US in 1988 (when adjusted for inflation). We had a far, far bigger military back then than Japan has now and we were rolling the F-22 then with the intent for...800+/-?

Why couldn't Japan afford to build their own 5th gen?



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Development costs and an extremely small production run. Look at what happened with the F-2 program costs (and GD/Vought had already done all the big wing Falcon work long before). Most of the cost was putting integrating indigenous systems, and the cost was still several times the price of a standard-run F-16. They license built/assembled mostly stock F-15J's for essentially the same price.

Now do the math on a new 5- or 6-gen from a clean sheet. It's ugly.

That's why the put off the decision and diverted the F-3 program money to F-35's and Aegis Ashore/Patriot systems a few years ago. And why they'll do it again until they are part of an international consortium for a large-run program. They already publicly balked at the price of current offers. They are already looking for international partners. They've been down this road before.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

So if we hold the F-22's development cost (~$44B) as a constant and then a per unit cost of $150M, then you're looking at $59B.

Part of the F-22 (and even more so with the F-35) was having the project drawn out for so long and with the changing requirements. If they can avoid that, it'll bring down the costs.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha


For a basically stock F-22 run of ~200 airframes, LM quoted USAF ~$10billion for startup costs. That's to get the line up and running and manned, engineering minor modifications, etc. Procurement costs were to run another forty billion. Ignoring the start up (non-recurring costs), that's still north of $200m a pop.

What makes you think they can get a clean sheet design for cheaper than that on a run of only 140? They dropped the ATD-X/X-2 like a hot potato because they realized that while it could be developed into a production machine it was going to be throwing good money after bad. It wasn't going to bring what they need for the cost. They aren't going to jump to an even bigger platform without a partner anytime soon. They'll continue to spend seed money to keep their aerospace industry healthy and relevant until the required technologies/industry mature substantially or until they can grab substantial workshare in an international program. There's othing wrong with that. It's smart.

Everyone needs big programs to survive these days. Not just Japan. The US can't afford a run of 140 aircraft either. They need large-scale production to take advantage of spreading development costs. The rest is haggling and politics. Buying into 20% of a 900 plane run is cheaper than solely running the whole program for 200 units.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha

...Given the export restrictions on the F-22, this ought to be an interesting threading of the needle for Lockheed...


I'd just come here to add something about the ITAR restrictions, but seem it's already been covered. It'll still be interesting to just how close to the regs they're going to fly.
edit on 28-11-2018 by AussieNutter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AussieNutter
Workarounds and a list of approved for export countries for the Raptor ie: LOEXCOM committee recommendations were carried out during the Clinton administration, however the process was never finalized. Hypothetically reviving that would not be beyond difficult particularly if China and to a lesser extent Russia begin to pose a markedly greater strategic threat. However its irrelevant for the F-22 now anyway. Such a framework can however be applied and individual countries assessed under it for various stealth technologies and or platforms. Japan would certainly fit in the B list of countries and if enough safeguards were assured and put in place probably pool A with little difficulty.



posted on Nov, 28 2018 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

Let's be very, very clear.

The US is not restarting the F-22 line.

They have already started the F-22 replacement. It's called NGAD.

They got the first 1/2 billion (roughly) for the NGAD this year.

FY20 will be almost $2B.

That amount will grow to $3.2B and then decline to 2023 or there abouts.

This profile fits the LRSB/B-21 profile very well. Likewise, fairly similar to the ATF program. And, lo, the USAF RCO is running the show. The USAF has stated they are going to build demonstrators with some of that money.

All of this is in the budget dox people don't like to crawl through.

IMNSHO, the likely contract award is (if the LRSB trajectory is followed) to be around 2021 or 2022. The IOC is likely to be 2028 to 2030. *IF AND ONLY IF* (ahem) the LRSB trajectory is followed. Based on projected funding, it is.

If they funding goes up faster, the USAF is moving the NGAD forward. If it does not go up as fast as projected, it will be delayed.

The NGAD will NOT be a F-22 or F-23 airframe. Additionally, the NGAD will also be rather different than the FCAS and Tempest. I had already thought that, but based on the 6th gen doc someone posted here from the think tank in the UK, that pretty much solidifies it. Stealth, very long range, deep magazine and DEW will be the watch words. It almost assuredly won't be a fastmover, so put that aside, folks.


Think more B-58 sized and stealthy.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

NGAD is a Navy program no? I thought it was another name for the FA-XX program?



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 05:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: BigDave-AR
a reply to: anzha

NGAD is a Navy program no? I thought it was another name for the FA-XX program?


Same name, different programs.

As i see it, the Air Force uses the term as cover for a couple of programs:
PCA, PEA, F-XX

PCA/Penetrating Counter Air - what anzha wrote above. Long Range VLO B-21 Escort / Air Dominance. Not necessarily a F-22 replacement. Maybe for the F-15 but entirely different concept. Probably considerably bigger with deeper magazines. Think subsonic/low supersonic F-23 on Steroids, what 5th gen should have been. May get delayed and combined, sold as 6th Gen

PEA/Penetrating Electronic Attack - the little brother the Air Force doesnt really want to talk about. Grey Program at this point. More a capability rqeuirement than a platform. Think Escort Electronic Attack platform for B-21, an VLO Long Range EA-18G with NGJ+. Air Force wants it yesterday. Actually driving the NGAD/PCA effort at this point IMO. But also possible they Switch the capability over to an UAV (MQ-L *cough*).

F-XX - also Next Generation Fighter in the past. Air Force studies truly 6th Gen. NGAD is used to fund this too. Out of the three the only one comparable to the Navys NGAD F/A-XX program. Which too is little more than fancy design concepts at this point. Its possible the Air Force will *delay* PCA and combine it with this to form some sort of 6th Gen aircraft to replace Legacy Fighters.
Too early to tell if they try another joint effort with the Navy. They probably wouldnt want to but the truth is, there is barely any money for even one of those programs with F-35 and B-21 in production.

edit on 29-11-2018 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Gotta love the murky acroynm soup, thanks for straightening me out, I’d love to see the a descendant of the F-23 being put into service (if one isn’t already running around under a black program) the widow was one hell of a bird.

A question about the idea of a LO electronic warfare platform aren’t they kind of conflicting, doesn’t your radar signature become a fairly mute point when emitting all kinds of electronic wizardry? You might be hard to detect via radar alone but stand out like a sore thumb whilst performing it’s jamming duties? I seem to remember the concept of a home on jam missile. Seems like any future EW/SEAD craft should be unmanned,



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: BigDave-ARbecome a fairly mute point when emitting all kinds of electronic wizardry? You might be hard to detect via radar alone but stand out like a sore thumb whilst performing it’s jamming duties? I seem to remember the concept of a home on jam missile. Seems like any future EW/SEAD craft should be unmanned,

These days think AESA array in LPI mode sending false signals to the source to mislead them.

Stand In Electronic Attack has been done before. The platform used didnt get a wiki page though. PEA is sort of the next gen replacement.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

IMO, we're likely to see a single airframe for the PCA, PEA & F-X. It'll be outfitted differently is all. In an era of DEW, maneuverability is really, really pointless.

Also, the Navy has only requested $5M for their next gen fighter, what they call the FA-XX. Whatever the Navy may be talking about for their fighter is almost purely fictional at this point. The Navy's AOA won't be done for a while. The USAF's AOA is, iirc, done.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
If you amateur sleuths spend a good day chasing down keywords on the internet, you'd be pretty surprised what you can find with regards to some of the above. Usually unintentional vague references within contractor or three letter agency presentations that can lead you down rabbit holes to projects you didn't even know existed.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: mightmight

IMO, we're likely to see a single airframe for the PCA, PEA & F-X.


Not so sure. The Air Force said they want PEA asap, possibly even before PCA. If they would decide to delay PCA to build a token *6th Gen* version (= they cant come up with the funds sooner), the PEA capability would almost certainly be moved to a LRSB family platform. They should do that anyway.

*True* 6th aircraft are at least a decade away from going anywhere. There is simply no money to procure a VVLO supersonic laser armed platform (or whatever) until they build up their F-35 and B-21 fleets. No matter what they end up doing with PCA, i dont see a revolutionary approach. Just a continuation of what made 5th Gen great. 5.5th Gen so to speak.

There is no way we see the F-15C/Ds replaced by a true 6th Gen Aircraft. They are gone as soon as PCA gets funded. If they are lucky, they'll get an improved *5.5th Gen* F-35D on top, which in turn would replace the F-15E fleet and very likely to replace the F-22s too.
If that doesnt happen the F-22s might get replaced by a true 6th Gen craft in the 2040s.

Chances of none of this happening and just F-35As and LRSB family blackness in perpetuity? ~ 40% id say.

The Navy will find a way to screw themselves out of a long range VVLO asset and end up having to replace the Super Hornets with updated Lightnings. YF-24 reloaded.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: thebozeian

Let's be very, very clear.

The US is not restarting the F-22 line.

They have already started the F-22 replacement. It's called NGAD. They got the first 1/2 billion (roughly) for the NGAD this year.

FY20 will be almost $2B.

That amount will grow to $3.2B and then decline to 2023 or there abouts.

This profile fits the LRSB/B-21 profile very well. Likewise, fairly similar to the ATF program. And, lo, the USAF RCO is running the show. The USAF has stated they are going to build demonstrators with some of that money.

All of this is in the budget dox people don't like to crawl through.

IMNSHO, the likely contract award is (if the LRSB trajectory is followed) to be around 2021 or 2022. The IOC is likely to be 2028 to 2030. *IF AND ONLY IF* (ahem) the LRSB trajectory is followed. Based on projected funding, it is.

If they funding goes up faster, the USAF is moving the NGAD forward. If it does not go up as fast as projected, it will be delayed.

The NGAD will NOT be a F-22 or F-23 airframe. Additionally, the NGAD will also be rather different than the FCAS and Tempest. I had already thought that, but based on the 6th gen doc someone posted here from the think tank in the UK, that pretty much solidifies it. Stealth, very long range, deep magazine and DEW will be the watch words. It almost assuredly won't be a fastmover, so put that aside, folks.


Think more B-58 sized and stealthy.


Yes, I saw this,

www.thedrive.com...
Now if I squint real hard and look at it with my right eye, I see this,



or this,




Both NGAD.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Violater1

You can also see something that doesn't fly, like a truck servicing something in the hangar, or some kind of ground based system. It's too vague to even guess at.



posted on Nov, 29 2018 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

And as a general rule, you buy (and operate) aircraft by the pound, so the odds of a B-58 sized aircraft being purchased and operated in large enough numbers to replace F-15's etc as a tactical fighter are near zilch.

A shared airframe forward capable of persistent ISR, interdiction -strike, and the PEA requirement has merit. We're probably going to see some of that scheme sized up in the Raider program.

A somewhat smaller F-111-sized platform aimed at those missions would probably be welcome by TAC air. But there's merit to the idea of canceling such a program for the smaller platform and using all that development and procurement money for even more Raiders where you already have sunk costs in a platform that can already perform those roles where/when needed.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join