Quoted: Quoted: What I see is a F-22 Raptor with 3 F-45's on it's wing, and the pilot "managing" his UCAV's while fighting himself. Probably a very accurate prediction, but I see AWACS backenders doing the UCAV managing, the -22 would have to be 2 seat to really work well in that role.  Now an F-15E (or K) model with 4 stealthy UCAVs on its wing, would be a hell of a surprise to the guy that though he was a one ship.

That would be badass. Pure badass.

Quoted: Quoted: The decision to go with the F-35 has not been met with a great deal of approval within the RAAF. I bet.  By the time the F-35 buy shrinks by 40% it will be a near $100M airplane, and the F-22 would make much better sense.  Oh well, lose a $30 part on a $60K part on a $5M engine, and the $80M airplane becomes a very fawking expensive smoking hole.  I guess the idiots didn't learn from the 300 crashed F-16s.  afsafety.af.mil/stats/f_stats.asp Look at all the numbers for single v twin engine, its just stupid to spend 30% less on a total piece of shit with one engine.  We need about 1000+ F-22a and NO F-35s, they should all be unmanned F/A-45Cs anyway.

Completely agree, that's what I have been arguing for a while, sad part is that would have even been the more cost effective option if we hadn't run the F-35 development program at all.

Actually it still might be cheaper, wish someone in the GAO would look at it, in the 21st century standardizing with one 'high' air plane might actually end up being the better bet the the budget concious 'high-low' mix of the F-15, F-16.

We also need to re-fund the X-45C/YF-45 program now in a big way.

And then we need to revamp the space aquisition process, and not to mention that the bomber fleet is rapidly becoming a formation of flying museum peices and the Navy is shrinking at an unexceptable rate and needs to revamp it's ship aquisition and R and D programs...How is it that we ended up at the tail end of the procurement cycle for all these programs all at once? Oh yeah, Clinton and Bush I.....

I think that we might actually have the money to do all this if we streamlined the aquisition process in general, ie, get ride of Cost-Plus and start opperating on a fixed cost true comercial basis.

And while we are at it lets dump the space treaty to, seriously do we really think that at this point banning property rights and weapons in space is a good thing for the United States?

700 to 180, geez what a slap in the face.  How in the hell are we the greatest power on earth supposed to maintain air surperiorty anywhere in the world with only 180?  The F16/F15 family is not going to be around forever and when they start being phased out and we go from Thousands of fighters to under 200 what are the ramifications of National Security?  Sorry to rant but seems like this kind of cut is proof in th pudding that the power of the USA is declining.  700 Raptors would be something for the Chinease or N.Koreans to really worry about but just 180?  And of that 180 probably only about a third maybe would actually be in theater of any asian conflict so say about 60 maybe ready to fight against China/N.Korea major conflict.  I really have a hard time believing that would have any kind of deciesive impact in a major conflict.  Sorry to hijack thread/rant off.

Quoted: Now, if a 'cheaper' version hit's the shelves I'm betting Austraila will be back in the frame as they really wanted the F-22 but just could not find the money. Japan and Israel would be the other natural purchasers....

who ya kidding Andy... we'll probably end up GIVING Raptors to Israel via Foreign Millitary Sales/Aid money just to keep our costs down...  

If I din't think the Isralis would find it advantageous to sell the tech to China it wouldn't worry me....

Quoted: Quoted: Now, if a 'cheaper' version hit's the shelves I'm betting Austraila will be back in the frame as they really wanted the F-22 but just could not find the money. Japan and Israel would be the other natural purchasers.... who ya kidding Andy... we'll probably end up GIVING Raptors to Israel via Foreign Millitary Sales/Aid money just to keep our costs down...   If I din't think the Isralis would find it advantageous to sell the tech to China it wouldn't worry me....

Israel's definitely getting F22's, I think saudis are going with european fighters instead though, nor do I think the poltical climate would allow F22 sales to Saudi - look at this port mess!  Japan is also definitely getting them, though I think Taiwan is not going to be offered them - might be too offensive with stealthy caapbilities, plus at the rate they're going, they'd probably rather buy chinese jets.

Oh yeah, damn those israelis for selling technology they invented, patented or perfected to other countries that may or may not be our largest trading partner, holder of american currency, american bonds and debt.  Damn them to hell.

Maybe we need to have a few bake sales so we can buy a few more Raptors....

I have really mixed feelings on this...

On the one hand we need more raptors, at least twice as many as are currently on the order books. The logical thing would be to axe the F-35 completley, or make it a navy only program and pour that money into the F-22 and X-45c. Also we should look into building a second block of F-22s with F-135/6 engines that are now avalible.

On the other hand, the F-22 should be held up as an example of how not to run a development/aquisition program. No fighter, no matter how advanced should take two decades from inception to production. That is insane. With modern computer modeling and automated production with friction stir welding and CF winding means that we should be cutting development times, not contracting them. This is a systemic problem within the defense comunity that we desperately need to fix.

That being said, the horse has already escaped the barn and the F-22 is ready now, so we need many more of them, having 60 in the European theater, 60 in the Asian theater, and 60 at home for training and reserve is not anything aproaching an adequate force when we are talking about facing off against the ChiComs with thousands of newly built fighters with the best tech the Soviet Union could offer. The F-22A is an order of magnitude beter the the SU-37, but I still think 60 F-22As looses to 2200 Su-37s.

I think it's utter foolishness to allow any other country to build F-22s. Japan might not stay an ally, and we all know about the Israelis great reputation of selling our technology to the highest bidder (China usually).

And we definitely need more than a lousy 180 planes.

Quoted: Quoted: Why not? If they go bad on us we just refuse to renew their software license key and the things can't fly ... it's all done via the GPS signals and a secret Microsoft back door in the fighters OS. lol CO: EVERYBODY SCRAMBLE!!! <pilot gets into F22> F22: I'm sorry, Your 14-day Windows Trial period is up. Would you like to validate by Mail, Telephone, or the Internet? Pilot: Fuck...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm hearing 'YES' too that one too. A number of countries would like to get their hands on the F-22 but the 'Full Fat - High Caffiene' version comes with too high a sticker price. Two countries have been offered the 'real deal' so far; Britain (did not want it), and Australia, (wanted it but could not afford it). Now, if a 'cheaper' version hit's the shelves I'm betting Austraila will be back in the frame as they really wanted the F-22 but just could not find the money. Japan and Israel would be the other natural purchasers. ANdy I wonder how much cheaper Lock-Mart can make it and how much of a perfromance/avionics downgrade before it makes sense to buy an F-35...Bascially will Lock-Mart be competing against it's own airframes? The basic problem with the F-35 is it's a lightweight fighter, optimised for strike missions. It's the old F-15 vs F-16 argument again. If it can get in close an F-35 will be able to tangle with an F-22, but the F-22's performance means the F-35 will never get the chance to find out. ANdy

I don't think I phrased my question properly... what I was trying to ask was at what point does a downgraded Raptor ="Well we might as well buy F-35's since they're cheaper and close enough."

Lockheed Martin F-22 and F-35: The 5th Generation Revolution in Military Aviation
 
 
(Source: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company; issued Feb. 21, 2006)
 
 
SINGAPORE --- With the F-22 Raptor reaching U.S. Air Force Initial Operational Capability last December and the scheduled first flight of the F-35 later this year, the 5th Generation of fighter aircraft is now a reality. Lockheed Martin, which produces both aircraft, detailed some of the battle-changing advantages and unmatched capabilities the world's only 5th Generation fighters now bring to the United States and its allies.  

George Standridge, vice president and deputy for business development at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, presented an in-depth look at the state- of-the-art attributes uniquely integrated in the F-22 and F-35 5th Generation fighters. "These fighters bring an order of magnitude increase in capability, survivability and supportability over legacy fighters, at a significantly lower cost and will transform defense worldwide," said Standridge, who briefed the press at the Asian Aerospace air show here today. Asian Aerospace is the region's foremost aerospace and defense technology exhibition.  

"Lockheed Martin has launched the world into the fifth generation of military aviation," said Standridge. "We believe the F-22 and F-35 represent a major inflection point in military aviation and all aviation for that matter. The F-22 and F-35 are battle-changing systems. These two aircraft, the only 5th Generation fighters being produced or developed today, are the only fighters that can survive and defeat the threats of tomorrow."  

Standridge said numerous analyses of tactical aircraft operations from a variety of government sources have all reached the same conclusions: 5th Generation fighters are significantly more effective than legacy fighters in all air dominance mission requirements and are the best value for the money.  

Without getting into detailed, classified information, Standridge noted that the F-22 Raptor's unique combination of stealth, speed, precision, agility, situational awareness, air-to-ground and air-to-air combat capabilities make it unlike any other military aircraft in the world. It is faster to the fight, two times more reliable, and three-plus times more effective than the F-15 it replaces. The Raptor also requires 1/3 less airlift to deploy.  

Standridge added that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will be:  

--Four times more effective than legacy fighters in air-to-air engagements  
--Eight times more effective than legacy fighters in prosecuting missions against fixed and mobile targets  
--Three times more effective than legacy fighters in non-traditional Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance (ISR) and Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses and Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD/DEAD) missions  
--About the same in procurement cost as legacy fighters, but requires significantly less tanker/transport and less infrastructure with a smaller basing footprint.  

"The synergy that results from combining stealth, speed, maneuverability, persistence, information fusion and situational awareness, improved sustainability, lean deployment and the ability to work within and interact with a broad array of networked systems in a single platform represents a quantum leap in capability and survivability over previous fighters," said Standridge. "No other fighter in the world today besides the F-22 and F-35 can make those claims."  

Quoted: Quoted: More F-22s being built.  Good with me. F-22s in the hands of a proven ally positioned close to probable threats.  Also good with me. No probs there. We need to sell more to allies. We need to buy more for ourselves.

+1

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I wonder how much cheaper Lock-Mart can make it and how much of a perfromance/avionics downgrade before it makes sense to buy an F-35...Bascially will Lock-Mart be competing against it's own airframes? The basic problem with the F-35 is it's a lightweight fighter, optimised for strike missions. It's the old F-15 vs F-16 argument again. If it can get in close an F-35 will be able to tangle with an F-22, but the F-22's performance means the F-35 will never get the chance to find out. ANdy I don't think I phrased my question properly... what I was trying to ask was at what point does a downgraded Raptor ="Well we might as well buy F-35's since they're cheaper and close enough." If you buy a Porsche without the trick stereo and body kit is it not still a Porsche? If you take a Honda Integra and rice it up is it still not a Honda Integra? The performance is much the same but the Honda is still not a Porsche. ANdy

No it's not, here it becomes an ACURA Integra

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I wonder how much cheaper Lock-Mart can make it and how much of a perfromance/avionics downgrade before it makes sense to buy an F-35...Bascially will Lock-Mart be competing against it's own airframes? The basic problem with the F-35 is it's a lightweight fighter, optimised for strike missions. It's the old F-15 vs F-16 argument again. If it can get in close an F-35 will be able to tangle with an F-22, but the F-22's performance means the F-35 will never get the chance to find out. ANdy I don't think I phrased my question properly... what I was trying to ask was at what point does a downgraded Raptor ="Well we might as well buy F-35's since they're cheaper and close enough." If you buy a Porsche without the trick stereo and body kit is it not still a Porsche? If you take a Honda Integra and rice it up is it still not a Honda Integra? The performance is much the same but the Honda is still not a Porsche. ANdy

I wonder what they do to lower the price then....avionics, different engines maybe?

MISSILE FIRE –This F-22A Raptor from the 27th Fighter Squadron, Langley Air Force Base, Va., fires an AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile at an aerial target drone over the Gulf of Mexico during a Combat Archer mission Feb. 14. This missile is one of the first fired from an F-22A Raptor. U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Michael Ammons.

(3 pages of Raptor talk and only 1 pic, we should be ashamed.)

Hi-Res linkage for anyone needing wallpaper.....

New Stealth Fighters Relevant, Despite Rise of UAVs: Lockheed

By MARTIN ABBUGAO, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, SINGAPORE

New warplanes like the stealthy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will continue to play a crucial role in combat despite the emergence of unmanned drones, U.S. aerospace giant Lockheed Martin said Feb. 21.

The F-35 will undergo its first flight test between September and December this year, company officials said after announcing that the first F-35 has completed assembly and been moved out of the factory ahead of ground trials.

This follows Lockheed’s F-22 Raptor, the other “fifth-generation” fighter in the company’s stable, which entered U.S. Air Force service in December 2005.

“These fighters bring a game-changing increase in capability, survivability and supportability over legacy fighters at a significantly lower cost and will transform defense worldwide,” said George Standridge, Lockheed vice president and deputy for business development.

“Lockheed Martin has launched the world into the fifth generation of military aviation,” he told a news briefing on the sidelines of Asian Aerospace, the world’s third-largest air show.

Standridge said the role of the F-35 to penetrate enemy air defenses and demolish targets with precision-guided weapons has not diminished even with the increased emergence of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Some analysts say the UAVs, or drones, can perform the same function. They have already been combat-tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Standridge, a former fighter pilot, said the UAVs have neither the F-35’s survivability nor range of capabilities.

Compared with current generation aircraft, the F-35 has superiority in air-to-air engagement, air-to-ground missions against fixed and mobile targets as well as in intelligence surveillance, reconnaissance and suppression of enemy air defenses, he said.

The warplane is a joint project of nine countries — the United States, Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Canada, Turkey, Australia, Denmark and Norway.

It is scheduled to enter service by 2012, Lockheed Martin spokesman John A. Smith said.
The supersonic, multi-role fighter is designed to replace AV-8B Harriers, A-10s, F-16s, F/A-18 Hornets and the United Kingdom’s Harrier GR.7s and Sea Harriers, the manufacturer said.

For the F-22, which costs around $110 million and offers air-to-air as well as air-to-ground combat capability, Smith said “there’s a lot of interest.” Industry news reports say Japan is among the countries which have expressed interest in acquiring the fighter.

“We believe the F-22 and F-35 represent a major inflection point in military aviation and all aviation for that matter,” Standridge said.

Lockheed Martin remained the top U.S. defense contractor in 2005. It had $19.4 billion in deals with the Pentagon last year, officials have said.

The company, also the top contractor in 2004, edged out Boeing which had $18.3 billion in Defense Department contracts last year, and Northrop Grumman, with $13.5 billion.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I wonder what they do to lower the price then....avionics, different engines maybe? ECM/EW suite and radar are the big sticker price items... ANdy

If the current sticker is $110 mil for the pimped out Raptor when does it become affordable, say $60 million? That should put it about $20 mil over the F-35.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I wonder what they do to lower the price then....avionics, different engines maybe? ECM/EW suite and radar are the big sticker price items... ANdy If the current sticker is $110 mil for the pimped out Raptor when does it become affordable, say $60 million? That should put it about $20 mil over the F-35. I ain't buying the $40 Million sticker price for the F-35. No way you are going to build something far better than the F-16 for less money, it would be the first time in history it happened in Defence procurement. The current cost of an F-16 is $45 Million, a $60 Million+ price tag on the F-35 is a more realistic base price. ANdy

You're probably right, I'm going on memory about the $40 mil price....so even 60 mil for an F-35, say the stripped down F-22 is 85mil, it seems to me to tilt in favor of the Raptor.

Quoted: MISSILE FIRE –This F-22A Raptor from the 27th Fighter Squadron, Langley Air Force Base, Va., fires an AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile at an aerial target drone over the Gulf of Mexico ....

That drone was more than likely an F-4 Phantom.....  flown over a bunch of them down at Tyndal AFB awaiting there demise over the gulf...  it brings tears to my eyes....

Quoted: No you were right, the DoD et al are still claiming the F-35 will roll off the line at $40 a pop..... someone there needs to step away from the crack pipe... If the probable real world cost of the F-35 was factored into the procurement decisions the Raptor doesn't look so expensive. ANdy

I would love to hear what Lock-Marts specs and price for the Raptor-Lite will be.

Quoted: On the other hand, the F-22 should be held up as an example of how not to run a development/aquisition program.

I think the number one failed aircraft procurement program is still the US Navy's A-12 boondoggle.
At least the F-22 is in an operational status.

Quoted: Quoted: On the other hand, the F-22 should be held up as an example of how not to run a development/aquisition program. I think the number one failed aircraft procurement program is still the US Navy's A-12 boondoggle. At least the F-22 is in an operational status.

Thats true, the Commanche could give the A-12 a run for its money though.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I would love to hear what Lock-Marts specs and price for the Raptor-Lite will be. I'm going to Fanborough 2006 as a guest of LM, I'll ask... ANdy

If you happen to get a cold and need someone to fill in just IM me.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: On the other hand, the F-22 should be held up as an example of how not to run a development/aquisition program. I think the number one failed aircraft procurement program is still the US Navy's A-12 boondoggle. At least the F-22 is in an operational status. Thats true, the Commanche could give the A-12 a run for its money though.

At least some of the tech from Commanche will end up in block III Apache and some other airframes.

Quoted: yea, they're on our side, and it's not like they are going to lie about being our friend, I mean what could they possibly do, give us friendship metals and then bomb us, again.

LMAO!    

Quoted: Quoted: Why not? If they go bad on us we just refuse to renew their software license key and the things can't fly ... it's all done via the GPS signals and a secret Microsoft back door in the fighters OS. Right, and then some Norwegian will write the patch and you'll be able to download it off Kazaa. I'm not so worried about government resale but of individuals or corporations selling out. One of our guys sells it, we can toss them in the brig. One of theirs sells...we can....be very angry?

Too funny...

Andy you are so Anti-aircraft....it's almost un-pc.
Have a word with yourself mate.


You "KNOW" air supieriority wins wars......


Tally Ho the Taffy....."Vote from 30,000ft"

Raptor Capabilities Present New Challenges
The F-22 Raptor's unequaled capabilities bring some unique challenges to Air Force maintainers.

By G. A. Volb / Ogden Air Logistics Center Public Affairs

Raptor Capabilities Present New Challenges
The F-22 Raptor's unequaled capabilities bring some unique challenges to Air Force maintainers.

By G. A. Volb / Ogden Air Logistics Center Public Affairs

The challenge for maintainers is keeping up with the "latest weapon system technology," he said. "But our technicians and support personnel have spent most of their careers working with new technology, so it won't be a new challenge." But preparing for the workload is an adventure in itself.

Depot activation for a new weapon system always presents challenges, but even more so for the F-22 given its high-end technology and sensitive profile.

"We're partnering with the aircraft's original equipment manufacturers (Lockheed-Martin and Boeing) to ensure we have the supply support we need," said Don Hallford, F-22 program manager.

Maintainers have to work supply line issues - making sure needed parts are on hand among other things, building a work area specifically for the F-22, and developing training requirements for mechanics.

"Most maintainers will tell you that being on the ground floor of a new weapon system is unique," said Dooner. "A lot of hard work goes into getting it off the ground but in the end, you have the opportunity to implement new ideas and ways of doing business. We have the chance to start anew, eliminating waste from our processes and procedures up front."

"And while the F-22 presents challenges when it comes to stealth technology, we've been working B-2 bomber maintenance for a while - about seven years - so we have experience in that field as well," he emphasized.

The maintainers continue, however, to take a proactive approach by sending personnel to field training detachments for hands-on schooling.

By virtue of the F-22 design, it's hoped maintainers will find their work a little more "user-friendly." According to officials, the Raptor will have better reliability and maintainability than any fighter aircraft in Air Force history.

An F-22 squadron also requires less than half the airlift of an F-15 squadron to deploy. Plus, the aircraft's increased reliability and maintainability pays off in less manpower to fix it and the ability to operate more efficiently.

"People are excited to start working on it," said Dooner. "We have heard about this aircraft for years now, and the maintenance and support teams are eager to dive in and get their hands dirty."

Dooner said experienced technicians and support personnel from all over the base will help implement the workload associated with the F-22 coming in April. Initially, maintainers are looking at between 30-35 flow days to turn around each aircraft.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If you happen to get a cold and need someone to fill in just IM me. You wouldn't enjoy it, you have to spend all day climbing in and out of cockpits, trying out the fight simulators and carrying around all the freebee's you get..... if I get given another set of gold cufflinks to go with my F-35 and B-1 shaped ones I'll cry.. ANdy

Yes, I can see where this would be sheer hell.
I wonder if the stripped version ends up with non-AESA radar or the semi-mechincal pseudo-AESA?

Question about the UCAVs... they're supposed to be super stealthy and super maneuverable, but how are they operated?  Are they controlled by radio link with a human who is sitting in a flight simulator?  Or are they autonomous?  It seems to me that if they're controlled by radio link they would be vulnerable to jamming and the radio link could give away their positions or make them easy meat for HARMs...

Quoted: Question about the UCAVs... they're supposed to be super stealthy and super maneuverable, but how are they operated?  Are they controlled by radio link with a human who is sitting in a flight simulator?  Or are they autonomous?  It seems to me that if they're controlled by radio link they would be vulnerable to jamming and the radio link could give away their positions or make them easy meat for HARMs...

Autonomous, for example the Global Hawk is given mission objectives and then launched, it fills in all the blanks and flies the mission by itself.

Quoted: My personal suspicion is that every combat aircraft we've exported to any but our STRONGEST, most longstanding allies have indeed been equipped with such a feature.    A hidden "easter egg" in the software that can be activated when we want to, and ONLY when we want to, and it would be a feature that is deeply hideen within a core technology that is indispensible to the operation of the aircraft, and activated by some extremely secret methodology.    My guess would be via the plane's radar set, receiving very special radar pulses generated by secret equipment.    The pulses carry an encrypted signal saying "Shut down and stop flying...NOW!" There may even be different levels of disabling available, anything from merely disabling the weapons systems to making the aerial refueling equipment inoperable (jammed inlet door, maybe) to a total shutown of engines, flight controls, and avionics,  or even to the point where the system captive fires the engines and explosives of any missiles carried on the plane, without releasing them first. Just a guess, but not an unreasonable one. CJ Quoted: I personnally think all planes sold should have some secret collapsable curcuit that could be triggered remotly somehow that we don't tell them about...In mid air all of a suddon all their planes lose power for no reason.......muhwahwawawawaw. But I like to think like that...

United States = Cylons
PRC = 12 Colonies of Kobol


I hope

On a related note, let's count the various U.S. systems (combat systems & engineering systems, et. al.) found on a Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF) Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG).


1. AEGIS combat system featuring the AN/SPY-1D RADAR (USA)
2. Mk41 MOD2 Vertical Launching System (VLS) (USA)
3. OTO 5 inch / 54 caliber rapid-fire gun (Italy)
4. Mk15 Phalanx 20mm CIWS (USA)
5. Standard Missile 2 (SM-2ER) (USA)
6. Anti-Submarine Rockets (ASROC) (USA)
7. RGM-84 HARPOON (USA)
8. AN/SWG-1A HARPOON guidance system (USA)
9. AN/UPX-29 IFF suite (USA)
10. Ishikawajima Harima LM-2500 Gas turbine x4(License-built GE LM2500);COGAG, 2 shaft propulsion (USA)
11. AN/WSC-3(v) SATCOM (USA)
ad nauseum

That's just for starters.

As I see it, there's gonna be an F-22J in the future based on previous experiences.

Quoted: On a related note, let's count the various U.S. systems (combat systems & engineering systems, et. al.) found on a Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF) Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG). www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/images/ddg175_jmsdf-01.jpg 1. AEGIS combat system featuring the AN/SPY-1D RADAR (USA) 2. Mk41 MOD2 Vertical Launching System (VLS) (USA) 3. OTO 5 inch / 54 caliber rapid-fire gun (Italy) 4. Mk15 Phalanx 20mm CIWS (USA) 5. Standard Missile 2 (SM-2ER) (USA) 6. Anti-Submarine Rockets (ASROC) (USA) 7. RGM-84 HARPOON (USA) 8. AN/SWG-1A HARPOON guidance system (USA) 9. AN/UPX-29 IFF suite (USA) 10. Ishikawajima Harima LM-2500 Gas turbine x4(License-built GE LM2500);COGAG, 2 shaft propulsion (USA) 11. AN/WSC-3(v) SATCOM (USA) ad nauseum That's just for starters. As I see it, there's gonna be an F-22J in the future based on previous experiences.

It all depends on cost and whether .gov gives it the rubber stamp.

I'd also love to hear how much the chi-coms would bitch if we decided to sell some Raptor-lites
and Japan decided to buy.

Quoted: Quoted: My personal suspicion is that every combat aircraft we've exported to any but our STRONGEST, most longstanding allies have indeed been equipped with such a feature.    A hidden "easter egg" in the software that can be activated when we want to, and ONLY when we want to, and it would be a feature that is deeply hideen within a core technology that is indispensible to the operation of the aircraft, and activated by some extremely secret methodology.    My guess would be via the plane's radar set, receiving very special radar pulses generated by secret equipment.    The pulses carry an encrypted signal saying "Shut down and stop flying...NOW!" There may even be different levels of disabling available, anything from merely disabling the weapons systems to making the aerial refueling equipment inoperable (jammed inlet door, maybe) to a total shutown of engines, flight controls, and avionics,  or even to the point where the system captive fires the engines and explosives of any missiles carried on the plane, without releasing them first. Just a guess, but not an unreasonable one. CJ Quoted: I personnally think all planes sold should have some secret collapsable curcuit that could be triggered remotly somehow that we don't tell them about...In mid air all of a suddon all their planes lose power for no reason.......muhwahwawawawaw. But I like to think like that... And THAT Sir is exactly the reason for the big spat between Britain and the US over the source code for the F-35. The US says we can't have it, (even thougfh we are Tier 1 partner), and our side says no way are they buying an all software driven plane without knowing exactly what is in the code. It has giotten in to such a bitter argument that Britain is now seriously considering cancelling it's purchase of 160 F-35's. ANdy

I thought those feathers had been smoothed over..... guest not. Looks like Super-Hornets for the RAF.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I thought those feathers had been smoothed over..... guest not. Looks like Super-Hornets for the RAF. It's getting more serious. Super Hornets? The MoD has asked BAe to come up with a proposal to navalise the Batch 3 Typhoons as a 'fall back' option. ANdy

Hmmm...Could have swore I read that they may be looking at Super-Hornets as an option.....too bad for Boeing, that would have been a nice order.