MoD to Slash Jet Fighter Orders as it Struggles to Save Aircraft Programme (excerpt)

(Source: The Guardian; issued January 12, 2010)

Defence chiefs are preparing drastic cuts to the number of American [F-35 JSF] stealth aircraft planned for the RAF and the Royal Navy’s proposed new carriers, the Guardian has learned.

They will be among the first casualties, with existing squadrons of Harrier and Tornado jets, of a huge shift in military spending being considered by ministers, officials and military advisers.

As they head towards their biggest and most painful shakeup since the Second World War, a consensus has emerged among the top brass that they cannot afford the 140 American Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) they have been seeking.

The JSF, or F35 as it is now called, has been subject to costly delays and the estimated price has soared from £37m each four years ago to more than £62m today.

One compromise would be for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to halve its order from 140 planes to 70.

There is also a growing view that Britain will not be able to afford to build the two large aircraft carriers, already delayed, let alone the planes due to fly from them. “The carriers are under real threat. There will certainly be a big reduction in JSF numbers,” a well-placed military source told the Guardian.

“The carriers are about more fast jets. They are very hard to justify,” added a defence official, referring to a growing consensus that the RAF already has too many fast jets.

If the order was halved, it would probably be split so that there was a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) version for the carriers, and a conventional version based at RAF ground stations.

Among other options being considered are: downsizing the second carrier to a much cheaper platform for helicopters, marine commandos, and unmanned drones; building both carriers but selling one, perhaps to India; and equipping them with cheaper catapult-launched aircraft.

No decisions will be made until after the general election. However, there is a consensus developing in the MoD that Britain simply cannot afford existing plans to build two large carriers in a project which, if the JSF planes are included, would cost an estimated £25bn. (end of excerpt)

Does anyone have any information on japans R&D fifth gen fighter?

The report on Japan loosing engineering know how seems to be a bit strange.. they are leading the way in certain sectors you just have to wonder if the report saying japan will loose engineers is a tactic to fund the home grown effort.

With Defense Test, China Shows Displeasure of U.S.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/world/asia/13china.html

Published: January 12, 2010
BEIJING — China said it had successfully tested the nation’s first land-based missile defense system, announcing the news late Monday in a brief dispatch by Xinhua, the official news agency. “The test is defensive in nature and is not targeted at any country,” the item said.

Skip to next paragraph
Related
Clinton, Starting Trip, Acknowledges Possible Tensions With China (January 12, 2010) Even if news accounts on Tuesday did not provide details about the test — and whether it destroyed its intended target — Chinese and Western analysts say there is no mistaking that the timing of the test, coming amid Beijing’s fury over American arms sales to Taiwan, was largely aimed at the White House.

In recent days, state media outlets have been producing a torrent of articles condemning the sale of Patriot air defense equipment to Taiwan. China views the self-ruled island as a breakaway province, separated since the civil war of the 1940s, and sees arms sales as interference in an internal matter.

The Defense and Foreign Ministries have released a half-dozen warnings over the weapons deal, saying it would have grave consequences for United States-China relations. The state-run Global Times newspaper urged readers to come up with ways to retaliate against the United States.

Writing in the Study Times newspaper, Maj. Gen. Jun Yinan said that China had the power to strike back. “We must take countermeasures to make the other side pay a corresponding price and suffering corresponding punishment,” wrote General Jun, a professor at China’s National Defense University.

Although most analysts doubt the Chinese will seek to punish the United States in a significant way — retaliatory measures over past arms sales have included the suspension of military talks — the especially vociferous response may herald rockier relations between the countries as they confront differences over monetary policy, trade issues, Iran and North Korea.

“For the Chinese, selling arms to Taiwan feels like a slap in the face,” said Shi Yinhong, a professor of United States-Chinese relations at People’s University in Beijing. “I think the government expected something different from Obama, especially so soon after his visit to China.”

The White House said it was simply fulfilling a deal that was negotiated during the Bush administration. It also pointed out that the sale, approved by the Pentagon last week, omits F-16 fighter jets and Black Hawk helicopters, a concession to Beijing.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaking in California on Monday, said she thought the strain in relations would be brief and mild. “It doesn’t go off the rails when we have differences of opinions,” she said of the relationship with China.

Relations may get bumpier in the coming weeks when President Obama meets with the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader whom China accuses of being a separatist, and President Ma Ying-jeou of Taiwan makes a brief visit to the United States. Overseas visits by Taiwanese officials invariably irk Beijing.

Arthur Ding, a research fellow at the Institute of International Relations in Taipei, the Taiwanese capital, said China may have thought its growing economic might and the improving cross-strait relations fostered by President Ma during his 20 months in office might have persuaded the United States to put off any weapons deal.

“Perhaps Beijing has unrealistic expectations,” he said. “I think they imagined their influence is greater than it is.”

For all the saber-rattling over the arms sale, some analysts say the official invective and anti-missile demonstration may have been largely aimed at domestic audiences, who increasingly expect their leaders to stand up to the West.

Zhu Feng, deputy director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies at Peking University, described China’s missile defense system as experimental and “not really meaningful” and said the test’s real purpose was an opportunity for the People’s Liberation Army to strut.

Despite China’s newfound confidence, he said the government is increasingly frustrated by its inability to influence the United States on an issue that has bedeviled Beijing for decades.

“China still lacks the leverage to force the White House to stop these sales,” he said. “So they feel like they must make a lot of noise.”

Jonathan Ansfield contributed reporting, and Li Bibo contributed research

Hmm anyone posted any pics of the PAK-FA I might have missed it in the noise of the strange debate about Brahmos.

India makes a missile that too as a JV with Russians and now Brahmos is world beating missile that even the Russians cant compare against? seriously?

Anyway any photos or dates of first flight yet?

Any pictures yet?

1. The 8/year is possibly for the LCA MK1 not the MK2, when given a larger order HAL will churn it out faster.
.

I heard the production rate was purely down to not having enough operators/technicians or workers.

Depending on how early they spoted the resource gap will govern if HAL can churn things out any faster in the required time frames.

Luckily for a lot of the things they will do with the structure they can use semi skilled staff which would take 1 month to train to an level of reliability, than there will be a period of 3-6 months where they get rid of the stragglers etc..

Luckily they would not need to get graduates for all of the jobs only for team leaders and supervisors. Again these guys would need to be trained up which will take longer and there will be a period of sorting the wheat from the chaff.

Production will also depends if the lack in resource is only at HAL with respect to the structures or with some of the tier 1 suppliers and systems people who make the avionics.

There are plenty of Indian contract workers floating around in the world to fill the need but you have to wonder if they would come back to HAL wages after working as contractors.

The technologies that ADC is working on like ATL and AFP wont really do much to speed up production (unless they already have all this perfected) that can not be done by buying in more tools and getting more labour on the job.

If they wait for ATL to be proven to ramp up production it will take some time. add to this any learning they will do and mistakes they will make (this will be per structure or part its not a blanket learning curve. i.e. Just because you can do a flat panel by ATL does not mean you can do all structures and lay-up combinations.)

Also as they may have to do some structural testing of any ATL produced parts.

Again that is all contingent on HAL getting increase in orders for the LCA.

With respect to the engine fitment for MKII, what engines have been chosen? If the LCA team have trouble getting the Eurojet to fit will they chose the GE varient or will they try to rectify it the problem and test both engines like for like? Murphy’s law can never be ignored.

sure it will be ignored, by the trolls ! 🙂 but they can’t be the target of any honest effort to inform people.
as for the rest, BR’s reputation is quite secure, thank you. from senior diplomats to serving and retd military personnel, a significant section of India’s policy establishment follows BR. as does a number of international journalists of repute.

teer, austin, will reply shortly.

Just because some one does not go the BR does not mean they are a troll, that is a bit to presumptious. They may, for what ever reason, not like to go to that forum.

I do not go to that forum so can comment on who goes to it or reads it.

However if you want high readership than surely something put in print by someone like key pubs, with sources from IAF, HAL, ADA etc signing off as editors for each section (avionics, structures, flight performance, requirements and generic history) you would get something definitive.

Just ask for volunteers who know a particular field to write few words on each section email it to the relevent “editor” or editors and ask for feedback. only way to get the input of ADA HAL is to do all the legwork and get them just to read or skim it. (all depending on being able to get access to the people).

you would present a win win situation, HAL and DRDO, Indian Private firms get publicity, Key pubs gets to make some money, we get a good source of non sensitive information.

How LADAR is a game changer?, i think LADAR research is more oriented for reconnaissance technology than for combat technology

Dont have any source I can post here however the LADAR was briefly mentioned on a discovery wings documentary on future fighters around 2-3 years ago.

They were looking at LADAR not only for the detection and ranging but to be used as a direct energy weapon iirc.

They also said that the LADAR would not be detected by current technology (i guess not because it was difficult to detect but because current sensors dont look for laser lock on i suppose.) making the F-22 truely stealthy.

They said this was a game changer and i dont know any better to argue with them.

How this stacks up to the PAK FA i do not know. I do not know any more than that presented in the documentary.