From todays “The Age” newspaper

Australia pushes for US plane secrets

March 16, 2006
….
The Royal Australian Air Force feels badly burnt by the US refusal to part with intellectual property rights that would have made its fleet of F-111s and Hornets easier and cheaper to maintain and upgrade. That has meant considerable work that could have been done in Australia has gone to US companies — a costly trap the RAAF does not intend falling into again.

@ Ja Worsley
Ja, is the quote above true or is it over the top?

The need for carriers.

Hi Sens
I take your point. Whether or not Italy and Spain actually need a carrier capability is indeed open to question. I am not aware that either of these two countries have ever sent their carriers to war. AFAIK only the UK and France have. I am keen to be corrected.
Can you imagine Italy and Spain relinquishing their carrier capability? I can’t.
The Harrier has never been a maintenance- friendly plane. As the airframe and engine age, the availability drops significantly. Obviously, the flying hours could be cut back and both countries could look to a common UCAV programme. How long would that take?
Dassault has a lot of experience with modern UCAV design, coupled with unparalleled FBW experience and they don’t see a European UCAV ( I mean a real UCAV- not a radio-controlled plane with a lawn-mower engine) for about the next 12 years.

And who is paying for development of the F-35? All the countries that are signed on, that’s who and this is where the problem is being caused, we’ve all put money into the program to develope a plane that can defeat radar and give the bad guy a tough time- both in the air and on the ground, yet now the US is sparking up and saying “you can’t have the full spec planes because we can’t have anyone opposing us” (that is only my words ok but that is how it is sounding not only to me but to all involved). Not even the UK who are a first level partner are going to get the full spec planes, nor now a choice in engines, does this seem fair? The UK have spent billions on this project and now they are coming out of it with planes that are going to be the same as those in service with Australia or Singapore who haven’t put as much in as they have.

If you ask me, the US is in serious trouble with this program and had better think about who is going to get what out of the deal! I don’t know about the other countries, but in the agreement signed by Australia over the development of this plane, we specified that if the final product was not up to our specs, we would pull out and all monies returned to the full amount.

Personally I think the biggest problem with the F-35 Program is George W Bush. He’s duped everyone, kinda like his pollitical life!!!

Hi Ja
The total financial input of the vaious level partners is miniscule compared to that being paid by the USA. The UAE paid for the development of systems that it specified.

Right from the beginning critics made clear the fact that tech transfer of the F35 programme has not been resolved. I certainly don’t want to create the impression that I support the Yanks in this matter, but If I want to have tech transfer, I get that in writing before I sign the cheque and not afterwards.
As I have mentioned before, the Harrier User Group don’t have a choice. The Yanks have them pretty much over the barrel, with the exception of the UK.

i wouldnt be surprised if alot of countries withdraw from this project and buy Eurofighters and Rafales instead!the US is notplaying it fair!if countries invest in this aircraft they should get the same standard as everyone else!

Some countries may withdraw, but it will be for reasons of cost more than anything else. Potential F35 customers will not get less tech transfer than F16 customers get now and most have been happy with that. Only the UAE bitched a bit- and that was because they were paying for the development. The F35 probably won’t go for less than $100 million apiece.

I wasn’t aware that any F35 had been exported. In fact I’m not aware that any F35 has been built- certainly not a production standard aircraft. As regards pure flight performce perhaps we should wait until a “real” F35 actually flies.
Certainly, the current Russian fighters finding favour in South East Asia are formidable aircraft, but even so the Russians are way behind as regards training equipment such as flight and mission simulators which are necessary to optimise the pilot’s flight experience and advancement. Two pilots to one plane, with each pilot flying 180 hours a year. That will cost a lot of money and perhaps still not deliver a fully proficient pilot if the ground training equipment is sub-optimal or perhaps non- existent.

While the S-3 may not be ideal? Using Rafales as Tankers is criminal…….. 😮

Hi Scooter
that’s what I meant- the S3 is a good solution and the Rafale is not a good solution.

IDFAF female fighter pilots

Hi guys.
I have the IMAX DVD “Fighter Pilot- Operation Red Flag”. The camera pans the flightline with close-ups of the pilots getting into their jets. At this particular Red Flag a number of Israeli F16s took part and a female pilot can been seen strapping herself into a F16 D. Also, female pilot flew a F15 C at this particular event. Women still can’t park though. :diablo:

Get this DVD! The footage is magnificent. There is a close-up of a couple of Strike Eagles in formation and one by one they peel off and away from the formation- fantastic! A10, F16, Luftwaffe Tornado, C17, MH60- they’re all there. Also the synthetic visualisation of the DACT sessions is well displayed.