“Well your understanding is somewhat different to mine.”

Indeed.

I don’t want to get into a futile willy-measuring exercise, but you didn’t know that the Japanese had been talking seriously to Eurofighter before this thread started, and certainly not that four JASDF pilots had flown the aircraft. You seem well read, of course, but do you claim any particular insight beyond what you have gleaned from aviation magazines?

My understanding is based on talking to the Super Hornet, Eagle, Typhoon, and Gripen marketing people who are actually tasked with selling aircraft to Japan, who have talked to JASDF procurement folk, and who have seen and read the requirement documents. It’s based on talking to programme insiders and test pilots in the companies concerned, and to a very small group of JASDF people, though my contacts in Japan are admittedly very limited.

That’s why I draw a distinction between what some mainstream politicians and newspapers say (which has sometimes emphasised the attractiveness of the F-22 to Japan), and what the air force actually wants.

Korea missiles are now viewed as part of the primary threat, not just the PRC’s aircraft.

Not having a robust long range stand off precision strike capability is viewed as a potential deal-breaker, and because of timescales, this is seen as the Typhoon’s greatest potential weakness, and this is why the Super Bug is so strong in Japan.

Anywhere but Japan, the F-15E might be leading the field.

This is also why some believe that Dassault were perhaps foolish to leave the Japanese competition open to its rivals.

The F-22’s USP is, of course, its ability to penetrate, which some believe could allow it to attack similar targets to those that less stealthy aircraft would use a stand off Storm Shadow or JASSM against. That’s how the aircraft can be considered by Japan, despite its inability to carry a Storm Shadow class weapon.

“The Japanese clearly require a fighter….”

That’s not my understanding.

Because of the Japanese constitution, and because of the mores of Japanese society, what appears to be the case and what is actually the case may sometimes be quite different. Especially when it comes to defence equipment.

I’m not surprised that you would assume that the Japanese F-4 replacement will be an air-to-air aeroplane – even a pure air-to-air aeroplane.

That’s not my understanding.

There is a really significant (secondary, but pivotally important) A-G requirement within this overall requirement, thanks to the threat posed by North Korea. I believe that this includes a requirement for a long range stand off precision attack capability.

“Back on track – I wish I could recall where I heard it, beyond the fact it was from an air force officer while we were having coffee (recalling which air force officer, and indeed from which air force is the problem), but if my failing grey matter is correct, I think JN may be right about the immaturity of AESA at the time being the source of concern.”

That’s certainly what I heard from an ex JASDF F-104 pilot (that the problem with the F-2 AESA was immaturity).

I wonder whether the four JASDF pilots (including a two-star general) enjoyed their flights with No.3(F) Squadron?

(No I don’t, I know exactly what they thought, but I wouldn’t want to gloat). :diablo:

And the fact that JASDF pilots have been given four Typhoon flights (and who knows how many flights in the rig, being shown Tranche 2 and 2+ capabilities) doesn’t indicate really serious interest…… :rolleyes:

I understand that F/A-18E/F and Typhoon are the front-runners in this competition, for reasons that should be obvious.

Very different requirements, though.

Australia wants a two-man, long range strike fighter to replace the F-111, with very long range being a priority.

Japan doesn’t need two-seat, doesn’t need Australian type range capability and doesn’t believe in strike!

Logistics apart, Australia could really have done with an F-15E derivative, or maybe even Rafale.

Swerve,

From a uniquely Japanese perspective, I suspect that the F-15 is simply ‘old hat’ – and it’s too difficult for politicians and taxpayers to grasp that a new F-15 is a different aircraft to the F-15s they’ve already had in service for two decades!

I took your statement (“There have been articles posted here saying that the Typhoon is one of the Types under consideration, however there has been no word on any selection.”) as inferring that you doubted the veracity of the claim that Japan was evaluating Typhoon.

Since May last year, when Flight reported that:

Eurofighter Typhoon could be going Japanese with entry into F-4EJ fighter replacement contest
Peter La Franchi / Berlin
The Eurofighter consortium is looking at options to develop a Japanese-specific variant of the Typhoon as one possible approach to contesting Tokyo’s expected medium-term competition to replace its Mitsubishi/McDonnell Douglas F-4EJ fighters.
The plan would have close parallels to Japan’s development of the Mitsubishi F-2 fighter based on Lockheed Martin’s F-16, the company says, and could involve significant technology transfer to Japan.
Japanese requirements for a major domestic industry role in its military aircraft programmes, coupled with constitutional prohibitions on its participation in the international arms trade, is prompting exploration of a wide array of alternative approaches. Eurofighter says it does not believe Japan would see licence-manufacturing arrangements for the basic Eurofighter model as an acceptable industrial option.
Other approaches might involve providing Japanese manufacturers with workshare on European civil aircraft production programmes as a means of ensuring compliance with the Japanese constitution.
The Japan Typhoon campaign is being run by BAE Systems. Eurofighter says the UK is making “good progress on the political side” in ongoing talks with Japan about its requirements. BAE confirms it is considering a range of options to meet Japanese requirements before the release of a detailed requirements document.
The UK government, meanwhile, is negotiating a Typhoon deal with Saudi Arabia, but declines to provide further details.

There have been numerous reports about Typhoon’s prospects in Japan.

eg:

http://www.air-attack.com/news/news_article/2405/Japan-considers-the-Eurofighter.html

“TOKYO, March 19 (RIA Novosti) – Japan is considering the possibility of upgrading its outdated fleet of F-4 fighters with advanced European aircraft, an anonymous source at the Defense Ministry said Monday.
Japan currently has about 60 F-4 Phantom strike fighters known for their extensive use by the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marines during the Vietnam war.
“We are considering the Eurofighter Typhoon or the French-manufactured Rafale among others,” the source said.
“Japan believes that the U.S. F-22A Raptor fighter is a wonderful aircraft but its purchase has to be approved by U.S. Congress and that poses a serious problem,” he said.”

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/332c3534-d58e-11db-a5c6-000b5df10621.html

Japan considers the Eurofighter
By Mariko Sanchanta and David Pilling in Tokyo
Published: March 18 2007 22:01 | Last updated: March 18 2007 22:01
Japan’s defence ministry is considering adopting the Eurofighter as its next- generation fighter jet, a potentially momentous move for a country that has until now only purchased fighters from the US, its closest military ally.
A decision could be made within the next six months, people familiar with the negotiations said, and the pro curement deal could run to tens of billions of dollars as Tokyo is looking to replace 250-300 ageing aeroplanes. “We are looking at the Eurofighter, along with other fighters,” said a defence ministry spokesman. “We are looking at all available data, not just American data.”
Military analysts say that Japan might be assessing the Eurofighter Typhoon as a ploy to press the US on price and access to highly sensitive technology.
Robert Dujarric, a defence expert at Temple University, said Japan would want the political insurance that went along with US jets. He pointed out that Singapore and South Korea both considered buying European fighters before eventually opting for US technology.
The defence ministry needs to replace its fleet of 90 F-4s, which went into service in 1971, and plan for the eventual retirement of its 200 F-15 fighters.
Industry experts say the Japanese really want to buy state-of-the-art F-22A Raptor stealth fighters, made by Lockheed Martin. But that ambition has been thwarted by the US Congress, which has banned the sale of the radar-evading F-22.
Sugio Takahashi, a re search fellow at the National Institute for Defense Studies in Japan, said Lockheed Martin had been lobbying the US to allow sales to Tokyo. The US company is keen to expand its market because the US military has ordered fewer than half its expected 500 F-22s, pushing unit costs up sharply.
Mr Takahashi said transferring Eurofighter technology would be less sensitive. In the past, Japanese manufacturers such as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries have built US fighters under licence, but given the advance of technology since, their ability to build F-22s is uncertain.
Thomas Schieffer, US ambassador to Tokyo, said it was natural that Japan should consider alternative technology. “Everybody understands the Europeans have good fighters too, and there’s going to be a debate here about what they need.”
The ambassador said it was difficult, though not impossible, to buy technology from countries other than the US, given the need for interoperability on the battlefield. “You want one set of planes you own to talk to another set of planes you own,” he said. Mr Schieffer hoped Japan would end up buying a combination of US technology, including F-22s, if congressional opposition could be overcome.
Even if the export ban were lifted, F-22s could cost Japan more than $200m (£105m) each, according to military experts. But Mr Takahashi says there would also be economic benefits to buying US fighters as they could share maintenance facilities with jets deployed at US bases in Japan.

http://www.lep.co.uk/ViewArticle.aspx?SectionID=74&ArticleID=2105993

South Korea eyes 20 Typhoon jets

The Eurofighter Typhoon consortium, which includes defence manufacturer BAE Systems, has been asked to join the battle for a £1.2 bn contract to supply South Korea with next-generation aircraft.
The Far East nation’s government has asked for information about the Lancashire-built fighter jet as it looks to splash out on 20 new planes.
BAE is the latest firm to make contact with the Korean Defence Acquisition Programme Administration (DAPA) about the FX contract, after manufacturing rival Boeing put its name forward earlier this week.
A spokesman for BAE confirmed the company has supplied information about Eurofighter to the DAPA.
He said: “We have been approached by the South Korean acquisition team and expect to receive a request for a proposal from them in due course, we will then look at the specifications of what they are looking for and then made a decision on whether we intend to join the competition from there.
“However, we have already supplied them with some low-level information about Eurofighter’s capabilities.”
BAE is widely-tipped to be in the running for the contract which would see it supply 20 jets to Korea from 2010 to 2012 to go alongside a fleet of 40 Boeing F-15Ks the country has already ordered.
The Russian Sukhoi-35 Super Flanker and the Rafale – built by French company Dassault – are expected to challenge Eurofighter and Boeing for the work.
A contract win for BAE would be a major boost for Warton and Samlesbury, the hub of the company’s involvement in the Eurofighter programme, which sees them working alongside Franco-German firm EADS and Italian manufacturer Alenia Aeronautica.
In January, the firm revealed it had opened preliminary talks with Japan about supplying 50 Eurofighter jets and was expected to be in the running when the contract is official put out to tender later this year.
To date, the controversial orders from Saudi Arabia and Austria, for 72 and 18 jets respectively, are the only confirmed deals from outside the consortium.
However, talks are ongoing with a large number of countries across the world looking to bolster their aircraft fleet.

The short answer is that no, they could not.

The SHars have not been maintained in AIRWORTHY condition, nor are radars etc. maintained. The lowest houred SHars were retained for possible sale to India, so that many of the Culdrose jets are high houred examples.

Even if you could find some low houred and serviceable SHars, the type was retired in part because it needed a huge and expensive upgrade to remain viable.

Resurrecting the SHar is impractical and entirely undesirable.

But that should not worry you. A CVS cannot carry sufficient SHars to provide meaningful CAP coverage if it carries any GR7/9s. To be able to defend itself, it needs to carry only SHar, making it a bit of a self-licking lollipop (fun, but of little practical benefit).

If it carries any SHars, it can’t carry enough GR7/9s to perform a meaningful power projection role.

And a carrier requires AD destroyers, a guard SSN, oilers and RFAs – a massive and costly force to deploy a relatively tiny air power element.

In any case, in the case of the Falklands, there is already an air base on the islands – so reinforcing the garrison and its air defences by air is quicker/cheaper/simpler/safer than sending a carrier.