Although I am a confirmed F-35 sceptic I see no real problem regarding sourse codes and maintenance.

Is the F-35 the right platform for the UK, I have my doubts but until we see how it actually performs, how many are purchased and who actually controls them I will withold final judgement.

I am not a F-35 sceptic but neither am I a fan – I do find myself in the category of wandering if the F-35B is the right choice for UK, and it is certainly a risky choice. If there was no need to operate them of the carriers as well, I put my money on the RAF preferring F-35A which I think makes far more sense for the role it will play and has lower inherent risk, as I cannot see the F-35A being cancelled or being massively delayed. The main risk for the F-35A is that the currently delay means that no export orders are filled until the USAF fill their immediate shortfall in fast jets.

Personally the operational sovereignty for UK are IMHO all about whole life cost and protecting British defence industry as it is almost impossible the UK will ever be embargoed by the US during the life of the F-35 and stop getting support

Have you seen the movie “Independence Day”?

If you can understand the three quoted sentences above, you’ll understand the heart of the issue.

That reasoning is also why Congress passed a law prohibiting the sale of F-22.

I have seen Independence Day it was very unrealistic :):)

I understand why the US does not want to share the code (though I think there is a lot financial reasons, not least penalising EC countries for wanting to integrate non-US weapons). What I also think is the US is underestimating how important sovereign ownership is the UK (or maybe I am overestimating how important it is).

it was never agreed uk will get the core code [like windows xp core code] but they will get the developers code [like modem or printer software that will plug and play]
as i said aussies and norway are writing software now and i guess UK is too

Not trying to stir anything up – but to quote this article http://www.jameshasik.com/weblog/2010/03/how-to-kill-the-joint-strike-fighter-1.html from early this year (no idea of the authors agenda or background he could be on the payroll of Boeing for all I know):

“The F-35 offers no operational sovereignty to overseas customers. All three European alternatives the JSF—Eurofighter, Rafale, and Gripen—come with access to software codes that the US government steadfastly refuses to provide. Without those, the F-35 is not locally upgradeable.Worse, the JSF program expects everyone’s aircraft to fly to Texas for servicing, which means that it’s not locally maintainable either.”

This article makes it clear (in their opinion) that UK will not get the code but for political reasons will not pull of JSF http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/11/24/us-guards-jsf-software-crown-jewels/ it says:

“Sharing source code would, in the words of one close observer of the program, “turn the British JSF into a Trojan Horse.” The message this source would send the British: “Yes we love you… but who are those third party nationals from the EU working for you? And how do we know we can trust them?”

British officials had threatened to pull out of the program if the US did not share the source code, but they are unlikely to go that far given how much political and financial capital they have committed to the project. There is also the fact, as one congressional source noted, that the British want what is commonly called the ITAR treaty approved by the Senate.”

I found lots of stories saying UK will not get access to source code, and a few where spokesman for the British Government are getting the code. If I find something more definite one way or the other I will post it.

well aussies and norway i’m told are developing their own specific software, it couldnt be done if we didnt have suitable codes, we dont get all of it, just what we need
you will find UK is the same or even better as a tier 1 partner, i dont think we are getting weapons integration at this stage, but UK wont get the lot either, just what it needs
as i understand it, its like microsoft, developers get the codes to write programs to plug and play, but no one gets all of microsofts codes

Just googled the subject and found this:

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f35-jsf-program-us-uk-reach-technology-transfer-agreement-02495/

linked to this:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5AO01F20091125?sp=true

Which says the US is looking to back track on the agreement reach with UK in 2006 on access to Source Code and is instead offering a reprogramming facility.

Does anyone else know if the UK got access to the source code when they licensed the Apache?

This is the second post of on a tangent.

If the SDSR recommends closer co-operation with the French what would you expect?

Would we just see some sort of trade pact, i.e. we will buy €2 billion of military equipment from France if they buy €2 billion of military equipment from UK, with say the UK buying a Mistral, dropping the C2 spec frigate for frigates based on the La Fayette and France buying something from the UK (here I draw a blank as France seems to be in a better place equipment wise than the UK right now).

Or do you see something more strategic, say UK and France combining their refuelling and strategic lift elements of their air forces, and their fleet auxiliaries of their navies together to reduce operating costs. Then identifying all their future procurement needs, working out which of them overlap and developing joint programmes which are split say 50:50 between British and French arms manufactures.

1) True enough, though numbers aren’t everything, the application of effect is very important, its not just an economic arguement about doing more with less.

2) There is still no firm decisions about the numbers of F35s to be finally purchased, i’ll be suprised if its as low as 50. But do remember that BAE is developing some rather nifty UAVs and UCAVs and that the days of predominately manned aircraft for combat are probably drawing to a close so investing in too many manned FJs will leave no money for the really cool toys.

3) As it is F35b will be better than F18 and Rafale and ASAC 7 Seaking/merlin is currently considered only inferior to Hawkeye in terms of endurance/op height, the Radar is worshipped across NATO. Its a far more adaptable platform, the RN can operate it off of LPHs, auxillaries etc which means you can send that level of surval capability anywhere you like, otherwise you would have to send a QE to have a Hawkeye overhead.

Firstly sorry to snip points out of original post.

RE: Point 1) I do understand the point you are making, the 1st Gulf War showed that quality is more important than quantity in A2A engagements and in general you want the best fighter you can buy which leads me to point 2. (Quality over quantity seems to be something the Chinese have brought into in a big way in recent years).

RE: Point 2) My moniker kinda gives you an idea where I am coming from. I worry the SDSR will see the RAF and the RN cut back massively in favour of the army and all of it being configured to fight irregular forces. I have seen various stories in the broad sheets which suggest that after the SDSR they will cut another Harrier squadron, 2 GR4 squadrons, limit the purchase of F-35 to around 50, payoff 3 – 5 RN ships early, cancel the airtankers deal (which IMHO is only good news if they then actually get some new tankers). All of this worries me a lot.

RE: Point 3) Would the Osprey MASC platform being developed in the US (with some UK input) be better than the Merlin? I know the maximum ceiling is higher for an Osprey but I have no idea how well it would operate at that ceiling.