Are they still officially committed to it or not?

So far as I know we’re only officially committed to 2 training aircraft which are to be based in the United States.

The safe money is that Australia will acquire the F-35, but I don’t think it’s a fait accompli. With 48 Super Hornets we’re already down to a 50% commitment, and there are further clouds on the horizon in terms of the US sequester.

If the sequester remains in place, one way USAF could respond is as I outlined in previous thread — cancel upgrade and life extension programs for F-16s and F-15Cs and start retiring them instead — and if that was done the F-35 program would be unaffected. But there are huge institutional roadblocks to such a move, from Congressional opposition to anything which threatens jobs in their districts to the Pentagon’s own hope for the return of Ronald Reagan.

More likely is that the sequester manifests itself primarily through reductions in procurement budgets, i.e. the F-35 program, and if orders are slowed then unit cost will remain unacceptably high for longer than is currently projected. In that circumstance Australia could well be pushed into a third batch of Super Hornets, and at that point — with 72 Super Hornets on the book — F-35 for Australia will be dead whether anyone wishes to officially acknowledge it or not.

So, both will purchase F-35’s! Japan has order 42 and that number will grow considerably. Maybe including both F-35A’s and F-35B’s.

It isn’t at all certain that Australia will purchase F-35, and for Japan to order more of something than originally specified would be rather unprecedented. More likely is that they will build two dozen F-35s at $250m a pop and declare the exercise over. :p

Even if South Korea develops its own fighter. It will be many years off and most believe the ROKAF will purchase a number of F-35’s in the mean time.

Who is this ‘most’ that you speak of? In any case, we will find out soon enough with Korea contract.

Singapore isn’t going to hold off purchasing New Fighters until any of the fighters on your aforementioned list is ready. As that would be decades if ever!

Why wouldn’t Singapore hold off on purchasing fighters for a few years so as to get a superior capability in the end? That’s what Australia is (ostensibly) doing with F-35 after all. And in the shorter-term F-35 will face great competition from the option of simply ordering more F-15SGs.

Malaysia could go either way. Yet, it’s neighbor selection would likely influence it choice….another plus for the F-35.

The only neighbour likely to influence Malaysia is India, and they have no interest in F-35.

Highly unlikely the US would allow the sale of F-35’s to Vietnam. At least in the foreseeable future.

Relations improving rapidly and could continue to do so, particularly if both nations see that to be in their strategic interests. Can well see F-35 being made available to Vietnam in post-2025 timeframe.

What’s so hard to get??? Let’s take your side of the world. Is Australia, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia going to be in the Fighter Market in the next decade. YES

That is just the Southeast Asia….

Talk about la-la-la:rolleyes:

Australia and Japan have already made their F-35 commitment and the only direction it is going is down.

South Korea is working on KF-X in same class as F-35 and is selling to Indonesia and anyone else who will buy.

Singapore … long-term sales potential, sure. But will face competition from KF-X, F-3, NGAD, etc.

Malaysia … possible but unlikely as MRCA will provide Malaysia ‘western’ component in short-term (i.e. till 2030) and F-35 isn’t on the candidate list. In long-term Malaysia is in position to consider just about everything incl. LMFS and AMCA and so F-35 will face stiff competition.

P.S. I’d put Vietnam on the F-35 candidate list too.

The fighter market for the next 20-30 is vast and the F-35 will have the majority of it.

Ok, hope things are well for you there in la-la-land. :p

Nations will need new aircraft, and most of them won’t be F-35s because it is too large and expensive to operate. Being F-4 Phantom class it is simply too much aircraft. Fortunately there will be no shortage of alternatives…

F/A-50
JF-17
J-10
Tejas
Gripen NG
SAAB 5G

In addition to second-hand F-16s, MiG-29s, M2Ks, i.e. those built in the last decade. No doubt second-hand Rafales, Typhoons, Super Hornets will find homes too. Meanwhile KF-X, LMFS, J-31 and AMCA will offer competition in same category as F-35.

And of course all this ignores upcoming UCAV platforms which could well fulfil offensive requirements for cash-strapped nations as SAMs do defensive requirements.

F-35 will never be as popular as F-16, sorry. Market is smaller and competition much fiercer both at same level and below.

Why? It’s just the Russian version of the USAF’s NGB. I’m still not totally convinced if anything will come of the Russian next generation bomber, given that they already have credible seaborne and land based nuclear delivery systems, it seems like an incredible waste of money.

NGB isn’t about nuclear deterrence but rather about China where a mere 20 B-2s aren’t going to cut it in conducting strikes against the mainland. As a nuclear deterrent alone both NGB and PAK DA would be a waste of money when SSBNs already cover that so effectively, but the bombers are far more flexible than that.

I do question whether Russia needs another Tu-160 class aircraft given that theatres of interest are relatively nearby in China, Central Asia, Middle East, Balkans, etc. It seems to me that an aircraft between Backfire and B-1 size would be sufficient and that lack of extreme range/endurance requirement further reinforces the case for a supersonic design.

I’m not sure about the 80/30% capability-price ratio. IIrc, that was a figure last used by MiG chiefs in a flawed comparison with the F-22, when they were desperately trying to sell the MiG 1.44 programme to the Yeltsin government.

The exact numbers don’t matter, just the general concept. Russia has sensibly refrained from investing in areas of marginal return. The lack of frameless canopy on T-50 is a good example of this conservative approach. I think we can all agree that avoiding B-2/F-22 like nightmare in terms of cost and maintenance requirements is in Russia’s interest.

^ Most usefully perhaps you get 75 Gripen (and later perhaps a limited number of UCAVs) and send the rest of the money elsewhere in the defence dept. I’m sure there are any number of other areas crying out for those funds.

What planet do you live on honestly??? Japan and Israel are freakshows! Really, both are highly respected Nations with excellent “Militarys”.

Israel spends a greater proportion of its money on the military than any nation this side of Saudi Arabia or North Korea. It also regularly invades the airspace of other nations to bomb them — a task for which F-35 is admirably suited. And it receives billions in military aid annually, thereby — as any economist will tell you — distorting market operations by making the Israelis less sensitive to price considerations.

Japan is a nation that will do limited production runs of highly specialised aircraft at four times the market price so as to maintain domestic industrial capacities. Japan doesn’t give a **** about unit cost: if it costs too much, they’ll just buy fewer — because unlike most nations fielded capability isn’t the main point of the exercise for the Japanese, they’re more interested in maintaining the latent capacity to resurrect the Rising Sun if necessary — and thus it too is a freakshow.

That these two nations have selected F-35 says as much about the broader suitability of the platform as Borat does about men’s underwear styling. In fact it would be difficult to think of two countries less representative of the broader market than those.