why doesn’t the US allow transfer of F-22 to countries like japan and australia that are desperate for it?

Bureaucratic inertia. The F-22 is the product of a time when the United States was able to think of ‘stealth’ aircraft as a kind of silver bullet and about as suitable a candidate for export as ICBMs or imaging satellites. As the decades pass and stealth technology proliferates, this policy becomes increasingly difficult to justify, but inertia is as real in politics as anywhere else: policies will remain in place unless and until the requisite pressure is applied to change them. And nobody has both the ability and the will to step up to bat on the issue. I don’t know about Japan, but in the case of Australia that’s due in no small part to shakiness on their side of the ledger. Vague expressions of interest do not a compelling case to take to Congress make. But of course, the Australian defence establishment is hardly going to present the government with the ultimatum that it simply must have this aircraft which is presently not available to the nation. So it’s a chicken and the egg sort of thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk4n0SvG0-Y

LockMart’s costings before and after being awarded the contract respectively. :diablo:

The 747 test bed for laser is going to minuturize into a fighter and excactly how/what would power it, eh?

Would it necessarily be a fighter? As djcross points out, several of the requirements listed point to an aircraft significantly larger than the F-22. We’ve seen WVR performance de-emphasised in the JSF program already; by ‘6th Gen’ could we be looking at it being considered (wisely or otherwise) entirely irrelevant?

The point here is not the political significance of purchasing a US Design.

Politics are always a factor, often a decisive one.

The Super Hornet can clearly win the MMRCA on merits alone.

I guess we can just call the competition off then. :rolleyes:

Regardless, of Political Considerations. I believe this is supported my the all likelyhood that the Mig-35 won’t be selected. Even with India’s close ties to Russia.

I don’t think the MiG-35 will be selected either. Because it’s Russian.

That’s the point. If India is buying other American hardware, and likely to buy more in the future, then the political implications of buying or not buying American in this specific instance are reduced.

And it’s not like India has a long history of operating US aircraft or is a close ally (like, say, Canada) such that not choosing an American platform for MMRCA would itself constitute a message to Washington. Indeed, that’s actually Russia’s position in this race, and the MiG-35 tender likely doomed because of it.

Its quite pitiful really with his constant obsession for Australia to field his fantasy airforce of F22, Super F111 and KC747 tanker.

The reluctance to let the F-111 go is understandable given that there really is no modern equivalent capability on offer. Su-34 is about as close as it comes (in a fantasy world where buying Russian is feasible) and even there you’re looking at much shorter legs. If the FB-22 concept had gotten off the ground it’d be another story entirely.

My own ‘fantasy’ for the RAAF would be for it to put the JSF on hold and buy another 40-60 Super Hornets to cover our needs out through 2025 or thereabouts, whereupon we should (1) have a much clearer picture of JSF capabilities and costs in relation to then and future requirements (2) have a much clearer picture as to the potential for UCAVs to shoulder the burden post-2030 and (3) have more platform options (incl. NGAD). The latest Defence White Paper indicated a desire to increase the number of combat aircraft operated by the RAAF; exact costings for JSF are still a matter of contention, but I think the notion that it’ll be affordable enough to allow for a better than 1:1 replacement of existing aircraft is well and truly out the window at this point.