Second best JSF

"Drewe Manton" wrote in message
. 4...
"L'acrobat" wrote in
:

The fact that the US military will also operate some lite versions
does not change the fact that nobody outside the US will get to
operate the full version.


RAF/RN? I suspect they will "get" to operate the full up version.


It is my understanding (from comments by the US Ambassador in particular)
that only the US gets the full version.

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 13:14:47 -0400, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


"John Cook" wrote in message
.. .
Just a quick recap on the JSF Blocks, a Block 2 aircraft does seem to
fit the bill as a JSF Lite!.


With JSF, the US forces will have a block approach:
* Block 1: basic capability with JDAM and AIM-120
* Block 2: more refined mission software, more weapons certified
* Block 3: 100 per cent of mission software, all the hardware
certified

Duh. Never heard of "spiral development", eh? Oddly enough, the USAF will be
using all three blocks as well; which kind of knocks the whole "JSF Lite"
argument off its bogeys...

OK I'll try to keep it simple, the statements made to date indicate
that:-

The USA will get Block 1 and because there are no export restrictions
the rest of the partners will get Block 1.

The USA will get upgraded to Block 2 and because there are no export
restrictions on Block 2 the rest of the partners will get Block 2.

Are you keeping up?

The USA willl get upgraded to Block 3 and because there are export
restrictions on Block 3 the rest of the parnters will NOT get Block
3.

Now thats easy enough isn't it.

BTW

Michael Cosentino, the international programs director for Lockheed
Martin's JSF project, yesterday confirmed the RAAF would be sold
so-called Block 2 aircraft and not the Block 3 type provided to the US
Air Force.

Now If I'm not mistaken, getting Block 2 and not getting Block 3 means
the RAAF's JSF is Lite, or do you have some other interpretation of
the facts.

Cheers




John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:26:01 +0800, "Neil Gerace"
wrote:


"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

It is not so much a matter of not trusting/allowing them access to
technology as it is a matter of it being a spiral development effort. The
first US aircraft will be Block 1, followed by Block 2, then ultimately
Block 3; spiral development gets the aircraft into service earlier, albeit
without it having its ultimate capabilities realized. As more capabilities
are realized, they are incorporated into the production blocks. If it were
a
*trust* issue, why is the *US military* also going to have Block 1 and 2
aircraft serving in our own forces?

Eventually they'll get Block 3, whereas it looks like the RAAF never will.
That's the difference.


Never ever say never!, they might just get it one day, but only if
there's a Block 4+ for the US :-).
The major issue will be Security of Supply, Imagine that Australia and
a 'far eastern country' get involved in a bit of a tiff, and we in
Oz need an urgent modification to our 'JSF Lites' to counter a
threat, AA, SA or whatever, We have to ask the US to provide
intergration/upgrades, we are definitely not getting the source code!,
now what happens if the US does'nt want to harm relations between the
US and a 'far eastern country'.

Or If they say 'well we'd like to give that capability to you, _but_
its a bit sensitive, we will certainly try to get an export licence
real soon - sorry!'.

What happens when were asked to support another military action with
the US with our JSF Lites, should we say 'we stay at home without the
upgrade!!! ', because if we do send a JSF Lite and one is lost to
enemy action, there's going to be some serious questions asked about
how close an ally we are, and what the hell were doing sending in an
inferior aircraft into a war zone.....

Its quite a mine field, once you start going down the 'your an ally,
but not that trustworthy route'


Cheers








John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

"John Cook" wrote in message
...


Its quite a mine field, once you start going down the 'your an ally,
but not that trustworthy route'

As I noted earlier (in regards F-16/79) it is also a national prestige
issue, no country was prepared to buy the 2nd rate F-16 because it was
designed to be a 2nd rate a/c for countries that could not be trusted with
cutting edge stuff.

It will be interesting to see how this impacts on sales.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:08:51 GMT, "L'acrobat"
wrote:


"John Cook" wrote in message
.. .


Its quite a mine field, once you start going down the 'your an ally,
but not that trustworthy route'

As I noted earlier (in regards F-16/79) it is also a national prestige
issue, no country was prepared to buy the 2nd rate F-16 because it was
designed to be a 2nd rate a/c for countries that could not be trusted with
cutting edge stuff.

It will be interesting to see how this impacts on sales.


Yup your right, the fear the US is showing is laughable, even if
they gave "insert your favourite nasty regime here" a hundred
F/A-22's that "nasty regime" could'nt hope to win a conflict with the
US, what are they afraid of?, Australia with 100 JSF's!!!.

I can't see it doing anything but harm, why they feel they needs to
downgrade the JSF is beyond me, when they have the F/A-22's as their
premier fighter.....

Hmmmm, when's the F/a-22 review again...;-)

Cheers
John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

"John Cook" wrote in message
...

The USA willl get upgraded to Block 3 and because there are export
restrictions on Block 3 the rest of the parnters will NOT get Block
3.

*How* much was it going to cost to keep those Pigs flying?

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:25:58 -0700, hobo wrote:

In article ,
John Cook wrote:


With JSF, the US forces will have a block approach:
* Block 1: basic capability with JDAM and AIM-120
* Block 2: more refined mission software, more weapons certified
* Block 3: 100 per cent of mission software, all the hardware
certified

I can understand not wanting to sell TURKEY or even Israel top of the
line equipment, but if we can't trust Oz and the UK then we should just
say screw it and go home.
fighting in western europe is different then say fighting in the
middle east or far east. Oz just has to worry about fighting in the
far east, Israel/Turkey in the Middle East, where as US has to be able
to fight all over the world. WHy do you think the Israeli and Saudi
F-15's are designed to fight only in that part of the world. If they
payed the Full price for a US version, they would get a plane that
would be able to fight in any part of the world.

JMO

"Lyle" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:25:58 -0700, hobo wrote:

In article ,
John Cook wrote:


With JSF, the US forces will have a block approach:
* Block 1: basic capability with JDAM and AIM-120
* Block 2: more refined mission software, more weapons certified
* Block 3: 100 per cent of mission software, all the hardware
certified

I can understand not wanting to sell TURKEY or even Israel top of the
line equipment, but if we can't trust Oz and the UK then we should just
say screw it and go home.
fighting in western europe is different then say fighting in the
middle east or far east. Oz just has to worry about fighting in the
far east, Israel/Turkey in the Middle East, where as US has to be able
to fight all over the world. WHy do you think the Israeli and Saudi
F-15's are designed to fight only in that part of the world. If they
payed the Full price for a US version, they would get a plane that
would be able to fight in any part of the world.

No, it has been indicated that they are not allowed to buy the full version.

I'm surprised the Labor party hasn't jumped on this, electorally a "we sent
troops to support them and now we can only get a second rate plane from our
supposed friends" message might well impact in exactly the area that Labor
does most poorly, the actual supporters of the Iraq conflict, who tend to
be Lib/Nat voters.

At the momement, the poss are pretty close and Labor taking votes from the
Greens etc won't help (because they get their preferences anyway), but
nabbing just one or two percent from the Lib/Nats might tip the scales.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:29:21 -0700, Lyle wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:25:58 -0700, hobo wrote:

In article ,
John Cook wrote:


With JSF, the US forces will have a block approach:
* Block 1: basic capability with JDAM and AIM-120
* Block 2: more refined mission software, more weapons certified
* Block 3: 100 per cent of mission software, all the hardware
certified

I can understand not wanting to sell TURKEY or even Israel top of the
line equipment, but if we can't trust Oz and the UK then we should just
say screw it and go home.
fighting in western europe is different then say fighting in the
middle east or far east. Oz just has to worry about fighting in the
far east, Israel/Turkey in the Middle East, where as US has to be able
to fight all over the world. WHy do you think the Israeli and Saudi
F-15's are designed to fight only in that part of the world. If they
payed the Full price for a US version, they would get a plane that
would be able to fight in any part of the world.


Why have we got to only worry about the 'far east, Israel/Turkey in
the Middle East', If the US askes for coalition forces for somewhere
else, do we say 'no thanks coz we havn't got the latest and
greatest'!!!.

I'm sure military planners were stunned to ask for fighting forces
for Iraq!!!, they were never on our top ten list!!.

Cheers

Cheers


John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

F/A-18 with Harpoon (And the land attack modification of Harpoon) might not
be too bad.... though the F-111 does rock. I guess EFA Typhoon is out....

As it is, JSF is still a while off. Maybe picking up more F/A-18s?

DEP