Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

[Ares]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.c ... 63de1d73f4

The Trump administration is pressuring Japan to choose a US defence company to develop jointly a replacement for its F-2 fighter jets as Tokyo considers a British alternative to cut its reliance on American weapons.

The US has proposed jointly developing a fighter based on the F-35 and F-22. But it would limit the use of Japanese technology, resulting in a “black box” fighter with no access to the source code required for independent upgrades — something the Japanese air force would like and many lawmakers consider essential to sovereignty.

He added the similar timeline of the Tempest made collaboration with the UK a “reasonable possibility” but the decision would depend on capability, cost and the potential for upgrades.

The decision will be up to Mr Abe, who will have to choose between independent technology and nationalist hopes or the US alliance and his prized relationship with Mr Trump.

Allegedly what Lockheed Martin proposed to the Japanese government, based on FB-22-3.

[inch]

I don't think Abe has any choice but jump in with trump ,think he will make it too hard for any other possible team ups ,think it was always going to be with the USA tbh and Japan just saying might go with someone else to get a better deal with USA

[ArmChairCivvy]

Japan just saying might go with someone else to get a better deal with USA

Have you seen how much of S. Korea's defence budget is dedicated to R&D?
- yes, I know, they should be on the same side, and the comparison is stupid
- but there is 7k yrs of history to 'who's the top dog', or cartoon-wise Top Cat

[Ron5]

Seems a complete non-story to me. US administration applies pressure to buy US while UK government applies pressure to buy British (Oh you didn't notice all the British Typhoon trips to Japan?).

The FT article naturally generated the usual hundreds of negative comments slamming (in order): Trump, the US, & Boris. Dutifully picked up and repeated on other sites by the same Putin-bots and useful idiots. One or two of the later appear here.

End result will be that Japan will decide to do what's best for Japan. I would caution anyone who wishes to be their partner that they march to a different drummer and will take some adjusting to. I personally would advise against but what do I know.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Putin-bots and useful idiots. One or two of the later appear here.

None of the former ?

[Timmymagic]

Seems a complete non-story to me. US administration applies pressure to buy US while UK government applies pressure to buy British (Oh you didn't notice all the British Typhoon trips to Japan?).

Perhaps buying the P-1 may have been a smarter move than P-8....

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part. That might be Trump's legacy to the US arms industry. Sure he'll be gone in time, and normal service will resume, but that lingering doubt that a lot of countries will now have, particularly within their defence and security communities may change the terms that the US can sell arms under in the future. If the US can adapt it might not be a problem, at 59% of global arms sales they're in the driving seat after all but if you were Japan you'd probably be looking for increased sovereignty as well. It might be the key selling point to Tempest. I don't think FCAS will be as open.

[SW1]

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part

Sovereignty has been brought into more focus because of what happened to Turkey on F35. You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee. Now if the US can do that to a NATO ally then they can do it to anybody. How long does your fighter capability last if the US turns off support?

[Ron5]

Perhaps buying the P-1 may have been a smarter move than P-8....

God no. Classic case of paying more for less.

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part. That might be Trump's legacy to the US arms industry. Sure he'll be gone in time, and normal service will resume, but that lingering doubt that a lot of countries will now have, particularly within their defence and security communities may change the terms that the US can sell arms under in the future. If the US can adapt it might not be a problem, at 59% of global arms sales they're in the driving seat after all but if you were Japan you'd probably be looking for increased sovereignty as well. It might be the key selling point to Tempest. I don't think FCAS will be as open.

Nothing to do with Trump. I hate the guy but don't lay this at his door. If you buy foreign, this is what you get. Buy Chinese, buy Russian, buy French, buy British, it's all the same.

[Ron5]

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part

Sovereignty has been brought into more focus because of what happened to Turkey on F35. You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee. Now if the US can do that to a NATO ally then they can do it to anybody. How long does your fighter capability last if the US turns off support?

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

And how long would the Saudi Typhoon capability last if the UK turned off the support?

[Dahedd]

Perhaps buying the P-1 may have been a smarter move than P-8....

I've a couple of mates who are either current or ex RAF "kipper fleet" One lad is currently serving with the P8s & says it was the only deal in town, the assistance from the USN made it the only option.

The other lad who left the RAF 5/6 years back was very much in favour of the Japanese P1. Felt it far better matched the way the RAF did its anti submarine work.

[SW1]

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part

Sovereignty has been brought into more focus because of what happened to Turkey on F35. You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee. Now if the US can do that to a NATO ally then they can do it to anybody. How long does your fighter capability last if the US turns off support?

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

And how long would the Saudi Typhoon capability last if the UK turned off the support?

It’s amazing how someone can contradict themselves and make the same point all in one post but I have to hand it to you, you managed it.

[Ron5]

Perhaps buying the P-1 may have been a smarter move than P-8....

I've a couple of mates who are either current or ex RAF "kipper fleet" One lad is currently serving with the P8s & says it was the only deal in town, the assistance from the USN made it the only option.

The other lad who left the RAF 5/6 years back was very much in favour of the Japanese P1. Felt it far better matched the way the RAF did its anti submarine work.

My guess is that the P-1 is more suitable for the low level style of operation that the Nimrod crews used to employ. Hence the second guy's opinion.

[Ron5]

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part

Sovereignty has been brought into more focus because of what happened to Turkey on F35. You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee. Now if the US can do that to a NATO ally then they can do it to anybody. How long does your fighter capability last if the US turns off support?

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

And how long would the Saudi Typhoon capability last if the UK turned off the support?

It’s amazing how someone can contradict themselves and make the same point all in one post but I have to hand it to you, you managed it.

You really are an idiot, even for an RAF guy.

The US cut off the F-35 from Turkey because Turkey bought Russian air defense missile systems. Nobody in the US or NATO or the JSF partnership, had any serious problems with the US taking that action. In fact the only serious criticisms were that it took so long. Your comment: "You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee" is utterly moronic.

[SW1]

The bit that seems to have a little bit of truth to it is the sovereignty part

Sovereignty has been brought into more focus because of what happened to Turkey on F35. You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee. Now if the US can do that to a NATO ally then they can do it to anybody. How long does your fighter capability last if the US turns off support?

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

And how long would the Saudi Typhoon capability last if the UK turned off the support?

It’s amazing how someone can contradict themselves and make the same point all in one post but I have to hand it to you, you managed it.

You really are an idiot, even for an RAF guy.

The US cut off the F-35 from Turkey because Turkey bought Russian air defense missile systems. Nobody in the US or NATO or the JSF partnership, had any serious problems with the US taking that action. In fact the only serious criticisms were that it took so long. Your comment: "You supposedly weren’t able to do that especially if you’d paid the joining fee" is utterly moronic.

Haha not even close. The why they were removed isn’t the issue. If you have sovereignty of capability you shouldn’t be able to have your a/c removed.

[Timmymagic]

Nothing to do with Trump. I hate the guy but don't lay this at his door. If you buy foreign, this is what you get. Buy Chinese, buy Russian, buy French, buy British, it's all the same.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree as to the implications. There have clearly been countries where the US (and other nations) have withdrawn support, most of the time for perfectly valid reasons, and I agree with the US stance over Turkey. But the software on modern combat aircraft has driven up the sovereignty issue to new heights, at least in the eyes of some of the larger customers (I suspect the smaller customers have little leverage to expect any difference). There is clearly concerns and pushback on the issue. I'd suggest that whomever reacts to those concerns could put themselves in a decent position. The fact that the Tempest team seem to be reacting to that, and FCAS and (apparently) the US manufacturers seem to be holding their line strikes me as a good sign.

[Ron5]

Putin-bots and useful idiots. One or two of the later appear here.

None of the former ?

I think we've found one of the later.

[Ron5]

Nothing to do with Trump. I hate the guy but don't lay this at his door. If you buy foreign, this is what you get. Buy Chinese, buy Russian, buy French, buy British, it's all the same.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree as to the implications. There have clearly been countries where the US (and other nations) have withdrawn support, most of the time for perfectly valid reasons, and I agree with the US stance over Turkey. But the software on modern combat aircraft has driven up the sovereignty issue to new heights, at least in the eyes of some of the larger customers (I suspect the smaller customers have little leverage to expect any difference). There is clearly concerns and pushback on the issue. I'd suggest that whomever reacts to those concerns could put themselves in a decent position. The fact that the Tempest team seem to be reacting to that, and FCAS and (apparently) the US manufacturers seem to be holding their line strikes me as a good sign.

Yes, as a manufacturer or country, you can react to such pushback by ceding control of your technology to your customer. Not sure that's a lasting strategy, but if that's all you have to offer...

Luckily the US has other things to offer other that technology transfer, like actual defense.

"Dear Japan, if you buy our jets, we will defend you with our biggest navy in the world ,our biggest air force in the world and our best equipped army in the world including our nuclear weapons, love America" versus "Dear Japan, partner with us in developing new jets and if China invades, we will send you our very best wishes, love Britain P.S. if Jeremy is our PM we won't even send you that"

[cockneyjock1974]

Deleted post
Why bother! Mods will do f all anyway.

[SD67]

Luckily the US has other things to offer other that technology transfer, like actual defense.

"Dear Japan, if you buy our jets, we will defend you with our biggest navy in the world ,our biggest air force in the world and our best equipped army in the world including our nuclear weapons, love America" versus "Dear Japan, partner with us in developing new jets and if China invades, we will send you our very best wishes, love Britain P.S. if Jeremy is our PM we won't even send you that"

Ron if it were was black and white as that then the Saudis would never have bought Typhoon and Tornado. Didn’t affect the US decision in GW1. The US is confronting / competing with China in the Pacific for a host of very good strategic reasons and one fighter purchase is not going to change that.
Japan are already collaborating with us on Meteor. The sky hasn’t fallen on anyone.

Whether they’d actually be a good partner for Tempest - I have my doubts. Most likely they’re using us as leverage to get the
Operational sovereignty they’re looking for. I

On the P1 / P8 question I think the RAF should have at least held a competition. With a transparent process and a clear validated set of requirements. Funny how Boeing seems to always get waved though without a competition <cough cough> Ryanair Factor <cough cough>

[Ron5]

Luckily the US has other things to offer other that technology transfer, like actual defense.

"Dear Japan, if you buy our jets, we will defend you with our biggest navy in the world ,our biggest air force in the world and our best equipped army in the world including our nuclear weapons, love America" versus "Dear Japan, partner with us in developing new jets and if China invades, we will send you our very best wishes, love Britain P.S. if Jeremy is our PM we won't even send you that"

Ron if it were was black and white as that then the Saudis would never have bought Typhoon and Tornado. Didn’t affect the US decision in GW1. The US is confronting / competing with China in the Pacific for a host of very good strategic reasons and one fighter purchase is not going to change that.
Japan are already collaborating with us on Meteor. The sky hasn’t fallen on anyone.

Whether they’d actually be a good partner for Tempest - I have my doubts. Most likely they’re using us as leverage to get the
Operational sovereignty they’re looking for. I

On the P1 / P8 question I think the RAF should have at least held a competition. With a transparent process and a clear validated set of requirements. Funny how Boeing seems to always get waved though without a competition <cough cough> Ryanair Factor <cough cough>

We were talking about Japan and with Japan, the UK has next to no leverage compared with the US. That is my point. If you want to argue otherwise have at it. If you want to talk about Saudi Arabia, that is another discussion.

No "threat", implied or otherwise, of partnering with the Brits on Tempest will make the slightest difference to the US poistion. It's a paper tiger (see what I did there).

Collaborating on Meteor eh? Jury is still out on that one.

Regarding P1 vs P8, why have a competition when the world and his brother knows who the winner is going to be? Effing pointless.

Or as the Brit general in charge of MVRP said when asked why didn't he have a competition before choosing the American JLTV "the other companies clearly could not build a vehicle for less than twice the price so why bother?".

So whoever is in charge of the P-8 purchase might say, "the Yanks lets us train and fly their P-8's for free for however many years since Nimrod was binned on the understanding we would eventually buy P-8's, are we now going to say we've changed our minds?"

Sorry I don't get the Ryanair reference. If it's another limey whinge then I'm not interested in getting it either.

[Ron5]

Deleted post
Why bother! Mods will do f all anyway.

I read it. Didn't bother me. I'm sure I deserve some shit thrown my way. Nobody's perfect.

[seaspear]

An interesting article suggesting President Trump is pressuring Japan not to go with B.A.E
https://www.defense-aerospace.com/artic ... ghter.html

[inch]

Like as I said total hot air as in Japan saying might go with tempest program ,it's so a non story I don't know why people are even reporting it ,it's going to be with the Americans end ov , doesn't mean we aren't going too hear stories for ages then by surprise they announce they going with America lol ,pure baloney farce

[ArmChairCivvy]

It now seems a pity that I didn't buy The Times yesterday (an x-ref in the linked article that was referencing the FT of the 10th):

(EDITOR’S NOTE: The Times reported Dec. 11 said “a source close to the Tempest program said that competition between Britain and the US for the F-3 contract was ‘hotting up’ and that ‘we expect it will only get more intense as we move towards a final decision next year.’”)

[Meriv9]

The right way is showing immediate benefits now IMHO.

Italy buys P1, Japan buys something from us directly or from you and you end the triangle buying something from us.