Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter II
Does anyone know if Japan's constitution prohibits the country from exporting advance weaponry? Hell half the world drive Japanese cars what's preventing them from staring their own "military industrial complex"? We all know they have the knowledge and technology to make them just the lack of will.
As far as I know Japan constitution still prohibit Japan the exporting of lethal weapon. Building car is one thing but building defense industry is much more difficult. Japan is self sufficient in ground armament but Aerospace is different matter.
Lately they can't even built zero defect car
heck when is the last time Japan produce a whiz bang product maybe Walkman. They completely missed the PC and internet and the handphone revolution
Gas turbine is the most difficult to manufacture There is only small number of country that can idependently developed Gas turbine because of extreme temperature on the first stage turbine blade. Just see how China struggle with developing single crystal turbine blade. I posted the article on the struggle of Chinese metalurgy in developing single crystal turbine blade.
It took them 30 years to prove beyond doubt that their technology is reliable
Without indigeneous Gas Turbine you can kiss goodbye in developing domestic Aerospace industry. Not that they didn't try before back in 1989 Japan want to deveoped FSX fighter but due unavailability of domestic Gas Turbine they have to rely of the like of GE and Pratt and Whitney essentialy giving veto power to US Senate and Congress by witholding the licence export Here is what wiki has to say
The FSX
Mitsubishi F-2Over 25 % of the ¥18.4 trillion Mid-Term Defense Estimate for FY 1986 through FY 1990 was allocated for equipment procurement, most of it domestically produced; but the most lucrative defense contract was for the FSX. Envisioned as a successor to the F-1 support fighter in the ASDF inventory, the FSX was expected to take ten years to develop at an estimated cost of ¥200 billion. In October 1985, the Defense Agency began considering three development options for the FSX: domestic development, adoption of an existing domestic model, or adoption of a foreign model. The agency originally favored domestic development. But by late 1986, after consultation and much pressure from the United States, it decided to consider a coproduction agreement with the United States. And in October 1987, Japanese and United States defense officials meeting in Washington decided on a joint project to remodel either the F-15 or the F-16. The Defense Agency selected the F-16.
Once the agreement was reached, it came under heavy criticism from members of the United States Congress concerned about loss of key United States technologies and technological leadership, risks of Japanese commercialization of technology at United States expense, and an insufficient share in the project for United States-based firms. As a result of the controversy, in early 1989 the United States demanded and obtained a review and revision of the agreement, restricting technology transfer and specifying that United States-based firms would receive 40 % of the work. The controversy left bitterness on both sides, and Japanese industrialists, convinced that a Japanese-designed and Japanese-developed FSX would be superior to a modified F-16 codeveloped by Japan and the United States, were irritated at United States pressure to renegotiate They considered the agreement already favorable to the United States. Japanese industrialists and defense planners seem to be inclined to be self sufficient with respect to future weapons research.
The FSX was never built, instead, the Japanese side decided to forgo cooperation with the Americans and develop a successor to the F-16 completely on their own. The result was the Mitsubishi F-2, entering service in 2001 finally. The Japanese aerospace industry is successful, also planning to launch a new Mitsubishi airplane.
Because of small production run it cost almost 4X the original F 16 and have structural problem eventually they end the production
The F-2 program was controversial, because the unit cost, which includes development costs, is roughly four times that of a Block 50/52 F-16, which does not include development costs. Inclusion of development costs distorts the incremental unit cost (this happens with most modern military aircraft), though even at the planned procurement levels, the price per aircraft was somewhat high. The initial plan of 141 F-2s would have reduced the unit cost by up to US$ 10 million per unit, not including reduced cost from mass production. As of 2008, 94 aircraft were planned.[1] Also controversial is the amounts claimed to be paid to American side as various licensing fees, although making use of the pre-existing technology was much cheaper than trying to develop it from scratch.
The Japanese may eventually make up to 94, at a cost of roughly US$ 110 million each in 2004 dollars. Much of the F-16 technology used in the F-2 was the subject of some political debate in the U.S. and Japan in the early 1990s. The technology transfers were authorized however, and the project proceeded.
The F-2's maiden flight was on 7 October 1995. Later that year, the Japanese government approved an order for 141 (but that was soon cut to 130), to enter service by 1999; structural problems resulted in service entry being delayed until 2000. Because of issues with cost-efficiency, orders for the aircraft were curtailed to 98 in 2004.
On 31 October 2007, an F-2B crashed during takeoff and subsequently caught fire at Nagoya Airfield in central Japan. The jet was being taken up on a test flight by Mitsubishi employees, after major maintenance and before being delivered to the JSDF. Both test pilots survived the incident with only minor injuries.[5] It was eventually determined that improper wiring caused the crash
So much for the much vaunted "Japanese technology prowess"
