If I may be allowed to insert my 2c worth into this spiralling-out-of-control machine...
There is always 2 sides to any argument.
I will concede that the JSF was a fantastic idea in its inception - produce a more affordable version of the F/A-22 for dissemination to allies, while allowing the U.S. to maintain its techology gap to facilitate its standing as the only power in the Western world with the ability to pose a threat to any spot on the globe.
While this idea - and I admit, the syntax of the aforementioned was harsh - is good in theory, we then face the real question of who is to benefit the most.
As an Aussie, our defence force has a vested interest in seeing projects born through Boeing thrive. The benefits of this partnership are debatable, but that is for another time...
The strategic gain that this aircraft will give to the U.S. is questionable.
Let's have a little bit of a squiz as to why...
The F/A-22 Raptor will be a high-impact weapon in any scenario that we can imagine - its attributes are not on trial here, but the question for mine is thus...
As the Raptor is proving to be a strong performer, and morphing through upgrades/insight into an aircraft that can perform throughout the gamut from ACM to Ground Attack to - and I admit I am not sure on this last point - recce, then what place does the JSF hold on the operational ladder than a runner-up that realistically was always optioned to be cancelled if it proved to be too much of a burden fiscally and under the scrutiny of Congress??
This leads to the obvious question...
If the support isn't going to forthcoming for this aircraft from its home-production country, and the U.S. is being so frugal in allowing other nations to have impact on its production variables, then do we really believe that we have a concrete contract-filler coming to our respective countries to fill the capability gaps that are starting to gape for all of us??
My concern would be quelled much more if more countries saw fit to invest at least some cosmetic interest in proposals to the U.S. Government/Defence Department that a watered-down version of the F/A-22 be researched for export to its allies.
We were never going to get the same version of the JSF anyway -what is the harm in lowering production/flyaway costs on one aircraft, thereby doing the U.S. a favour, rather than be passengers in a program that none of us have real power to influence and watch the Raptor flourish??
I have no doubt that most of us would be willing to accept a lower-stealth version of the Raptor, with subsequent software differences to make interoperability more able...
What do others think??
Happy to hear any informed arguments of support or blatant disagreement...
