Haanzo
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 283
- Reaction score
- 0
Sen. Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii) has told the Japanese government that a fleet of 40 Raptors desensitized for foreign military sales would cost about $11.6 billion with deliveries of combat-ready stealth fighters beginning in 2014.
But while congressional support for the F-22 is creating a lot of political interest and support, aerospace industry analysts say its all just rhetoric unless someone in the executive branch preferably from the White House -- steps up to support extended Raptor production and export of the stealthy, 5th generation fighter. So far, that has not happened.
However, some very heavy hitters are supporting both continued production and sales to Japan, in particular. Sen. Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) are pushing both in public and behind the scene.
The cost of preparing the F-22 for export was detailed in a letter from Inouye, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to Ichiro Fujisake, Japans Ambassador to Washington. Starting with the assumption of a letter of agreement in early 2010, major development would take approximately four years, followed by ground and flight testing, the letter says. Procurement of long-lead materials would begin in 2011 with production to begin in mid-2014, The first mission capable aircraft could be delivered to Japan in 2017.
The estimate for non-recurring development and manufacturing cost is $2.3 billion, the letter continues. The actual cost to produce forty aircraft is approximately $9.3 billion, bringing the total to $11.6 billion. Spreading that cost over an estimated forty aircraft leads to an average aircraft cost of $290 million. An associated letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the figures were calculated using information which was provided by the Air Force, Inoyues second letter says. I believe the Government of Japan is likely to be interested in purchasing the aircraft even at the relatively high price which has been estimated.
The Pentagon is paying $142.5 million per aircraft as part of a multi-year contract. Aerospace industry analysts say that any break in F-22 production would add extra costs.
Meanwhile, the White Houses Office of Management and Budget was drawing a number of lines in the sand marking disagreements with the House passage of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2010.
A Statement of Administration Policy contends that OMB will recommend a veto of the proposed legislation if it includes $369 million in advanced procurement funds for F-22s in Fiscal 2011 or addition of $603 million for an alternative engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
This is nothing unusual, says the industry analyst. It happens every time there is new defense legislation.
There were other points of contention without the veto threat attached:
Restrictions on the Missile Defense Agency limiting U.S. engagements with NATO and European allies regarding missile defense.
The need to add proposals to build the capacity of partner nation special and conventional forces in order to improve and increase coalition participation in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Requirements to maintain the strategic airlift fleet at 316 aircraft and restrictions on retiring C-5s.
Restrictions on the Futenma Replacement Facility in Okinawa that would broach agreements reached with Japan and put the international agreement on the facility at risk.
Restrictions on accelerated aircraft retirement by the U.S. Air Force.
Reduction of $163 million in funding for the Armys Extended Range Multi-Purpose UAV which would result in a 50% cut in systems planned for Fiscal 2010.
Ares Homepage
so japs getting f-22s
But while congressional support for the F-22 is creating a lot of political interest and support, aerospace industry analysts say its all just rhetoric unless someone in the executive branch preferably from the White House -- steps up to support extended Raptor production and export of the stealthy, 5th generation fighter. So far, that has not happened.
However, some very heavy hitters are supporting both continued production and sales to Japan, in particular. Sen. Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) are pushing both in public and behind the scene.
The cost of preparing the F-22 for export was detailed in a letter from Inouye, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to Ichiro Fujisake, Japans Ambassador to Washington. Starting with the assumption of a letter of agreement in early 2010, major development would take approximately four years, followed by ground and flight testing, the letter says. Procurement of long-lead materials would begin in 2011 with production to begin in mid-2014, The first mission capable aircraft could be delivered to Japan in 2017.
The estimate for non-recurring development and manufacturing cost is $2.3 billion, the letter continues. The actual cost to produce forty aircraft is approximately $9.3 billion, bringing the total to $11.6 billion. Spreading that cost over an estimated forty aircraft leads to an average aircraft cost of $290 million. An associated letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the figures were calculated using information which was provided by the Air Force, Inoyues second letter says. I believe the Government of Japan is likely to be interested in purchasing the aircraft even at the relatively high price which has been estimated.
The Pentagon is paying $142.5 million per aircraft as part of a multi-year contract. Aerospace industry analysts say that any break in F-22 production would add extra costs.
Meanwhile, the White Houses Office of Management and Budget was drawing a number of lines in the sand marking disagreements with the House passage of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2010.
A Statement of Administration Policy contends that OMB will recommend a veto of the proposed legislation if it includes $369 million in advanced procurement funds for F-22s in Fiscal 2011 or addition of $603 million for an alternative engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
This is nothing unusual, says the industry analyst. It happens every time there is new defense legislation.
There were other points of contention without the veto threat attached:
Restrictions on the Missile Defense Agency limiting U.S. engagements with NATO and European allies regarding missile defense.
The need to add proposals to build the capacity of partner nation special and conventional forces in order to improve and increase coalition participation in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Requirements to maintain the strategic airlift fleet at 316 aircraft and restrictions on retiring C-5s.
Restrictions on the Futenma Replacement Facility in Okinawa that would broach agreements reached with Japan and put the international agreement on the facility at risk.
Restrictions on accelerated aircraft retirement by the U.S. Air Force.
Reduction of $163 million in funding for the Armys Extended Range Multi-Purpose UAV which would result in a 50% cut in systems planned for Fiscal 2010.
Ares Homepage
so japs getting f-22s
bye
