That might sound easy but it would involve a lot of time and cost in reality.
Agreed, depending on what it is that is the requirement that one is trying to meet.
If the components in question are still the same part numbers they will
be what is commonly called bogus parts and would be totally unacceptable. They would have to have totally different part #s for multiple reasons. There are multiple legal processes in both the civil and military aviation for certified replacement parts. PMA for one.
Not really viable when things such as ITAR is in place.
There is nothing to stop the rest of NATO doing exactly the same as the current US administration is doing and tearing up agreement (eg ITAR) because they do not like it. The US admin would have a hissy fit but are massively vulnerable to external financial forces in multiple ways as has been pointed out by the Canadian PM and others.
If using independent (i.e. no US involvement what-so-ever) IP then yes, things are possible. But that is easy to say and difficult to actually do.
It is amazing how many people think the US owns almost all IT and other IP. Unfortunately Europe does not make computer chips but China does and, as certain AI and other IT programs have proven for the last 10 years, China is NOT behind the US in many such technologies. In case you had not noticed it, in the last 12 months multiple NATO countries have signed trade agreements with China in a range of areas that were, until then, exclusively US supplied because like it or lump it, and I do not like it, the US is now viewed as an unreliable and/or unstable trading partner.
The explosion in drones is a different matter to something such as a manned combat aircraft. be careful assuming what happens in one field easily transfers to the other.
New engines and manned airframes have long lead times and the need is now so they are off the table. On the other hand Antonov and other Ukrainian companies long predate drones and so do both Ukrainian other NATO companies in multiple other mil tech areas, not just aviation.
Think of companies like Firepoint that did not even exist before this war and are now one of the world leaders in short to medium range airborne weapons and who will, as soon as they sort out the flamingos problems, be also be a leader in long range weapons that cost a small fraction of what the US equivalent missile costs. And all their weapons are combat tested and continuously being refined as a result of that combat testing. This is why India has just signed to obtain, and no doubt manufacture, Ukrainian drones, not Russian or American drones.
What I am suggesting will happen is not creating complete aircraft but, in the short term, primarily electronic components for all US made weapons as they are the fastest to design, prototype, test and produce. The purpose of these electronics would be to remove the US's ability to kill the weapons if used without US approval. It is through electronic components that the US can kill Ukrainian and other countries weapons being used against targets in Russia. Think how many times Ukraine could have shot down Russian bombers or destroyed them on the ground but the US said no right back to day one of this war. Secondly I can see Ukraine building their own missiles to fire from American launchers and Ukraine modifying those launchers to prevent the US preventing that use. It is a logical use of existing hardware and Ukraine has shown great ability to do such adaptations.
Remember also that Boeing outsourced a lot of their IT for civil, and probably military, aircraft to India and India is also a possible source of such replacement electronics. They are a world leader in many IT areas and willing to take on challenges that others may shy away from. Everyone thinks Apple and Google invented electronic payments using mobile phones but they were at least five years behind India in that field. Ukraine has been smart enough to use hackers to design the electronics in many of their unmanned systems because hackers think outside the box and rapidly create things that conventional university educated designers "know" are impossible. Perfect example - watch this on how one hacker, officially in one sitting, broke open Pandoras box and created the AI agent.
View: https://youtu.be/WnzR5aOElvw?is=iABxpS9kA5Ii5rpG
Sorry to sound like I am trying to 'pour cold water' on what you are saying but I live and breath this stuff on a daily basis as part of my job. I even visited and met with GKN Aerospace people last week in Sweden discussing aspects like the RM12/RM16 (Swedish designation for the F414).
No. I agree with a lot of what you said but I think you were discussing apples when I was discussing oranges. Please correct me if I am wrong.
