Main battle tanks of today.....

[Kruska]

Hmmmm..

Not quite, Germany sold exactly the same technology to NATO partners. In the meantime the US took over the German U-boot shipyard to get that technology and they are not forwarding the latest technology to e.g. Greece. However Singapore received top notch F-15's including AIM 120's and they are demanding the same for their current F-35 involvment.

And do you seriously think that the "English Cousins" will ever pose negativley or develop to be a threat towards the USA ?

It is indeed a conceived US policy to whom to give what, unlike European ventures where off course all involved partners share the same knowhow.

So my Australian friends, don't hesitate and buy those Eurofighters and Leo 2A6.

Regards
Kruska

 

[Soren]

Do you think that the Germans sell there modern U Boots with the latest technology. No they sell them with lesser technology so that they keep an edge.

The Italian Navy has recieved the same Type 212A's that the German navy operates, it is Korea Greece who have recieved the new Type 214's without some of the classified technology.

So I don't really see a comparison here, and like I said SAAB Eurofighter will both supply the new upgrades as they arrive. Lockheed's decision not to is suspicious. Like I said I can understand the deal about the F-22, but its not for sale like the F-35 is.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The Italian Navy has recieved the same Type 212A's that the German navy operates, it is Korea Greece who have recieved the new Type 214's without some of the classified technology.

So I don't really see a comparison here, and like I said SAAB Eurofighter will both supply the new upgrades as they arrive. Lockheed's decision not to is suspicious. Like I said I can understand the deal about the F-22, but its not for sale like the F-35 is.

I was referring to the Type 214. Did I ever say the Type 212? No. The 214 is based off of the 212 and is sold for export. It is basically the same as the 212 but with out the non-magnetic hull and the AIP propullsion system.

Why because you dont sell you top technology to other countries...

Again Soren, it is not a new idea and all countries do it.

" will ever pose negativley or develop to be a threat towards the USA ?

It is indeed a conceived US policy to whom to give what, unlike European ventures where off course all involved partners share the same knowhow.

Ofcourse the European Partners recieve the same technology? They designed it and worked on it together. That is completely different than say England building a new F-23000 Super Lightning (ofcourse this does not exist) and selling the there top technology to France who did not work on the project with them

So sorry that does not compare...

 

[Kruska]

Hello D.A.I.G.

Again Hmmmm...

The F-35 project is actually a joint venture of many countries especially NATO partners. Singapore is very much even technologywise involved. It is not a sole US project such as the F-22 or B-2 etc. etc.

I do fully understand the US position of "protectionism", which is not shared by Germany on its products to NATO or ANZUC members.

So again my dear Australians, "Think it over"

Regards
Kruska

 

[Glider]

And do you seriously think that the "English Cousins" will ever pose negativley or develop to be a threat towards the USA ?

So my Australian friends, don't hesitate and buy those Eurofighters and Leo 2A6.

Regards
Kruska

Re the F35 the UK had the idea that the USA were concerned that the UK would develop a better version. Sounds daft I know, but we did have a track record of doing this with Helicopters and developing better weapons / systems for the F4.
The technology that the US were denying us would have stopped the UK integrating new developments into the airframe, without having to hand the whole thing over to the US for testing. This was now been resolved and we now have the access required.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Hello D.A.I.G.

Again Hmmmm...

The F-35 project is actually a joint venture of many countries especially NATO partners. Singapore is very much even technologywise involved. It is not a sole US project such as the F-22 or B-2 etc. etc.

I do fully understand the US position of "protectionism", which is not shared by Germany on its products to NATO or ANZUC members.

So again my dear Australians, "Think it over"

Regards
Kruska

Sorry but I find it very hard to believe that Germany does not have a position of "protectionism" and anyone who believes so is either naive or just does not wish to believe it for whatever reasons.

I will leave it at that and allow this to get back on topic...

 

[Soren]

I was referring to the Type 214. Did I ever say the Type 212? No. The 214 is based off of the 212 and is sold for export. It is basically the same as the 212 but with out the non-magnetic hull and the AIP propullsion system.

Why because you dont sell you top technology to other countries...

Yet the Germans gave this technology to the US, and Italy actually have 212's in service.... Like I said it is only Greece Korea who are withheld the technology here.

Again Soren, it is not a new idea and all countries do it.

I never said it was a new idea, but not all countries do it to their close Allies.


Anyway like you said lets get back on topic.

 

[Matt308]

I mean you don't offer to sell someone something and then deny them the evolutionary upgrades, that's like giving a guy who has just bought a whole aeroplane a set of wings instead and then there you go, have fun!

Soren, you are absolutely off base on this one. The US is not selling development partners the Mk I or initial version and then abandoning them. That is pure BS, poppycock and crap. You watch too much TV my friend.

The US is not willing to share stealth development information nor software source code. Member nations are certainly allowed to purchase future revisions, but the US retains the right to keep those portions mentioned above proprietary and sovereign. To do otherwise would require the direct transfer of the technology origins.

If member nations want to have upgrades or undergo MAJOR maintenance cycles, then the US is willing to provide that as part of the purchase agreement. We are not going to provide the world with the latest physical stealth development processes and the source code for the flight controls computer/flight management computer.

Get over it. As Adler says, you guys do the same damn thing. The difference is that everyone wants a piece of the stealth pie and the US is not willing to give it up.

This doesn't mean you can't upgrade your own aircraft. You just can't change the basic core software applications without lots of reverse engineering and decrypting state secrets.

 

[Soren]

Huh?

Matt, Lockheed doesn't want to upgrade the JSF-35's sold to the newest blocks, that's the whole problem, and the reason behind the many doubts expressed by the many supposed buyers of the a/c. Many potential costumers are for this reason starting to prefer the Eurofighter SAAB Gripen as their next generation fighter.

If Lockheed would but agree to upgrade the a/c to the newest blocks then this problem would be none-existant.

 

[Matt308]

Well if that is the interpretation, then have at the Eurofighter and Gripen. It would be an absolute shame that America's allies would turn a technical issue into political fodder.

However, I assure you that they never will. The F-35, and its upgrades, will be available to member nations. I have no worries. It's all political posturing.

 

[Soren]

All I know is that there's allot of commotion around this issue at the moment, and it seems esp. SAAB is gaining an edge as their prize tag and delivery plan seems to fit more of the customers.

Are you saying you havent heard about this before Matt ??

 

[Matt308]

I absolutely have. And I understand the issue. It is not about upgrades, it is about indigenous maintenance at major checks for the stealth aspects and ability to modify core software. Both claimed as essential for an independent nation to upkeep their air assets and qualify them for future compatibility with different mission software, weapon payload and C4I. I understand.

But if no likey, buy Saab. And I would suggest, buy many.

 

[Soren]

IMO Lockheed should make it available, they'd score allot of costumers that way I'm sure, esp. seeing many of the nations are really enthustiastic about the VTOL design as that will mean much smaller airfields are needed.

And I would suggest, buy many.

Why buy many ?

 

[Matt308]

Because you get what you pay for.

 

[Soren]

Hehe not always..

 

[Matt308]

Okay buddy.

Where abouts in Germany do you live in Soren?

 

[Soren]

Despite what you believe I don't live in Germany.

 

[Matt308]

Oh. I saw Adler ask you a few times and you didn't respond. The Mods can trace your IP, so I just assumed.

Tell me my guess is right, you are a states boy.

 

[Matt308]

Besides... I couldn't figure out why you would be prowling around this site at 0530 German local time.

So whereabouts, Soren?

 

[Soren]

Never told anyone and wont for some time As I said in another thread, I appreciate my anonymity.