• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Japanese next generation fighter study (aka i3, F-3)

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,704
Reaction score
448
Interesting ... so they are now already at iteration 26DMU !
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
26DMU (may be) or pre-25DMU?
http://www.mod.go.jp/atla/ats2015/image/pdf/o2-8.pdf
 

Attachments

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,143
Reaction score
1,103
Sure it's not just a distorted F-22 model? Looks almost identical.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,815
Reaction score
254
flateric said:
26DMU (may be) or pre-25DMU?
http://www.mod.go.jp/atla/ats2015/image/pdf/o2-8.pdf
I think that is the 25MDU, as it had the stabilators with anhedral.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
It has no EOTS like 25DMU
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
3
flateric said:
It has no EOTS like 25DMU
Do you think the Japanese government will ban export sales to the USA? Being Japanese I'm sure it's good for 200,000 miles like some Honda's. B)
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,170
Reaction score
1,176
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/proposed-japanese-combat-aircraft-bigger-f-22?NL=AW-18&Issue=AW-18_20161209_AW-18_88&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1&utm_rid=CPEN1000000230026&utm_campaign=7863&utm_medium=email&elq2=1e16aa306f0f40259d3133211a59195a
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
29DMU (or 27DMU?), IHI XF9-1core engine delivery and other program progress
https://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/ddogs38/40447563.html
 

Attachments

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
1
As much as I yearn for some translation on the propulsion details, I also wonder where they are going to get their UCAV from?

It looks like it is supposed to fly in both A2A roles as well as A2G. But something could be lost in translation for me perhaps.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,121
Reaction score
741
it has the same under-wing canoe has those being a characteristic of the PakFa.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
TomcatViP said:
it has the same under-wing canoe has those being a characteristic of the PakFa.
Su-57 'canoe' is a SRAAM weapons bay, while this is not. Stop, where have I seen something like it before...
 

Attachments

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,121
Reaction score
741
Thank you for the pic.

But why would someone have yet another Weapon bay to house a single missile with all the added complexity of a restricted volume to place the hinges, actuator etc... Was it ever asserted to be a missile bay or is this just someone assumption?
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
It's even patented by Sukhoi.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
299
flateric said:
TomcatViP said:
it has the same under-wing canoe has those being a characteristic of the PakFa.
Su-57 'canoe' is a SRAAM weapons bay, while this is not. Stop, where have I seen something like it before...
First time that I have seen that bay on the F-22. It would appear to be more of a bay for electronics than something like the missile bay's on the Su-57.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
That's exactly what I said before.
 

raptor82

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
10
Reaction score
7
flateric said:
TomcatViP said:
it has the same under-wing canoe has those being a characteristic of the PakFa.
Su-57 'canoe' is a SRAAM weapons bay, while this is not. Stop, where have I seen something like it before...
I could be wrong, but the bulges under the 25/26 DMU's wing root seems to be SRAAM missile bays exactly as PAK-FA's.
 

Attachments

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
Ah, I stand corrected then. Thanks!
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,121
Reaction score
741
flateric said:
It's even patented by Sukhoi.
Yes. I have seen that patent with its oblique trapeze and launch rail (can't find the pic right now - but should be on the website). I don't believe in this as a prime design solution. An alternate design, yes but not much.

With the F22 pictures, it is even more apparent the the idea of creating a new WP just for one single missile is weird. Expendable/Frangible outer skin why not but this?!

Notice that the Su have this, the F22 too, the 35 has no sraam and reverse ram air inlet on its shoulderwing position, the Japanese design resort to canoe too and the latest Typhoon aero innovation had those long folding panel over the wing roots (Typhoon ipa7).

Either we have here a new fashion trend or the sign of an emerging technology... with some rational military arguments behind.

 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
800
TomcatViP said:
flateric said:
It's even patented by Sukhoi.
Yes. I have seen that patent with its oblique trapeze and launch rail (can't find the pic right now - but should be on the website). I don't believe in this as a prime design solution. An alternate design, yes but not much.
That's your problem, not ours. I've seen it on real bird, open, with a missile mockup on a launch rail.
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
882
Reaction score
87
TomcatViP said:
flateric said:
It's even patented by Sukhoi.
Yes. I have seen that patent with its oblique trapeze and launch rail (can't find the pic right now - but should be on the website). I don't believe in this as a prime design solution. An alternate design, yes but not much.
This kind of continuous denial is quite epic and a sight to behold. You clearly must have some kind of variant of religious reason to continue this belief, as you are long past any rational thought.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,316
Reaction score
1,337
flateric said:
TomcatViP said:
flateric said:
It's even patented by Sukhoi.
Yes. I have seen that patent with its oblique trapeze and launch rail (can't find the pic right now - but should be on the website). I don't believe in this as a prime design solution. An alternate design, yes but not much.
That's your problem, not ours. I've seen it on real bird, open, with a missile mockup on a launch rail.
I think he's saying it's a solution, just not an ideal solution. (Then again, it depends what one's needs are.)
 

Mach42

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
78
Reaction score
12
Visible IRST and EOTS housings?
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
299
Mach42 said:
Visible IRST and EOTS housings?
Looks like it.

Another thing, the designs keeps on getting better and better. B)
 

totoro

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
342
Reaction score
59
Website
www.youtube.com
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
 

Blitzo

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
35
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
 

Reaper

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
213
Reaction score
10
Similar requirements + available technology result in similar looking concepts. And normally you pick the more conventional/proven configuration, since things get difficult at later development stages anyway (see X-35 vs X-32).
 

Blitzo

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
35
Reaper said:
Similar requirements + available technology result in similar looking concepts. And normally you pick the more conventional/proven configuration, since things get difficult at later development stages anyway (see X-35 vs X-32).
Yep, I was just being cheeky :)
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,722
Reaction score
478
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Exclusive: Japan to delay multi-billion dollar fighter jet development - sources"
Tim Kelly, Nobuhiro Kubo

November 12, 2017

Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-fighter-jet/exclusive-japan-to-delay-multi-billion-dollar-fighter-jet-development-sources-idUSKBN1DD0D4?il=0

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan will delay a decision to develop a new advanced fighter jet, four sources said, as military planners struggle to settle on a design and officials splash out on new U.S. equipment such as ballistic missile interceptors and F-35 stealth planes.

Faced with a growing military threat from North Korea and increased activity by Chinese air force jets over the East China Sea, Japan is under pressure to improve its defenses on two fronts.

Any delay to the new fighter, known as the F-3, will raise a question mark over the future of what could be one of the world’s most lucrative upcoming military contracts, estimated at more than $40 billion to develop and deploy.

A decision after the first half of 2018 would be too late for it to be included as a core program in a new five-year defense equipment plan beginning April 2019 that Japan will reveal at the end of next year.

“The direction is for the F-3 decision to be put back,” said one the sources who have knowledge of the discussion. The people who spoke to Reuters asked not to be identified because they are not authorized to talk to the media.

They said the decision, on whether to forge ahead as a domestic program or seek international collaboration, would now likely come after 2018.

“Regarding the F-3 decision, including whether we will delay a choice, we have haven’t come to any conclusion,” a spokeswoman for the Ministry of Defence Acquisition Technology & Logistics Agency said.

SQUEEZE

Analysts estimate developing the F-3 could cost $40 billion, a figure described another source as an “initial cost.”

With a defense budget of around $50 billion that has increased in the past few years at just under an annual 1 percent, that outlay, even spread out over years of development, represents a major undertaking.

It would come at a time when Japan is spending a record amounts on U.S. equipment, including Lockheed Martin Corp’s F-35 jet, Raytheon defense missiles and Boeing Co and Textron Inc’s tilt-rotor Osprey troop aircraft.

In 2013, Japan procured 118 billion yen ($1 billion) of equipment through the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system. By last year, that outlay had quadrupled to 486 billion yen.

President Donald Trump in Tokyo last week called on Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to purchase additional U.S.-made weapons as his administration pushes Washington’s allies to contribute more to their joint defense.

DUAL ROLE

For now, that defense is focused on countering the threat posed by North Korean ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons.

Japan’s defense forces, however, want the F-3 to counter growing Chinese air power in the skies over the western Pacific and East China Sea where Tokyo and Beijing are locked in a territorial dispute.

Japanese fighters scrambled a record 806 times to intercept Chinese planes in the year that ended March 31.

A second role for the yet-to-be-built fighter is to reinforce Japan’s defense industry by giving Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) and its suppliers their first fighter jet program since Japan built its F-2 fighter two decades ago.

Mitsubishi Heavy, the maker of the World War Two-era Zero fighter, in January 2016 tested a prototype jet, the ATD-X. Developed for around $350 million, it was seen as the first step toward a new homegrown frontline stealth fighter.

While support for a domestic-only program is strong among some government officials, other bureaucrats are worried about the potentially enormous expense of developing components from scratch. They support international collaboration to share costs with overseas partners and tap their technology.

“What we have now is a flying box” without all the systems that constitute a fighter such as weapons and sensors, said another of the sources.

Possible overseas partners include BAE Systems, a leading designer of the high-altitude Eurofighter interceptor backed by the British government, F-35 builder Lockheed Martin and Boeing, maker of the F-18 strike fighter. All have responded to initial requests for information from Ministry of Defence overseeing F-3 plans.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
3
Blitzo said:
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
Or, oh my god, the F-22 design is simply the most cost effective ends to a mean. Wow, imagine that! Lockheed went with a rather conventional design planform that has been around since (perhaps) the 1950s because it made $$$ sense. Holy sh*t what a concept.
 

donnage99

"Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
982
Reaction score
29
One thing can be said though - Lockheed f-22 set the philosophy for all future stealth design approach. If you look at the yf-23 or B-2, their stealth approach is very different (not in term of the radical shapes of the aircraft).
 

Blitzo

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
35
Airplane said:
Blitzo said:
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
Or, oh my god, the F-22 design is simply the most cost effective ends to a mean. Wow, imagine that! Lockheed went with a rather conventional design planform that has been around since (perhaps) the 1950s because it made $$$ sense. Holy sh*t what a concept.
;)

I'm sure you know I was being facetious.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,316
Reaction score
1,337
Airplane said:
Blitzo said:
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
Or, oh my god, the F-22 design is simply the most cost effective ends to a mean. Wow, imagine that! Lockheed went with a rather conventional design planform that has been around since (perhaps) the 1950s because it made $$$ sense. Holy sh*t what a concept.
Except that's it's complete crap. There's nothing "magical" about the F-22's design, and in fact the YF-23 was judged superior in many regards. You'll note neither Russia nor China felt compelled to parrot the design either.
 

Blitzo

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
35
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
Blitzo said:
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
Or, oh my god, the F-22 design is simply the most cost effective ends to a mean. Wow, imagine that! Lockheed went with a rather conventional design planform that has been around since (perhaps) the 1950s because it made $$$ sense. Holy sh*t what a concept.
Except that's it's complete crap. There's nothing "magical" about the F-22's design, and in fact the YF-23 was judged superior in many regards. You'll note neither Russia nor China felt compelled to parrot the design either.
And what of the Turkish, the Koreans, the Japanese and the Indians? The proposals of their designs look far more like F-22/F-35 than YF-23.

I think it's not a stretch to think that the F-22/F-35 configuration is one that happened to strike the right balance between performance and industrial capability for many of those nations, and that adopting a more radical configuration like YF-23 might have been more difficult and so it is comparatively less popular.
 

latenlazy

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
213
Reaction score
4
Blitzo said:
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
Blitzo said:
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
Or, oh my god, the F-22 design is simply the most cost effective ends to a mean. Wow, imagine that! Lockheed went with a rather conventional design planform that has been around since (perhaps) the 1950s because it made $$$ sense. Holy sh*t what a concept.
Except that's it's complete crap. There's nothing "magical" about the F-22's design, and in fact the YF-23 was judged superior in many regards. You'll note neither Russia nor China felt compelled to parrot the design either.
And what of the Turkish, the Koreans, the Japanese and the Indians? The proposals of their designs look far more like F-22/F-35 than YF-23.

I think it's not a stretch to think that the F-22/F-35 configuration is one that happened to strike the right balance between performance and industrial capability for many of those nations, and that adopting a more radical configuration like YF-23 might have been more difficult and so it is comparatively less popular.
I imagine maybe the F-22’s configuration is more conservatice than the YF-23’s, and for countries that don’t have a prominent aerospace industry with extensive experience building fighters a big part of choosing any design will involve limiting program risk.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,316
Reaction score
1,337
Blitzo said:
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
Blitzo said:
totoro said:
Design keeps getting more and more boring, personally. Would be nice if it was more visually different from F-22, instead of looking more and more like it.
Lockheed should tighten up their cybersecurity! Everyone from the Chinese to the Turkish to the Japanese, to the Indians and the Koreans seem to be developing F-22 clones. The only logical reason why so many nations are all emulating F-22 can only be due to all of them having infiltrated lockmart's databases :mad:
Or, oh my god, the F-22 design is simply the most cost effective ends to a mean. Wow, imagine that! Lockheed went with a rather conventional design planform that has been around since (perhaps) the 1950s because it made $$$ sense. Holy sh*t what a concept.
Except that's it's complete crap. There's nothing "magical" about the F-22's design, and in fact the YF-23 was judged superior in many regards. You'll note neither Russia nor China felt compelled to parrot the design either.
And what of the Turkish, the Koreans, the Japanese and the Indians? The proposals of their designs look far more like F-22/F-35 than YF-23.

I think it's not a stretch to think that the F-22/F-35 configuration is one that happened to strike the right balance between performance and industrial capability for many of those nations, and that adopting a more radical configuration like YF-23 might have been more difficult and so it is comparatively less popular.
I think, with those guys, there's probably a lot of "hey, it worked for Lockheed", and playing it safe. (Which is sortof what you're saying.) Note how the Japanese F-2, the JF-17, the SK T-50, and the F-CK-1 all have a very similar layout to the F-16. (Yeah, the F-2 basically IS an F-16 Agile, but you see what I mean.)
Maybe the YF-23 was too unfamiliar. (Then again, that didn't seem to bother Russia and China.) I just think the notion of there only being one way to do a thing isn't really born out by history.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,316
Reaction score
1,337
latenlazy said:
I imagine maybe the F-22’s configuration is more conservatice than the YF-23’s, and for countries that don’t have a prominent aerospace industry with extensive experience building fighters a big part of choosing any design will involve limiting program risk.
As I recall, that is even a big portion of why the US went with the YF-22 ("risk" also applying to the contractor's track record at the time as well), and played a big part of the YF119 being selected over the more radical YF120.
 

kitnut617

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
372
Reaction score
86
sferrin said:
Maybe the YF-23 was too unfamiliar. (Then again, that didn't seem to bother Russia and China.) I just think the notion of there only being one way to do a thing isn't really born out by history.
I have noticed that many of the Russian (and Chinese) projects look a lot like many of the rejected western projects. Maybe it's because the ""technical data"' is more easily found on line -----
 
Top