May 2010 Archives

 

I found this Japanese television feature package that gives a good overview of the country's ATD-X programme, which aims to produce a technology demonstrator of a fifth generation stealth fighter.

Last week, I was in Tokyo and met with Japanese ministry of defence officials who are involved in the ATD-X programme.

I asked them why Japan is embarking on development of a fifth generation stealth fighter?

The answer I got was two-fold. One of the officials told me the ATD-X programme is a direct response to the USA's refusal to allow Japan to purchase the F-22 Raptor. Another told me that Japan wants to develop fifth generation fighter technology so it can stay ahead of China.

Japan is very concerned about China's growing fleet of advanced fighters such as the Sukhoi Su-30 and Sukhoi Su-27. China is also working on development of its own fifth generation fighter and there is the possibility that Russia's PAK-FA fifth generation fighter, currently in development, could end up in Chinese hands one day.

Even though Japan is working on a technology demonstrator, it is unlikely to become a new aircraft programme due to the high costs involved. This is the impression I got in Japan and its also one of the points raised in this TV package.

The growing trend towards international joint-development of military aircraft is leading Japan to review its military export policies.

Japan's long-standing ban on the export of military equipment effectively stops local manufacturers from participating international programmes such as the Joint Strike Fighter. But many of the top programmes these days are multinational joint-development programmes. And Japan's current system of manufacturing aircraft under licence is proving to be too costly.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries presently makes the F-2, an aircraft manufactured under licence as it is based on the Lockheed Martin F-16. The F-2 is seen here in this picture. The F-2 is incredibly expensive to produce, to the point that it would have actually been much cheaper if Japan had just bought F-16s from the USA.

Japan is about to embark on a new fighter competition, the FX programme, that aims to procure 40-50 fighters to replace Japan's ageing McDonnell Douglas F-4 fighters.

During my trip to Tokyo I met with officials from Japan's ministry of defence and executives from some of the local defence manufacturers. There is no doubt in my mind that Japan is about to embark on a major shift in government policy. The objective - Japanese involvement in joint-development of military aircraft for the international market.

I visited ShinMaywa Industries, on the outskirts of Tokyo, today and met with Yasuo Kawanishi, who is involved in business development. I also met with Eiichi Negishi, who is seconded to the Japan Aircraft Development Corporation, and is helping with commercialisation of the ShinMaywa US-2 amphibious aircraft.

The US-2 is a search and rescue (SAR) aircraft in service with the Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force.

Because it is a niche product, ShinMaywa has only delivered four US-2s to the Maritime Self-Defence Force and has just one more on order, for delivery in 2012.

Clearly ShinMaywa needs to find other customers to justify the investment it has made in this aircraft.

Japanese companies are forbidden from exporting military equipment, except to the USA, so ShinMaywa has developed a concept for a civil variant, namely the US-2 fire-fighting amphibian. As the name suggests, this is a fire-fighting aircraft that can land and take-off from rough seas with waves of up to around 3m.

On paper the US-2 stacks up pretty well against other fire-fighting amphibious aircraft.
ShinMaywa's product spec sheet says the US-2 can carry 15t of water whereas the Beriev Be-200 and the Bombardier 415 can carry only 12t and 6t of water respectively.

The Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency tells me that they have difficulty landing their 415 in seas with more than one metre high waves. The US-2, meanwhile, can handle 3m high waves.

So the Japanese have a product that appears to be the best on paper and we know they can build it because they are already building the SAR version.

Meanwhile, China's AVIC General Aviation Company is trying to develop a fire-fighting amphibious aircraft called the Dragon 600.

I know that relations between China and Japan are strained and there is a lot of rivalry between the two. But if we put aside emotions and look at it rationally, it makes no sense for China and Japan to compete on their own in such a niche market.

It would make more sense for the two to co-operate and work together on this. One of ShinMaywa's problems is the high cost of manufacturing in Japan. If some of the manufacturing was done in China it would allow the US-2 amphibious aircraft to compete better on price.

Some would argue that having manufacturing of US-2 parts done in China would be giving the Chinese defence technology. I don't buy this argument. We're not talking about attack aircraft here. The US-2 is a four-engined turboprop SAR aircraft which is made almost entirely from metal with almost no composite materials.

If some of the systems on board have dual civil and military use then Japan, with regards to the civil variant, can always substitute these with other systems.

It is also worth adding that when Italy and France came to the realisation a few decades ago that they were developing very similar turboprop aircraft, they responded by teaming up rather than competing. The company they created was ATR, a 50-50 joint-venture between EADS and Italy's Alenia Aeronautica.

I am in Tokyo doing some research on the Japanese aircraft manufacturing industry and are looking very closely at the Japanese defence market.

For decades Japan has been a closed shop where western aerospace companies wishing to sell into Japan have had to partner with one of the large Japanese manufacturing conglomerates such as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Fuji Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries.

The local partner assembles the aircraft in Japan at great cost and everyone benefits except for the Japanese tax payer.

The western aerospace company makes a profit, the Japanese partner makes a profit and the government can take comfort from the fact it is helping to keep Japan's aerospace manufacturing industry alive.

But recent budget constraints has led the government to question the high cost of procurement.

It has even taken the bold step of cancelling an order for Fuji manufactured AH-64D Apache helicopters, citing the high costs of each helicopter.

Fuji has responded by suing the government, hence signalling the end to the cosy relationship that once existed between government and Japan's aerospace manufacturing industry.

By cancelling the order, the government has signalled that it has had enough with paying so much for defence equipment. The question is, what is it planning to do next?

Singapore-based low cost carrier Tiger Airways has dominated its fair share of news headlines this year, as it rolled out an initial public offering, announced a third Australian base at Avalon Airport and announced ambitious plans to double its fleet in the next two years.

Which is all well and good, because it's always exciting to hear about an airline's expansion plans.

But lately, Tiger's efforts to steal the limelight have come across as well... a tad desperate.

First, there was that press release trumpeting itself as the "second biggest airline in Singapore". Then today, it publicly challenged rivals AirAsia and Jetstar to a "punctuality and transparency contest", alleging that the two airlines' on-time performance results are based on criteria that are not as strict as Tiger's.

Honestly, I doubt Tiger will get a response from either AirAsia or Jetstar, which as we know, are also busy expanding their route network in the increasingly competitive low-cost carrier market.

So Tiger, perhaps it's time to sink your claws into something, well, more substantial. Tell us about your new routes, about your plans for another base outside Singapore and Australia, about how you plan to increase profit, instead of spending time trying to undermine your rivals.

Work at those plans, and then let the results speak for themselves.

Because at the end of the day, you wouldn't want to be accused of being a toothless tiger.

Indonesian Aerospace (IAe) is developing a new 19-seat aircraft, the N219. I spoke with the aircraft-maker's director of aero-structure Andi Alisjahbana, who sent me these pictures of the aircraft.

IAe already makes the CASA 212-200 under licence from Spain but the Indonesians are developing the N219 independently of CASA and argue that the Indonesian aircraft will not compete against the 212 because it is a slightly smaller aircraft and is a Part 23 rather than a Part 25 aircraft.

The Indonesians claim that the N219 will have a technologically-advanced tapered wing. Another selling point is that the cabin has three-abreast seating.

The product specs show the aircraft will have a maximum take-off weight of around 7t and its maximum payload will be 2.5t.

IAe will design the aircraft to take off from runways shorter than 600m-long.

It looks like the N219 will be competing for sales in the developing world against the Chinese-built Harbin Y12, which is also a 19-seat Part 23 aircraft. Although IAe is saying initially it will focus its sales efforts in Indonesia.

I've never really understood why China failed to pay more attention to developing its Y12 to capture the global market for 19-seat aircraft.

The competition in this segment had been pretty minimal and the Y12 is a good product. But now with IAe, Ruag (Dornier 228NG) and Viking Air (Twin Otter Series 400) coming into the market, things are going to get pretty crowded.

Royal Brunei has publicly confirmed that it plans to add Boeing 777s in late June and that it is speaking to Singapore Airlines (SIA), which is looking to phase out some of its 777-200ERs.

I confirmed this with Royal Brunei's top spokeswoman but she was reluctant to elaborate because the deal has yet to be finalised.

But Royal Brunei's online booking engine shows that it plans to replace its Boeing 767s on the Bandar Seri Begawan-London Heathrow route with 777s starting 24 June.

Its non-stop Bandar Seri Begawan-Brisbane service will switch from 767s to 777s effective 25 June, the booking engine shows.

Sources tell me that the Royal Brunei 777s have 30 business class and 225 economy class seats, which matches SIA's two-class 777s with local registration starting with 9V-SV.

Royal Brunei needs the 777s as interim lift until its Boeing 787s arrive (whenever that is). Prior to now it has been getting by with 767s. 

I also received an email today from SIA's top spokesman, Nick Ionides, telling me that the Singapore carrier has finalised an agreement with Russia's Transaero covering the sale of four 777-200s, with manufacturing serial numbers 28998, 28999, 28514 and 28523.

Officials at Indonesia's Merpati Nusantara are saying that Xian Aircraft has fixed the crack found in the vertical stabiliser of one of Merpati's MA60s, local registration PK-MZC.
 
The airline official I spoke to says it was a problem with the materials used rather than a design flaw.
 
But the fact there was a crack is reason for concern.
 
The MA60 is based on the Antonov An-26, an aircraft that has a reputation for being rugged and reliable although not the most fuel efficient turboprop.
 
Chinese aircraft-makers need to do a lot more to improve their reputation in the marketplace. They also need to be quicker to respond to concerns raised in the news media with regards to Chinese-built aircraft.