export friendly 라는 뜻은 수출되어도 미국 국내 기술 유출금지법에 저촉되지 않게
한다는 뜻입니다.
The U.S. Obey Amendment, is a decade old law that prohibits U.S. taxpayer funds from being used to set up an F-22 export program. This, combined with mention of export risk of certain F-22 technologies, suits the needs of any company that is trying to make money off of the F-35.
The article, and to be fair others before it, also claim that it would take up to a billion dollars to set up the F-22 for export. The F-35 also requires money to be made export friendly.[1] You see, Lockheed Martin does not decide what U.S. technology is safe for export, the U.S. Government does. So far, money at $602,594,580 and $134,188,724 in two separate U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) contracts for the purpose: “… to develop a version of the JSF Air System that meets U.S. National Disclosure Policy, but remains common to the U.S. Air System, where possible,” have been authorized in the past years. There is more money for other similar export configuration efforts of the F-35. For example another DOD contract to help integrate the U.K. F-35 effort has been done. Quoting the contract: “….$115,836,036 modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee contract. This modification provides for integration of the United Kingdom version of the joint strike fighter (JSF) air system with the United Kingdom carrier version future (CVF) under the JSF systems development and demonstration effort.” Not quite to the billion claimed to make the F-22 exportable yet, but getting there.
그러니까 7억3천7백만 달러 정도가 US National Disclosure Policy에 저촉되지 않게
수출용 F-35를 고치는데 드는 비용입니다.
General Ryan approved industry members to come up with a “B configuration” plan for NATO, and a full-up USAF-spec “A configuration” for Australia. His guidelines for the A configuration were:
1.Same engine, no downgrade.
2.Same signature
3.Jet will not be used against us
4.Tech transfer concerns were downed aircraft and inadvertent disclosure scenarios; the same as USAF.
5.Full knowledge of all capabilities; information to remain in the embedded training system resident in the jet.
6.Withhold some hardware until needed, but full knowledge and training capabilities remain in the aircraft
수출용 F-22는 두가지 버젼이 있는데
나토 국가에 파는 B 버젼과, 거의 미공군용 랩터 버젼인 A 버젼이 있습니다.
호주는 A 버젼을 받기로 되어 있었다고 하는 군요.
A버젼은 이와 같은 조건을 충족시키는데
1. 똑 같은 엔진, No 다운그레이드
2. 똑 같은 스텔스 성능
3. 이 랩터는 절대로 미국에 반하는 목적으로 사용되지 않는다는 조건
4. 기술이전 우려의 경우, 추락된 기체 및 사고로 인한 기술 공개 시나리오에서
미공군의 절차를 따를 것
5. 모든 능력의 지식에 대해 알려줌, 정보는 훈련체계 내에 남아 있을 것.
6. 일부 하드웨어는 필요시 까지 보류됨 하지만, 모든 정보와 훈련 능력은 기체와 함께 존재함
이랬습니다만, ...
이런 조건을 들고 미국 관계자들이 호주정부에 찾아갔더니, F-35로 입장이 바뀌어져서
무산되었다는 이야기 입니다.
이 기사는 또한 개발에 30조원이 투자된 JSF를 보호하기 위해, 랩터가 JSF가 한창 팔리고
Moreover, then-US Ambassador Bob Schieffer told the Australian parliament in 2004 that Australia would get "the stealthiest airplane that anybody outside the United States can acquire. ...Having said that, the airplane will not be exactly the same airplane as the United States will have."
그러나 또한, 미국이 가질 기체와는 정확히 똑 같지는 않을 것이라고 부연설명했군요.
There is also the technical possibility that a JSF version "meets national disclosure policy" not by having sensitive technology removed from it but by incorporating anti-tamper measures. It's a possibility, but a distant one.
이 기사는 수출용의 경우 National Disclosure Policy를 충족시키기 위해 JSF 의 민감한
첫댓글 역시 호주는 '진짜 동맹국' 이군요. 해동의 K국하고는 레벨이 다르지요, 레벨이....^^;