Airbus is still working out its strategy in the segment that the 767 and 787 occupies. The airframer is officially set on delivering the A350-800, but is also entertaining calls for a re-engined A330. The future of the 767 passenger variant is feasible only if Airbus remains locked on the A350-800 option, says Richard Aboulafia, vice-president of analysis at the Teal Group. “If Airbus doesn’t re-engine the A330, then maybe [the passenger 767 has a future],” he says. An A330neo would occupy shorter routes of 5,000nm (9,270km) or less in the passenger class – closer to the 767-300ER. “Then [the passenger 767] ends,” Aboulafia adds.

But the lower dollar amounts do not necessarily mean the US Defense Department is reducing its capabilities, experts say. “Just the fact that we’re asking for less money doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re getting less than we did,” said Marco Cáceres, senior analyst and director of space studies for the Virginia-based Teal Group consulting firm. “In many cases, we may be getting more than in the past decade.”

DoD also has been planning changes in the makeup of its satellites, putting more payloads on a single spacecraft, thus returning a bigger bang for the buck since multiple launches are no longer required. “They’re trying to find ways to develop and build and operate their satellite systems a lot cheaper,” Cáceres said. “My sense is they’re going to save a lot of money there in terms of satellites.”

Phil Finnegan, director of corporate analysis at the Teal Group, agreed that the control regime could prevent U.S. drone manufacturers from accessing emerging markets.  “There’s definitely a risk of losing market share because of MTCR,” he said. “As this technology spreads worldwide, the U.S. and Israel are not going to be the only exporters. New potential exporters include Turkey and India. China is developing a wide range of UAVs and is beginning to get into the export market.”

Turkey is one of 34 MTCR members. Israel, China and India do not have to abide by the regime’s export rules.  Some change has occurred in the interpretation of the MTCR, allowing U.S. allies to purchase certain systems, Finnegan said. The Australian Navy has purchased the Triton, the U.S. Navy’s maritime version of the Global Hawk for surveillance missions at sea. South Korea is also interested in the Triton, while Japan has indicated a desire to own the U.S. Air Force’s version of the UAV, he said.

“You are also seeing a trend where U.S. companies are being proactive and trying to develop export versions of UAVs that are saleable,” Finnegan said. General Atomics did just that with its Predator XP, an unarmed version of the medium-altitude, long-endurance UAV flown by the U.S. military. The United Arab Emirates was able to procure an XP because it is specifically designed to not carry weapons and its maximum payload is below the 500-kilogram threshold.  General Atomics officials declined to comment for this story.  

“Allies will buy these versions that may not have the capabilities that U.S. forces use but suit their purposes fine,” Finnegan said. “That opens the way for a country like Saudi Arabia to purchase these kinds of high-end UAVs.”

One analyst said defeating enemy air defenses involves a blend of technologies and tactics which the JSF is well-suited to perform. “The F-35 is low observable against enemy radar. It is also designed to emit a lot less. A big part of this is knowing where the threats are and how to avoid them. The objective is to try to fly between the cracks and gaps,” said Richard Aboulafia, Vice President of analysis at the Teal Group, a Virginia-based consultancy.

Aerospace analyst, Richard Aboulafia with the Virginia-based Teal Group said the F-35′s first overseas appearance marked the start of a more aggressive drive to lock in foreign orders at a time when the U.S. military has repeatedly delayed its own. “What they really need to do is transform the program’s economics by getting above that 30-something (annual production) plateau they’re on,” he said. “They need to get to a virtuous cycle where numbers go up and costs go down … the opposite of a death spiral.”