it was said both 2 pilots were safe after ejection at 200m hight. the official news might come out later.

Quite a few reports said that the pilots were not willing to give up the plane during the emergency landing in order to saving the civilian estates on the ground. you know, this is a overpopulated country and the city is expanding fast recently. there are more and more civilian estates around those old air force bases.

Fair point and I have written on such stories myself, and in such cases, the pilots did do the right thing. However AFAIK, large scale military exercises tend to take place away from populated areas, so it seems unlikely that it was that unsafe to aim the plane away from the troops (who are quite few) and just eject.

If y’all feel like having the ultimate debate on Taiwan – China – Arms Sales, why don’t you start another thread on that topic?
This is supposedly about where UAE might sell it’s M2K’s, to which Taiwan was just a tangent, not the main topic.
Taiwan may well be a possibility, but there’s plenty of other one’s as well. I don’t see why the whole thread should be de-railed over this when it can be summarized as “potential political issues may persuade against selling anything to Taiwan”.

I seriously don’t get the whole drama about Taiwan. By all signs, it seems set for greater integration with China, and everyone on both sides of the straights is surely smart enough to see it would benefit nobody to pull the rug out from under Taiwan’s political-economic system when Hong Kong clearly in an example of a flexible space for mutual accomodation. Playing up war scenarios over the whole issue from the perspective of “the West” is utterly inconsistent given “one China” is universally recognized (of course, NATO hasn’t seemed inclined to hold itself to consistent standards). Then again, I find it silly how Chinese nationalist get defensive over “democratization” in China – Any actual democracy in China would not likely produce a government any more “obedient” to “Western interests” than the current one.

Anyhow: Please take it to a new thread if you can’t keep it on topic to UAE Mirage 2000’s.

Many good points made.

Taiwan is simply not even a remotely likely destination for the UAE M2Ks because of the political and economic consequences the UAE and France will suffer if such a sale went ahead. Everyone except one angry kid seems to agree on that.

But some people just can’t seem to be able to accept that China might actually be able to influence the decisions of other countries through economic and political leverage.

So the USN is stopping those SURTASS ships is it PLAWolf?

And have those ships only started snooping around this year?

Any event can be viewed from different angles.

Chinese fishing boats start harassing USN SURTASS boats. The pentagon kicks up a big fuss, and then, suddenly,no more noise and the matter is dropped.

Face it China does not have the pull that you are trying to make out here. China is not a superpower yet. The UAE could easily sell those Mirages on and threaten to charge on Chinese imports to the regional economies if they make trouble over it. Any victory China would make by standing by her principles on that one, and trying to punish the UAE through loss of any transhipment tariffs (though there shouldnt really be any from a Freeport), would be far and away overshadowed by the loss of trade with the ME states and the interests they have in western Africa. Certainly, at the moment, the Chinese economy doesnt need another hit to its export goods markets!. You are the one in blinkers if you dont see that.

Oh please. Do you think 9 billion is going to mean more to China or the UAE? And I never take you as one to exaggerate. Currently Chinese companies prefer the UAE because its a free port, not because its the only port in the ME.

As has already been established, the UAE re-exports the vast majority of the Chinese goods it handles. So there is little skin off Chinese exporter’s nose if those exports land somewhere else. Hell, the Chinese government can easily compensate exporters for extra costs as a result, and maybe even sneak a little extra in as a subsidy.

If the UAE sells those Mirages to Taiwan, they will be the ones who suffer more. Refer to my earlier post regarding the knock-on effects to the service sector.

Then, bottom line, the question would have to be asked about all the fuss being kicked up about a few dozen last-vintage fighter jets. Would the PRC’s ‘face’ be served by visibly worrying about a transaction that is hardly going to tip the numerical balance in Taipei’s favour?. This isnt the purchase of a dozen SSK’s is it now wolf!!!.

No, the bottom line is about principle. Aside from the USA, no-one else sells arms to Taiwan. The French did it, and then eventually got the message.

Only the UAE is not the USA nor France. It is not big enough to force China to be pragmatic in its response, and if the UAE behave like they are a superpower who can trample over Chinese national security interests willy nilly, then they will be made an example off.

Hell, some in Beijing may even hope a small country like the UAE (but not the UAE specifically) would make such a miscalculation so they can really go to town on them and set an example so the likes of India and Japan don’t start getting any ideas. There’s an old saying in China, ‘kill the chicken for the monkey to see’. Both the USA and France were too big and too important, and China was too weak to be able to afford to use them as the ‘chicken’. But today, with the UAE, completely different kettle of fish.

There is a difference between a nominal range and a practical range. The first firing opportunity is given by the position at first. The second question is the ability of AAM and tracking radar to overcome the ECM or other items. Raw data are very misleading sometimes. The Mirage can be fitted with the Super 530, but related to the theater of operations the Mica can be the better choise. The J-10 with PL12 can be the best too, but that does depend, what the the PRC has figured out for their theater of operations.

Which is a very longwinded way of saying nothing.

By your logic the fighter with the longest range AAM is the winner from the start, when all AFs world-wide do think otherwise, when fitting their fighters with different range AAMs. 😉

Have a look around. Are next gen BVRAAMs getting longer or shorter ranged compared to current gen ones?

Because their is no intrest in the related weapons-race and the related rise in tension.

Taiwan is just strong enough not to be overhelmed in short notice. Nothing more and nothing less. All that does keep the option for a political solution in the future.

Very fancy US state department bullcrap. Fancy, but still bullcrap.

Just a few short years ago, the Americans themselves were ‘encouraging’ Taiwan to buy far more arms then the eventual agreement, and throwing a hissy fit when the legislature voted down the astronomical proposed deal and demanded cuts.

China on the other side does allow the survival of North Korea.

And how is that even remotely relevant other then as means to linking China to NK and try to smear it with people’s distaste for NK?

Stick to the point and leave the pathetically transparent spinning at home.

There is no call for it and you are not nearly good enough to pull it off.

Like suspending military talks for a couple of months? Oh my God, I’ll go and cower and hide in the cupboard…..

So why aren’t the Americans selling Taiwan everything they asked for.

North Korea already has sanctions about arms sales on it. I’m not sure what sanctions the US has placed on Russia for selling arms to Iran, but Tehran does have other UN sanctions against it. Whereas there are no UN sanctions on Taiwan.

Nit picking and utter pointless comment.

Like the US does not impose sanctions on anyone without a UN resolution.

It let’s the US off lightly when it sells arms to Taiwan.

More superficial commentary based on superficial knowledge.

China does not whack the US with a big stick because that would be stupid. But is anyone in any doubt about China’s displeasure?

Anyone who think they can behave like the Americans have picked a pretty poor role model and also have no understanding of just what allows America to get away with some of the things it does.

Now, unless the UAE has an economy 3 times the size of China’s and a dozen aircraft carrier battle groups, its not in any position to breach China’s ‘red line’ and not expect terrible economic and political consequences at the very least.

Based on previous form re countries that sell arms to Taiwan, the UAE has little to fear. If China wants countries to not sell any arms to Taiwan, it needs to punish whoever makes the next sale in a way that really hurts and not just in a short-term way. But China won’t because it doesn’t have the guts to risk damage to its reputation on the world stage nor to provoke a fight. I don’t think it would even do that to the UAE given other countries nearby would become suspicious of China’s meddling.

Idiotic comments like that are exactly the reason why China will be tough if the UAE displays the mental capacity of a pre-teen.

The only countries that have sold arms to Taiwan in the last couple of decades have been the US and France, and when they did the weapons sales, China was in no position to pressure either economically, politically or militarily.

If you have not noticed. Things have moved on a little since then to the point where the French will not even think about arms sales to Taiwan and the Americans are dragging their feet on already agreed sales.

Americans can still sell arms because of its military and economic might, but anyone else who tries that now will be made an example of.

This may sound really stupid, but why cant airships travel faster abit of research into optimum shape slap a few jet engines on the thing?

Because of their size.

The teardrop shape used by most airships are as aerodynamic as you can get. But the way airships function requires a huge volume and that causes a lot of drag.

Slapping more engines on will make it faster, to a point. But that comes at the cost of high fuel consumption and range/endurance reductions.

Its a balancing act to get the optimal speed v endurance mix with the optimum speed being pretty low.

As for their use.

Well, as has already been pointed out many times already, they would make very good heavy-lift assets.

I am not that sure about surveillance, SAM battery or AWACS or EW birds. Airships are too big to hide and too slow to run, making them pretty easy targets. Especially when stealth is becoming ever more widespread. Plus airships has lousy response times.

The only front-line combat mission I can see airships performing would be maybe one bristling with cannons and hellfires that function very much like an massive AC-130 that can stay on station for days or weeks at a time.

Should be pretty easy and cheap to develop. It will be able to carry massive guns and huge volumes of munitions to do some truly unholy damage. Standard self protection suit against heatseekers (can even put in a few phalanx/goalkeepers and RAMs if you want to play it really safe) and you have something that will make the AC-130 look like a child’s firecrackers in comparison.

Not much use against anyone with a reasonable airforce or half decent SAMs, but should be hell on a stick for the likes of the Taliban.

I think this is the kind of weapons the US military needs right now.

But since it isn’t stealth and can’t supercruise, I doubt the USAF will be interested.

Yes, China can put pressure on the UAE, but the cost would be far greater to China than the UAE. Yes, China can afford it, but would it bother? It would be expensive for China, both in the short term & the long term. The precedent it would set might discourage others from doing the same, but equally, it might discourage them from laying themselves open to such pressure, & that could cost China dear. Is that a gamble worth taking? It would project an image of China as a bully, a heavy-handed, crude, country, the rise to power of which is a thing to be feared. Is that how China wishes to be seen?

Would it be worth it?

Is China’s Taiwan policy something Beijing just dreamed up last night?

Every government has ‘red lines’ that you cross at your own peril.

China’s Taiwan policy is well established, has remained consistent for decades and crystal clear. What more, it is pretty practical in that everyone can get on perfectly well without having to cross Beijing in their normal dealings with Taiwan.

No-one could be surprised at a furious reaction from Beijing if you sold weapons to Taiwan, just like no-one would be surprised at massive US displeasure and sanctions of you sold weapons to Iran or North Korea or even Cuba.

Its not China imposing unreasonable and restrictive rules on the world to limit everyone’s rights and freedoms. Its about defending China’s national interests. And if the UAE did sell the Mirages to Taiwan, then they only have themselves to blame for the consequences as that is a conscious and deliberate choice they made to cross Beijing.

If you think a country using well established and non-violent means to get a point across is ‘bullying’, then you have a very rose-tinted idea of how the world actually works.

And in regard to your last point. Well I think ‘if you sell weapons to Taiwan you will suffer the consequences’ is a point Beijing will sacrifice much to get across because the precedent principle works both ways. If Beijing let this one go, how can they justify a tough stance when someone else takes notice and decide they also want some weapons sales to Taiwan?

The fact of the matter is that if China has the clout to get the notoriously independent French to stop selling arms to Taiwan and the masters of the universe Americans to drag their feet on agreed arms sales. Does anyone here honestly think tiny UAE will brave the wrath of the Dragon to make a one-off sale that will net them a few billion tops with little prospects of future sales?

How unbelievably stupid and short-sighted would they have to be to think the benefits outweighs the costs here?

Plawolf,

China will change the market laws? 😀

Have you not been following anything from economics to climate changes these last decade or so?

Its fooling to think China cannot have a huge impact on world trade if it has the will to bare the economic and political cost of doing something drastic.

I cannot write a lot here because it would be off-topic. But what you’re explaining about oil trades just cannot work that way.

If you have not noticed, I was talking primarily of short-term measures that will hit hard but should not cause any lasting damage.

China simply canceling all existing crude and natural gas orders with the UAE will be painful for both parties, but more so for the UAE. Sure, there won’t come a point where UAE is sitting on oil and can’t sell it, but in the short-term, its income is going to be hit hard as it struggles to find enough new customers to take all the surplus oil it suddenly has overnight. China can even increase the pain by taking measures to make it harder for the UAE to supply oil to China via 3rd parties (ie, chemical tests of crude).

In the long term, sanctions targeting UAE’s service economy will cause the real pain if China feels the need to make an example.

No matter what, China can easily cost the UAE far more money then it can make from the fighter sales. Throw in the political fall out and the fighter deal seems like an even more stupid idea.