F-22 is among the first AESA, internal carriage of weopons, TVC fighter. so even if numbers are cut capability is still there.
Problem with EF is that numbers are cut but no capability enhancement. There is not even CFT certified.
Another failed programe like EF is Chinese J-10.
Even after 10 years into production it is practically same plane. no AESA, no Engine upgrade, No CFT and certainly no advanced strike capability.

Ah back to your same old ill informed pronouncements again JSR!

A failed program would be one which is cancelled or the type retired early due to it failing to meet customer requirements.

Has the Typhoon or J-10 programs been cancelled? Have either types been retired early due failing to meet customer requirements?

No on both counts.

Typhoon has a fully scheduled program of enhancements including CFT, it is earmarked to remain in service for at least forty to fifty years in some countries. CAC haven’t been able to produce J-10 quick enough to meet their needs and it also has an ongoing capability upgrade program. Both are getting an AESA, both are getting upgraded engines and both are having their strike capabilities enhanced. Typhoon for example has been going through trials with Paveway IV recently.

So if you haven’t got anything to add to the discussion beyond your usual drivel JSR can you leave the talk to the grown ups here.

I think Swerve and Jonesy have nicely covered the main points here really but to throw in my 2 pence worth! 😀

I think the RN experience of the Type-21 still colours their thinking on such matters, they ended up with a type that was really suited for fairly local tasking and ended up sending it to the South Atlantic. With the technology of the time they were crew heavy and cramped (but with excellently designed crew accommodation – designed by a woman I believe) with a compromised sensor and weapons fit, not forgetting that the Sea Cat launcher was next to useless. They couldn’t fit the RN’s new light self defence missile the Sea Wolf to it as the system is actually huge requiring deck penetration for the tracking radars etc.

I agree with Jonesy, redefine the MHPC into something closer to an OPV rather then introduce an intermediate Corvette/Frigate class. The good news is with modern developments in lean crewing and system miniaturisation it needn’t be as compromised as Type-21. My shopping list would be:

1) Diesels only. The latest generation means that they can keep up with a task group if so needed.
2) Simple radar fit. Modern datalinking means they can rely on a picture from other vessels in a task group.
3) Something like the Bofors 57. Non deck penetrating and more then enough to scare pirates or do some basic NGS. Also has a rather good anti air capability.
4) Couple of 30mm cannons.
5) No anti ship missile system.
6) Hanger and heli deck that is reconfigurable for multi use containers. A helicopter can carry anti ship missiles if needed.
7) Space for the Raytheon Phalanx and its associated wiring installed. (This gives the choice to install SeaRam). Don’t actually install Phalanx but leave it as an option for any crisis.

Probably tons of other stuff that could be added to the list but I would want something that is lean manned but could be useful within a task force. I would also toy with leaving enough space for a few VLS but only if it doesn’t add too much cost. Imagine if we had the Bofors 57 and Phalanx in San Carlos.

I see them mainly working with Amphibious Ready Group (ARG), their big 155mm and huge missile load of various missile types alongside sophisticated radars will be very handy supporting the USMC.

The USMC have been muttering for years over losing the big 16″ guns of the Iowa class, the Zumwalt goes some way in giving a similar capability back.

It is worth mentioning that a data-link has been muted for ASRAAM on and off over the years. Currently the work involved developing CAMM is the most likely path to that happening.

Kind of looks like you are sacrificing one of the key advantage of a submarine, its stealth! A long range MPA could surely pick up the sail bulge unit sticking out of the water, also wouldn’t it have quite a significant IR signature which again could be picked up at long range.

Kind of looks like a forgotten concept for SeaQuest!

At least the Israelis went through some “formalities” when they aquired our technology………..the Chinese jsimply steal it.

Well here is the rub, Israel was merrily selling Weapons technology to China! Technology that was often funded by or based upon American R&D, technology that China then reverse engineered. All of this happened whilst America had (and still does) an embargo on selling weapons technology to China, Israel only stopped when America finally put its foot down and threatened to withdraw significant funding if Israel continued with a sell of Phalcon AEW&C technology to China.