The f/a-50 would be ideal low cost buy to replace the mig-21’s. The Lockheed link would make a statement to China. Buying swedish has no meaningful political statement in regards to the Chinese issue.
If it’s about making a political statement, why not buy the Tejas?
Vietnam will want something affordable with excellent short field capability. Gripen is a no brainer. Plus Sweden is less susceptible to economic pressure from the PRC than other vendors. They will probably buy something high profile from the U.S. just to make a political statement.
I’ve been following for this, what an amazing age we live in.
Alexander Korolev wrote this impressive piece debunking the myths that Russo-Chinese alliance is not feasible.
http://www.theasanforum.org/the-strategic-alignment-between-russia-and-china-myths-and-reality/
Carlo Kopp wrote about the application of the Scaled Composites Proteus some years ago as a replacement for geosynchronous communication satellites. Proteus is smaller than the Divine Eagle and capable of high altitude loitering for over 18 hours. Although I don’t know where they would sling such a load on a twin hull airframe.
I should say, 0.1 is Super Hornet+stealth pod territory.
If the J-20 does have an air to ground role it shouldn’t surprise anyone. What modern fighter doesn’t? Look at the F-22 with its sub 200 production run, lack of role in the wars America presently finds itself in, and being retroactively shoe-horned for dropping bombs and tell me if it wouldnt have been specified as a multirole fighter if USAF knew during ATF design phase what it knew now.
It is however quite another thing to claim the J-20 as some sort of dastardly plot to secretly develop a bomber. China has made no secret of its desire for a bomber to replace the H-6, for which the J-20 is clearly unsuited. If anything they should promote the J-20 as a strike fighter to distract attention from their other long range offensive programs.
Not sure what hidden offensive capability you’re referring to. It’s fair to say J-20 is not designed to be the most agile knife fighter technology permits (easier ways to point a missile than point the whole plane), but I wouldn’t place too much stock on analysis based on prototype photos. A ” few years ago” people erroneously thought it was as big as a F-111, turns out it’s a bit smaller than a Flanker with main bay similar in size to the F-22.
If we add Indian Navy and Coast Guard we’ll get 50+ airframes. I’m not sure what the point is.
This isn’t the 1970s, where air superiority fighters and interceptors were entirely different concepts. We live in an age where almost all kills are BVR and the last gun kill happened almost 30 years ago. The J-20 is specified as a “super maneuverable” fighter so it can take care of business if it has to, but more importantly it has superior range than American 5th gen fighters so it can push back the tankers they need to reach China. The Raptor was designed for the more geographically compact European theater and a time when they were hedging their bets between BVR and WVR.
The first 12,000 ton cutter has gone on its sea trial 🙂
What’s the name of this class? From what I read it has a 76mm gun, I’m surprised it’s not bigger.
The Israelis and the Jordanians would probably use aid too
Pakistan is already getting more aid than Congress is willing to give. Just look how long it took to authorize the AH-1Z, and Pakistan will probably want those delivered before even thinking about the A-10.
Israel neither want nor need the A-10.
Maybe the Jordanians. Iraq market is cornered by Frogfoots, the Pakistanis will probably ask for subsidies. The Saudis tend to go for sexy fast movers.
Now that Putin and Xi Jinping are bros maybe Russia will join the J-31 project. Should be a global best seller with this tie up. Plus Shenyang has a long standing working relationship with the Russians.
Rooivalk is dead AFAIK. Denel didn’t even offer it to Nigeria and Kenya where they are sorely in need of attack helicopters.