dark light

Multirole

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 761 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Z-20: do you consider it a copy or an original helicopter? #2153354
    Multirole
    Participant

    I have said the J-10 is to the Lavi what the Super Hornet is to YF-17. They are related but the J-10 is a different beast altogether than the very limited prototype that was the Lavi.

    The Z-20 is a different story. I regard it as a modified S-70. It may not even be as capable as the standard Black Hawk. The fact is China doesn’t have unlimited funding to spending on new fighters, bombers, transports, submarines and ships. With the Z-20 they chose a low risk, low cost program to get a proven system operational. This program was not pursued as an opportunity to revolutionize China’s vertical aviation industry as there was little incentive to do so.

    Multirole
    Participant

    Russia spends 5.6% of its GDP in the military
    Europe spends less than 2.1% and its GDP is more than 10 times the one of Russia
    Therefore, Europe could certainly afford the developement of a 5th or 6th generation a/c if it had the will to do so.

    I agree, what I said was no European country would go it alone. A European 6th gen would also likely be somewhat of a niche design, with lesser range requirement than what US, China, and Russia would specify.

    As far as Pak Fa is concerned, Indian tech contribution may be nil, but funding and export prospects not insignificant. Russia will have to deal with similar issues with their next gen program, what with they already have to go it alone with their next bomber, submarine, surface ships, etc…

    Multirole
    Participant

    Europe has no need for a 5th gen fighter besides the F-35. Europe also cannot afford a 6th gen fighter program that isn’t a multinational work share program. Ergo no single European country will develop their own 5th or 6th gen fighter, unless we’re talking about UAS.

    Even Russia needed Indian financing for Pak Fa. At this rate I doubt Russia can go it alone with 6th gen either.

    in reply to: for the future of the KzAF, pak-fa or j-31 #2184540
    Multirole
    Participant

    firstly i dont think it will ever be built, secondly i think the prototype has poor range,
    and thirdly its reportedly not agile either, and fourthly i have yet to see anyone praise chinese military hardware,
    but i have seen many customers dismayed, starting with iran

    Looking at Iranian experience with Chinese aircraft is a bit like asking Cubans for opinion on the state of modern US auto industry. :highly_amused:

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2185518
    Multirole
    Participant

    J-20 is actually designed with extrememly advanced 6th gen quantum harmonic oscillation camouflage. Thus in accordance with Heisenberg uncertainty principle, when under observation it can be both 20 and 23 meters long at the same time.

    in reply to: What were the potential market for the Mirage 4000? #2188853
    Multirole
    Participant

    I feel bad for the people behind the SNECMA M53 engine. Such a nice little engine for its time, only used on 600 single engine jets. That’s got to be the most boutique fighter jet engine ever. At least the M88 will probably get to power some UAVs.

    in reply to: What were the potential market for the Mirage 4000? #2194275
    Multirole
    Participant

    I should revise my statement. If the French could make it at a price point competitive to the F/A-18, they could potentially win Kuwaiti, Finnish, Spanish, Malaysian contracts in the 90s. I doubt that would’ve happened.

    in reply to: What were the potential market for the Mirage 4000? #2194298
    Multirole
    Participant

    I make it 274, not counting the secondhand ones passed on to Brazil.

    Not that different from my estimates. My point stands that the Mirage 2000 was not the export success many imagine it to be. There were a significant number of users but many of those operated a dozen or so jets. The Mirage 4000 would be competing for the same customers as those that eventually bought Eagles and Flankers. There was no reason any of them would have preferred the 4000. Export chances would have been dismal.

    in reply to: What were the potential market for the Mirage 4000? #2195702
    Multirole
    Participant

    After Mirage III Dassault never really knocked one out of the park again. The F1 did okay but only about two hundred Mirage 2000s were exported. Most buyers bought handfuls. Other than the Saudis I can’t see anyone besides France buying.

    In some alternate universe where the Soviet Union didn’t implode in 1991 some of the Flanker customers like China and Indonesia could’ve turned to the Mirage 4000.

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2195901
    Multirole
    Participant

    The J 20 is more of a “hey look, I have a 5th gen stealth fighter” project than the Pak Fa is.

    Is that why Russian fanboys are on this thread posting fake images?

    in reply to: B707 vs. KC-135 #2201810
    Multirole
    Participant

    I think I remember reading somewhere Iran tried to reengine their 707 tanker by replacing the four turbojets with two turbofans.

    in reply to: Helicopter News & Discussion #2201820
    Multirole
    Participant

    This a little OT, I was wondering are military helicopters normally officers or NCOs. In the US Army they are often a separate category of warrant officers. I can’t imagine it would be this convoluted world wide.

    in reply to: Rafale and J-10, which was more successful? #2201868
    Multirole
    Participant

    J-10 allowed the country still building MiG-21 clones to leap into the 4th generation and it’s design team went on to design the J-20. This program taught China how to design modern fighters and is without question one of the most transformative of all time. It’s impact on industry could be compared to the F-117 on American aviation.

    Rafale is a worthy continuation of the excellent French aviation tradition, but nothing earth-shatteringly new.

    in reply to: Iran: J-10 or MiG-29? #2201911
    Multirole
    Participant

    Clearly their best move would be to license produce Su-30 and contract with the Chinese for some subsystems. If the Russians cut them off at some point they can turn to the Chinese for parts. Its basically sanctions proof. Not really sure they need a J10 or MiG-29, but the Russians may force some Fulcrums on them for that Su-30 license.

    One the whole the Chinese will be shy about arming Iran with high end warplanes as they buy more oil from the Gulf Arabs than Iran. I can see Iran becoming a customer for Y-20, L-15 etc.

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2202791
    Multirole
    Participant

    The J 31. Who wants it ? Anyone ? Even the China fans fully admit the 31’s short comings. The concept is a good one. 2 engine F 35 sized fighter. But its reputation is in the gutter.

    What reputation, combat record? Has it been caught sleeping around?

    Lots of countries want it. Want and affordability aren’t the same thing. I want a Ferrari and a Porsche. China’s fortunate enough to buy one, but maybe not both.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 761 total)