I still think China should’ve submitted the L-15 for T-X. :diablo:

Generally Chinese airframes don’t last long; a typical Chinese airframe is good for 3000 ~ 4000 hours and then junked. The L-15 isn’t durable enough to survive the abuses likely to be put on by the USAF.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/local-military/air-force-wants-to-replace-jet-trainers/nWDJg/

The new aircraft also would replace the F-16D Fighting Falcon in a “bridge program” that prepares student pilots to fly the fifth generation fighter, the F-22 Raptor.

Yup, the F-16D too will be replaced by the T-X jet, which would mean that the USAF needs a jet that flies like an F-16D in terms of turns and afterburner acceleration.

Chicago-based Boeing expects to offer the Air Force a new design for the T-X competition, while other U.S. firms will pair with foreign aerospace manufacturers to pitch jet trainers flying today. In each case, final assembly of the Air Force jets will be in the United States, company spokespersons said.

“Over the past several years, Boeing has conducted extensive studies of both new and derivative platforms as well as many industry teaming approaches,” the company said in a statement. “Our analysis consistently indicate an all-new, purpose-built solution will provide the most affordable and effective solution to the Air Force’s advanced flight training requirements.”

General Dynamics will partner with Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi to offer the T-100, a variant of the M-346 jet trainer. Italy, Israel and Singapore fly the jet.
“It was developed specifically as a trainer for the global markets,” said Chris Marzilli, president of General Dynamics C4 Systems in Scottsdale, Ariz.
“It’s going to bring a lot of jobs to bear across the country and across the world if you consider Alenia’s involvement,” he said.

Lockheed Martin will partner with Korean Aerospace Industries to field the T-50, a multirole aircraft that has trained South Korean jet pilots since 2007. The plane can mimic the performance characteristics of the latest jet fighters, such as the F-35, said B.J. Bowling, a Lockheed Martin spokesman in Fort Worth, Texas.

Northrop Grumman has partnered with British-based BAE Systems Inc. and L-3 Link to pitch the Hawk Advanced Jet Training System. Britain, Saudi Arabia and Oman have chosen the Hawk T2 aircraft, the latest variant of the Hawk trainer, according to Lisa Hillary-Tee, a BAE Systems spokeswoman in Herndon, Va.

“BAE Systems has built almost 1,000 Hawk aircraft in total, helping to produce highly trained combat pilots from 25 countries, with more than 3 million flying hours logged,” she said in an email.

The best way forward in my opinion will be this.

1. An EJ200 derived Engine ordered in significant numbers and with a bit of indigenisation.

The reference engine in the current design is EJ220. Doesn’t mean it will be EJ220 in the prototype, as the engine choice is subject to an open bidding.

4. Carrier variant.

Carrier capability requires a consultant that actually built a carrier jet before(ie Boeing or Dassalt, not Lockheed or EADS) and increases weight and drag penalty. This is in fact what Boeing’s pitching, that if they make the KFX a naval jet then Boeing could sell several hundred units to the US Navy as an F-35C replacement to build the economy of scale and that Boeing would put its own money down if Korean government agreed to this arrangement, but I doubt the Korean government would agree to this as this would increase developmental risks(Not that Boeing is a terrible naval jet maker); Koreans are extremely risk averse and a major cost overrun and delay is rare in Korean weapons programs. This is the reason for KFX blocks, in order to minimize the risks.

I reckon India would be better off partnering with Japan. IMHO, Japanese aerospace is currently more advanced than the Koreans while also Koreans will not accept less than 51% ownership of a stealth program.

Japan too would seek a majority stake in any co-development arrangement unless it is with the US in a 6th gen jet.

it would be hillarious if all AMCA ends up to be is a stealthy airframe with Rafale guts, and KFX is a stealthy airframe with Eurofighter guts.

Both engine contracts would go through open international biddings.

I could see some advantages to upgrade South Korea’s current fleet of F-15’s. Yet, to spend so much on New Built Aircraft seems like a waste.

Their logic is different. They could go to war at any moment, so even a temporary reduction in number is unacceptable.

The situation is not like in Europe where a country could effectively disarm and nothing happens; it’s a new Cold War out there in Asia, where all major countries are potential combatants toward each other.

Still, during the F-X “competition” (IIRC) Boeing had the cheapest product with the Super Hornet though Boeing were quite unwilling regarding ToT, industrial benefits and so on.

Not at all.

Boeing : 75~80% license production, with exception of radar, antenna, and a few others.
BAE : 90% license production.
Lockheed : 20% sourcing <= the latest Sankei news article says this figure dropped to 4%.

… still, which one did Japan select again. :rolleyes:

Japan is a less mature democracy and its officials do not fear the voters and press; they do fear the US pressure and cave into US demands.

Korea on the other hand has a more mature democracy where its officials do fear the voters, the opposition party, the press, and most importantly, American and European law firms operating in Korea whom the foreign bidder can always count on bringing in a lawsuit if they feel they have been unjustly treated.

This is the reason why Korea was the first country to demand, and got, the telemetry data of the F-35 and chase it in air, because the Korean officials were far more afraid of domestic criticism than raising frictions with the US DoD, and then decided to give the lowest performance mark on the F-35.

Highest Price + Lowest Performance Score = virtual elimination.

How about a reliable source quoting an official response?

http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2013/01/skorea-fighter-replacement-program-goes.html

One government source was quoted as saying that “The manufacturer noted the unit price of F-35 will be around KRW 213 billion (excluding armament and transportation options), and for 60 jets, the overall cost could soar to the KRW 15 trillion-level.” The source also said other jets, Boeing’s F-15 and EADS’ Eurofighter, will have a price range of KRW 10-11 trillion as well. Another government official confirmed that the estimated prices were reported to Kim Jang-soo who leads a transition team handling external affairs, security and North Korea policies for President-elect Park Geun-hye.

Lockheed Martin’s F-35, which will be sold on the U.S.-government guaranteed foreign military sale has even less leverage for price discount, so the jet might be dropped out of the F-X race.

Insiders at the ROKAF suggest the F-X should pick between F-15 and Eurofighter while excluding F-35 which comes with the KRW 15 trillion price tag. “Within the ROKAF, the discussion is moving from ‘the ROKAF must procure less number of stealth-proven F-35s despite the hefty price tag’ to ‘The Branch cannot wait any longer for the next-generation fighter jets’ activation.’”

I suspect that it will indeed be picked up. The Navy needs a VLO jet for its future carriers — the combined J-15/J-31 platform mix would be the most impressive afloat —

I am not sure if the J-31 could do STOBAR with a pair of RD-93s, although the base design for the J-31 appears to be the F-35C.

If SAC really intended the J-31 for naval STOBAR operations, it would have used a pair of AL-31s. Remember that the J-31 is intended for export, so SAC must solve the engine sourcing issue and pick an engine that was easy to source in order to export.

FYI I’m from China and I don’t need any sort of education on China from you.

You will be shocked how much foreigners know about China more than its own citizens do. Remember that the Chinese citizens do not get access to much of the outside world, while foreigners get an unrestricted access to Chinese content inside China.

J-31 is a independent project carried out by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation which failed the PLAAF bid of 4th gen fighter. SAC is a full subsidiary of AVIC II

So where did SAC get the money to do it? The money didn’t clearly come from the central government and it costs billions to do a fighter jet.

Sth like “each military region is an independent army)” is paranoia created in your dream.

What’s happening in China is unheard of in other countries with a centralized authority on military. Imagine each Army of the United States military having their own military academies and develop its own fighter jets at each Army’s private military factories; that’s exactly what’s happening in China.

By your own admission the J-31 is a private venture with no backing from the central government. That means it must be exported to have a volume production, so would China allow the best of its technology be used in it? Of course not. Not to mention that the F-35 on which it is based on is highly buggy and its defects would likely show up on the J-31, such as the weapons bay door that is under excessive stress during a high speed flight, etc.

Well, the J-31 exists in hardware form , it flies NOW , isn’t it ? Doesn’t matter if PLAAF or PLANAF buys it or not, as long as it will find customers.

Customers tend to shy away from jets not adopted by the airforce/navy of the country of its origin.

But anyway, i’ll bet you this WILL be part of PLAAF and/or PLANAF, you’ll see. 🙂

We can resume that discussion when the J-31 earns its PLA marking. But until then it is just a private venture jet bankrolled by the Shenyang military region with no guaranteed future. Due to its modest financing, its avionics and radar should be lacking too, just like the JF-17 whose avionics Pakistanis wanted to yank out and replace with the French parts.