ok while we are one topic of SRAAMs

Can some one clear the claims of near BVR Range of ASRAAM?

Performance and Operational Philosophy

The ASRAAM is designed to enable the early engagement of opposing fighter aircraft, and this is reflected in the missile’s combination of highly sensitive FPA seeker, midcourse inertial package and high energy motor. In a pre-merge engagement scenario, the FPA seeker allows target acquisition at significant BVR ranges, and the inertial midcourse guidance package means that the missile can be fired if necessary even blind to intercept an inbound threat aircraft. The high energy motor provides very high acceleration, and range performance which has traditionally been the domain of radar guided BVR missiles. Like its BVR active radar counterpart, the AMRAAM, ASRAAM will fly itself to a geometrically appropriate position, activate its seeker, acquire the target and home to impact. Because a short burn motor is used, and the FPA seeker is of course passive, the victim aircraft may have little if any warning of the inbound ASRAAM.

In comparison with its contemporaries, the AA-11 Archer, the Rafael Python 4, the BGT Iris T and the AIM-9X, the ASRAAM is fundamentally different in both design philosophy and intended mode of operation. Its extended range performance provides a unique BVR capability, which in effect overlaps the capabilities of radar guided BVR missiles. Its combination of heatseeking and inertial midcourse guidance provides it with a much larger engagement envelope in close combat.

and Where does the MAA-1B stands in WVRAAMs?

So what Prasun Sengupta is saying is that the Saudis are so dumb that they couldn’t have the Swedes train them and would rather finance a larger and costlier Erieye deal of the PAF so that they would train them in return ? Wow, what logic !

I completely agree with you here, i think that he is saying so just because of order by the Saudi airforce for Saab-2000 Erieye AEW&C but as we know PAF got its training from the Sweden and has just started operating the Saab-2000 Erieye AEW&C this year so his views dont make any sense at this point in time

Slightly off topic, but the above claims are rather far fetched. I doubt whether Pakistan could operate a nuclear attack sub, the costs would be too high. Maybe if it is highly subsidised by the Chinese, but I doubt that. Not to mention the political implications, there’s already enough concerns in the west over Pak nukes, I’m sure handing over a nuke sub would raise a few issues.

Are there any further details on the Erieye acquisition being partly funded by the Saudis, apart from; ‘…it is believed…’

I think the P-3 Hawkeye deal is pretty much dead now, most likely be a varient of the ZDK-03, if any, for the PN.

Cost would be high no doubt but strategic assest always come at high price (not sure if PN is really looking for this SSN from Chinese have to wait fro other sources to confirm the news). There wont be lot of Political implications for reasons like it is a SSN ie Nuclear powered sub not a nuclear weapons carrying sub and Given Pakistan’s stance of being only India centric helps too as world dont see Pakistan as direct threat to them the very difference from the IRAN. Export related noises wont be much given the situation where India is already importing a couple of SSNs

ZDK-03 ‘Karakoram Eagle’ seems like a good option with good endurance low cost and commonalty with PAF

That is fine, but you are missing the point which I was making about production, or perhaps I was not clear enough, that unless the production line is kept open with confirmed orders for new builds (not just upgrades) then Taiwan will have no option but to import, if it wants cost effective aircraft. Whether it be the LCA or F-16 or Gripen or whatever.

Skills are lost, people leave & after a time, you have to spend a lot to regain skills.

Otherwise, like Japan, it will have to spend heavily to keep local capabilities continuing (see the F-2 program costs). That the ROC is seeking the Viper, when the F-CK-1 C/D on paper, appears fairly credible, indicates they are not too much in favor of the latter, or its too expensive or does not have political support.

Hence, it seems the F-CK-1 is the end of the line for this program. There has been talk of a follow on program to the F-CK-1 but it has not been launched formally, as far as I am aware.

I understood you point and thats why i am saying that if we are talking about the ready to deliver aircraft than YES you have valid point but we were talking about the possibility of LCA’s sale to Taiwan. Thus cost of the opening new lines (that is if ROCAF want light weight aircraft) will be balanced through commonality of aircraft with A/B version and cost savings in training and reduced time frame and risk factor.

But if talk about the F-16 or Gripen then YES you are right.

When did I say India has a ready LCA MK-II to offer. My point is even if it were ready, or if India were to offer ROC a stake in co-development of the MK-II or the MCA, even such ideas are unlikely to be taken forward as India-ROC ties are not overt enough to antagonize PRC, for now. India is not too bothered about antagonizing PRC when it comes to defensive actions (its raising 2 new division for the mountains, inducting new missiles etc) but is pretty subdued when it comes to external moves.

One explanation is policy drift. Another is that its simply waiting till its economic growth is even more well established & secure, till it acts more forthrightly in terms of realpolitik.

Fair points. And I agree when you say:

Because thats where the Govt. of India has been lagging in terms of foreign policy & speedy decisions.

This whole discussion started with point raised by a member that India should offer LCA to Taiwan (which we all know says needs those aircrafts urgently to keep some balance with China)

Stake in co-development of the MK-II will make little sense to Taiwan but yes stake in co-development of MCA will be a good start if India can pull such deal

Problem is, looks apart, the F/CK-1 C/D also has limitations. The program has 71 orders for upgrades, which means existing airframes converted to the latest standard. Am unsure if production of the aircraft is still ongoing.

Second, the program per Wiki had 3 phases:

It does not mention an increased thrust engine. I recall reports that the ROCAF was unhappy with the lower powered engines & that the problems persisted despite quick fixes later on. The ROCAF instead preferred more F-16s and Mirage 2000’s, only to be unhappy with the Mirage 2000 as well over spares & limited support from France over Chinese pressure.

Another issue above is the upgrade does not cover advanced systems like an AESA radar. While no panacea, it would if well implemented offer more capability, than the current system which is based on a re-engineered AN/APG-67 design.

Realistically, the best (only) option for the ROCAF are F-35s to face superior numbers & which include heavy platforms (J-11 class). The other option is an advanced Viper variant, but while that could face evolved J-10s it would have a challenge versus Flankers

My friend my point was if ROCAF wanted LCA MK-II class aircraft they could always go for F-CK-1 C/D. Yes it will need up-gradation like AESA radar and some other avionics but that will be certainly less risky and time consuming option when compared LCA MK-II which will make its first flight in 4 to 5 yeas (i hope i am not off target for the First flight dates) and will have to go under clarification and meet IAF’s own urgent needs.

I certainly do agree that F-35 or advanced Viper are the only options capable of handling the threats faced by the ROCAF thus it is unrealistic to assume that LCA MK-II can be pitched to them for their requirements.

Without USN the PRC will shell and bombard Taiwan to smitherenes before any attempted landing akin to what Americans did in Japanese islands in WW2.

like Teer said Taiwan will need to make sure that war isn’t over before USN and USAF can react to the Chinese invasion and with every increasing defense budget and high growth of Chinese military it is getting harder year by year for USN to extend its military support for Taiwan . We have already seen the world backing down from selling Taiwan weapons under pressure from China and now what looks like a first phase of giving into Chinese demands, USA has started to follow the world by declining the critical weapons sales something no one would have imagined in 1990s.

If he is truly real and is relaying what the PAF officials are thinking, that is an even more worrying situation. There are a lot of problems in different Chinese military aviation projects, I can tell you that. I spend all day on SDF trying to lower the expectations of the fanboys. I don’t know what AVIC1 or PLA is telling PAF, but I can only go by what I see in the domestic projects and the problems they are seeing. And let’s just say the stuff that this Eagle Hannan guy saying is way too optimistic.

Just picking one example, he says that PLAAF will definitely buy JF-17. Pakistani fanboys have spent so much time on different forums trying to convince me that PLAAF will buy JF-17. Now, I personally think that they should and will buy JF-17, but none of the places I usually get my information from has indicated that this is final. And most importantly, we have not seen CAC producing any variants of JF-17 yet to be tested for PLA like we saw with J-10B, J-11B and J-11BS in the past few years.

So, if PAF thinks the same way this guy does and can only see the positives and none of the negatives, then there are serious problems.

Ok let me try to put it this way, while Eagle Hannan is reporting what he heard from the PAF officials at the air-show, that does not means that PAF is looking at only the positives only. You see at an air-show lots of people will ask officially questions about the fighter jets and their weaponry, almost all of the will respond with very very positive words and their praise for the weapon system in service or the one they are going to purchase as this is their duty at an air show which i am sure you would understand with your vast experience of covering the Chinese defense developments.

point i am trying to make is simple, how many times see an official at an air-show saying i am here to promote this weapon and its inferior to the ………….

Like you I too believe that PLAAF should buy JF-17 (for reasons you have discussed many times earlier) but like i said before there is no point in discussing unless we have a official source from PLAAF and PAF confirming the point of view you believe in. It would be simple waste of time and energy as neither side will accept the arguments presented by other.

If we accept the PAF’s possible schedule of 2014/15 for FC-20 you will notice that it will be atleaset 6-8 years from the time rumors of J-10 purchased appeared in some forums which shows that PAF understands the Chinese technological limit’s and is looking to enhance the weapon system as per their requirements and our Chinese brothers are more then forthcoming in this regard and J-10 is not an isolated example.

tphuang what is you take on the Fc-20 and ZDK-03 AEW&C?

I’m sure if you bring the people from CAC here, they will tell you that J-10 is a far superior plane. I don’t know who this Eagle Hannan really is, but let’s just say I find a lot of stuff he says to be suspect.

I will tell you that nobody in China even thinks SD-10 is equal in performance to AMRAAM.

As for PLAAF buying JF-17, it is not set in stone. Now personally, I am in favour of China purchasing 300 to 500 of them, but all of the sources I’ve read have indicated that this has not been signed yet.

Even if someone claims that version of SD-10 is comparable (may be not equal but somewhat comparable)to AIM-120C, well that could very well depend what version they were talking about.

First basic AIM-120C were delivered in 1996 which means that it happened is 14 years ago.

AIM-120C-4 were first delivered in 1999 and AIM-120C-5 in July 2000.

On the JF-17/FC-1 to China no one has claimed that PLAAF has already signed the contract but that they are committed to do that in later stages and since PLAAF is silent on the matter lets leave the topic till some air clears up and PLAAF either orders JF-17/FC-1 or rejects the project.

But any Iranian retaliation will draw the United states into the fray. This will be the large scale destruction of the Iranian military and its nuke program.
Do you think the U.S. will let Iran block the straights of Hormuz?
Further more S.A. the UAE and a host of other nations in the gulf dislike Iran almost as much as they dislike Israel. and will probably tolerate a Israeli strike. Havent you noticed the build up?

One thing we must all be sure is that Iran won’t be just siting there still after the bombs starts dropping.

To counter weak Iraqi army and virtually untrained Talibans US has to spend hundreds of billions dollars every year through out this decade and still they are not able to achieve the victory they planned at the start of war.

Fighting Iran whose strategy would be to do damage through offensive weapons like IRBMs and AntiShip missiles will have very bad impact on the already very venerable US and world economy which no one wants

no matter how much gulf government are against IRAN what would matter is who they are likely to support in time of war under pressure from their citizens Israel or Iran and i think we all know the answer

Israeli image of a powerful regional power capable of defeating its enemies will be hit hard if they stop at anything less then complete destruction of the Iranian nuclear infrastructure which seems impossible considering widely spread, underground and may be hardened nuclear-related sites. and they will have to do this with dozes of Missiles targeting their cities each day.

or Iran starts opens support to Iraqi or Afghan extremist in their fight against USA coz of their support to Israel.

Saudi to Israel: Clear for takeoff?

Israel would need USA with it from the start atleast or even more better if USA can do their dirty work for them alone