If they have bee pathetic then i guess NATO/USA have been uber pathetic in both Iraq and Afghanistan. What you say friend ?:)

Nato and the US have made far more effort than the pakistanis, and have thus far not made a truce with the terrorists.:mad:

SOC’s is mixing his bias and political views with his judgment. As such, his article loses all credibility. Some utter crap in the posted article includes:

– He forgets that the US govt created and funded osama and left pakistan holding the bag once the soviets were defeated.
– He forgets that pakistan has lost more soldiers fighting the taliban since 9/11 then any other country.
– He forgets that pakistan pays a daily price in terms of bombings from al quaida in every city and civilian loss of life.

If he had just discussed the JF-17, his article could be discussed. As it stand, it comes across as wild rants fueled by hatred.

So what, the US is partly responsible for the Taliban/AQ, and?

The fact is that pakistan as failed to even dent the terrorist networks that operate within it. The situation is so bad that the tribal leaders of pakistani waziristan have asked the Afghan government for help!:eek:

Here is an interesting article I found on a blog. Its by our very own SOC.

The FC-1 seems to be a lousy piece of cr@p thats going to get blown out by the mighty Yum-Kay-Eye 😀

The article ends with a feisty account of how the evil pakistanis are not rounding up the taliban and how they should be isolated, wonder how the hundreds of pakistani soldiers dead from fighting there are going to feel about that 😮

Personally, I’d like nothing better than Pakistan breaking out of the US feifdom and following its own foreign policy, sell nukes to Iran and build a NATO like organization with China.

China, Pakistan, and the FC-1

A few weeks or so ago, China delivered the first two FC-1 fighter jets to Pakistan. The FC-1, also known as the JF-17 to Pakistan, is a Chinese designed single-seat fighter jet. It’s powered by a Russian-made engine and equipped with Chinese avionics and weapons (although the prospects of Pakistan incorporating Western kit isn’t out of the question).

Now, the idea of Pakistan receiving a modern, lightweight fighter jet would seem to be ideal, as their air force is severely lacking in terms of quality equipment. Their current air arm relies mainly on comparitively ancient aircraft like the Mirage III, A-5 (a Chinese variation of Russia’s MiG-19), and F-7 (a Chinese variation of Russia’s MiG-21). Sure, they’ve tried to keep up appearances by continuing to operate a small fleet of early-block F-16As and upgrading their other aircraft with newer systems, but truth be told, the PAF has some serious shortfalls to address. Pakistan even lacks any sort of BVR AAM, internet propagandist spoutings to the contrary. So reequipping with a modern fighter would seem to be a logical step, given that Pakistan’s main rival India has an air force festooned with modern high-performance aircraft (the Mirage 2000, MiG-29, and Su-30MKI, to name a few).

That all being said, the FC-1 is clearly viewed as an inferior product by Pakistan. If the FC-1 was a top-tier fighter jet, then why in the world would Pakistan be consistently pushing for the acquisition of more F-16s from the United States? FC-1 fanboys will allege that Pakistan wants to replace the old Mirages, A-5s, and J-1s with a mix of both FC-1s and F-16s. Okay, sure. Then why is Pakistan also trying to acquire China’s other new fighter, the J-10? Do they want a three-jet fleet? Or is the J-10 intended to backstop a potential failure in the F-16 acquisition plans? Something is clearly amiss here. If the FC-1 was the superfighter that some Pakistani aviation fans would want you to believe, then why aren’t they clamoring for more FC-1s in place of those F-16s? Or is Pakistan’s infatuation with the F-16 just so intense that not even the vaunted FC-1 can break it down? But enough of that, let’s examine some of the FC-1’s current problems.

1-it has a limited weapons load, and to tote a large payload it needs to waste hardpoints with fuel tanks. This is somewhat curtailed by the fact that the FC-1 would not have to go very far to find its targets in or over India, however.

2-the FC-1’s flying ability is at the mercy of Russia at the moment, given that Russian engines are used to power the aircraft (as of right now Russia is apparently turing a blind eye to China’s re-export of said engines, but that could always change).

Then there’s the issue of the FC-1’s true effectiveness in combat on the subcontinent. Pakistan wants about 150 of them. Unfortunately for them, India is buying and license building a similar number of a true 4.5 Generation fighter jet, the Su-30MKI. TVC, a PESA, and a robust long-range weapons fit for both A/A and A/G combat make the Su-30MKI a world-class fighter jet, and pretty much hands air superiority over the subcontinent to the Indian Air Force, easily. Sure, people will argue that “the FC-1 is smaller so it’ll be able to get really close before the Indian pilots see it”. Wow. Ignorance reigns. As if it worked that way. By that logic, the B-2 should be really non-stealthy as it is rather expansive. Oh wait, it’s not, claims by bitter anti-American internet ranters like Venik (who, amusingly enough, apparently lives in Philadelphia…) about Serbian B-2 shootdowns over the FRY notwithstanding. Read up on RCS, aspect angles, and PESA before assuming that just because Pakistan bought it it has to be just fabulous and the best of the best, geniuses. Lots of corner reflectors, external weapons carriage, and other features of the airframe make the FC-1 a pretty decent radar target. For that matter, they make the Su-30MKI a decent target as well, and then it comes down to avionics fit and weapons load, as well as pilot ability.

Let’s put the whole force into perspective. You’ve got FC-1s and F-16s on one side, with Su-30MKIs, MiG-29s, MiG-21BISONs, and Mirage-2000s on the other. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to realize that it’s not the numerical advantage that gives India the edge here. Inserting the FC-1 into this environment is foolhardy; the J-10 would be a far better option, being more capable of dealing effectively with other truly modern fighters. The J-10 is part of that peer group, while the FC-1 is the cheap alternative. So, if Pakistan wanted to make strides towards being able to actually combat the Indian Air Force, they need something better than the FC-1 and something more politically reliable than the F-16. That would be the J-10. They won’t be able to match the IAF on a 1 for 1 basis, but they’ll be far more capable than an FC-1 force would be. Of course, they could always plan on sticking to the nuclear deterrent option, in which case they could justify the cheaper FC-1 as merely attrition and life-cycle replacements for their older legacy aircraft. This of course is contingent on Pakistan’s actual firing off of a nuclear weapon in the event of a conflict, otherwise they’d pretty much have had it. Not that they wouldn’t go down if they did start lobbing nuclear weapons around, falling themselves under the Indian counterstrike, but at least in that case they’d take India down with them. That all depends on the fortitude of the leadership in Pakistan, I guess. They had no problem taking over the nation and harboring Al Qaeda and the Taliban after ENDURING FREEDOM though, so I would think they’d have no issues with unleashing a nuclear exchange.

Now, in reality, both India and Pakistan need to learn a thing or two about actual air defense. Neither one of them has a real air defense network. India has a small edge by having numerous S-125 SAM sites around major airbases, compared to Pakistan’s solitary HQ-2 site in Islamabad. An actual air defense network with a few modern, long-range SAMs like the S-300PM-1 or HQ-9 would make a lot of difference and help even things out a bit, since Indian air combat aircraft would have a new issue to contend with beyond how many FC-1s they can shoot down at range.

Personally, I think China should just back off of the FC-1 project. Granted, the cheap FC-1 represents a potential export success as a J-7/MiG-21 replacement across the globe. But there are better options. For a little more cash, a nation could have China’s real fighter jet, the J-10. Dropping the FC-1 would enable Chengdu, the FC-1 and J-10 manufacturer, to concentrate more on improving and perfecting the J-10. A mixed force of J-10s and various FLANKER iterations would be a very effective combat force to replace the older Q-5s, J-7s, and J-8s. The FC-1 just doesn’t have a place in the PLAAF except as a token political buy to give faith to Pakistan and other export customers. If the PLAAF truly desires a short-range fighter for point defense, to replace the J-7, then the Hongdu L-15 supersonic trainer provides a far more logical basis. For one, it keeps another type out of your inventory, cleaning up your logistics. Also, it provides an export product to take the FC-1s export niche if foreign nations cannot afford the J-10.

Remember, the FC-1 is the final iteration of a US-Chinese project in the 1980’s that would have modified and updated the J-7 design to feature a large nose radar and side-mounted intakes. Tianamen Square ended that partnership, and China turned to Russia for a time for advanced fighter jets, buying Su-27SK and Su-30MKK/MK2 aircraft. At some point the Chengdu team began work on the new design, possibly with help from Mikoyan, and the FC-1 was born. However, it still represents a sub-par fighter jet, clearly targeted for less propserous buyers who can’t afford top-tier kit like the J-10. It might end up with a great avionics fit, and decent Chinese weapons, but the aircraft is still not on par with the rest of the world’s latest fighter aircraft. Especially the J-10 and the Su-30MKI.

So, China should give up the ghost and drop the FC-1. Yes, they view Pakistan as an ally against India. But there are other products much more suited for Pakistan, like the HQ-9 long-range SAM and the J-10 fighter jet. But that’s alright, Pakistan wanted to go for the inferior product, and that’s their prerogative. Maybe they just don’t have the revenue to make a large enough J-10 buy, what with their lack of recent exports of nuclear technology and their love affair with the F-16.

And really, why we want to sell F-16s to a nation that is clearly neither democratic nor an actual ally (have they rounded up the Al Qaeda and Taliban remnants in Waziristan? No? Sheesh…) is beyond me. We picked the wrong ally in that fight. Better to cut ties with Pakistan and move on to a better relationship with both India and China. Perhaps increased diplomatic and economic ties with both nations could lead to a mending of fences, helping to further isolate and marginalize Pakistan.

Until they start selling nuclear technology again, of course.

http://temperedinsanity.blogspot.com/search/label/FC-1

One of the best articles posted here in some time.

All been discussed before, such bugs are hardly unsurprising and certainly not Raptor specific.

This is the best J-11B picture that I can find showing the intakes, indeed it does almost seem like there has been some sort of concious effort not to show them in photos of the type.

I am sure that there are people on here with sharper eyes than me, if you can see any differences between this ana regular Su-27 in terms of the intakes please shout it out!

Hasn’t the Rooivalk been reincarnated as the ZW-10? I thought SA was collaborating with China on it. Not to mention the HJ-10L/Mokopa; HJ-9/Ingwe; and Anjian/Seraph.

No, China is reportedly working with Eurocopter on the WZ-10, officialy this cooperation only stretches as far as the rotor system and power plant but there is a definate resemblance to the Tiger.

It is definately a shame that this bird is being canned, it is/was a great piece of kit.

Well, you either can detect a sub or not………..Clearly, the parties involved should have the answers?

No, like others said the variables are so huge it is unbelevable.

No, not Absalon & Esbern Snare. They’re “Command & Support Ships”, or “Flexible Support Ships”. I mean the so-called “Patrol Ships” ordered last year, on the same hull, with weapons including SM-2, & APAR/SMART-L radars. All-out warships of 6000+ tons, with one of the best AAW suites in the world. “Patruljeskibe” eh? :diablo:

Of course your reffering to these,

http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/NavyNews/2006/0622_PatrolShips.htm

I think that they can definately be called destroyers. I like the way that Denmark fits 16 instead of 8 harpoons, it puts their AShW capability well ahead of most other western nations.