Damn I miss Paris. Nice pics.

They could of used the bombay for a missile trapeze like the F-106. Or more fuel. And why not missiles streamlined into the fuselage like on so many other planes?

swerve,

You forget that the Soviets dumped what amounted to Nike-Ajax program over much of North Korea’s strategic targets. The US pilots flew through the most sophisticated missile defense network of its time. You also had radar-directed guns throwing ten and twenty pound shells across the sky. You had massive cannon barrages filled with small and large caliber shells down low. On top of that they flew through a coordinated defense of interceptors. Not only did they generally rule the skies over Northern vietnam, they nearly completely decimated the opposition whenever it came out of the clouds to attack.

Wait a minute, in Vietnam the heavies won out.

Yes, the F-16I was not delivered with the Elta EL/M-2032, true, but it was what Isreal designed for it. It’s what Isreal wanted for it. The AN/APG-68(V)9, inferior although it may have been, won out. That’s because the US was paying the bill.

Here’s a good close up of the 2032: Elta.pdf

If this is the same radar as the Cheetah then we get a clue from some of the other fighters around the world as to how it would work. Venezuela used it in AMX-ATI. JF-17 prototypes used it. Romanian ex-Mig-21M/MF upgraded to Lancer C uses it. The F-16I appears to use it, too. Any idea what limitations each version of the 2032 radar has versus its capabilities?

Edit: This link details it as the EL/M-2035 radar, a development of the Elta EL/M-2021B.

The F-15E has serious wing flutter when trying to perform low level penetration flight. It would be the only US-built option to meet most of the demands if those are true.

True on the Su-30, but more like it fell long. 🙂

First of all there was never a J-4 !!! … and where do You get this “Chengdu J-9/FC-1 Fishpaste” as the Chengdu J-9 and the FC-1 are two completely different aircraft … !:mad:

Original J-9: source = http://www.china-defense.com/aviation/chinese_fighter_development/chinese_fighter_development-2.html

The J-9 project ran in parallel with the J-8 project but used a completely new airframe. The design target maximum speed was Mach 2.4 at above 20,000 metres altitude. In order to achieve this target the J-9 was fitted with an 8,500kg thrust turbojet engine and the 601 Institute initially used a tailless delta design. Development at this point shifted to the newly built 611 Institute and the Chengdu Aircraft Factory. At the beginning of the 1970s, the 611 Institute proposed a new design using a canard ahead of the delta wing (not dissimilar to the Swedish Viggen), but because it required new materials and know-how plus engine performance problems it wasn’t until 1975 before the design could be completed. The new J-9 design was quite advanced with air intakes on the fuselage sides featuring variable inlet geometry to alter the compression mixture. It used a 12,400 kg wet thrust turbofan engine and featured a Type 205 radar (search range about 70km) and four PL-4 radar-guided air-to-air missiles. The J-9 plan was discontinued in 1980. However, the effort was not totally wasted as the J-9 development enabled Chinese engineers to gain experience with the canard layout type, experience that would prove useful in the J-10 project.

The FC-1/JH-17 replaced the original J-9 program and has now taken its name.