thobbesWhat about the other side of the coin??? India still fly’s Mig-21’s and F-4’s are still in service in countries such as South Korea and Japan. Even more Advance Types like the F-15’s and F-16’s are starting to get old and clearly will be outclassed by 4.5 and 5th Generation Types.
Totally agree on India’s Air Force – that’s a great example of focus on indigenisation at the expense of real capability.
Japan and South Korea have far greater percentages of 4th generation aircraft than Japan.
Japan has 40 odd F-4Es in service out of a fleet of 350 fighter aircraft (plus a few more RF-4 recce). And these are more advanced than a J-7 or Q-5!
South Korea has about 200 F-5 and F-4 out of a fleet of 200 aircraft. Al the F-4 and F-5s will be gone by 2020, replaced by F-X Phase III and F/A-50.
Also what 4.5th generation jets do the Chinese have that will outfly an upgraded F-15 or F-16?
And you forget the US of A. 2,000+ 4th generation combat aircraft supported by hundreds of tankers and transports, dozens of AWACS and a menagerie of other advanced EW/C3 etc etc.
thobbesThere are i think atleast 76 Su-27SK/UBK that you didnot mentioned.
J-11 of all types closer to 200.
Apparently they’ve been retired – indeed I’ve seen a picture of a Su-27 being towed down a high way to a scrapper.
H-6K is another.
Let’s compare to USA:
China: 80-120 H-6 of which 15 are H-6K.
USA: 20 x B-2A, 66 x B-1B, 76 x B-52H.
China’s H-6s have one big disadvantage – they have to operate within range of high density fighter/air defence concentrations (i.e South China, East China, Philippine and Yellow Seas).
USAF bombers can operate from relatively safe bases ala Hawaii, Guam and Australia. B-2s can operate from continental USA.
Both have projects on the burner.
JH-7/J-10 number will be closer to 300 each. both have 10 years in production.
All numbers on JH-7 that I’ve seen show about 200-270 J-10 and under 120 JH-7.
thobbesToday you could make that case. Yet, production of the J-11 and J-10 Series is moving right along.
Plus, China is continuing Development of the J-20 and J-31.
As stated it’s slow compared to PLAAF’s reequipment needs:
J-10: 270 J-10s entered service in 2005-12 period.
J-11: In 15 years only up to 164 have entered service.
JH-7: 120 -ish aircraft since 2004.
Extrapolate that to J-20 and J-31, and their might be 300-400 in service by 2030 compared to nearly 2,000 F-35 + F-22 and that assumes development of J-20 amd J-31 goes according to plan.
Last 100% indigenous combat aircraft China built by itself was JH-7 and that one first flew in 1988.
J-10 had Israeli and Russian help.
Also you ignore the force multipliers – tankers, AWACS, etc.
Fighters are only one piece of the puzzle.
I would also add that if the latter two don’t mature to acceptable level. China could very likely acquire the PAK-FA from Russia.
Probably – it’s why China has brought a couple of hundred Su-27/-30/35s.
thobbes[ATTACH=CONFIG]220394[/ATTACH]
You forget J-7, Q-5 and JH-7?
Is it because having half of the fleet obsolete makes the threat look less threatening.
And remember the obsolescence cycle, by the time J-7, Q-5 and JH-7 are all replaced the J-11 and J-10s will be old and in need of retiring.
thobbesYet, like you said you didn’t include the PLAN. Which, also operates many Advance 4th Generation Fighter Types like the J-11B, J-15, and J-10.
,
PLAN is not that big – quick look at Wiki.
24 Su-30MK2
24 J-11
20 J-10
up to 16 J-15.
35-50 JH-7
35 J-7
48 J-8
30 Q-5
Again at least 50% is obsolete.
China is also developing not one but two 5th Generation Fighters. In addition China’s Military Build Up is almost at a Frantic Pace and Across the Board at that. From 5th Generation Fighters to Aircraft Carriers to everything in between…….Honestly, I don’t see China’s Neighbors seeing the Build Up as Non-Threatening!
Whoopee do. Unless they can load up on 500-600 J-20/J-31 in period 2020-2030, the 5th generation don’t really change much.
Chinese induction rates are too slow to keep up with rest of world as the rest of the world has a far more advanced starting point (i.e. F-15/-16s entering service in 1980s, Chinese equivalent J-10 only entered service in 2005).
And their induction rates aren’t that quick – an optimistic number says 270 J-10s entered service in 2005-12 period. Regular numbers show about 200.
J-11 induction rates are also slow – in 15 years only up to 164 have entered service. JH-7: 120 -ish aircraft since 2004.
Extrapolate that to J-20 and J-31, and their might be 300-400 in service by 2030 compared to nearly 2,000 F-35 + F-22 and that assumes development of .
As stated:
1. Lacking in numbers for true offensive operations. Traditional knowledge requires attacker to have at least a 3:2 advantage in numbers. China cannot do this – it’s fighter fleet is small, it’s overall domestic requirement too huge and most of it’s fleet too old.
2. Lack of force multipliers – tankers, AWACS, strategic transports. And they’re not buying large numbers of these.
The only force multiplier they have is a large number of ballistic missiles.
3. Large scale fleet obsolesence and modern fighter induction rates are not quick enough to make up difference. China has already retired earlier Su-27s whilst needing to retain nearly 1,000 obsolete J-7/-J-8/Q-5 to maintain numbers.
4. US has absolute numerical and technological advantage.
5. North Asian countries maintain robust and sophisticated defence forces with considerable capability. And they continue to invest in it – AEGIS destroyers, AWACS, fighters ala F-15 and F-35.
The only one’s that have been truly worried are the Filipinos who could be defeated even by a WWII era force equipped with Gloster Gladiator fighter planes and Swordfish torpedo bombers.
The other one is Taiwan because even though it currently has a modern force it has been unable to source too many new systems.
thobbesI totally agree.
Problem with Chinese air power is that up to the 1990s it was pretty much a 1950s force based on an outdated doctrine and completely stalled technologically (mainstay fighter was 1958 vintage J-6/MiG-19S/PM) and the focus was fighter aviation at the expense of anything else.
It’s made amazing progress but it’s still a mainly outdated force lacking in force multipliers.
This will certainly be the case in 2020 and most likely in 2030 as well (by that stage J-10 and J-11 are close to obsolescence and need replacing).
Ballistic missiles are a cheap way of maintaining deterrence.
thobbesMr. Gates was just applying some pressure to keep the F-35 On Time and On Budget. Plus, don’t forget the former Secretary of Defense (not State) pushed the cancelation of the F-22 in favor of the F-35!
My bad on Secretary of Defence – no sleep between 6:00 am Saturday and 9:20 pm on Sunday!
Anyhow Gates might’ve preferred the F-35A & C but he did put F-35B on probation.
And it wasn’t until after Gates left and Panetta came on board that F-35B was prematurely taken off probation.
Depends on what you mean??? Is the F-35 going to be cheap in the sense of the simple F-16A of the early 1980’s no! Yet, if you compare it to F-16C (blk 50/60) it would be comparable. Also, as long as we are talking price. The F-35 will be very competitive price wise with the best 4/4.5 Generation Fighters available today. (F-16 blk 60, F-15 Strike Eagle, Typhoon, and Rafale) Which, are not nearly as capable.
USAF is predicting it will be at least 22% more costly to fly than an F-16 Blk 50.
As for Eurofighter and Rafale, their operating costs are pretty horrific. And notice they don’t sell much on export markets unless the operator is oil rich or beyond inefficient.
I will dominate for a whole series of reasons. Including its Stealth, Advance Situational Awareness, Sensor Fusion, and Flight Performance. In addition to some of the best trained Pilots the World.
That and the opponent has a 1980s vintage MiG-29, no AWACS, no EW and the elite pilots get 50 hours flying a year. :eagerness:
It’s opponents are the ones that are going to loose and more than out……..
Against your average opponent, F-16C is as much overkill capability as F-35A. F-35’s superior capabilities are there for a “just in case WWIII” scenario that mostly likely won’t happen.
Higher F-35 acquisition costs = less airframes which means fleet life is reduced as you can’t share aircraft around. Accidents will also have a bigger impact – losing 1 F-35 out of 60 is more detrimental than 1 F-16 out of 120. This is especially relevant for smaller operators (which is everyone but USA). In fact current highest non-US user is Turkey who is planning a mere 116 airframes. Number 2 is Israel who is planning a mere 100 between now and 2030.
Higher F-35 operating costs = able to afford less flight hours/training, cut out other capabilities/services.
It’s nice to have a sooper-dooper WWIII compliant stealth jet but it sucks when you have to chop down flight hours, scrap your Search and Rescue unit and then replace the sooper-dooper WWIII compliant stealth jet cause you’ve reached it’s maximum life earlier than if you had a larger fleet..
thobbesOf course we don’t know the intended role for either. I assume the J-31 is a Strike Fighter similar to the F-35. The J-20 is more of a question mark. As it could be more of a long range Interdictor or even an Interceptor??? Hell, from all we know it could be just a demonstrator of Advance Technology and not planned for Series Production???
All the current thinking about J-20 is that it’s a stealthy MiG-31.
Seems like a good tactic – take out US AWACS and especially air refuelling tankers to limit US operational range.
Whatever it is, it is planned for series production and service entry in 2017-19 according to Deputy Commander of PLAAF, General He Weirong.
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2013/January%202013/0113PLAAF.aspx
thobbesI think anyone claiming F-35 program is going to be cancelled doesn’t understand the current status of the program either technically or politically.
F-35B was close and I suspect if Robert Gates was still Secretary of State, F-35B might’ve been cancelled by now.
The F-35 will sell well and in some cases it does have a near monopoly.
However I don’t think it’s going to be anywhere near as cheap as advertised even with economies of scale.
I think it’ll do it’s job fine – that job consisting of air policing and occassional third world bombing runs. If it ever gets into A2A it will dominate because it’s opponents will be poorly trained tyros flying outdated aircraft without EW or AWACS.
The only problem is that of cost – no-one’s even pretending anymore that this thing will be any close to the cheap F-16.
And that’s where you lose out.
thobbesCanada F-35 Worst Case Scenario: $25 billion (56%) cost blow out
An interesting article and especially comments about F-35 operational costs not coming down but rather estimates of future costs coming down.
The estimates are obviously based on assumptions about everything from price of fuel to inflation to industrial issues (e.g. salaries and other employee costs).
As someone that works in finance and budget management, I can tell you estimates are a dangerous thing and especially when the assumptions are faulty or set up to give a favourable impression.
And too often the assumptions are bad and designed to promote certain subjective opinions. Basically you can prove anything with numbers and statistics if you build in the correct assumption.
Personally I always build “fat” into my estimates i.e. I overestimate costs because inevitably something unexpected does come up.
And 50 year estimates based on inflation, currency and oil prices are extremely difficult to predict. If I told someone in 1990 that the AUD or CAD were going to hit parity with USD or oil prices would peak at $145 per barrel in 2008-10 I would’ve been laughed at.
In any case National Defence estimate of US$46 billion for whole Canadian F-35 program seems understated if a worst case scenario blows cost out by 54%.
I don’t think $71 billion cost (54% blowout) will happen. Worst case scenarios seldom do.
However the cost is more likely to be more than $46 billion presented, especially as F-35 build rate isn’t assured and CAD will most likely drop once US economy finds it’s legs.
Mind you the CAD, oil prices and inflation rates are an issue with any jet and not just F-35.
Build rates on the other hand aren’t, primarily because Eurofighter and F/A-18E/F builds for home countries is winding down in 2015-20 period and even more so in 2020-23 period (F/A-18E/F probably won’t even be in production by then).
thobbesthobbes, we “Islamists” are not as bad as you make us out to be. I didn’t like US policy, so I left, packed my bags, sold my stuff, my car, quit my job, wrote a colourful letter to the congress and just walked away. I certainly don’t ever intend to come back. Its strange how quickly men are willing to label others they don’t know or understand.
Fair enough.
Problem is so many Islamists (and Christians as well) think that the only correct way is their way. And many Islamists think that if you don’t do it their way, you should be punished and even killed.
If someone wants to be a Muslim then that’s their choice. But keep it to themselves. And stop demanding Sharia law in secular countries or Christian/Buddhist/Animist/Whatever countries where Muslims are an a small and often very new minority.
As the great, late George Carlin once said, “thou should keep thy religion to thyself.”
thobbesYou know that is one thing that has surprised me recently, the amount of datalinks there are beyond Link16. AFM reported on a multinational JAS-39C/D Gripen exercise and there were at least three different datalinks depending on the fielding nation none of which could talk to each other despite the aircraft being the same.
Where they all NATO operators?
The other interesting thing is airforces with multiple types that use different links.
Crazy!
C3 is such a critical component of warfare that I’m amazed at this kind of lack of integration.
thobbesnot true most tactical loads carried by the Aussie C-130’s are between 3-5tons
I didn’t know that. In that case C-27 does make sense!
i would replace FFG’s with 15 DDG’s.
Problem is RAN surface fleet is slowly shrinking. After Hobart class replaces FFGs, we will have 11 major surface combatants instead of 12 now.
If you want to use the LHDs in any fashion in a real shooting war, they’ll probably require 2 surface ships as escorts thus shrinking fleet further.
And 8 out of those 11 are the somewhat undergunned ANZACs (currently no AGM-84 AShM, no CIWS/Phalanx).
“Fitted for but not equipped wth” is a load of tosh especially when you might not necessarily have brought the equipment to be fitted.
I’m not sold on submarine replacement either – building, getting seaworthy and maintaining (including providing sufficient crews) for 6 Collins class subs has been difficult at best and a disaster at worst.
Getting 12 even bigger boats sounds like a recipe for disaster.
Personally I’d buy something ala Israeli Navy Dolphin class subs.
I’m not sold on benefits for Australian indigenous submarine building capability especially when the whole project was designed as a jobs creation scheme for South Australia.
thobbes… in which case the founding fathers of your country where also… “Nut-jobs”. Glad to know.
Meanwhile, in a parallel universe, I actually think that the US action in Libya and potentially in Syria shows that there is a great deal of moral fiber left, a thing we Muslims do not often fully appreciate. After all, the US could just simply sit back and watch Assad slowly but surely kill the FSA using Russian weapons and support. I think that beyond their self-interest, there are somewhere also admirable ideals of humanity at play. But guess that’d make ’em a bit of a “nut-job” eh?
Never understood how bombing people to save them was a humane thing to do.
To be honest I think wars for control of territory or natual resources or whatever make far more sense than wars for ideals even if those ideals are “human rights”.
I’m sure civilians killed by NATO bombs in Libya or Serbia appreciate the humane ideals behind those bombs. :eagerness:
thobbesEverything was big in the 1980s.
And for one I am glad big gung ho action flicks are back.
Expendables 2 was pure unadulterated trigger happy bliss. It was like a meeting of Gods! :eagerness:
I just hope the heavy metal gets as good as it was in that period especially the Thrash Metal of 1983-90.
I’m willing to risk WWIII for that kind of awesome.
Sign In
