I wonder what I would do in that situation having lost my family?
25000, 25’000’000 ?
I don’t think either would be compensation. Could I spend the money, enjoy the money knowing what it cost?
An acceptance of fault, a sorry from the CEO and time to mourn?
Or just accept the fact and walk away?
Strangely the last option seems the best.

Money makes for a salary lost in a family for example.
You can then be able to send your child through some studies instead of being forced down a position where he can’t fulfill his aspirations
Money makes for a mortgage that can be paid instead of a house lost
Money makes for psy support instead of depression
Money makes for dignity instead of charity reliance.

Your post is really odd. But perhaps you’d like to think that the dead were all illegal immigrants inbound to tap social benefits?

Legit never knew it really existed until today.

Was it for a foreign customer?(notice the squared vertical tail’s tip)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]245477[/ATTACH]

I know the gear was down, but notice how the F2 effortlessly keeps up on dry power.

Nonetheless, a considerable indigenous achievement and moment of pride.

Yes. Noticed also the usage of full AB.

@ DJ:
Thank you.
For the recess, I had in mind that it looked a bit oversized for the hook that can be spotted in place.

I’m puzzled. The original developer of the RBE2 had a name partly derived from the American founder of one of the firms that merged to form it, but that was in the 19th century. It had no US ownership at all when work on the RBE2 began.

If you think that I miss interpreted the name “Thomson” for that of an American chap, you sold my fur for cheap 😉
But it’s a near miss. Look deeper in the story if you really want to skin that cat.

The intention from France and the USA regarding Taiwan are really opposed. French political class would not sell to T only because of the fear to loose some commercial ties (which are ridiculously low compared to other countries and do not support that policy!). French mil industry does not sell anything openly to China. Reasonably there are no grounds for not selling (again) to T).

The US, IMOHO, fears the proximity and potential leaks. This is absolutely different. This is why, I see more T as being the playground of Bae, IAI etc… Not sure although if that vision is shared by many here.

Are you sure? The F-20 radar was the General Electric AN/APG-67, now a Lockheed Martin product fitted to light fighters & armed trainers such as the Ching Kuo & IA-63. I’ve not heard of it being integrated on the F-16. Old F-16s with APG-66 radars have either had the APG-66 upgraded, or replaced by the APG-68 – both made by Northrop Grumman.

And how did the mechanically scanned APG-67 become the basis of the Thales RBE2 PESA radar?

I’ve never heard of Dassault having any part of the F-16 MLU contract, except in Belgium, where the work was done by SABCA – a Belgian firm in which Dassault Group is the majority shareholder, & which had assembled 222 of the NATO four country F-16s & long done F-16 support for a few air forces, so a logical choice. But SABCA operates separately from Dassault Aviation & Dassault Systemes within the Dassault group.

I should have not talked about radar. I took a shortcut. The components are what I should have mentioned. For the link b/w 20 & 16, you can follow the link that I have included in my post. For the link b/w the Rafale Radar and the F16 you should browse the name of the company that originally did work on the RBE2 (US owned). There are not much results with the amount of details needed here to be relevant with this conversation. You will find it pretty easily (could be in Fr)

For the scandal relative to the MLU and Dassault, I did post somewhere here a month ago a press report relating the end-inquiry. I think it’s inflammatory enough to not paste it again, especially at this time, even given the situation.

There is another fundamental difference between the actual “indigenous fighters” and the F-20 and it is in the word itself.
Tigershark was a tentative from the US to gave to their own third world allies an up-to-date plane but without any of the sensible technologies of their own teen fighters, even with a full transfer of technologies such a thing would have not permitted to these nation to advance their own industrial capabilities in any regard.
So in the end taking the F-20 would result in a lose/lose situation for them: cutting edge performances and no technological progress of any sort.
Even the F-16/79 doesn’t meet any simphaty into potential buyers for the same reason, while instead the original intended prime customer for the F-20, the ROC took a great overall advantage in being permitted to develop its own Ching Kuo with technological transfer from US (and others) in compensation for the cancellation of initial deal.

The F20 didn’t have inferior system regarding the 16. Nobody wanted this and Northrop was looking for… customers. In fact, Northrop’s engineers had to find a parallel way to make for a powerful radar (as much as the 16 at least) that fitted inside the small nose, with a lower maintenance cost (an hint to who it inspired?). Doing so, they selected a radar that had been rejected by the USAF for the 16 but had a promising potential. This led them through a painfull and costly dev but, at the end, the Radar was so advanced that it dwarfed the one on the 16 in term of range, growth potential and maintenance.
So much that the Radar was latter integrated on the 16.
Dassault was then so much interested in the technology that it formed the basis of the … Rafale radar.
SO much was it that Dassault gained confidence that it could swap the MLU contract on the… F16 fleet.
So So so much (ouioui) that it led to one of th most despicable scandal in Eu arm sales…

So, let’s say that in the end, the most countries that had benefited from a “full transfer of technologies [that] such a thing would have not permitted to these nation to advance their own industrial capabilities in any regard” were… the USA, the NATO and France!

Not personal.. Just that sometime lecturing history is the surest way to make a big… splash 😉 *

Source:
From my non reliable on board memory and http://www.thecid.com/f20a/index.html

*and it happens to me often!

The original problem that face Taiwan is to be landlocked at an alarming proximity of its military rival. However Taiwan is an island and how do you defend such island… By extending the fight out to sea. The British empire has done that for centuries and the present strategy still bear traces of this.
Taiwan should inspire itself and benefits from the investments made by the UK: the couple of aircraft and carrier that this country is fielding is an example to follow. Add a modern naval SAM system, from the US, Europe or one dev’d in coop with India and Israel, and you have a coherent batlle management system, military and politically that will offer resilience by extending the fight well beyond the Taiwan strait.
In other words, think big picture. Even China, by the sheer number can’t invade Taiwan AND face a confrontation in the whole China sea.
Inevitably, with that kind of defense, a politically credible Taiwan will merge new alliances that they have parted themselves from with that dual head/corruption road.

My take only, obviously.

Remark to djcross:
I don’t think that any SAM system can radiate for minutes and then travel for Kilometers. You’ll need a very dense network to protect your territory that way as at any time a lot of system will be off on the road.
This is where the concept of mobile SAM meets its limit. Either you’ll need a topography that allow a quick concealment for a short travel time or a very long engagement range to increase your reaction time. And then you face the wall of cost, bulkiness, discretion etc… Such SAM are strategically effectives. They don’t lead to air dominance in an all-out confrontation.