Didn’t they buy something recently from china? I recall some news in that direction..

hmm but the FC-1 Block X could only go so far as replacing the MiG-29s. Maybe something more – like a J-10 Block X or a J-XX but jointly developed with Ukraine. The other two would be more than glad to have Ukraine on board given its immense expertise and industrial capacity for making engines. And whats a fighter jet but an engine with wings?

PS: those italian girls look hot in that picture and so does the ukrainian politician 😉 good looks, power and money make a powerful blend of persuasion :dev2:

actually as I read it with DSI the optimal boundary vis-a-vis speed is 1.8. Thats what the test data showed with the F-16. The reason it wasn’t put in the F-16 new builds is probably because of that. I don’t really know what distiller is talking about in terms of the effect of the nose on the airflow. That doesn’t make sense. While you probably can fly at 2 with the DSI, its by far not an optimal solution. So it wouldn’t make sense on anything other than the F-35 and the FC-1 / JF-17. Unless of course you started building F-5s again or on a mirage X000. Or perhaps also the less known MiG 5th generation project.

Yes, the Sealand Government of course. Those guys have some mean mermaids and mermen working for them. Just imagine, you’re minding your business flying 300 miles from the Sealand secret sea bases dropping whale killing JDAMs, just another fine day working for the Empire and suddenly a BVR flies at you and bites you in the ****!!

PLA_MKII, you can’t be sure it NEVER happened.
If it wasn’t usual practice, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen at all.
Executions were public indeed and did’t comprehend torture, but what about the interrogatories?

You’re right, I can’t be sure it never happened but I can tell you its generally true. Cheers, thats the end of my contribution as i don’t want to start a flame war.

The regiments that had Q-5s are indeed being replaced or supplemented with JH-7As, and at least one with an Su-30MKK. Namely the 18th and 28th Division among them. That tells you that the PLAAF does not take the CAS role highly enough to produce a dedicated aircraft for it.

The new Q-5s actually function more like fast mini-strike aircraft rather than CAS. Now that you have the latest models with a laser target designator in the nose, ala the MiG-27K. In my view the Q-5 comes out like a cheaper, shorter ranged analog to the MiG-27s—both are renosed fighters to give a better view of the lower front hemisphere. It’s not a plane analogous to the Su-25 or the A-10. Early in the career, the Q-5 was envisioned for things like carrying nukes or even antiship missiles. The plane was a cheap fighter bomber for the lack of a proper one in the PLAAF.

The FC-1 is simply a light weight multirole jet. It can do point defense interception to precision ground attack roles, even ship attack roles. To say its being groomed as a Q-5 successor does not fit the pattern we have seen. Even if its small and light, when it gets incorporated into the PLAAF, it would be regarded as a plane for the elite regiments. While people like to talk about high-medium-lo mix for the PLAAF, the operational reality is more like new-old mix.

The PLAAF still has a lot of old J-7s, even J-8IIs, that it can deploy as flying MLRS or dropping dumb bombs.

I am beginning to see what you mean. You’re right, old vs new seems more reasonable than role replacement as is more common in the western air forces.

Here is my thesis on the FC-1:

It will replace not only J-7s but also Q-5s. The JH-7A is not a replacement for the CAS role of the Q-5s. It is not designed for the CAS role and is not suitable for it. There are no other real alternatives unless you wanted to use J-10s which would be a waste of J-10s and at that won’t even be as effective (given the wing area, size and angle of attack). I see the FC-1 playing the same role that F-16s today play for the USAF. Filling in the gaps where the big ticket items cannot or will not play.