MadRat, the last (507th) production P&W F119 was delivered in January 2013. Do you see the US granting export licences and reopening the production line for the i/F3?…or do you envisage active Japanese partnership in P&W’s AETD programme?

If the answer to these questions is ‘No’, then expect the i3 to take on a distinctly ‘medium’ flavour. I think it would be very difficult indeed for IHI to develop an F119 class engine anytime in the next decade (given their current best effort is the XF5-1 rated @ 11,000lb).

I thought Japan had already announced plans to develop a 15-ton engine?

Regarding the potential for Japanese-Indian collaboration on AMCA/F-3, it’s not impossible, but the fundamental problem is that each would require greater R&D workshare than the other would be willing to forego. Add to this that such a joint venture would have to start in the near future when the Japanese currently have no experience with such joint ventures and the Indo-Japanese relationship is still immature, and I think any significant intermingling of the programs is unlikely.

Maybe in case I missed Your irony or sarcasm :dev2: … but what should India do with the Tu-160’s engine ???

NK-32 could serve as the basis for an Indian long-range strike platform, but that requirement is some ways in the future. Nevertheless, IAF and MoD should be devoting some thought to the post-2030 environment if only so that they don’t inhibit certain paths by e.g. overburdening themselves with manned tactical aircraft — in essence, so they don’t end up facing the same problem USAF has today, attempting to shed airframes it doesn’t need and can no longer afford to operate in order to fund programs that are actually important. Of course China will have to be careful to avoid this same problem in future as well.

One would’ve thought a nation with Poland’s history would be reluctant to invade others, but as you point out, that doesn’t appear to be the case.

The specific shortcomings identified are valid enough, and of course the PLA is well aware of them and working to correct the situation. But the broader premise is silly: there is no such thing as ‘war’ in the generic sense of the term, only specific contingencies, or at best types of war, and China’s readiness to engage in each, against different adversaries and in different contexts, varies widely. For example, who would doubt that China even today could repel an invasion force mounted by any adversary or conceivable coalition thereof?

As for ‘modern’ war, what is that? If it is operations in the vein of the western war of terror, then China has little to no need to engage or prepare for such foolhardy conflicts of choice. If we are referring to even a limited war between large, modern, near peer adversaries, how prepared is anyone for such a war? No nation has any credible record in this respect, with the closest approximation being the United States and its allies, given six full months of prep time, against a lone, third-rate adversary already drained by a decade of war some 25 years ago. Of course, everyone has their theories as to how a modern great power conflict will play out, but they had their theories back in 1914 as well, and spent the next four years shedding one misconception after another in the most brutal manner imaginable.

Huh, turns out the near-term demographics of the UK aren’t as sobering as I’d imagined. The proportion of the UK population aged >70yrs of age is only set to increase from today’s 12.4% to 15.7% by 2030 — proportionally speaking a much smaller jump than the US from today’s 9.7% to 14.5% by 2030.

Got an actual picture? Seems like someone just took the Sensor Craft proposals and put them all into one graphic as one vehicle 🙂

Just as many photographs as there are of LRS-B.

Try this link; I’m not sure if it’s still up because it keeps redirecting me to the Australian website: http://www.popsci.com/china-flies-its-largest-ever-drone-divine-eagle

One thing seems clear: it’s big. Both physically, and metaphorically.

Funny thing given all this talk — I happened to be perusing SIPRIs recent publications on global military expenditures earlier, and apparently Argentina is one of a limited number of countries to have doubled its military expenditures over the 2004-13 period.