Semi-Lobster3- At the moment the Rafale is taylored to French weapons at first which are much more expensive vis-a-vis US weapons. Example,MICA is massively inferior to AMRAAM but costs more .
I don’t think that comparison is all that fair. The MICA is a short-to-medium range missile, its more comparable to the Derby or IRIS-T. Even though its not in service yet, the Meteor would be a more fair comparison to the AMRAAM
Semi-LobsterIndia likely to award trainer contract in 2011 Q3
Hmm, interesting the M-311 was submitted. I wonder if there is still an appetite out there for a jet powered basic trainer when nowadays it seems prop aircraft are proving more popular in the basic training role?
Semi-Lobsterhttp://military.globaltimes.cn/china/2011-04/648200.html
Mostly an article on the official introduction of the J-15 but at the end they mention the J-18 rumour and so far have officially denied such a project exists.
Semi-LobsterThree out of 12 ex-South African Air Force Cheetah fighters will arrive in Ecuador this week.
It will be interesting to see just how well the Cheetah stacks up to the Kfir head to head
Semi-LobsterThe SH would be an outright stupid decision combining both obsolescence and dependency on US. At least one of these can be prevented by choosing one of the other candidates.
I think the idea that Japan would be getting the SH ‘as is’ is naive considering this is Boeing after all who have a long history of working with Japan (as McDonnell Douglas). The same Boeing who also stressed that they are completely open to Japan to develop a new SH based derived and Boeing openly mentioned that they would be willing to transfer F-15SE technology to develop a new Hornet and emphasized that production of any such SH derivative would be built in Japan. In terms of technology transfer I’d say Boeing’s offer has the most incentive to offer Japan… wrapped up in an older package, one could say that the extras involved (technology transfer, co-production, co-development etc.) with the deal may be more of interest to Japan than the aircraft itself. The other aircraft are certainly more advanced than the old super bug but I’m not sure how much Eurofighter or Lockheed Martin are willing to offer in terms of technology or working with Mitsubishi.
Semi-LobsterThis post is OT, I shouldnt respond, but I cant resist. The F-20 Tigershark was the worst idea, adding an F404 to a F-5 airframe. It was offered to the USAF for Aggressor duty, they rejected it and chose the F-16 instead. It was offered to small countries, they all rejected it as it cost the same as the F-16. The F-5 was aerodynamically very good at what it was designed for, very efficient performance using a low rated engine. F-20 specs were not significantly improved over the F-5E. If the F-5E were put back into production, I do believe a lot of AFs would buy it as it still provides very potent capabilities at an economical price and operating costs no current fighter can match.
Price and performance is a trade off a lot of smaller countries must consider and sometimes price is the more important factor. Many countries in South America are still buying refurbished Mirage III based Kfirs and Cheetahs while in Africa there are still a lot of interested buyers of Chengdu’s F-7G series fighters (Tanzania recently received an unspecified number of F-7TGs)
Semi-Lobster
Really?
The Mitsubishi F-1 wasn’t really based on the Jaguar it was more ‘inspired by’, Breguet/BAC never saw a penny from the F-1
Semi-LobsterThe USN does not want to spend money on upgrading the SH though. Just look at the apathetic solution for an IRST they came up with! They have also said no to new engine dev.
Any development of the SH would be between Mitsubishi and the US Government would not be involved, much like how Japan worked with Lockheed-Martin to develop the F-2 from the Agile Eagle. As for engines, the F414-GE-INS6 could be used.
Semi-LobsterI think everybody is overlooking some very important aspect of past purchases by Japan of military aircraft, technology transfer, indigenisation, customization and local production. The F-2 (a joint project with Lockheed-Martin), the F-15J (a joint project with McDonnell Douglas/Boeing), the F-4EJ/F-4EJ Kai (a joint project with McDonnell Douglas) and so far Boeing is offering the most comprehensive amount of technology transfer and even hinting that a radical modification using technology from the F-15SE to create a new Super Hornet derivative
Semi-LobsterATD-X is only planned to enter service in late 2020s, the 2014 (or whatever) demonstrator is just one step in long-term project. That’s why industry is desperate for a bridge. Needless to say F-35 is in the poorest position of the candidates to act as such on account of latest potential production start date for Japan and least development prospects for industry.
True, co-development has always been a very big aspect of Japanese tenders going as far back as the F-86F and Japan hopping on board the F-35 is simply not realistically possible given the F-35’s unique development and planned-production. The SH on the other hands has potential
Semi-LobsterI still wonder how ‘serious’ Japan is about the ATD-X? Does the government REALLY intend to induct it or is it simply a make work project for Mitsubishi Aerospace since production of the F-2 will end in September 2011 which would leave the industry in limbo and would lead to a loss of jobs and specialized skills?
Semi-LobsterIn the first half of the 90’s when the process of getting Hawk 109/209 to TNI-AU inventory underways, on several publications back then TNI-AU already stated that eventhough they have secondary Air-Defence capabilities, the main reasons for Hawk 200 in Indonesian Air Forces is for Ground attack. Specifically for maritime-surface attack, as the primary intended purpose for Hawk 200 in TNI-AU inventory is Maritime patrol.
That’s why they are based on Pekanbaru and Pontianak in which both AFB directly facing strategic sea lanes. This’s the intended primary jobs for Hawk 200 in which TNI-AU hopping for, in which also I believe they’re less effective for what TNI-AU hopping on the primary job due to their limitations on their size.
It’s not a secret that TNI-AU just now only got what they’re hoping for effective Maritime/sea lanes CAP in the form of SU-30. That’s the reasons those SU-30 based in Makasar so they can conducts Maritime patrol on Indonesian eastern teritorial waters and sea lanes.
Back to Hawk 200, TNI-AU did not have choices (in which on several publications after Soeharto’s fall some of the retired TNI-AU brass elaborated on publications their frustrations on Soeharto’s policy to the Air Force). One of their frustrations was to be forced getting Hawk 100/200 due to Soeharto’s children insistance rather than their prefered F-16.
I should stated that what I mean on ‘primary weapons’ is the primary weapon Hawk 200 in Indonesian inventory can get to fullfill their intended primary role which is surface and maritime attack. Maverick is the best thing that available for them in Indonesian inventory which made them able to conduct their ‘intended’ primary role in Indonesian Air Force.
In that case (skipping over the sorry period of political corruption in Indonesia during the 90s) for a maritime strike role the Exocet carrying Super-Etendard equipped with an Anemone Radar system (which is twice as powerful as the older Agave radar) would be more useful if the primary role is anti-shipping and naval patrol. One can argue that the Hawk 200s CWI which allows it to fire the AIM-7 (and British Skyflash) give the Hawk better air-to-air capabilities but Super-Etendard can be argued to have better strike and especially naval strike capabilities. Of course, given the ‘skulduggery’ involved with under the table deals with French military contracts in the 90s it may have been for the best. One can say that while the Suharto regime was corrupt, at least nobody was ever murdered liked what happened with the French deal in Taiwan.
Semi-LobsterI think it depends what the requirement will be. In the early 90’s, Indonesia begin to look for A-4 replacement. The candidates were F-16 (preferable by the Air Force), Hawk 200, and Super Etandard.
Super Etandard was offered by French even with possible under license manufacturing with Di/IAe, but loosing ground to Hawk 200 on the basis more economical engine, more advance avionics and sensors, and compatibility on servicing infrastructures with existing LIFT Hawk mk 53.
Although the radar of Hawk 200 capable for Air Defence with AIM-7, but in Indonesian services it’s being used more as surface attack (ground and sea) with maverick as primary weapons. The Hawk 200 being located in Pekanbaru AFB in Sumatra and Pontianak AFB in Borneo in which both directly facing strategic sea lanes (malaca and singapore straits for Pekanbaru and south china sea for Pontianak). This show that Hawk 200 primary duties in Indonesian services is to conduct sea lanes patrol.
They are doing alright, however due to the their size they are not able to cover intented teritorial sea lanes effctively. Still they show quite powerfull punch for their size.
Thus with good ground attack capabilities and reasonable second line Air Defence capabilities, I think it’s comparable and even more capable than Super Etandard. It’s just due their size, they are limited for long range patrol duties, in which for Indonesia is the requirements.
However seems the Indonesian Air Force still satisfied with Hawk 200 (or at least content with). THe plan is to get MLU for existing Hawk 200 inventories together with Hawk 100 (in which being used as Recce duties), although no new fighters intended.
The Hawk 200 may have a more advanced radar, but what use is the use an AN/APG-66H Radar if Sparrows have NEVER been equipped on a Hawk 200 ever and the aircraft is far too slow to add any real advantage over a supersonic fighter in WVR combat? The Super-Entendard was more or less built around the Exocet anti-shipping missile which would be far more useful for anti-ship roles than the Maverick while not having to sacrifice range. The AS-30L’s track record is also just as good as the Mavericks.
Semi-LobsterOnly advantage ?
You just forgot a little thing : the Hawk 200 has a radar (APG-66, with a potential AMRAAM capability) while the K-8 has not.
That’s not to say that the K-8 could not be modified to carry a radar but you are very correct, so far no K-8 variant, even the ‘combat’ K-8Ws acquired by the Venezuelan Air Force carry no radar.
I think comparing an advanced trainer like the Hawk series of aircraft and the K-8 is a bit unfair, the K-8 while similar in dimensions to the Hawk, is a much simpler aircraft, that costs half as much as a Hawk and weights nearly half as much. I think the K-8 could though potentially be used as a quiet versatile attack platform if re-engined, given a radar, and possibly redesigned wings and hardpoints but the limitations of its design are simply that the K-8 was designed as a cheap, simple, intermediate training aircraft and not designed for ‘high performance’ situations. To think otherwise would require a radical redesign like jumping from an L-39 to an L-159.
Semi-LobsterIt depends what’s the future for KAI F/A-50, even in Korea. With KFX in the process, F/A-50 can be redundant.
The South Korean government has already stated that want 60 FA-50s by 2013 and eventually hope to acquire 150 FA-50s in total, The KFX and the FA-50 appear to be tandem projects in replacing South Korea’s huge, ageing and increasingly, unsafe F-5 and F-4 fleets. This appears to be a classic high/low combination with a heavier, more expensive, twin engine KFX fighter and a cheaper, lighter FA-50 to augment its numbers.
Sign In
