troung“No this shows no body wants old Aircraft.”
No it was lobbying by them and Israel, which got them the planes, so yes they wanted them. And they want more.
And FYI Italy has leased some recently, Thailand bought some, Portugal got some, Pakistan still wants them so that should more then counter your statement. The Philippines could also get the plane if a deal can be reached. So yeah the plane is still making sales even the second hand ones.
“How many countries had purchased ACE upgrade for F-16?”
Israel got F-16Is rather then do the upgrade. It was a political move. And it is on offer to Venezuela at the moment and they are looking into that and the MLU.
“And how many had purchased old F-16s and get MLU for it?”
Portugal for one did that already. Jordan is looking into the upgrade. And some of Denmark’s MLUs are from surplus USAF stocks.
And FYI the MLU program is still going with the M-3 to have the JHMCS and be able to use the GBU-31 JDAM.
So no the F-16 is not some old plane that cannot be upgraded.
“No opportunity to transfer assembly line or technology.”
The Netherlands, Belgium, South Korea and Turkey have had/still have assembly lines. A good deal of Egypt’s F-16C/Ds came from Turkish production lines.
“As i said there are lot of countries left for FC-1 to capture the market and you cannot challenge the argument.”
And to think I said earlier that the FC-1 will likely make export sales other then just Pakistan. So that would stand as me basically agreeing with you on something.
troung“According to a very well informed colunist from one of the most important Brazilian newspapers, the report prepared by the comission headed by the Minister of Defense sugests the purchase of the F-16 Viper.”
Hmm… another lawn dart user? Wouldn’t that be funny.
“You know, I’m an American, and I think we make first-rate military hardware, but this kind of interference in defense competitions is deplorable.”
That’s more a factor of living in the real world. Yeah it might not be “fair” but with millions (or billions) of dollars on the line who plays fair?
Everyone twists arms, offers offsets at taxpayer expense, takes out adds saying that theirs is the best or what ever to make their plane sound attractive. Yeah in the perfect world a nice “fair” 2 on 2 DACT would settle these “competitions” but that’s hardly feasible. I just wonder of this “pressure” will work…
“Either Super Flanker or Gripen and fine by me, anything besides that would make Brazil look really stupid”
Yeah and we don’t want you opening a topic on how stupid you think Brazil is now do we :rolleyes: ?
I personally think the JAS-39 or Mirage 2000BR would be excellent choices for them. But really any of the choices are good.
troungHi-117;
“Did Jordan paid or it is Aid?”
Jordan’s deal was a no cost lease, so basically the USA covered the costs. That just goes to show the USA can low ball just about any opponent. And Jordan could be getting more under similar deals.
“Did it includes AIM-120B”
Thailand got the AIM-120B. Jordan has the AIM-7M and is lobbying for the AIM-120B.
“But 4 or 5 years down the line there will be to make the numbers”
And as for Indonesia, in 4-5 years there will still be no opening for the FC-1.
“It is better than 20 years old airframe with no customization”
A 20-year-old airframe that happens to have a better design, excellent tech support, widespread availability of spare parts, an excellent combat record and the list goes on.
And for customization you can fit the F-16 for many different weapons such as the IRIS-T, Python Mk.3/4/5, R-550 Mk.2, SPICE, Popeye, Penguin, LITENING LDP, ATLIS II, and the list goes on an on. Yeah sure seeing as the IDF/AF went for the F-16I rather then giving their F-16A/B Block 15s the ACE upgrade which was to feature the M-2032 radar, Derby and such you can say no one has thus far fitted a foreign BVR missile in operational service even though the MICA EM is touted as being able to be fitted.
And your big sales pitch about a wide variety of radar being available has a lot to do with no one radar being chosen for the FC-1 unlike the F-16. There are different radars on offer for the F-16 such as the M-2032, Griffo 2000 and of course the APG-66 (v) 2.
Seeing as the MLU (EU), Flacon One (Singapore), and ACE (Israeli) are on offer to export users that goes against saying the F-16A/B is not customizable. Oh yeah and the IDF was allowed to carry out the ACE on their planes it was the IDF/AF which went for the F-16I rather then upgrading the F-16A/B Block 15s.
troungH-117;
“Thats the point space is opening up for light multirole fighters at affordable price in next few years.”
There is no space opening up. The F-16s they had been lobbying for were supposed to replace the A-4E (24) and F-5E/F (12) and now the Flanker (total of 48) is doing just that now that the F-16 deal is over. So the space has closed to replace their older planes.
“If it is paid than i reserve the right to know their price? If it really isbelow $10M.?”
If my memory holds me right this deal came too more, at around 12 or so million a piece. That’s just the way that deal turned out.
Jordan’s in the long run came to less as they got 16 for 220 million and included in the price was the cost of setting up a support system, providing training and supplying weapons and they also got the “Falcon Up” upgrade.
But I don’t doubt the FC-1 will make export sales, seeing as the USA would not sell to say Syria, North Korea or Iran.
troungH-117;
“Now they are currently lobby for more F-16? FC-1 is a perfect canidate for replacement in future.”
They lobbying ended after it became a slight scandal and now they are going for Flankers. And they have other big plans but none for a light fighter.
So really you have nothing to back up the TNI-AU is a likely customer for the FC-1.
“thats what i asking for. Either theyare new or Old and what Price?”
The F-16A/B ADFs of the ANG were surplus but the RTAF wanted them. There was no arm-twisting and the planes have received the AIM-120 as well.
troung“70% performance of the F-16. How was this measured?”
That’s the number that is always quoted in media sources. When the project started off it was claimed they would have a plane with 75% or so of the F-16 capability. And looking at things that has to do with the speed, range, payload and such.
Personally I think it would make more sense to start comparing the FC-1 to anything until after it is finished with its testing and enters service at the very least.
troung“Wolverine”;
“funny. i tend to proove my arguements and unlike you i dont tend to ignore stuff. funny you call me a narrow minded nationalist when you yourself are the biggest bigot on this forum. and do you even know my nationality?”
proove = prove
arguements = arguments
dont = don’t
i = I
And fix the capitalization errors.
Seems like you are only calling me a bigot because I did not agree with your very weak argument on the LCA being better then the Mirage 2000-5 Mk.2.
Srbin;
“Yes but AIM-7 any version is not very good, can you list all the F-16 users without AIM-120?”
The users who lack the AIM-120 are Egypt, Venezuela, Jordan, Indonesia and Pakistan. I’m not sure if Portugal has gotten their AIM-120s yet, but those should be coming.
“It doesn’t mean crap, just because FC-1 can do about 75% of an F-16 doesn’t mean FC-1 sucks. Performance isn’t everything.”
Well first off the number 75% really does not mean it is better either.
Now people should not get me wrong on what I think the FC-1 can do for the PAF. The FC-1 is a massive boost for the PAF fighter force to counter the InAF. It is a huge step in the right direction for their ability to protect their air space.
“THat’s kind of true when we know very little about them especially J-10 and FC-1”
Yeah. Its hard to compare things when they are less then covered projects which are not finished.
H-117;
“Neither they have shown any interest in F-16 either recently.”
Indonesia was lobbying very hard for the F-16A/B Block 15 OCU the only thing that stopped it was human rights related issues.
“I gave the link for weopon load increase. hard points increase is now a high possibility.”
You gave a link that went to this forum that had a link which to the homepage of another forum that went no where.
“These are now old stories. I think you are not reading into Malaysia recently.”
And you are? They are not even looking into the FC-1 yet you are saying that they will buy them.
“Those F-16 are perfect canidate of replacement for future.”
Once again they are not looking at the FC-1 to replace the F-16s they have.
“While FC-1 will sold at hard currency while for old F-16 no body wants to pay for it.”
Thailand did pay for the planes.
“I asked for pictures with 7 hard points not a statement.”
Scroll up you posted one yourself.
troungH-117;
“Have you seen FC-1 with 7 hard points? So how can it become a fact?. It is just a beginning plane. Which can change with development.”
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/aircraft/fighter/fc1.asp
“Seven stores stations, one under the fuselage and six under the wing, up to 3,800 kg.”
So back up your claim of China adding in loading points.
“It has been droped in favor of some thing else like Su-30MKM or AWACS.”
No the RMAF does split buys. So the F/A-18F and Su-30MKM combo is a high possibility provided a good price can be reached on the trade in of the F/A-18Ds. It’s ongoing negotiations.
“Every Airforce has both large and small and long range and short range fighters.”
False statement as not every air force has large planes and for example if some people in the RSAF get their way the F-5E/F could be replaced by more F-15S deep strikers which would leave them with no short range planes in service. And for example with Russian customers who have the money many are going for the just the Flanker and not MiG-29s which of course means their only 4th generation planes are heavy. A small air force might not want to do a high low and it might not be worth it if they have the massive air space the TNI-AU is tasked with protecting.
And the TNI-AU does have a light fighter it is called the F-16A/B Block 15, and the RMAF will still have the MiG-29N/UN and the F/A-18Ds until those possibly get traded in to knock off the price on the F/A-18F.
“No Airforce can survive only on large fighters. There will be opportunity for lighweight fighters in next 3 or 4 years.”
Maybe you’re dumb or can’t read but they are not looking at the FC-1.
“They will built in hundreds if not in thousands.”
You have no idea if thousands will be made. None that’s just a number you pulled out of nowhere. Hell China is shaky on buying them so for all we know the number could not break 200.
“Those F-16s were newly built or 20 years old airframes i want to know this thing. And is paid or free.”
FYI Egypt and Israel get their F-16s all but free.
Sydro;
“although truong has mentioned some very good points like there is NO plan for Indonesia or Malaysia of ever buying FC-1, thats just some wet dream by h111/sd-10.”
And to think after all this time we agree on something.
“Just because F-16 beats the Gripen or the LCA performance wise doesn’t mean it’s better, means just it can carry heavier loads across larger distances.”
Was I comparing the JAS-39C/D or LCA to anything in this topic?
“Just because it doesn’t match F-16 performance wise doesn’t mean it will suck.”
Doesn’t mean it is good either.
“now truong, you wan’t to clear up something, are these F-16 nations lacking AIM-120 and have something like AIM-7 or they have NO BVR capability at all?”
Only Indonesian, Venezuelan and Pakistani F-16s are non-BVR capable in other words they are limited to only being able to use the AIM-9P-4/L and R-550 Mk2 or whatever. Even Jordan and Egypt have the AIM-7M on their F-16s (which came free by the way). Hell Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand now have the AIM-120 on their F-16s. Getting cleared for that system is not terribly hard.
” but what we’ll know for sure it will be a great multirole fighter that will perform all kinds of missions and will be cheap.”
To be honest we don’t know yet. That’s what makes these FC-1/LCA/J-10 vs. the rest of the world topics silly as in the end the planes are unproven and not ready and the topic falls back to that in the end.
“Wolverine”;
“dont try that kidn of logic with this guy. according to him biger aircrft are automatically supirior to smaller ones. so there is no way a grupen or LCA is ever going to be supirior to a Mirage2000 or an F16.”
Not you again.
Don’t = don’t
Biger = bigger
Supirior = superior
Aifcrft= aircraft
You should at least use a spell checker…
“and the other one simply likes to think that whatever plane he likes is the best.”
And you of course are a narrow minded nationalist who spells on a 4th grade level.
“my advise to you is not to get into this at all. you are trying to debate with two of the front runners for the village idiot prize around here.”
Come on you are in the running as well. In fact maybe of the two of you (you and H-117) I don’t know which of you bore me more.
And work on the spelling and capitalization dear boy.
troungH-177;
“We shall wait about the number of hardpoints but wingspan is the same.”
It has 7 hard-points that’s a fact. So you should cut the attempt to dodge facts.
“currently Indonesia has plans for 48 Flankers to replace F-5 and And A-4. But how can you be sure about plans 3 years later when FC-1 is full developed. Remember plans are modified with passage of time. 48 Aircrafts are not enough for size of Indonesia.”
That’s 48 planes replacing 36 planes. And FC-1s don’t have the range they need. And they are not buying the FC-1 they have no plans for it or money to burn.
“You will not see those F-18F in RMAF colors. Thats for sure.”
Prove it.
“how do you know 3 or 4 years ahead of time.”
I’m not even going to bother to respond to that one.
“Flanker is current order. FC-1 future. Not the same time line.”
They have no plans for the FC-1.
“FC-1 can share Radar, weopons and engine with RMAF MIG-29s with much cheaper cost of maintaining.”
They are not buying the FC-1 either.
“Did thailand bought the Old F-16 recently and got upgraded or the upgrade is related to original purchase?”
They bought the F-16A/B ADFs recently and soon afterwards got the AIM-120.
“It all comes to future. We shall see when FC-1 is fully developed.”
So now you realize that you can’t make up your FC-1 is better then the F-16A/C so you hide behind the fact it is still in testing. Well great but that just makes the FC-1 look worse as it does not stack up yet it is not even in service. The FC-1 is slower, carried less of a payload, it has fewer loading points, a poorer view out of the cockpit and the list goes on and on.
“FC-1 is development platform. And many changes can be expected in its development time. It is not upgradation. Upgradation comes after development. So your upgradation argument does not hold any weight.”
You do realize that you have not made any real points yet. Other then your “excellent” point about bubble cockpits being bad . :rolleyes:
troung“Its IAF and not InAf”
:rolleyes: :confused: :rolleyes:
You get the point on what airforce I am talking about at least…
troungH-177;
“How you know about their future.”
People have plans. Their plans are very well laid out. Indonesia is buying 48 Flankers to replace the F-5E/F MACANs and A-4Es and the RMAF is buying 18 Su-30MKMs, looking to trade in the F/A-18Ds and use the money earned to lower the price of the F/A-18Fs.
“Fc-1 has still to 2 or 3 years of development left.”
Isn’t that great, so not only is it inferior to the F-16A/C but it is not even done testing yet.
“Those F-16 can be replaced at some point of time.”
Not by the FC-1.
“Flanker does not undercut FC-1 market interms of money.”
Point being is that the TNI-AU will not be spending money on the FC-1 when they are already getting the Flankers which are costing a lot anyways.
“And much lesser price and less strings attached with missiles. “
Really unless a nation is stupid they will not get sanctions. Hell Russia has cut off the tap for people and so has China.
“The basic reason that Malaysia dropped F-18F. twin engine fighters are expensive in maintaing..”
They have not dropped the F/A-18F its called negotiations
“Fc-1 can make the numbers with added strike ability”
They are not buying the FC-1. It is not on the books as a plan and would not fit in with what they are doing. So other then saying you think it would be nice you have nothing to back up they will ever use it.
“Who has bought those F-16s with MLU with $7 to $12M paid and AIM-120 delivered.?”
Thailand for one. They just got the AIM-120 not to long ago on their new F-16A/B ADFs.
“How do you know that Fc-1 hardpoints will be the same assuming the increase in weopons load?upgradation is always a possiblity. Both FC-1 and F-16 has same wingspan.”
Blah blah blah.
So you can’t refute that. The FC-1 has 7 loading points so yes it cannot take an F-16 style load up and hope to clear the runway.
If your only counter is to make up upgrades then you really should just stop responding.
“I gave the link for weopon load increase.”
To a topic here which led to another forum, which the story was not shown on.
Srbin;
“why so? because of size or performance or tech?”
A and B and plus of course the fact that they are likely opponents.
“AIm-120 is not very guaranteed.”
Only three nations lack BVR capable F-16A/Cs. The nations that don’t have the AIM-120 are lobbying for it (Egypt, Jordan). Go figure two of the nations which lack BVR systems/capability are habitual “problem children”.
“truong seems to be too Anti-Russian-Chinese and seems to hate Russian-Chinese equipment and thinks it never works”
That is of course off topic but you seem to dislike the USA and of course there was your constant insulting of Arabs on ACIG.
Rockgordon;
“Anyways, troung, you are banging your head against a wall here …”
I know.
PLA;
“And thinking that US is the best supplier unless one is Pakistan or Indonesia… Man. Sounds very subjective.”
Go figure but unless a nation really steps out of line they get excellent support. Both China and Russia have cut off supplies to nations in the past. Indonesia butchers civilians and Pakistan sells nuclear tech, come on don’t play the victim here.
“I wanted to say that there is enough market share for Fc1…”
It already has one customer so yes there is a market share for it. I never said there was not one. In fact I tend to think it might make a couple more sales.
troungH-117;
“Did Malaysia sign up for F-18F?:”
Not yet but the USA is offering a buy back on the F/A-18Ds so the deal is a huge possibility.
“Show me any current deal of Single engine fighters.?”
The point is the RMAF is no longer buying single engine fighters and Indonesia is buying 48 Flankers, which have the range they need. The TNI-AU will have Su-30MKs, Su-27SKs, F-16A/B Block 15 OCUs and Hawk 209s as their fast jet force in the coming years. And the RMAF’s last splurge on fighters was for the MiG-29N and F/A-18D, both of which are dual engine.
The young Hawk 208/209s are both single engine yes but will stay with both nations for some years to come in thier CAS role.
Neither one is buying the FC-1.
“And FC-1 uses smaller engine and less fuel and smaller rcs.”
And a smaller range and payload as well as a lower top speed. And no one really knows what the RCS will be.
“FC-1 will be cheaper than new F-16 by wide margin. Old F-16 will basically US has to give for free.”
An F-16A/B ADF goes for between 7-12 million dollars apiece. That’s a fully BVR capable fighter with American tech support and weapons such as the AIM-120. The FC-1 cannot compare with that price.
“You can always mount fuel tank for range”
And the F-16 can carry bigger ones the point being. And under wing tanks would not kill the offensive load of an F-16 (9 loading points) as much as it would kill the FC-1s (7 loading points). An F-16A/B ADF could carry 4 AIM-120s, 2 Mk.84s, 2 under wing fuel tank, an ECM pod under the center, and a LDP. Can the FC-1 do the same? No because it lacks the places to put those.
Stick with comparing the FC-1 to the LCA.
troungH-177 or whatever you are calling yourself;
“Indonesia and Malaysia now looks towards Chinese leadership.”
FYI the RMAF is looking into the F/A-18F. They are still very much US clients. And Indonesia could reenter the fold as soon as the thing about their Special Forces killing American missionaries is sorted out.
But neither nation is buying Chinese fighters. Indonesia is leaning toward Russia and South Korea for military needs and Malaysia is looking at Russia, America, France and other EU nations to service them.
“And FC-1 can easily complement Flankers.”
Neither one has shown an interest in Chinese planes.
“cockpit increases drag,”
And improves visibility. The FC-1 is lacking is visibility compared to the F-16A/C.
“And FC-1 due to recent revisions with FBW, increase weopons load , speed to Mach 2.1 and China AAMs and Anti-Ship missiles will not be a bad choice either.”
Back that up. The speed is around mach 1.6 and the payload is around/slightly over 8000lbs.
“FC-1 is supposed to has 75% weopon load and range.”
First off 75% is not impressive at all. And second off the F-16s range has gotten bigger with the CFTs (with can be fit on all block 30/32s and above).
“It is better to get Radars with on source codes and on choice rather than imposed from out side. Russia, France, Italy all are marketing Radars for FC-“
Wow. And the F-16 now comes with an AESA set. But the big thing is the fact the buyer has to go radar shopping in Europe, buy the engine from Russia and the airframe from the Chinese. Hardly a complete package like the F-16.
But none of what you said changes the fact the FC-1 does not add up well with the F-16.
troung“But the fact that US is opening up the dump market (plenty F16’s) is possible… But is that with BVR?”
Only three F-16A/C users lack BVR capable F-16s. And those are Indonesia, Venezuela and Pakistan. Thailand has the AIM-120 so that should tell you something on how hard it is to get BVR weapons on an F-16. And the F-16A/B ADFs with the AIM-120 cost the RTAF less then the FC-1, and they got them a lot faster also for example.
“Is that with TOT? And who has been a bad supplier? China? I don’t think so.”
Unless you mess up bad (Pakistan, Indonesia) the USA happens to be one of the best if not the best supplier out there. As for China, several buyers have not been terribly happy with the goods received.
Also the USA does not slap on embargo’s for no reason and they are not easy to get either.
“What would you opt… A brand new plane with French Italian parts with some TOT and no boycot or the outdated F16 with strings attached…”
I would not call the F-16A/C outdated and especially compared to the FC-1. The F-16 is faster, has a better cockpit view, has a better payload, a large number of weapons cleared for it and excellent customer support. And being able to buy the whole platform from one source is a lot better then having a Russian engine, Chinese airframe and French, Israeli or Italian radars and avionics. Oh yeah and the F-16A/C is proven and in service.
troung“If that’ll cost too much, they could allways get a cheaper attacker/trainer, like the Yak-130D or the Mig-AT from Russia, or even an Aero L-159 from the Czechs.”
Converted trainers like the L-159A, MiG-AT and/or Yak-130 could not replace the A-7H. The planes would lack the payload and range of the A-7H.
Sign In
