Pilotasso Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Indeed, back to topic please! I was only speaking about an interesting *scenario*, like the ones we have in Lockon and F4:AF. Nothing else. What we can discuss is how the Hornet/Superhornet (on CBG) and F-16 + Ching Kuo F-CK-1 C/D (Taiwan) relate to J-10 and Flankers (Su-27SK/Su-30MKK) in China (I think we all agree that the other 4000 fighters are not really up to spec! ;) ) And if you noticed none of the asian types ever got to be simulated even as AI units. F4AF is the only exception but then again its because the fans got the reigns of it. I would like to see something more realistic about them. The European edition of Combat Aircraft Vol 7. no 9 has a special on the J-10. They estimate a projected payload in excess of 9500 kg (19850lb!) and a max combat radius of some 1370nm (hi-lo-hi) or 710nm (lo-lo-lo). Compared to a Mig-29, these are impressive figures, one of the reasons the Chinese choose to develop J-10 over acquiring multi-role Mig-29's. I believe that article is the one I linked here on the first page. Powerplant is an AL-31FN with max thrust of 125,5KN. Problem is the radar: US blocked further Israeli assistance, so it will be a Russian Zhuk derivative. Flight performance should be very good, follwiing the Israeli lavi input. It wont lack in numbers: the Chinese already signed a contract for 300 AL-31FN engines! According to what I saw the J-10 like the lavi is designed for a big load over longer distances, even more than the flanker does, because its fenomenal range falls dramaticaly as soon as you start loading it. J-10's wing profile is suposed to save fuel for that trick. J-10 wont be the top dog of dogfighting though. Thrust to weight is very average because unlike the lavi, the J-10 is all metal. The chinese lack precise composite manufacture quality the west has. .
MBot Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I think the Taiwanese Airforce also has Mirage 2000 ( -5 ? ). What do you think would be the role assignement for the F-16 and Mirage ? Falcon for A-G and Mirage for A-A, or multirole for both ?
GGTharos Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Uhm...the F-16, IIRC, is a better dogfighter than Mirage, plus it has more modern avionics, thus also making it better in BVR... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Pilotasso Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Actualy the mirages dont lag behind in avionics unless your talking about an older taiwanese version of the mirage. .
hitman Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 here's a newsflash: it wouldnt matter who has more. it would be the end of the world. get that? Yeah I got that...doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that. So what makes you think that the US WONT get their hands dirty from defending Taiwan?
tflash Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Uhm...the F-16, IIRC, is a better dogfighter than Mirage, plus it has more modern avionics, thus also making it better in BVR... It depends what version of F-16 Taiwan has: I thought it where F-16A? Are they upgraded since? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Meyvn Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Here's a link for you. This supposition on the part of some here, including myself, was not just something pulled out of the air. :smilewink: http://www.fas.org/news/taiwan/1996/index.html Do you have any updated info? Things are changing since 10 has got behind.:smilewink: Even Bush Administration had different policies toward China during last 6 years
Meyvn Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 True...but we dont put Aegis class cruisers in Taiwanese ports for the sakes of a few memory chips. Get GG back in here and he'll proclaim that the F-22's would own the entire chinese airforce, lol... The USA can and will stand up for Taiwan (as we have many times before) against Mainland China. Mostly so because of what I allready have said: Taiwan has an independantly elected democratic government. Logical reasoning here is that China would only use nuclear weapons if confronted with the invasion of mainland China. IIRC, we have more nukes than they do, so this would take that argument out of question. MAD comes back to mind. Believe it or not, the USA will back Taiwan over a conflict with China. Just because they are not recognized by either the US or NATO doesnt mean we wont support them in their time of need. Iraq ring a bell? South Korea? How about South Vietnam? History always repeats itself. Taiwan isnt much more different. Edit: I am not saying that the US has engaged in shooting with China over Taiwan. I just wanted to make that clear. Sorry to bring it up here. But it is truely a politics issue. That's why ur talent and knowledge in aircraft doesn't count here. U.S. will and should always put its national interest in the first place. Whether U.S. will get involved in the conflict really depends on when and how the two sides come to conflict. If U.S. will back up China whatever happened, TW would already declare its independence as their present president always want to do. Since mainland doesn't have the regular air and navy power to defeat U.S. (which I agree that F22 is really a mighty fighter) and they won't use nuclear weapon unless they are really crazy. Did that happen? No. Why? Because TW is not sure about whether U.S. will back them up or not. (at least not as sure as you) Will U.S. backed up every democratic elected government? I don't think so. Not mentioned that U.S. had support many dictators including that just been hang one, how about the democraticly elected Hamas government? About the aegis class cruisers parked there, let me tell you something. In 1958 military confrontation broke out when mainland bombardment TW's outskirt island which are very close to mainland. U.S. sent their 7th fleet to escort TW support landing fleet. However, when PLA opened fire on all of them, U.S. fleet fled and left TW's fleet behind. And talk about Korean war and Vietnam, LOL, does U.S. win any of these two?
tflash Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Damned guys, how many times have we to ask politely to leave politics out of this, we are talking about the J-10 in this thread. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
hitman Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Actually I was poking fun at GG in stating the F22 would pwn the Chinese AirForce. http://www.taiwansecurity.org/Reu/Reuters-121400.htm http://www.cfr.org/publication/3628/if_taiwan_declares_independence_and_china_reacts_with_force_on_whom_should_the_us_lean_harder_china_or_taiwan.html?breadcrumb=default These serve as prime examples as to why the US would support Taiwan should China ever decide to reclaim the island.
Meyvn Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Aircraft maybe, air war is definitely politics. Check Carl von Clausewitz out. LoL
Meyvn Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Actually I was poking fun at GG in stating the F22 would pwn the Chinese AirForce. http://www.taiwansecurity.org/Reu/Reuters-121400.htm http://www.cfr.org/publication/3628/if_taiwan_declares_independence_and_china_reacts_with_force_on_whom_should_the_us_lean_harder_china_or_taiwan.html?breadcrumb=default These serve as prime examples as to why the US would support Taiwan should China ever decide to reclaim the island. Check the two link article's date. Yeah, as I previously said, Bush Adm's policy toward China really took some changes during his early period 2000-pre 911 period and after 911-2004, 2004-2006. During the first period, Bush said he would back up TW whatever happened which I don't think he really know what he was talking about. Then came the 911. After 5 years, now U.S. and China had very strong economic connection, ever heard about responsible stake holder?
hitman Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 ever heard about responsible stake holder? Not really. Bush Adm's policy toward China really took some changes during his early period 2000-pre 911 period and after 911-2004, 2004-2006. Bush's Administration doesnt dictate policy exclusively... But then again, I never majored in politics. And personally I think Bush is still pissed over the P-3 incident back in 2001. Just because we have closer economic ties with China doesnt mean that we are bed buddies with them, nor does it mean we take long, lingering soapy showers with them either. NAFTA doesnt grant China diplomatic immunity to invade Taiwan without restraint.
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Do you have any updated info? Things are changing since 10 has got behind.:smilewink: Even Bush Administration had different policies toward China during last 6 years Even if I did, I'm pretty sure it doesn't have anything to do with the topic of this thread...the J-10. :D
Alfa Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Sorry to bring it up here. But it is truely a politics issue. The topic of this thread is not political - it concerns a particular Chinese fighter design and not the circumstances in which it might used. If you want to discuss politics, you need to find another forum for it(!). - JJ. JJ
Meyvn Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 The topic of this thread is not political - it concerns a particular Chinese fighter design and not the circumstances in which it might used. If you want to discuss politics, you need to find another forum for it(!). - JJ. Actually, I didn't expect to read great political points here either, I came here to learn knowledge about aircraft and play lomac better. But when people began to talk about my plane is better than yours and if there is a war, blablablabla......there you go. About J-10, the high profile showout in China official media is quite unusual. I think China may want to export J10 to many of his neighbour, to compete with F16
hitman Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I think they should have stuck with the n00b owner MiG-29S.
Alfa Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Actually, I didn't expect to read great political points here either, I came here to learn knowledge about aircraft and play lomac better. Ok no problem then :) - JJ. JJ
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 But when people began to talk about my plane is better than yours and if there is a war, blablablabla......there you go. Oh, I think you just misunderstood what was being said. I don't think anybody said who would pwn who, just that there would be a military standoff that might end in combat, that's all. It wouldn't be good for anybody. Try not to read too much into the posts. ;) I'd like to see what the J-10 can do as far as ordnance carriage goes. It looks like it could lug a s**tload of ordnance into the sky. :pilotfly:
PythonOne Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 If China uses nukes on Taiwan, i seriously doubt the US would want to jump in and use their nukes thus leading to a total nuclear war. In fact, china doesn't need to launch their nukes at taiwan, they could use all their nukes and bomb themselves which will kick up enough dust to block out the sun for the entire earth. :music_whistling:
nscode Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 Yeah... they would like to do that, I'm sure :D Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
tflash Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 CNN must be reading this board to ;) http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/01/05/china.jet.ap/index.html [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Recommended Posts