JMSDF v PLAN

[Gtrof]

Hey, I have been thinking about the steps the Chinese have been taking to improve their air and naval forces. They are working on making a blue water fleet that can operate away from home waters. So what will the second biggest (US being the 1st) naval power in the Pacific do about this the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force?

 

How will both sides fleet’s look say twenty years down the line? Will both posses aircraft carriers of some type? Will Japan move to SSNs instead of SSKs? Chinese airpower is building new high tech home grown fighters; will Japan do the same instead of modifying US designs?

[tankerwanabe]

Albeit the their F-2 is finally entering service, I can't help but notice the it is a generation behind everyone else. Looking at money, they paid through the nose for national pride. I guess they didn't forsee their economic downturn.

 

If I were the Japanse, I'd buy off the shelf goods from the U.S. and install indiginous software and avionics, then add other improvements to perfect the design. They've a history of taking a good idea and making it perfect.

 

Not sure if the China threat is real though. It sounds more like propaganda to justify a bigger military budget.

[Guest pfcem]

Albeit the their F-2 is finally entering service, I can't help but notice the it is a generation behind everyone else.  Looking at money, they paid through the nose for national pride.  I guess they didn't forsee their economic downturn.

218890[/snapback]

 

A gereration behind who?

 

What neighboring nation has a figher that is a gerneration ahead of the F-2?

 

Yes the F-2 was developed from the F-16 but it does include a number of advancements. I would put the F-2 in the same leage as the Block 60 F-16. Hardly a generation behind anything North Korea or China has.

[Gtrof]

Not sure if the China threat is real though.  It sounds more like propaganda to justify a bigger military budget.

218890[/snapback]

 

Nah, its not propaganda. China is actually modernizing its forces, while at the same time reducing their size. Its kinda of like the Industiral Revloution in the US. After it started we began to build more and more ships. Now China is getting large influxs of captial from other nations, and they are becoming a econmic force to be delt with.

 

Plus they have begun to build a series of modern ships. Like the Type 052C DDG codenamed Lanzhou class. It has a modern designed hull to reduce a RCS and is being equiped with a Chinese Phase Radar system like the AEGIS system on our Tico and Bruke class ships. Other versions of this class share the same traits, low RCS design, lots of missiles and battle mangament systems. Plus China has worked on new multi roll fighters like the J10 a PLAAF version of the F-16.

 

If you want see more about PLA military check out http://www.sinodefence.com/default.asp

[tankerwanabe]

A gereration behind who?

 

What neighboring nation has a figher that is a gerneration ahead of the F-2?

 

Yes the F-2 was developed from the F-16 but it does include a number of advancements.  I would put the F-2 in the same leage as the Block 60 F-16.  Hardly a generation behind anything North Korea or China has.

218905[/snapback]

 

I wouldn't put the F16 (even block 16) in the same class as the Su27s family.

 

South Korea bought F15Es and almost took the Eurofighters and Raphaels. Singapore just took F15Es. We're about to replace the F16s with F35s. Aussies too.

 

The F2 may have look great 12 years ago. But it's kind of dated now. There's only so much you can do to before limited by the airframe itself.

[tankerwanabe]

Nah, its not propaganda. China is actually modernizing its forces, while at the same time reducing their size. Its kinda of like the Industiral Revloution in the US. After it started we began to build more and more ships. Now China is getting large influxs of captial from other nations, and they are becoming a econmic force to be delt with.

 

Plus they have begun to build a series of modern ships. Like the Type 052C DDG codenamed Lanzhou class. It has a modern designed hull to reduce a RCS and is being equiped with a Chinese Phase Radar system like the AEGIS system on our Tico and Bruke class ships. Other versions of this class share the same traits, low RCS design, lots of missiles and battle mangament systems. Plus China has worked on new multi roll fighters like the J10 a PLAAF version of the F-16.

 

If you want see more about PLA military check out http://www.sinodefence.com/default.asp

219056[/snapback]

 

To me, China still looks like they're buying off-the-shelf stuff from a Russian yard sale.

 

Example: They're still working on a multi-role fighter. Well, that would make them about 20 years behind everyone else.

 

China has enough problems trying to govern its own people and curb its own population. What makes anyone think that it wants to invade another nation and take on more citizens?

 

Frankly, I see China as posing a much bigger economic threat. It looks to have modeled itself on the Japan model, except with a 10x skilled workforce. It will be able to make anything we make and sell it at 1/4 the price.

 

But then, one can't buy more F22s with an economic threat.

[jakec]

To me, China still looks like they're buying off-the-shelf stuff from a Russian yard sale. 

 

Example: They're still working on a multi-role fighter.  Well, that would make them about 20 years behind everyone else.

 

China has enough problems trying to govern its own people and curb its own population.  What makes anyone think that it wants to invade another nation and take on more citizens? 

 

Frankly, I see China as posing a much bigger economic threat. It looks to have modeled itself on the Japan model, except with a 10x skilled workforce.  It will be able to make anything we make and sell it at 1/4 the price.

 

But then, one can't buy more F22s with an economic threat.

219265[/snapback]

 

You're right that PRC is buying everything that isn't nailed down from Russia (30 Il-76 and 8 Il-78 yesterday). But PRC military industrial complex has also been rapidly improving over the last decade.

 

Your "example" is flat out wrong. The J-10 indigenous production multi-role fighter began entering service with the 44th division of the PLAAF in 2004. PRC aviation industry has also reverse-engineered the Su-27 and is manufacturing it as J-11A/B (China stopped importing kitset Sukhois ahead of schedule a year ago).

 

Your domestic concerns point is surely correct. China's rulers do have increasing domestic worries from the developmental divide to floundering banks to AIDS to the ideological bankruptcy of their cause. But there is at least as equal an argument that such concerns might make those rulers more keen to find external "threats" and to divert attention from their internal failings. Are you aware of the anti-Japanese riots stoked by the Communist Party this April?

 

China might be an economic threat, but it won't be one in the way you describe for many years to come. Domestic innovation and management is woeful. IPR protection is non-existent, thwarting attempts to improve domestic ability to innovate and compete. The workforce is in no way, shape or form 10x as skilled as Japan's! China is often described as the "factory of the world" but really it is the assembly shop of the world, using low cost labour to assemble foreign components according to intellectual property owned elsewhere in factories built by foreign investors.

 

You seem to be missing the obvious linkage between the PRC's growing wealth and the consequent ability to spend on modern weapons. Even if the PRC was not increasing its defence spending, if it simply kept spending the same percentage of GDP on the military as it does today the 9% annual GDP growth would soon translate into a hefty increase in resources available to the military.

[LeoTanker]

PRC aviation industry has also reverse-engineered the Su-27 and is manufacturing it as J-11A/B (China stopped importing kitset Sukhois ahead of schedule a year ago).

 

219292[/snapback]

 

 

Aren´t thoose licence produced Flankers? If memory serves right China was supposed to buy 100 (or some thing similar) Su-27s off the shelf from Russia, and also got premition to licenceproduce some 300 more on their own.

 

Or could it be the Su-30MKI you are reffering to? The chineese have bought them too, but thats a separate deal. (I belive they have shown some intrest in the Su-35 too)

 

 

I would defenately say that a Chineese Su-30MKI is on par with the Jap F-2, by the way...

 

 

@Gtrof:

 

The J-10 is not a copy of the F-16, rather a development of the Israeli Lavi. Israel sold China the Lavi prototypes (and assisted in RoD) after it had been canseled by their government in 199?. I bet the US taxpayers liked that!

Edited September 9, 2005 by LeoTanker

[jakec]

Aren´t thoose licence produced Flankers? If memory serves right China was supposed to buy 100 (or some thing similar) Su-27s off the shelf from Russia, and also got premition to licenceproduce some 300 more on their own.

 

Or could it be the Su-30MKI you are reffering to? The chineese have bought them too, but thats a separate deal. (I belive they have shown some intrest in the Su-35 too)

I would defenately say that a Chineese Su-30MKI is on par with the Jap F-2, by the way...

@Gtrof:

 

The J-10 is not a copy of the F-16, rather a development of the Israeli Lavi. Israel sold China the Lavi prototypes (and assisted in RoD) after it had been canseled by their government in 199?. I bet the US taxpayers liked that! 

219319[/snapback]

 

China purchased a licence production right for the Flanker in the 1995-6. Originally this was said to encompass 200 airframes to be assembled at the Shenyang factory. China began assembly around 1999 and continued until last year, gradually incorporating more Chinese origin parts. Reportedly between 95 and 105 Flankers were assembled and are in service with the PLAAF as J-11. Then China reportedly told Russia it would not be going through with the whole 200 airframes.

 

At about the same time, reports emerged that Shenyang had built its own version(s) of the Flanker and that this was to be the future for Flanker production in China, rather than the kitset deal with Russia. Note: China is developing and maybe near mass producing the WS-10 which will replace the AL-31F engine perhaps in both the domestic Flanker and J-10.

 

By direct import from Russian factories China has also acquired about 78 Su-27 and 100 Su-30MKK.

[whyhow]

I wouldn't put the F16 (even block 16) in the same class as the Su27s family.

 

South Korea bought F15Es and almost took the Eurofighters and Raphaels.  Singapore just took F15Es.  We're about to replace the F16s with F35s.  Aussies too.

 

The F2 may have look great 12 years ago. But it's kind of dated now. There's only so much you can do to before limited by the airframe itself.

219259[/snapback]

 

I wouldn't put the Spitfire in the same class as the Me-110 either, but that doesn't mean the Spitfire can't wipe the floor with the Me-110. You are reading too much into terms like "class" and "generation", and not looking close enough at the real capability of the aircrafts themselves.

 

Comparing F-2 to the F-16 is like comparing the F-18E Super Hornet to F-18C Hornet. It may look like a Hornet, and even called a Hornet, but it is really not a Hornet. The F-2, and the F-18E, are really new aircrafts, was vastly superior capabilities compare to the aircrafts that they are supposely based on (for political reasons). According to its specs, the F-2 is quite close to the Raphael in capabilities.

 

The Japanese F-2 is superior to the Chinese Su-27SK in all the important catagories.

1) smaller RCS

2) better weapon suite

3) far more advanced sensors and avionics

 

Backed up by Japanese E-767 AWACS, the F-2 should be able to easily handle the Su-27SK. (even though the F-2 wasn't designed as an air superiority fighter)

The real problem is that the F-2 is so expensive, not even the Japanese can afford many copies. They'll probably buy the JSF to make up the difference, but they'll probably manage to turn that into a pork-barrel fiasco too

[whyhow]

You're right that PRC is buying everything that isn't nailed down from Russia (30 Il-76 and 8 Il-78 yesterday). But PRC military industrial complex has also been rapidly improving over the last decade.

 

Your "example" is flat out wrong. The J-10 indigenous production multi-role fighter began entering service with the 44th division of the PLAAF in 2004. PRC aviation industry has also reverse-engineered the Su-27 and is manufacturing it as J-11A/B (China stopped importing kitset Sukhois ahead of schedule a year ago).

 

Your domestic concerns point is surely correct. China's rulers do have increasing domestic worries from the developmental divide to floundering banks to AIDS to the ideological bankruptcy of their cause. But there is at least as equal an argument that such concerns might make those rulers more keen to find external "threats" and to divert attention from their internal failings. Are you aware of the anti-Japanese riots stoked by the Communist Party this April?

 

China might be an economic threat, but it won't be one in the way you describe for many years to come. Domestic innovation and management is woeful. IPR protection is non-existent, thwarting attempts to improve domestic ability to innovate and compete. The workforce is in no way, shape or form 10x as skilled as Japan's! China is often described as the "factory of the world" but really it is the assembly shop of the world, using low cost labour to assemble foreign components according to intellectual property owned elsewhere in factories built by foreign investors.

 

You seem to be missing the obvious linkage between the PRC's growing wealth and the consequent ability to spend on modern weapons. Even if the PRC was not increasing its defence spending, if it simply kept spending the same percentage of GDP on the military as it does today the 9% annual GDP growth would soon translate into a hefty increase in resources available to the military.

219292[/snapback]

 

 

1) developmental divide

big problem! PRC's economy must continue its grow rate in order to generate enough new jobs for the peasants migrating to the cities. On the other hand, China's population isn't exploding like it was before the "One Child Policy". Its population growth rate is now lower than the United States. Without having to worry about the education and finding jobs for an excess population, China can devote the freed up funds for infastructure development. The rural population is still largely underemployed, and don't have the benefits of the welfare network enjoyed by the urban population. However, unlike some other capitalist authoritarian countries, the PRC leadership are not turning a blind eye to that problem. Farm taxes have been revoked to ease the economic burden of the peasants. Massive amount of fundings are directed towards the development of the poorer western interior region. Elections have been instituted in rural regions first to calm the unrests. And when unrests break out anyway, the rulers still seem to have the internal security capability and the political will to put them down ruthlessly.

 

2) floundering banks

I think this problem has been overplayed here in the West. I'm sure more knowledgable posters will correct me, I don't think the chaotic banking and accounting rules is a fatal problem at this stage of China's economic development. Looking at the Industrial Revolution period in Europe and America, banking crisises were common occurances during those days, but they didn't really slow down the economic growth dramatically until the Great Depression.

 

3) AIDS

Basically an non-issue these day. It was a potential problem several years back due to ignorance and government inaction. But the government has officially changed its policy, and is spend a great deal of effort on education and prevention now.

 

4) ideological bankruptcy

non-issue since June 4th, the Chinese intellectuals tried to confront the government, the rulers gave them a smackdown. since then, nobody really cares about ideological issue anymore. as long as they can make money in peace, nobody give a damn about ideological or moral bankruptcy.

 

5) "external threat"

the only "threat" that matters is Taiwan. the development in naval, amphibious, and airborne strengths, and looking at weird experiments like using regular artilleries on cargo ships, it seems the PLA is preparing itself to use the military option if Taiwan does declare formal independence. OTOH, the Taiwanese opposition parties and business investments in mainlands will probably ensure that's an unlikely eventuality.

 

6) domestic innovation, management, IPR protection, and "cheap labor"

China have enough brainy people, but need to learn alot about management from western companies. That's why Lenovo brought IBM's PC division, and appointed an American as the CEO, and moved its headquarter to the United States, they want IBM's management experience above all. As for the lack of IPR protection, Microsoft doesn't seems to think that a big enough problem when they decide to located their Asian research center in Beijing. All the major western hi-tech firms have large research center in China now, to take advantage of their scientific and engineering talents. There are many other developing countries with even cheap labor cost than China, but few have the combination of good infastrcture (built under the Communism) and cheap labor like PRC.

 

Of course PLA's budget will grow as PRC's economy grows, but it is still a small percentage of their overrole budget, hardly a warmongering stance. The truth is PLA's equipments are way past obsolence, they are still flying J-6/Mig-19s and drive in Type-59/T-54s! Even without any external threats, PLA has to upgrade its equipments to a relative modern standard if it is to remain a credible force.

[Guest pfcem]

I wouldn't put the F16 (even block 16) in the same class as the Su27s family.

 

South Korea bought F15Es and almost took the Eurofighters and Raphaels.  Singapore just took F15Es.  We're about to replace the F16s with F35s.  Aussies too.

 

The F2 may have look great 12 years ago. But it's kind of dated now. There's only so much you can do to before limited by the airframe itself.

219259[/snapback]

 

First off, dito to what whyhow said.

 

Maybe you do not realize just mow much further advanced the block 60 & F-2 are over the block 50/52. In terms of avionics & weapons/payload capabilities, the are on par with the Eurofighter & Raphale in many respects.

 

Japan has F-15's to counter the Su-27 derivatives & it has quite abit of upgrade potential left. Plenty of room for more advanced avionics & by simply fitting them (F-2 as well) with the 32,000 lbs thrust engine from the block 60 F-16 & suddenly you have a whole new aircraft all together.

 

Also note that in 10-20 years, Japan is very likely to be flying F-22s & F-35s.

[tankerwanabe]

First off, dito to what whyhow said.

 

Maybe you do not realize just mow much further advanced the block 60 & F-2 are over the block 50/52.  In terms of avionics & weapons/payload capabilities, the are on par with the Eurofighter & Raphale in many respects.

 

Japan has F-15's to counter the Su-27 derivatives & it has quite abit of upgrade potential left.  Plenty of room for more advanced avionics & by simply fitting them (F-2 as well) with the 32,000 lbs thrust engine from the block 60 F-16 & suddenly you have a whole new aircraft all together.

 

Also note that in 10-20 years, Japan is very likely to be flying F-22s & F-35s.

219404[/snapback]

 

So you're saying that an F2 wing can take on a Su27 wing? Most people put the Su-27 at least in the same class as the F15. Therefore, I doubt it.

 

Funny, but I remember stating that the Japanese made a big mistake in procuring an expensive indiginous aircraft. I also stated that the Japanse would have been better off buying an American off-the-shelf and perfecting it with their own gadgets.

 

Ditto with buying the F22 and F35.

 

The issue wasn't whether Japan can take on China. The issue was whether Japan should have bought American instead of going by themselves.

[jakec]

Last post because its off topic:

Whyhow I think you're wrong on many levels..

People in China do care about moral and ideological bankruptcy precisely because of the developmental divide we both agree exists. There has been a sea change away from lauding the robber baron capitalism of the Jiang years in China today, instead there is growing criticism of the idea that only getting rich matters. Thats because only some people (a minority) got rich and many of them are perceived to have done so through illegal, underhand, and corrupt means. But lets be honest, those people still have significant political clout and they are using it to protect their vested interests. When the hukou system is completely dismantled and all people wherever they were born can claim the same social benefits, the same access to education, healthcare, and other benfits, when they can move their families to settle where they please, and when migrant workers are paid on time then you can talk about the poor performance of western countries in looking after the disadvantaged.

 

The banks are reporting growing NPLs again. That is because nothing has fundamentally changed in the way lending is conducted according to political rather than economic criteria. The reforms have stalled. A banking crisis would spark other related crises.

 

If you and the CPC think AIDS is a non-issue then China is in bigger trouble than I thought.

 

Your claims re nobody caring about the CPC's lack of ideological basis are laughable. It is precisely this worry that is mentioned in numerous speeches by Hu/Wen and it is this worry that drives the partywide campaign for advanced nature introduced after the 4th party plenum last year.

 

On IPR, have you actually read anything by Chinese leaders in the last year. It is precisely the weakness in IPR protection and the need to encourage more home-grown innovation that Wu YI, Wen Jiabao, Hu Jintao are mentioning again and again. Microsoft sets up R&D facilities but keeps all the IP for itself not for China.

[tankerwanabe]

You're right that PRC is buying everything that isn't nailed down from Russia (30 Il-76 and 8 Il-78 yesterday). But PRC military industrial complex has also been rapidly improving over the last decade.

 

Your "example" is flat out wrong. The J-10 indigenous production multi-role fighter began entering service with the 44th division of the PLAAF in 2004. PRC aviation industry has also reverse-engineered the Su-27 and is manufacturing it as J-11A/B (China stopped importing kitset Sukhois ahead of schedule a year ago).

 

Your domestic concerns point is surely correct. China's rulers do have increasing domestic worries from the developmental divide to floundering banks to AIDS to the ideological bankruptcy of their cause. But there is at least as equal an argument that such concerns might make those rulers more keen to find external "threats" and to divert attention from their internal failings. Are you aware of the anti-Japanese riots stoked by the Communist Party this April?

 

China might be an economic threat, but it won't be one in the way you describe for many years to come. Domestic innovation and management is woeful. IPR protection is non-existent, thwarting attempts to improve domestic ability to innovate and compete. The workforce is in no way, shape or form 10x as skilled as Japan's! China is often described as the "factory of the world" but really it is the assembly shop of the world, using low cost labour to assemble foreign components according to intellectual property owned elsewhere in factories built by foreign investors.

 

You seem to be missing the obvious linkage between the PRC's growing wealth and the consequent ability to spend on modern weapons. Even if the PRC was not increasing its defence spending, if it simply kept spending the same percentage of GDP on the military as it does today the 9% annual GDP growth would soon translate into a hefty increase in resources available to the military.

219292[/snapback]

 

So how many of those indigenous multi role J-10s are in operations compared to the rest of China's airforce? Not to many huh?

 

Funny, but I was under the impression that China has a whole load of engineers. I think what you're describing is a China a decade ago. Have you notice a bit of a surge in international investments? Economically, they're doing pretty well for a an assembly shop.

 

Imagine China in 10 years what Hong Kong was, but whole lot bigger. WAY bigger. That is what we have to compete against. If we don't dispell the assembly shop myth, we're going to get hit hard ala Japan.

 

But I still doubt that China will focus on militarism. They have no history of international expansionism. All this hoopla about the Chinese military threat. Frankly, they're finally catching up with the world. Barely. I only forsee two targets. Taiwan... and by a very very long shot ... Vietnam.

[Tranquil]

The Japanese F-2 is superior to the Chinese Su-27SK in all the important catagories.

1) smaller RCS

2) better weapon suite

3) far more advanced sensors and avionics

 

 

How about the all important range / payload equation? (lawn darts?)

N001VE has substantial output (with TWS & r-77 support)

 

 

i dont see how the F-2 addresses the current lack of capability of the existing F-16 system.

e.g. range and payload, lack of survivability with the single engine and tail plane. questionable placement of the control collum. Lack of upgrade potential dud to small size and limited engine output.

 

 

Apples with oranges anyway.

 

f-16 - Mig-29

 

Su-27 - F-15

[tankerwanabe]

I wouldn't put the Spitfire in the same class as the Me-110 either, but that doesn't mean the Spitfire can't wipe the floor with the Me-110. You are reading too much into terms like "class" and "generation", and not looking close enough at the real capability of the aircrafts themselves.

 

Comparing F-2 to the F-16 is like comparing the F-18E Super Hornet to F-18C Hornet. It may look like a Hornet, and even called a Hornet, but it is really not a Hornet. The F-2, and the F-18E, are really new aircrafts, was vastly superior capabilities compare to the aircrafts that they are supposely based on (for political reasons). According to its specs, the F-2 is quite close to the Raphael in capabilities. 

 

The Japanese F-2 is superior to the Chinese Su-27SK in all the important catagories.

1) smaller RCS

2) better weapon suite

3) far more advanced sensors and avionics

 

Backed up by Japanese E-767 AWACS, the F-2 should be able to easily handle the Su-27SK. (even though the F-2 wasn't designed as an air superiority fighter)

The real problem is that the F-2 is so expensive, not even the Japanese can afford many copies. They'll probably buy the JSF to make up the difference, but they'll probably manage to turn that into a pork-barrel fiasco too 

219382[/snapback]

 

Sorry, didn't mean to not answer your post. There were so many I lost track.

Lets take a look at your argument.

 

1) Smaller RCS

What are we really talking about? Detection isn't it? Once either bird lights up its radar it announces to the world where it is doesn't it? So it comes down to who sees each other first and gets the first launch. This means that smaller RCS would matter only if each bird carries the same radar. But if the Su carries a bigger radar, then RCS is moot.

 

2) Better weapons? Don't know about that. Those archers and r77 looks pretty potent. Japans haven't sign on for the AIM9x yet. The r77 and amraam (and MICA) looks like parity to me.

 

3)Better avionics? I'm pretty sure the F2 is not getting the APG80. Last I heard the Japanese indeginous radar ran into software problems and they can't get detection above 50nm. Other than that, the program is pretty secretive. I couldn't find any source.

 

But here's some info on what the Su27s family radar looks like:

 

* For aircraft N011M has a 350 km search range and a 200 km tracking range.

* A MiG-21 for instance can be detected at a distance of up to 135 km. Design maximum search range for an F-16 target was 140-160km.

* A Bars' earlier variant, fitted with a five-kilowatt transmitter, proved to be capable of acquiring Su-27 fighters at a range of over 330 km.

* It can track 20 air targets and engage the 8 most threatening targets simultaneously.

* The forward hemisphere is ±90º in azimuth and ±55º in elevation.

* N011M can withstand up to 5 percent transceiver loss without significant degredation in performance.

 

Source: VayuSena : A WebSite on the Indian Air Force

 

That looks like a pretty good avionics suite to me.

 

Maybe the Japanese should have taken a look at what the Chinese bought before going off on their own with their $105 million per copy F2.

[Guest pfcem]

So you're saying that an F2 wing can take on a Su27 wing?  Most people put the Su-27 at least in the same class as the F15. Therefore, I doubt it.

 

Funny, but I remember stating that the Japanese made a big mistake in procuring an expensive indiginous aircraft. I also stated that the Japanse would have been better off buying an American off-the-shelf and perfecting it with their own gadgets.

 

Ditto with buying the F22 and F35.

 

The issue wasn't whether Japan can take on China. The issue was whether Japan should have bought American instead of going by themselves.

219427[/snapback]

 

No, what i am saying is that the Chinese Su-27 derivatives are not more advanced than the F-2. Being bigger does not make it more advanced. Aside from its larger size & greater range due to that size, what makes you think the Su-27 is more advanced then the F-2. With modern AEW aircraft, the detection range of an individual fighter is not that significant as the AEW asset is always going to detect the enemy 1st anyway & guide the fighters to their targets.

 

But yes a wing of F-2s can take out a wing of Su-27s, if needed just as a flight of Su-27s can take out a flight of F-2s.

 

Japan has F-15s to counter the Chinese Su-27 derivatives & the F-15 still has a lot of potential as I stated before.

 

The F-2 is a multi-role attack fighter not a long-range air-superiority fighter like the Su-27. Comparing the two is unrealistic as they are intended for different roles.

 

It is unfortunate for Japan that developement of the F-2 took so long & drove procurement costs up. Japan is already looking for a replacement due to the high cost of the F-2. We seem to agree on that.

 

What I am disagreeing with is your contention that the F-2 is "a gereration behind" its contempararies in the region. The closest Chinese equivalent to the F-2 is the J-10 & in that case the same questionable agruments you have stated as to the superiority of the Su-27 over the F-2 can be applied to the F-2 over the J-10.

[Guest pfcem]

How about the all important range / payload equation? (lawn darts?)

N001VE has substantial output (with TWS & r-77 support)

i dont see how the F-2 addresses the current lack of capability of the existing F-16 system.

e.g. range and payload, lack of survivability with the single engine and tail plane.  questionable placement of the control collum.  Lack of upgrade potential dud to small size and limited engine output.

Apples with oranges anyway.

 

f-16 - Mig-29

 

Su-27 - F-15

219433[/snapback]

 

Compared to other fighters in the same size/weight class the F-2 is among the most capable aircraft flying today.

 

If by "questionable placement of the control collum" you mean the placement of the "joystic" you are 100% wrong. Its location on the F-16/F-2 is far superior to the traditional between the legs placement. It requires virtually no effort on behalf of the pilot to control the aircraft.

 

The F-16/F-2 has plenty of upgrade potential within the limits of its size & weight.

 

The block 60 F-16 has 32,000 lbs of thrust, hardly a lack of engine output, equal to that of the Rafale of similar weight & size. Also remember that while the Su-27 has a great power-to-weight ratio in "airshow" configuration, once loaded with full tanks of fuel & a usefull weapons load, their power-to-weight ratio is nowhere near as good.

 

Like you said "F-16 to Mig-29" & F-15 to Su-27" so why do you fault the F-2 for not comparing well to the Su-27? With exception to range due to consideable size difference, the F-2 compares quite well with the Su-27.

[Guest pfcem]

Sorry, didn't mean to not answer your post. There were so many I lost track.

Lets take a look at your argument.

 

1) Smaller RCS

What are we really talking about?  Detection isn't it? Once either bird lights up its radar it announces to the world where it is doesn't it?  So it comes down to who sees each other first and gets the first launch. This means that smaller RCS would matter only if each bird carries the same radar. But if the Su carries a bigger radar, then RCS is moot.

 

2) Better weapons?  Don't know about that. Those archers and r77 looks pretty potent.    Japans haven't sign on for the AIM9x yet. The r77 and amraam (and MICA) looks like parity to me.

 

3)Better avionics?  I'm pretty sure the F2 is not getting the APG80. Last I heard the Japanese indeginous radar ran into software problems and they can't get detection above 50nm. Other than that, the program is pretty secretive. I couldn't find any source.

 

But here's some info on what the Su27s family radar looks like:

 

    * For aircraft N011M has a 350 km search range and a 200 km tracking range.

    * A MiG-21 for instance can be detected at a distance of up to 135 km. Design maximum search range for an F-16 target was 140-160km.

    * A Bars' earlier variant, fitted with a five-kilowatt transmitter, proved to be capable of acquiring Su-27 fighters at a range of over 330 km.

    * It can track 20 air targets and engage the 8 most threatening targets simultaneously.

    * The forward hemisphere is ±90º in azimuth and ±55º in elevation.

    * N011M can withstand up to 5 percent transceiver loss without significant degredation in performance.

 

Source: VayuSena : A WebSite on the Indian Air Force

 

That looks like a pretty good avionics suite to me. 

 

Maybe the Japanese should have taken a look at what the Chinese bought before going off on their own with their $105 million per copy F2.

219453[/snapback]

 

You are comparing a dedicated heavy-weight air-superiority fighter with a light(middle)-weight multi-role attack fighter & faulting the latter for not being the former.

 

It does not matter that much that the Su-27 carries a bigger radar, the weapons ranges are similar & AEW assests are going to detect enemy aircraft long before individual fightes detect each other.

 

While the air-to-air weapons of the Su-27 & F-2 are similar, the F-2 is capable of carrying a wider range of air-to-ground weapons.

[swerve]

Plus China has worked on new multi roll fighters like the J10 a PLAAF version of the F-16.

 

It may be about the same size, but that doesn't make it a version of the F-16. Might as well say the Tejas is a version of the Gripen, because it's a similar size. Completely different plane.

 

Look at the pictures -

 

 

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j10.asp

[Sebastian Balos]

Why do you all state that F-2's radar is so advanced? According to some sources, it's radar isn't so effective as previously thought, due to a flaw in it's project. I don't know if this refers to an older design, or to the current AESA radar.

 

Also, Su-27 is a very capable fighter, in BVR, as well as in dogfight, despite it's size. It's turning circle is smaller than that of F-16, not even mentioning F-15. Even the modernised MiG-21 and Mirage-2000 proved to be pretty tough opponents for US aircraft, as proved by the recent indian face-off, when Su-30 (not Su-30MKI) won more than 90 % air-air mock-up battles against F-15, which were equipped with APG-63V2 AESA radar, JHMCS and AIM-9X! OTOH, the fights were 3-1 in indian's favour and BVR capability was restricted to 20 nm for F-15C (Su-30 were probably allowed to use AA-10 and AA-12 BVR missile capability):

 

http://kuku.sawf.org/Articles/139.aspx

 

It was stated that F-15C and Su-30 detected each other at approximately the same distance. If BVR missile capability would have been allowed for both opponents, these fighters would have been probably evenly matched. What's the current AIM-120 version on US fighters? AIM-120C? What's it's range?

 

I don't know anything about Mirage-2000 and MiG-29 performance against US fighters, most notably F-16Cs.

 

What's the difference between Chinese Su-30MKK/MKK2-3 and Indian Su-30/MKI? Different radar perhaps?

 

What sensors do Japanese F-15 use? Did they upgrade them recently?

 

Regards, Sebastian

[LeoTanker]

Note: China is developing and maybe near mass producing the WS-10 which will replace the AL-31F engine perhaps in both the domestic Flanker and J-10.

219350[/snapback]

 

 

Well, my friend, this artickle doesn´t really support your claims:

 

http://www.sinodefence.com/news/2005/news05-07-31.asp

 

I´m not saying you are wrong, but...

 

Great photo of the J-10 in the article by the way! (Doesn´t really look like an F-16, does it?)

[elytorian]

What's the difference between Chinese Su-30MKK/MKK2-3 and Indian Su-30/MKI? Different radar perhaps?

 

 

Regards, Sebastian

219540[/snapback]

The chinese MKK does not use a thrust-vectoring engine.

The indian MKI gets western avionics and a new russian BARS phased array radar.

iirc the emphasis of the indian SUs' will be more A2A work.

[Ol Paint]

Why do you all state that F-2's radar is so advanced? According to some sources, it's radar isn't so effective as previously thought, due to a flaw in it's project. I don't know if this refers to an older design, or to the current AESA radar.

 

Also, Su-27 is a very capable fighter, in BVR, as well as in dogfight, despite it's size. It's turning circle is smaller than that of F-16, not even mentioning F-15. Even the modernised MiG-21 and Mirage-2000 proved to be pretty tough opponents for US aircraft, as proved by the recent indian face-off, when Su-30 (not Su-30MKI) won more than 90 % air-air mock-up battles against F-15, which were equipped with APG-63V2 AESA radar, JHMCS and AIM-9X! OTOH, the fights were 3-1 in indian's favour and BVR capability was restricted to 20 nm for F-15C (Su-30 were probably allowed to use AA-10 and AA-12 BVR missile capability):

 

http://kuku.sawf.org/Articles/139.aspx

 

It was stated that F-15C and Su-30 detected each other at approximately the same distance. If BVR missile capability would have been allowed for both opponents, these fighters would have been probably evenly matched. What's the current AIM-120 version on US fighters? AIM-120C? What's it's range?

 

I don't know anything about Mirage-2000 and MiG-29 performance against US fighters, most notably F-16Cs.

 

What's the difference between Chinese Su-30MKK/MKK2-3 and Indian Su-30/MKI? Different radar perhaps?

 

What sensors do Japanese F-15 use? Did they upgrade them recently?

 

Regards, Sebastian

219540[/snapback]

Sebastian,

 

Go back and re-read the article you posted. The Cope India 2004 missiles involved non-AESA F-15Cs and did not simulate AIM-120 AMRAAM. This isn't to say that the Indian Air Force isn't good, but you are exaggerating the situation a bit.

 

Douglas