J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by crobato, Dec 29, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. franco-russe
    Offline

    franco-russe Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,015
    Likes Received:
    1
    That is a very reasonable prognosis, remembering that they still have to deliver most Lot 06 J-10A's in 2012.

    An yes, of course they will be in service for decades to come. Modern combat aircraft should be expected to serve for nearly 40 years, and the J-10 only entered front-line service (with 131 Regt, 44 Ftr Div) in 2004
     
  2. Dizasta1
    Offline

    Dizasta1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,057
    Likes Received:
    1,233
    Personally, I feel that PLAAF ought to have a balance on the USAF. What I mean't to say is, just look at the number of F-16s USAF has, nearly 1200, as well as the number of F-15s, which is around 300. PLAAF should ideally have a large fleet of its mainstay fighter, J-10Bs (at least 500-700 fighters or more). J-11Bs should be proportionately less to the J-10Bs, however, not as less in proportion, as the USAF have on the F-15s to F-16s ratio.

    Ideally, if finances, logistics permit it, PLAAF should have (300) J-20s, (300 to 500) J-11Bs, (700-900) J-10Bs and about (150-300) JH-7Bs. But I guess everyone here would laugh at such numbers. In spite this, I still say, that an air force of PLAAF's stature deserves the large fleet lay out, as I have mentioned. It's fit for a Superpower, that is China!
     
  3. franco-russe
    Offline

    franco-russe Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,015
    Likes Received:
    1
    PLAAF is not and in the future is unlikely to be a copy of USAF.

    Whatever some might find desirable, the ratio between SU-27/SU-30/J-11 and J-10 in PLAAF and PLANAF combined is 16 regiments of the former and 7 regiments of the latter.

    As they are built in roughly equal numbers, the ratio will only slowly change.
     
  4. Dizasta1
    Offline

    Dizasta1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,057
    Likes Received:
    1,233
    In any conflict or potential conflict, the outcome is always calculated on the basis of numbers. This doesn't necessarily mean that you have equal your adversary, fighter for fighter, or tank for tank. Rather, it is an acceptable fleet, troop, squadron strength, which deems any conflict with their enemy, a stalemate. And there are many examples of this, where a country, though not as superior in numbers, has attained a level of strength by which it thwarts or hinders its rivals from open war.

    We have witnessed such match-ups in the cold war, between United States and the Soviet Union. The same comparison can be made of Pakistan and hindustan, where hindustan has a superiority in numbers, however Pakistan has built up enough numbers to thwart or stemmed the enemy of thinking about open war. Also, the fact that Pakistan is Nuclear Power, prevents hindustan (wrongfully known as india), from declaring open war.

    For China, open war with the America, is and should not be a possibility. Simply because both countries would perish in such a conflict. However, the key for China is, to achieve a respectable level of conventional military strength, which thwarts any aggressive designs by the enemy. As America is the only standing rival to China, it is only logical for China to attain a military strength which can challenge America and let it know, that open war, would cost it dearly.

    Which is why, China should ideally achieve a respectable military strength, where America may have 11 Aircraft Carriers, China can do with a minimum of 6 Aircraft Carriers. And where USAF has a combined fleet of 2000-3000 fighter-jets, China should have at least 1700-2000. The same goes for the PLA, which needs more mobility, with the likes of larger Military Cargo aircraft and larger Military Cargo helicopters.

    It isn't necessary for PLAAF to have 1200 J-10Bs, just because USAF has 1200 F-16s, rather a lesser number of J-10Bs, which are large enough to challenge America's air force's might. And even though, the manufacturing capability of reaching such strength levels in the PLA, PLAAF and PLAN/PLANAF, may take time, it is essential for China to achieve it and maintain parity with the United States.

    A powerful China, is essential to the global balance of power, as it is foolish to allow just one power (United States) to rule the world. Balance is essential and imperative for a peaceful world.
     
  5. franco-russe
    Offline

    franco-russe Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,015
    Likes Received:
    1
    It would in any case be quite difficult for the US to deploy its air force within range of China. I would find it very unlikely that Japan and South Korea allow their territory to be used for operations against China, which would leave the US only Guam and Taiwan as basing options - plus of course aircraft carriers, of which six are supposed to be in the Pacific Fleet (currently just five). India might be an option, too, in the future.

    When the new Panama Canal opens in 2014, Atlantic Fleet carriers will be able to deploy to the Pacific quite rapidly, avoiding the unpleasant trip round Cape Horn and allowing principle the entire US carrier fleet to be concentrated against China.
     
  6. escobar
    Offline

    escobar Brigadier

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,709
    Likes Received:
    2,949
    If it is very unlikely that Japan and South Korea (US allies) would not allow US to use their territory as base for operations against China
    it is even more unlikely that India would do that.
     
  7. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,827
    Likes Received:
    8,911
    deleted due to political comments ! (off-topic)
     
    #2747 asif iqbal, Feb 19, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 21, 2012
  8. latenlazy
    Offline

    latenlazy Colonel

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,289
    Likes Received:
    3,483
    I doubt China needs such a large air force. Unlike the US, China doesn't have and won't have as many fixed global assets, and won't need so much power projection.
     
  9. Munir
    Offline

    Munir Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    May 14, 2006
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    1
    If they want to secure resources and export they need a very capable and big Navy. In that respect China needs a lot bigger numbers. The cost of that will be higher then what Dizasta talks about. I doubt the PLAAF needs that number of high tech planes. More then 100 J20 is already huge. That is already 5 squadrons.
     
  10. Dizasta1
    Offline

    Dizasta1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,057
    Likes Received:
    1,233
    During the time, when the British Empire was a superpower, the rule was that whom so ever controlled the Sea, dominated everything. Then the age American Empire came to fore, the rules changed and it is whom so ever controlled the Seas and Skies, dominated everything.

    For China, limiting its sphere of influence and power projection to just Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, is not in any way going to be a challenge for the United States. This is because, in order to be a global power, China needs to have enough clout, both economically and militarily, to exert influence in the region. The reason for this is simple, if China is not able to do so, the rule of the jungle applies. The strongest devour the weak.

    Apart from a power military, China also requires stable, strong (at least in their region) allies. And that too, allies which are fiercely aligned to it's friend, China. This is only possible, when China has the capability to step in to defend its ally. Something which America has promised Taiwan, in the event they declare independence from China, officially! It is also only possible, if China expands its economic growth and prosperity out of the shadows of dependence on America and Europe.

    Coming back to the subject, China's ability to field a large, well equipped and technologically advance PLAAF, PLAN & PLANAF, would be the deciding factor in it being able to counter American influence in its own backyard, as well as deep into the Pacific or Indian Oceans.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page