JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by crazyinsane105, Sep 26, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Zahid
    Offline

    Zahid Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Likes Received:
    331
    Cheap, very cheap, extremely cheap are all relative terms with no figures attached to them. One man's cheap is another man's expensive and vice versa. With 150 - 250 JF17 production run for PAF alone is enough to make it viable. Just spread the cost of delvelopment over this number and you will get a number less than USD 1 Million. All the parts that go into making JF17 are not western-priced. And certainly JF17 is more than the sum of its parts. PAF is very pleased with it. PAF pilots prefer it over older F16.

    Even a "hand full" of other customers would make it a success. Third world countries are ideal customers for it. Especially when you consider how sanctions are slapped on by western countries at any pretext.

    It was a very smart move by Pakistan to deflect and counter pressure from USA, start own production, take a step towards development of capabilities that would allow own designing, develop stronger ties with China, and answer India's domestic fighter LCA.

    JF17 and J10 are not competitors. If indeed they were China would have killed this project.

    Repeating the question from my last post: I would like to question the assertion that extremes of armed trainers and high-end jets would out compete the rest of the fighters. What is the logic behind that and how could this be made to look tenable?
     
    #1341 Zahid, May 28, 2010
    Last edited: May 28, 2010
  2. Pointblank
    Offline

    Pointblank Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    2
    Simple.

    Many countries looking for replacements of their F-5 and MiG-21 fleets are diverging in two directions (or both) depending on their situation. If the country is primarily fighting a counter insurgency, they will most likely lean towards an armed trainer because they are more affordable and easily maintained while having enough combat punch to do what is asked.

    If the country is requiring a more modern air defence capability over their F-5's and MiG-21's, they will look for a higher end combat aircraft that has more in the way of air superiority capabilities. The Sri Lankan Air Force for example, is looking into replacing their IAI Kfir's and MiG-27's for a higher end combat jet, such as the MiG-29. The Moroccan Air Force is replacing their F-5 fleet with new F-16's. The Saudi Air Force is replacing the balance of their F-5 fleet with Eurofighter's. The Swiss Air Force is evaluating the Saab Gripen, the Eurofighter and the Rafale to replace their F-5 fleet. The Libyans are looking towards MiG-29's and Rafale's to replace their MiG-21 fleet.

    And then, there are countries going both ways. For example, the Indonesian Air Force is diverging their combat jet fleet in two directions; armed jet trainers such as the BAe Hawk and armed basic trainers such as the Embraer Super Tucano in one direction, and they have expressed a desire to replace their F-5's with something like additional F-16's, or Mirage 2000's, Dassault Rafale's, Saab Gripen's and the like. South Korea is replacing their F-5 fleet with the indigenous T-50 Golden Eagle and for the higher end, more F-16's and F-15's.
     
  3. tphuang
    Offline

    tphuang Brigadier
    VIP Professional Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    7,551
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    Here is a question to think about for this debate. If half of JF-17 profit goes to Pakistan and half of the profits of all suppliers also go to Pakistan as some have suggested proudly. Why would China want to sell JF-17 when it could pocket all the profits if it sells J-10?
     
  4. rhino123
    Offline

    rhino123 Pencil Pusher
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    179
    What you say make sense. But sometime we don't look at profit as a figure only. We look at the percentage of the profit. So even if fifty percent of whatever final profit earned will go to Pakistan, but the remaining might still be large enough for China to have a go at it.

    In that aspect... we would be looking at the initial unit cost (not adding up the profit, the raw cost) and then the final selling cost of each unit. And it might be much larger than J-10.

    Plus I would imagine that J-10 is not going to sell cheap. And so many of the countries might be put down at that cost and go for western (if they could) aircraft (not that J-10 is anything lower than equivalent J-10 fighters, but sometime sterotype "made in china"=no good sentiment always get the better of people.)
     
  5. optionsss
    Offline

    optionsss Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    For JF-17 is not competing in the same market with Gripen nor Eurofighters. It's a supersonic fighter with BVR capability, but comes with a price no more expensive than a Bae Hawk. Used F-16 are competitive, but you go through with the necessary upgrade that's still 60mil per aircraft. Unless some European just want to get rid of the aircraft from inventory, but then you have to pay for your own spare parts, and those are very expensive.
     
  6. Pointblank
    Offline

    Pointblank Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ah, but the prices of Eurofighters, F-16's and Saab Gripen's have dropped significantly due to the extremely high competition in this sector. As I said, lots of entrants into a market means lower prices.
     
  7. Indianfighter
    Offline

    Indianfighter Junior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    504
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well that's simply because the J-10 and the JF-17 are different classes of fighters. Their markets won't overlap. Even Pakistan intends to use it's J-10 along with the new F-16s it is getting, whereas JF-17s are the workhorses.

    So countries looking to get workhorses (like MiG-21) may look at JF-17, but those looking for serious strike capability will look at J-10, used F-16, MiG-29 and Flankers.
     
  8. plawolf
    Offline

    plawolf Brigadier

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,214
    Likes Received:
    12,886
    Still not to the point where they are remotely price competitive against the J10 let alone the JF17.

    Then there is also the training, munitions, maintenance and running costs to consider.

    Its no use buying a brand spanking new fighter if you can't afford to fight let alone train with them.

    How much are western munitions going for these days compared to Chinese? How much will it cost to get your pilots trained up on your new planes in Europe or America compared to China? How much would support and spares cost?

    It all adds up.
     
  9. Red Moon
    Offline

    Red Moon Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    132
    Moreover, if the price for Gripens, F-16, etc. can be lowered, so can the price for JF-17 and J-10. In price competition, China will win every time, whether its shoes or ships.
     
  10. Zahid
    Offline

    Zahid Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Likes Received:
    331
    The qualities ascribed to trainers are just what makes JF17 stand out. It is affordable, easily maintained, has enough combat punch to do what is asked. With speed, BVR, payload, IFR, an excellent interface, and other goodies, it delivers more than a mere trainer is capable of and that too at 15 - 20 million dollars. Who could beat that?

    Most European countries and most Arab states are not going to be interested in JF17 since they are not target customers. Azerbaijan and Egypt have reportedly shown interest though. For Pakistan Air Force this aircraft is a capable workhorse to shore up numbers and help keep a high sortie rate while having the ability to threaten enemy aircraft. May there be other Air forces who think along similar lines? I bet.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page