Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
The two projects you mention were meant as technology demostrators.
The two projects you mention were meant as technology demostrators.
JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
PeoplesPoster
Junior Member
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
F-16 & F-18's have been continuously upgraded in order to keep their relevance. So if you somehow think that upgrading the FC-1 with radar absorbent paint, which is a relatively low cost solution, or any other upgrade is pointless than you are in fact making the plane worthless in the near and distant future. Whats the point of buying a "low cost fighter" when your just going to lose them in any foreseeable conflict?
F-16 & F-18's have been continuously upgraded in order to keep their relevance. So if you somehow think that upgrading the FC-1 with radar absorbent paint, which is a relatively low cost solution, or any other upgrade is pointless than you are in fact making the plane worthless in the near and distant future. Whats the point of buying a "low cost fighter" when your just going to lose them in any foreseeable conflict?
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
I think you have misunderstood what other posters (HDSKU) I believe had posted. I think what he mean by reducing the radar signature as was an answer to one of the previous posting about Stealth FC-1, was that it defeat the purpose of having the FC-1 because the FC-1 is basically a low cost figther, by changing the entire structure of the aircraft, this would step up the cost and I doubt with the current budget of most countries including Pakistan, could afford such a fighter.
As to upgrades of the avionics and stuff like that, I believe at current status the avionics are good enough. Plus FC-1 is actually upgradable and so in near future, the Pakistani or other country who bought the platform could still upgrade their avionics. And to the radar absorbant paint, it can still be applied, but it will only reduce radar signature and not turn the FC-1 into a full stealth plane.
I think you have misunderstood what other posters (HDSKU) I believe had posted. I think what he mean by reducing the radar signature as was an answer to one of the previous posting about Stealth FC-1, was that it defeat the purpose of having the FC-1 because the FC-1 is basically a low cost figther, by changing the entire structure of the aircraft, this would step up the cost and I doubt with the current budget of most countries including Pakistan, could afford such a fighter.
As to upgrades of the avionics and stuff like that, I believe at current status the avionics are good enough. Plus FC-1 is actually upgradable and so in near future, the Pakistani or other country who bought the platform could still upgrade their avionics. And to the radar absorbant paint, it can still be applied, but it will only reduce radar signature and not turn the FC-1 into a full stealth plane.
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
JF17 is replacing "vintage" planes with no BVR/IFR/HMS/IRST/etc etc. Think about Mirages 3-5, mig21/J7p/pg, A5, F6, and some more. It is never meant to be the latest but a cheap and decent multi role fighter. It wil be upgraded in batches yet it will never come near expensive planes (Block60, JSF etc) cause these do not only cost atleast triple (to ten times more) but these are in different league.
You can have the latest for billions of USD but can you afford it? Do you need it? You will always have low, medium and high end fighters. And you just fill your basket by looking at your budget and other constraints. That shouldn't be very difficult to understand. And please try to understand that you do not automaticly win wars when spending more.
JF17 is replacing "vintage" planes with no BVR/IFR/HMS/IRST/etc etc. Think about Mirages 3-5, mig21/J7p/pg, A5, F6, and some more. It is never meant to be the latest but a cheap and decent multi role fighter. It wil be upgraded in batches yet it will never come near expensive planes (Block60, JSF etc) cause these do not only cost atleast triple (to ten times more) but these are in different league.
You can have the latest for billions of USD but can you afford it? Do you need it? You will always have low, medium and high end fighters. And you just fill your basket by looking at your budget and other constraints. That shouldn't be very difficult to understand. And please try to understand that you do not automaticly win wars when spending more.
vesicles
Colonel
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
I don't think "obsolete" weapons will simply fall apart in the face of advanced weapons. There have been many examples of one force using "obsolete" weapons beating the supposed advanced weapons. If you understands the weapon systems and develop appropriate tactics, you will hold your own in a fight, even if it means at a huge cost. F-22 vs. some obsolete fighter might have 10:1 killing efficiency, but if you use your obsolete fighter effectively, you can exhaust those F-22's eventually. Since no nation can afford to field an entire AF with F-22's, you eventually even the field a little IF you know what you are doing.
I don't think "obsolete" weapons will simply fall apart in the face of advanced weapons. There have been many examples of one force using "obsolete" weapons beating the supposed advanced weapons. If you understands the weapon systems and develop appropriate tactics, you will hold your own in a fight, even if it means at a huge cost. F-22 vs. some obsolete fighter might have 10:1 killing efficiency, but if you use your obsolete fighter effectively, you can exhaust those F-22's eventually. Since no nation can afford to field an entire AF with F-22's, you eventually even the field a little IF you know what you are doing.
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
I wonder how long the air force can keep the morale of its pilots up when its at the wrong side of a 10 to 1 kill rate?. Besides is 'Peoples poster' refering to the Chinese airforce or other 3rd world countries coming up against upgraded 2nd hand F16's etc bought by more affluent 3rd world countries.
Mind you those F35s are supposed to be pretty good as well?
I wonder how long the air force can keep the morale of its pilots up when its at the wrong side of a 10 to 1 kill rate?. Besides is 'Peoples poster' refering to the Chinese airforce or other 3rd world countries coming up against upgraded 2nd hand F16's etc bought by more affluent 3rd world countries.
Mind you those F35s are supposed to be pretty good as well?
Last edited:
vesicles
Colonel
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
You would be surprised how men can thrive and morale can be maintained in adverse conditions. Just look at Korean War.
You would be surprised how men can thrive and morale can be maintained in adverse conditions. Just look at Korean War.
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
Some of those 3rd world countries can only afford a squadron of fighters at a 10/1 kill rate youve lost all your planes in one or two sorties
Some of those 3rd world countries can only afford a squadron of fighters at a 10/1 kill rate youve lost all your planes in one or two sorties
vesicles
Colonel
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
Then how many of the F-22/PAK/J-XX can they afford? My argument was that, based on their limited budget, it's better to field more planes like J-10/JF-17/FC-1 than fielding a few F-22/PAK/J-XX-class fighters. And in a potential conflict with advanced AFs, they might stand a better chance with their better trained pilots, better maintained J-10 and with better tactics that suits these nations' special situations, much like the "asymmetric warfare" that China develops. My original argument was toward one poster's comment about Pak supposedly skipping J-10 and aiming for the J-XX.
My view is that tactics is as important as weapon systems. Much like a land battle between an advanced force and an obsolete one. Instead of fielding the same expensive tanks and guns like their advanced foe, the obsolete army stands a better chance by changing the tactics to guerrilla warfare while still using their obsolete weapons. And we see many successful examples of this view.
Then how many of the F-22/PAK/J-XX can they afford? My argument was that, based on their limited budget, it's better to field more planes like J-10/JF-17/FC-1 than fielding a few F-22/PAK/J-XX-class fighters. And in a potential conflict with advanced AFs, they might stand a better chance with their better trained pilots, better maintained J-10 and with better tactics that suits these nations' special situations, much like the "asymmetric warfare" that China develops. My original argument was toward one poster's comment about Pak supposedly skipping J-10 and aiming for the J-XX.
My view is that tactics is as important as weapon systems. Much like a land battle between an advanced force and an obsolete one. Instead of fielding the same expensive tanks and guns like their advanced foe, the obsolete army stands a better chance by changing the tactics to guerrilla warfare while still using their obsolete weapons. And we see many successful examples of this view.
Last edited:
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009
Whether a third world nation has one squadron of high end fighters or ten squadrons of low end fighters, it stands no chance against a modern air force such as the USAF or PLAAF. However, against another third world nation, having more low end fighters to maintain better sortie rates and cover more territory would make more sense. Also it is unknown how cost-effective 5th generation aircraft.
Whether a third world nation has one squadron of high end fighters or ten squadrons of low end fighters, it stands no chance against a modern air force such as the USAF or PLAAF. However, against another third world nation, having more low end fighters to maintain better sortie rates and cover more territory would make more sense. Also it is unknown how cost-effective 5th generation aircraft.
- Status