Low-cost, muti-role aircraft for small militaries

Red___Sword

Junior Member
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Here is where you have miss conceptions. Interceptors don't necessarily have to refer to fighters that have limited maneuverability and primarily target bombers. Both the F-14 Tomcat, F-15, and the F-22 are great interceptors despite the fact that they are designed with air superiority in-mind.

The J-10A's ramped air-intake reflects the PLAAF's demand for high-speed capabilities.

Good example you mentioned, F-14, F-15, F-22 they can all fly 2M if needed (and doing that for a rather long range, compare to many others), and they are all "heavey" fighters. J-10 can really "sprint" but not "intercept", should the target is afar, and trys to long-drawn dance at a critical range (in, and out of your range, in, and out of your range...), burns your fuel out.

I am aware what is dedicated interceptor and a fighter that can intercepts... J-10 is not a good anwser for that. (Hey Argentina, I got good J-11BS for sale, we game?... LOL.)

Politically speaking, I think China would not export J-10 to a place where too many third party can "take a peek" in it. So J-10 option is out at its foundation.
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

I agree! I do not wish begin any sort of discussion over the Malvinas War, and I would like to encourage the forum member from indicating any assumptions of future conflicts. Even through the rhetoric from Argentina’s dismal president (Cristina Kirchner) is strong the reality is the Argentine military has been starved of equipment (and money) for the past thirty years and would not be capable of mounting and invasion of the Malvinas. However, the British military is equally unable to project is military force as it once could in the 1980’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Personally I don’t see Argentina and England going to war over the archipelago, neither has the money or the will to commit political suicide to have the islands in their possession. Additionally I believe that the fate of the inlanders should be left in the hands of the residence. They have the right of self-determination. The military dictatorship in Argentina was wrong to have invaded the islands. They gambled that the distraction would turn people attention away from the deteriorating economy.

With that said. There is money to purchase new combat aircraft and the opposition party is in full gear to return the military as a potent force for nation defense and UN operations. Some estimate form articles in La Nacion and El Clarin state there is between 600 to 750 million to upgrade the air force alone within the next five years.

My personal favorite would be the JF-17/FC-1 utilizing the SNECMA M53-P2 powerplant and Israeli avionics. I’ve also considered the Mig-29. However, everything I’ve read mentions that the aircraft is a maintenance nightmare. Which is something to consider, since you don’t want capital for future equipment purchases to be spent on maintenance and overhauls.

I am glad that the Ministry of Defense did not go through with the purchase of the Mirage F-1’s. These aircraft are inferior to the F-16’s operated by Chile (Argentines principal adversary). Dare I say I would prefer to see the Mig-23MDL over the Mirage F-1. The only advantage that the Mirage has is that it utilizes the same (similar) powerplant as the Mirage III, and would require little effort to absorb.

As a footnote: the current Argentine government spent over 600 million US$ to broadcast futbol games for poor Argentines, but can’t spend 600 million on some fighter aircraft.
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Judging from your reasoning the only choices are Russian and Chinese fighters. Since this forum is called sino-defence what plane do you think most people will recommend? :D

Why J-10 with Israelis avionics and radar?

The JF-17/FC-1 utilizing the SNECMA M53-P2 powerplant and Israeli avionics, this aircraft would have a good change against the 10 F-16 C/D and 36 F-16 A/B in the Chilean Air Force inventory.

The J-10 would be an incredible aircraft to have, but I agree that the Chinese many not want to let their best “new” fighter out of their control just yet.
 

Lezt

Junior Member
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Here is where you have miss conceptions. Interceptors don't necessarily have to refer to fighters that have limited maneuverability and primarily target bombers. Both the F-14 Tomcat, F-15, and the F-22 are great interceptors despite the fact that they are designed with air superiority in-mind.

The J-10A's ramped air-intake reflects the PLAAF's demand for high-speed capabilities.

Good example you mentioned, F-14, F-15, F-22 they can all fly 2M if needed (and doing that for a rather long range, compare to many others), and they are all "heavey" fighters. J-10 can really "sprint" but not "intercept", should the target is afar, and trys to long-drawn dance at a critical range (in, and out of your range, in, and out of your range...), burns your fuel out.

I am aware what is dedicated interceptor and a fighter that can intercepts... J-10 is not a good anwser for that. (Hey Argentina, I got good J-11BS for sale, we game?... LOL.)

Politically speaking, I think China would not export J-10 to a place where too many third party can "take a peek" in it. So J-10 option is out at its foundation.

Well, it is always like this with technology advancement. For ships, first we have the slow havily armored dreadnaughts going at around 20 knots. Then the fast battle cruisers with thinner armor going at 30 knots, then we have supper dreadnaughts like the Iowa and Yamoto which is heavily armored and can break/almost break 30 knots.

Same with tanks too, We have our mediums which are well armed and manuvorable and heavy tanks which are well armed and well armored. Then we have MBTs which are as well armed, armored and manuverable as meds and heavy tanks combined.

So everything eventually give way to jack of all trade units - similarly with interceptors.
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

I agree. I do not expect it and certainly hope it does not happen.

But just the same, Argentina continues to assert their claim and Brazil and Uruguay backs them...even beyond diplomatically at times. Remember, the Brazilians forced a UK bomber down during the war and imprisoned the crew for a week or ten days during the war.
If the right events took place and Argentina felt goaded, and the opportunity...they might still try. Although they lost, they also fought hard and bloodied the UK pretty well with their air attacks on the Navy.

I just do not think they have the proper air force assets to maintain air supremacy or even superiority over the islands should they be able to take them again. They would need a good fighter and quite a few of them...something better than the Mirage 5s they have.

Let's hope it is all simple conjecture.

The Vulcan Bomber that landed in Rio during the Falklands War was not 'forced down by the Brazillians', rather the aircraft developed a fault whilst inflight refuelling and could not complete it's mission, leaving the crew with the choice of ditching in the South Atlantic or diverting to a civilian airport, in this case Rio. Having chosen the latter (and informed the UK to give sufficient warning to Brazil they were coming) the crew dumped all their sensitive code books and other documentation in a weighted bag into the sea and tried to jettison their missiles (Shrike anti radition missiles, the sortie was against the Argentine Radar installations around Port Stanley. No bombs carried on this mission) but were unable to do so. The aircraft was allowed to land at Rio but was impounded on arrival and the crew 'detained' by customs in a reasonably comfortable hotel for a week whilst the diplomats sorted it all out. The aircraft and it's crew were allowed to leave but had to leave the Shrike Missiles behind, they were officially referred to by both countries as 'Sidewinders' for self defence, to disguise what the aircraft's actual mission was (no doubt Argentina already knew) and the Brazillians got a great gift of the Shrikes for the technical staff to examine.

During the conflict, the RAF's Vulcans flew a total of five sorties to the Falklands (that's five individual aircraft), each sortie requiring the simltaneous launch of 11 Victor Tankers to top each other and the Vulcan up, burning more fuel each time the the entire Sea Harrier force did in the whole operation, only the first three 'Black Buck' missions carried bombs (21x 1,000lb 'dumb bombs, unguided and aimed using techniques developed in WW2!) so of 63 bombs dropped, one hit the runway at Port Stanley causing a large crater... which was filled in and the runway fully operational in just over two hours. Yet to hear the RAF go on about it today you'd think the Vulcan won the war! The final two sorties were armed with the Shrike missile to disable the Argentines air defence radars on the islands, but the Argentines were smart enough to switch off their radars when the detected the planes coming in. Shrike could not keep a lock on a target that had shut down, whereas more modern missiles can.

Looking to the present day, Argentina has something of a quandry. They want to retake the Falklands, but they don't trust their own military and have restricted defence spending for decades. To defeat the RAF's Typhoons at Mount Pleasant, they would either have to aquire an aircraft of equal or superior quality (difficult, expensive and highly unlikely) or buy aircraft in sufficient numbers to overwhelm the Phoons (of the four aircraft based there, two will be on Q at all times, a third at thirty minute notice to reinforce and the fourth in maintenance), so Argentine planning for this scenario would have to be based around this specific threat. The RAF can send more aircraft from the UK, but even using inflight refuelling they could not be expected to arrive and become combat effective for at least twenty four hours after the initial attack, so Argentina has that long to mount an attack, defeat two to three of the world's most capable AD aircraft, land on the islands, defeat the Garrison and capture Mount Pleasant before UK reinforcements arrive. (sarcasm mode on) Good Luck with that! (sarcasm mode off!)
Bottom line: whoever controls Mount Pleasant airbase controls the islands.
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

Just a reminder that we don’t what this thread to become a Malvinas/Falkland discussion. As Jeff Head mentioned “please keep on topic”.

Thank you
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

I am a little old timer on this, when use the term "interceptor", the image emerges in my mind is always something flys high, flys fast, flys far, and shoot BVRAAMs. The interceptor is supposed to intercept nothing but enemy bombers on their way to wreck your nation (before they did), so time is of essence (time cost of "shoot down the enemy" is of essence)

J-10 is a good multi-role (which anti-fighter is the main role) 3rd gen fighter, but not dedicated to traditional "interception".

Anyway, this is a very good thread for some reading, I guess the east pacific don't have that "bomber's threat" like west pacific had, at all. As for Argentina herself, I think more quantity of fighters doing their job during war time, is more useful (and vital) than a few better quality fighters. Typhoon and any possible British reinforcements are a greater force than FC-1 or J-10 anyway; and another lesson I think the Argentine would learnt from the last war is that ammo would running out quicker than you think, if you use "too hi-tech" stuff (not to mention boycott by your contractor, the same one supplys Rafales) .

- In all, quantity matters, when quality difference is not THAT significant.

Perhaps I should use a different word other than interceptor (excuse my English). It should have said multi-role combat aircraft with a primary role of nation air defense and secondary attack role. I would have to be an aircraft that is at least a 4th generation aircraft that will have at least a 10 to 15 year life if it’s used equipment and 20 to 25 year life new.

I agree about the cost of munitions. Those fancy AAM cost big bucks (mucho dinero) and tend to be used up quickly in a combat situation. Another example of poor planning would be like Taiwan purchasing enough sidewinder and sparrows to last all their combat aircraft two sorties.

Of course we could get into another interesting exchange of ideas just talking about AAM.
 
Last edited:

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

If Brazil gets Rafales for instance, it may be worthwhile for Argentina to do the same to simplify support issues and allow for more thorough cross-training.



There has been some discussion about Argentina piggy backing on the Brazilian purchase. There has always been a love relationship between the FAA and Dasualt aircraft.
However I don’t se this happening due to the high unit costs.

Currently the Argentine Naval Aviation operate their Super Etendard’s off of the Brazilian carrier Sao Paulo
 

Red___Sword

Junior Member
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

So everything eventually give way to jack of all trade units - similarly with interceptors.

Make sense, but not necessary always "stands".

SR-71 and Mig-31 kind of monsters are something un-replace-able. Their "job scope" is still needed from time to time, yet no other "jack of all trade unit" can handle.

But no offence, Argentina don't need what the "interceptor" we are talking about. A very good multi-role plane is still best choice for most situation. - J-10 "sprints", not intercepts. If up to me, I got money, I choose F-15C + F-15E package (3:1) or Mig-39; I lack money, then I choose FC-1. J-10 is something (to Argentine AF) "not here not there".


Edit:

Wow, didn't refresh, just read #27.

In that case, I highly recommend J-10 and FC-1 for the two situation, ignoring my patriotics (Hi everyone, I am a PRC citizen), J-10 and FC-1 still costs way less than any other options, leave you extra money for extra ammo or what ever fit. And buy from China, politically, you have a less chance to get back-stabed when in conflict with a typical western enemy (who calls his friend which happens to be your contractor to back-stab you).
 
Last edited:

antiterror13

Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?

How about Chinese F-7G, it is a very good, cheap and proven fighter with BVR (limited) capability, it is better than F-16A/B. Perhaps PRC would sell her existing F-7Gs to Argentina cheaply
 
Top