Some comments on AT-3 article

Saw this link popup on the left side today:

"Taiwan Modifies Aircraft To Carry Anti Ship Missiles"

If anyone is curious about what the plane looks like:


Here's the specs:


AIDC built 60-62 of these, of which 10 has been lost to accidents. The upgraded attacker variant has APG-66T radar, and can carry HF-2 AShM. This is a ROCAF aircraft that's often overlooked because it's a trainer/light attacker.

light, cheap, and deadly. and it can sink a million dollar destroyer. this is exactly the same asymetrical arefare chian has been beveloping so long, but now it must face it!!

whats with the accident rate? 10/50? thats 20%!

old subsonic trainers will not destory the PLAN

they will most likely be shot down before they even see their target

MIGleader said:

light, cheap, and deadly. and it can sink a million dollar destroyer. this is exactly the same asymetrical arefare chian has been beveloping so long, but now it must face it!!
whats with the accident rate? 10/50? thats 20%!

Click to expand...

The AT-3 is ROCAF's primary jet/fighter trainer, and the accident rate reflects 20 years of use (1984-2004?). I think training combat pilots is not easy, and if you look at the accident description, about half of the incidents resulted in fatality for both the trainer and the student. X_X

In terms of performance, the AT-3 is similiar to a BAE Hawk. They both have 5 hardpoints and can carry up to 6,000 lbs of munitions. The AIDC upgrade to AT-3 includes APG-66T radar, new fire control system (for HF-2 AShM), new MFD's/HUD, HOTAS, etc.

Since the US won't allow ROCAF to modify the F-16's to carry domestic weapons, the ROCAF is probably looking at the AT-3 as alternate platform to the IDF for anti-shipping roles in emergency situations. So far I think only a few AT-3's have been modified.

darth sidious said:

old subsonic trainers will not destory the PLAN
they will most likely be shot down before they even see their target

Click to expand...

It's not the trainer, it's the anti-ship missile. AShM's are long-range stand off weapons that do not require line of slight. Both the AT-3 and HF-2 are not that advanced, but then most of PLAN's ships don't have modern anti-missile systems either.

before they approach the PLAn they willl be intercepted by flankers

if they manage to surive that then they will still have to braved the HQ-9 sam lonched from chinas new destoryer

given that its nither fast or does it carry a large pay load that thing will not be very useful in wars

i really dont see a couple of at-3s or hesueng fengs hitting a chinese ship. the hq-9 is said to have range of around 120 km, allowing the missle to reach right over taiwan strait and shoot down the trainer. i think the plan intends to use the 52cs and bs as fleet air cover, so the missle has little chance of scoring a hit.

darth sidious said:

before they approach the PLAn they willl be intercepted by flankers
if they manage to surive that then they will still have to braved the HQ-9 sam lonched from chinas new destoryer
given that its nither fast or does it carry a large pay load that thing will not be very useful in wars

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is going to seriously compare the air combat capability between a Su-27 and an AT-3. LoL.

The AT-3 is slow, but it can carry ~6,000 lbs of munitions. I don't know the HF-2 missile's weight, but can cite the air-launched Harpoon at 1,160 lbs. So the AT-3's pylons are likely rated at >1,000 lb capacity.

Are these aircraft of any value in combat? Prolly not in air to air engagements, but can still perform short range close air support. The BAE Hawk 200 is a good example.

your the one that thinks the At-3 is superior not me

if the at-3 is attacking the plan then it will be meet by some kind of fighter before it even gets

its silly to assume that it can just approch and lunch its missiles

after that thereis also the hq-9 missile waiting for it!!!

so no the AT-3 willl not be able to inflict massive damage to the PLAN

Ahem! No one talked about which is superior!!!
Dude, if China, or Canada, is in Taiwan's shoes right now, what will they do?
I mean comm'on, it may not be advanced, but it works.

The HF-2 has a range of 80km and is very light.
It weights 685 kg.

PS-AT-3 is only a basic trainer, right? It does not look sleek, but bulky and not very aerodynamic from my eyes.

Dont boast here gentelmens. Air launched SSMs are tricky and deadly weapons like adeptious told you. And you cannot exept unbrakable (land based) Flanker umbrella over PRC fleet and execp it to do all the workload of carrier airwing linked via functioning datalink to the fleet units and controlled from the navy's point of view. Im not expert of how capaple chinese interarms co-operation is, but i due understandaple reasons wouldnt praise it so high that any areal thread Taiwan sends should be considered as some sort of joke.
Also, Chinese navys biggest froud still is SAM, and only trhee ships in forseeable future are armed with long range SAM, thougth we dont know much about their anti-missile capapilityes. Sthill and HQ-7 arent the top of nothc missilepoppers and even those seems to be an exeption, than rule in chinese ships. And most likely target for these planes and missiles are the landingship waves closing on Taiwanese soil. And those poor things have nothing against air thread that isent WWII era propellor planes making divebombings. Chinese missile ships (O52Cs&051Cs) cannot effectively provide unpenetrable aircover for both amphfleet and distant operating ships, (to counter Taiwanese/possible US ships) So in some theather, AT-3s have a change to triumph for succses.

So please, lets try to give a 'mature' view to others and leave the most sillyest 'those planes are crappy, cos their taiwanese' BS in to our little heads.

Thougth I wonder why not taiwanese choose AIDC for this convertion. It isent much of a intercetor, but has better range, playload and speed compared to AT-3. Supersonic is a good advantage, expecially in counternaval operations, were some sort of airthread can be expected...