China can and will achieve total air superiority over Taiwan

tphuang said:

you sound a little too desperate right now.

Click to expand...

Why, because I challenged a blanket statement you made? Come on, don't throw silly comments like that around.

If you say that the political factor is a little different and that it will take than 20 years from the time that F-35 first fly to the time that Taiwan will get an operational squadron of F-35 like what happened with F-16.

Click to expand...

Sorry I'm not sure what you're saying there.

But you were insisting that Taiwan can somehow get F-35 all through next decade when F-35A hasn't even flied yet.

Click to expand...

And you were insisting that China would have an operational stealth jet before Taiwan would have the F-35, even though we have no idea how developed the former it is, nor precisely what capabilities it will have.

If Taiwan were to get the F-35 next decade it would probably be relatively late in the 2010s. I have never said that it will get them next decade. But that doesn't mean it couldn't when we don't know the production schedules, nor that China will certainly have loads of "stealth fighters" by the time it does get the F-35.

Do you honestly believe that Taiwan will get F-35 before ABAC and other JSF partners?

Click to expand...

Where did I say I did?

Taiwan could get them early if the US sold some on of its own initial production quota, like the UK is doing for Saudia Arabia with the Typhoon. Of course that would mean the US would have to be very concerned over the military situation across the Straits and want to remedy it as quickly as possible - and we've no idea what things will be like next decade.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree over this issue, rather than side-track the discussion further. Quibbling over a couple of years isn't worth it.

SampanViking said:

The PRC is now firmly embedded in the Technological world which means the ROC will enevitably lose any theoretical conflict. All sides know this, which is why Tiawan is not prepared to commit to the historic sales deals it has already provisionally agreed.

Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with the hold-up of the sales. It was partly party politics and partly an issue of cost. Things are a little different now, which is why the P-3C Orion purchase is moving ahead. If things were as you say there are, Taiwan would have never bought the Kidds.

It is however a serious mistake to believe that because China has not developed US style global reach, that somehow their capabilities are deficient.

Click to expand...

Excuse me, you're saying China has a global reach like the US? That is obviously not true. Maybe you didn't mean that, but that's sort of what you're implying.

Oh Fu! Fu! Fu!

That has nothing to do with the hold-up of the sales. It was partly party politics and partly an issue of cost

Click to expand...

Yes, because if the acquisition makes no real difference to any potential outcome, why bother spending money that could be used better elsewhere?

Excuse me, you're saying China has a global reach like the US?

Click to expand...

No I said; as you in fact quoted me saying,

China has not developed US style global reach

Click to expand...

please give your special attention to the word just after has but before developed.

My full point was very plainly laid out and clear, so I suggest you spend less time listening to your collection of the complete speches of Tony Blair as real people tend to be quite straitforward, say what they mean and mean what they say.

SampanViking said:

Oh Fu! Fu! Fu!

Click to expand...

Sampan you're scaring me. Whatever turns you on, just keep it secret, right?

Yes, because if the acquisition makes no real difference to any potential outcome, why bother spending money that could be used better elsewhere?

Click to expand...

Erm, so why is the P-3C deal progressing? And why were the Kidds bought? Obviously politicians in both the Pan-Blue and Green camps think they would make a difference. And if China thought the sales were pointless, they wouldn't make such a fuss and let Taiwan waste money on something that wouldn't stop it from taking over.

No I said; as you in fact quoted me saying, please give your special attention to the word just after has but before developed.

Click to expand...

Sorry I misread your comment.

so I suggest you spend less time listening to your collection of the complete speches of Tony Blair

Click to expand...

Sampan that is the lamest attempt by you at a joke ever, given that whenever I've mentioned British politics I've said I dislike Blair and the Labour Party. Surely you could have thought up something about Dave Cameron or Ming Campbell - at least then you would have had a chance of connecting!

FuManChu said:

Why, because I challenged a blanket statement you made? Come on, don't throw silly comments like that around.

Click to expand...

nah, it's all about the tone of your voice. You gotta relax. And please, don't call me huang, that's not my name

Sorry I'm not sure what you're saying there.

Click to expand...

it took 20+ years from the first flight of F-16 to when it became an operational squadron in Taiwan. If we apply that to F-35, Taiwan would not get it until around 2030 and would not sign a contract until 2025.

And you were insisting that China would have an operational stealth jet before Taiwan would have the F-35, even though we have no idea how developed the former it is, nor precisely what capabilities it will have.

If Taiwan were to get the F-35 next decade it would probably be relatively late in the 2010s. I have never said that it will get them next decade. But that doesn't mean it couldn't when we don't know the production schedules, nor that China will certainly have loads of "stealth fighters" by the time it does get the F-35.

Click to expand...

Any stealth fighter would be very capable. As for when it's coming out. I always thought that 2016 is a good time, since that's when China's next generation engine WS-15 is expected to be certified.
What does it matter if you know the production schedule? The only thing that matters is when you are going to get it. Considering how popular F-35 will be, we can expect a huge backlog. Taiwan should've approved that large arms package, so that it at least would have obtained some block 50+. And even that has a huge backlog.

Where did I say I did?

Taiwan could get them early if the US sold some on of its own initial production quota, like the UK is doing for Saudia Arabia with the Typhoon. Of course that would mean the US would have to be very concerned over the military situation across the Straits and want to remedy it as quickly as possible - and we've no idea what things will be like next decade.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree over this issue, rather than side-track the discussion further. Quibbling over a couple of years isn't worth it.

Click to expand...

now that I see your final sentence, I will just stop my reply then.

It's misleading to use F-16 Block 20 historical timetable for F-35. Everyone knows US cooperated with PRC in the 1980s to counter Soviet Union, therefore no F-16 sales until 1989 Tian An Men incident and the collapse of Soviet Union. Taiwan's F-5 acquisition timeline did not decide F-16 timeline, why should F-16 timetable decide anything about F-35?

You don't see anyone used Soviet exported MiG-17 for prediction for Chinese Flanker purchase, for the exactly the same reason. No one would use J-8's timeline for PLA's next generation stealth fighter either.

If you want to play the timeline game, let's look at F-15 and its replacement F-22. F-15 achieved IOC in 1975, ATF requirements were formed in 1981, and F-22 achieved IOC in 2005. There is 20~30 years between the IOC. So if J-10's IOC is 2002~2003, add 30 years is 2032. Doesn't look so good now does it?

I highly doubt ROCAF would get F-35 around 2015. But it seems like there is plenty of "desperation" for everyone here. I don't see the same standard being rigorously applied to both sides.

I seemed to have already ended the debate with Fumanchu. Not sure why you need to bring up an argument that's already finished. So, I will just stop here.

I also don't understand why people are trying to put a spin on PLA's PGM cost. It's a first try, why should it have the same level of cost effectiveness as US PGM? Besides, in a Taiwan Strait war it's not about PLAAF's PGM versus USAF's PGM. It's about PLAAF PGM against ROCAF / USAF defense, and PLA defense against PGM attacks.

Introduction of PLA's PGM is a very big, exciting news. But the most interesting issue following the PGM appearance itself, is the future development and countermeasures. That's the next level we need to look at

You two may decide to drop it, but I see no reason why I cannot remind other forum readers about the critical aspects.

Not trying to stir up negative feelings, just saying things as it is.

cabbageman said:

I also don't understand why people are trying to put a spin on PLA's PGM cost. It's a first try, why should it have the same level of cost effectiveness as US PGM? Besides, in a Taiwan Strait war it's not about PLAAF's PGM versus USAF's PGM. It's about PLAAF PGM against ROCAF / USAF defense, and PLA defense against PGM attacks.

Introduction of PLA's PGM is a very big, exciting news. But the most interesting issue following the PGM appearance itself, is the future development and countermeasures. That's the next level we need to look at

Click to expand...

I'm simply trying to explain to you the PLAAF procurement practices and export policies. JF-17 and L-15 makers can make as much claim about how much their aircraft will cost to the outside world, plaaf will still get them at much lower price. Same with LS-6

You two may decide to drop it, but I see no reason why I cannot remind other forum readers about the critical aspects.

Not trying to stir up negative feelings, just saying things as it is.

Click to expand...

was it really that important that you need to dig up a dead issue?

cabbageman said:

I also don't understand why people are trying to put a spin on PLA's PGM cost. It's a first try, why should it have the same level of cost effectiveness as US PGM? Besides, in a Taiwan Strait war it's not about PLAAF's PGM versus USAF's PGM. It's about PLAAF PGM against ROCAF / USAF defense, and PLA defense against PGM attacks.

Introduction of PLA's PGM is a very big, exciting news. But the most interesting issue following the PGM appearance itself, is the future development and countermeasures. That's the next level we need to look at

Click to expand...

No on is putting a spin about its capabilities. It's expected not to have the accuracy. Jamming isn't something I consider to be much of an issue because you have to detect these bombs early to activate a jammer, take the jammer airborne to be truly effective against such bombs and even if you did jam it, it does not stop the primary INS system. I don't expect the Beidou to match US GPS in accuracy, but it is the accuracy of the INS system alone that interests me most because that has a lot of repurcussions in other missile systems as well.

However, the cost does indeed needed to be clear---its not production cost. The context of the mention, question and answer is clearly how much they can expect to sell the product to export markets. Getting a handle of the true costs of the weapon also gives you an indication how much the PLAAF can expect to field them.

From the tone of the answer, it seems to me the interviewee knows the export selling cost of the FT-1, which is the competing product, and it's definitely lower than the LS-6, but the LS-6 can justify itself with better range and accuracy.

Crobato said it well. Cost is an important factor to determining how well fielded a weapon can be - for the LS-6 to be the JDAM equivalent to the PLAAF it must cost less than the JDAM. Tphuang has however made a valid point in that I failed to consider - they do not cite domestic prices. I still do think that at US$80k it would be indicative that its production cost is still likely to be higher than the JDAM.

That said, now that I looked deeper into the other weapons that China revealed, I think the FT-1 is a closer equivalent to the JDAM. The FT-1 is already fielded in the PLAAF, is it?