Re: Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft
Is there any A-10 equivalent Chinese aircraft?
Bring back production of the A-10. A-10X?
Is there any A-10 equivalent Chinese aircraft?
Low-cost, muti-role aircraft for small militaries
- Thread starter Miragedriver
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Re: Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft
I would mention the Scailed composite Ares Concept craft.
A10C just entered service It's doubtful we will see any expansion to the A10 series other then the possible A-10PCAS ( a unmanned A10) any time soon. IT's not cheap it is durable though it can't take off from a dirt field.
the better Russian mention would have been SU25 frogfoot.
I would mention the Scailed composite Ares Concept craft.
A10C just entered service It's doubtful we will see any expansion to the A10 series other then the possible A-10PCAS ( a unmanned A10) any time soon. IT's not cheap it is durable though it can't take off from a dirt field.
the better Russian mention would have been SU25 frogfoot.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Re: Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft
I think the future of CAS lies with UCAVs and dedicated attack helicopters. UCAVs may not necessarily be cheaper to buy than some of the manned turboprop options currently on the market, but they are truly expendable and can be produced in vast numbers.
I do see a gap in the market for a turbofan powered gun platform to help cut down on reaction time and also provide options other than expensive ATGMs for low value targets and for fire suppression.
I think the future of CAS lies with UCAVs and dedicated attack helicopters. UCAVs may not necessarily be cheaper to buy than some of the manned turboprop options currently on the market, but they are truly expendable and can be produced in vast numbers.
I do see a gap in the market for a turbofan powered gun platform to help cut down on reaction time and also provide options other than expensive ATGMs for low value targets and for fire suppression.
Re: Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft
Do the current gunships counts as battlefield attack aircraft?
They may not cheap per unit, but I thought they can take-off from rough strips and have decent loiter time, and one gunship can probably perform the work of multiple smaller attack crafts.
Do the current gunships counts as battlefield attack aircraft?
They may not cheap per unit, but I thought they can take-off from rough strips and have decent loiter time, and one gunship can probably perform the work of multiple smaller attack crafts.
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?
Mirage
In my opinion going for the JF-17 has advantages and disadvantages.
In Mexico they have decided to get US and European companies giving expertise and training.
While domestic suppliers get the skills to work with big companies.
In Brazil they went for design and coperate with the West while maintaining contacts with Russia and other nations.
If you go for JF-17 Argentina gets a very good tech transfer, but it will isolate it.
Argentina is one of the G20 albeit one of the smaller nations and smaller econonomies
In order to succeed you will need Brazil to allow argentina get in the Embraer Programs and Russia to get close to South america.
China will also will need to become a regular tech transferer to Argetina`s aerospace.
At the end you will need to balance the west and east influences.
If the west allows a re-approchment and yields to Argentina`s demands, you might get a very good deal.
But if China demands more and more money, your limited military budget will lead to limited benefit.
India and China pay alot to Russia for tech, but i doubt Argentina can do it.
In that sense to be honest i think you are making a mistake, military aircraft can only be justified when you have a military budget to support it.
In that sense i think in Mexico they have a more practical view, there is no investment in our arm forces but they want to export, supply and we are already designing jet engine parts fo ITP or G&E and we supply engine parts for Pratt & whitney and Rolls Royce via Frisa.
Any way we are not policy makers but simple fans commenting the news
Regards
Mirage
In my opinion going for the JF-17 has advantages and disadvantages.
In Mexico they have decided to get US and European companies giving expertise and training.
While domestic suppliers get the skills to work with big companies.
In Brazil they went for design and coperate with the West while maintaining contacts with Russia and other nations.
If you go for JF-17 Argentina gets a very good tech transfer, but it will isolate it.
Argentina is one of the G20 albeit one of the smaller nations and smaller econonomies
In order to succeed you will need Brazil to allow argentina get in the Embraer Programs and Russia to get close to South america.
China will also will need to become a regular tech transferer to Argetina`s aerospace.
At the end you will need to balance the west and east influences.
If the west allows a re-approchment and yields to Argentina`s demands, you might get a very good deal.
But if China demands more and more money, your limited military budget will lead to limited benefit.
India and China pay alot to Russia for tech, but i doubt Argentina can do it.
In that sense to be honest i think you are making a mistake, military aircraft can only be justified when you have a military budget to support it.
In that sense i think in Mexico they have a more practical view, there is no investment in our arm forces but they want to export, supply and we are already designing jet engine parts fo ITP or G&E and we supply engine parts for Pratt & whitney and Rolls Royce via Frisa.
Any way we are not policy makers but simple fans commenting the news
Regards
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?
I am in complete agreement. You put in words what I was unable to express. As we say in Spanish “Hay algo de esto que no me cierra.” A natural intuition that this is not a good deal.
I am in complete agreement. You put in words what I was unable to express. As we say in Spanish “Hay algo de esto que no me cierra.” A natural intuition that this is not a good deal.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Re: Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft
The issue with Dedicated Attack helos is as i pointed out range, speed and loiter. A EMB 314 Super Tucano has a combat range of 300 nmi and a top speed of 319 knots A AH64D has a range of 257Nmi and a top speed of 158 knots. Until Compound helicopters are accepted as replacements for the current state of the art Attack helicopter family's that speed edge is going to remain. For some nations and mission needs a Rotary wing attacker is just not the best answer. A Super Tucano has a endurance of almost 9 hours of flight time on mission AH64D 2.5 hours.
I don't view it as one or the other.
Both in my opinion form part of a triad CAS. the top is the fighter Jet then you have the light to medium attackers and then the Attack helicopters. You can then add in fourth tier for this being craft like the AC130 but Only the US has that platform now. Sure their are rumors of a Y8 attack variant and the C27/G222 as well as CN295 and any number of Russian aircraft have the potential to be fitted with cannons and missiles but they arn't used in that mode.
at this point in time we are seeing a rise in development of smaller aimed/smart missiles like the AGM-176 Griffin and DAGR systems these are sub ATGM weapons for soft targets. In the west the light fighter cannon of the past seem to be shifting to medium weight as light multi role like the F16 and it's 20mm give way to the F35 and it's 25mm. Well heavy cannon's like the AC130 drop the 40mm, 105mm and multi barrel 30mm for singular 30mm cannons and missiles.
It's my opinion that for first line armed forces aircraft like these are stop gap machines until the next generation of Compound helicopter moves from proof of concept into battle deployed Attack machines and closes the speed and endurance gaps. Then most will form a triad force with Compound AH and scout types, multirole fighters like the F35 and Transport attackers like Harvest Hawk C130J's
Second line forces will buy what AH's and multirole jets they can, but fill up on COIN types particularly the Super Tacano (its selling well) using them as the attack work horse for boarder patrol and counter insurgent strike.
The issue with Dedicated Attack helos is as i pointed out range, speed and loiter. A EMB 314 Super Tucano has a combat range of 300 nmi and a top speed of 319 knots A AH64D has a range of 257Nmi and a top speed of 158 knots. Until Compound helicopters are accepted as replacements for the current state of the art Attack helicopter family's that speed edge is going to remain. For some nations and mission needs a Rotary wing attacker is just not the best answer. A Super Tucano has a endurance of almost 9 hours of flight time on mission AH64D 2.5 hours.
I don't view it as one or the other.
Both in my opinion form part of a triad CAS. the top is the fighter Jet then you have the light to medium attackers and then the Attack helicopters. You can then add in fourth tier for this being craft like the AC130 but Only the US has that platform now. Sure their are rumors of a Y8 attack variant and the C27/G222 as well as CN295 and any number of Russian aircraft have the potential to be fitted with cannons and missiles but they arn't used in that mode.
at this point in time we are seeing a rise in development of smaller aimed/smart missiles like the AGM-176 Griffin and DAGR systems these are sub ATGM weapons for soft targets. In the west the light fighter cannon of the past seem to be shifting to medium weight as light multi role like the F16 and it's 20mm give way to the F35 and it's 25mm. Well heavy cannon's like the AC130 drop the 40mm, 105mm and multi barrel 30mm for singular 30mm cannons and missiles.
It's my opinion that for first line armed forces aircraft like these are stop gap machines until the next generation of Compound helicopter moves from proof of concept into battle deployed Attack machines and closes the speed and endurance gaps. Then most will form a triad force with Compound AH and scout types, multirole fighters like the F35 and Transport attackers like Harvest Hawk C130J's
Second line forces will buy what AH's and multirole jets they can, but fill up on COIN types particularly the Super Tacano (its selling well) using them as the attack work horse for boarder patrol and counter insurgent strike.
Last edited:
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?
Below is a (translated) article that appeared in Interdefensa last week:
Conical of an Argentine JF-17
By M. R. Cimino
According to the prestigious English publication Jane’s, Argentina’s aircraft factory (FAdeA) has started official talks with the Chinese government in view of co-producing FC-1/JF-17 combat aircraft in the main factory in Córdoba. FadeA in just beginning and as expected the highlight is the possible transfer of technology. However, it is well known that China at best will only allow a local assembly.
Editor’s opinion
As a joke in bad taste, this news comes to us here at Interdefense without the slightest doubt, however we had some signs that poured in from time to time. Obviously with the newspaper article this past Monday, anyone can now verify it.
If we go back to the 84th Anniversary of the FAdeA (Oct 16, 2011). The CEO revealed his dream of a Pulqui III aircraft. There was a silent nod between the FAdeA CEO and the Chinese representative, that our photographer saw, but did not understand. Assuming some friendliness or willingness to hopefully talk about the J-10. Later, during the second Raul Argarañaz (the FAdeA CEO ) trip to China brought more enthusiastic new about the J-10. However this seemed to be diluted in the vague dream of Argentina green year (good economic year).
In each of our visits to the EAM and FAdeA respectively, we never stopped hearing the same comment, "Someday the Pulqui III" and even a mischievous smile, he would leave before any questions could be answered. A few weeks ago we all learned from the third visit to China was, "We did really well in China." It was also added that member of the delegation included Eng. Nicolás Topa. Topa, who is recognized as the authoritative word in Argentina aircraft manufacturing. The tour began by China, followed by Russia, Ukraine and then as final destination the Paris Air Show 2013 in France.
In the corresponding notes FAdeA at Le Bourget 2013, sneaked the term Pulqui III. Many Argentines were horrified as to what the aviation world think about our audacity and/or ignorance (at independently designing and building a new aircraft). Until today, the announcement of official talks between China and FAdeA for co-producing the JF-17 has been like a bucket of cold water.
Below is a (translated) article that appeared in Interdefensa last week:
Conical of an Argentine JF-17
By M. R. Cimino
According to the prestigious English publication Jane’s, Argentina’s aircraft factory (FAdeA) has started official talks with the Chinese government in view of co-producing FC-1/JF-17 combat aircraft in the main factory in Córdoba. FadeA in just beginning and as expected the highlight is the possible transfer of technology. However, it is well known that China at best will only allow a local assembly.
Editor’s opinion
As a joke in bad taste, this news comes to us here at Interdefense without the slightest doubt, however we had some signs that poured in from time to time. Obviously with the newspaper article this past Monday, anyone can now verify it.
If we go back to the 84th Anniversary of the FAdeA (Oct 16, 2011). The CEO revealed his dream of a Pulqui III aircraft. There was a silent nod between the FAdeA CEO and the Chinese representative, that our photographer saw, but did not understand. Assuming some friendliness or willingness to hopefully talk about the J-10. Later, during the second Raul Argarañaz (the FAdeA CEO ) trip to China brought more enthusiastic new about the J-10. However this seemed to be diluted in the vague dream of Argentina green year (good economic year).
In each of our visits to the EAM and FAdeA respectively, we never stopped hearing the same comment, "Someday the Pulqui III" and even a mischievous smile, he would leave before any questions could be answered. A few weeks ago we all learned from the third visit to China was, "We did really well in China." It was also added that member of the delegation included Eng. Nicolás Topa. Topa, who is recognized as the authoritative word in Argentina aircraft manufacturing. The tour began by China, followed by Russia, Ukraine and then as final destination the Paris Air Show 2013 in France.
In the corresponding notes FAdeA at Le Bourget 2013, sneaked the term Pulqui III. Many Argentines were horrified as to what the aviation world think about our audacity and/or ignorance (at independently designing and building a new aircraft). Until today, the announcement of official talks between China and FAdeA for co-producing the JF-17 has been like a bucket of cold water.
Last edited:
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?
Just to add insult to injury. Total air-to-air missile count for the FAA is 40 AIM-9L, 30 AIM-9M and 50 R-550 Magic 1. Nothing in the BVR arena.
Additionally 14 IAI Daggers where decommissioned in late December 2012. This leaves in service:
(03) Mirage IIIEA
(02) Mirage IIIDA
(07) Finger IIIB (Mirage 5 upgrade)
(02) Dagger Trainers
(01) M-5 Mara
Also there are only 23 A-4AR serviceable (5 of these are in storage)
Just to add insult to injury. Total air-to-air missile count for the FAA is 40 AIM-9L, 30 AIM-9M and 50 R-550 Magic 1. Nothing in the BVR arena.
Additionally 14 IAI Daggers where decommissioned in late December 2012. This leaves in service:
(03) Mirage IIIEA
(02) Mirage IIIDA
(07) Finger IIIB (Mirage 5 upgrade)
(02) Dagger Trainers
(01) M-5 Mara
Also there are only 23 A-4AR serviceable (5 of these are in storage)
Last edited:
Kurt
Junior Member
Re: New interceptors for the Argentine Air Force?
Letting all the opinions sink in, a Chinese fighter for Argentina is perhaps no bad idea. A bad idea would be to become an exclusive customer of Chinese weapons.
The deal can be spiced with a wider range of contracts for exports Argentina has to offer that are in demand on the Chinese market and vice versa.
This UK blog has a good article on the subject.
The Argentine military has major problems after their loss of gouvernment control, unlike Chile that was almost in the same situation. Why is that so?
China also offers the chance to have a mutual carrier cooperation with Brazil. Longterm Argentina will get an LPD or a light carrier again. Short term they have to talk about the reasons for all that hate against their officers. After the Falklands Argentine officers were allowed to keep their sidearm to avoid lynching!
might be food for thought. In Latin America you could replace attack helicopters with COIN aircrafts and give them some missiles against fighters. A cheap solution that can fly the long distances with little infrastructure while having a few capable interceptors as the high component of the aircraft mix with aerial refuelling.
Letting all the opinions sink in, a Chinese fighter for Argentina is perhaps no bad idea. A bad idea would be to become an exclusive customer of Chinese weapons.
The deal can be spiced with a wider range of contracts for exports Argentina has to offer that are in demand on the Chinese market and vice versa.
This UK blog has a good article on the subject.
The Argentine military has major problems after their loss of gouvernment control, unlike Chile that was almost in the same situation. Why is that so?
China also offers the chance to have a mutual carrier cooperation with Brazil. Longterm Argentina will get an LPD or a light carrier again. Short term they have to talk about the reasons for all that hate against their officers. After the Falklands Argentine officers were allowed to keep their sidearm to avoid lynching!
might be food for thought. In Latin America you could replace attack helicopters with COIN aircrafts and give them some missiles against fighters. A cheap solution that can fly the long distances with little infrastructure while having a few capable interceptors as the high component of the aircraft mix with aerial refuelling.