ROCAF Indigenous Fighter Program

adeptitus said:

As already mentioned, there's a fear that making the IDF "too good" would mean reducing F-16 orders. The F-4 Phantom II had several good upgrade projects that were scrapped for similar reasons, including a P&W PW1120 engine upgrade "Boeing Super Phantom".

Personally, I felt that AIDC had the rug pulled under them. As soon as the F-16 sale became a reality, aircraft orders and funding were cut. The funds allocated to the C/D upgrade program was also quite small. The ROC military leadership would rather spend more $ to import proven foreign systems, than to invest in unproven domestic industry products.

The same sentiment is widespread and sometimes they import stuff that's not even suitable for local conditions. Maokong Gondola, for example, were imported from Europe without proper ventilation systems. In Europe they use them on ski slopes so you don't need air conditioning. In Taiwan it gets really hot and humid.

The IDF is not a "top of the line" fighter. It was pieced together with imported technology, and inferior in raw performance to western & Russian front line fighters. But it was an exceptional product that was born out of necessity to counter PLAAF's J-8. Compared to many other still-born aircraft projects, the IDF was fortunate that it not only flew, but was also mass produced for service.

Even if the ROCAF prefers the proven F-16 C/D, IMO AIDC deserves another order of 60-120 aircraft. The IDF platform is still useful as a fighter-trainer replacement for the AT-3.

Click to expand...

Ahhh, sounds frustrating, especially after 9 years of development and being almost complete, only to suddenly be trumpped so suddenly like that. Well gvien the era it came it, it was indeed rather lucky, over a dozen aircraft of the same era were shelved. Given ROC's preference to import equipment rather than develop themselves, is there any real hope of AIDC developing another fighter in the future? With the KMT re-realigning with its traditional views on China, there is less incentive to invest as much defending against China but also less incentive in importing foriegn military equipment. BTW the F-CK-1 was designed to counter the J-8, which turned out to be... rather mediocre. How much did the ROC know about the development of the J-8?

And do you really think the AT-3 needs to be replaced now? As an advance trainer its days are over but it looks like it may be serviceable as an intermediate trainer.

The ROC thought the J-8 would turned out to be some super MiG-21. Instead, the J-8 turned out to be a national defense supersonic interceptor. In the end, you invented a slow but very maneuverable aircraft to fight a very fast but not so maneuverable aircraft. Which doesn't serve to counter things at all. You can imagine the fight, the J-8II would just run away from its opponent, while the Ching Kuo would just turn away from the J-8II's attacks. The only kind of level playing field between the two would be beyond visual range attacks.

crobato said:

The ROC thought the J-8 would turned out to be some super MiG-21. Instead, the J-8 turned out to be a national defense supersonic interceptor. In the end, you invented a slow but very maneuverable aircraft to fight a very fast but not so maneuverable aircraft. Which doesn't serve to counter things at all. You can imagine the fight, the J-8II would just run away from its opponent, while the Ching Kuo would just turn away from the J-8II's attacks. The only kind of level playing field between the two would be beyond visual range attacks.

Click to expand...

Ah, sounds like a nightmare for the pilots! Speaking on intelligence, how much did the PLAAF know about the IDF program? The J-10 and J-13 (later cancelled) programs were already underway durin this time, did that effect development at all?

BTW sorry all my posts seem to be questions, but I'm an inquistive guy!

The PLAAF probably knew enough, as it wasn't a secret. The IDF probably sounded more impressive while in the project stage rather than in the end, where it seemed more underwhelming. But they wasn't as concerned about that as the fact that the ROCAF was also acquiring Mirage 2000-5s and F-16As.

Ironically, the ROCAF did already have a fighter that can counter the J-8II then and which they retired. That was the F-104 Starfighter.

crobato said:

The PLAAF probably knew enough, as it wasn't a secret. The IDF probably sounded more impressive while in the project stage rather than in the end, where it seemed more underwhelming. But they wasn't as concerned about that as the fact that the ROCAF was also acquiring Mirage 2000-5s and F-16As.

Ironically, the ROCAF did already have a fighter that can counter the J-8II then and which they retired. That was the F-104 Starfighter.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't think the F-104's habit of crashing would be a terribly effective counter-measure against the J-8II And if the F-104's service with Pakistan proved anything, a relatively fast and maneuverable fighter like India's MiG-21s can prove to be a very dangerous foe.

Semi-Lobster said:

I wouldn't think the F-104's habit of crashing would be a terribly effective counter-measure against the J-8II And if the F-104's service with Pakistan proved anything, a relatively fast and maneuverable fighter like India's MiG-21s can prove to be a very dangerous foe.

Click to expand...

The F-104's habit to crash (the ROCAF actually has one of the better safety records for users of this aircraft) is due to high wing loading. Late model MiG-21s are not any better on this regard and shares similar symptoms.

If an F-104 tries to slow down and tangle with a MiG-21 on a turning low altitude fight, its going to lose. But aircraft using speed to its utmost advantage can bring decisive advantages as well, just as the way the Japanese Zero got owned by faster US fighters in WWII. The same can result with the J-8II vs. the Ching Kuo. Tactics have to be used smartly.

The J-8II isn't as maneuverable as a MiG-21 or J-7, but its wing loading should be lighter than an F-104, so it may turn a little better than it. Nonetheless the F-104 can be nimble and fast because it has a light airframe and can accelerate quickly. Its will be a good fighting match against the early J-8I and J-8B.

crobato said:

The F-104's habit to crash (the ROCAF actually has one of the better safety records for users of this aircraft) is due to high wing loading. Late model MiG-21s are not any better on this regard and shares similar symptoms.

If an F-104 tries to slow down and tangle with a MiG-21 on a turning low altitude fight, its going to lose. But aircraft using speed to its utmost advantage can bring decisive advantages as well, just as the way the Japanese Zero got owned by faster US fighters in WWII. The same can result with the J-8II vs. the Ching Kuo. Tactics have to be used smartly.

The J-8II isn't as maneuverable as a MiG-21 or J-7, but its wing loading should be lighter than an F-104, so it may turn a little better than it. Nonetheless the F-104 can be nimble and fast because it has a light airframe and can accelerate quickly. Its will be a good fighting match against the early J-8I and J-8B.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised to hear about the Taiwanese F-104s fairing well, I heard things like rain and humidity (which Taiwan has A LOT of) played havoc with the F-104's avionics, good to hear they stayed safe.

As for the tactics used by the aircraft, thats is certainly in the realm of piloting and training which isn't something that can be discussed by numbers and specifications, smart tactics can trump superior technology if used correctly. The development of the Ching-Kuo was still important in defence I think. None of the many original designs were really 'interceptor like', they chose the most realistically capable one and the smaller operational range of the F-CK-1 compared to the J-8I/J-8Bs crossing the Strait should give soem advantage to the F-CK-1. Also as we discussed in the J-8 thread, the J-8 hada lot of room for improvement and the B was quickly superceded by the much more capable D which led to the H and then to the F. The old F-104 certainly did not have that sort of life left in it and it had to be replaced by something.

Well, the AT-3....... well, talk about 自强.........actually, replace the F-5s first. They are not too old and have F-20 features, but AFAIK they aren't BVR capable. If you replace them with IDFs, you are helping a lot with logistics. More missiles for Falcons and less types of parts for the maintenance crew to remember.

The problem I would see are parts availability. Not all parts of the planes are indigenous and royalties are going to be less of a problem than politics if you ask me. And I hope ROCAF stop taking in Falcons just to bump up their inventory. They seriously don't need anymore F-16s. (If they must, I guess they can cannibalize the older planes) But if you can afford to waste money on jets, you really should learn to fix your big as elephant! Their missile supply, apart from the Mirages, are dangerously low. Both the AMRAAM and TC-2s are somewhere in the 200s...maybe.

But the trouble of acquiring AMRAAMs are incentive to producing more TC-2s, which even though contains American components, should not be as much trouble. More incentive to give the IDF its due. =D

Seriously, ROCAF don't planes, they need missiles.

And personally, if I could have a warbird, the IDF tops my list. (And being an US citizen, engine procurement isn't a problem for me.)

Semi-Lobster said:

I'm talking about future procurements of more advance later block 50/52 F-16s. Rumours of the C/D project being stalled or cancelled by being overshadowed by new F-16s to supplement the older Block 20s have been going around for a while now, I just wanted to hear if there is anything new on that?

Click to expand...

I read that the legislative had agreed to the upgrade of 70 IDFs (which was the initial request) when the budget went through the committee stage. I don't know what the final result was/will be, but I doubt it will be cut on second reading as the KMT control the committees and legislative overall.

Supposedly the ROCAF were not hot on the upgrade, but with the delay in getting new F-16s they're happy with at least half the fleet being upgraded (possibly more later).

Sumdud I agree they need more missiles, but when the F-5s are all retired won't there be a bit of a hole in the fleet? Plus given China is improving its qualitative side surely it's a bad idea to rest on one's laurels. It's not like Taiwan will get the F-35 anytime soon nor perhaps anything like the F-15 or Super Hornet. If new F-16s are the only thing it will get for a while I would think it's better to press for an order now rather than get into a position where they're needed but it will take years to negotiate for the sale, let alone have them delivered.

It's not like Taiwan can't afford new missiles and some new jets.

sumdud said:

Well, the AT-3....... well, talk about 自强.........actually, replace the F-5s first. They are not too old and have F-20 features, but AFAIK they aren't BVR capable. If you replace them with IDFs, you are helping a lot with logistics. More missiles for Falcons and less types of parts for the maintenance crew to remember.

The problem I would see are parts availability. Not all parts of the planes are indigenous and royalties are going to be less of a problem than politics if you ask me. And I hope ROCAF stop taking in Falcons just to bump up their inventory. They seriously don't need anymore F-16s. (If they must, I guess they can cannibalize the older planes) But if you can afford to waste money on jets, you really should learn to fix your big as elephant! Their missile supply, apart from the Mirages, are dangerously low. Both the AMRAAM and TC-2s are somewhere in the 200s...maybe.

But the trouble of acquiring AMRAAMs are incentive to producing more TC-2s, which even though contains American components, should not be as much trouble. More incentive to give the IDF its due. =D

Seriously, ROCAF don't planes, they need missiles.

And personally, if I could have a warbird, the IDF tops my list. (And being an US citizen, engine procurement isn't a problem for me.)

Click to expand...

I read that the legislative had agreed to the upgrade of 70 IDFs (which was the initial request) when the budget went through the committee stage. I don't know what the final result was/will be, but I doubt it will be cut on second reading as the KMT control the committees and legislative overall.

Supposedly the ROCAF were not hot on the upgrade, but with the delay in getting new F-16s they're happy with at least half the fleet being upgraded (possibly more later).

Sumdud I agree they need more missiles, but when the F-5s are all retired won't there be a bit of a hole in the fleet? Plus given China is improving its qualitative side surely it's a bad idea to rest on one's laurels. It's not like Taiwan will get the F-35 anytime soon nor perhaps anything like the F-15 or Super Hornet. If new F-16s are the only thing it will get for a while I would think it's better to press for an order now rather than get into a position where they're needed but it will take years to negotiate for the sale, let alone have them delivered.

It's not like Taiwan can't afford new missiles and some new jets.

Click to expand...

Well for the AT-3, its hard to expect something like a trainer, even supersonic trainers to have BVR capabilities, most trainers are trainers first and light attack aircraft second, very few modern advanced trainer aircraft carry MRAAMs, not even ones like the Aero L-159 which is not just touted as an advance trainer but as a 'multi-role combat aircraft' or BaE's most advance Hawk 200 series do not carry such a loadout. I think what ROCAF needs right now is a refurbishment plan to upgrade their existing fleet of F-16s and work on aquiring more missiles because while the TC-2 would be easier to aquire, I'm not sure the slightly larger F-16 fleet is compatible with it while on the otherhand of course one can argue that the AIM-120 can't be used for the F-CK-1. Maybe in addition to giving the F-CK-1 TC-2A support there will be AIM-120 support, but who knows.

Also its good to hear that upgrades are going full steam ahead, the F-CK-1 fleet is simply too large to ignore and its performance issues are glaring to ignore. As for replacing the F-5, currently IIRC the only F-5s still operating are from Peace Tiger 6 which was 60 aircraft. Ideally bolstering their Mirage fleet and replacing a single engine fighter with a single engine fighter would have been ideal and cost effective especially given the mediumish size of the tender, of course the only problem though is that Dassault does not make the Mirage 2000-5 anymore and everybody seems to be avoiding the Rafale like the plague. Taiwan has a history of having issues with license agreements so I doubt the Eurofighter is hardly viable. The F-CK-1 production has ended and would be difficult to reopen most likely but now would be the best time while the C/D upgrades are going on. Since reducing the size of the ROCAF is ridiculously unlikely, the only real alternative, politically speaking (Russian MiG-35s and Su-30Ks are out of the question logistically and politically), is the F-16 as the likelyhood of an aircraft like the F-15 or F-18 entering service as you said Mr. T, is unlikely. France is still an option of course, especially given the cool relations between Beijing and Paris right now and France's desperateness to finally export the Rafale somewhere but in all likelyhood the ROCAF is banking on the F-16 with newly built F-CK-1 C/Ds being a distant second.