Taiwan´s ROCAF wants to buy 66 F-16C/D Block 52

The_Zergling

Junior Member
if you don't consider precision strike munitions "offensive", I don't know what the hell you do consider as such.

Well it's very vague. I would expect "offensive" munitions like Harpoons and LGBs to be used against a Chinese Amphibious invasion force.

My definition of offensive weapons would be ballistic missiles like those that China has aimed at Taiwan. Of course it's not like Taiwan has restrictions against getting those, like Japan would, but it is still causing controversy within Taiwan about whether or not getting cruise missiles is really that good of an idea.

To me, military equipment (fighters, cruisers) crossing the straight is fair game, and weapons used against them to me would be considered defensive. This includes AMRAAMs, Harpoons, Mavericks, LGBs... because even though they technically can be used against targets on mainland China, it's highly unlikely considering the limited range of the F-16.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
if you don't consider precision strike munitions "offensive", I don't know what the hell you do consider as such.

Well it's very vague. I would expect "offensive" munitions like Harpoons and LGBs to be used against a Chinese Amphibious invasion force.

If we're talking about US munition exports, you can use the quantity as an indicator. Missiles such as AIM-9, AIM-7, AGM-65, & AM-114's are considered defensive munitions and sold by the hundreds.

Long-range weapons such Tomahawk cruise missiles are considered offensive munitions, and almost never exported outside of close NATO allies. S. Korea might be the first and only exception to this rule.

And then there's in "in-between" category, where you find Harpoon, SM-1/SM-2, AIM-120, and LGBs. These are exported in limited quantities. In case of ship-board weapons, just enough to outfit the ship, with few or no spares.

If we were to compare the US munitions export to other countries, Sweden has a stricter export policy, vs the French is more lax.
 

Violet Oboe

Junior Member
Actually the US has steadily optimized her weapons export policy with the pivotal aim of maximizing indirect influence and eventually direct control over the strategic options of the respective recipient country. Accordingly the separation between ´offensive´ and ´defensive´ weapons is not determined only by technical definitions but rather in a broader political way which takes US interests foremost into account.

South Korea´s F-15K deal was indeed influenced by the assumption that after buying the 40 jets from Boeing Seoul would also get a deal about the much desired cruise missiles. Of course the delicate relationship that exists between Japan and ROK gives the US the optimal chance to apply her classic ´divide et impera´ strategy which will inevitably entangle both Tokyo and Seoul in a web of rivalry and mistrust which only Washington as the ´indispensable supplier of security in east asia´ will be able to disentangle albeit with a major profit for her own interests.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
The Koreans have made a lot of advances in area of consumer electronics. Samsung is really kicking Sony's butt. However I think Japan is still ahead (or Korea) in advanced technical and industrial capability.

The only reason why Japanese ships aren't equipped with cruise missiles, is because of policy. If they wanted them, I have little doubt that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries can build them. Maybe not up to Tomahawk's specs and range, but at least on par with European products (MBDA Storm Shadow).

It's like if Japan wanted nuclear weapons, they can prolly build it in 6 months.

So if S. Korea and Japan really gets into an arms race, and Japan were to get serious about it, I think the S. Koreans are going to get short end of the stick. This would also not benefit the PRC, as the Japanese traditionally have a "crush crush" mentality with respect to military rivals, as opposed to China's tribute-bribery system with its neighbors.

=========

On side note, has anyone noticed that those little Gulf States like UAE and Baharin seem to have very little arms export (import) restrictions from US and EU? UAE got the latest F-16 block 60's and even European cruise missiles.
 
Last edited:

Violet Oboe

Junior Member
@dear adeptitus:
The Emirates military consists mainly of the Abu Dhabi and (somewhat smaller) the Dubayy armies. Both have a seperate structure and they have been reliant on foreign contractors for almost everything. During the early days of the UAE (founded in 1971) in the 70´s and 80´s the bulk of personnel in the army were pakistani and in the mid eighties more than 30000 pakistani soldiers were stationed in Abu Dhabi before they got cold feet (apparently also the US was uncomfortable with such a substantial presence) about Pakistans president Zia ul Haq´s regional ambitions and these troops were withdrawn in 1987 (interestingly before the Iraq-Iran war ended). After this period the emirati military consisted of western (US, UK, France) and some arab (mainly egyptian) contractors although some high profile positions like pilots and commanders are filled with emirati nationals (who also sometimes are not born there too!).

There is no offense against emiratis intended (if someone from Abu Dhabi or Dubayy reads our discussion please join us with your knowledge!) but I certainly assume that the UAE will not be able to use their super modern block 60 F-16 and their Mirage 2000-9 in a real military operation without direct involvement of american and french contractors on the ground and possibly in the air. Additionally the airforces of UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwayt are closely integrated with CENTCOM command structures so that they in reality form a kind of auxilliary USAF in the middle east.
 
Last edited:

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
Back on the topic of Taiwanese arms purchases, it is obvious that the China will always have an edge of Taiwan in the military balance. However, with just a few improvements (an adequate amount of AMRAAMs is the main one, another I can think of is a PAC-3 order and delivery) I think that Taiwan has a real chance of defeating a Chinese amphibious assault. A big part of this is the fact that Taiwan has a strikingly good numbers balance with the PLAAF (90 to 100 J-11s, around 100 Su-30 MKKs, 300 J-8IIs) to the ROCAFs 300-400 airplanes. Besides, the ROC would have the advantage of defending-longer time in the air, SAM and AAA defences. So yes, Totoro is right when he says air supremacy is critical to Taiwan's defence. All I was saying is that China's advantage is only going to grow in all areas, and since air combat is the most technologically advanced and expensive area of military operations, Taiwan will be at the greatest disadvantage there, and thus might want to explore other options.

I agree with Zergling's idea of offensive weapons. A Harpoon missle would be considered a defensive weapon for Taiwan because it would be used against an incoming Chinese fleet.
 
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
However, with just a few improvements (an adequate amount of AMRAAMs is the main one, another I can think of is a PAC-3 order and delivery) I think that Taiwan has a real chance of defeating a Chinese amphibious assault.

It's worth noting that although new PAC-3 won't be bought for at least another year, the government is hoping to upgrade the existing batteries to PAC-3 standard. Obviously that would provide enhanced defence in the meanwhile.

I agree with Zergling's idea of offensive weapons. A Harpoon missle would be considered a defensive weapon for Taiwan because it would be used against an incoming Chinese fleet.

Indeed. Taiwan's weapons won't be used unless it is attacked first. There is the possibility that there might be a pre-emptive strike using something like the HF-IIE, but that would only be if it was blatantly obvious an invasion was en-route.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
I saw these posts from AFM and they're copied from a Taiwan forum board. Quite interesting to mention that Taiwan doesn't have a lot of TC-2s either.

Jimbo 於: 2005/2/23, 06:18 NO: 1104479567#r96

TC-2 seeker is the Motorola design used by Raytheon in the failed bid for the initial AIM-120 contract, which was won by Hughes. The ECCM on TC-2 is worst than AIM-120, but for trailing crossing targets the TC2 seeker is extremely good, better than AIM-120.

Overall, TC-2 is just as good as AIM-120, which incidentally put Taiwan in a very selective club of active radar "fire and forget" AAM producing country. The failure of TC-2 is not the failure of the design, but the failure of the short sightedness of Taiwanese!

What Taiwan did wrong was that your country have no experience with large scale arms acquisition program, and to maintain the level of your military equipment readiness with follow up orders. Your country's bitter prolong haggling with the defense contractor over prices and changing the terms of the contract mid-stream, has left you with only around 200 seeker heads for the TC-2s. Your country could've ordered more, or sign a long term repeat follow up contracts that will guaranteed your country a steady supply of TC-2 seeker heads. But in the end, the batch of 200 was too small for Raytheon to continue, they have stop producing the seekers for TC-2s.

Taiwan Air Force is left with the unworkable number of 200, that's it!

The F-CK-1 is designed to carry 2 TC-2s in belly mounts. With around 130 airframes, Taiwan Air Force can't even carry the designed 2 TC-2s per aircraft! Both F-CK-1 and TC-2 are failures, both programs are doomed by the short sightness of the Taiwan government! Your government's constant penny pinching, led to a situation where they are penny wise but dollar stupid. The small numbers of both items ordered increased cost dramatically instead of saving money, AIDC was saddled with large up front cost of starting F-CK-1 production line, just to end it after 130 airframes. The huge start up cost was pass to each individual airframes, that each bare fly away unit costing $30 million. This is a very expansive way of buying a F-16 style fighter!

Instead of preserving the F-CK-1 production line to recoup the $10 billion start up cost, your country abandoned the production line. The production line could've been saved with an advance trainer based on the IDF to replace the AT-3, similar to South Korea's T-50 "Golden Eagle" with a single F404 engine, loosing your country's chance to acquire the F404 engine. Now, you can't even build any replacement F-CK-1s if you want to, or to upgrade the F-CK-1 to the proposed ADF variant.

Just imagine, your country could have a fighter (ADF) that's powered by two F404, placing it in the F-18 class, with similar range and performance capable of striking inland targets in China.

In 2003, your country spend $7,611.7 million on military, where did all that money went? You should be concerned, because your country have a military that couldn't fight.

----------

Jimbo 於: 2005/2/24, 02:24 NO: 1104479567#r104

I felt that the IDF program could have been a lot better, the engine designed should have been rated at a minimum 7,000 lb st and 10,000 lb afterburning, the ITEC engine came short on both counts. With the above engine requirement, you can replace both J85s on the F-5E with one new engine. The radar and cockpit development should have been parallel with both the new aircraft and upgrading the F-5E in mind, this way you would have two air frames launching the TC-2 missile. In effect, the money spend and the development on the IDF/TC-2 program could have been spread over the upgrading the F-5E to F-5G/F-20 standard. Even with the limited number of IDFs built, the development cost would saved by upgrading the F-5Es. The production line for IDF could be used to rebuild F-5Es to F-5G/F-20s. In the end, Taiwan would have 130 IDFs, and at least 100 F-5G/F-20s. Each aircraft would have a requirement for 4 TC-2s, the total TC-2 manufactured would be at least 920 just for the fighters. Then, there are the navalized version to replace the totally ineffective Sea Chaparral and air defense version to replace both the Chaparral and Skyguard/Sparrow. The combined total for TC-2 manufactured could be over 2000~3000, given enough foresight and political will.

What's done in the past is done, therefore how much lamenting is of no use.

Moving on...

Taiwan Air Force is faced with 4 adversaries, J-10, J-11, FC-1, and Su-30 MMK.

J-7 and Q-5 does not have the range to operate effectively over Taiwanese air space, J-8, JH-7 has the range but can be easily countered.

J-10 and FC-1 are broadly equivalent to F-16 Block 20 and IDF, however, they are only the verge been introduced.

Therefore, the only effective threat facing Taiwan right now are the J-11 and Su-30MMKs. In 2005, China will have 133 J-11s and 76 Su-30s, a combined total of 209 Sukhois facing 330 total frontline Taiwanese fighters. The lost ratio between Taiwanese fighters and Sukhois are 1.6~1.7 to 1, the numbers game dictates that Taiwan will need 334 and 355 Taiwanese fighters. Notice both numbers are higher than the combined total Taiwanese frontline fighter right now, without throwing in J-10 and FC-1. The lost ratio between J-10 and FC-1 to Taiwanese fighters are .7~.8 to 1.

As of right now, your country's air force don't have enough frontline fighters to counter the J-11/Su-30 MMK threat. If Chicom introduces J-10 and FC-1 in great numbers, your country's air force will certainly be overwhelmed.

The situation is critical right now!

----------

Jimbo 於: 2005/2/24, 14:05 NO: 1104479567#r109

Yes, you should be pissed off, given Taiwan Air Force's current state of crisis. Your leaders paralysised by clan fighting and petty self centered hold on power. Facing the Chinese threat with their modernizing military, Taiwan should be spending more money on military. But when China is spending an ever increasing amount upgrading their military, your president decided that it's a good idea to reduce the size of Taiwan's military and reduce the amount of time served for the draftees. I don't get it...

Unless China is not a threat, and Taiwan is ready to become a province of China.

We already moved away from the IDF/F-20 discussion. Let me to the math for you again.

The scenario with PLAAF's overwhelming advantage was calculated with Taiwan's total frontline fighters, including F-16s, Mirage 2000s, and IDFs.

Taiwan's combined total frontline fighters, F-16 Block 20, Mirage 2000-5, IDF, are only 332 aircrafts. Taiwan's got 146 F-16 Block 20, 57 Mirage 2000-5, 128 F-CK-1s, the number you use are no longer accurate. PLAAF's got 133 Su-27/J-11 and 76 Su-30 MMK for a combined total of 209 Sukhois.

Using the lost ratio versus Sukhoi fighters Su-27/J11 and Su-30 MMK of 1.6~1.7 Taiwanese fighters per 1 Sukhoi, as of right now you don't have enough frontline fighters to counter the Sukhoi threat. Taiwan still need 334~355 frontline fighters just for the Sukhois, let along all the other sundry fighters and attack aircrafts in the PLAAF's inventory like 674 J-7, 200 J-8, 401 Q-5, 25 JH-7, 120 H-6. Of course, these are the total number of fighters in PLAAF's inventory, there's no way they can all be deployed for the cross strait conflict. However, given the seriousness Chicom placed on the cross strait conflict and the limited number of Sukhois, they can all be in theater for the cross strait conflict. So, the J-7s, J-8s, Q-5s, H-6s are countered by whatever the number of F-5Es still in Taiwan Air Force's service.

The balance of power already tipped towards China, Taiwan Air Force needs an influx of new fighters right now, I am no longer talking about the IDFs, or the F-20s, or the stillborn ADF.

Let's face it, Chicom's Sukhois are arguablely one of the best fighters in the region, matched only by Japan and U.S. F-15s. Last time I checked, Taiwan didn't have any F-15s.

----------

Jimbo 於: 2005/2/24, 14:13 NO: 1104479567#r112

I don't agree...

MiG-21 by all account is comparable to Taiwan's F-5E. In fact, the capability of the two aircrafts are so close that the U.S. military uses the F-5E to mimic the MiG-21 in adversary roles.

So, MiG-21 = F-5E. Super 7 or FC-1 = IDF. J-10 = F-16A early model. Taiwan's F-16 Block 20 is effectively F-16C, with higher capability than J-10.

ADF's performance will be in the F-18C/D range, which is less than Su-27/J-11.
 

The_Zergling

Junior Member
I completely agree with Taiwan's failure in the indigenious area. The technology was there, but the production was carried out in a very superficial way, which pretty much mirrors nearly everything about the Taiwan military, i.e. the relatively small number of Patriot Missiles, more F-16s than AMRAAMs...

As the article points out, the TC-2 is an impressive missile and the F-CK-1 (especially after its most recent upgrade) are a credible defense especially against Chinese fighters that will be limited by range and loadout problems since they're not fighting over home turf and will have to fly round-trip flights. However it's just all a big show. Taiwan currently could stage a decent defense against a Chinese invasion right now, but is nowhere near its possible potential.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
CSIST is known to have manufacutured the TC-2A with new seeker head and guidance package. Although this is an ARM version, it does indicate that CSIST's TC-2 production is not limited to Raytheon-supplied 200 seeker head kits. If they wanted to make more, I think they can always get the parts from somewhere.

Also, if a war breaks out and US decides to aid the ROCAF, I don't think it'd take too much effort to update the software code on IDF's to carry AIM-7's and AIM-120's. The GD-53 is basically AN/AGP-67 anyway.

I think the AIDC IDF gets a lot of bad press because people think it's neutered from birth. But we have to keep in mind that it was built only because the US refused to sell F-20 and F-16's, so Taiwan had to make do with what scraps the US was willing to sell. After the US agreed to export F-16's, the IDF suddenly doesn't get much love anymore.

IMO this is yet another example of "grass greener on other side" or "moon bigger on other side". The mentality that whatever they make themselves are inferior and everything that the other guy makes is better, so let's import everything.
 
Top