Brumby
Major
Those kind of events will transpire whether the F-16 is upgraded to V or not. They are therefore superfluous to the conversation.
Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter Gollevainen
- Start date
Modern tanks/helicopters are both very usable for coast defense/beachhead reduction purposes. I honestly don't see much propaganda in these purchases.
M60 as a platform is clearly beyond its limits. Taiwan isn't Turkey, sinking money into them is simply unjustifiable.
Brumby
Major
In a way what you described is superfluous to the V upgrade because those overall considerations are independent to whether Taiwan did or did not undergo the F-16 upgrade. That said, the improved capability does bring to Taiwan additional deterrent capability and impose more complex calculus onto the Chinese planners. It will more likely than not allow Taiwan to be in the game longer and provide more time for the US to mobilise and to respond. Without air domination, China is unlikely to risk invasion.
There are two things that I don't really get it based on your description on the use of AEW&C in providing targeting solution.
(1)They would probably be subject to similar risk as their intended target unless they are placed well behind area of operation. Have you done the maths that this could actually work - like detection range and range resolution?
(2)Data linking requires robust network with nil latency. Is China there yet? I don't think the USAF even has this type of CEC capability. The USN has made further progress than the rest of the other services. A link 16 type of datalink will not work for cooperative guidance because of latency.
Within the F-35 community, cooperative engagement could be executed because of MADL. Between the F-18, Aegis and E2D it is because of NIFC-CA and the TTNT waveform. It requires big data pipes and building those is heavy investment. It is not by way of Link 16.
For one, the vastly different degrees of combat readiness.
Furthermore, the only thing we reliably know about the J-20 is that it uses an engine comparable to 30 year old Western motor designs. In that alone it doesn't even match up to 4.5 gens.
It's all aspect RCS while strongly classified, is widely deemed inferior to the F-22. The same for IR signature.
It isn't a plane question.
And it is very hard to estimate.
Inferiority of chinese engine isn't readily transferable onto other aspects of the aircraft.
What's more important, chinese designers knew it themselves, and J-20 was born at the time, when f-22 in its final configuration was known to everyone. J-20 concept is much yonger than even the JSF.
Eyeball RCS estimations...
What can be reliably said with the eyes, though, is what J-20, say, has a FLIR, and F-22 got it deleted for cost reasons.
That's as close as we will get in the next few decades. Although some like Carlo Kopp have tried to go a bit further only to arrive at a similar conclusion. Speaking of eyeballing, I've yet to see a RCS reduction tinted canopy on the J-20. I did see it on its FLIR though.
Finally, there's the technology maturity argument: F-22 was the third operational VLO aircraft for the US, whereas the J-20 is China's first.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Nope.
What they bought was overhauled M1A1 brought up to an M1A2 baseline. What Taiwan is buying would be based of the M1A2C which is farther improved.
As to M60. The M60 tanks they have can be upgraded. But the problem is the older M48 tanks they have those are really really old. Would be of little use as an HIFV.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Please don't say things when you don't know what's going on; the AL-31 original design is old but it has been continuously updated. There are new AL-31 versions in the works even now and none of them are comparable to 30 year old American engines that give out less than 110kN. Even America's most updated 4.5 gen engines today are behind the updated AL-31 versions some of which can produce over 145kN of thrust. Only America's 5th gen engines are more powerful. The lowest possible estimate for the AL-31 version on the J-20 is 137kN because those are known to be sold to China for its advanced J-10 versions. If China bartered for a more powerful variant for its J-20, which is highly plausible, they would be even more powerful than those. Finally, whether or not the performance matches up is going to depend on a lot more than engine power; Dr. Song designed J-20 to perform to under-powered engines if necessary and so far, all accounts in the PLAAF have J-20 flying better than the Flankers and J-10 which are both known to be incredibly maneuverable 4-4.5 gen fighters.
Materials on the J-20 are unknown and there are no reliable studies on it including that of Kopp.
You came here to discuss J-20 vs F-22 and you didn't even know that J-20 has been using a tinted canopy for years? Please don't do this LOL
Well, there's late-comer's advantage for China. Building something 20 years later with more technology and knowledge available provides many advantages, with the on-board computer systems being the most obvious.
Last edited:
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
No, the conversation is not only about whether the F-16V with AIM-120D is an upgrade for the ROCAF. It is, easy part over. There were 2 other points: 1 is that whether or not they would provide an advantage over PLAAF fighters with PL-15 and the answer is that that is unlikely. The other point is how would these jets be used by the ROCAF and the biggest assumption for them being useful at all is that they can become airborne (at least in meaningful numbers), which is unlikely to happen and the points outlined here all add on to why it's highly unlikely they will even have the chance to make any difference because it's highly unlikely that they can even get into the air.
That's a bold statement.
-Taiwan has a well-established and maintained dispersion capability; country isn't big, but this is no Kuwait either. Geography is favourable as well.
-RoC has quite dense air defence network, with significant(theoretical) ABM and point defence capability. F-16Vs themselves are an important part of LACM intercept capability, since this is sort of "speciality" of this particular model of fighter.
-Force in question(above 3 hundreed fighters) is very significant. Unless they understand sonething very wrongly, it is numerically unlikely for them to invest so much(compare their tactical fighter strength with european air forces!) in capability they do not expect to be able to use.