Indonesia eyes Eurofighters to check China’s threat

[gambit]

With all these so called advantages, do you think Taiwan can conquer PRC?

After all, if PLAAF cannot obtain air superiority over Taiwan, it means that ROCAF would be able to defeat the PLAAF, right?

If PLAN cannot obtain naval superiority over Taiwan, it means that ROCN can defeat the PLAN right?

If that is not true, then the only difference between ROCN/ROCAF invading PRC, and PLAN/PLAAF invading Taiwan, would be SAMs and ground based missiles.

That is the simplest way to put it.

Did North Vietnam 'conquered' the US? Did the NVA actually defeated the US military? No to both.

What you failed to understand is that airpower -- at this time -- remains largely a supporting cast member to the final act of ground control. To date, only the US came close to having its airpower being the arbiter of a war. I will admit I used 'close' loosely. Airpower is temporary while ground control is as permanent as we can get, so what this mean is that air superiority over contested airspace is quickly irrelevant in the absence of a surface follow thru. In the case of Taiwan, that surface follow thru is a successful amphibious operation.

Taiwan have only one objective -- defeat the amphibious invasion. Nothing more. Taiwan have been -- in the eyes of the world -- an independent country no matter what China say. With the defeat of China's invasion, that unspoken perception will slowly manifest into diplomatic reality.

 

[gambit]

So easy yet you still cant stand your claim. So easy yet it is China that is begging for diplomatic talks over SCS and got turned down https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/indonesia-china-south-china-sea-united-nations-12847188

That wasnt a spank, that was a tickle

All right imma head to sleep. Wake me up when the tanks are rolling and df bla bla are flying over Jakarta would ya

Pay attention to the SCS and Taiwan.

Let us take Taiwan first. If China successfully invade Taiwan, the rest of Asia will be cowed. Whether the US was passive or not -- is irrelevant in the long term. If Taiwan falls, China will make the rest of the Asian countries, with perhaps the exception of JPN and SKR, vassal states. ID will 'bend the knee', as a popular TV show quoted.

No different than with the SCS. I would be willing to bet dollars to doughnut that China sees control of the SCS is tactically/operationally easier to achieve than the conquest of Taiwan. And in many ways, the passivity of Asia appears to bore that out. Leaving the US and Western allies to challenge China in the SCS gives China the needed clue as to that passivity and how to intimidate SEA into submission without China firing a single shot.

 

[Feng Leng]

Pay attention to the SCS and Taiwan.

Let us take Taiwan first. If China successfully invade Taiwan, the rest of Asia will be cowed.

The first step was Xinjiang and then Hong Kong, actually.

China successfully annihilated the Xinjiang separatists, then we annihilated the Hong Kong separatists.

Next we are going after the Taiwan separatists.

Philippines was spanked and now Duterte begs China for mercy.

The other countries like Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia know the crosshairs are on them.

USA was given a full dose of our coronavirus. It is in no shape to confront China.

 

[nufix]

Pay attention to the SCS and Taiwan.

Let us take Taiwan first. If China successfully invade Taiwan, the rest of Asia will be cowed. Whether the US was passive or not -- is irrelevant in the long term. If Taiwan falls, China will make the rest of the Asian countries, with perhaps the exception of JPN and SKR, vassal states. ID will 'bend the knee', as a popular TV show quoted.

No different than with the SCS. I would be willing to bet dollars to doughnut that China sees control of the SCS is tactically/operationally easier to achieve than the conquest of Taiwan. And in many ways, the passivity of Asia appears to bore that out. Leaving the US and Western allies to challenge China in the SCS gives China the needed clue as to that passivity and how to intimidate SEA into submission without China firing a single shot.

Eh, that is too far fetched. This isnt 15th century. Indonesia has been staying in the sidelines until China starts to antagonize it over its EEZ. Getting Indonesia calm is easy, dont antagonize it. Indonesia and China do not have direct territorial issue and Indonesia is not a claimant there. So it is up to China whether it wants to drag another major country into its enemy‘s camp or not.

 

[nufix]

The first step was Xinjiang and then Hong Kong, actually.

China successfully annihilated the Xinjiang separatists, then we annihilated the Hong Kong separatists.

Next we are going after the Taiwan separatists.

Philippines was spanked and now Duterte begs China for mercy.

The other countries like Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia know the crosshairs are on them.

USA was given a full dose of our coronavirus. It is in no shape to confront China.

Hmm? So you admit that Covid19 is yours and therefore a Chinese virus? So Trump is right all this time?

 

[Feng Leng]

Hmm? So you admit that Covid19 is yours and therefore a Chinese virus? So Trump is right all this time?

covid-19 is the freedom virus. It loves "free" countries. We just give it moral support

 

[nufix]

covid-19 is the freedom virus. It loves "free" countries. We just give it moral support

but China caught it as well, so whats wrong with the virus?

 

[Feng Leng]

but China caught it as well, so whats wrong with the virus?

China is virus free except for Hong Kong where the virus is spreading like crazy because the people there ask for "freedom".

 

[gambit]

Eh, that is too far fetched.

Indonesia and China do not have direct territorial issue and Indonesia is not a claimant there.

The desired goal for China is control, not territory, regarding Indonesia and everyone else in Asia. Getting Asians to acquiesce the SCS is like giving your neighbor veto power over your front yard without giving up ownership. ID may not have direct interests in the SCS, but others do, so in the long run, you will pay extra and will cave to China's demands on other issues.

 

[nufix]

China is virus free except for Hong Kong where the virus is spreading like crazy because the people there ask for "freedom".

Sure, but it didnt diminish the fact that China caught the virus too. So the weapon backfired?

 

[nufix]

The desired goal for China is control, not territory, regarding Indonesia and everyone else in Asia. Getting Asians to acquiesce the SCS is like giving your neighbor veto power over your front yard without giving up ownership. ID may not have direct interests in the SCS, but others do, so in the long run, you will pay extra and will cave to China's demands on other issues.

That is why Indonesia is now taking interest in the SCS because apparently, China cannot control its own desires. Like I said, the moment China antagonizes Indonesia, China unnecessarily drags Indonesia into its SCS issue.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/10/world/asia/indonesia-south-china-sea-military-buildup.html

 

[Feng Leng]

Sure, but it didnt diminish the fact that China caught the virus too. So the weapon backfired?

LOL our political goals are being achieved. The US dollar is collapsing at a rapid pace. That's all that matters

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

No... it is not objective fact, instead it is an obsolete assumption. [emoji38]

You can't equate China 10 year ago with current China, it is arbitrary assumption; she has all things needed to produce tech the same level as western if not surpassing. I've given you example right? 5G, Maglev, Supercomputer, quantum satellite, AI, etc. You see how US are lagging in some area and on par in many areas.

China spend more on military tech r&d than civilian tech r&d, so if China can surpass in some civilian electronics (5G, etc), why can't she surpass US in avionics including AESA too? You can consider J-10C as a Huawei version while F-16V as Cisco version of jet fighters

So your evaluation is very subjective which is based on your obsolete assumption.



How would APG-68 protect viper from PL-15 onslaught?
I've told you many times PL-15 is using AESA, means can't be jammed nor intercepted by EW system. Dont be so slow to grasp.

Basically: F-16 Viper is just 4+ generation, on the other hand J-10C is 4++ generation, means J-10C should be more sophisticated. Besides excel in EW, J-10C also has less radar signature than F-16V.

The F-16V’s alterations to the original design are relatively conservative. There are no reductions to the radar cross section or applications of stealth coatings and no improvements to the F110 engine's thrust have been made. Upgrades are restricted to avionics, with new cockpit displays, electronic warfare systems and an AESA radar all integrated. The fighter deploys the same AIM-120C missile as regular F-16 variants, although some reports indicate it could integrate AIM-120D missiles with a longer 180km range in future. The F-16V overall represents a cheaper idea for an ‘enhanced F-16’ to the F-16E - developed for the United Arab Emirates, the F-2 developed for Japan, and the F-21 concept currently being marketed to India - all of which have seen far more ambitious enhancements from high composite airframes and new more powerful engines.

There was not a single field in which the F-16 could boast superior capabilities over the J-10. Not only is the J-10 design more advanced, but the J-10C has seen more comprehensive improvements compared to the original design than the F-16V has relative to the original Fighting Falcon. These have included a reduced radar cross section, applications of stealth coatings, a greater use of composite materials a new more powerful AESA radar and integration of PL-15 air to air missiles.
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...le-engine-fighter-would-prevail-in-an-air-war​

So you see .... NONE single field F-16 could boast superior capabilities over the J-10 as you claim above [emoji23]

So forget with your dreaming Viper can take on J-10C, Viper is absolutely inferior.
If you compare F-35 with J-10C then yes F-35 can boast superiority in one or more field, but sorry not F-16V



It is just assumption. If you claim that US senior pilots is more experienced than PLAAF, I could believe; but if you claim Taiwan, sorry it is just your own belief.

J-10C has 3D TVC. Not only that, its TWR (thrust to weight ratio: > 1.15) is the greatest among existing fighter plane, better than F-16V (1.096).

Th J-10 retains one of the highest thrust/weight ratios in the world as a result of its extremely light weight and powerful engine - standing at 1.15 for the J-10A and likely even higher for the C variant due to its greater use of composite materials. No U.S. fighters currently in service, including twin engine platforms such as the F-18 and F-22, are capable of matching this. The F-35 by contrast, though deploying an extremely powerful F135 engine, is extremely bulky which gives it a high wing loading and a thrust/weight ratio of just 0.87.
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...n-the-pla-s-j-10c-contend-with-america-s-f-35​

Making smartphone are not same as making AESA radar. That is why nobody is buying Chinese weapons when there is a much better alternative for them available.

Apparently all Chinese lack reading comprehension.

The article not even state the J-10C are technology on par with the Viper with the only one supporting your claim is this dubious claim of the export variant being downgraded. Which a citation is desperately needed btw. And it said the only advantages it have are on the airframe & the engine somewhat failing to mention that the reason why the viper kept the F110 engine was because of doctrinal philosophy of USAF & to keep hardware commomality. Also it's blatantly obvious that you pick the article because it affirms your belief.

Before you learn how to read you need to learn critical thinking & not just post an obvious click bait.

Facts of the matter is that airforce around the world have ordered Viper while there is no line forming ordering a J-10C. This despite your claims of China's superior civilian technology which somehow translate to superior military technology. Now wonder why that is so?

 

[Feng Leng]

Making smartphone are not same as making AESA radar. That is why nobody is buying Chinese weapons when there is a much better alternative for them available.

LOL China is the fifth largest arms exporter in the world. Where is Indonesia?

 

[antonius123]

Making smartphone are not same as making AESA radar. That is why nobody is buying Chinese weapons when there is a much better alternative for them available.

LOL you are still densed.

Of course making handphone (and also supercomputer, maglev, tianwen, beidou, quantum satellite) is not the same as making AESA you clown, but all require the same .... "R&D". This China leadership in many technology fronts show how strong China R&D is. Thats why we can safe assume that China AESA must be as good as her 5G, Maglev, Supercomputer, etc due to China's strong R&D.

That is plausible assumption, rather than your stupid and ignorant assumption that China always remain making low quality tech forever and for a demanding buyer.

Apparently all Chinese lack reading comprehension.

The article not even state the J-10C are technology on par with the Viper with the only one supporting your claim is this dubious claim of the export variant being downgraded. Which a citation is desperately needed btw. And it said the only advantages it have are on the airframe & the engine somewhat failing to mention that the reason why the viper kept the F110 engine was because of doctrinal philosophy of USAF & to keep hardware commomality. Also it's blatantly obvious that you pick the article because it affirms your belief.

Before you learn how to read you need to learn critical thinking & not just post an obvious click bait.

The article is very clear about J-10C excellence over F-16 Viper.

Find this sentence in the article that I quote above:

There was not a single field in which the F-16 could boast superior capabilities over the J-10. Not only is the J-10 design more advanced.​

Dont you understand what it means? The other sentences explain in more detail why J-10 is more advance.

People like you is lacking IQ severely obviously

Facts of the matter is that airforce around the world have ordered Viper while there is no line forming ordering a J-10C. This despite your claims of China's superior civilian technology which somehow translate to superior military technology. Now wonder why that is so?

LOL. Another assumption of ignorance with logical fallacy

It is same claim that F-16 is better than Rafale/Typhoon/F-22 because many airforce around the world buy F-16 than those planes.

You need to understand that there are many factors play for decision to buy air fighter, such as: politics, political tie, commonalities, price, after-sales. Many airforce buy F-16 because of US influence (politics) + price + commonality.