Steps for a fighter
Dear Johnny,
Andrew Whyte posts a good question though it is a little convoluted (Johnny Neihu’s Mailbag, Dec. 26, page 8).
Having been involved in the aerospace business as an engineer for many years, I will break down the steps required to design and build a 4th or 5th generation fighter.
A 4th generation fighter would be an aircraft similar to the F-16 and F-15 fighters. The 5th generation fighter would be in league with the F-22 and F-35 fighters.
Taiwan’s Indigenous Defense Fighter (IDF), or Ching-kuo fighter, was developed locally with the assistance of several US companies. There is a reason why the IDF appears somewhat similar to the F-16: Similar horizontal stabilizer and wing design were incorporated to provide better lift and control capability. The engines are TFE1042 turbo fans provided through a joint effort with AlliedSignal, a US company (now Honeywell). Avionics and radar systems were developed with a joint agreement between BAE and Northrop Grumman. Even the Vulcan cannon is a weapon designed jointly with a US company.
The one weakness of the IDF is its engine. It was originally proposed to have a GE F110 or Pratt F100-PW engine, like the F-16. Unfortunately export requirements could not be met and a less powerful engine was supplied.
The point of all this is to show how difficult and expensive it is to design and build a fighter from the ground up utilizing locally made products. Even China cannot duplicate these conditions — at least not yet.
If Taiwan were to build another aircraft, should it be 4th gen or 5th gen? We are talking millions upon millions of dollars to develop and field this type of weapon.
It is more prudent and cost-effective to purchase an off-the-shelf proven variant that is available sooner and that would benefit national defense faster than through a development stage.
Currently no country outside the US can build 5th generation fighters, so that means Taiwan would have to design a 4th generation fighter that would not be more capable than existing equipment.
Johnny, your last sentence was spot on!
Sam Small
Johnny replies: Thanks for the letter, Sam. For those who can’t be bothered looking online or popping down to the local library, the “last sentence” of my reply was: “The ‘indigenous fighter’ problem hinges not on the capacity to make arms but the lack of a fundamental instinct of defending against a looming predator.”
Extending this line of thinking, let’s assume that the Americans are caught napping and a Chinese invasion overcomes Taiwan’s military “deterrent” and installs a puppet government. Democratic voices are silenced; dissidents are rounded up and jailed and/or murdered, along with ordinary people caught up in the tumult.
It is what happens next that, to me, provides the most profound deterrent to an invasion.
The new “status quo” will only last so long in the face of a global boycott on trade with Taiwan, and the economy would flounder — and this doesn’t factor in the massive blow to the morale of workers that would follow the violence.
Are Taiwanese just going to kick back and watch as our wealth and sense of security are squandered — and with local collaborators licking their lips as the spoils flow in? The answer is unclear, because the Chinese are adept at inflicting terror on frontier populations until the poor bastards can only respond in modes Beijing calls “terrorist.”
But if we make a case that a takeover would prompt a general rebellion (non-violent non-cooperation or civil warfare, take your pick), then Beijing might just think twice before crossing the Rubicon Strait.
Open-ended conflict in Taiwan can only corrode China’s fantasy of world respectability. Would the comprehensive loss of face be worth it for those sons of bitches?
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations