What's your take on FA-50?

Is it true that the newest version is as good as new F-16?

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >slower
    >way smaller radar and worse avionics
    >can't carry nearly the same payload
    >worse combat range

    It's not even in the same tier as the viper

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    looks like a armed trainer

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      It is

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Because it's T-50, the trainer version. Pic related is actual FA-50. There are no more trainer only version being produced but only FA-50 in different configurations. T-50,TA-50,FA-50 now all share the same airframe.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      It is and i'm sick and tired of people on this board constantly hyping it up.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >people
        More like dellusional nationalists and paid advertisers.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Do Malaysia and the Philippines look like paid shills to you? There's always nothing strange about good weapons system getting much attention.

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It really depends on what you want to do. If you want to fight within and a bit beyond your border and want to generate a shit ton of sorties very quickly. Then armed trainers/light fighters aren't a bad call.

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Good cost to capability ratio for lobbing Brimstones and SPEARs at vatnigs I guess.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >vatnigs
      rent free

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Hello subhuman.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >virtue signaling this hard

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Interesting that you think hating vatniks is a virtue, but no, we just enjoy making fun of you.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >virtue signaling this hard

        >even the pussy Irish are buying fighter jets as insurance against possible Monke chimpout
        the FA-50 is even one they're looking at. Something isn't "rent free" when it relates directly to that topic at hand

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It will never be as good as F-16. Lockheed-Martin would have never assisted Worst Korea in development if they were going to make a competitor to their own product.

  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    So when do we get to see the much hyped 'Block 20' FA-50s with AMRAAM integration?

  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The SABR AESA radar that is going to be added will be a big boost to its capabilities

  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It's the perfect solution to generate low-cost sorties to intercept Chinese nuisance airspace incursions. Taiwan (that is to say the independent, sovereign nation of Taiwan, fuck the CCP) should buy 300.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      They've already developed their own

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        But mass production is scheduled for March 2023. Seems a little too late given how much fuckery is going on these days.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        That's a beautiful plane

  9. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Clearly this plane is doing something right as lockmart is using it as their bid for the US air force and navy trainers acquisition programs. (The T-50 version, not the FA-50 version)
    >KAI says that the deal with Lockheed will help the T-50 to compete in upcoming competitions such as USAF and US Navy requirements for additional trainers, the Canada Future Fighter Lead-In Training (FFLIT) programme, and other opportunities globally.
    https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/kai-lockheed-enhance-t-50-marketing-relationship/148960.article

  10. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Its meant to be an F-5 replacement with a few more bells and whistles.

    It's tailored for safe peacetime airspaces but can get out of trouble if its overmatched by dedicated fighters.

  11. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    FA-50 is something you use when you need a good enough aircraft that is cheap, in still in production, have potential for modernization, is easier and less expensive for maintenance, can be sortie quick from relatishort runway and it have enough operational range it can protect small country.

    So yeah for South Korea or Poland doctrine this thing is perfect.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >or Poland doctrine this thing is perfect.
      come again? polish old migs are still better than this and I'm not shiting on fa50 here it's just that mig is old but actually a real fighter jet
      fa is good for fighting aganist swarms of old best korea's stuff
      or fucking up partisans(like filipinos does)

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        A fully kitted out FA-50 with an AESA radar is comparable to Gripen. This thing is literally a budget F-16 on disguise.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Not cheap enough to be a trainer in numbers.
          Too expensive to go up against F-16's or JF-17's at export leve.

          >it true that the newest version is as good as new F-16?
          Nah, not even close. It offers some things over legacy/older F-16's such as the AESA radar if it ever gets integrated. But if that's all you want, a cheap and cheerframe that can do BVR the JF-17 has it beat.

          At some point modenizing older jets becomes more costly and resorce consuming than buying new fighters. If I have to use allegory it would be like trying to put a RTX graphic card into PC made in 2000 and trying to make it work.

          FA-50 will be easier and cheapr to upgrade. And with few NATO parts that fighter capabilities will be easily comparable to Gripen or F-16 of which that plane is bassed on.

          And FA-50 isn't meant to be only jet that will be used by Poland. It is just good enough supplemental fighter that can cover gaps between use of F-35, F-15 and F-16 that Poles also plan to use and buy more in the future.

          But SK offers tech transfer and licences for domestic production that will greatly reduce issue of supply lines and costs of parts and even jet themselves that don't have to be transported from the other side of the globe. SK also hope that after Poland other Eastern European nations will also be very interested in replacing theor old Soviet era jets with FA-50 and Poland producing parts for them being a neighbor to them will be very useful.

          Poland already uses F-16's so buying more F-16's is more cost effective. Especially when you consider countries like Netherlands and Belgium are getting rid of their Block 30 F-16's that can easily be upgraded to Block 70 standard.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            To add some credence to my posts

            The T-50 that Philippines brought, which didn't have BVR capabilities (it was to be added later) cost around $35m per airframe.

            Adding in BVR (using the EL-M 2032) will add another ~$6m to the price.

            A used F-16 will set you around ~$40, probably even less. Draken International brought 12 from Netherlands last year for chump change.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Poland already uses F-16's so buying more F-16's is more cost effective. Especially when you consider countries like Netherlands and Belgium are getting rid of their Block 30 F-16's that can easily be upgraded to Block 70 standard.

            Yes. But unlike FA-50 F-16 is no longer produced. It will slowly lead to same experience Poland have with their MiG-29 situation were upgrading and maintaining thrm will be more costly than getting new jest that while are more expensive to buy they are cheaper to maintain and sortie in long run.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >F-16 is no longer produced.
              F-16V for Slovakia and Taiwan wants to say hi

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              F-16 is absolutely still produced and Poland could even get a production line depending on how many they buy.
              Lockheed was willing to give India one, Poland actually has aircraft production experience.

              MiG-29 are different to F-16's, F-16's absolutely have a role in the future and can be upgraded. See what Israel and Turkey have been doing with them. MiG-29 was made specifically so it was limited in some regards (loiter time, range, hardpoints). The USSR didn't want to export anything too capable.

              That's only part of the reason they're ditching the MiG's, the other part is to meet NATO cross-compatibility guidelines and standards.

              https://i.imgur.com/oGVgyji.jpg

              [...]
              Then why the fuck are the RMAF and PAF are drooling over it instead of all the surplus F-16s according to you?
              https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/07/21/malaysia-south-korea-figher-jet/
              No, these are not some trainer selection processes, but genuine fighter jet programs.
              Even more so, there are already words arising that the Malaysians are preferring the FA-50 option over the Tejas for its LCA program in which the Indians said it will be a guaranteed win for the latter for it being much more superior to the FA-50, which hasn't even been fully upgraded to the Block 20 config. Is it because they're corrupt and benighted backward shitholes?

              Because neither the RMAF doesn't operate the F-16 so it doesn't benefit from simplified logistics and wants something for LIFT which the F-16 can't directly do.
              Because PAF don't have the funds to consistently operate/maintain. The F-16 has a slightly larger logistical/maintenance overhead. Something that wouldn't bother Poland as they already operate them.
              >tejas
              lmao

              tl:dr Different countries = different needs. F-16's already meet Poland's needs and are better in every regard compared to FA-50.

              It really doesn't matter today. If FA-50 gets AN/APG-83 and AIM-120 like they are supposed to it's going to be able to do pretty much the same things as Grippen or F-16. They are still less capable overall because of shorter range, but if they meet in the air it literally doesn't matter.

              The moment it starts affecting American FMS congress will immediately start using ITAR and funny money to force vendors (Lockheed, Grumman, GE) to raise prices of key components so it's no longer competitive.
              This has happened before (Gripen) and will happen again.

              Sorks should be proud of themselves but that doesn't mean the F/A-50 can even come close to the success the F-16 has.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Because PAF don't have the funds to consistently operate/maintain. The F-16 has a slightly larger logistical/maintenance overhead. Something that wouldn't bother Poland as they already operate them.
                bro they've been opting for either the Gripen or F-16V all along but couldn't get either of them because the prices shot up. But according to your logic since the initial introduction cost of second hand F-16s isn't too much different from the FA-50, they should be buying those instead, right?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >The moment it starts affecting American FMS congress will immediately start using ITAR and funny money to force vendors (Lockheed, Grumman, GE) to raise prices of key components so it's no longer competitive.
                LMAO immediately stopped reading right there.
                >This has happened before (Gripen) and will happen again.
                The FA-50 has an American patron called LM unlike Gripen and it being a total colossal fuck up has nothing to do with this. Anyways, once the new T-50 gets adopted by the US military it will be a race to the bottom from then, no need to worry about costs at all.
                >Sorks should be proud of themselves but that doesn't mean the F/A-50 can even come close to the success the F-16 has.
                KAI is already seetting the sales goal as 1000 being sold and it doesn't seem all that illusive honestly.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Guess what company Boeing co-operated with developing the new trainer aircraft for the USAF.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Too bad boeing is on strike at the moment. The sole reason behind the air force diversifying its trainers is because T-7 couldn't keep up with the expactations, so they desperately needed an alternative.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >american patron
                But it's not an American product, it's not made in America and it doesn't lead to American jobs.

                It won't hit US exports because USA is not making anything in it's weight range.

                Ukrainian war showed everyone that 4th gen planes are eaten alive by even outdated SAMs. Russian air force is pretty much completely useless over Ukraine thanks to some MANPADs and 30 years old AA batteries.

                If you want an offensive plane you need 5th gen. And for defense it literally makes no difference if it's F-16, F-15, Rafale, Grippen or FA-50. They all have comparable radars and missiles and that's everything that matters. Actually a tiny plane like FA-50 may have an advantage since it's RCS is smaller.

                >USA is not making anything in it's weight range.
                In it's weight range, no, in it's price range, yes.
                Look at countries who would've brought the Gripen and got duped into the F-16 instead.
                >They all have comparable radars and missiles and that's everything that matters.
                Loiter time, speed, range matter just as much for CAP. The F-16 trumps in these regards.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >But it's not an American product, it's not made in America and it doesn't lead to American jobs.
                LM has shares in this project and once it gets selected then the aircraft will be coproduced in the US as well.

                Then explain why almost every country that has bought new jets have bought fighter jets.

                Explain why FA-50 isn't a fighter jet. The problem solved on its own.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                It's a trainer aircraft dressed up to look like a fighter. If it was as good as you claim then surely it would have beaten the F16, Gripen, Rafale and F35?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You know there's only 200 pound difference in internal fuel capacity between Gripen and FA-50, and even then it could be mitigated by removing the seat and replacing it with a fuel tank. Also, FA-50 with the new 300 gallon external tank has a ferry range of 3600km.

                It's a trainer aircraft dressed up to look like a fighter. If it was as good as you claim then surely it would have beaten the F16, Gripen, Rafale and F35?

                >It's a trainer aircraft dressed up to look like a fighter.
                >FA-50 - Empty weight: 6,470 kg (14,264 lb)
                >Tejas - Empty weight: 6,560 kg (14,462 lb)
                >Gripen - Empty weight: 6,800 kg (14,991 lb)
                Do you see where it's going? To say that either T-50 or FA-50 is a trainer is an understatement since the airframe is too heavy for training purposes only. It's actually the other way round since much of the T-50's designs are recycled from the F-16.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                It won't hit US exports because USA is not making anything in it's weight range.

                Ukrainian war showed everyone that 4th gen planes are eaten alive by even outdated SAMs. Russian air force is pretty much completely useless over Ukraine thanks to some MANPADs and 30 years old AA batteries.

                If you want an offensive plane you need 5th gen. And for defense it literally makes no difference if it's F-16, F-15, Rafale, Grippen or FA-50. They all have comparable radars and missiles and that's everything that matters. Actually a tiny plane like FA-50 may have an advantage since it's RCS is smaller.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            To add some credence to my posts

            The T-50 that Philippines brought, which didn't have BVR capabilities (it was to be added later) cost around $35m per airframe.

            Adding in BVR (using the EL-M 2032) will add another ~$6m to the price.

            A used F-16 will set you around ~$40, probably even less. Draken International brought 12 from Netherlands last year for chump change.

            Then why the fuck are the RMAF and PAF are drooling over it instead of all the surplus F-16s according to you?
            https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/07/21/malaysia-south-korea-figher-jet/
            No, these are not some trainer selection processes, but genuine fighter jet programs.
            Even more so, there are already words arising that the Malaysians are preferring the FA-50 option over the Tejas for its LCA program in which the Indians said it will be a guaranteed win for the latter for it being much more superior to the FA-50, which hasn't even been fully upgraded to the Block 20 config. Is it because they're corrupt and benighted backward shitholes?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >A fully kitted out FA-50 with an AESA radar is comparable to Gripen
          Not this retard again. Gripen was made from the beginning as an multirole aircraft with heavy emphasis on the aerial combat.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            It really doesn't matter today. If FA-50 gets AN/APG-83 and AIM-120 like they are supposed to it's going to be able to do pretty much the same things as Grippen or F-16. They are still less capable overall because of shorter range, but if they meet in the air it literally doesn't matter.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              https://i.imgur.com/RhOtq3F.jpg

              T-50 was designed with a combat variant in mind, which is why it is powered by F404 from the start, the same engine that's adopted by the Gripen. Also, the FA-50 has a max payload of up to 12000lbs(3x 2700, 2x1600, 2x350) for combat missions, but the actual structural threshold can be as high as 20000lbs when disregarding high g maneuvers. The upgrade prospects are much better on the FA-50 in terms of the number of aircrafts built and the number of users, which will be taking a leaf once more by the USAF and Navy joining the league.

              Now compare the statistics.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                What statistics? Speed or climb rate matters shit when modern missiles delete you from 100km. FA-50 is getting the same radars as newest F-16.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >You don't have to dodge BVR-missiles and catch up to enemy threats.
                FA-50 shills are absolutely retarded.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Once you're in a kill zone, you are dead for sure, no evac maneuvers as depicted in DCS movies. And this is especially true for new missiles like Meteor or PL-15.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Then explain why almost every country that has bought new jets have bought fighter jets.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            T-50 was designed with a combat variant in mind, which is why it is powered by F404 from the start, the same engine that's adopted by the Gripen. Also, the FA-50 has a max payload of up to 12000lbs(3x 2700, 2x1600, 2x350) for combat missions, but the actual structural threshold can be as high as 20000lbs when disregarding high g maneuvers. The upgrade prospects are much better on the FA-50 in terms of the number of aircrafts built and the number of users, which will be taking a leaf once more by the USAF and Navy joining the league.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        At some point modenizing older jets becomes more costly and resorce consuming than buying new fighters. If I have to use allegory it would be like trying to put a RTX graphic card into PC made in 2000 and trying to make it work.

        FA-50 will be easier and cheapr to upgrade. And with few NATO parts that fighter capabilities will be easily comparable to Gripen or F-16 of which that plane is bassed on.

        And FA-50 isn't meant to be only jet that will be used by Poland. It is just good enough supplemental fighter that can cover gaps between use of F-35, F-15 and F-16 that Poles also plan to use and buy more in the future.

        But SK offers tech transfer and licences for domestic production that will greatly reduce issue of supply lines and costs of parts and even jet themselves that don't have to be transported from the other side of the globe. SK also hope that after Poland other Eastern European nations will also be very interested in replacing theor old Soviet era jets with FA-50 and Poland producing parts for them being a neighbor to them will be very useful.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Literally all this jet needs to do is
        >be able to do BVR engagements and lug missiles who can engage at these ranges
        Which it will be able to do once block 20 is out.
        >have datalink to be able to get targets from NATO AWACS
        >maybe drop a bomb from time to time
        Done
        This is not vietnam, nor is it Ace fucking combat
        An air superiority fighter needs to have good radar, sensor integration with other elements like ground radar/AWACS, and be able to lug BVR missiles
        No one is going to be fucking dogfighting in 2022 unless they are still using what is essentialy stone age technology (like Russia is)
        And it does not need to do anything more than that, since Poland is buying the F-35 for all the fancy stuff like SEAD

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    No

  13. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >PH already bombed muslims with it
    It's been baptized and everything.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      There was also a friendly fire incident involving unguided bombs, so that's also a check mark off the list.

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    the whole deal is just to cover up the shit that is happaning with masters, most of polish M-46 are grounded
    leonardo is just fucking terrible

  15. 1 week ago
    T-I-G-E-R-S

    No.

  16. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It's way smaller and lighter. A lot of people talk about this plane recently because of that whole Poland deal but they are buying them as ground force support planes. They are not meant to replace F-16 or even do the same things.

  17. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Fuck no. It's still miles better than Gripen C/D due to it actually costing less than F-16, unlike Gripen

  18. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    it's a smaller F-16, so no it fucking isn't

  19. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It's a trainer.

    Like all trainers, it's armament is for "in case shit really hits the fan and we have to send everything". It's never going to be armed unless something truly terrible happens and it's specifically built to NOT be the equal to a true fighter.

    I don't understand why you've been spamming shitty threads like this lately, moronfag.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      You for got to mention
      >A trainer that weighs as much as a fighter
      FA-50 weighs almost twice as much as other subsonic trainers, and unlike those makeshift fighter alternatives, it's built from the ground up as a multi-purpose supersonic aircraft. But it doesn't matter since T-50 is the trainer version you're looking for, whereas FA-50 is a dedicated multirole fighter jet design.

  20. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    As to Poland purchase our MOD said they wanted any jets as fast as possible because our soviet jets were cannibalized for Ukraine and any soviet jets that are left are a risk to pilots as they could break down mid flight with their age and lack of parts from Russia. So this semi-fighter trainer plane FA-50 is just a filler for ex soviet plane pilots to have anything to fly with an train for future real fighter jets. Our MOD also said they plan on buying more F-35 in near future or F-35 with F-15. If FA-50 were to be upgraded to block 20 version they could be used as budget jets for air policing too.

  21. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >F404
    into_the_trash.jpg

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      F404 and F414 are here to stay, for as long as the Hornets are still alive.

  22. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    there are no new f16s?

    but anyway.... its small light and cheap...
    and using same AA weaponry.... so basing on that fact alone it should be comparable in over the horizon fighting - as CAS machine? probably not as good but anyway why putting pilot at risk if drone can do the work?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      It's much faster than drones and modern missiles like Brimstone have 50-60km range so they can be used from relative safety.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      F-16's can't be produced fast enough for Poland and even used fleets are gobbled up quickly (see Romania's purchase of Norway's old fleet). At least there is some commonality between the FA-50 and F-16, especially in the support system.

  23. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Philippine Chairforce don't have the budget to buy real F-16s so they stuck with FA-50s. They also dawdled too late and missed the last JAS-39C/D production and by the time they were seriously interested with cash hand over fist they had a new dictator who was a Beijing shill and hated how the country was allied to America and its European partners.

    In the end even Saab told them to fuck off and didn't want to entertain the Philippine Chairforce because fuck selling to rogue dictators.

    They didn't go with the M-346 because of their garbage experience with the S-211 flying coffin.

    Their politicians don't really care nor want a strong military because they don't want the military to be a powerful political organization that could simply coup them if things don't go their way and their generals are as worse as vatnik generals in terms of siphoning taxpayer funds into their own bank accounts.

Your email address will not be published.