Poland Buys South Korean FA-50

[Thumpalumpacus]

Timings. The earliest the FA-50s could realistically enter service would be 2024. Remember that they have to be built, trained for, be introduced to service etc before the MiG-29s would be able to be released. I can't see the Poles giving up a capability , even the MiGs, without a replacement first secured and in/entering service. If anything, a batch of additional F-16s would be more likely to trigger a Polish MiG transfer than the FA-50s.

I didn't realize the timeline played out that far. Thanks for the info.

 

[SaparotRob]

The T-7 is still a couple of years away from initial service and the USAf is at the front of the queue.

Re the light fighter idea, there has been some thinking:

View attachment 679571

Go Boeing!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Go Boeing!

 

[Snautzer01]

Timings. The earliest the FA-50s could realistically enter service would be 2024. Remember that they have to be built, trained for, be introduced to service etc before the MiG-29s would be able to be released. I can't see the Poles giving up a capability , even the MiGs, without a replacement first secured and in/entering service. If anything, a batch of additional F-16s would be more likely to trigger a Polish MiG transfer than the FA-50s.

Isnt i so if there are paying clients the proces will get a kick on the behind? For me that is the american way. When money is on the table all bets are off and magic happens. Specially when you guys like the clients.

 

[Wildcat]

Interesting article about the Polish buying South Korean weapon systems.
Poland signs major arms deal with South Korea - Australian Defence Magazine

 

[ThomasP]

The South Korean armaments industry, along with their industry as a whole, is an interesting case study. Beginning in the early-1990s there was significant investment of money in industrial infrastructure and R&D. I was fortunate enough to have been involved in sourcing bits and pieces from South Korea and Taiwan for a few years in the late-1990s/early-2000s. From what I learned South Korea went through a similar transition to what Japan did post-WWII - re they made a concerted effort to institute a nation-wide revamp of quality control in manufacturing. The heavily centralized government controlled heavy-industry sector helped to shorten the transition, again similar to what happened in Japan.

As most of you probably know, beginning in the 1990s many Japanese products (cars being a very good example) showed better overall quality (for the most part) than the ~equivalent products made here in the US. One result is that the Japanese have dominated the US small car market from the late-1990s/early-2000s.

South Korea is following a similar path to quality and the follow-on of international sales ability.

Also, this type of transition has allowed a massive increase in the size of their GDP. From 1990 to 2000 their GDP doubled, it then doubled again from 2000 to 2010. It would have doubled again from 2010 to 2020 but they are approaching a kind of natural limit due to the size of their population - ie for a given manufacturing technology there is a limit to how much a person can produce, with the level of access to natural resources being another of the big-3 factors (ie population, natural resources, technology) limiting a country's ability to grow their manufacturing. The growth of their GDP, from $101 billion in 1985 to $1.6 trillion in 2020 is indicative of their success - as are their continued inroads in the foreign markets. (Keep in mind that their population is ~47 million.)

My understanding is that the South Korean armaments are ~equal in quality and ability to the equivalent US & EU produced equipment (not counting the really expensive things like the F-35, although we will have to see just what the KF-21 Boramae is capable of).

 

[nam72]

Stalin wanted territory from the Japanese before hostilities ceased,just like Eastern Europe. Everything done by Stalin was for his benefit only.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Stalin wanted territory from the Japanese before hostilities ceased,just like Eastern Europe. Everything done by Stalin was for his benefit only.

I agree with you completely, but we need to remember that everything done by every country is for their own benefit only. We just like to call it "in our national interest" here.

 

[GTX]

My understanding is that the South Korean armaments are ~equal in quality and ability to the equivalent US & EU produced equipment

Well they have benefitted from a lot of US & EU involvement as well as a fair amount of copying/reverse engineering (and not always licensed).

For instance, the T-50 basic design benefitted considerably from the involvement of Lockheed Martin. It has GE designed engines, ELTA radar...etc

 

[Shinpachi]

Historically, Korea is a mini-China. If you can control them, you can controll the continent.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The US sadly created an enemy with North Vietnam…

Imagine the fork in the road of history had the US replied positively to Ho Chi Minh.

Letter from Ho Chi Minh to President Harry Truman Asking for Intervention, February 28, 1946 | State Historical Society of Iowa

Transcript of Ho Chi Minh's Letter to U.S. President Harry Truman

iowaculture.gov

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Imagine the fork in the road of history had the US replied positively to Ho Chi Minh.

Letter from Ho Chi Minh to President Harry Truman Asking for Intervention, February 28, 1946 | State Historical Society of Iowa

Transcript of Ho Chi Minh's Letter to U.S. President Harry Truman

iowaculture.gov

I don't want this to go political, but my brother, a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran (fought in the A Shau Valley during the TeT offensive, 101AB) made a profound confession to me years ago - "we fought the wrong enemy."

 

[SaparotRob]

I think things might be looking up now between the U.S. and Vietnam. We can't go back but we can move forward.

I hope that didn't come off all "khumbaya".

 

[Admiral Beez]

I think things might be looking up now between the U.S. and Vietnam.

Nothing like a common enemy (China) to bring everyone together.

 

[special ed]

There is a book somewhere in my stacks by an author named Vann, an American who tried to tell us in 1946 that Ho and his brand of govt would be similar to that of Marshal Tito. We accepted Tito's style of comunism and gave him P-47s later F-84s as well as various armor. We apparently felt closer to France in 1946 than Ho, who we assisted in his fight against the Japanese.

 

[gumbyk]

I think one reason why they might have went with the FA-50 was because the production line is active and the aircraft has seen combat (The Philippines have used theirs against communist insurgents).

And, as much as it's heading into political areas: 6 months ago when the decision would have been being made, Korea was a whole lot more politically stable.

 

[GreenKnight121]

I'm aware. My office is just above the assembly line.

Should of bought the T-7.

I am sure it will have a light fighter variant similar to the T-38/F-5.

I think one reason why they might have went with the FA-50 was because the production line is active and the aircraft has seen combat (The Philippines have used theirs against communist insurgents).

T-7 line has started. Its downstairs wear the 15 is.

The T-7 is still a couple of years away from initial service and the USAf is at the front of the queue.

Re the light fighter idea, there has been some thinking:

View attachment 679571

Then, you should be aware that there is NO light fighter version of the T-7, nor is there an official USAF program to develop one... just some PR work by Boeing to try to get some USAF interest in that direction.

You can hardy expect Poland to buy something that isn't even "in-progress" over something that has already seen combat!

The T-7 is a trainer... which Poland did NOT buy (T-50 is the SK trainer version, and Poland operates M-346s in that role) - they bought the light fighter version.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Then, you should be aware that there is NO light fighter version of the T-7, nor is there an official USAF program to develop one... just some PR work by Boeing to try to get some USAF interest in that direction.

Well aware - but at the same time if a marketer can convince a potential customer that they can deliver the goods, you'll see a lightweight fighter version of this aircraft suddenly appear. Knowing Boeing, it would not surprise me if they have already have a plan in place to produce a lightweight fighter based on the T-7 - when a party shows interest!

With all that said, compare the two aircraft - The FA-50 seems a bit more "robust" than the T-7.

 

[gumbyk]

Knowing Boeing, it would not surprise me if they have already have a plan in place to produce a lightweight fighter based on the T-7.

I'd be very surprised if Boeing hadn't 'future-proofed' the aircraft and designed it with growth in mind.

 

[GreenKnight121]

Well aware - but at the same time if a marketer can convince a potential customer that they can deliver the goods, you'll see a lightweight fighter version of this aircraft suddenly appear. Knowing Boeing, it would not surprise me if they have already have a plan in place to produce a lightweight fighter based on the T-7 - when a party shows interest!

With all that said, compare the two aircraft - The FA-50 seems a bit more "robust" than the T-7.

I was speaking to the gentleman in the first two quotes... the one who works for Boeing and said that Poland should have bought Boeing's trainer instead of SK's light fighter when they wanted was a combat aircraft, not a trainer.