Aviation Week is very reliable, Slow.  Not saying that they can't be wrong, but they're usually right.  Just because Korean message boards are debating their numbers doesn't mean that those message boards are right.  Casual observers of the SP boards might be led to believe that the Rafale is either made of magical pixy dust, or is an iron stove that can barely get off the ground.  Neither is right, of course, but that's the problem with relying on the internet or message boards.

 

And KFX is an example of "fighter nationalism."  There's nothing wrong with that, if Korea wants to foot the cost for developing an entirely indigenous fighter that they're not likely to export.  They might be better served and it certainly would be cheaper buying on the open market, but if this is what Korea wants to do, go for it.  There is definitely some nationalism at play, but that's not necessarily a bad thing either.  Just expensive.

 

As far as the Chinese newspapers go, remember that they're state-run and as such are organs for the CCP.  As we've found out here at SP, the Chinese government routinely has posters go onto message boards and post either propaganda or disinformation.  I remember a Chinese poster here who claimed the PLAN had a dozen SLBM-equipped subs and two carriers building--in 2004.  It may be true that they've finally laid the keel for their two new carriers, but again, I'll believe it when they're launched and I see shakedown cruises...but not before then.

 

Ah yes, better to believe a random internet kid who has shown time and again that he can't even accurately summarize a press article...

 

Aviation Week covers the entire world.  They do and always have spent a great deal of time on programs in non-English speaking countries.  The idea that their translators are somehow behind by 6-months is just nutty.  

 

The simple fact here is that you are a fanboy with a habit of lying when it suits you, and they are a respected industry publication with as good a record for accuracy as is possible to achieve.

 

 

I seriously doubt Aviation Week is 6 months behind.  If we were talking about the bad old days of the USSR, when the Russians were obfuscating the hell out of everything, then maybe...but not today, and not with the ROK.  It wouldn't be just Aviation Week either--you'll have Air Forces Monthly, Air International, and Combat Aircraft all over this too.  If KAI wants to sell the KFX overseas (which would be a good idea, for reasons you mentioned), they'll want to get this info out as soon as possible. 

 

Slow, you should know better than to trust internet boards!  I can say that I'm actually an insider at the Pentagon and that the F-22 was cancelled because we've got Veritechs in production--doesn't make it true.  Maybe insiders are posting on message boards, but more likely they're also calling publications like Aviation Week, because they want to get the word out.  Everybody reads Aviation Week, especially potential customers.  Makes no sense to sit on this or not make sure AW doesn't have the latest on KFX. 

 

I haven't heard anything about Turkey using Korean equipment--do you have any examples? I'd be interested.

Ah, okay.  I hadn't heard about that, though I do recall seeing something on the T-50.

 

Again, I wouldn't trust anything on message boards without having some way to verify.  I can claim to know everything about anything, and for all you know the SP Powers That Be have vetted me, too.  I'm also quite sure that publications like Aviation Week have Korean correspondents who can translate freely.  This isn't the 1880s; internationally respected magazines like AW, or even glossies like Air Forces Monthly, don't exclude people because they don't speak English.  Hell, I could call up an old professor friend of mine who speaks Korean and have him translate an article for me over the phone; how hard would it be for someone who actually gets paid to do this stuff?

 

Flight Global's KFX update with Boeing's comment on it < link >

 

According to the preliminary specifications, the aircraft is to have basic stealth characteristics and a domestically built active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. It would have a much larger combat radius than the F-16, include an electronic warfare suite, incorporate an infrared search-and-track system, and datalink systems fit for a network-centric environment.

It has not been decided if it would be a single-engined or twin-engined aircraft, but it is projected to have 50,000lb of thrust (220kN). Super-velocity intercept and supercruise capabilities are also required.

Seoul also hopes to engage foreign aircraft manufacturers significantly in the programme. The Konkuk centre's conclusion was that the "self-development of the aircraft is possible" if there is "joint development of core technology" and sufficient "technology transfer from abroad". To this end, the centre earlier this year asked Boeing, Eurofighter, Lockheed and Saab for their recommendations about the feasibility of the plans, as well as for suggestions on how they could help.

Boeing, which has sold 60 F-15Ks to South Korea and has been the most successful defence contractor in the country in recent years, is keen to get involved in the programme.

"We have been working with the Korean government since 2007 on several scenarios and ways to collaborate on the KF-X. They will take all of the input and make a decision within the next 12 months," says Joe Song, Asia Pacific vice-president for international business development at Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. "The KF-X is complementary to what we offer. One of the benefits is that they know our aircraft and love them." 

That was using the Hawk trainer development program as a baseline estimate and it was an economic feasibility study for an export market by university economics wonks to the Korean parliament with not one of them with experience with aeronautics program management at all!

 

Who are you trying to kid?