Dogfight is not ... anymore

BVR or Beyond Visual Range, Stealth, Over the Horizon, GPS, Countermeasures, Fire and Forget, Radar Homing are just but some of the prevalent characteristics of advance weaponry and its delivery system that could render dogfights obsolete, and less viable to be a part of primary strategy and may be viewed as a secondary tactical option. Accordingly, it may relegate to be the least as a priority for consideration when procuring weapon’s delivery system like fighter jets.  An aerial platform that has the aforementioned mode and characteristics of operation regardless of speed and size can pose as a serious threat even against late generation fighters. If procurement budget is a major constraint, emphasis need be placed primarily not on the fighter jets capability to fly at supersonic or hypersonic speed, but rather on its ability to detect threat at far distances; to launch and employ its weapons at supersonic speed or at far distances; and to sustain utilization without breaking the purse.  A loitering drone, a submarine or a frigate moving at a cruising speed of 25 knots which by all means is nowhere near the speed of a fighter jet can shoot down an SU-27 or an F-16 jets 40kms away, even beyond assuming the former/s are equipped with BVR sensor/radar and adequately range supersonic missiles. It is a question of who can take advantage of the “First to See, First to Push” option. Countries with meager resources may necessarily focus less on the platform per se but more on its capability to accommodate the technology that the modern battlefield demands, with sustainability.

FA-50 jet from South Korea are said to be in the vicinity of 38 million dollars per unit. Incorporating a BVR to the jet would drastically increase the unit cost to US Dollars 53 million per unit, which is approximately the price of one Gripen, or three weaponized KFIR's. The preceding figures highlights the surge in acquisition cost resulting from prioritizing the airframe over the technology. A BVR capable Embraer A-29 can be had for around US Dollars 28 million, which is half the price of the FA-50/BVR platform. Even more, rumor has it that a Tucano operation is at US$ 500-600 per flight hours, which is relatively low compared to operating a full pledged multirole fighter that goes to US$ 2000-5000/ flight hour. A supersonic FA50 without the BVR could land  into trouble when faced against a propeller driven Embraer A-29 Super Tucano that is BVR equipped, and given the comparison, one may guess correctly which of the two would be able to shoot first. The FA50 has fewer weapons certification as of yet compared to the A-29 Super-Tucano that is certified for 130 weapons configuration including Delilah and Python missiles. The Tucano can be operated extensively to perform more sorties due to cost tolerance, and hence can be utilized not only for combat operations but also for maritime patrol, surveillance and counterinsurgency as well. It is a proven multi-mission aircraft with low maintenance and operating cost.

If money is not a question, then by all means get the latest, the fastest and the best. But if one is toying with a few coins in his pocket he has to make sure that those coins will bring him to his destination and that would require a cost effective means to do so. The foregoing exemplifies the point that there are practical alternatives towards a cost-effective defense. That is, to reach that level of combat parity for less. A fighter jet that can not see beyond the horizon is relatively myopic if not a blind one;  its only advantage is it can proceed to its demise at supersonic speed.