Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2
- Thread starter ejaz007
- Start date
china cant be a consumer economy unless it avoids the middle income trap. CCP is trying hard to get to a consumer driven economy by 2025. if it succeeds then it truly rivals the US. the other threat looming is the disastrous imapct of 1-child policy. as most of the labor force will retire at once while not having enough population in the labor pool to support them
In the past, japan, korea were all at the level of where china is today. sadly they all fell for the middle income trap
Aamir Hussain
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,009
- Reaction score
- 33
- Country
- Location
If we want release of F-16, access to retired/stored airframes or third country stock we will need to offer some kind of carrot to the US. These days, reportedly, US is looking for air bases close to Afghanistan to launch drone missions if need be.
Now if we do agree to it, than the questions is what would we ask in return and how to package the acceptance, domestically and what would be the blow back from across the border.
Not doing so would result in what kind of fall out an from whom?
The advantages are obvious, if negotiated from a position of strength, release of withheld CSF, release of F-16's, & AH 1Z's, License to export double the number of LHTEC T800-4A engines (On Frame and spare engines) Third country transfer of F-16's and access to EDA land weapons and air crafts (Difficult to negotiate the latest version of AMRAAM) This is the obvious windfall. How much the US agree to all this depends upon how hungry they are and how much pressure India can bear upon them to not to do so.
The blow back will in the shape of political point scoring by the usual suspects, religious right will make a hue and cry with obvious political tint, and likely hood of Af Talibs facilitating Pak Taliban for cross border raids into Pakistan. To some extent, the last point can be managed. Financial squeeze and FATF censure will be a factor played in game.
What if we don't give access. US will then use overflights to target AF Talibans ( we will indirectly be giving them access in way) and might face the same blow back as described in the previous paragraph. US might then promote a more active role to be played by India in Afghanistan if they don't get basing rights in Pakistan.
In all this, what would be the reaction of China? How will they view the use of an airbase by US?
The permutation and combinations are endless and there is no simple answer to all of this. In the end Pakistan has to weigh its decisions keeping in view its short term and log term goals in the region. But above all see the benefits of a uni polar or a bipolar approach to its regional strategy.
Now if we do agree to it, than the questions is what would we ask in return and how to package the acceptance, domestically and what would be the blow back from across the border.
Not doing so would result in what kind of fall out an from whom?
The advantages are obvious, if negotiated from a position of strength, release of withheld CSF, release of F-16's, & AH 1Z's, License to export double the number of LHTEC T800-4A engines (On Frame and spare engines) Third country transfer of F-16's and access to EDA land weapons and air crafts (Difficult to negotiate the latest version of AMRAAM) This is the obvious windfall. How much the US agree to all this depends upon how hungry they are and how much pressure India can bear upon them to not to do so.
The blow back will in the shape of political point scoring by the usual suspects, religious right will make a hue and cry with obvious political tint, and likely hood of Af Talibs facilitating Pak Taliban for cross border raids into Pakistan. To some extent, the last point can be managed. Financial squeeze and FATF censure will be a factor played in game.
What if we don't give access. US will then use overflights to target AF Talibans ( we will indirectly be giving them access in way) and might face the same blow back as described in the previous paragraph. US might then promote a more active role to be played by India in Afghanistan if they don't get basing rights in Pakistan.
In all this, what would be the reaction of China? How will they view the use of an airbase by US?
The permutation and combinations are endless and there is no simple answer to all of this. In the end Pakistan has to weigh its decisions keeping in view its short term and log term goals in the region. But above all see the benefits of a uni polar or a bipolar approach to its regional strategy.
Yasser76
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2017
- Messages
- 2,629
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Kind of weird, this is what I was saying and in post 15,481 on the previous page you contridicted me.....
Naya hai?
Aamir Hussain
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,009
- Reaction score
- 33
- Country
- Location
No buddy I did not contradict myself, I am in this post, outlying what needs to be done on our side and on the US side. The real issue is still how India will play out its cards if Pakistan fold under pressure. I still believe, it wont happen as containment of China is a bigger issue than keeping Kabul intact.
Yasser76
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2017
- Messages
- 2,629
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
OK, well I have reread it and we will have to disagree, chance seems to keep changing. Let's leave it at that
Deltadart
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 22, 2016
- Messages
- 1,402
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Everything you suggested has been tried before. This time around the benefits of not giving bases out weight the benefits of giving bases. I believe after the foreign troops withdrawal, the air and ground access will end as well. We need to get out of others wars, and work for economic and social development of our nation. It's about time we put Pakistan first.
Windjammer
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 41,290
- Reaction score
- 181
- Country
- Location
Sherdils Viper sits in it's HAS on ADA.
truthseeker2010
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2010
- Messages
- 5,168
- Reaction score
- -8
No AIM-120 for ADA?
Windjammer
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 41,290
- Reaction score
- 181
- Country
- Location
In many sectors, JF-17s have taken over ADA duties from F-16s.
And it's not as if all air engagements are BVR combats.
FuturePAF
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Messages
- 10,546
- Reaction score
- 24
- Country
- Location
Considering the US is signaling a desire for renewed military cooperation with Pakistan, could this be the time Pakistan should approach the US to allow Pakistan to upgrade the F-16 in a few minor ways?
considering the evolution in IRST technology and our relationship with Leonardo, should Pakistan seek an addition to its F-16s so that they feature a nose mounted IRST, similar to the F-16 Block 60? If Pakistan can’t get an AESA on our F-16s, at least through a different sensor it maybe able to pick up enemy fighters a different way, and engage them further out; at the maximum NEZ of the Aim-120C5. A stop gap measure until political winds change and allow Pakistan to get an AESA on the aircraft.
Perhaps Leonardo would be willing to sell the PIRATE IRST from the Eurofighter. If not that IRST, there is also the Skyward IRST used on the Gripen.
www.leonardocompany.com
www.leonardocompany.com
The Italians could put their IRST into an “Open Pod” Design, with one IRST “head” option, while they could have another EW AESA “head” option.
The other upgrades would be avionics upgrades to better integrate the IRST and share the data between aircraft and other platforms and the C4ISR network.
P.S. IRST advancements are being made, so getting the best IRST possible can make a huge difference. Perhaps using the sniper pod the same can be achieved, which is probably why the PAF never pursued the IRST option for the F-16 and even went with the IRST pod option for the JF-17.
here are some of the latest to show the advancements between the F-35 EOTS and the new “Advanced EOTS” as a reference
www.lockheedmartin.com
considering the evolution in IRST technology and our relationship with Leonardo, should Pakistan seek an addition to its F-16s so that they feature a nose mounted IRST, similar to the F-16 Block 60? If Pakistan can’t get an AESA on our F-16s, at least through a different sensor it maybe able to pick up enemy fighters a different way, and engage them further out; at the maximum NEZ of the Aim-120C5. A stop gap measure until political winds change and allow Pakistan to get an AESA on the aircraft.
Perhaps Leonardo would be willing to sell the PIRATE IRST from the Eurofighter. If not that IRST, there is also the Skyward IRST used on the Gripen.
Pirate IRST
Skyward
The Italians could put their IRST into an “Open Pod” Design, with one IRST “head” option, while they could have another EW AESA “head” option.
The other upgrades would be avionics upgrades to better integrate the IRST and share the data between aircraft and other platforms and the C4ISR network.
P.S. IRST advancements are being made, so getting the best IRST possible can make a huge difference. Perhaps using the sniper pod the same can be achieved, which is probably why the PAF never pursued the IRST option for the F-16 and even went with the IRST pod option for the JF-17.
here are some of the latest to show the advancements between the F-35 EOTS and the new “Advanced EOTS” as a reference
F-35 Electro Optical Targeting System (EOTS)
Unlock precision air-to-air and air-to-surface capabilities with our forward looking infrared (FLIR) and infrared search and track (IRST) sensor combination.
Last edited:
Sifar zero
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2020
- Messages
- 1,359
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Is your source Haqeeqat TV??Just joking.
We would have like 6 fighter's until Mirage and F 7 is retired.
I think this deal would be the same as VT 4 the crews would be in training right now in China and then in the end the planes would be revealed in an exercise or a parade.
Similar threads
- Locked
