# Future of SD-10 in PAF?



## Bilal Khan 777

Pakistan Air Force opted for a compromise solution, with the inability to get European weapons, for SD-10 air to air missile. The weapon is now in service, with many hundred on order. However, what is the future of this weapon? Considering the evolving threat of BVRAACM in the theatre, it is likely that PAF will look for a life beyond SD-10.

Enters Russian Federation, which warmup gestures to Pakistan, as India lap dances in American corn fields. Russia has a robust arsenal of developed and developing air to air weapons. It is likely that Pakistan will look towards Russia to arm the next generation of JF17 aircraft, and making the aircraft relevant to Russian block for purchase (having a Russian power plant does help).

What we may expect is a solid interest of PAF in RVV series weapons, such as the Archer and Adder. This may make the sub-continent air battle very interesting, and perhaps the only airfare that will operate US and Russian weaponry side by side.

It is quite possible that Pakistan may opt for Su-35 aircraft, just to access the weapons for JF17 deployment. 
However, there will be counter actions to try to buy Rafale or EFT, to access european weapons. May the tallest glass on the table win.

BR

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Umair Nawaz

SD10b is an option. @Windjammer @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

The question applies to most of the other BVRAA missiles on the market, So my guess is that BVRAA missiles will evolve too..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bratva

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Pakistan Air Force opted for a compromise solution, with the inability to get European weapons, for SD-10 air to air missile. The weapon is now in service, with many hundred on order. However, what is the future of this weapon? Considering the evolving threat of BVRAACM in the theatre, it is likely that PAF will look for a life beyond SD-10.
> 
> Enters Russian Federation, which warmup gestures to Pakistan, as India lap dances in American corn fields. Russia has a robust arsenal of developed and developing air to air weapons. It is likely that Pakistan will look towards Russia to arm the next generation of JF17 aircraft, and making the aircraft relevant to Russian block for purchase (having a Russian power plant does help).
> 
> What we may expect is a solid interest of PAF in RVV series weapons, such as the Archer and Adder. This may make the sub-continent air battle very interesting, and perhaps the only airfare that will operate US and Russian weaponry side by side.
> 
> It is quite possible that Pakistan may opt for Su-35 aircraft, just to access the weapons for JF17 deployment.
> However, there will be counter actions to try to buy Rafale or EFT, to access european weapons. May the tallest glass on the table win.
> 
> BR



What about PL-15 ? It is a meteor class BVR. PAF may buy Russian BVR in limited number but the long term future is with PL-15 and PL-10.



Umair Nawaz said:


> SD10b is an option. @Windjammer @Bilal Khan (Quwa)



There is no SD-10B. China shelved the program and Merged SD-10B,C,D into PL-15

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Beast

Archer R-77 missile is inferior. That is why Chinese goes for SD-10 or PL-12 missile. We are disappointed with performance of R-77 BVRAAM in our Su-30MKK fleet. Trying to go for Russian option is like downgrading itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
19


----------



## Jaga Badmash

Bratva said:


> What about PL-15 ? It is a meteor class BVR. PAF may buy Russian BVR in limited number but the long term future is with PL-15 and PL-10.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no SD-10B. China shelved the program and Merged SD-10B,C,D into PL-15


Can we arm our JF-17 with AIM-120 AMRAAM which is far superior to Russian and Chinese BVRs.


----------



## Super Falcon

Inducting SU 35 Will resolve all issues

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bratva

Jaga Badmash said:


> Can we arm our JF-17 with AIM-120 AMRAAM which is far superior to Russian and Chinese BVRs.



No we can not. For that we need to unlock the *proprietary* software of AIM-120 so to integrate it with our radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Jaga Badmash

Bratva said:


> No we can not. For that we need to unlock the *proprietary* software of AIM-120 so to integrate it with our radar.


If we buy large number of missiles may US gives approval for that but again may be JF-17 current radar is not that powerful to support AIM-120.


----------



## Bratva

Jaga Badmash said:


> If we buy large number of missiles may US gives approval for that but again may be JF-17 current radar is not that powerful to support AIM-120.



In order to gain approval for this kind of thing, Pakistan has to sign several defence pacts like CISMOA. Large quantity will not create any influence for Pakistan dictating its terms.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Basel

Beast said:


> Archer R-77 missile is inferior. That is why Chinese goes for SD-10 or PL-12 missile. We are disappointed with performance of R-77 BVRAAM in our Su-30MKK fleet. Trying to go for Russian option is like downgrading itself.



But Indian Super Sukhoi, Mig-29Ks & PAK FA will use next gen BVR & WVR missiles, are those not good in performance?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Beast said:


> Archer R-77 missile is inferior. That is why Chinese goes for SD-10 or PL-12 missile. We are disappointed with performance of R-77 BVRAAM in our Su-30MKK fleet. Trying to go for Russian option is like downgrading itself.



I don't think you are independent when you make this claim.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jaga Badmash

Bratva said:


> In order to gain approval for this kind of thing, Pakistan has to sign several defence pacts like CISMOA. Large quantity will not create any influence for Pakistan dictating its terms.


If we equip JF-17 with latest radar of F-16 block 60 or at least 52+ then there is no need to sign such agreements.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Jaga Badmash said:


> If we buy large number of missiles may US gives approval for that but again may be JF-17 current radar is not that powerful to support AIM-120.



AIM120 is an active seeker, so its a handoff from the radar. It can also be a handoff from the data link. The power of the air intercept radar has no significance on the weapon carried.



Jaga Badmash said:


> If we equip JF-17 with latest radar of F-16 block 60 or at least 52+ then there is no need to sign such agreements.



And how realistic is availability of these systems?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Bratva

Jaga Badmash said:


> If we equip JF-17 with latest radar of F-16 block 60 or at least 52+ then there is no need to sign such agreements.



Then we have to move this kind of JF-17 away from mainstream bases and onto Shahbaz where chinese cant come and touch JF-17 wherever they like.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jaga Badmash

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> AIM120 is an active seeker, so its a handoff from the radar. It can also be a handoff from the data link. The power of the air intercept radar has no significance on the weapon carried.
> 
> 
> 
> And how realistic is availability of these systems?


US already supplied AIM-120 to Pakistan some news quoted around 500 and we never approach US for any equipment for JF-17 since US equipment are quite prone to sanctions and may PAF don't want that project like JF-17 hit by any sanctions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Jaga Badmash said:


> US already supplied AIM-120 to Pakistan some news quoted around 500 and we never approach US for any equipment for JF-17 since US equipment are quite prone to sanctions and may PAF don't want that project like JF-17 hit by any sanctions.



JF-17 is an non-ITAR platform, means no american origin equipment will be installed. AIM-120 is for US platforms only, and platform and region locked.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I don't think you are independent when you make this claim.


We have R-77 in our stock. So what do you think? We even modify existing Su-30MKK to fire our own PL-12 missile. If R-77 is such magical and wonderful missile. We would have long gone for more or keep buying R-77. But fact is, many layman has hyped up by its wonderful marketing skill and didn't know the real story.

China never go for the second restock of R-77. Once it fully expended, we will used only PL-12 missile or PL-15 if it enter service.







Most likely the Russian radar is replaced with domestic radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Zarvan



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tipu7

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Pakistan Air Force opted for a compromise solution, with the inability to get European weapons, for SD-10 air to air missile. The weapon is now in service, with many hundred on order. However, what is the future of this weapon? Considering the evolving threat of BVRAACM in the theatre, it is likely that PAF will look for a life beyond SD-10.
> 
> Enters Russian Federation, which warmup gestures to Pakistan, as India lap dances in American corn fields. Russia has a robust arsenal of developed and developing air to air weapons. It is likely that Pakistan will look towards Russia to arm the next generation of JF17 aircraft, and making the aircraft relevant to Russian block for purchase (having a Russian power plant does help).
> 
> What we may expect is a solid interest of PAF in RVV series weapons, such as the Archer and Adder. This may make the sub-continent air battle very interesting, and perhaps the only airfare that will operate US and Russian weaponry side by side.
> 
> It is quite possible that Pakistan may opt for Su-35 aircraft, just to access the weapons for JF17 deployment.
> However, there will be counter actions to try to buy Rafale or EFT, to access european weapons. May the tallest glass on the table win.
> 
> BR


I guess we should keep working with Denel for air to air missiles for coming blocks of Jf17
How about replacing SD10 with Marlin




And PL5 by A Darter?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

@Bilal Khan 777 

In terms of the future a key consideration will be the guidance suite. As difficult as it is to develop the propulsion, I don't think there is a world's of difference between the rockets powering the SD-10 series versus the R-series or other AAMs (exception being AIM-120D and Meteor). But the guidance element is an option question. One's consideration isn't only confined to the current typing, e.g. active radar-homing, but we also need to keep other ideas, such as dual-seekers (e.g. ARH and IIR) and AESA-based seekers. The vendor who is (1) developing this stuff, (2) is willing to export it, (3) and is willing to sell to Pakistan would be the long-term winner, IMO.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
12


----------



## zebra7

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Pakistan Air Force opted for a compromise solution, with the inability to get European weapons, for SD-10 air to air missile. The weapon is now in service, with many hundred on order. However, what is the future of this weapon? Considering the evolving threat of BVRAACM in the theatre, it is likely that PAF will look for a life beyond SD-10.
> 
> Enters Russian Federation, which warmup gestures to Pakistan, as India lap dances in American corn fields. Russia has a robust arsenal of developed and developing air to air weapons. It is likely that Pakistan will look towards Russia to arm the next generation of JF17 aircraft, and making the aircraft relevant to Russian block for purchase (having a Russian power plant does help).
> 
> What we may expect is a solid interest of PAF in RVV series weapons, such as the Archer and Adder. This may make the sub-continent air battle very interesting, and perhaps the only airfare that will operate US and Russian weaponry side by side.
> 
> It is quite possible that Pakistan may opt for Su-35 aircraft, just to access the weapons for JF17 deployment.
> However, there will be counter actions to try to buy Rafale or EFT, to access european weapons. May the tallest glass on the table win.
> 
> BR



1. You are claiming SD-10 an export variant of the PL-12 as inferior, inferior to whom ?? and on what terms ?

2. JF-17 radar is Chinese KLJ-7 v2, so if PAF choose some other BVRAAM, who is going to mate it, and does the BVRAAM is a plug and play device to be just put it on the plane.

3. SU-35, to access the weapon for JF-17 development, how ?? Does Chinese think that they could not supply their weapon package, and wants Russian to add their weaponary so easily. Doesn't Chinese thinking of some profits gain from the JF-17 weapon package.

@Beast so which Seaker Chinese are using in their PL-12 BVR

and some one suggesting PL-15 ?? Is it ready for the export ? and the cost signify the usage in general or rather for special targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

zebra7 said:


> 1. You are claiming SD-10 an export variant of the PL-12 as inferior, inferior to whom ?? and on what terms ?
> 
> 2. JF-17 radar is Chinese KLJ-7 v2, so if PAF choose some other BVRAAM, who is going to mate it, and does the BVRAAM is a plug and play device to be just put it on the plane.
> 
> 3. SU-35, to access the weapon for JF-17 development, how ?? Does Chinese think that they could not supply their weapon package, and wants Russian to add their weaponary so easily. Doesn't Chinese thinking of some profits gain from the JF-17 weapon package.
> 
> @Beast so which Seaker Chinese are using in their PL-12 BVR
> 
> and some one suggesting PL-15 ?? Is it ready for the export ? and the cost signify the usage in general or rather for special targets.


PL-12 BVRAAM use a unique dual passive/active seeker which is more resistant to ECM.


----------



## zebra7

Beast said:


> PL-12 BVRAAM use a unique dual passive/active seeker which is more resistant to ECM.



I said which seeker and developed by which OEM and of which country origin.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

zebra7 said:


> I said which seeker and developed by which OEM and of which country origin.


Luoyang Electro-Optical Technology Development Center (LOEC). Everything is from China. 

There are many rubbish western source which just recycle false claim of the seeker from Russia AGAT.


----------



## zebra7

Beast said:


> Luoyang Electro-Optical Technology Development Center (LOEC). Everything is from China.
> 
> There are many rubbish western source which just recycle false claim of the seeker from Russia AGAT.



China usually run parralel development program along with the imported system, and China in this case uses AGAT AGAT's 9B-1348 active-radar seeker due to the difficulty in the development. Care to explain *Project 129. 
*
Other than seeker the inertial guidance system, and Data link is also Russian.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

zebra7 said:


> China usually run parralel development program along with the imported system, and China in this case uses AGAT AGAT's 9B-1348 active-radar seeker due to the difficulty in the development. Care to explain *Project 129.
> *
> Other than seeker the inertial guidance system, and Data link is also Russian.


Datalink of Russian origin is BS. We made a unique similar link 16 comparable to US called *J*oint *S*ervice *I*ntegrated *D*ata *L*ink *S*ystem(全军综合数据链系统). It is something Russia not even comparable. So how can it be Russia origin?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zebra7

Beast said:


> Datalink of Russian origin is BS. We made a unique similar link 16 comparable to US called *J*oint *S*ervice *I*ntegrated *D*ata *L*ink *S*ystem(全军综合数据链系统). It is something Russia not even comparable. So how can it be Russia origin?



LOL Did you even know what is Link 16


----------



## Beast

zebra7 said:


> LOL Did you even know what is Link 16


Yes, military standard link between most military system. Sharing data and info.


----------



## zebra7

Beast said:


> Yes, military standard link between most military system. Sharing data and info.



Then you should know that it is just the standard, and software only, not the hardware.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

zebra7 said:


> Then you should know that it is just the standard, and software only, not the hardware.


I am just quoting an example. Its difficult to translate to specific correct english from Chinese source.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Tipu7 said:


> I guess we should keep working with Denel for air to air missiles for coming blocks of Jf17
> How about replacing SD10 with Marlin
> View attachment 333686
> 
> And PL5 by A Darter?
> View attachment 333687



Yes but Denel has two issues. Marlin is far from ready, and Darter is with a wrong marketing team which will likely lead to the market being secured by the next contender.



zebra7 said:


> 1. You are claiming SD-10 an export variant of the PL-12 as inferior, inferior to whom ?? and on what terms ?
> 
> 2. JF-17 radar is Chinese KLJ-7 v2, so if PAF choose some other BVRAAM, who is going to mate it, and does the BVRAAM is a plug and play device to be just put it on the plane.
> 
> 3. SU-35, to access the weapon for JF-17 development, how ?? Does Chinese think that they could not supply their weapon package, and wants Russian to add their weaponary so easily. Doesn't Chinese thinking of some profits gain from the JF-17 weapon package.
> 
> @Beast so which Seaker Chinese are using in their PL-12 BVR
> 
> and some one suggesting PL-15 ?? Is it ready for the export ? and the cost signify the usage in general or rather for special targets.



Kindly don't put words in my mouth. SD10 effectively meets the current requirement of PAF. However, JF17 is for future role, and the future requirement vis-a-vis the evolving threat requires other weapons to be considered.



Beast said:


> We have R-77 in our stock. So what do you think? We even modify existing Su-30MKK to fire our own PL-12 missile. If R-77 is such magical and wonderful missile. We would have long gone for more or keep buying R-77. But fact is, many layman has hyped up by its wonderful marketing skill and didn't know the real story.
> 
> China never go for the second restock of R-77. Once it fully expended, we will used only PL-12 missile or PL-15 if it enter service.
> 
> View attachment 333778
> 
> 
> Most likely the Russian radar is replaced with domestic radar.


Most of Chinese hardware is license produced or illegal copied Russian or Israeli hardware. There are hardly innovations out of China. You can harp your horn all you like, but being the largest customer of chinese defense exports, we know what works and what is junk from China.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> @Bilal Khan 777
> 
> In terms of the future a key consideration will be the guidance suite. As difficult as it is to develop the propulsion, I don't think there is a world's of difference between the rockets powering the SD-10 series versus the R-series or other AAMs (exception being AIM-120D and Meteor). But the guidance element is an option question. One's consideration isn't only confined to the current typing, e.g. active radar-homing, but we also need to keep other ideas, such as dual-seekers (e.g. ARH and IIR) and AESA-based seekers. The vendor who is (1) developing this stuff, (2) is willing to export it, (3) and is willing to sell to Pakistan would be the long-term winner, IMO.



Well thought out ideas, and something everyone interested in the topic should think about.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beast

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Most of Chinese hardware is license produced or illegal copied Russian or Israeli hardware. There are hardly innovations out of China. You can harp your horn all you like, but being the largest customer of chinese defense exports, we know what works and what is junk from China.



LOL, as if you know. Actually you know nothing. Most your knowledge of Chinese military is based on bogus western source which basically recycle from crap western article which is nothing but smearing.

Or you want to claim DF-21D is also copy from Russia? We do not need this kind of crap Pakistanis fanboy like you who only know how to worship western stuff blindly.

Or you want to claim China UCAV is also copy from Russian who even needs to buy from Israel? Israel dont even have a proper working UCAV. Their surveilance drone is good but cant carry out combat and surveilance mission at once. The best UCAV is from USA and China.





Learn more before you sprout nonsense.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Beast said:


> LOL, as if you know. Actually you know nothing. Most your knowledge of Chinese military is based on bogus western source which basically recycle from crap western article which is nothing but smearing.
> 
> Or you want to claim DF-21D is also copy from Russia? We do not need this kind of crap Pakistanis fanboy like you who only know how to worship western stuff blindly.



Excuse me sir. This is MY thread, so watch your bull shit. It is your opinion what I know or don't. Most of my knowledge is based on being the end user of Chinese military equipment. I do not worship western equipment blindly, and kindly take you juvenile attacks elsewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SQ8

The Adder series is a great system on paper, but so far its reliability and availability is an issue along with a very suspect shelf life. T

he SD-10 is at the end the seeker of the Adder mated with a modified Sparrow body. 

The performance of the SD-10 was evaluated against the Aim-120C and found to match it. 

The issue is the impeding issue of needed a new generation Helmet for the JF-17 which is where the actual limitations occur. The Russians have nothing to offer and what is available has Elbit or IAI stamped on its components. 

The PL-5 is pretty adequate for most slash and dash passes but the trump card what was to be the A-darter never panned out. That is the where the real problem is. 

The JF-17 is unlikely to get anything western for the PAF at least since the French are too desperate to land more deals on our "playa" neighbor throwing their money around.



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Excuse me sir. This is MY thread, so watch your bull shit. It is your opinion what I know or don't. Most of my knowledge is based on being the end user of Chinese military equipment. I do not worship western equipment blindly, and kindly take you juvenile attacks elsewhere.


Cue the nationalist and over zealous Chinese teenager who keeps calling out everyone as having no knowledge.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Pakistan Air Force opted for a compromise solution, with the inability to get European weapons, for SD-10 air to air missile. The weapon is now in service, with many hundred on order. However, what is the future of this weapon? Considering the evolving threat of BVRAACM in the theatre, it is likely that PAF will look for a life beyond SD-10.
> 
> Enters Russian Federation, which warmup gestures to Pakistan, as India lap dances in American corn fields. Russia has a robust arsenal of developed and developing air to air weapons. It is likely that Pakistan will look towards Russia to arm the next generation of JF17 aircraft, and making the aircraft relevant to Russian block for purchase (having a Russian power plant does help).
> 
> What we may expect is a solid interest of PAF in RVV series weapons, such as the Archer and Adder. This may make the sub-continent air battle very interesting, and perhaps the only airfare that will operate US and Russian weaponry side by side.
> 
> It is quite possible that Pakistan may opt for Su-35 aircraft, just to access the weapons for JF17 deployment.
> However, there will be counter actions to try to buy Rafale or EFT, to access european weapons. May the tallest glass on the table win.
> 
> BR



Hello Sir,

You are touching on a subject that most people cannot comprehend. When bad decisions are made---terrible things happen immediately and in the long run---.

Bad decisions not only have an immediate effect---but they have a MULTIPLIER effects that lingers on for years to come---and raises its ugly head where you least expect it to.

And that is when I come back to the year 2002---2005. A vendor knowing that a sale is must to save the life of its fighter aircraft industry---a buyer totally oblivious to the fact---or does not care.

The consequences of not buying the Rafale are going to haunt the paf for many a coming decades---.

I think that the Paf needs to find a way to get hooked up with the EFT and some goodies for the JF17----.

I would rather have that package with 24---30 EFT's than 40 SU35's---.



Beast said:


> We have R-77 in our stock. So what do you think? We even modify existing Su-30MKK to fire our own PL-12 missile. If R-77 is such magical and wonderful missile. We would have long gone for more or keep buying R-77. But fact is, many layman has hyped up by its wonderful marketing skill and didn't know the real story.
> 
> China never go for the second restock of R-77. Once it fully expended, we will used only PL-12 missile or PL-15 if it enter service.
> 
> View attachment 333778
> 
> 
> Most likely the Russian radar is replaced with domestic radar.



Hi,

I do not understand why you are upset at the word copy----. Copying is a form of art that few have---.

Copying something means that you have the ability to get into the head of the person who designed that item---if your copy meets the abilities of the one copied from---then technically you are ahead of the originator----but if you end up making a better system out of the copy---then you capabilities are way way ahead of those of the original manufacturer.

Which means that you just needed to be shown a direction---and your inner intellect superior brain power took it over and took things to the next level up.

So---next time when someone says " it is a copy "---you better smile and say---" yes it is ---and we have more coming from where it came from".

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Thorough Pro

What is stopping Pakistan now to outflank india and sign a deal for 40 Rafaels tomorrow?


----------



## Curious_Guy

Money and may be french themselve



Thorough Pro said:


> What is stopping Pakistan now to outflank india and sign a deal for 40 Rafaels tomorrow?


----------



## MastanKhan

Thorough Pro said:


> What is stopping Pakistan now to outflank india and sign a deal for 40 Rafaels tomorrow?



Hi,

India has already signed a massive deal for the Locomotives with France---correct me if I am wrong---. If india totally rejects the Rafale---then maybe---.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## wiseone2

Jaga Badmash said:


> Can we arm our JF-17 with AIM-120 AMRAAM which is far superior to Russian and Chinese BVRs.


the yanks might not allow



MastanKhan said:


> Hello Sir,
> 
> You are touching on a subject that most people cannot comprehend. When bad decisions are made---terrible things happen immediately and in the long run---.
> 
> Bad decisions not only have an immediate effect---but they have a MULTIPLIER effects that lingers on for years to come---and raises its ugly head where you least expect it to.
> 
> And that is when I come back to the year 2002---2005. A vendor knowing that a sale is must to save the life of its fighter aircraft industry---a buyer totally oblivious to the fact---or does not care.
> 
> The consequences of not buying the Rafale are going to haunt the paf for many a coming decades---.
> 
> I think that the Paf needs to find a way to get hooked up with the EFT and some goodies for the JF17----.
> 
> I would rather have that package with 24---30 EFT's than 40 SU35's---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I do not understand why you are upset at the word copy----. Copying is a form of art that few have---.
> 
> Copying something means that you have the ability to get into the head of the person who designed that item---if your copy meets the abilities of the one copied from---then technically you are ahead of the originator----but if you end up making a better system out of the copy---then you capabilities are way way ahead of those of the original manufacturer.
> 
> Which means that you just needed to be shown a direction---and your inner intellect superior brain power took it over and took things to the next level up.
> 
> So---next time when someone says " it is a copy "---you better smile and say---" yes it is ---and we have more coming from where it came from".



the EFT is a political nightmare with 4 countries responsible


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

MastanKhan said:


> Hello Sir,
> 
> You are touching on a subject that most people cannot comprehend. When bad decisions are made---terrible things happen immediately and in the long run---.
> 
> Bad decisions not only have an immediate effect---but they have a MULTIPLIER effects that lingers on for years to come---and raises its ugly head where you least expect it to.
> 
> And that is when I come back to the year 2002---2005. A vendor knowing that a sale is must to save the life of its fighter aircraft industry---a buyer totally oblivious to the fact---or does not care.
> 
> The consequences of not buying the Rafale are going to haunt the paf for many a coming decades---.
> 
> I think that the Paf needs to find a way to get hooked up with the EFT and some goodies for the JF17----.
> 
> I would rather have that package with 24---30 EFT's than 40 SU35's---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I do not understand why you are upset at the word copy----. Copying is a form of art that few have---.
> 
> Copying something means that you have the ability to get into the head of the person who designed that item---if your copy meets the abilities of the one copied from---then technically you are ahead of the originator----but if you end up making a better system out of the copy---then you capabilities are way way ahead of those of the original manufacturer.
> 
> Which means that you just needed to be shown a direction---and your inner intellect superior brain power took it over and took things to the next level up.
> 
> So---next time when someone says " it is a copy "---you better smile and say---" yes it is ---and we have more coming from where it came from".


The SD-10 was less of a bad decision than it was a necessity of the time. In the early 2000s there were hardly any decent active radar-homing (ARM) AAM solutions available to the PAF. For example, there was the R-Darter, which - while an ARM - was becoming a dated solution, and Denel's next-gen BVRAAM programs (e.g. T-Darter) were just not entering development.

In fact, I was speaking to a South African engineer familiar with Denel's dealings with Pakistan a few weeks ago; the company had hoped to engage in a number of projects, but in the mid-2000s, the BRICS mantra and India's lure for lucrative contracts encouraged the company's leadership close the door on Pakistan (and in the process abandon a number of promising programs).

For one reason (e.g. corruption allegations) or another ("IP theft in India" - his words, not mine), Denel was not able to effectively enter the Indian market. "It was a regretful decision" (again, his words, not mine).

The PAF was interested in the MICA-RF, but that tunnel collapsed.

Besides that, there wasn't much of anything else, besides perhaps some even older semi-active radar-homing (SARH) solutions such as the Aspide. Unfortunately, and to @Bilal Khan 777's point, the PAF has yet to secure a true next-gen AAM solution - i.e. a platform that will stay relevant for not a few years, but at least 10-15 years. In that regard, it is a matter of studying who is in practical possession of the best concepts.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Super Falcon

SD 10 will evolve too


----------



## Viper0011.

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Pakistan Air Force opted for a compromise solution, with the inability to get European weapons, for SD-10 air to air missile. The weapon is now in service, with many hundred on order. However, what is the future of this weapon? Considering the evolving threat of BVRAACM in the theatre, it is likely that PAF will look for a life beyond SD-10.



- SD-10 and later, PL-15 will remain in the PAF and for the JFT's (along with potential Russian or EU options).

- Pakistan wants full independence in terms of essential defense capability. A big part of that is an internally made BVR weapon, similar to the capability that the JFT provides for the PAF. The only and a better option is the Chinese one (whether SD-10 TOT or licensed manufacturing of PL-15). Russians or Europeans won't give you the proprietary codes and integration capability beyond need.

- Plus, SD-10 and PL-15 have said to have both, the Russian influence and the Western influence in terms of having advanced Passive and Active seekers. So its a better option then the Russian one's available today, which have proven pretty useless in pretty much all air battles in the Middle East in recent times.

- Some analysis I've read from Janes and others (very credible) also explain that the SD-10 program has Israeli technology involved too (Python, etc). The Israelis cancelled all advanced capability projects with the Chinese per the US pressure, when the Israelis were selling the Chinese their Phalcon AWACS platform. Till then, the tech transfer and know how provided on BVR missile platform had played a key role into SD-10's development. Which is why it is rated directly with AMRAAM C5 and not with the Russian Archer or other BVRAAM's.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The SD-10 was less of a bad decision than it was a necessity of the time. In the early 2000s there were hardly any decent active radar-homing (ARM) AAM solutions available to the PAF. For example, there was the R-Darter, which - while an ARM - was becoming a dated solution, and Denel's next-gen BVRAAM programs (e.g. T-Darter) were just not entering development.
> 
> In fact, I was speaking to a South African engineer familiar with Denel's dealings with Pakistan a few weeks ago; the company had hoped to engage in a number of projects, but in the mid-2000s, the BRICS mantra and India's lure for lucrative contracts encouraged the company's leadership close the door on Pakistan (and in the process abandon a number of promising programs).
> 
> For one reason (e.g. corruption allegations) or another ("IP theft in India" - his words, not mine), Denel was not able to effectively enter the Indian market. "It was a regretful decision" (again, his words, not mine).
> 
> The PAF was interested in the MICA-RF, but that tunnel collapsed.
> 
> Besides that, there wasn't much of anything else, besides perhaps some even older semi-active radar-homing (SARH) solutions such as the Aspide. Unfortunately, and to @Bilal Khan 777's point, the PAF has yet to secure a true next-gen AAM solution - i.e. a platform that will stay relevant for not a few years, but at least 10-15 years. In that regard, it is a matter of studying who is in practical possession of the best concepts.



Hi,

Thank you for your post---and it again comes back to the ramifications of simple deals gone bad---.

No deal is a single deal in itself---. So what is obvious and visible to everyone now ( what was visible to very few of us then ) is that there were blunders made one after the other.

Obviously there was no concept of FEATURES & BENEFITS--- or what I would do for them---to what they will do to us in return kind of thinking---.

Paf needed someone with god's view of the French deal or for every deal that they have failed to make in a timely manner---.

There are basically 2 tier 1 vendors in the world for air force aircraft / weapons / EW suite that can supply you from one end to the other---covering everything---the U S---& the French---& the Paf managed to get both of them pi-ssed off or ticked off at pakistan.

Now---someone Plz tell me what kind of game plan and strategy is this---.

You talk about the mid 2000's----when things started to change----Bilal---the world knew that change was coming----the only fool that did not believe in that was the Paf and its Air Chief---and the Pakistanis---.

At that time pakistanis were walking arrogant as gods---" money talks---the GORAY will sell their mother's to us for money "---that was the mindset of the pakistanis---not illiterate pakistanis---but the Pakistani military air force General Staff---".

Well---they are not selling their mothers for anything---the pakistani air force wants to---but no one wants to buy their mothers---.

It is said in the U S---you want to check the pulse of the U S--check the car sales in the U So----that is the first thing that tells you what is coming----. The sale of vehicles to the citizens of a certain nation in the late 90's and early 2000's tells a very interesting story 

The indian influence by mid 2005 was no surprise---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jaga Badmash

wiseone2 said:


> the yanks might not allow


Since India is going to have complete F-16 / F-18 plus many other make in India aseembly lines we might ask Modi to give us access

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Viper0011. said:


> - SD-10 and later, PL-15 will remain in the PAF and for the JFT's (along with potential Russian or EU options).
> 
> - Pakistan wants full independence in terms of essential defense capability. A big part of that is an internally made BVR weapon, similar to the capability that the JFT provides for the PAF. The only and a better option is the Chinese one (whether SD-10 TOT or licensed manufacturing of PL-15). Russians or Europeans won't give you the proprietary codes and integration capability beyond need.
> 
> - Plus, SD-10 and PL-15 have said to have both, the Russian influence and the Western influence in terms of having advanced Passive and Active seekers. So its a better option then the Russian one's available today, which have proven pretty useless in pretty much all air battles in the Middle East in recent times.
> 
> - Some analysis I've read from Janes and others (very credible) also explain that the SD-10 program has Israeli technology involved too (Python, etc). The Israelis cancelled all advanced capability projects with the Chinese per the US pressure, when the Israelis were selling the Chinese their Phalcon AWACS platform. Till then, the tech transfer and know how provided on BVR missile platform had played a key role into SD-10's development. Which is why it is rated directly with AMRAAM C5 and not with the Russian Archer or other BVRAAM's.



SD-10 is a Ukrainian program derivative with Russian seeker built in China on License, with a Chinese AAM fuse.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The SD-10 was less of a bad decision than it was a necessity of the time. In the early 2000s there were hardly any decent active radar-homing (ARM) AAM solutions available to the PAF. For example, there was the R-Darter, which - while an ARM - was becoming a dated solution, and Denel's next-gen BVRAAM programs (e.g. T-Darter) were just not entering development.
> 
> In fact, I was speaking to a South African engineer familiar with Denel's dealings with Pakistan a few weeks ago; the company had hoped to engage in a number of projects, but in the mid-2000s, the BRICS mantra and India's lure for lucrative contracts encouraged the company's leadership close the door on Pakistan (and in the process abandon a number of promising programs).
> 
> For one reason (e.g. corruption allegations) or another ("IP theft in India" - his words, not mine), Denel was not able to effectively enter the Indian market. "It was a regretful decision" (again, his words, not mine).
> 
> The PAF was interested in the MICA-RF, but that tunnel collapsed.
> 
> Besides that, there wasn't much of anything else, besides perhaps some even older semi-active radar-homing (SARH) solutions such as the Aspide. Unfortunately, and to @Bilal Khan 777's point, the PAF has yet to secure a true next-gen AAM solution - i.e. a platform that will stay relevant for not a few years, but at least 10-15 years. In that regard, it is a matter of studying who is in practical possession of the best concepts.


SD-10 is a stop gap measure, but JF17 will see more. The life beyond SD-10 will see more weapons being inducted.

Earlier questions of how to mate radars with AAM. In case of an active seeker AAM, that is not required. JF17 has two mission computers and a stores management system. The main interfacing point is the mission computer.



MastanKhan said:


> Hello Sir,
> 
> You are touching on a subject that most people cannot comprehend. When bad decisions are made---terrible things happen immediately and in the long run---.
> 
> Bad decisions not only have an immediate effect---but they have a MULTIPLIER effects that lingers on for years to come---and raises its ugly head where you least expect it to.
> 
> And that is when I come back to the year 2002---2005. A vendor knowing that a sale is must to save the life of its fighter aircraft industry---a buyer totally oblivious to the fact---or does not care.
> 
> The consequences of not buying the Rafale are going to haunt the paf for many a coming decades---.
> 
> I think that the Paf needs to find a way to get hooked up with the EFT and some goodies for the JF17----.
> 
> I would rather have that package with 24---30 EFT's than 40 SU35's---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I do not understand why you are upset at the word copy----. Copying is a form of art that few have---.
> 
> Copying something means that you have the ability to get into the head of the person who designed that item---if your copy meets the abilities of the one copied from---then technically you are ahead of the originator----but if you end up making a better system out of the copy---then you capabilities are way way ahead of those of the original manufacturer.
> 
> Which means that you just needed to be shown a direction---and your inner intellect superior brain power took it over and took things to the next level up.
> 
> So---next time when someone says " it is a copy "---you better smile and say---" yes it is ---and we have more coming from where it came from".



As someone pointed out, EFT has its own unique set of issues.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mikkix

By joining China against the will of US, we will now in a huge risk and will be short in defense technologies after that. Now question is can China will compensate us because if we join US against China then we will have every weapons of new technologies from US just like India is now trying to do.
Can we dont have ability to make good relations to both of them or is it another phrase like "either with us or against us?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## amardeep mishra

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Most of Chinese hardware is license produced or illegal copied Russian or Israeli hardware. *There are hardly innovations out of China*. You can harp your horn all you like, but being the largest customer of chinese defense exports, we know what works and what is junk from China.



Hi dear @Bilal Khan 777
There is no doubt that a lot of chinese products especially weapon systems that we see are either licensed versions or illegal rip offs of russian/israeli/western systems. There are different ways countries aim to design weapon system,i remember a very recent talk by a chinese professor in delhi(i did not attend it-my friend did!) wherein he mentioned how different countries have different approach to developing weapon systems.There were two broad ways he could identify and that are-
1)Playing catch-up with western established manufacturers or
2)Doing everything either legal or otherwise to bridge the gap
He clearly mentioned china follows 2nd option and india 1st one. China has gradually moved up the ladder or moving up the technology chain.
But it is also erroneous to assume that there is no "innovation out of china".Chinese companies are now leaders in bulk of patent filing. In terms of sheer specification comparision between chinese rip offs and equivalent western counterpart,an older rip off(or a chinese weapon design maybe till mid-late 2000s) would come out to be 2nd best.However as china moves up the technology ladder this difference would only narrow up- but it will certainly take a long-i really mean a long time to achieve parity or even surpass the western "way of research" or "quantitative/qualitative" specs of weapons they design.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> For one reason (e.g. corruption allegations) or another ("IP theft in India" - his words, not mine), Denel was not able to effectively enter the Indian market. "It was a regretful decision" (again, his words, not mine).


Hi dear @Quwa
In terms of weapons research,indian govt doesnt really support IP theft. On the contrary it is considered a safe place in terms of protection of IP rights.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi dear @Bilal Khan 777
> There is no doubt that a lot of chinese products especially weapon systems that we see are either licensed versions or illegal rip offs of russian/israeli/western systems. There are different ways countries aim to design weapon system,i remember a very recent talk by a chinese professor in delhi(i did not attend it-my friend did!) wherein he mentioned how different countries have different approach to developing weapon systems.There were two broad ways he could identify and that are-
> 1)Playing catch-up with western established manufacturers or
> 2)Doing everything either legal or otherwise to bridge the gap
> He clearly mentioned china follows 2nd option and india 1st one. China has gradually moved up the ladder or moving up the technology chain.
> But it is also erroneous to assume that there is no "innovation out of china".Chinese companies are now leaders in bulk of patent filing. In terms of sheer specification comparision between chinese rip offs and equivalent western counterpart,an older rip off(or a chinese weapon design maybe till mid-late 2000s) would come out to be 2nd best.However as china moves up the technology ladder this difference would only narrow up- but it will certainly take a long-i really mean a long time to achieve parity or even surpass the western "way of research" or "quantitative/qualitative" specs of weapons they design.
> 
> 
> Hi dear @Quwa
> In terms of weapons research,indian govt doesnt really support IP theft. On the contrary it is considered a safe place in terms of protection of IP rights.


Was just quoting a disgruntled South African.


----------



## MastanKhan

@Bilal Khan 777[/USER]

What a tangled web we weave-----

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Falcon26

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The SD-10 was less of a bad decision than it was a necessity of the time. In the early 2000s there were hardly any decent active radar-homing (ARM) AAM solutions available to the PAF. For example, there was the R-Darter, which - while an ARM - was becoming a dated solution, and Denel's next-gen BVRAAM programs (e.g. T-Darter) were just not entering development.
> 
> In fact, I was speaking to a South African engineer familiar with Denel's dealings with Pakistan a few weeks ago; the company had hoped to engage in a number of projects, but in the mid-2000s, the BRICS mantra and India's lure for lucrative contracts encouraged the company's leadership close the door on Pakistan (and in the process abandon a number of promising programs).
> 
> For one reason (e.g. corruption allegations) or another ("IP theft in India" - his words, not mine), Denel was not able to effectively enter the Indian market. "It was a regretful decision" (again, his words, not mine).
> 
> The PAF was interested in the MICA-RF, but that tunnel collapsed.
> 
> Besides that, there wasn't much of anything else, besides perhaps some even older semi-active radar-homing (SARH) solutions such as the Aspide. Unfortunately, and to @Bilal Khan 777's point, the PAF has yet to secure a true next-gen AAM solution - i.e. a platform that will stay relevant for not a few years, but at least 10-15 years. In that regard, it is a matter of studying who is in practical possession of the best concepts.



Can't Pakistan somehow invest 100-million in Denel and gain ownership stake of the company?


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

This is from a novice and naïve person. What's about the Turkish systems? There appears to be a number of projects for BVR, AESA, IIR etc. systems going-on. I have to admit Turkish folks are increasingly getting proficient in defense projects. Reis Erdo'an has put his reputation at stake for these projects. Software might not be an issue. As for the hardware, if the design is available, sanction prone components may be replaced with Chinese chips. China has a huge semiconductor drive to get key technologies. I am pretty sure within 5 years they will be fabricating lot of key chips, e.g., processors, analog etc. They're getting good with process technologies, so military grade ICs may be within their reach. Since GaN based devices are fabricated by Turkish folks themselves it should be a huge relief. Just few random thoughts...

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

HAKIKAT said:


> This is from a novice and naïve person. What's about the Turkish systems? There appears to be a number of projects for BVR, AESA, IIR etc. systems going-on. I have to admit Turkish folks are increasingly getting proficient in defense projects. Reis Erdo'an has put his reputation at stake for these projects. Software might not be an issue. As for the hardware, if the design is available, sanction prone components may be replaced with Chinese chips. China has a huge semiconductor drive to get key technologies. I am pretty sure within 5 years they will be fabricating lot of key chips, e.g., processors, analog etc. They're getting good with process technologies, so military grade ICs may be within their reach. Since GaN based devices are fabricated by Turkish folks themselves it should be a huge relief. Just few random thoughts...



It is quite possible that many of the future weapons and platforms operated by Pakistan are of Turkish origin.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Was just quoting a disgruntled South African.



now now, be careful before the reference brigade starts asking for you for references and passport copies.



Falcon26 said:


> Can't Pakistan somehow invest 100-million in Denel and gain ownership stake of the company?



I don't think that would be possible. Such a proposition works for UAE as then south african talent can move there. That may not be feasible for Pakistan now. The technical risk has to be owned by manufacturer, not the buyer.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Falcon26 said:


> Can't Pakistan somehow invest 100-million in Denel and gain ownership stake of the company?


Denel is a state-owned enterprise, so the South African Gov't won't be parting from it as a whole.

What Pakistan could potentially do (though still unlikely) is pair an armed forces acquisition to commercial offsets, which in turn can be fed into a new subsidiary in Pakistan OR commercial work for Pakistani state owned enterprises (SOE), such as HIT.

Our MODP is vocally eager to pivot the SOEs such that they don't depend on government funding in order to operate. However, this is only possible if these SOEs get commercial work outside of the armed forces' requirements, and the best known way to pull that off is to sign onto commercial offset deals.

For example, if the Army were to buy another 200 MRAPs, it could buy them from Denel, but with a clause that requires 49% of the contract value to be re-invested in Pakistan. Denel could do that by (1) setting up a subsidiary in Pakistan or (2) contract component work out to HIT for not just the Pakistan Army, but all MRAP orders (even those from Nigeria, for example).

In the best case scenario, once your offset obligations are complete, the original vendor will keep contracting work to you. So in the end, you could (in theory, though rarely) get 100%+ of the contract back into the economy.

However in Pakistan's case, I don't think armoured vehicles would be the start of such a venture. The best chance we have for such stuff is actually the assault rifle program, and this is because POF is a much more mature SOE, the Army has massive scale and real buying power (at least in terms of small arms), and we are actually intent on making it happen. 

The private sector subsidiary is a nice idea, but Pakistan's business - and general - environment is just not conducive for such measures. I guarantee you Denel will have as much "fun" China is having with CPEC in trying to work with the wider nation to get a factory line going, unfortunately.


Bilal Khan 777 said:


> now now, be careful before the reference brigade starts asking for you for references and passport copies.


I can out lawyer them.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Falcon26

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Denel is a state-owned enterprise, so the South African Gov't won't be parting from it as a whole.
> 
> What Pakistan could potentially do (though still unlikely) is pair an armed forces acquisition to commercial offsets, which in turn can be fed into a new subsidiary in Pakistan OR commercial work for Pakistani state owned enterprises (SOE), such as HIT.
> 
> Our MODP is vocally eager to pivot the SOEs such that they don't depend on government funding in order to operate. However, this is only possible if these SOEs get commercial work outside of the armed forces' requirements, and the best known way to pull that off is to sign onto commercial offset deals.
> 
> For example, if the Army were to buy another 200 MRAPs, it could buy them from Denel, but with a clause that requires 49% of the contract value to be re-invested in Pakistan. Denel could do that by (1) setting up a subsidiary in Pakistan or (2) contract component work out to HIT for not just the Pakistan Army, but all MRAP orders (even those from Nigeria, for example).
> 
> In the best case scenario, once your offset obligations are complete, the original vendor will keep contracting work to you. So in the end, you could (in theory, though rarely) get 100%+ of the contract back into the economy.
> 
> However in Pakistan's case, I don't think armoured vehicles would be the start of such a venture. The best chance we have for such stuff is actually the assault rifle program, and this is because POF is a much more mature SOE, the Army has massive scale and real buying power (at least in terms of small arms), and we are actually intent on making it happen.
> 
> The private sector subsidiary is a nice idea, but Pakistan's business - and general - environment is just not conducive for such measures. I guarantee you Denel will have as much "fun" China is having with CPEC in trying to work with the wider nation to get a factory line going, unfortunately.
> 
> I can out lawyer them.



Thanks for the very well detailed reply. My point wasn't Pakistan owning Denel 100% but perhaps something more modest like 10-15%.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The SD-10 was less of a bad decision than it was a necessity of the time. In the early 2000s there were hardly any decent active radar-homing (ARM) AAM solutions available to the PAF. For example, there was the R-Darter, which - while an ARM - was becoming a dated solution, and Denel's next-gen BVRAAM programs (e.g. T-Darter) were just not entering development.
> 
> In fact, I was speaking to a South African engineer familiar with Denel's dealings with Pakistan a few weeks ago; the company had hoped to engage in a number of projects, but in the mid-2000s, the BRICS mantra and India's lure for lucrative contracts encouraged the company's leadership close the door on Pakistan (and in the process abandon a number of promising programs).
> 
> For one reason (e.g. corruption allegations) or another ("IP theft in India" - his words, not mine), Denel was not able to effectively enter the Indian market. "It was a regretful decision" (again, his words, not mine).
> 
> The PAF was interested in the MICA-RF, but that tunnel collapsed.
> 
> Besides that, there wasn't much of anything else, besides perhaps some even older semi-active radar-homing (SARH) solutions such as the Aspide. Unfortunately, and to @Bilal Khan 777's point, the PAF has yet to secure a true next-gen AAM solution - i.e. a platform that will stay relevant for not a few years, but at least 10-15 years. In that regard, it is a matter of studying who is in practical possession of the best concepts.



Hi,

2002 was the time that the Paf should have latched onto the French---grabbed their legs and said---we ain't gonna let you go---.

You kids still have no clue---what severe consequences that you are going to face in the coming years for that NO---. Some of you might start to understand what had happened and others---it is too late for them.

From a position of victory---we are being dragged into a position of submission---. Why---because our Air Force is weak---. Why is it weak---because our air force generals either made blunders---.
A total disregard for the needs of the nation.

9/11---as much as it was an eye opener---it was also an opportune moment for pakistan as well.

The U S was never a trusted ally---the swedes---you could not depend upon---the russians---not at that time---the chinese---still struggling---the english---nothing to show at that time---the only one left was france---.

The tragedy over here is---that they offered a full fledged package and the Paf generals got lost in the numbers---.

They simply did not have the vision to grasp at the moment---they simply did not have the vision to see WHAT was being offered---and HOW GOOD that OVERALL deal on the Rafale was---.

There is more to it when you pay a top notch price for a certain equipment.

The Paf generals says that they did not see it coming---how is that possible and believable---I saw it coming and I have been crying about it since 2003 either on one forum or the other---.

How could they not see it coming---the had de-throned the enemy from its mighty perch---how could they not anticipate the action of the enemy---even though that action was very visible to all and sundry---.

Well---then it comes down to another question---did the Paf generals intentionally sabotage the deal or any other deal that needed to be made in urgent---because they had decidedly made a decision that they are not going to prepare to fight india.

They will wave a white flag---first be refusing the Rafale deal---then by donating the funds for the F16 for flood relief and thirdly going for a simple small single engine lower tier JF17.

It will keep the air force jobs---with the usual claims of paf's inferior equpiment is superior to eneymy's superior equipment---the young pakistanis will be happy---so no threats no worries---pay checks are coming---better jobs are waiting after retirement---so no big deal---.

You kids need to learn something---never trust the integrity of the nation on unproven and untested weapons systems when yu are under duress---.

Always go for a TRUSTED NAME----and you will never have a problem.

SD10 is an extremely potent missile---in its current format---and in years to come---it will get deadlier---but if we had made the right decisions---we could have had more potent systems 10 years ago----.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Falcon26

HAKIKAT said:


> This is from a novice and naïve person. What's about the Turkish systems? There appears to be a number of projects for BVR, AESA, IIR etc. systems going-on. I have to admit Turkish folks are increasingly getting proficient in defense projects. Reis Erdo'an has put his reputation at stake for these projects. Software might not be an issue. As for the hardware, if the design is available, sanction prone components may be replaced with Chinese chips. China has a huge semiconductor drive to get key technologies. I am pretty sure within 5 years they will be fabricating lot of key chips, e.g., processors, analog etc. They're getting good with process technologies, so military grade ICs may be within their reach. Since GaN based devices are fabricated by Turkish folks themselves it should be a huge relief. Just few random thoughts...



The progress being made by Turkey in the area of military production is simply phenomenal and it shames countries much bigger than it. The next decade will be very interesting to see what Turkey comes up with. It's certainly a model to follow for countries like Pakistan and Egypt among others.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MastanKhan

HAKIKAT said:


> This is from a novice and naïve person. What's about the Turkish systems? There appears to be a number of projects for BVR, AESA, IIR etc. systems going-on. I have to admit Turkish folks are increasingly getting proficient in defense projects. Reis Erdo'an has put his reputation at stake for these projects. Software might not be an issue. As for the hardware, if the design is available, sanction prone components may be replaced with Chinese chips. China has a huge semiconductor drive to get key technologies. I am pretty sure within 5 years they will be fabricating lot of key chips, e.g., processors, analog etc. They're getting good with process technologies, so military grade ICs may be within their reach. Since GaN based devices are fabricated by Turkish folks themselves it should be a huge relief. Just few random thoughts...




Hi,

Thank you for your post---. When Turkey reaches its target production for a potent weapons system---missiles---EW suite etc---and Pakistan is a willing buyer---there will be every effort made by the powers to be to sabotage the deal---one way or the other---.

Why---because Pakistan has chosen to be the whipping boy out of CHOICE---and not because of fate.

Pakistan has chosen to be dealt with from a position of weakness and that is not a good place to be---.

Due to the political turmoil in the country---there are no checks and balances on the air force---they are an entity of their own---the defence minister is an illiterate person with no clue about weapons systems---.

I will just take the wait and see attitude---because that is all there is left.



MastanKhan said:


> @Bilal Khan 777[/USER]
> 
> What a tangled web we weave-----



Hi,

I think that Bilal Khan has launched a flare in the dark of the night-----and everyone is wondering---where did that come from---.

For the SD10---I again go back to what the chinese have to face---. All their monies and resources are invested in creating something to match the americans---setbacks are not going to slow them down at this stage---they will keep on pouring more and more till they break the glass ceiling---.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Viper0011.

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for your post---. When Turkey reaches its target production for a potent weapons system---missiles---EW suite etc---and Pakistan is a willing buyer---there will be every effort made by the powers to be to sabotage the deal---one way or the other---.
> 
> Why---because Pakistan has chosen to be the whipping boy out of CHOICE---and not because of fate.
> 
> Pakistan has chosen to be dealt with from a position of weakness and that is not a good place to be---.
> *
> Due to the political turmoil in the country---there are no checks and balances on the air force---they are an entity of their own---the defence minister is an illiterate person with no clue about weapons systems---.*
> 
> I will just take the wait and see attitude---because that is all there is left.



What political term oil your are referring to? There's been a democratic system in place which has made leaps and bounds of progress on all fronts (including economics), so if you'd blame the laziness of your generals onto the political environment, the instability might be your brain's art and not real. Just saying. Let's call out who should be called out. You can't possibly blame a civilian government for the lack of proper military strategic planning.

Its like me saying all failures and problems the F-35 saw and cost many, many more billions, was because of Obama's government. These sounds spicy for a one minute tabloid news paper but have no facts behind it and is totally untrue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for your post---. When Turkey reaches its target production for a potent weapons system---missiles---EW suite etc---and Pakistan is a willing buyer---there will be every effort made by the powers to be to sabotage the deal---one way or the other---.
> 
> Why---because Pakistan has chosen to be the whipping boy out of CHOICE---and not because of fate.
> 
> Pakistan has chosen to be dealt with from a position of weakness and that is not a good place to be---.
> 
> Due to the political turmoil in the country---there are no checks and balances on the air force---they are an entity of their own---the defence minister is an illiterate person with no clue about weapons systems---.
> 
> I will just take the wait and see attitude---because that is all there is left.


Don't worry Mastan Bey. Time is changing and it's changing fast. New paradigms are replacing the old models. I can assure you no power on the earth can undo Pak-Turkey deals....

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## MastanKhan

Viper0011. said:


> What political term oil your are referring to? There's been a democratic system in place which has made leaps and bounds of progress on all fronts (including economics), so if you'd blame the laziness of your generals onto the political environment, the instability might be your brain's art and not real. Just saying. Let's call out who should be called out. You can't possibly blame a civilian government for the lack of proper military strategic planning.
> 
> Its like me saying all failures and problems the F-35 saw and cost many, many more billions, was because of Obama's government. These sounds spicy for a one minute tabloid news paper but have no facts behind it and is totally untrue.



Hi,

Viper---in as many ways you want to put---there is political ' term oil ' in the country---.

I am calling the fck ups of the Paf the fck ups of the Paf---the reason I am calling the defence minister and illiterate---because I know that he is---.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Falcon26 said:


> Thanks for the very well detailed reply. My point wasn't Pakistan owning Denel 100% but perhaps something more modest like 10-15%.


Direct ownership, especially with a state in another state-owned entity, is a touchy subject. Imagine how things would go down if someone proposed letting UAE's Tawazun Industries buy a stake in PAC. However, offsets and subsidiaries are possible, though much farther down the line.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PaklovesTurkiye

MastanKhan said:


> It is said in the U S---you want to check the pulse of the U S--check the car sales in the U So----that is the first thing that tells you what is coming----. The sale of vehicles to the citizens of a certain nation in the late 90's and early 2000's tells a very interesting story
> 
> The indian influence by mid 2005 was no surprise---.



I m struggling to get this thing in my head....Will u b kind enough to elaborate what you just wrote in above quoted post of yours?


----------



## Viper0011.

MastanKhan said:


> Viper---in as many ways you want to put---there is political ' term oil ' in the country---.
> 
> I am calling the fck ups of the Paf the fck ups of the Paf---the reason I am calling the defence minister and illiterate---because I know that he is---.



MK - I don't know your level of understanding of these matters anymore. To be honest, sometimes, you sound so far apart like the Earth and the Sky. I've watched, studied and observed Pakistan and how shit happens in Pakistan for 48 years now. There is NOTHING in Pakistan that a defense civilian minister does. The military guys find what they need, facilitate the deal (actually make the deal 90% of the time) and send the invoice to the civilian defense minister. Who then signs off on it having no choice. This is Pak military for you and that's how they operate. Above all laws!! Who are you fooling by putting the blame onto civilians??

On political "unrest", yea, after "re-introducing" politics of intensity and extremism where you verbally abuse your opponents family and all, now your guy wants to attack the sitting PM's house, just like he did to the Parliament of Pakistan. That's not term oil. That's one selfish individual so madly obsessed with one PM and the power seat, that he wants to damage his country. For the remainder of this "political instability shiit", read the following. If the Bloomberg and all are ok with Pakistan and call it the top investment destination, I don't think you or a few others opinion matter as its based on selfish purposes, not towards Pakistan. Sorry, but that's the truth. I would say, I expected better and truthfulness from you. But oh well.

Did you know that Pakistan has emerging market status but China doesn't? And you'll tell me the people running a $ 20 trillion economic system are stupid and you are wiser !!

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/15/why-...g-markets-index-approval-and-china-didnt.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-jump-most-this-year-after-upgrade-from-msci

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...growth-surging-to-7-as-china-invests-billions

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Waqas Bin Adam

Thorough Pro said:


> What is stopping Pakistan now to outflank india and sign a deal for 40 Rafaels tomorrow?


Indian diplomacy.


----------



## fatman17

SD10 is comparable to AIM120A, so not a bad missile.


----------



## MastanKhan

PaklovesTurkiye said:


> I m struggling to get this thing in my head....Will u b kind enough to elaborate what you just wrote in above quoted post of yours?



Hi,

Everyone who comes to the U S---has to buy a car---so where do new comers go---new comers with jobs and money---they go to new car dealers---.

So---at that time there was a massive influx of people in the IT field---pay was very good---along with it came the ideology as well---.

Then unlike the pakistanis---the indians wooed the american politicians and public---got into media as well.

9/11 was a big setback for them because they saw re-birth of alliance between the U S and pakistan---but they did not have to worry for too long---pakistanis ended up stabbing themselves in their own heart.



Viper0011. said:


> MK - I don't know your level of understanding of these matters anymore. To be honest, sometimes, you sound so far apart like the Earth and the Sky. I've watched, studied and observed Pakistan and how shit happens in Pakistan for 48 years now. There is NOTHING in Pakistan that a defense civilian minister does. The military guys find what they need, facilitate the deal (actually make the deal 90% of the time) and send the invoice to the civilian defense minister. Who then signs off on it having no choice. This is Pak military for you and that's how they operate. Above all laws!! Who are you fooling by putting the blame onto civilians??



Viper,

I did not write any different---. I stated that the defense minister is illiterarte---he knows nothing---which can also be translated to---the military gets what it wants---.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SQ8

fatman17 said:


> SD10 is comparable to AIM120A, so not a bad missile.


C janaab. Horse's mouth.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Oscar said:


> C janaab. Horse's mouth.



He compares it like cigars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> He compares it like cigars.


Should do that. he is in this picture.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Oscar said:


> Should do that. he is in this picture.



Expected.


----------



## fatman17

*PL-12/SD-10*



A PL-12 active radar homing AAM was being fired from a PLAN J-10A fighter. PL-12 (K/AKK-12?) was under development at LETRI/607 Institute since early 90s. The missile was expected to be in the same class as AIM-120A/B and its active seeker may have evolved from the earlier AMR-1 design (R-129? based on Russian 9B-1348 seeker & datalink for R-77). Its tailfins appear to have fin tips as well as the leading edges of the fin root cropped. These specially designed tailfins are believed to possess lower drag for greater speed and higher torque for better maneuverability. Two datalink antennas can be seen next to the nozzle for mid-course correction. Several dielectric strips are seen along the middle warhead section which house the radio proximity fuse. PL-12 completed its development test in December 2004 and was certified in 2005. Its export version is called SD-10 (SD-10A as the improved version) and was first revealed to the public during the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow. Currently it is in the service with J-8F/DF, J-10/A/B/C, J-11B/BH, J-15 and Su-30MK2. In addition SD-10A is being carried by JF-17 currently in service with PAF. Some specifications of SD-10: length 3,850mm, diameter 203mm, wing span 674mm, weight 180kg, max g-load 38g, max speed 4M, range 60-70km. Recently produced PL-12 is expected to feature an improved seeker with new digital processor and SINS. The improved PL-12 (PL-12A?) is thought to be comparable to American AIM-120C4. It was reported in November 2010 that PL-12 may feature an active/passive dual mode seeker in order to achieve greater ECCM capability and kill probability. Several improved versions were proposed by the 607 Institute, including PL-12B with improved guidance system, PL-12C with foldable tailfins for internal carriage by the 4th generation fighters (e.g. J-20) and PL-12D with a belly air inlet and a ramjet motor for long range attack similar to PL-21 (see below). However it appears that the PL-12C/D proposal may have merged into the PL-15 program. During the 2012 Zhuhai Airshow a new anti-radiation air-to-ground variant was unveiled as LD-10 with a range of 60km, which could equip JF-17 as well. It was reported that PAF ordered 100 LD-10 in 2011 and 50 was delivered between 2014 and 2015.
_- Last Updated 8/22/16_



fatman17 said:


> *PL-12/SD-10*
> 
> 
> 
> A PL-12 active radar homing AAM was being fired from a PLAN J-10A fighter. PL-12 (K/AKK-12?) was under development at LETRI/607 Institute since early 90s. The missile was expected to be in the same class as AIM-120A/B and its active seeker may have evolved from the earlier AMR-1 design (R-129? based on Russian 9B-1348 seeker & datalink for R-77). Its tailfins appear to have fin tips as well as the leading edges of the fin root cropped. These specially designed tailfins are believed to possess lower drag for greater speed and higher torque for better maneuverability. Two datalink antennas can be seen next to the nozzle for mid-course correction. Several dielectric strips are seen along the middle warhead section which house the radio proximity fuse. PL-12 completed its development test in December 2004 and was certified in 2005. Its export version is called SD-10 (SD-10A as the improved version) and was first revealed to the public during the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow. Currently it is in the service with J-8F/DF, J-10/A/B/C, J-11B/BH, J-15 and Su-30MK2. In addition SD-10A is being carried by JF-17 currently in service with PAF. Some specifications of SD-10: length 3,850mm, diameter 203mm, wing span 674mm, weight 180kg, max g-load 38g, max speed 4M, range 60-70km. Recently produced PL-12 is expected to feature an improved seeker with new digital processor and SINS. The improved PL-12 (PL-12A?) is thought to be comparable to American AIM-120C4. It was reported in November 2010 that PL-12 may feature an active/passive dual mode seeker in order to achieve greater ECCM capability and kill probability. Several improved versions were proposed by the 607 Institute, including PL-12B with improved guidance system, PL-12C with foldable tailfins for internal carriage by the 4th generation fighters (e.g. J-20) and PL-12D with a belly air inlet and a ramjet motor for long range attack similar to PL-21 (see below). However it appears that the PL-12C/D proposal may have merged into the PL-15 program. During the 2012 Zhuhai Airshow a new anti-radiation air-to-ground variant was unveiled as LD-10 with a range of 60km, which could equip JF-17 as well. It was reported that PAF ordered 100 LD-10 in 2011 and 50 was delivered between 2014 and 2015.
> _- Last Updated 8/22/16_



confusing to say the least


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

fatman17 said:


> *PL-12/SD-10*
> 
> 
> 
> A PL-12 active radar homing AAM was being fired from a PLAN J-10A fighter. PL-12 (K/AKK-12?) was under development at LETRI/607 Institute since early 90s. The missile was expected to be in the same class as AIM-120A/B and its active seeker may have evolved from the earlier AMR-1 design (R-129? based on Russian 9B-1348 seeker & datalink for R-77). Its tailfins appear to have fin tips as well as the leading edges of the fin root cropped. These specially designed tailfins are believed to possess lower drag for greater speed and higher torque for better maneuverability. Two datalink antennas can be seen next to the nozzle for mid-course correction. Several dielectric strips are seen along the middle warhead section which house the radio proximity fuse. PL-12 completed its development test in December 2004 and was certified in 2005. Its export version is called SD-10 (SD-10A as the improved version) and was first revealed to the public during the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow. Currently it is in the service with J-8F/DF, J-10/A/B/C, J-11B/BH, J-15 and Su-30MK2. In addition SD-10A is being carried by JF-17 currently in service with PAF. Some specifications of SD-10: length 3,850mm, diameter 203mm, wing span 674mm, weight 180kg, max g-load 38g, max speed 4M, range 60-70km. Recently produced PL-12 is expected to feature an improved seeker with new digital processor and SINS. The improved PL-12 (PL-12A?) is thought to be comparable to American AIM-120C4. It was reported in November 2010 that PL-12 may feature an active/passive dual mode seeker in order to achieve greater ECCM capability and kill probability. Several improved versions were proposed by the 607 Institute, including PL-12B with improved guidance system, PL-12C with foldable tailfins for internal carriage by the 4th generation fighters (e.g. J-20) and PL-12D with a belly air inlet and a ramjet motor for long range attack similar to PL-21 (see below). However it appears that the PL-12C/D proposal may have merged into the PL-15 program. During the 2012 Zhuhai Airshow a new anti-radiation air-to-ground variant was unveiled as LD-10 with a range of 60km, which could equip JF-17 as well. It was reported that PAF ordered 100 LD-10 in 2011 and 50 was delivered between 2014 and 2015.
> _- Last Updated 8/22/16_
> 
> 
> 
> confusing to say the least



I still maintain that for the evolving threat in our theatre, something beyond SD-10 has to be looked into. SD-10 is a good stop gap measure as the BVR landscape was empty for a long time. However, we would still need speciality weapons to interdict specific threats.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I still maintain that for the evolving threat in our theatre, something beyond SD-10 has to be looked into. SD-10 is a good stop gap measure as the BVR landscape was empty for a long time. However, we would still need speciality weapons to interdict specific threats.



Hi,

This threat was as visible 15 years ago as it is today---.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TaimiKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I still maintain that for the evolving threat in our theatre, something beyond SD-10 has to be looked into. SD-10 is a good stop gap measure as the BVR landscape was empty for a long time. However, we would still need speciality weapons to interdict specific threats.



Well Sir, we all agree that for present and next 5-8 year time frame the SD-10 and AMRAAMs may do the task, but for future what the the issues that you are seeing and what recommendation do you have. 

Getting western stuff presently is a tough task and in future also would be very tough / impossible especially if we have no plans to acquire a western platform. 

So where to go and what to do. Keep the Chinese engaged for their future projects and look for some western stuff / try new projects with Turks ? 

PL-15 / 21 is said to be a future system by Chinese:

http://www.popsci.com/chinese-air-to-air-missile-hits-targets-spooks-usaf-general
http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-i.html

Russian options are currently don't seem possible and in future also chances are very slim till we induct one of their platforms which the Indians won't let.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> This threat was as visible 15 years ago as it is today---.



15 Years ago the nuclear triad and the strategic forces were not organized and deployed like they are today. There threat 15 years ago was different, and the threat today is different.


----------



## ghazi768

For Denel, too much water has flown under bridges. SD-10 is here to stay.Period.

Now when we are talking about BVR alternatives in general, first question is why?

This "why" might be either seeker or superior kinematics. When it comes to seeker, do monopulse seekers have an alternative? can anyone please mention that alternative effective at the same ranges at which mono-pulse can.

Once kinematics go beyond 100-150 km, how and who will provide a FCS for a 5m2 RCS, do we have any such platform?

For a bit shorter ranges, because of increasing DRFM, french have worked on Mica, US is still working on 9X-3 and Chinese on PL-10. the best we can hope for is expected node from up north.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xerxes1

Oscar said:


> Should do that. he is in this picture.


Is he ? I don't see a fat man

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talha Baloch

PL-15 is best option for PAF & china is trusted nation & time tested friend of Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thepakistani

It was past...american equipment was most mod, best...Chinese inferior copy only.

At present...things have changed much more than our expectations.

Future ....may be very diffrent...it seems to be.

I expect more from PL15.

America is going down the hill from all aspects. But our American followers are.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Talha Baloch

thepakistani said:


> It was past...american equipment was most mod, best...Chinese inferior copy only.
> 
> At present...things have changed much more than our expectations.
> 
> Future ....may be very diffrent...it seems to be.
> 
> I expect more from PL15.
> 
> America is going down the hill from all aspects. But our American followers are.....


Yup agree with you, now china will lead this game in the world.


----------



## SQ8

Xerxes1 said:


> Is he ? I don't see a fat man


What you talking about?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Talha Baloch said:


> PL-15 is best option for PAF & china is trusted nation & time tested friend of Pakistan.


So we buy a weapon for its origin, or for its merit or availability? If meteor was available, would PL-15 be viable?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> So we buy a weapon for its origin, or for its merit or availability? If meteor was available, would PL-15 be viable?


No, We buy a weapon after looking at its origin & merit... then decide based on kickbacks.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Oscar said:


> No, We buy a weapon after looking at its origin & merit... then decide based on kickbacks.


Sometimes, as I read somewhere, we receive the kickbacks, then we find hard to justify the merit despite the origin.


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Sometimes, as I read somewhere, we receive the kickbacks, then we find hard to justify the merit despite the origin.


Anything that has a kickback is already tainted. Such as the Mp-5 which was ToT'd on what is one of many unfair traitorous deals done by people in PA. Such as the Mirage avionics prior to ROSE, such as a nice sulphur or something analyzer that sits rusting at the building in H-11 sector and has not a single useful attribute that the organization there wanted or ever needed; but was approved because someone's chahazad bhai who happened to be a retired colonel approved the deal because his relative had taken the agency for that rather useless equipment.

Or maybe the purchase of certain glowy bulbs for a place where yellow stuff gets slammed around at 10000rpm, which originally cost $.50-$1.50 a pop and were available from Amrika, strangely these were purchased from Cheen at $180 each ( I can only imagine the kickback). But then who asks these people what they do with our cash since we are kept busy hating one 10%, 60% or 20% who keeps coming and going without ever returning anything.
And this is stuff I can mention before someone decides to come out of some obscure media directorate and starts posting legal threats here. 

We are corrupt to the core, each and EVERY one of us.

I dither though.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## UEM

Super Falcon said:


> Inducting SU 35 Will resolve all issues


Half a squadron of Su-35 will not make a difference against hundreds of Su-30Mkis


----------



## Super Falcon

UEM said:


> Half a squadron of Su-35 will not make a difference against hundreds of Su-30Mkis


Who told you we are buying half squadron

36 to 50 SU 35 are planned for induction further more will be inducted

It's about quality

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> 15 Years ago the nuclear triad and the strategic forces were not organized and deployed like they are today. There threat 15 years ago was different, and the threat today is different.



Hi,

But the need of a potent BVR has not changed for the last 15 years---.

The problem has been with consolidating the deal---. 

The problem has been with a lack of understanding and comprehending future needs and desires in a positive---comprehensive---and a forward projected thinking manner---.

The problem has been with the assessment of the level of threat---the problem has been with a callous approach to a very serious problem.

The problem has been with the non challant behaviour.

The problem been in not sealing the deal in a timely manner----.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Oscar said:


> Anything that has a kickback is already tainted. Such as the Mp-5 which was ToT'd on what is one of many unfair traitorous deals done by people in PA. Such as the Mirage avionics prior to ROSE, such as a nice sulphur or something analyzer that sits rusting at the building in H-11 sector and has not a single useful attribute that the organization there wanted or ever needed; but was approved because someone's chahazad bhai who happened to be a retired colonel approved the deal because his relative had taken the agency for that rather useless equipment.
> 
> Or maybe the purchase of certain glowy bulbs for a place where yellow stuff gets slammed around at 10000rpm, which originally cost $.50-$1.50 a pop and were available from Amrika, strangely these were purchased from Cheen at $180 each ( I can only imagine the kickback). But then who asks these people what they do with our cash since we are kept busy hating one 10%, 60% or 20% who keeps coming and going without ever returning anything.
> *And this is stuff I can mention before someone decides to come out of some obscure media directorate and starts posting legal threats here.*
> 
> We are corrupt to the core, each and EVERY one of us.
> 
> I dither though.


I'm sure you can team up with @MastanKhan and give those media directorate people a run for their money.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I'm sure you can team up with @MastanKhan and give those media directorate people a run for their money.



There is no point in giving anyone a run for their money. The idea is to use facts and facts alone. Verifiable facts. However, this is a misnomer as these facts are essentially my own experiences and hence CANNOT be facts at all. Which is why I avoid needless and baseless criticism and focus on events that can be deemed plausible by corroboration. 

The people of the military are just that; people. granted they are trained and many truly are brave and bold; but there are also those who are sell outs or cowards. People who ran from enemy aircraft in 65 while claiming kills, people who were very eager to shoot hapless Bengalis but pee'ed under Indian attack, people who made millions off siphoning off airforce resources during Zia's era, people who made millions in kickbacks from Army or Military deals, and people who during Kargil and 2001 went to PNS Shifa and begged doctors to declare them unfit so they wont face the Indian Navy. 

They are just people, and people that represent a section of Pakistanis as who we are.

Either way, I dither.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I'm sure you can team up with @MastanKhan and give those media directorate people a run for their money.



Hi,

With what we have seen so far---I am positive that we can do a much much better job----actually we could have done a much better job---.

The paf are NOT QUALIFIED to make the right kind of deal---they may think that they are---but looking at the results---it is evident that pak air force is clueless in the art of deal making and taking utility of an opportune moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## fatman17

TaimiKhan said:


> Well Sir, we all agree that for present and next 5-8 year time frame the SD-10 and AMRAAMs may do the task, but for future what the the issues that you are seeing and what recommendation do you have.
> 
> Getting western stuff presently is a tough task and in future also would be very tough / impossible especially if we have no plans to acquire a western platform.
> 
> So where to go and what to do. Keep the Chinese engaged for their future projects and look for some western stuff / try new projects with Turks ?
> 
> PL-15 / 21 is said to be a future system by Chinese:
> 
> http://www.popsci.com/chinese-air-to-air-missile-hits-targets-spooks-usaf-general
> http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-i.html
> 
> Russian options are currently don't seem possible and in future also chances are very slim till we induct one of their platforms which the Indians won't let.



we need to collaborate with the Chinese by utilizing our western experience with what's available with the Chinese, remember Chinese avionics is improving by leaps and bounds. Ukraine , turkey and south African tech can be made a base for upgrading Chinese missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MastanKhan

Hi,

The sparrows have already eaten the seeds off the ground that was tilled---. It is too late to do something now----.

You pakistani kids and adults are going to learn that neither you are very smart---nor very intelligent---or too clever when it came to making defense deals---.

The only RAAG that you could sing was " no funds " " corruption "----it does not meet the needs----the price is too high----.

You guys are the true enemies of pakistan---.

For the last 10 years---if you guys had one voice and stood together and gotten access to media in pakistan---you could have forced the paf to change the direction of its follies---.

You kids cherish the drama created by the Pak F16 pilots taking out the EFT or the Rafale in excercizes---but have no clue that what could kill them---they don't have any antidote for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Qabza Group

SD-10 has even got some superiority over Adder. The A-Pole of SD-10 is met earlier, which makes its platform a bit safer during the Crank. If Firing Doctorine not set on Rmax, the DLZ shooting capability of SD-10 is also a bit superior to AA-12. In Block-3, the SD-10 proves clearly to be a supirior choice than Adder.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dazzler

Qabza Group said:


> SD-10 has even got some superiority over Adder. The A-Pole of SD-10 is met earlier, which makes its platform a bit safer during the Crank. If Firing Doctorine not set on Rmax, the DLZ shooting capability of SD-10 is also a bit superior to AA-12. In Block-3, the SD-10 proves clearly to be a supirior choice than Adder.



Please elaborate your post and terms used:

* A-Pole
* Rmax
DLZ

Thanks


----------



## _NOBODY_

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> As someone pointed out, EFT has its own unique set of issues.


But then again aren't these countries desperate for orders because the production line of Typhoon will stop if they didn't receive more orders. Soft loans and aid from China and fellow Arab countries can lets us have Typhoon.
@MastanKhan @Quwa

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

TheGreatOne said:


> But then again aren't these countries desperate for orders because the production line of Typhoon will stop if they didn't receive more orders.
> @MastanKhan @Quwa



They are desperate for orders, but over the years companies like BAE Systems are calcified over with bureaucracy. They cannot take export customers seriously, and they all seem to have job security and government subsidized programs. The problem that I see is large defense companies being run by accountants, and that is why you don't see EFT flying in countries like Pakistan.



Oscar said:


> Anything that has a kickback is already tainted. Such as the Mp-5 which was ToT'd on what is one of many unfair traitorous deals done by people in PA. Such as the Mirage avionics prior to ROSE, such as a nice sulphur or something analyzer that sits rusting at the building in H-11 sector and has not a single useful attribute that the organization there wanted or ever needed; but was approved because someone's chahazad bhai who happened to be a retired colonel approved the deal because his relative had taken the agency for that rather useless equipment.
> 
> Or maybe the purchase of certain glowy bulbs for a place where yellow stuff gets slammed around at 10000rpm, which originally cost $.50-$1.50 a pop and were available from Amrika, strangely these were purchased from Cheen at $180 each ( I can only imagine the kickback). But then who asks these people what they do with our cash since we are kept busy hating one 10%, 60% or 20% who keeps coming and going without ever returning anything.
> And this is stuff I can mention before someone decides to come out of some obscure media directorate and starts posting legal threats here.
> 
> We are corrupt to the core, each and EVERY one of us.
> 
> I dither though.


What do you mean the MP-5 doesn't work? I thought it was always the faulty mags...



Qabza Group said:


> SD-10 has even got some superiority over Adder. The A-Pole of SD-10 is met earlier, which makes its platform a bit safer during the Crank. If Firing Doctorine not set on Rmax, the DLZ shooting capability of SD-10 is also a bit superior to AA-12. In Block-3, the SD-10 proves clearly to be a supirior choice than Adder.


New account made by serving officer to defend the SD-10, intriguing.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Eagle

Oscar said:


> There is no point in giving anyone a run for their money. The idea is to use facts and facts alone. Verifiable facts. However, this is a misnomer as these facts are essentially my own experiences and hence CANNOT be facts at all. Which is why I avoid needless and baseless criticism and focus on events that can be deemed plausible by corroboration.
> 
> The people of the military are just that; people. granted they are trained and many truly are brave and bold; but there are also those who are sell outs or cowards. People who ran from enemy aircraft in 65 while claiming kills, people who were very eager to shoot hapless Bengalis but pee'ed under Indian attack, people who made millions off siphoning off airforce resources during Zia's era, people who made millions in kickbacks from Army or Military deals, and people who during Kargil and 2001 went to PNS Shifa and begged doctors to declare them unfit so they wont face the Indian Navy.
> 
> They are just people, and people that represent a section of Pakistanis as who we are.
> 
> Either way, I dither.



Sir, why not to make an attempt to turn the steering wheel a bit in right direction through any kind of source/bridge that may overcome or minimize further failures, if any.


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

Oscar said:


> Anything that has a kickback is already tainted. Such as the Mp-5 which was ToT'd on what is one of many unfair traitorous deals done by people in PA. Such as the Mirage avionics prior to ROSE, such as a nice sulphur or something analyzer that sits rusting at the building in H-11 sector and has not a single useful attribute that the organization there wanted or ever needed; but was approved because someone's chahazad bhai who happened to be a retired colonel approved the deal because his relative had taken the agency for that rather useless equipment.
> 
> Or maybe the purchase of certain glowy bulbs for a place where yellow stuff gets slammed around at 10000rpm, which originally cost $.50-$1.50 a pop and were available from Amrika, strangely these were purchased from Cheen at $180 each ( I can only imagine the kickback). But then who asks these people what they do with our cash since we are kept busy hating one 10%, 60% or 20% who keeps coming and going without ever returning anything.
> And this is stuff I can mention before someone decides to come out of some obscure media directorate and starts posting legal threats here.
> 
> We are corrupt to the core, each and EVERY one of us.
> 
> I dither though.



People get the leaders they deserve...it is a reflection of their own being. Deep pschy of the masses is manifested in their leaders.


You dither, my dear brother, yet this rampant corruption bothers you to your very core.


Is there no way that this pervasive corruption in your great country can be managed if not totally irradicated?

I know...it sounds so cynical to say _manage corruption_...but corruption is the curse of human condition. It is global...what differs is the level/spread in a given society.

Wish you and your great country a better future that you all surely deserve! 

I do percieve a spirit of time changing in your country...PDF is a micro cosmos of Pak society... status quo is weakening slowly, but surely.

a few years back none challenged anything...and were all blindly supporting their forces.

now Pak posters are more unforgiving and want the best for their taxes...if they pay at least!

.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Qabza Group

Dazzler said:


> Please elaborate your post and terms used:
> 
> * A-Pole
> * Rmax
> DLZ
> 
> Thanks



A-Pole: The range between Fighter and the target when The radar of missile goes active.
After launching the Active BVR, The missile gets its initial guidance from the platform till a specific time and then its Own radar goes active. So to provide guidance to the missile, the platform has to travel further into the threat facing it (just like semi-active). This makes him more vulnerable. Once the radar of ARH missile goes active, the aircraft can breakoff away from the target, now the missile homes on to its own guidance. That DISTANCE (between the Launching aircraft and the target aircraft) at which this missile flows on its own guidance is A-Pole.
The SD-10 platform gets a much earlier A-Pole than the AA-12 platform, hence the "Fire and Forget" property is more in it, making its Platform Safer.

Rmax: It is the Maximum claimed range of the missile at a specific height. It depends upon various factors like Speed of the launching aircraft, Speed of the target aircraft, Aspect Angle between both the aircrafts and most importantly the heights of both aircrafts. As the missile is fired at the Maximum range, the kill probablility is just close to 5-10%. the Rmax of Adder is slightly more than SD-10.

DLZ: (Desired Launch Zone) It is a place ahead of Rmax, in which the missile gets better cues and the kill probability is increased. Unlike Rmax (in which if the target aircraft turns even 5 degrees the in-flight missile may trash) , in DLZ the missile is fired with accuracy of degrees, which are marked in Ds, e.g. if a missile is fired in D10, it means even if the target turns away 10 degrees from that point, missile will hit him, same goes for D20,D30...D90, D120 and then D180 which is called E-Pole (No Escape zone) meaning thereby even if the target aircraft turns 180 degrees after launch of a missile, it will be invariably shot down.
In case of SD-10 and AA-12, This DLZ criteria is met much earlier in SD-10 thus giving it a clear edge over the adversary platform.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
4 | Like Like:
19


----------



## cranwerkhan

Qabza Group said:


> A-Pole: The range between Fighter and the target when The radar of missile goes active.
> After launching the Active BVR, The missile gets its initial guidance from the platform till a specific time and then its Own radar goes active. So to provide guidance to the missile, the platform has to travel further into the threat facing it (just like semi-active). This makes him more vulnerable. Once the radar of ARH missile goes active, the aircraft can breakoff away from the target, now the missile homes on to its own guidance. That DISTANCE (between the Launching aircraft and the target aircraft) at which this missile flows on its own guidance is A-Pole.
> The SD-10 platform gets a much earlier A-Pole than the AA-12 platform, hence the "Fire and Forget" property is more in it, making its Platform Safer.
> 
> Rmax: It is the Maximum claimed range of the missile at a specific height. It depends upon various factors like Speed of the launching aircraft, Speed of the target aircraft, Aspect Angle between both the aircrafts and most importantly the heights of both aircrafts. As the missile is fired at the Maximum range, the kill probablility is just close to 5-10%. the Rmax of Adder is slightly more than SD-10.
> 
> DLZ: (Desired Launch Zone) It is a place ahead of Rmax, in which the missile gets better cues and the kill probability is increased. Unlike Rmax (in which if the target aircraft turns even 5 degrees the in-flight missile may trash) , in DLZ the missile is fired with accuracy of degrees, which are marked in Ds, e.g. if a missile is fired in D10, it means even if the target turns away 10 degrees from that point, missile will hit him, same goes for D20,D30...D90, D120 and then D180 which is called E-Pole (No Escape zone) meaning thereby even if the target aircraft turns 180 degrees after launch of a missile, it will be invariably shot down.
> In case of SD-10 and AA-12, This DLZ criteria is met much earlier in SD-10 thus giving it a clear edge over the adversary platform.



thanks sir concept cleared now very informative !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

Qabza Group said:


> A-Pole: The range between Fighter and the target when The radar of missile goes active.
> After launching the Active BVR, The missile gets its initial guidance from the platform till a specific time and then its Own radar goes active. So to provide guidance to the missile, the platform has to travel further into the threat facing it (just like semi-active). This makes him more vulnerable. Once the radar of ARH missile goes active, the aircraft can breakoff away from the target, now the missile homes on to its own guidance. That DISTANCE (between the Launching aircraft and the target aircraft) at which this missile flows on its own guidance is A-Pole.
> The SD-10 platform gets a much earlier A-Pole than the AA-12 platform, hence the "Fire and Forget" property is more in it, making its Platform Safer.
> 
> Rmax: It is the Maximum claimed range of the missile at a specific height. It depends upon various factors like Speed of the launching aircraft, Speed of the target aircraft, Aspect Angle between both the aircrafts and most importantly the heights of both aircrafts. As the missile is fired at the Maximum range, the kill probablility is just close to 5-10%. the Rmax of Adder is slightly more than SD-10.
> 
> DLZ: (Desired Launch Zone) It is a place ahead of Rmax, in which the missile gets better cues and the kill probability is increased. Unlike Rmax (in which if the target aircraft turns even 5 degrees the in-flight missile may trash) , in DLZ the missile is fired with accuracy of degrees, which are marked in Ds, e.g. if a missile is fired in D10, it means even if the target turns away 10 degrees from that point, missile will hit him, same goes for D20,D30...D90, D120 and then D180 which is called E-Pole (No Escape zone) meaning thereby even if the target aircraft turns 180 degrees after launch of a missile, it will be invariably shot down.
> In case of SD-10 and AA-12, This DLZ criteria is met much earlier in SD-10 thus giving it a clear edge over the adversary platform.



very informative, thanks

I have a question, what is the maximum engagement range of sd-10A version? i have at least two figures, 80km and 90 km. But the actual figure ia anybodys guess to date.

thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Qabza Group

Dazzler said:


> very informative, thanks
> 
> I have a question, what is the maximum engagement range of sd-10A version? i have at least two figures, 80km and 90 km. But the actual figure ia anybodys guess to date.
> 
> thanks.



You are welcome.
As far as the actual max range of a missile is concerned it is not FIXED FOR ANY MISSILE. One day you can even see an IR guided missile hitting at 25kms while even an Active BVR Missing at 25kms even if the target doesn't take evassive maneuver. Even IF THE GUIDANCE IS OF SAME TYPE FOR TWO MISSILES, Max Range depends upon Multiple of factors:-

a) Aerodynamics

This is ofcourse the main factor. If the missile is of thin Diameter and long in design with agile actuators (its control fins) then it has more ranges. How?? it will be understood below.

b) Motor burnout Time

If the missile's motor burnout time is more due to the nature of Propulsion / Fuel in it, it can travel more distance. Typical missiles possess 10-20 seconds of motor burnout time. Please note that in this phase (when the motor is burning) the missile is very less agile due to The forward force.

c) Height of the launching Platform

In Aerial battle the height of launching platform is one of the main factors for the max range of missile. In case of BVRs, The Higher the launching platform is the more will be range of BVR. But again the agility will be compromised due to Low air density, it is here that the Aerodynamic design comes into account.

The other factors are:-
- Rate of closure of the two Aircrafts
- Aspect Angle between them

An SU-30 carring AA-12 at 15000 feet will have less max range than The same at 30000.

Max SD-10 range can b calculated by its Motorburnout time vs Speed graph at a given height. 

An interesting thing:-
If you consider the max ceiling a JF-17 can climb and launch SD-10 and its Adversery also coming towards him HEAD-ON. Both Aircrafts at Mach-2, I won't wonder if the SD-10 Hits the Adversary at 120kms

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
4 | Like Like:
18


----------



## Xerxes1

Oscar said:


> What you talking about?


I am just joking sir


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> What do you mean the MP-5 doesn't work? I thought it was always the faulty mags....


Not working is not the issue, that amount of money for ToT for what was just a CQC requirement of max 300 units being turned into a mass procurement programme for a "field weapon" to be used on the front lines. Nobody wanted the gun, the bullet is lying on the ground after 800ft(not meters) and the evaluation team put a big "NOT RECOMMENED FOR FIELD" on the file. But the general had already cashed his cheque and we spent millions on something that was not needed.

Just another day, another $million and more no one knows what happened to and why.. and unlike the much(and correctly) maligned politicians; we wont hear much of these sacred cows and the only accountability so far is the Naval chief who did not even do 1/10th of the crap these guys pull off. But they needed to save face before a bigger torch was put on them so Mansour ul haq got the whole boot while those with 7 Land Cruisers given to them as "gifts" for military contracts have kids living in Dubai and opening up coffee shops just for fun because Daddy has enough money to keep them and their grandkids there for eons. 

Lets not dither.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## MastanKhan

Qabza Group said:


> You are welcome.
> As far as the actual max range of a missile is concerned it is not FIXED FOR ANY MISSILE. One day you can even see an IR guided missile hitting at 25kms while even an Active BVR Missing at 25kms even if the target doesn't take evassive maneuver. Even IF THE GUIDANCE IS OF SAME TYPE FOR TWO MISSILES, Max Range depends upon Multiple of factors:-
> 
> a) Aerodynamics
> 
> This is ofcourse the main factor. If the missile is of thin Diameter and long in design with agile actuators (its control fins) then it has more ranges. How?? it will be understood below.
> 
> b) Motor burnout Time
> 
> If the missile's motor burnout time is more due to the nature of Propulsion / Fuel in it, it can travel more distance. Typical missiles possess 10-20 seconds of motor burnout time. Please note that in this phase (when the motor is burning) the missile is very less agile due to The forward force.
> 
> c) Height of the launching Platform
> 
> In Aerial battle the height of launching platform is one of the main factors for the max range of missile. In case of BVRs, The Higher the launching platform is the more will be range of BVR. But again the agility will be compromised due to Low air density, it is here that the Aerodynamic design comes into account.
> 
> The other factors are:-
> - Rate of closure of the two Aircrafts
> - Aspect Angle between them
> 
> An SU-30 carring AA-12 at 15000 feet will have less max range than The same at 30000.
> 
> Max SD-10 range can b calculated by its Motorburnout time vs Speed graph at a given height.
> 
> An interesting thing:-
> If you consider the max ceiling a JF-17 can climb and launch SD-10 and its Adversery also coming towards him HEAD-ON. Both Aircrafts at Mach-2, I won't wonder if the SD-10 Hits the Adversary at 120kms



Hi,

The issue is not what the SD10 can or could do in the future---. The issue brought up is that we needed to have access to higher TIER BVR missile than what is available to us now---or in future.

And that is where I had stated---that was evident some 15 years ago---. That is when the planning and procurement should have been made to secure the future dealings with the French. That did not happen---the Paf failed to do what was needed of it.

Then comes another opportune moment in the shape of Yemen crisis---and in this case Gen Raheel Shareef fails miserably as well---.

Gen Raheel was only fit to be a corps commander---not a commander in chief---. He should have assessed the coming problems---but he did not listen---.

He was so full of confidence about his achievements that he decided on his own to visit the U S and try to show the americans what he ha done---not realizing that the americans had already walked away from pakistan---.

Yemen alliance would have again opened up the opportunity with the French to have made some good deals---.

Total overall terrible planning.



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> New account made by serving officer to defend the SD-10, intriguing.



Hi,

Can't blame him for that---he's got what he's got---he is going to make the best of it---so he is going to defend it as well---.



The Eagle said:


> Sir, why not to make an attempt to turn the steering wheel a bit in right direction through any kind of source/bridge that may overcome or minimize further failures, if any.



Hi,

This board had the chance and the ability to turn the steering 180*---but those in power positions at Paf had no concept of strategy / gamesmanship / tactical procurement.

These same superstars till yesterday were bragging about all combat to be WVR---how could they understand the intricacies of the combat at BVR---.

You had to be knowledgeable about BVR combat in the 90's---if you had read books---these SUPPOSED WORKS OF FICTION in the 90's---they were open about where air warfare technology and weapons were headed. These books were WORKS OF FICTION in NAME ONLY----they laid out the actual coming capabilities of the u s air force out in the open for everyone to read and know.

It was so BLATANTLY OPEN material that majority took it for PURE FICTION---which it was not and never was---. The talk in the books was of real stuff in the field operation---but as it was not in the field at that time---it was considered to be fake.

On this very board some 10 years ago and on pakdef dot org I wrote some 12 years ago---that the U S has moved away from wvr combat---and the pilots are being trained more for BVR engagements---to launch the BVR missiles and then break away for the reason that a superior BVR missile and a superior EW suite will create air superiority in the theater---.

And I was lambasted for that by everyone----now you kids and adults are going to be smashed real time---.

When you go WVR---you lose all your superiority and the margin is 50 / 50---.

Now don't expect that your paf general would also be knowledgeable of these changes---remember---what your generals were saying in the first gulf war---they were illiterate then and not much has changed---.

This place---this very board---you the literate ones---you had the chance to make the difference---break the chains---but you kids acted like the worst enemies of pakistan---thru your poor decision making---thru a lack of understanding---due to lack of listening---you guys did not do anything different than what was being done in pakistan.

Now that you guys are being cornered---and going thru slow strangulation---and some of those on the periphrey are begining to see the noose being tightened have begun to realize about the folly that the paf made.

My screams of pain---you have been hearing for the last 10 years---now it is your turn---your sceams of pain are just begining to register----you will be screaming louder---it is all a matter of time now.

A problem is never solved by killing the messenger----it is just the begining of more problems to come.


Any naysayers on this board----just pick the books by Dale Brown and start reading from the first book till the one in the mid 2005----. There many other writers like him that have laid it out things not beyond imagination for the time they were written in.

All the tactical stuff he wrote about the air force / air combat has come true so far.

There was a very interesting read I had in one of his books---it had the picture of a B1 bomber on it I think---he writes about EW aircraft that would have super computer in it that could access into the brain of the incoming bvr missiles thru data link---break the code---reprogram the code and turn the missile against the enemy---truth or fiction----?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## zebra7

Qabza Group said:


> SD-10 has even got some superiority over Adder. The A-Pole of SD-10 is met earlier, which makes its platform a bit safer during the Crank. If Firing Doctorine not set on Rmax, the DLZ shooting capability of SD-10 is also a bit superior to AA-12. In Block-3, the SD-10 proves clearly to be a supirior choice than Adder.



Which version of Adder/ R77


----------



## Qabza Group

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> The issue is not what the SD10 can or could do in the future---. The issue brought up is that we needed to have access to higher TIER BVR missile than what is available to us now---or in future.
> 
> And that is where I had stated---that was evident some 15 years ago---. That is when the planning and procurement should have been made to secure the future dealings with the French. That did not happen---the Paf failed to do what was needed of it.
> 
> Then comes another opportune moment in the shape of Yemen crisis---and in this case Gen Raheel Shareef fails miserably as well---.
> 
> Gen Raheel was only fit to be a corps commander---not a commander in chief---. He should have assessed the coming problems---but he did not listen---.
> 
> He was so full of confidence about his achievements that he decided on his own to visit the U S and try to show the americans what he ha done---not realizing that the americans had already walked away from pakistan---.
> 
> Yemen alliance would have again opened up the opportunity with the French to have made some good deals---.
> 
> Total overall terrible planning.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Can't blame him for that---he's got what he's got---he is going to make the best of it---so he is going to defend it as well---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This board had the chance and the ability to turn the steering 180*---but those in power positions at Paf had no concept of strategy / gamesmanship / tactical procurement.
> 
> These same superstars till yesterday were bragging about all combat to be WVR---how could they understand the intricacies of the combat at BVR---.
> 
> You had to be knowledgeable about BVR combat in the 90's---if you had read books---these SUPPOSED WORKS OF FICTION in the 90's---they were open about where air warfare technology and weapons were headed. These books were WORKS OF FICTION in NAME ONLY----they laid out the actual coming capabilities of the u s air force out in the open for everyone to read and know.
> 
> It was so BLATANTLY OPEN material that majority took it for PURE FICTION---which it was not and never was---. The talk in the books was of real stuff in the field operation---but as it was not in the field at that time---it was considered to be fake.
> 
> On this very board some 10 years ago and on I wrote some 12 years ago---that the U S has moved away from wvr combat---and the pilots are being trained more for BVR engagements---to launch the BVR missiles and then break away for the reason that a superior BVR missile and a superior EW suite will create air superiority in the theater---.
> 
> And I was lambasted for that by everyone----now you kids and adults are going to be smashed real time---.
> 
> When you go WVR---you lose all your superiority and the margin is 50 / 50---.
> 
> Now don't expect that your paf general would also be knowledgeable of these changes---remember---what your generals were saying in the first gulf war---they were illiterate then and not much has changed---.
> 
> This place---this very board---you the literate ones---you had the chance to make the difference---break the chains---but you kids acted like the worst enemies of pakistan---thru your poor decision making---thru a lack of understanding---due to lack of listening---you guys did not do anything different than what was being done in pakistan.
> 
> Now that you guys are being cornered---and going thru slow strangulation---and some of those on the periphrey are begining to see the noose being tightened have begun to realize about the folly that the paf made.
> 
> My screams of pain---you have been hearing for the last 10 years---now it is your turn---your sceams of pain are just begining to register----you will be screaming louder---it is all a matter of time now.
> 
> A problem is never solved by killing the messenger----it is just the begining of more problems to come.
> 
> 
> Any naysayers on this board----just pick the books by Dale Brown and start reading from the first book till the one in the mid 2005----. There many other writers like him that have laid it out things not beyond imagination for the time they were written in.
> 
> All the tactical stuff he wrote about the air force / air combat has come true so far.
> 
> There was a very interesting read I had in one of his books---it had the picture of a B1 bomber on it I think---he writes about EW aircraft that would have super computer in it that could access into the brain of the incoming bvr missiles thru data link---break the code---reprogram the code and turn the missile against the enemy---truth or fiction----?



The theatre of Aerial battle in Subcontinent is just the Indo-Pak scenerio, In which one country has got russian based AA-12 and the other one has got AIM-120C + SD-10. The Cost effectiveness of all these projects do come into the account. 
While your concerns are right, it may also be considered that:-
- A force has not only to procure a specific equipment, it has to get its spares support for a quite long period of time. The cost of spares do increase with aging. The effectiveness of weapon may be questioned after 5 years but then the force can not decommission it after 5 years. So the AGREEMENT COST includes all this. If PAF was going to procure one US weapon that too of a good caliber with Spares support, then Going for a cheaper but even efficient weapon in shape of SD-10 is not a bad planning. Even SD-10 being a superior choice than what Adversary has got as best (AA-12).

- The Air force has not only to procure Aireal Firing weapons but it has to look for a viable option of Airdefence equipment for earlywarning, SAMs, Even EW suits as you mentioned, ASV/ASW weapons thus this is a whole PACKAGE which an Airforce has to keep in mind. Which has got ECONOMICAL IMPLICATIONS. In a country where each individual always points out the defence budget, going for high priced equipment is a much difficult task.

- There is nothing better than producing own equipment jointly with full technology transfer. If one keeps on buying things from other countries, it msy not ever be able to produce its own. Who knows in future PAF may start to produce good AAMs after mastering this Aircraft manufacturing.



zebra7 said:


> Which version of Adder/ R77


*
R-77 (standard), RVV-AE, R-77-1 and K-77M*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## aliyusuf

Qabza Group said:


> *R-77 (standard), RVV-AE, R-77-1 and K-77M*


Sir, I am assuming that it is plausible that you may have enough information on the R-77 standard and that SD-10 somehow has the advantages in performance over it as you had mentioned ... but shouldn't RVV-AE, R-77-1 and K-77M have significantly better characteristics than the R-77 standard and also quite understandably be better than SD-10? Otherwise what's the point in having just additional kinematic range?
Your response would help me clear my mind on the topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Qabza Group said:


> The theatre of Aerial battle in Subcontinent is just the Indo-Pak scenerio, In which one country has got russian based AA-12 and the other one has got AIM-120C + SD-10. The Cost effectiveness of all these projects do come into the account.
> While your concerns are right, it may also be considered that:-
> - A force has not only to procure a specific equipment, it has to get its spares support for a quite long period of time. The cost of spares do increase with aging. The effectiveness of weapon may be questioned after 5 years but then the force can not decommission it after 5 years. So the AGREEMENT COST includes all this. If PAF was going to procure one US weapon that too of a good caliber with Spares support, then Going for a cheaper but even efficient weapon in shape of SD-10 is not a bad planning. Even SD-10 being a superior choice than what Adversary has got as best (AA-12).
> 
> - The Air force has not only to procure Aireal Firing weapons but it has to look for a viable option of Airdefence equipment for earlywarning, SAMs, Even EW suits as you mentioned, ASV/ASW weapons thus this is a whole PACKAGE which an Airforce has to keep in mind. Which has got ECONOMICAL IMPLICATIONS. In a country where each individual always points out the defence budget, going for high priced equipment is a much difficult task.
> 
> - There is nothing better than producing own equipment jointly with full technology transfer. If one keeps on buying things from other countries, it msy not ever be able to produce its own. Who knows in future PAF may start to produce good AAMs after mastering this Aircraft manufacturing.
> 
> 
> *
> R-77 (standard), RVV-AE, R-77-1 and K-77M*


To get into AAM manufacturing Pakistan would need to access vendors willing to release incredibly valuable propulsion and guidance technologies. For what it's worth, Denel Dynamics is willing to release at least some of that expertise in exchange for a co-funding partner to help with the Marlin. Unfortunately, this would be a risky venture as the technology in question - including coveted dual-pulse propulsion - is in the development and demonstrator phase. Riskiness isn't inherently bad, but when funding is tight all around, the decision-makers will have a higher incentive to be risk-averse.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Eagle

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> This board had the chance and the ability to turn the steering 180*---but those in power positions at Paf had no concept of strategy / gamesmanship / tactical procurement.
> 
> These same superstars till yesterday were bragging about all combat to be WVR---how could they understand the intricacies of the combat at BVR---.
> 
> You had to be knowledgeable about BVR combat in the 90's---if you had read books---these SUPPOSED WORKS OF FICTION in the 90's---they were open about where air warfare technology and weapons were headed. These books were WORKS OF FICTION in NAME ONLY----they laid out the actual coming capabilities of the u s air force out in the open for everyone to read and know.
> 
> It was so BLATANTLY OPEN material that majority took it for PURE FICTION---which it was not and never was---. The talk in the books was of real stuff in the field operation---but as it was not in the field at that time---it was considered to be fake.
> 
> On this very board some 10 years ago and on pakdef dot org I wrote some 12 years ago---that the U S has moved away from wvr combat---and the pilots are being trained more for BVR engagements---to launch the BVR missiles and then break away for the reason that a superior BVR missile and a superior EW suite will create air superiority in the theater---.
> 
> And I was lambasted for that by everyone----now you kids and adults are going to be smashed real time---.
> 
> When you go WVR---you lose all your superiority and the margin is 50 / 50---.
> 
> Now don't expect that your paf general would also be knowledgeable of these changes---remember---what your generals were saying in the first gulf war---they were illiterate then and not much has changed---.
> 
> This place---this very board---you the literate ones---you had the chance to make the difference---break the chains---but you kids acted like the worst enemies of pakistan---thru your poor decision making---thru a lack of understanding---due to lack of listening---you guys did not do anything different than what was being done in pakistan.
> 
> Now that you guys are being cornered---and going thru slow strangulation---and some of those on the periphrey are begining to see the noose being tightened have begun to realize about the folly that the paf made.
> 
> My screams of pain---you have been hearing for the last 10 years---now it is your turn---your sceams of pain are just begining to register----you will be screaming louder---it is all a matter of time now.
> 
> A problem is never solved by killing the messenger----it is just the begining of more problems to come.
> 
> 
> Any naysayers on this board----just pick the books by Dale Brown and start reading from the first book till the one in the mid 2005----. There many other writers like him that have laid it out things not beyond imagination for the time they were written in.
> 
> All the tactical stuff he wrote about the air force / air combat has come true so far.
> 
> There was a very interesting read I had in one of his books---it had the picture of a B1 bomber on it I think---he writes about EW aircraft that would have super computer in it that could access into the brain of the incoming bvr missiles thru data link---break the code---reprogram the code and turn the missile against the enemy---truth or fiction--



Salam Janab,

It has been a while interacted with you. Hope you are doing well.

Muhtaram, there is no doubt about your love for Pakistan and it's military or atleast I would say who am I to judge.

We are humans and make mistakes but I am sure, the high-up never sold the mother for it. There was corruption and my post was in the same contexts to @Oscar Sir. 

For a while, newly grown would be inspired like we are doomed if read it all or here atleast without any other source of knowledge. Yes, we do have people/lovers that wouldn't bear a single word against the force but on other hand critics are breaking the roof, making an extra hype. The things are, how the voices can be heard and new implementation can be done.

We lacked in tech but there were unavoidable circumstances, the circumstances that includes the cancer like corruption as well. Accountability is needed indeed but saying that strategies are not up-to the mark or as per whatever available, that's not fair. We are not economically strong like the rivals nor can spend that much so we will be looking for a solution with few numbers of Western/expensive and more of inexpensive but effective weapons. 

Entry in Yemen theater was more of attached to D.C Go as well. We have to keep in mind that we are not totally independent by the economy and still to bear with US if she has a say in anything. Until & unless, we are totally independent of our economy, that's not possible that we can afford any further hidden sanctions though Yemen's decision was taken after considering the many factors including the concern of our friend. We cannot stretch that much as much as people want us to do so and also, IMO let the Kings learn a lesson for a while that nobody is pawn against the money alone here and what if it is going to be more than the earlier little benefits. 

The new lot is more concerned about our needs and requirements based upon the sources available and trust me, it is turning to a change and adopting a new way/strategy however may need time as it's been a long time and merely rectified. There could be few hurdles due to an Iron rod in the neck but not for long. 

My supposition was to have a civilian screen installed to show different picture as well that few cannot do due to unavoidable circumstances but it shouldn't be like providing an opportunity for bashing that few take it for granted merely to serve their own ego and are not well-wishers at all. 

RS wasn't visiting D.C for self praise but the tour consist of many agendas wherein cross border infiltration, foreign involvement in terrorism and clarifying the picture that was badly painted by our Civilian Government. The same visit also conveyed a message that seems like we will be happy being apart. US knew our diverting strategy that would give us a bit of edge over sanctions pron and string attached weapons of US. 

PAF is late but not that much and I would say let the Rafale be done and we will be seeing a much improved strategy from our end. Also, we do not advertise the things for support stunt but we have limitations due to small pocket and corruption therein as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Qabza Group

aliyusuf said:


> Sir, I am assuming that it is plausible that you may have enough information on the R-77 standard and that SD-10 somehow has the advantages in performance over it as you had mentioned ... but shouldn't RVV-AE, R-77-1 and K-77M have significantly better characteristics than the R-77 standard and also quite understandably be better than SD-10? Otherwise what's the point in having just additional kinematic range?
> Your response would help me clear my mind on the topic.



RVV-AE is the same thing as R-77.

As per my knowledge the mods in R-77-1 are majorly of its SIZE, Which includes its length and hence more Fuel in it. Which clearly effects MOTOR BURN OUT time (ref my previous post). The more motor burn out time will give it more range but it doesn't effect avionics suite of the missile.

As per Mods in K-77M are corcerned, Yes apart from further improvements in design and range, The radar would include AESA seeker instead of previous pulse doppler one which may be a positive thing for Adder operators. But this thing hasn't been operationalized yet so its effectiveness coupled with Super Zhuk cannot be ascertained. The Adders presently in service have the performances as i have described in my previous posts. (Atleast in Indo-Pak scenerios)

As far as ARH BVRs are concerned, one thing must be kept in mind that they are by-design manufactured to take initial guidance from the aircraft. Its in their betterment i would say. Because like in multi-aircrafts scenerio, the AI of shooting aircraft may be locked to one target while the active BVR may get on to another one if it doesn't take intitial guidance from aircraft.
If you read the guidance of all active missiles it is in three stages, like in case of R-77 it is written " Inertial with mid-course update and terminal Active Radar Homing" Which means that as soon as it is launched, it takes inertial guidance along with mid course update from the AI of the aircraft and in TERMINAL stage the Radar goes active. So it is for the safety of the launching aircraft that its missile's radar should go active early.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## MastanKhan

Qabza Group said:


> The theatre of Aerial battle in Subcontinent is just the Indo-Pak scenerio, In which one country has got russian based AA-12 and the other one has got AIM-120C + SD-10. The Cost effectiveness of all these projects do come into the account.
> While your concerns are right, it may also be considered that:-
> - A force has not only to procure a specific equipment, it has to get its spares support for a quite long period of time. The cost of spares do increase with aging. The effectiveness of weapon may be questioned after 5 years but then the force can not decommission it after 5 years. So the AGREEMENT COST includes all this. If PAF was going to procure one US weapon that too of a good caliber with Spares support, then Going for a cheaper but even efficient weapon in shape of SD-10 is not a bad planning. Even SD-10 being a superior choice than what Adversary has got as best (AA-12).
> 
> - The Air force has not only to procure Aireal Firing weapons but it has to look for a viable option of Airdefence equipment for earlywarning, SAMs, Even EW suits as you mentioned, ASV/ASW weapons thus this is a whole PACKAGE which an Airforce has to keep in mind. Which has got ECONOMICAL IMPLICATIONS. In a country where each individual always points out the defence budget, going for high priced equipment is a much difficult task.
> 
> - There is nothing better than producing own equipment jointly with full technology transfer. If one keeps on buying things from other countries, it msy not ever be able to produce its own. Who knows in future PAF may start to produce good AAMs after mastering this Aircraft manufacturing.
> 
> 
> *
> R-77 (standard), RVV-AE, R-77-1 and K-77M*



Hi,

Agreed on most parts----but this was for short and mid term planning---. The long term planning somehow escaped the discussion---and that is where it was vital to have the French on your side.

Economics and cost savings are important---but not ultimate---. You can overcome the costs by reducing the numbers in the initial stages. The ultimate goal is to have a viable alliance and a superior system.

We already know that our relationship with the U S was cyclic---and that was when india was not working hard to get the U S on its side---. But this time around---things changed drastically---india has chosen the alliance of the U S over russia---and this was clearly visible after 9/11---which meant that pakistan had its days numbered with the U S---.

In that scenario---to let go off france was a strategic and technical disaster---. We already knew that we are going to lose one of our tier one weapons supplier---if someone did not believe in it---he needs to be " ---- "---.

As for producing our own AA missiles---we could---under given condition could only muster up a Tier 3 or a Tier 2 missile---but not a Tier 1 AA missile either in the short---medium or long range---and that is due to the limitations in technology available.

I give a lots of praise to @Bilal Khan 777 for opening up this DARING topic for discussion---the shock of its implications would have popped the eyes of many a pakistanis out---those pakistanis who were living in their dream world filled with illusions.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## araz

BilalKhan 777.
Thank you very much for a very interesting thread. It is a far cry from our usual we are better than you thread. The topic is also fairly technical and as it happens @Qabza Group has helped out by providing a lot of knowledge on the subject. Exploring the topic further, we have BVRs from US and China. The US ones we dont talk about much and I think we are all in agreement that so far they are the best in the arena. As to the Chinese ones we all accept that :
A) They are adequate for use as of today 
B) They may need upgrading or replacing for future use. 
Our choices remain limited as the French will not play ball with us, The UK and its cronies are too complicated and difficult to procure from, and US is now unreliable. That leaves us exploring other options. 
Turkey as you suggested may form a good source of future procurements however their offerings at the moment are in development. 
South African offerings are limited or nonexistent as their R&D appears to have shut down due to lack of resources.
Italy is a possibility but recent dealings from what I have heard have been marred with shouts of corruption so whether they have anything of substance remains to be seen.
Other providers like Brazil are not far enough in their development cycles to be reliable providers. 
We also do not know to what extent the Chinese weaponry will develop and mature. You are assuming that it might not be as rosy as it seems. The ycertainly have the money so what are the stumbling blocks? So a few questions for you to answer here.
Please also let us know what your own thoughts are.
Regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tipu7

@Qabza Group @Bilal Khan 777 
Fellas,
How you guys will relate upcoming Meteor in IAF arsenal and options we got to attain missile of similar generation?
How capable do you people think SA Marlin or Chinese export version of Pl12 will be for Jf17 point of view?


----------



## ziaulislam

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> To get into AAM manufacturing Pakistan would need to access vendors willing to release incredibly valuable propulsion and guidance technologies. For what it's worth, Denel Dynamics is willing to release at least some of that expertise in exchange for a co-funding partner to help with the Marlin. Unfortunately, this would be a risky venture as the technology in question - including coveted dual-pulse propulsion - is in the development and demonstrator phase. Riskiness isn't inherently bad, but when funding is tight all around, the decision-makers will have a higher incentive to be risk-averse.


there is no R&D without risk, otherwise its a ready made item off the shelf..
i long considered pakistan not getting involved in AAM and SAM derived from an AAM as strategic error
we need a standarad SAM and medium range cruise missles(unlike the nuclear RAAD restricted to mirages)


----------



## majid mehmood

i dont think so it will have a long term future
bcz pl 15 will almost take over by 2025


----------



## Blue Marlin

araz said:


> BilalKhan 777.
> Thank you very much for a very interesting thread. It is a far cry from our usual we are better than you thread. The topic is also fairly technical and as it happens @Qabza Group has helped out by providing a lot of knowledge on the subject. Exploring the topic further, we have BVRs from US and China. The US ones we dont talk about much and I think we are all in agreement that so far they are the best in the arena. As to the Chinese ones we all accept that :
> A) They are adequate for use as of today
> B) They may need upgrading or replacing for future use.
> Our choices remain limited as the French will not play ball with us, The UK and its cronies are too complicated and difficult to procure from, and US is now unreliable. That leaves us exploring other options.
> Turkey as you suggested may form a good source of future procurements however their offerings at the moment are in development.
> South African offerings are limited or nonexistent as their R&D appears to have shut down due to lack of resources.
> Italy is a possibility but recent dealings from what I have heard have been marred with shouts of corruption so whether they have anything of substance remains to be seen.
> Other providers like Brazil are not far enough in their development cycles to be reliable providers.
> We also do not know to what extent the Chinese weaponry will develop and mature. You are assuming that it might not be as rosy as it seems. The ycertainly have the money so what are the stumbling blocks? So a few questions for you to answer here.
> Please also let us know what your own thoughts are.
> Regards
> A


nonsense. our relations with Pakistan are good and stable
heck shes even planning on going to pakistan
https://www.geo.tv/latest/110155-Pakistan-is-our-dependable-ally-Theresa-May-tells-Sharif

she met your pm at the un recently too
https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/pakistan/pm-nawaz-meets-british-counterpart-theresa-may-in-new-york/






the meteor is a very expensive missile. a £2million each you can buy multiple sd-10's 
and 2 aim-120d for a smudge over $1 million.
so yeah its very expensive.
but can pakistan fire such a missile at targets 200+km? no
the f16 is a closed sources system and the 18 f18blk 52 have the aim-120c5's anyway
the jf-17 does not have a powerful radar and the block 3 nowhere near in sight till after 2017.
so what else does pakistan have? nothing
the stop gap aircraft are just a myth .the the 5th gen birds are only on paper and very likely chinese as the turks are pushing back the tfx to mid-late 2020's
do note we (the uk) are lead developers in the missile, we have a 39% stake in the missile. which is higher then the next two highest stake holders combined.
i get quiet annoyed when people say oh the uk can be trusted bla bla bla. end of the day its business if we mess up on business then we will lose alot more business. so why mess up in the first place?
heck you want the typhoon? easy all you gotta do is spec it out and pay for it and negotiations on the transfer of tech under the new pakistani procurement policy and there you have it. a bird that will run rings around the rafale.
end of the day if you want it you have to pay for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## araz

Blue Marlin said:


> nonsense. our relations with Pakistan are good and stable
> heck shes even planning on going to pakistan
> https://www.geo.tv/latest/110155-Pakistan-is-our-dependable-ally-Theresa-May-tells-Sharif
> 
> she met your pm at the un recently too
> https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/pakistan/pm-nawaz-meets-british-counterpart-theresa-may-in-new-york/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the meteor is a very expensive missile. a £2million each you can buy multiple sd-10's
> and 2 aim-120d for a smudge over $1 million.
> so yeah its very expensive.
> but can pakistan fire such a missile at targets 200+km? no
> the f16 is a closed sources system and the 18 f18blk 52 have the aim-120c5's anyway
> the jf-17 does not have a powerful radar and the block 3 nowhere near in sight till after 2017.
> so what else does pakistan have? nothing
> the stop gap aircraft are just a myth .the the 5th gen birds are only on paper and very likely chinese as the turks are pushing back the tfx to mid-late 2020's
> do note we (the uk) are lead developers in the missile, we have a 39% stake in the missile. which is higher then the next two highest stake holders combined.
> i get quiet annoyed when people say oh the uk can be trusted bla bla bla. end of the day its business if we mess up on business then we will lose alot more business. so why mess up in the first place?
> heck you want the typhoon? easy all you gotta do is spec it out and pay for it and negotiations on the transfer of tech under the new pakistani procurement policy and there you have it. a bird that will run rings around the rafale.
> end of the day if you want it you have to pay for it.


I have tolerated your nonsense long enough. The next time you let go of civility I will make sure your arse is hauled out of this forum to give you some cooling time.I dont have any problem with people disagreeing with posts that I have made, but just like I keep it civil unless provoked, I would expect others to do so. So let it be understood clearly.
Now the reason for problems procuring from the British have been various. Due to £/Rs exchange British products remain expensive plus your labour costs have been high. Secondly buying form the British will put you in the same boat as buying from the US as their policies and manner of dealing tend to be similar and UK hhas traditionally followed the US cues. 
Thirdly, I think you will have to take permission from multiple vendors to provide to pakistan. If this is the case then there will be complications with that as well as generally the EU has been too busy trying to please the Indians. 
This is the reason for me writing what I wrote. Now if you can respond civilly then do so otherwise dont bother!
A

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

araz said:


> I have tolerated your nonsense long enough. The next time you let go of civility I will make sure your arse is hauled out of this forum to give you some cooling time.I dont have any problem with people disagreeing with posts that I have made, but just like I keep it civil unless provoked, I would expect others to do so. So let it be understood clearly.
> Now the reason for problems procuring from the British have been various. Due to £/Rs exchange British products remain expensive plus your labour costs have been high. Secondly buying form the British will put you in the same boat as buying from the US as their policies and manner of dealing tend to be similar and UK hhas traditionally followed the US cues.
> Thirdly, I think you will have to take permission from multiple vendors to provide to pakistan. If this is the case then there will be complications with that as well as generally the EU has been too busy trying to please the Indians.
> This is the reason for me writing what I wrote. Now if you can respond civilly then do so otherwise dont bother!
> A


really provoked. your the one going on about the uk wont sell you the meteor. its the world minus china versus pakistan.
come one. really ?
ok so its not we wont sell it to you it that its expensive, i stressed that in my first post. 

so your third point being india. the meteor is only on the rafale for india,which has a one way data link which was designed for the mica missile. 
also aquiring permission from vendors wont be a problem
the entire eu is not pleasing india its only specific countries such as france, sweden. countries such as italy, spain germany and eastern european countries dont care as they have gained nothing.
im saying if you want it you can have it. but is pakistan going to buy it? no they would wait probably wait for hiliary to give you the aim-120d or go chinese or possibly south africain

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## araz

Your problem is you shoot before you bother to read. Where did I even mention meteor. Can you point me to where I mentioned meteor in my earlier posts. I could not have been clearer in my second post as well as the first about my reasons for writing what I wtote. To ease matters further I again explained myself and yet you go off on a tangent and spoil a whole thread. I know who will or wont sell to us but we cannot procure it due to difficulties which I have highlighted. So bother to read first and then respond. 
A


----------



## Trying to be honest

I would guess germany would be pain point for eurofighter or meteor arrival than uk. From pure economic point of view think of airbus, car sale esp the luxury marques. There are pressure points which india can use. Unless china actively bats for pakistan with the germans. But then again Chinese would wantto sell their own wares.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

araz said:


> Your problem is you shoot before you bother to read. Where did I even mention meteor. Can you point me to where I mentioned meteor in my earlier posts. I could not have been clearer in my second post as well as the first about my reasons for writing what I wtote. To ease matters further I again explained myself and yet you go off on a tangent and spoil a whole thread. I know who will or wont sell to us but we cannot procure it due to difficulties which I have highlighted. So bother to read first and then respond.
> A


which other bvraam do we have for sale? theres only one. and skyflash dont count as thats old and not in production anymore. you clearly mention the uk having difficulties selling pakistan a missile to replace the sd-10 . the sd-10 being a bvraam i worked out you meant the meteor. the asraam is a short-mid range ir guided missiles so that dont count.

you said you know who will and wont sell pakistan missiles, how do you know? do you work in the airforce? knowing someone who works there is not good enough as they wont go telling the public what there upto. and would likely miss-guide you to throw you of your scent. 

so if you weren't referring to the meteor what were you referring to from the uk?


----------



## araz

Blue Marlin said:


> which other bvraam do we have for sale? theres only one. and skyflash dont count as thats old and not in production anymore. you clearly mention the uk having difficulties selling pakistan a missile to replace the sd-10 . the sd-10 being a bvraam i worked out you meant the meteor. the asraam is a short-mid range ir guided missiles so that dont count.
> 
> you said you know who will and wont sell pakistan missiles, how do you know? do you work in the airforce? knowing someone who works there is not good enough as they wont go telling the public what there upto. and would likely miss-guide you to throw you of your scent.
> 
> so if you weren't referring to the meteor what were you referring to from the uk?


OK detective Holmes so solve the next mystery, ie in the current environment with 2- 3 members having active dealings with India and at least one having previously denied offensive capabilities to PAF, how do you think a request for meteor will go down with the 5 partners involved in its development/ deployment You never read my post did you? I can tell from your response that you did not. Secondly you know how the US indirectly twists various nations wrists so how do you think it would react to the UK selling us the Meteor when the AIM 120D or even C7 has not been offered to us. Thirdly Captain Obvious might want to explain what the reaction of the EU would be to selling the meteor to a nation known to having very close ties with the Chinese who could potentially be their next adversary.
Who I am and what I do is none of your concern and neither am I revealing my credentials on an open forum. For that matter who the heck are you to be making such tall claims about UK selling meteor to PAF.WHAT ARE YOUR CREDENTIALS?
A


----------



## Blue Marlin

araz said:


> OK detective Holmes so solve the next mystery, ie in the current environment with 2- 3 members having active dealings with India and at least one having previously denied offensive capabilities to PAF, how do you think a request for meteor will go down with the 5 partners involved in its development/ deployment You never read my post did you? I can tell from your response that you did not. Secondly you know how the US indirectly twists various nations wrists so how do you think it would react to the UK selling us the Meteor when the AIM 120D or even C7 has not been offered to us. Thirdly Captain Obvious might want to explain what the reaction of the EU would be to selling the meteor to a nation known to having very close ties with the Chinese who could potentially be their next adversary.
> Who I am and what I do is none of your concern and neither am I revealing my credentials on an open forum. For that matter who the heck are you to be making such tall claims about UK selling meteor to PAF.WHAT ARE YOUR CREDENTIALS?
> A


i did read your post, yes indeed the meteor is a joint weapon just like the typhoons. which is why you go through a government deal. can you imagine how much head ache you'd go through talking to multiple partners over the same thing? so in essence mbda is not selling weapons to pakistan they are selling them to a partner government and then onto pakistan. the saudis went through the british government for their typhoons. just using that an an example here.ok so i never mentioned going through a g2g deal to get the missile...... my bad most of your purchases are g2g deals so hence the assumption.
yes the united state does pull strings to prevent deals going through. which is why people lobby. the indians are good at it. as for the aim-120c7...... it not a question of being offered but more about asking instead. heck the c8 or 120d is already available for export. Hillary likely to the next president and wanting to keep the afganistan war going she would keep pakstan happy and im sure the 120d would be available but im not sure via fms.
as for china vs europe.....yeah ok
your the one going on about how you claim to know who will and wont sell you kit. i have no idea who you are. but a good guess would be a middle age british pakistani somewhere in london probably who moved here in the 80's.

oh and as for my credentials, i worked for bae systems for about 3 years and have close friends there.


----------



## MastanKhan

Blue Marlin said:


> i did read your post, yes indeed the meteor is a joint weapon just like the typhoons. which is why you go through a government deal. can you imagine how much head ache you'd go through talking to multiple partners over the same thing? so in essence mbda is not selling weapons to pakistan they are selling them to a partner government and then onto pakistan. the saudis went through the british government for their typhoons. just using that an an example here.ok so i never mentioned going through a g2g deal to get the missile...... my bad most of your purchases are g2g deals so hence the assumption.
> yes the united state does pull strings to prevent deals going through. which is why people lobby. the indians are good at it. as for the aim-120c7...... it not a question of being offered but more about asking instead. heck the c8 or 120d is already available for export. Hillary likely to the next president and wanting to keep the afganistan war going she would keep pakstan happy and im sure the 120d would be available but im not sure via fms.
> as for china vs europe.....yeah ok
> your the one going on about how you claim to know who will and wont sell you kit. i have no idea who you are. but a good guess would be a middle age british pakistani somewhere in london probably who moved here in the 80's.
> 
> oh and as for my credentials, i worked for bae systems for about 3 years and have close friends there.



Hi,

You are arguing with someone--who has never ever offered a solution---a strategy--- a game plan---a deceit---deception or any kind of larceny needed in procuring a major weapons system in a timely manner---.

This guy is a total total apologist---who does nothing else than apologize for failed options---.

I remember @Sinopakfriend one time asked him for a strategy and game plan---and it was same old apologetic sob story---a total white wash---.

Now---coming back to the topic---what has happened in the last few days----it becomes more evident and clear that the paf has sabotaged the security and progress of pakistan more so than any enemy of pakistan could possibly do that---.

Until and unless pakistan makes a packaged deal including saudi arabia for EFT---I do not think that there is a single western platform available to pakistan at this time---with a full complimentary package---.

But leave the western package aside---only if the Paf had procured atleast 2 sqdrn's of J10 C's and 2 sqdrn's of JH7B's awhile ago---which would have doubled the current strength of the air force---the threats that pakista is facing today would not have happened---.

Why do we have to go for a nuclear war---why could the Paf not raise the conventional level of force---?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Blue Marlin

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> You are arguing with someone--who has never ever offered a solution---a strategy--- a game plan---a deceit---deception or any kind of larceny needed in procuring a major weapons system in a timely manner---.
> 
> This guy is a total total apologist---who does nothing else than apologize for failed options---.
> 
> I remember @Sinopakfriend one time asked him for a strategy and game plan---and it was same old apologetic sob story---a total white wash---.
> 
> Now---coming back to the topic---what has happened in the last few days----it becomes more evident and clear that the paf has sabotaged the security and progress of pakistan more so than any enemy of pakistan could possibly do that---.
> 
> Until and unless pakistan makes a packaged deal including saudi arabia for EFT---I do not think that there is a single western platform available to pakistan at this time---with a full complimentary package---.
> 
> But leave the western package aside---only if the Paf had procured atleast 2 sqdrn's of J10 C's and 2 sqdrn's of JH7B's awhile ago---which would have doubled the current strength of the air force---the threats that pakista is facing today would not have happened---.
> 
> Why do we have to go for a nuclear war---why could the Paf not raise the conventional level of force---?


araz is a good guy but what he said is consistant with what a lot of other pakistanis say so it not some kind of attack on him. usually he's good its just this specific case.

the typhoon is the only option for pakistan to counter the rafale which is being signed for tomorrow it is expensive but the tranche 3a is £85 million flyaway which is more than the rafale but the weak stirling would say now would be a good time to buy.

the j10b/c is not as advance as there european counterparts yet so thats not an option bu the jh7 is an avaliable attack aircraft but its very old.

pakistan would either need a stop gap until a 5th gen jet is avaliable. or upgrade the jf-17 with an aesa and a some better bvraams.
honestly a jf-17 with and aes and some potent bvraams would be a deadly combo as the jf-17 small rcs and the aesa would make any fighter to think twice. even the rafale.

they dont have the money for a stop gap so a the block 3 with an aesa and some better bvraams would be a good solution.
what do you think @Bilal Khan 777 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Blue Marlin said:


> araz is a good guy but what he said is consistant with what a lot of other pakistanis say so it not some kind of attack on him. usually he's good its just this specific case.
> 
> the typhoon is the only option for pakistan to counter the rafale which is being signed for tomorrow it is expensive but the tranche 3a is £85 million flyaway which is more than the rafale but the weak stirling would say now would be a good time to buy.
> 
> the j10b/c is not as advance as there european counterparts yet so thats not an option bu the jh7 is an avaliable attack aircraft but its very old.
> 
> pakistan would either need a stop gap until a 5th gen jet is avaliable. or upgrade the jf-17 with an aesa and a some better bvraams.
> honestly a jf-17 with and aes and some potent bvraams would be a deadly combo as the jf-17 small rcs and the aesa would make any fighter to think twice. even the rafale.
> 
> they dont have the money for a stop gap so a the block 3 with an aesa and some better bvraams would be a good solution.
> what do you think @Bilal Khan 777 ?



This was exactly my point. JF17 with AESA and extended range BVRs is the solution. However, some people take the political angle and start spewing hate towards PAF and calling it incompetent. Regarding EFT, it is not a questions of money, but the question of availability. EFT has never been offered to PAF. If and when it is offered, PAF will find the money to buy it. Coming back to the topic, I believe the the RVV series AAMs should be solicited, as Pakistan has the ability to integrate them.



MastanKhan said:


> oh and as for my credentials, i worked for bae systems for about 3 years and have close friends there.





MAI or ES? What level? Message me privately.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This was exactly my point. JF17 with AESA and extended range BVRs is the solution. However, some people take the political angle and start spewing hate towards PAF and calling it incompetent. Regarding EFT, it is not a questions of money, but the question of availability. EFT has never been offered to PAF. If and when it is offered, PAF will find the money to buy it. Coming back to the topic, I believe the the RVV series AAMs should be solicited, as Pakistan has the ability to integrate them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAI or ES? What level? Message me privately.



Hi,

Those are blue marlins credentials---.

I still remain a car salesman---.



Blue Marlin said:


> araz is a good guy but what he said is consistant with what a lot of other pakistanis say so it not some kind of attack on him. usually he's good its just this specific case.
> 
> the typhoon is the only option for pakistan to counter the rafale which is being signed for tomorrow it is expensive but the tranche 3a is £85 million flyaway which is more than the rafale but the weak stirling would say now would be a good time to buy.
> 
> the j10b/c is not as advance as there european counterparts yet so thats not an option bu the jh7 is an avaliable attack aircraft but its very old.
> 
> pakistan would either need a stop gap until a 5th gen jet is avaliable. or upgrade the jf-17 with an aesa and a some better bvraams.
> honestly a jf-17 with and aes and some potent bvraams would be a deadly combo as the jf-17 small rcs and the aesa would make any fighter to think twice. even the rafale.
> 
> they dont have the money for a stop gap so a the block 3 with an aesa and some better bvraams would be a good solution.
> what do you think @Bilal Khan 777 ?





Blue Marlin said:


> araz is a good guy but what he said is consistant with what a lot of other pakistanis say so it not some kind of attack on him. usually he's good its just this specific case.
> 
> the typhoon is the only option for pakistan to counter the rafale which is being signed for tomorrow it is expensive but the tranche 3a is £85 million flyaway which is more than the rafale but the weak stirling would say now would be a good time to buy.
> 
> the j10b/c is not as advance as there european counterparts yet so thats not an option bu the jh7 is an avaliable attack aircraft but its very old.
> 
> pakistan would either need a stop gap until a 5th gen jet is avaliable. or upgrade the jf-17 with an aesa and a some better bvraams.
> honestly a jf-17 with and aes and some potent bvraams would be a deadly combo as the jf-17 small rcs and the aesa would make any fighter to think twice. even the rafale.
> 
> they dont have the money for a stop gap so a the block 3 with an aesa and some better bvraams would be a good solution.
> what do you think @Bilal Khan 777 ?




Hi,

It would take around 4-5 years for the indians to start getting the Rafale---.

For pakistan---within 2 years you can have a sqdrn of J10C's and within another 2---you can have a 2nd sqdrn---.

On parallel----you are getting the JF17's as well---BLK2---BLK3's in future---.

The time is over for playing a SAFE game for pakistan air force---. It needs to go out on the limb---.

For 3 billion dollars---the Paf can have 150 J10C's at 50 mil a pop with aesa----all the weapons systems that would be used on the JF17 would be used on the J10's---.

The problem here is that the speed at which the JF17's are being produced is very slow---this SPEED is more suitable to nations that do not have any threat---but when you are sitting on the verge of war since 2002---the thought process of the pakistanis & the Paf needs to change.

Just because an actual clash has been avoided---it does not mean the problem has dissipated---.

I would rather see 150 J10C's in paf colors than see 24 EFT's---.

2.5 billion for 150 J10C's and spend another 2 billion on EW suite and weapons---.

The readers need to understand one more time---an aircraft like the J10 is needed because it is available and it raises the overall power projection of the Paf in a shorter time and at a lower cost---.

An aesa equipped J10C is somewhere between the BLK52 and the BLK60---.

Again---our problem is that we do not have enough aircraft coming in at a faster pace to fill in the massive hole.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## aftab_s81

@MastanKhan 
The J-10C may well replace the role of our Mirages. I wonder if we can spend more than $4bn on a single Bakr Eid, why can't we spend that amount to protect our very country. One of the reason may be b/c Army sucks up most of the budget allocated for defense.


----------



## MastanKhan

aftab_s81 said:


> @MastanKhan
> The J-10C may well replace the role of our Mirages. I wonder if we can spend more than $4bn on a single Bakr Eid, why can't we spend that amount to protect our very country. One of the reason may be b/c Army sucks up most of the budget allocated for defense.




Hi,

That is not the case---the Paf has wasted a lots of opportunities----they all get seperate funds---plus extra funds for the aircraft for the Paf---.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This was exactly my point. JF17 with AESA and extended range BVRs is the solution. However, some people take the political angle and start spewing hate towards PAF and calling it incompetent. Regarding EFT, it is not a questions of money, but the question of availability. EFT has never been offered to PAF. If and when it is offered, PAF will find the money to buy it. Coming back to the topic, I believe the the RVV series AAMs should be solicited, as Pakistan has the ability to integrate them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAI or ES? What level? Message me privately.


instead of wait for an invitation, why dont you approach them or even open a tender (with only two options)
what is the rvv series. is that the r77?


----------



## araz

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> You are arguing with someone--who has never ever offered a solution---a strategy--- a game plan---a deceit---deception or any kind of larceny needed in procuring a major weapons system in a timely manner---.
> 
> This guy is a total total apologist---who does nothing else than apologize for failed options---.
> 
> I remember @Sinopakfriend one time asked him for a strategy and game plan---and it was same old apologetic sob story---a total white wash---.
> 
> Now---coming back to the topic---what has happened in the last few days----it becomes more evident and clear that the paf has sabotaged the security and progress of pakistan more so than any enemy of pakistan could possibly do that---.
> 
> Until and unless pakistan makes a packaged deal including saudi arabia for EFT---I do not think that there is a single western platform available to pakistan at this time---with a full complimentary package---.
> 
> But leave the western package aside---only if the Paf had procured atleast 2 sqdrn's of J10 C's and 2 sqdrn's of JH7B's awhile ago---which would have doubled the current strength of the air force---the threats that pakista is facing today would not have happened---.
> 
> Why do we have to go for a nuclear war---why could the Paf not raise the conventional level of force---?


Mastan Khan
At least get some new lines to get a point across. I know you well and your view points. While I disagree with them I have always countered it with arguments. I would suggest you do the same. And please dont go off on one of your philosophical bullshit posts but give me some hard facts to talk about. Till then ------ Dont bother!!
A


----------



## MastanKhan

araz said:


> Mastan Khan
> At least get some new lines to get a point across. I know you well and your view points. While I disagree with them I have always countered it with arguments. I would suggest you do the same. And please dont go off on one of your philosophical bullshit posts but give me some hard facts to talk about. Till then ------ Dont bother!!
> A



Sir,

This is not a tv " DRAMA " where you got to listen to new lines to keep the level of excitement up---. This is a real scenario---real life---life and death situation---where if you don't acknowledge and correct your mistakes---you have serious problems---like now.

I don't have philosophical bs---. I talk about real issues---directions and how to approach and handle them---.

I mean to say---hanging Paf traitors does that sound like philosophical?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rustom

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> *For 3 billion dollars---the Paf can have 150 J10C's at 50 mil a pop with aesa----all the weapons systems that would be used on the JF17 would be used on the J10's---.*


*

3 billon dollars should give you 60 aircraft at 50 mil a POP. Math doesn't add up for 150. Just saying.*


----------



## MastanKhan

rustom said:


> *
> 3 billon dollars should give you 60 aircraft at 50 mil a POP. Math doesn't add up for 150. Just saying.*



Hi,

Okay---thank you----maybe we could stretch it to 6 bliion dollars---120 J10C's .


----------



## ali_raza

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Okay---thank you----maybe we could stretch it to 6 bliion dollars---120 J10C's .


sir all ur pradictions are coming true.there is a reason i m ur fan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## araz

MastanKhan said:


> Sir,
> 
> This is not a tv " DRAMA " where you got to listen to new lines to keep the level of excitement up---. This is a real scenario---real life---life and death situation---where if you don't acknowledge and correct your mistakes---you have serious problems---like now.
> 
> I don't have philosophical bs---. I talk about real issues---directions and how to approach and handle them---.
> 
> I mean to say---hanging Paf traitors does that sound like philosophical?


Same old bullshit from the same old mouth. Nothing new here.
A


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

araz said:


> Same old bullshit from the same old mouth. Nothing new here.
> A



Disagreements are okay brother. No need to loose composure.


----------



## zebra7

MastanKhan said:


> I still remain a car salesman---.



LOL


----------



## Trying to be honest

An AESA equipped plane will no way be costing only $50m, the calculations are all haywire. AESA manufacturing costs are more related to material and less related to labour, so Chinese AESA should in no way be massively less costly than a Western AESA. So I can't agree that AESA equiped J10 will cost only $50m.


----------



## aftab_s81

I wonder why PAF still hasn't chosen its next tier-1 platform. Funds restrictions aside, I dont think there are too many options to choose from. I think they will have to invest in J-31 program BEFORE it become a nightmare to wakeup. I don't think Su-35 is suitable for PAF, though Mig-35 may be a better solution keeping in mind it uses similar engine to JFT. Also payload and range is comparable to F-16. 
If FAF commits to something today, it will take around 4 years to actually realize that platform on ground.
@Windjammer, @MastanKhan, @araz

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jupiter2007

Trying to be honest said:


> An AESA equipped plane will no way be costing only $50m, the calculations are all haywire. AESA manufacturing costs are more related to material and less related to labour, so Chinese AESA should in no way be massively less costly than a Western AESA. So I can't agree that AESA equiped J10 will cost only $50m.



J-10 cost around 65 million.

Source: pakdef
J-10c with Chinese AESA.
Jf-17 block 3/4 will cost between 40 to 50 millon each depends on configuration.


----------



## Trying to be honest

Ple


jupiter2007 said:


> J-10 cost around 65 million.[/QUOTE


Is it the price of the AESA version, if so plz send the source.


----------



## jupiter2007

Trying to be honest said:


> Ple
> 
> Is it the price of the AESA version, if so plz send the source.



Pakistan should be working with Denel Dynamics to help develop SRAAM/BVRAAM.

A-Darter SRAAM/SAM
A-Darter Mk 2/3
A-Darter Light
A-Darter anti-shipping missile (ASM)
B-Darter - BVRAAM
R-Darter


----------



## Trying to be honest

Pakdef is a forum, no documents or chines sources I assume. But then thinking of it and comparing to other aesa platforms, lower cost engine (single engine and russian), possible low r&d employee, costs in China, lower cost of avionics - $65mn give or take would make sense. But that is of the platform only I guess. And also we have to assume that China doesn't seek any profit addendum over and above this price.


----------



## Ultima Thule

jupiter2007 said:


> Pakistan should be working with Denel Dynamics to help develop SRAAM/BVRAAM.
> 
> A-Darter SRAAM/SAM
> A-Darter Mk 2/3
> A-Darter Light
> A-Darter anti-shipping missile (ASM)
> B-Darter - BVRAAM
> R-Darter


just in your imaginations their is no A-dater versions you stated and their also no B-Dater and A-Darter, R-darter is joint project b/w Brazil not with Pakistan, i heard that Pakistan was developing T-Darter with Denel in the distant past and what your sorce please give me the link


----------



## jupiter2007

pakistanipower said:


> *just in your imaginations their is no A-dater versions you stated and their also no B-Dater and A-Darter*, R-darter is joint project b/w Brazil not with Pakistan, i heard that Pakistan was developing T-Darter with Denel in the distant past and what your sorce please give me the link



first of all, I said "Pakistan should", I didn't say Pakistan is....
Second, Please do some research before you embarrassing yourself..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-Darter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-Darter
http://www.deneldynamics.co.za/products/missiles/air-to-air-missiles/a-darter



> Further envisaged development include a A-Darter light, A-Darter Extended Range, and a ASM version. There are also projects to develop an A-Darter Mk2 and later a Mk3.





> Denel Dynamics is also developing a new radar-guided, beyond-visual-range AAM (BVRAAM) missile called B-Darter


http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/a-darter-air-to-air-missile/

*How do you like them apples?*


----------



## Ultima Thule

jupiter2007 said:


> first of all, I said "Pakistan should", I didn't say Pakistan is....
> Second, Please do some research before you embarrassing yourself..
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-Darter
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-Darter
> http://www.deneldynamics.co.za/products/missiles/air-to-air-missiles/a-darter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/a-darter-air-to-air-missile/
> 
> *How do you like them apples?*


So you believe those unreliable links like *WIKIPEDIA* and *AIRFORCE *TECHNOLOGY it is good for your health, post some reliable links like* JANE'S*, *FLIGHT-GLOBAL*, *AVIATION WEEK *etc etc your two links are empty for variation of A-darter and their is no B-Darter, it is* MARLIN* they are developing as a BVRAAM, do some research before you posting and your DENEL links doesn't states any version A-Darter, and that i called it reliable link


----------



## jupiter2007

pakistanipower said:


> So you believe those unreliable links like *WIKIPEDIA* and *AIRFORCE *TECHNOLOGY it is good for your health, post some reliable links like* JANE'S*, *FLIGHT-GLOBAL*, *AVIATION WEEK *etc etc your two links are empty for variation of A-darter and their is no B-Darter, it is* MARLIN* they are developing as a BVRAAM, do some research before you posting and your DENEL links doesn't states any version A-Darter, and that i called it reliable link




One can argue about Wikipedia but as far as I know Airforce Technology is a reliable site.
My point is that Pakistan needs to diversify it's defence equipment and shouldn't put all it's eggs in the same basket (china). 
South Africa,Turkey, Serbia, Italy, Ukrainian, Belarus, Azerbaijan, South Korea and Brazil, all of these countries have a pretty decent defence industry and Pakistan must work with them on defence projects to develop it's own civilian and defence industry.


----------



## Ultima Thule

jupiter2007 said:


>


there is no version of A-darter in your screenshot what are you trying to prove, *"OVER-SMART"*


----------



## jupiter2007

pakistanipower said:


> there is no version of A-darter in your screenshot what are you trying to prove, *"OVER-SMART"*



Please don't ask me to teach you how to read.

Just in case if you decided to delete your comments.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

jupiter2007 said:


> Please don't ask me to teach you how to read.
> 
> Just in case if you decided to delete your comments.....


yaar their is nothing in your screenshot to teach me how to read yaar don't fool yourself their is no version of A-Darter, Why don't you accept the truth, get out of your imagintions wishful thinking


----------



## jupiter2007




----------



## MastanKhan

Hi,

We still have a deal for delivery signed for the J10's at around 35-40 mil a pop.

Aesa fire control radar---should not be more than 5 million dollars at the high end---and at this crucial time----we need to grind the chinese for a deal---very very soft loans---.

As for the equipment---it should not be diversifed---two at the most three----. But majority of the weapons are from one to two sources---.



araz said:


> Same old bullshit from the same old mouth. Nothing new here.
> A



Hi,

And you stand in line with the traitors of the Paf---who have sabotaged the defense of pakistan---and as you protect them---plz consider whom you stand with.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## araz

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> We still have a deal for delivery signed for the J10's at around 35-40 mil a pop.
> 
> Aesa fire control radar---should not be more than 5 million dollars at the high end---and at this crucial time----we need to grind the chinese for a deal---very very soft loans---.
> 
> As for the equipment---it should not be diversifed---two at the most three----. But majority of the weapons are from one to two sources---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> And you stand in line with the traitors of the Paf---who have sabotaged the defense of pakistan---and as you protect them---plz consider whom you stand with.


I stand by my opinion. Yes. But this is what you are doing. The rest as I said is opinion. Yours vs mine.
You have to date never provided any sound logic for your suppositions. The ones that I remember have been responded to so many times I am getting tired of even listing them. So carry on with your bull shit like you have done for many yrs. If you write anything of value I will thank you but dont expect a response for drivel. Good day.
A



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Disagreements are okay brother. No need to loose composure.


This disagreement has a history. I have been happy to keep myself away from his opinion. But when he jumps in for an attack on a post not addressed to him and tries sly attacks I sometimes lose it. So sorry about soiling your thread. Anyways lets move on.
A

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> We still have a deal for delivery signed for the J10's at around 35-40 mil a pop.
> 
> Aesa fire control radar---should not be more than 5 million dollars at the high end---and at this crucial time----we need to grind the chinese for a deal---very very soft loans---.
> 
> As for the equipment---it should not be diversifed---two at the most three----. But majority of the weapons are from one to two sources---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> And you stand in line with the traitors of the Paf---who have sabotaged the defense of pakistan---and as you protect them---plz consider whom you stand with.



Kindly keep name calling aside. If you have something to contribute, you are welcome. AESA is an Air Intercept Radar, in a fighter aircraft, not a fire control radar, which implies an air defense system FCR.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MystryMan

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> We still have a deal for delivery signed for the J10's at around 35-40 mil a pop.
> 
> Aesa fire control radar---should not be more than 5 million dollars at the high end---and at this crucial time----we need to grind the chinese for a deal---very very soft loans---.
> 
> As for the equipment---it should not be diversifed---two at the most three----. But majority of the weapons are from one to two sources---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> And you stand in line with the traitors of the Paf---who have sabotaged the defense of pakistan---and as you protect them---plz consider whom you stand with.



IIRC in time of Kargil conflict i read somewhere that China was to provide 120 F-7(J-7) from its inventory if the conflict expands to international borders (they had to remain within borders of Pak).
Similarly by inducting J-10(Latest Advanced Variant either B,C or D) we can again leverage the same support from PLAAF due to commonalty of platform. It will give us more flexibility to absorb war attrition and we can be more aggressive in attacking targets inside India.


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> AESA is an Air Intercept Radar, in a fighter aircraft, not a fire control radar, which implies an air defense system FCR.



Hi,

I guess it is all in the wording

" KEY FEATURES The Vixen 1000E Radar has been designed from the outset to meet worldwide fire control radar detection and target tracking needs combined into one efficient modular system. The Vixen 1000E builds on common modular units for a scaleable system architecture to meet the needs of fire control and intercept radar operational requirements whilst remaining resistant to radar countermeasures ".

file:///home/chronos/u-c0b151217f034a2285b584d010dd63d355cc4ead/Downloads/MM08133_Vixen_1000E_LQ_.pdf



MystryMan said:


> IIRC in time of Kargil conflict i read somewhere that China was to provide 120 F-7(J-7) from its inventory if the conflict expands to international borders (they had to remain within borders of Pak).
> Similarly by inducting J-10(Latest Advanced Variant either B,C or D) we can again leverage the same support from PLAAF due to commonalty of platform. It will give us more flexibility to absorb war attrition and we can be more aggressive in attacking targets inside India.



Hi,

The difference between then and now is like between analogue and digital---. In the past---you were flying similar aircraft with similar mechanical input control---.

Now you have a newer version of a LAPTOP in every different model of a fighter aircraft and it takes time to learn to operate the machine.

So---the 90's scenario will not work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> I guess it is all in the wording
> 
> " KEY FEATURES The Vixen 1000E Radar has been designed from the outset to meet worldwide fire control radar detection and target tracking needs combined into one efficient modular system. The Vixen 1000E builds on common modular units for a scaleable system architecture to meet the needs of fire control and intercept radar operational requirements whilst remaining resistant to radar countermeasures ".
> 
> file:///home/chronos/u-c0b151217f034a2285b584d010dd63d355cc4ead/Downloads/MM08133_Vixen_1000E_LQ_.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The difference between then and now is like between analogue and digital---. In the past---you were flying similar aircraft with similar mechanical input control---.
> 
> Now you have a newer version of a LAPTOP in every different model of a fighter aircraft and it takes time to learn to operate the machine.
> 
> So---the 90's scenario will not work.



How about train some PAF pilot using J-10A/B from PLAAF so that if situation demand you can bring some from China. It can be a open secret deal between Pakistan China that PAF will lease some during war time so that it won't interpret China join against India directly which would escalate the situation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

Blue Marlin said:


> i did read your post, yes indeed the meteor is a joint weapon just like the typhoons. which is why you go through a government deal. can you imagine how much head ache you'd go through talking to multiple partners over the same thing? so in essence mbda is not selling weapons to pakistan they are selling them to a partner government and then onto pakistan. the saudis went through the british government for their typhoons. just using that an an example here.ok so i never mentioned going through a g2g deal to get the missile...... my bad most of your purchases are g2g deals so hence the assumption.
> yes the united state does pull strings to prevent deals going through. which is why people lobby. the indians are good at it. as for the aim-120c7...... it not a question of being offered but more about asking instead. heck the c8 or 120d is already available for export. Hillary likely to the next president and wanting to keep the afganistan war going she would keep pakstan happy and im sure the 120d would be available but im not sure via fms.
> as for china vs europe.....yeah ok
> your the one going on about how you claim to know who will and wont sell you kit. i have no idea who you are. but a good guess would be a middle age british pakistani somewhere in london probably who moved here in the 80's.
> 
> oh and as for my credentials, i worked for bae systems for about 3 years and have close friends there.


it depends upon multi factors, the key is that we are every weak at diplomacy and India consider it as an act of war if somebody sells weapons to us...this is just like china consider anybody who sell weapons to Taiwan as act of war..

the very reason why even USA is reluctant to sell taiwan equipment


----------



## Dazzler

@Qabza Group

Few days ago, i met a friend who is a jf-17 jockey. He said that the SD-10A has better overall flight characteristics and rocket burn time courtesy a bigger rocket motor. Secondly, he mentioned the Home On Jam mode and better ECCM capability, depending upon the flight conditions, target distance like head on or tail among other conditions off course.

Need your input.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Wet Shirt Contest

Its not just "$50m" fly away cost, any new platforms would be expensive, so you also account the cost of weapons package, infrastructure, training and another 3 - 4 years for proper integration into airforce. we don't enjoy the purchasing power like our neighbor do, PAF fully needs to understands that before committing to any "kneejerk" accusation.

Personally, i don't see any J10 deal because PAF is fully committed with Jf17 and its blocks until next generation platforms becomes available. right now the focus should be on J17 weapons package, this can be done at the fraction of the cost of accruing a new platform.


----------



## MastanKhan

Wet Shirt Contest said:


> Its not just "$50m" fly away cost, any new platforms would be expensive, so you also account the cost of weapons package, infrastructure, training and another 3 - 4 years for proper integration into airforce. we don't enjoy the purchasing power like our neighbor do, PAF fully needs to understands that before committing to any "kneejerk" accusation.
> 
> Personally, i don't see any J10 deal because PAF is fully committed with Jf17 and its blocks until next generation platforms becomes available. right now the focus should be on J17 weapons package, this can be done at the fraction of the cost of accruing a new platform.



Hi,

Indeed---50 mil is just a fly away cost---but the good thing is that no new weapons need to be purchased---. But off course traing and other accessories need to be covered---.

What you did not understand is----the JF17 production cannot meet the needed demand---the committment for the JF17 is well and good---but if the numbers are not being produced to take care of the NOW problem---.

It would be just like your mother or my mother would be dying of cancer---and would need 30 shots of a medicine a month----and you and I only giver her 10 shots a month---.

Shame on you---and shame on me for being such a disgusting son.



monitor said:


> How about train some PAF pilot using J-10A/B from PLAAF so that if situation demand you can bring some from China. It can be a open secret deal between Pakistan China that PAF will lease some during war time so that it won't interpret China join against India directly which would escalate the situation.




Hi,

Thank you---that is an excellent thought---but a better act would be to sign the deal for the delivery of the first 36---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SQ8

Dazzler said:


> @Qabza Group
> 
> Few days ago, i met a friend who is a jf-17 jockey. He said that the SD-10A has better overall flight characteristics and rocket burn time courtesy a bigger rocket motor. Secondly, he mentioned the Home On Jam mode and better ECCM capability, depending upon the flight conditions, target distance like head on or tail among other conditions off course.
> 
> Need your input.


It is equal in performance to the AIM-120C. What more a statement do you need?



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This was exactly my point. JF17 with AESA and extended range BVRs is the solution. However, some people take the political angle and start spewing hate towards PAF and calling it incompetent. Regarding EFT, it is not a questions of money, but the question of availability. EFT has never been offered to PAF. If and when it is offered, PAF will find the money to buy it. Coming back to the topic, I believe the the RVV series AAMs should be solicited, as Pakistan has the ability to integrate them.



The offering problem lies not in that the Eurofighter consortium never offered it; but that it is almost impossible based on the delicate diplomacy involved in dealing with what are essentially 5 nations with ownership of the aircraft to agree in their civilian setup to release this aircraft in limited yet consequential numbers to a nation that as such does not have good PR due to media and financial lobbies by India.

It has been given a lite evaluation and the PAF loved it; but from a aircombat perspective.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dazzler

Oscar said:


> It is equal in performance to the AIM-120C. What more a statement do you need?





AIM 120 C has at least 7 different derivatives, which one do you think is comparable to the SD-10A?


----------



## araz

Oscar said:


> It is equal in performance to the AIM-120C. What more a statement do you need?
> 
> 
> 
> The offering problem lies not in that the Eurofighter consortium never offered it; but that it is almost impossible based on the delicate diplomacy involved in dealing with what are essentially 5 nations with ownership of the aircraft to agree in their civilian setup to release this aircraft in limited yet consequential numbers to a nation that as such does not have good PR due to media and financial lobbies by India.
> 
> It has been given a lite evaluation and the PAF loved it; but from a aircombat perspective.


I think it boils down to whether we can muster up some hard cash to put on the table for the deal or not. In the current financial situation of EU, provided we put cash down, we will get approval but he problem remains one of money.
By the way how did you get a negative rating? You are not the sort of guy who trolls threads to get such ratings.
A


----------



## Ultima Thule

Dazzler said:


> AIM 120 C has at least 7 different derivatives, which one do you think is comparable to the SD-10A?


I think SD-10A is equal to C-5, just my opinion


----------



## Dazzler

pakistanipower said:


> I think SD-10A is equal to C-5, just my opinion



In terms of range and performance, they are quite identical

*AIM 120C AMRAAM

Wing span - 44.7 cm (17.6 in)
Fin span - 44.7 cm (17.6 in)*

*Diameter* - 17.8 cm (7 in)

*Weight* - 157 kg (345 lb)

*Speed* - Mach 4

*Range* - 105 km (65 miles)

*Warhead* - 18 kg (40 lb) WDU-41/B blast-fragmentation


*Shan Dian-10A 

Length: *3934 mm 
*
Diameter: *203 mm
*
Wing span: *670 mm
*
Fin span: *752 mm
*
Weight: *199 kg
*
Propulsion: *Solid dual-thrust rocket motor with lofted profile
*
Range: *100 km
*
Altitude: *21 km
*
Speed: *Mach 4
*
Guidance: *Strap-down inertial guidance + datalink correction + active radar terminal guidance
*
*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

araz said:


> By the way how did you get a negative rating? *You are not the sort of guy who trolls threads to get such ratings*.
> A



What are you talking about? I love doing that.
No, that is from some TT where I did not agree with his jingoism.



Dazzler said:


> AIM 120 C has at least 7 different derivatives, which one do you think is comparable to the SD-10A?


C-1/4 series with the range of the -7.


----------



## Dazzler

Oscar said:


> C-1/4 series with the range of the -7.



The C-7 has much longer range compared to the C-5, approaching around 150 km as far i know. 

In that case, a prestigious and mighty target will become a piece of cake you know 

Thanks


----------



## monitor

Kills of the future
This 2014 CGI shows a J-31 stealth fighter launching a long range PL-15 missile. Given USAF concerns about the high performance PL-15, it could indeed feature high performance technologies like range and maneuverability enhancing ramjets, and a jam resistant AESA radar seeker.


via Popular Science...

The PL-15 is developed by the 607 Institute. It is the replacement for China's current BVRAAM, the radar guided, PL-12, which reportedly has a range of approximately 100km. Compared to the PL-12, the PL-15 has an improved active radar seeker and jam-resistant datalinks, along with a dual pulse rocket motor to extend its range.
Even in the prototype stage, the PL-15 is already an international star. Speaking at the 2015 Air Force Association conference the same week as the test, USAF Air Combatant Commander General Hawk Carlisle cited the PL-15 as the reason for Congress to fund a new missile to replace the American AMRAAM. His reasons for concern is the PL-15's range. By incorporating a ramjet engine, its range could reach 150-200km, was well as its terminal maneuverability. That would out-range existing American air-to-air missiles, making the PL-15 not just a threat to fighters like the F-35, but also to US bombers and aerial tankers critical to American air operations across the vast Pacific. General Carlisle called "out-sticking" the PL-15 a high priority for the USAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Dazzler said:


> The C-7 has much longer range compared to the C-5, approaching around 150 km as far i know.
> 
> In that case, a prestigious and mighty target will become a piece of cake you know
> 
> Thanks



That 150km is based upon best case launch scenarios. As such, the range for the SD-10 is probably around the same as put by Qabza group. To achieve such ranges requires the target to be in a very specific set of altitiude and speed, and the launch aircraft also has to have a specific altitude and speed. 

What matters is the No Escape Zone of the missile and there the SD-10 is as good as(if not slightly better in certain kinematics) than the Aim-120C-5

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Eminent Mainstream Media

Dazzler said:


> In terms of range and performance, they are quite identical
> 
> *AIM 120C AMRAAM
> 
> Wing span - 44.7 cm (17.6 in)
> Fin span - 44.7 cm (17.6 in)*
> 
> *Diameter* - 17.8 cm (7 in)
> 
> *Weight* - 157 kg (345 lb)
> 
> *Speed* - Mach 4
> 
> *Range* - 105 km (65 miles)
> 
> *Warhead* - 18 kg (40 lb) WDU-41/B blast-fragmentation
> 
> 
> *Shan Dian-10A
> 
> Length: *3934 mm
> *
> Diameter: *203 mm
> *
> Wing span: *670 mm
> *
> Fin span: *752 mm
> *
> Weight: *199 kg
> *
> Propulsion: *Solid dual-thrust rocket motor with lofted profile
> *
> Range: *100 km
> *
> Altitude: *21 km
> *
> Speed: *Mach 4
> *
> Guidance: *Strap-down inertial guidance + datalink correction + active radar terminal guidance



There is a notable difference in the size and the missile design If you notice-

SD10 is heavier, thicker missile than Aim120C- It seems the designers of SD10 got Mach 4 by burning more propellant- Which Aim120C was able to do so in lesser amount and hence is a sleeker missile- at the same time getting 5 km more range than SD10- 

Also the dual thrust motor burning with lofted profile here means that the missile uses gravity to achieve 100km range- Hence the last stage is not accelerating with power as major acceleration would come with gravity and hence the kill zone or the no-escape zone would be significantly lower than actual range- It is the usual method followed by AMRAAM of various countries- However new propulsion methods like dual pulse rocket(Aim120D) and air-breathing rocket is able to achieve powered flight for majority of Its flight profile-


----------



## SQ8

Eminent Mainstream Media said:


> There is a notable difference in the size and the missile design If you notice-
> 
> SD10 is heavier, thicker missile than Aim120C- It seems the designers of SD10 got Mach 4 by burning more propellant- Which Aim120C was able to do so in lesser amount and hence is a sleeker missile- at the same time getting 5 km more range than SD10-
> 
> Also the dual thrust motor burning with lofted profile here means that the missile uses gravity to achieve 100km range- Hence the last stage is not accelerating with power as major acceleration would come with gravity and hence the kill zone or the no-escape zone would be significantly lower than actual range- It is the usual method followed by AMRAAM of various countries- However new propulsion methods like dual pulse rocket(Aim120D) and air-breathing rocket is able to achieve powered flight for majority of Its flight profile-



Again, please provide the proof to your claims including exact length and dimensions along with a copy of the brochure of the Sd-10 and that of the Aim-120C with NeZs and other relevant data.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Eminent Mainstream Media

Oscar said:


> Again, please provide the proof to your claims including *exact length and dimensions* along with a copy of the brochure of the Sd-10 and that of the Aim-120C with NeZs and other relevant data.



Ask *Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT 
*
I just used the data provided by him-


----------



## SQ8

Eminent Mainstream Media said:


> Ask *Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT *
> 
> I just used the data provided by him-


Then quote that data, it must be here right? After all, if you are passing conclusions as a completely untrustworthy member on boost time; you must have some logical reasoning to it.


----------



## Eminent Mainstream Media

Oscar said:


> Then quote that data, it must be here right? After all, if you are passing conclusions as a completely untrustworthy member on boost time; you must have some logical reasoning to it.



Refer post #169

example 199kg is heavier than 157kg- 

203mm is thicker than 178mm- 

Given both use solid propellants which burn per cross section area- SD10 will burn more fuel per Km-


----------



## S10

The future is probably PL-12C, with foldable fins to fit inside the belly of J-20. It's going to have performance roughly on par with AIM-120D. That means maximum range of around 150km and effective kill range of ~60km. Current AIM-120C, PL-12 and R-77 have about 40km effective range against fast maneuvering targets.

Obviously the dimension of PL-12 is slightly larger than AIM-120, but that also allows more room for fuel and larger seeker.


----------



## WarFariX

SD-10 is very important for PAF as with good strategy it will be enough to take on MKIs


----------



## HRK

Oscar said:


> It is equal in performance to the AIM-120C.



One thing I am still not getting about SD-10 is its limited range (≥ 70 KM as per its brochure) as compare to AIM-120C & it is believed that the range of AIM-120C is ≥100 KM (if web sources are to be believed) 

on the basis of this I am assuming either we are over estimating the range of AIM-120C in our inventory or the quoted range for SD-10 in that brochure is wrong


----------



## SQ8

HRK said:


> One thing I am still not getting about SD-10 is its limited range (≥ 70 KM as per its brochure) as compare to AIM-120C & it is believed that the range of AIM-120C is ≥100 KM (if web sources are to be believed)
> 
> on the basis of this I am assuming either we are over estimating the range of AIM-120C in our inventory or the quoted range for SD-10 in that brochure is wrong



There was a good explanation of why range is a subjective term in these brochures given by another member here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

Oscar said:


> There was a good explanation of why range is a subjective term in these brochures given by another member here.



OK I will try to find it .....


----------



## SQ8

HRK said:


> OK I will try to find it .....


Go back a few pages in this thread.
https://defence.pk/members/qabza-group.179061/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Oscar said:


> It is equal in performance to the AIM-120C. What more a statement do you need?
> 
> 
> 
> The offering problem lies not in that the Eurofighter consortium never offered it; but that it is almost impossible based on the delicate diplomacy involved in dealing with what are essentially 5 nations with ownership of the aircraft to agree in their civilian setup to release this aircraft in limited yet consequential numbers to a nation that as such does not have good PR due to media and financial lobbies by India.
> 
> It has been given a lite evaluation and the PAF loved it; but from a aircombat perspective.


what about approaching one government? it would streamline the process. but end of the day it would need to be approved by all of the partners. the saudis and oman purchased typhoons through bae systems (uk) and kuwait purchased them via alenia aermacchi (italy). heck with the active search for new orders theres an option for an off the shelf purchase. an offset purchase may complicate things and as i understand your modp says theres must be an ofset at a certain percentage. im not sure if the build it in pakistan like a flatpack furniture counts anymore. as you have demonstrated you can already build fighter jets, and wont bring anything special.
i read that our pm will visit pakistan next year. its not related to the typhoon obviously, it means theres gonna be a few trade deal to offset brexit. but its an option.
as for lobbies, end of the day we supply weapons to who every has money, heck even the saudis when they used our kit to kill civilians recently at a funeral. lobbing is not gonna offset a multibillion pound deal. remember that.


----------



## SQ8

Blue Marlin said:


> what about approaching one government? it would streamline the process. but end of the day it would need to be approved by all of the partners. the saudis and oman purchased typhoons through bae systems (uk) and kuwait purchased them via alenia aermacchi (italy). heck with the active search for new orders theres an option for an off the shelf purchase. an offset purchase may complicate things and as i understand your modp says theres must be an ofset at a certain percentage. im not sure if the build it in pakistan like a flatpack furniture counts anymore. as you have demonstrated you can already build fighter jets, and wont bring anything special.
> i read that our pm will visit pakistan next year. its not related to the typhoon obviously, it means theres gonna be a few trade deal to offset brexit. but its an option.
> as for lobbies, end of the day we supply weapons to who every has money, heck even the saudis when they used our kit to kill civilians recently at a funeral. lobbing is not gonna offset a multibillion pound deal. remember that.



The Saudis and Omanis can bypass all their diplomatic worries by throwing a drum of oil at any objecting member of the Eurofighter consortium.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Oscar said:


> The Saudis and Omanis can bypass all their diplomatic worries by throwing a drum of oil at any objecting member of the Eurofighter consortium.



The drums of oil go on the table and underneath, and on the palms as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HRK

Qabza Group said:


> If you consider the max ceiling a JF-17 can climb and launch SD-10 and its Adversery also coming towards him HEAD-ON. *Both Aircrafts at Mach-2*



is it 'just' an assumption for JF-17 ....


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> The drums of oil go on the table and underneath, and on the palms as well.


Exactly , all we can offer is Sarson ka saag and khalis Makhan. 
They dont seem to like that at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

Oscar said:


> The Saudis and Omanis can bypass all their diplomatic worries by throwing a drum of oil at any objecting member of the Eurofighter consortium.


end of the day, the typhoon consortium needs orders, and realistically the Netherlands which opened a tender for new fighter jets will go for the f35 as its a level 2 partner in the program.

and the possibility of the saudis buying 48 more of them is crazy but end of the day it is saudi arabia here so it may happen but i dont foresee it .

malaysia are planning to upgrade the mig 29's instead to smt standard. and indoneasia not playing ball.
so its options are limited and the program supporting 100,000 jobs in total theres pressure to search out of the usual circle for orders.
i personally feel if you "want" it then you'd work to getting it. the indians are looking at the f16in blk70 and the gripen e both of which are superior then your flagship f16 blk 52+'s. 
so you either fast track the ngf or get a stop gap.


----------



## SQ8

Blue Marlin said:


> end of the day, the typhoon consortium needs orders, and realistically the Netherlands which opened a tender for new fighter jets will go for the f35 as its a level 2 partner in the program.
> 
> and the possibility of the saudis buying 48 more of them is crazy but end of the day it is saudi arabia here so it may happen but i dont foresee it .
> 
> malaysia are planning to upgrade the mig 29's instead to smt standard. and indoneasia not playing ball.
> so its options are limited and the program supporting 100,000 jobs in total theres pressure to search out of the usual circle for orders.
> i personally feel if you "want" it then you'd work to getting it. the indians are looking at the f16in blk70 and the gripen e both of which are superior then your flagship f16 blk 52+'s.
> so you either fast track the ngf or get a stop gap.


All of that depends upon funds. Funds that are also needed for new EW systems, SAMs and other ancillary support. 
A better option is to invest in more and more SoWs until a NGF.


----------



## GumNaam

Oscar said:


> Exactly , all we can offer is Sarson ka saag and khalis Makhan.
> They dont seem to like that at all.


You'd be surprised how much oil Pakistan has. But th le dumbass filthy politicians don't take it out.


----------



## Blue Marlin

Oscar said:


> All of that depends upon funds. Funds that are also needed for new EW systems, SAMs and other ancillary support.
> A better option is to invest in more and more SoWs until a NGF.


ew systems,you mean like replacing the dassault ew aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._24_Squadron_(Pakistan_Air_Force)

orl ike working on "connecting" your fighter jets together like link16/11 and your own thing.

personally it would be great to hear of a long range sam and new frigates. the former being the most important i would assume theres some hq-9 batteries dotted around pakistan, i doubt the airforce dont just sit there there twiddling their thumbs.hences the assumption. that and i read someone leak news of it.

and as for next gen missiles..... well bilal khan 777 says denel a-darter program is not run buy the brightest of the bunch. i assume on the pr side not technical. and the bvraam either the marlin, pl-15 or wait to ask dear hillary nicely for aim-120d's and radar upgrades to the older f16s so they can fire them too. and the aim-9x wont hurt too.

also your timing suggests your not state side. hows the weather in the uk? not to cold i hope.


----------



## SQ8

GumNaam said:


> You'd be surprised how much oil Pakistan has. But th le dumbass filthy politicians don't take it out.


Until is seen being taken out and in drums. It is as good as non-existent. So regardless of if's and buts. Pakistan has no oil.



Blue Marlin said:


> ew systems,you mean like replacing the dassault ew aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._24_Squadron_(Pakistan_Air_Force)
> 
> orl ike working on "connecting" your fighter jets together like link16/11 and your own thing.
> 
> personally it would be great to hear of a long range sam and new frigates. the former being the most important i would assume theres some hq-9 batteries dotted around pakistan, i doubt the airforce dont just sit there there twiddling their thumbs.hences the assumption. that and i read someone leak news of it.
> 
> and as for next gen missiles..... well bilal khan 777 says denel a-darter program is not run buy the brightest of the bunch. i assume on the pr side not technical. and the bvraam either the marlin, pl-15 or wait to ask dear hillary nicely for aim-120d's and radar upgrades to the older f16s so they can fire them too. and the aim-9x wont hurt too.
> 
> also your timing suggests your not state side. hows the weather in the uk? not to cold i hope.



We already have a proprietary link known as link-17 that is compatible with link 16.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Preacher

UEM said:


> Half a squadron of Su-35 will not make a difference against hundreds of Su-30Mkis



We work on the quality not on the quantity. When it comes to actual war those Su-30Mkis will be crashing into the grounds all by themselves because of technical malfunctions. As said by Indian Defense Minister half of their MKI fleet is not war ready --- over 350 of the approximately 700 combat aircraft in the air force's inventory are in a state to fly and undertake operations. 
source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...-to-technical-issues/articleshow/50206678.cms

P.S: Before someone label me as just 'another troller I'm just telling the importance of quality over quantity

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MilSpec

Oscar said:


> Until is seen being taken out and in drums. It is as good as non-existent. So regardless of if's and buts. Pakistan has no oil.
> 
> 
> 
> We already have a proprietary link known as link-17 that is compatible with link 16.


J-series programming or machine language encoders? any more info to read?


----------



## Basel

@Bilal Khan 777 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Windjammer @Zarvan @gambit @Blue Marlin 

will it be good / feasible for PAF to initially go for available used EFT trench-1 & 2s? How much capabilities they would offer compared to frontline fighters of IAF and PAF's F-16?


----------



## Windjammer

Basel said:


> @Bilal Khan 777 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Windjammer @Zarvan @gambit @Blue Marlin
> 
> will it be good / feasible for PAF to initially go for available used EFT trench-1 & 2s? How much capabilities they would offer compared to frontline fighters of IAF and PAF's F-16?


In BVR they are in a class of their own but WVR , PAF has repeatedly outclassed them while flying in their F-16s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## _NOBODY_

Windjammer said:


> In BVR they are in a class of their own but WVR , PAF has repeatedly outclassed them while flying in their F-16s.


That was due to superior pilot skills. Typhoon is superior in WVR combat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

MilSpec said:


> J-series programming or machine language encoders? any more info to read?


My only involvement was reading through these two and then providing them an idea of how a mid-point product it could be simulated onto matlab and then implemented in C embedded(part way because we are big on TI).
Did not even know it was going to end up being called Link-17
http://everyspec.com/MIL-STD/MIL-STD-3000-9999/MIL-STD-6016C_NOTICE-2_22648/
http://standards.globalspec.com/std/419657/nato-stanag-5522



TheGreatOne said:


> That was due to superior pilot skills. Typhoon is superior in WVR combat.


That depends. It is excellent at high speed energy maneuvering, but not too good in the slow speed nose pointing.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
3


----------



## Basel

Windjammer said:


> In BVR they are in a class of their own but WVR , PAF has repeatedly outclassed them while flying in their F-16s.



If PAF pilots fly even trench1 & 2s with meteor BVR and ASRAAM / IRIS-T / A-Darter with HMD how much it will enhance PAF's capabilities against IAF's frontline fighters?


----------



## Sine Nomine

Oscar said:


> That depends. It is excellent at high speed energy maneuvering, but not too good in the slow speed nose pointing.


One thing is clear sir,we are pretty much screwed in arena of Fighters,we are seriously lagging behind in both Quality and Quantity pretty much due to economy.If we failed,we are doomed.
Recent Acquisition of SAM's seems a stop gap measure,until we have money to buy Jets.


----------



## Basel

Oscar said:


> My only involvement was reading through these two and then providing them an idea of how a mid-point product it could be simulated onto matlab and then implemented in C embedded(part way because we are big on TI).
> Did not even know it was going to end up being called Link-17
> http://everyspec.com/MIL-STD/MIL-STD-3000-9999/MIL-STD-6016C_NOTICE-2_22648/
> http://standards.globalspec.com/std/419657/nato-stanag-5522
> 
> 
> That depends. It is excellent at high speed energy maneuvering, but not too good in the slow speed nose pointing.



So that is why trench-3B is suppose to have TVC?


----------



## Sine Nomine

Oscar said:


> My only involvement was reading through these two and then providing them an idea of how a mid-point product it could be simulated onto matlab and then implemented in C embedded(part way because we are big on TI).
> Did not even know it was going to end up being called Link-17
> http://everyspec.com/MIL-STD/MIL-STD-3000-9999/MIL-STD-6016C_NOTICE-2_22648/
> http://standards.globalspec.com/std/419657/nato-stanag-5522


How much that system is resistant to Jamming.


----------



## SQ8

Basel said:


> So that is why trench-3B is suppose to have TVC?



No. Tranche -3 will be offered with a wing root LERX to assist in slow speed performance enhancement. 
No TVC for current customers for Tranche-3.



قناص said:


> How much that system is resistant to Jamming.


Classified. But very robust against Jamming.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Basel

Oscar said:


> No. Tranche -3 will be offered with a wing root LERX to assist in slow speed performance enhancement.
> No TVC for current customers for Tranche-3.
> 
> 
> Classified. But very robust against Jamming.



There will be two trench-3s A & B I m talking about 3B not initial trench-3.

Can you post any illustration or pic of EFT with LERX? Giving an idea how it will look.

some nice info about EFT in below link.

http://www.janes.com/article/56174/sdsr-2015-typhoon-service-life-extended-and-numbers-increased


----------



## SQ8

Basel said:


> There will be two trench-3s A & B I m talking about 3B not initial trench-3.
> 
> Can you post any illustration or pic of EFT with LERX? Giving an idea how it will look.
> 
> some nice info about EFT in below link.
> 
> http://www.janes.com/article/56174/sdsr-2015-typhoon-service-life-extended-and-numbers-increased


https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/15/improving-the-typhoons-aerodynamics/

Tranche 3B is only for sale- possibly to Kuwait or Oman. No TVC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Oscar said:


> https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/15/improving-the-typhoons-aerodynamics/
> 
> Tranche 3B is only for sale- possibly to Kuwait or Oman. No TVC.


the 3b was proposed to come with tvc. the design work is done. it just needs a buyer.
the 3b would be scraping 5th gen territory only stealth hindering its chance of being called a 5th gen fighter
most likely the turks will go for tvc with the ej-2xx for their tfx
oman and kuwait will be going for the 3a variant but only kuwait will have the captor-e aesa radar

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Blue Marlin said:


> the 3b was proposed to come with tvc. the design work is done. it just needs a buyer.
> the 3b would be scraping 5th gen territory only stealth hindering its chance of being called a 5th gen fighter
> most likely the turks will go for tvc with the ej-2xx for their tfx
> oman and kuwait will be going for the 3a variant but only kuwait will have the captor-e aesa radar


In other words. No TVC. 
Being planned and being flight tested and ordered are two different realities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Basel said:


> @Bilal Khan 777 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Windjammer @Zarvan @gambit @Blue Marlin
> 
> will it be good / feasible for PAF to initially go for available used EFT trench-1 & 2s? How much capabilities they would offer compared to frontline fighters of IAF and PAF's F-16?


the tranche 1 are quiet old now and the Spaniards and the Austrians are prepared to get rid of them and have been offered to other countries.



Oscar said:


> In other words. No TVC.
> Being planned and being flight tested and ordered are two different realities.


well...................ok
but if we get rid of some of our tranche1's and order 48 3b's, i would assume they would request tvc with greater thrust. i think i read that in the white paper.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Blue Marlin said:


> but if we get rid of some of our tranche1's and order 48 3b's, i would assume they would request tvc with greater thrust. i think i read that in the white paper.



Greater thrust maybe. But no TVC; the west is moving beyond it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Oscar said:


> Greater thrust maybe. But no TVC; the west is moving beyond it.


moving beyond to replace the tornadoes, the typhoons will be around till the early 2040's

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Basel

@Blue Marlin what EFT old for retirement? 

If I m correct, it entered in service after F-16s block-50s they will remain in service for long in many countries (upgraded / MLUed when needed) and EFTs retiring? they have not even served enough time required for fighter jets to be MLUed / upgraded.

Is manufacturing quality is not good like low price Chinese goods?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Basel said:


> @Bilal Khan 777 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Windjammer @Zarvan @gambit @Blue Marlin
> 
> will it be good / feasible for PAF to initially go for available used EFT trench-1 & 2s? How much capabilities they would offer compared to frontline fighters of IAF and PAF's F-16?


Theoretically - i.e. if everything aligns perfectly (e.g. availability of enough fly-worthy Tranche 1 & 2, cash, consortium members willing to deal directly and not grease, India not budding in, Pak Gov't not collapsing, etc), perhaps.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Awi

Oscar said:


> My only involvement was reading through these two and then providing them an idea of how a mid-point product it could be.....



Was it back in 2004-2005? Just for my general knowledge


----------



## _NOBODY_

Oscar said:


> That depends. It is excellent at high speed energy maneuvering, *but not too good in the slow speed nose pointing*.


Can't CAPTOR-E radar cover up this weakness?


----------



## SQ8

TheGreatOne said:


> Can't CAPTOR-E radar cover up this weakness?


What does a radar have to do with slow speed manoeuvring?


----------



## _NOBODY_

Oscar said:


> What does a radar have to do with slow speed manoeuvring?


I was talking about engagement. Due to swash plates can't it lock on the F-16 before?


----------



## Basel

Bilal Haque said:


> the basic assumption being that we would have the cash and the good will of the US to buy the EFT, if we have cash in hand and the goodwill of the US the f16 b70 would be a much better choice, since
> i) india wont buy them
> ii) Much easier in time and money to buy and absorb them
> b70 can also get us access to the latest AMRAAM models and AIM9X which will be good enough to counter the RAFAEL
> Im more woried about the Indians joing the F35 project as a full member which i think will happen



US bird is more sanctionable then EU one, as during 71 war US President had to persuade European countries to provide weapons to Pakistan as he was not able to do, due to sanctions, so having a European bird is better and Meteor and ASRAAM / IRST is better then AIM-120D/AIM-9X block-1.


----------



## Basel

Bilal Haque said:


> the basic assumption being that we would have the cash and the good will of the US to buy the EFT, if we have cash in hand and the goodwill of the US the f16 b70 would be a much better choice, since
> i) india wont buy them
> ii) Much easier in time and money to buy and absorb them
> b70 can also get us access to the latest AMRAAM models and AIM9X which will be good enough to counter the RAFAEL
> Im more woried about the Indians joing the F35 project as a full member which i think will happen



US bird is more sanctionable then EU one, as during 71 war US President had to persuade European countries to provide weapons to Pakistan as he was not able to do due to sanctions, so having a European bird is better and Meteor and ASARAAM / IRST is better then AIM-120D/AIM-9X block-1.


Bilal Haque said:


> if anything having a bird with a huge British input will definetly be sanctioned, i still remember the French nuclear deal of 1977 when the French reneged on already signed deal. Unfortunately USA is the big bad wolf and europeans are its sheep herd



You can not compare Nuclear deal with conventional weapons deal it like comparing Apples with Oranges.

Also France was good ally till Indian fighter jet competition, they were ready to sell all types of weapons including Rafale jets.

Our economy down slide and Indian booming economy is also a big matter in these deals.


----------

