Qatar: Talks with Pakistan over Mirage 2000-5s

[Super Falcon]

Hi,

He is wrong on BVR----. Does he think that the nations spending 500k 1mil 1.5 mil on a BVR missiles are stupid.

Does he think that the designers of F22---F35--J20--J31--Pakfa or other stealth aircraft are dumb for building these aircraft---.

These stealth aircraft are primarily dependant on their bvr capabilties---.

If pesa was better---then there would be no aesa.

Off course SU will be a maintenance nightmare

He is right about the F16's

At least he admitted that kill switches exist.

Don't agree that SU 35 Would be nightmare for maintenance yes you need bit more guys for caring it

If it gives us a added capabilities in war which we lack what harm in it

At top if it was a nightmare
Than no country ever bought F 15 F 18 SU 30 SU 35 SU 27 MIG 29 MIG 35 Eurofighter Rafale Tornado etc

All those airforces are fool to have one of these nightmares for maintaining them yet they have single engine jets too

Get out of mental block otherwise air war has evolved over the years it is technology more than pilot skills today

 

[MastanKhan]

then why are you quoting pk ratio close to 60% at the end range of missile.

Hi,

If you do not understand the comments---then ask---" I do not understand what you stated---could you please explain it further "---and that way you will get into the habbit of asking something that you did not understand---.

It will help you get a better grasp of what is being stated.

 

[araz]

Sir Araz,

Your "no comment" is actually a comment.

My brother.
You give too much importance to this humble man. Perhaps Sir Bilal Khan 777 might be able to shed some light.
However this concept that somehow the Indian Aircorce will whistle and the US will shut down our 16s is so falacious I cannot but laugh at it. The US has its reputation on the line and if its hardware was ever to lose out to the Russians due to malfunctioning secondary to kill switches,its name would be dust in the armaments industry.
However if we were ever to go avainst the US then there will be problems but we are going to be toast in any case whether the 16s work or not. So defence there at least hypothetically will be other armaments. However even US will not attack us directly. You need to look at Iraq to see what happened between the first and second Iraq war to guage how US will get to us.
A

Don't agree that SU 35 Would be nightmare for maintenance yes you need bit more guys for caring it

If it gives us a added capabilities in war which we lack what harm in it

At top if it was a nightmare
Than no country ever bought F 15 F 18 SU 30 SU 35 SU 27 MIG 29 MIG 35 Eurofighter Rafale Tornado etc

All those airforces are fool to have one of these nightmares for maintaining them yet they have single engine jets too

Get out of mental block otherwise air war has evolved over the years it is technology more than pilot skills today

I think the cost per hour of clight will be in excess of 18-20000$ and turnaround time could well be 6-8 hrs. The engines are newer and possibly better but in general the russian engines are more labour intensive than western ones. The last and most important bit is the problem with Russian supply chain which is notoriously unreliable and slow. All in all not a very enviable position. However it maybe manageable. Mind you the threat of sanctions will still be there.
What do people think of J10C with this engine?
A

 

[Hell hound]

Hi,

If you do not understand the comments---then ask---" I do not understand what you stated---could you please explain it further "---and that way you will get into the habbit of asking something that you did not understand---.

It will help you get a better grasp of what is being stated.

sir i was just questioning how did you reach at the 60% probability to kill ratio of a modern bvr at its max range .the stage where it has almost no energy to spare and a single energy depletion maneuver by the jet will result in a miss.

 

[randomradio]

I think the cost per hour of clight will be in excess of 18-20000$ and turnaround time could well be 6-8 hrs.

The CPFH of the MKI in IAF is $12000. The Su-35 should be a bit cheaper. Turnaround time is 3 hours from landing to take off.

The last and most important bit is the problem with Russian supply chain which is notoriously unreliable and slow.

That's not true. It depends on how you have planned your supplies. Spares production starts within 30 days after the order has been received.

The Syrian intervention has proven how well Russian gear stacks up in high intensity environment. As long as you keep your equipment supplied, there should be no problem in getting your jet to do 3 sorties a day minimum if not more.

The cost is another matter entirely. The Flankers need more upkeep, but the boost to capability pays for itself. It can perform missions 14+ hours long.

 

[IceCold]

My brother.
The US has its reputation on the line and if its hardware was ever to lose out to the Russians due to malfunctioning secondary to kill switches,its name would be dust in the armaments industry.A

Sir let us examine this point a bit further. You say this will tarnish the reputation of the US defence industry and destroy them? Am i right
Before we begin discussing the above let us first check all those countries that actually buys US stuff and how will a kill switch on say a Pakistani F-16 would affect them?
The top US equipment buyers are Israel, Middle East most prominently Saudi Arabia, UAE and NATO including UK. Now will these countries stop buying US hardware because there was a kill switch in a Pakistani F-16 which rendered it useless in war against India? The answer would be no why because it all comes down to strategic interests of the above mentioned countries and how they align with the US and other than Pakistan none of the countries mentioned above will ever have an interest that puts them at odds with the US. Not in the distant future anyway.
Now lets examine our scenario. US is now an Indian ally and this is pure a geopolitical decision for the US because it sees India as a counterweight to China. Does any of the countries mentioned above has a problem with that? The answer would be No. Does Pakistan have a problem with that? Absolutely yes because we are after all a Chinese ally. Does that puts us in cross hairs with the US? It absolutely does.
So will sabotaging Pakistani F-16s with kill switches would dust US name in the armaments industry? The answer would be a No. None of the countries mentioned above would have a problem buying US weapons just because Pakistani F-16s were rendered useless.

 

[araz]

The CPFH of the MKI in IAF is $12000. The Su-35 should be a bit cheaper. Turnaround time is 3 hours from landing to take off.



That's not true. It depends on how you have planned your supplies. Spares production starts within 30 days after the order has been received.

The Syrian intervention has proven how well Russian gear stacks up in high intensity environment. As long as you keep your equipment supplied, there should be no problem in getting your jet to do 3 sorties a day minimum if not more.

The cost is another matter entirely. The Flankers need more upkeep, but the boost to capability pays for itself. It can perform missions 14+ hours long.

Thank you I stand corrected.
A

 

[randomradio]

My brother.
You give too much importance to this humble man. Perhaps Sir Bilal Khan 777 might be able to shed some light.
However this concept that somehow the Indian Aircorce will whistle and the US will shut down our 16s is so falacious I cannot but laugh at it. The US has its reputation on the line and if its hardware was ever to lose out to the Russians due to malfunctioning secondary to kill switches,its name would be dust in the armaments industry.
However if we were ever to go avainst the US then there will be problems but we are going to be toast in any case whether the 16s work or not. So defence there at least hypothetically will be other armaments. However even US will not attack us directly. You need to look at Iraq to see what happened between the first and second Iraq war to guage how US will get to us.
A

This is a weak argument. US customers are NATO, very close US allies like Japan, Korea and Singapore and then there's the Middle East. NATO and the allies have zero worries about kill switches. And the Middle East has no other political option but American. Kill switch or not, they will all line up to buy American jets.

The F-35 is in fact advertised with kill switches now.

 

[araz]

Sir let us examine this point a bit further. You say this will tarnish the reputation of the US defence industry and destroy them? Am i right
Before we begin discussing the above let us first check all those countries that actually buys US stuff and how will a kill switch on say a Pakistani F-16 would affect them?
The top US equipment buyers are Israel, Middle East most prominently Saudi Arabia, UAE and NATO including UK. Now will these countries stop buying US hardware because there was a kill switch in a Pakistani F-16 which rendered it useless in war against India? The answer would be no why because it all comes down to strategic interests of the above mentioned countries and how they align with the US and other than Pakistan none of the countries mentioned above will ever have an interest that puts them at odds with the US. Not in the distant future anyway.
Now lets examine our scenario. US is now an Indian ally and this is pure a geopolitical decision for the US because it sees India as a counterweight to China. Does any of the countries mentioned above has a problem with that? The answer would be No. Does Pakistan have a problem with that? Absolutely yes because we are after all a Chinese ally. Does that puts us in cross hairs with the US? It absolutely does.
So will sabotaging Pakistani F-16s with kill switches would dust US name in the armaments industry? The answer would be a No. None of the countries mentioned above would have a problem buying US weapons just because Pakistani F-16s were rendered useless.

Icey my friend and dear Random radio
It is not as simple as that. Why do countries buy US ?simply because their products with the best bang for the buck. They are dead reliable. Now you have a plane of which 4500 copies have been sold and it starts falling down against the Mig Bison/29s. How do you think people will perceive the 16s. Something which has inherent faults. Do you think US will risk that? I dont necessarily agree with the notion that the Arabs will buy US irrespective of whether these planes are good or not. If you look at the Arab market, Saudi Arabia has just bought Typhoons because of US reluctance to supply them with BVR AAMs although they have also bought 15s. UAE inspite of having patents on the AESA radar and having fairly capable bl. 60s armed to the hilt has dwindled between ordering more or ordering Rafale. Kuwait and Egypt has ordered Rafale. The Japanese have built their own plane and South Korea is diversifying and building their own. Turkey is moving away inspite of having the source codes for 16s. So traditional markets forcthe US are no more traditional and things are pretty labile.
Now look at Indo US nexus. The US has no love for India or for that matter Pakistan. They are in it for money. They want to use India to contain China plus India has the biggest market in the so called democratic free world.The US wants to tap into it. However it will never allow India to get too far ahead and wants to keep Pakistan just happy enough to keep wanting more US products.
Of all the countries that have seen confrontation involving US hardware, PAF is along with Turkey the foremost and therefore flagships of demonstration of US hardware. So if US hardware does not work to its capacity in a war scenario, they will lose so much business you cant believe it.
So in short kill switches may well be there but cannot and will not be used in an Indo Pak encounter.
There are other permutations to it which I dont want to go into. Needless to say PAF is not sitting idle. Lets leave it at that.
A
A

 

[randomradio]

Now you have a plane of which 4500 copies have been sold and it starts falling down against the Mig Bison/29s. How do you think people will perceive the 16s.

Why will the kill switches work only during combat? Kill switches will be used to prevent the aircraft from taking off. In case there is an aircraft in the air, the kill switch will activate after landing. There is no negative publicity in that. Don't forget that this is a country that destroyed an airliner in order to send a message to the Iranians.

And who knows, Pak leaders may already have been aware of it since the day of purchase. The Americans may have already explained its purpose and the conditions for its use. We know for a fact that the F-35 does now, and countries are lining up, even the Middle East has evinced a lot of interest.

If you look at the Arab market, Saudi Arabia has just bought Typhoons because of US reluctance to supply them with BVR AAMs although they have also bought 15s.

That's the thing. The Middle East will buy American jets even without BVR. But they will never in their right mind buy a European or Russian jet without BVR.

UAE inspite of having patents on the AESA radar and having fairly capable bl. 60s armed to the hilt has dwindled between ordering more or ordering Rafale. Kuwait and Egypt has ordered Rafale.

UAE and Qatar are replacing their existing M-2000s. Egypt bought the Rafale because they wanted a jet that was competitive with the Israeli F-35. That's why they bought it in a hurry too. The Egyptians have probably purchased 3 squadrons of the Mig-29 as well.

The Japanese have built their own plane and South Korea is diversifying and building their own. Turkey is moving away inspite of having the source codes for 16s. So traditional markets forcthe US are no more traditional and things are pretty labile.

The Koreans are diversifying in areas where the US does not compete in. And the Japanese are diversifying because the F-22 was rejected for export and they have the need to replace their F-15s.

Now look at Indo US nexus. The US has no love for India or for that matter Pakistan. They are init for money. They want to use India to contain China plys India has the biggest market in the so called democratic free world.The US wants to tap into it. However it will never allow India to get too far ahead and wants to keep Pakistan just happy enough to keep wanting more US products.
Of all the countries that have seen confrontation
A

India is not dependent on the US for core technologies. All of that's coming from Russia and pretty soon France.

In fact what India has bought from the US are technologies that are not available elsewhere. The Russians don't have a C-17, C-130, Chinook or P-8 equivalent yet. Similarly India is purchasing drones, carrier aewc and carrier tech from the US because even the Europeans don't have equivalents. The only exception was the Apache which won the tender fair and square, meaning it could have lost too.

Basically, if the Russians don't have it, the Europeans don't have it, India buys American. So the "get too far ahead" situation doesn't affect India. In fact, in about 6 months you will know how far India has really come when it comes to core technologies.

 

[Super Falcon]

My brother.
You give too much importance to this humble man. Perhaps Sir Bilal Khan 777 might be able to shed some light.
However this concept that somehow the Indian Aircorce will whistle and the US will shut down our 16s is so falacious I cannot but laugh at it. The US has its reputation on the line and if its hardware was ever to lose out to the Russians due to malfunctioning secondary to kill switches,its name would be dust in the armaments industry.
However if we were ever to go avainst the US then there will be problems but we are going to be toast in any case whether the 16s work or not. So defence there at least hypothetically will be other armaments. However even US will not attack us directly. You need to look at Iraq to see what happened between the first and second Iraq war to guage how US will get to us.
A


I think the cost per hour of clight will be in excess of 18-20000$ and turnaround time could well be 6-8 hrs. The engines are newer and possibly better but in general the russian engines are more labour intensive than western ones. The last and most important bit is the problem with Russian supply chain which is notoriously unreliable and slow. All in all not a very enviable position. However it maybe manageable. Mind you the threat of sanctions will still be there.
What do people think of J10C with this engine?
A

Grow up Russia has evolved it's technology don't stuck up in 80s if we can care RD 93 which is even bigger nightmare it's old MIG 29 engine
SU 35 Saturn 117S (AL-41F1S) Engine not only cost effective and drinks even lower fuel than wester mirage 2000 which you are talking of getting

Problem is you don't look snigger picture
We live in very hostile environment surrounded by enemies and yet we talk about cost effective what cost effective

If you have fear of death do you consider buying a tablet which atleast have better chance to let you live or a tablet which have lesser chance

If we go to your type mentality than I say why buy F 16 Better buy old SABRE jets which PAF operated in 70s we don't need to train our technician and we have no maintenance havoc and we have better cost effectiveness running them than F 16


GROW UP look SU 35 capabilities best things comes with prices but can guarantees you it will save your back

The CPFH of the MKI in IAF is $12000. The Su-35 should be a bit cheaper. Turnaround time is 3 hours from landing to take off.



That's not true. It depends on how you have planned your supplies. Spares production starts within 30 days after the order has been received.

The Syrian intervention has proven how well Russian gear stacks up in high intensity environment. As long as you keep your equipment supplied, there should be no problem in getting your jet to do 3 sorties a day minimum if not more.

The cost is another matter entirely. The Flankers need more upkeep, but the boost to capability pays for itself. It can perform missions 14+ hours long.

Most of people here don't worry about what the purpose of buying but purpose saving money where your nations life is at stack the Memon thinking is hard to get rid of

INDONESIA Egypt Qatar oman

Buying more expansive jets but these type of cheap thinking they don't do considering hostility of our enemy

INDONESIA using SU 30 they don't have issues

We should see the purpose do this machine do the job

Naraz lost his mind like amir Khan memory loss

 

[randomradio]

Most of people here don't worry about what the purpose of buying but purpose saving money where your nations life is at stack the Memon thinking is hard to get rid of

INDONESIA Egypt Qatar oman

Buying more expansive jets but these type of cheap thinking they don't do considering hostility of our enemy

INDONESIA using SU 30 they don't have issues

We should see the purpose do this machine do the job

Naraz lost his mind like amir Khan memory loss

PAF has built itself as a defensive air force like Sweden. So the type of jets purchased reflects the capability one desires.

As for the examples you gave, Qatar and Oman are rich. Egyptian purchases are being subsidized by Saudi and UAE. And Indonesia is a pretty rich country as well, they would be crossing $1T in GDP pretty soon. And none of them have made a large nation their enemy like Pak has. So these are pretty bad examples.

If you look at a more realistic example, Turkey does not have modern a twin engine jet either, even though they have the money for it. So they have an air force that's similar to what Pak or Sweden have built. And that's to counter a larger and more powerful air force.

This means a heavy aircraft like the Su-35 is useless to PAF.

 

[HRK]

It can perform missions 14+ hours long

can you plz explain it further .... ??

 

[randomradio]

can you plz explain it further .... ??

Most long duration missions that aircraft are expected to perform are based on range. For example, when the French first started bombing Libya, the first ADLA mission with 4 Rafales lasted 9 hours 45 minutes over a distance of 3400 miles. Aircraft took off from St Dizier, finished their mission and then landed in Chad. Subsequently, all missions took 9 hours from Chad to Libya and back. They would use transit time to conduct briefings en route. Recon missions would last 6 hours.

IAF too has been doing this since mid-2000s. IAF MKIs train regularly by flying towards simulated targets in the A&N Islands from the main land. These missions last about 14 hours. This is what gives you strategic reach.

The only way to do this is with air to air refueling, be it with tankers or buddy aircraft. Buddy refueling also gives the Rafale and MKI additional fuel stops in hostile airspace.

It's of great importance once you consider what the IN/IAF can do in the SCS from Car Nicobar, especially when working jointly with the Vietnamese or the Malaysians.

Manned jets can do missions that last 16 hours long before reaching the human limit. If the Super Sukhoi upgrade comes with unmanned capabilities, then some types of missions, particularly patrols, can go beyond 24 hours. Keeping the jets in the air is what will win you wars after all.

 

[Super Falcon]

PAF has built itself as a defensive air force like Sweden. So the type of jets purchased reflects the capability one desires.

As for the examples you gave, Qatar and Oman are rich. Egyptian purchases are being subsidized by Saudi and UAE. And Indonesia is a pretty rich country as well, they would be crossing $1T in GDP pretty soon. And none of them have made a large nation their enemy like Pak has. So these are pretty bad examples.

If you look at a more realistic example, Turkey does not have modern a twin engine jet either, even though they have the money for it. So they have an air force that's similar to what Pak or Sweden have built. And that's to counter a larger and more powerful air force.

This means a heavy aircraft like the Su-35 is useless to PAF.

Turkey don't have hostile environment around it neither it's enemy bigger and top of it it has more than 100 F 16 and around 100 F 35 are ordered

Dear one more thing Indonesia is not a rich country and as for Egypt not all jets are subsidies they have 200 F 16 50 MIG 35 36 Rafale and mirages even if some are subsidied but they are maintaining it with poor economy



Not all has been subsidies

Need is a mother of all inventions if you hesitate about prices than I'm sorry Pakistan will remain 1000000 years back to the world do u move with world or remain

Don't compare turkey turkey will have state of the art F 35 in few years and in numbers do u have