What's new

Bangladesh Air Force

ziaulislam

BANNED
Apr 22, 2010
16,111
10
15,705
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
You need to count your blessings that China improved their aerospace industry and the Russians released the RD-93.

Otherwise Pakistan would have been SCREWED.

I'm tired of the same crap coming from some of you guys....why does Bangladesh need an air force? Won't India protect you? You guys are traitors! etc etc etc

You have your problems.

We have ours.

Lets at least not bring each other down.

For each insult you throw our way, we can throw right back.

It's not gonna lead to any good.

Keep this in mind in the future.
Look bengaldeshi are not traitors they love their country
Bengaldesh like most of world is also not focused on wars as its neighbour(on ALL sides, bar small area of myanmar) is india which is very friendly with bengaldesh

So bengladesh doesnt need an airforce hence you will see nothing happening

China russia usa sweden france..we have brought stuff from all of them recently..so dont know what screwed means..pakistan would have probably bought f16, typhoon if china had nothing to offer ..both available for now..india is growing..one day it will big enough for it to block acess of weapons to pakistan (may be china will still be open) ..same is true for bengladesh..india will likley block weapons..bar china ...

But point is bengladesh and india are strong allies and bengladesh hence doesnt need weapons therefore has the lowest gdp spending on defense
 

Avicenna

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 18, 2016
5,243
3
8,517
Country
United States
Location
Bangladesh
Look bengaldeshi are not traitors they love their country
Bengaldesh like most of world is also not focused on wars as its neighbour(on ALL sides, bar small area of myanmar) is india which is very friendly with bengaldesh

So bengladesh doesnt need an airforce hence you will see nothing happening

China russia usa sweden france..we have brought stuff from all of them recently..so dont know what screwed means..pakistan would have probably bought f16, typhoon if china had nothing to offer ..both available for now..india is growing..one day it will big enough for it to block acess of weapons to pakistan (may be china will still be open) ..same is true for bengladesh..india will likley block weapons..bar china ...

But point is bengladesh and india are strong allies and bengladesh hence doesnt need weapons therefore has the lowest gdp spending on defense
Eh, no.

A couple of points:

Bangladesh can not take for granted its security.

Myanmar is openly hostile, with actions if not words.

India is a PM Yogi away from turning on Bangladesh.

I used to think Bangladesh was in a relatively safe neighborhood but I was wrong.

If BAF had any sort of real capability, Myanmar could not have done what they did in 2017.

Also, Switzerland is neutral and has for neighbors NATO nations. (safe neighborhood)

And yet they just bought the F-35.

So yea, Bangladesh needs an air force.

As for Pakistan:

We saw what happened post 1989.

During the 90's I feared for you guys considering the US embargo and lack of options.

And lets be honest, Pakistan is perceived unfavorably vis a vis India during this time and until recently somewhat.

So your options were limited.

Forget, F-16s, Typhoons, Rafales, Gripens or anything else from the West.

Russian options were unobtainable due to India.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) would love to hear your thoughts regarding Pakistani options during this time period.

If it wasn't for FC-1/JF-17, what would have been the plan?

Probably soldier on with whatever you had.

If push came to shove, maybe buy F-8M or JH-7.

Yea, if not for the success of JF-17, Pakistan was SCREWED.

Again count your blessings the Chinese were able to do what they did in regards to their aerospace industry and that Russia sold China those RD-93.

As for Bangladeshi expenditure on defense.

Yea, it definitely appears defense is not a priority for Bangladesh.
 
Mar 8, 2021
439
0
366
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Again count your blessings the Chinese were able to do what they did in regards to their aerospace industry
Yes you are right.China has really helped us a lot in our aerospace industry.
It has one more aspect.aerospace industry has helped us a lot in designing our nuclear Missiles.Once it was time when our nuclear scientists were copying N.Korean missiles now we have a good pool of aerospace scientists for designing our missiles.aerospace industry is now backbone of our strategic weapons.again thanks to China.only one project brought so much for us
 

Joy_Bangla

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Mar 17, 2018
44
0
52
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Singapore
APG-83 uses similar technology to the larger (and far more powerful) AESA's on the F-35 and F-22, but it's mostly electronic processing equipment as much as I know. Similar processing speed, but raw performance, range, angular resolution, etc, will be noticeably less. This is mostly due to size limitations brought about by the F-16's airframe. Not only is the nose cone pretty small (and can't easily be upgraded, without offsetting the aerodynamic, mass, c.o.g.), but also the equipment bay to house the electronics/cooling/power equipment for the radar is quite limited.

This is why the USAF has claimed the F-16 has pretty much reached its limit of upgradability. This is why they are considering a brand new 4++ or -5th gen multirole single-engined fighter, to make up the numbers.

Against the euro-canards, they don't have supercruise capability, which has a big impact on BVR combat.

For defensive countries like Bangladesh, ground control (or hopefully AWACs soon) intercept plays a large role. You need to scramble fast and get higher than your enemy as quickly as possible, for the optimal BVR shot, as your BVR missiles will preserve more energy.

The EFT is perhaps one of the most optimized platforms on earth for such a purpose. It has the highest sustained climb rate of any aircraft (bar Su-57) and is designed to excel at very high altitudes. The higher the altitude, the more kinematical advantage swings towards the Eurofighter's favor. No 4th gen based platform can pull 9G's at 50,000ft, or have the same level of supersonic agility at any altitude (with the exception of maybe the Su-35, due to TVC).

A typhoon pilot once wrote how all 4th-gen based airframes (Mirage-2000, F-16, MiG-29, F-15, etc) were more or less very similar performance-wise. In order to tell their differences, you'd normally need a timing watch. But on the EFT, you can literally FEEL the difference on your ***. It's "quantum leaps" ahead on acceleration, sustained climb rate, and supersonic agility, despite appearing similar on paper.

It's like the difference between a 1990s and a modern F1 car. May have similar horsepower, weight, etc. But modern F1 cars can take a corner flat out at 200mph, whereas the older machine would probably need to slow down to 140mph for the same corner.
In this modern era, flight kinematics have little relevance. Western nations are moving more towards network centric.

Western Jet always tries to distance themselves and pick off enemies from far. Why would any pilot risk going into head to head dog fight?
 

Indos

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Jul 25, 2013
13,346
22
17,233
Country
Indonesia
Location
Indonesia
In this modern era, flight kinematics have little relevance. Western nations are moving more towards network centric.

Western Jet always tries to distance themselves and pick off enemies from far. Why would any pilot risk going into head to head dog fight?
You forget EW (Electronic Warfare), the more sophisticated EW development then the chance for dog fight using WVR missile and even gutling gun are greater.

F 35 is built where confidence level on BVR missile is very high, but later we understand the ability of EW to dodge missile is getting greater. This is why KF 21/IFX is designed as more agile than F 35
 
Last edited:

UKBengali

ELITE MEMBER
May 29, 2011
18,018
7
22,186
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
In this modern era, flight kinematics have little relevance. Western nations are moving more towards network centric.

Western Jet always tries to distance themselves and pick off enemies from far. Why would any pilot risk going into head to head dog fight?

That is not true.

Flight kinematics are still important as missiles need to have the maximum chance of being able to hit their target. The ability of an aircraft to get into optimal firing position counts even for BVR duels and that is where powerful twin-engine fighters like Eurofighter have an advantage over others like F-16.
 

Michael Corleone

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 27, 2014
10,206
-5
10,545
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Ukraine
I'm not suprised.

But these fools need to de-link MRCA with this.

WTF does a pie in the sky air show have to do with MRCA?

For 16 units?

Come on get real.

Get to work BAF and make the deal already.

You are WAY behind Burma.

Have some shame, especially after 2017.

It's like complete imbeciles are in charge.
Waste 100+ millions to host the airshow alone 😂
Only two options
Western f16/gripen
Eastern j10/jf17

Third option: why does even bengaldesh needs an airforce when it has india to protect it
Looks like third option is what we’re going for
 

Joy_Bangla

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Mar 17, 2018
44
0
52
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Singapore
That is not true.

Flight kinematics are still important as missiles need to have the maximum chance of being able to hit their target. The ability of an aircraft to get into optimal firing position counts even for BVR duels and that is where powerful twin-engine fighters like Eurofighter have an advantage over others like F-16.
Firstly, there is negligible chance of BVR duel since most BVR missiles are long range.

Rapid maneuver are done to prevent lock-on not escaping locked on missile. AIM-120 can withstand +35G while most fighters puts up with 12 G at most. So they rely primary on Chaffs and EW suites not aircraft kinematics.
 

Avicenna

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 18, 2016
5,243
3
8,517
Country
United States
Location
Bangladesh
Firstly, there is negligible chance of BVR duel since most BVR missiles are long range.

Rapid maneuver are done to prevent lock-on not escaping locked on missile. AIM-120 can withstand +35G while most fighters puts up with 12 G at most. So they rely primary on Chaffs and EW suites not aircraft kinematics.
Simply put the faster and higher you go and release, the greater the range of the released munition.
 

PoondolotoPandalum

FULL MEMBER
Jun 24, 2021
107
-1
275
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United Kingdom
In this modern era, flight kinematics have little relevance. Western nations are moving more towards network centric.

Western Jet always tries to distance themselves and pick off enemies from far. Why would any pilot risk going into head to head dog fight?
Kinematics will always be relevant as long as air-to-air missiles are deployed.

The range and effective kill-zone of a missile is strongly affected by the speed and altitude of the launch platform. So it's always advantageous to go faster and higher than your enemy when firing a BVR shot. It increases the kill-zone of your missile by quite a lot, due to higher velocity. This becomes important for engaging maneuvering targets. You want your missiles to preserve as much energy as possible

Also, supersonic agility is highly relevant to dodging incoming missiles and pulling off very complex notching maneuvers. Missile seekers use the Karmen filter to predict the velocity of the target (remember velocity is both speed and direction). The higher the velocity delta (speed + direction component), the lower the accuracy of the firing solution generated by the Karman filter. Remember, Missiles don't chase a target (at least not radar-BVR aam's). They fly to where a target is expected to be, as calculated by its inboard computer
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,955
74
23,384
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Eh, no.

A couple of points:

Bangladesh can not take for granted its security.

Myanmar is openly hostile, with actions if not words.

India is a PM Yogi away from turning on Bangladesh.

I used to think Bangladesh was in a relatively safe neighborhood but I was wrong.

If BAF had any sort of real capability, Myanmar could not have done what they did in 2017.

Also, Switzerland is neutral and has for neighbors NATO nations. (safe neighborhood)

And yet they just bought the F-35.

So yea, Bangladesh needs an air force.

As for Pakistan:

We saw what happened post 1989.

During the 90's I feared for you guys considering the US embargo and lack of options.

And lets be honest, Pakistan is perceived unfavorably vis a vis India during this time and until recently somewhat.

So your options were limited.

Forget, F-16s, Typhoons, Rafales, Gripens or anything else from the West.

Russian options were unobtainable due to India.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) would love to hear your thoughts regarding Pakistani options during this time period.

If it wasn't for FC-1/JF-17, what would have been the plan?

Probably soldier on with whatever you had.

If push came to shove, maybe buy F-8M or JH-7.

Yea, if not for the success of JF-17, Pakistan was SCREWED.

Again count your blessings the Chinese were able to do what they did in regards to their aerospace industry and that Russia sold China those RD-93.

As for Bangladeshi expenditure on defense.

Yea, it definitely appears defense is not a priority for Bangladesh.
The PAF had the option to collaborate on the J-10 instead of the JF-17. Yes, the J-10 was a higher-risk and more complex project, but the rewards were much higher in terms of fighter performance and, potentially, building R&D capacity in Pakistan. In fact, by ordering the J-10CE, the PAF basically came full-circle.

In the late 1980s, Dassault also offered the PAF the Mirage F-1's production line and a ton of ATAR turbojet engines. There may have been a scenario where the PAF was manufacturing the Mirage F-1 under license and, potentially, upgrade it with the RD-93, modern radar, BVR (R-Darter), SOWs (H-2, H-4, Ra'ad, etc). Sure, not as technically advanced as the JF-17, but we could've had this capability in 1999 during the Kargil conflict. It would've also bought us time to invest in something like the J-10.

However, in the absence of China and a strong economy, our options were basically nil in the 1990s.
 

Michael Corleone

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 27, 2014
10,206
-5
10,545
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Ukraine
The PAF had the option to collaborate on the J-10 instead of the JF-17. Yes, the J-10 was a higher-risk and more complex project, but the rewards were much higher in terms of fighter performance and, potentially, building R&D capacity in Pakistan. In fact, by ordering the J-10CE, the PAF basically came full-circle.

In the late 1980s, Dassault also offered the PAF the Mirage F-1's production line and a ton of ATAR turbojet engines. There may have been a scenario where the PAF was manufacturing the Mirage F-1 under license and, potentially, upgrade it with the RD-93, modern radar, BVR (R-Darter), SOWs (H-2, H-4, Ra'ad, etc). Sure, not as technically advanced as the JF-17, but we could've had this capability in 1999 during the Kargil conflict. It would've also bought us time to invest in something like the J-10.

However, in the absence of China and a strong economy, our options were basically nil in the 1990s.
Pakistan ordered j10CE?
 

PDF

STAFF
May 1, 2015
3,047
14
4,535
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pakistan ordered j10CE?
More like J10C-P. It's still not announced officially but it's a done deal. With Indian threat looming, we need numbers and more robust capability. JF 17 BLK III needs off-the-self supplementary aircraft asap.

In terms of one of our ex ACM (Sohail Aman), he rated JF 17 (BLK3A?) as 8 and J10 (C) as 8.5.

As for BAF procurement, I shall only say a bird in hand is better than two in the bushes. It takes years to fully operationalize and develop familiarity and tactics with a new platform. And even if you place an order today, it shall take 18 to 24 months, probably more due to COVID situation etc to produce BAF orders.

As a third person, I would dare say Myanmar with 5 yrs of operational experience of 4.5 Gen (JF-17) will fare better than 1 yr operational experience of Bangladesh's 4.5++ new platform. Forget India for now.

BAF should have insitutuional memory (through ex PAF) of the importance of airpower in conflict (1965,71). Unlike Pakistan, which suffered from WoT and natural calamities which disrupted both finances and concentration of inventory, BAF should have fared better.

The good news is, you guys have ample training jets meaning basic and advance flying capability along with large quantity of pilots are available. It takes more time to make a capable pilot than operationalize a new platform. So all is not lost!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 4, Members: 1, Guests: 3)


Top Bottom