What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

MastanKhan

PDF VETERAN
Dec 26, 2005
20,594
165
57,107
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
It'd be a bigger strategic blunder for China to cut Pakistan loose.

Basically, the Chinese know (or now know) the caliber of our rulers. This shouldn't have been news to them, but anyways, it's as clear as glass that our political and military leadership aren't "it." As a group, they're not even able to defend Pakistan's national interests, forget helping others (except for the U.S., which seems to have a stronger grasp of the situation).

However, China can't change geography or strategic realities. The U.S. is on China's case. It'll use India even more so in the coming years to get on China's nerves. Pakistan is the perfect release valve for any pressure India puts on China.

The moment Pakistan's leadership develops "it" (i.e., genuine independence and aggressive foreign policy re: Kashmir and Afghanistan), China will extend its hand to Pakistan. That's the ally they want. However, if they cut Pakistan loose and, worse, the U.S. really steps in to create yet another anti-China ally (even a tier-2 type to India's tier-1), then yeah, China's fully encircled.

Simply put, China aren't leaving us, but they aren't taking us seriously either. Like our ties with the U.S., we're entering a weird hazy zone with the Chinese too due to the indecisiveness, corruption, and listlessness of our leadership.

Hi,

As china has no history of conquest and invasion in the recent past---it really has no idea how to own their allies.

The americans the british will fight tooth and nail to keep their allies---even pakistan.
 

RAMPAGE

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 30, 2012
5,762
4
11,179
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Hi,

As china has no history of conquest and invasion in the recent past---it really has no idea how to own their allies.

The americans the british will fight tooth and nail to keep their allies---even pakistan.
A civilisation old as time, and you say it has no idea of diplomacy? You could do with some deference and humility, Mastan.
 

JamD

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2015
2,143
94
7,956
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
If accurate, this engineering study might be more for the PAF than the TuAF. It may be a way for us to figure out how to properly integrate our own choice of radar, electronics and weapons to the JF-17. @JamD
OzgurPAK program? :partay:

It's not just that. In fact, that aspect of the relationship is recoverable because the U.S. will drive India to intensify its anti-China focus.

The issue is literally us. We don't have enough internal know-how and capacity to get the most out of the JF-17 program. We're reliant on China, and the Chinese aren't going to help us build our aerospace fundamentals (and rightfully so). China has zero incentive and -- be it for geo-political reasons or just keeping things simple and cost-effective -- have us buy their stuff off-the-shelf as-is.

Turkey, on the other hand, is more willing to help us build our R&D.

Why?

Because they're not as big as China (or US) where they can tap into tons of funding, or rely on domestic orders to drive economies-of-scale. They need partners and are willing to build consortiums with other countries, notably Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The TuAF isn't going to get more than 200 MMUs, but if you factor in Pakistan, Malaysia, etc, you could get to 500 units.

However, we can't do jack because we don't have enough know-how and capacity.

So, to get to its actual goal, Turkey is willing to 'upskill' us so that we can one day support their bigger projects.

Of course, nothing's free of strings. For a start, Turkey wouldn't want any of this net-new work happening at PAC, for example. It doesn't want to deal with generals, but rather, actual engineers and other aerospace industry and management professionals. It's going to be through Turkish Aerospace's subsidiary in Pakistan and, potentially, private sector companies in Pakistan.

This JF-17 "study" could be a carrot from Turkey to help us build real fundamentals and to show AHQ that domestic R&D has to work a certain way for it to pay off. The PAF solves some of its issues (e.g., finally getting a grasp of the JF-17) and, in return, Turkey gets to shape our aerospace industry such that we support their interests (the Turks want to build their own Airbus or Boeing; a megacorp with facilities across several countries).
The US train left in the 80s. The China train left in the 2000s. The Turkey train is moving and we will miss it too if things go on as they always do. The one difference is Turkey's albeit very small skin in the game with their local subsidiaries. Believe me they are trying so hard to get our babus to make intelligent decisions but there is too much inertia in our babus way of life. At the very least Pakistan is and will be an important customer. Hopefully, it can be a partner too.
 

JamD

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2015
2,143
94
7,956
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Not really.I mean yes, but not really. The Turks suffer the same problem as we do, as all middle income countries do, they are advanced in some areas, but lousy in others.
They have wanted us to share a lot of stuff in areas where we are have far greater expertise, such as BM and CM and its guidance, and have been very willing to share with us.
We have demurred. And nothing I have read recently has suggested anything lately otherwise.

As for China? Forget about it. We have as @kursed has posted, really screwed the pooch there. Pretty much all strategic projects have been cancelled. We could have gotten superpower tier weapon system and their design capability. But, thats done now.
Having seen their capacity very intimately I will respectfully disagree. The level of technical expertise, industrial base, and money invested into aerospace that the Turks have is easily 100 times more than us. If they really want to develop ballistic missiles they will. Their command over core technologies is very good. They have focused on developing core technologies over decades while we have been happy with overstaffed idaras making the same 5 systems for decades.

I hope you can tour their facilities to see how much far behind we are. Their work is almost at par with western aerospace companies. Maybe 70-80% there. And they are closing the gap soon.


It's disingenuous to put Pakistan and Turkey in the same aerospace technology tier.

We can continue this discussion on relevant threads if you'd like since this is the JF17 thread after all.



On topic: Ozgur program focused on the JF17 might not be a bad idea at all. However, I don't think Turkey will be doing that for themselves since their lineup is basically occupied. Maybe for export customers.
 

sparten

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2006
2,103
-1
1,634
Having seen their capacity very intimately I will respectfully disagree. The level of technical expertise, industrial base, and money invested into aerospace that the Turks have is easily 100 times more than us. If they really want to develop ballistic missiles they will.
Very respectfully, I was talking generally and not about aerospace, where they have a several decade headstart over us.
If they want to build BM and CM (they already do) they would be idiots if they didn't ask us for help, (and the Turks are many things, idiots isn't one of them), as you well know. Since that is one place where we do have significantly more experience. Nor have they been shy to ask for help before. In the mid 2000s when the Americans were resisting tech transfer they approached us for composite armour designs for their tanks.
 

JamD

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2015
2,143
94
7,956
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Very respectfully, I was talking generally and not about aerospace, where they have a several decade headstart over us.
If they want to build BM and CM (they already do) they would be idiots if they didn't ask us for help, (and the Turks are many things, idiots isn't one of them), as you well know. Since that is one place where we do have significantly more experience. Nor have they been shy to ask for help before. In the mid 2000s when the Americans were resisting tech transfer they approached us for composite armour designs for their tanks.
Got it.

I don't doubt what you're saying about mid 2000s. Things have changed very rapidly since.
 

sparten

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2006
2,103
-1
1,634
It'd be a bigger strategic blunder for China to cut Pakistan loose.

Basically, the Chinese know (or now know) the caliber of our rulers. This shouldn't have been news to them, but anyways, it's as clear as glass that our political and military leadership aren't "it." As a group, they're not even able to defend Pakistan's national interests, forget helping others (except for the U.S., which seems to have a stronger grasp of the situation).

However, China can't change geography or strategic realities. The U.S. is on China's case. It'll use India even more so in the coming years to get on China's nerves. Pakistan is the perfect release valve for any pressure India puts on China.

The moment Pakistan's leadership develops "it" (i.e., genuine independence and aggressive foreign policy re: Kashmir and Afghanistan), China will extend its hand to Pakistan. That's the ally they want. However, if they cut Pakistan loose and, worse, the U.S. really steps in to create yet another anti-China ally (even a tier-2 type to India's tier-1), then yeah, China's fully encircled.

Simply put, China aren't leaving us, but they aren't taking us seriously either. Like our ties with the U.S., we're entering a weird hazy zone with the Chinese too due to the indecisiveness, corruption, and listlessness of our leadership.
And yet they have made this "strategic blunder" as you call it. They have removed support from us for multiple strategic projects including one in a area which has been a major concern for them and where they have invested heavily over the last two decades.

I just want to emphasise again, just how badly this "pivot" has hurt our strategic relationships built up over half a century, something most of our leadership was in denial over and most members here still are. For instance the quoted poster. And again, not only was the pivot not necessary, it was done for selfish domestic political reasons and whats worse is that the relationship didn't need to be dragged into the selfish domestic political reasons, they could have done it without touching on our strategic relationship at all it was done through lack of care.

Fifteen years from now we will be looking back in horror.
 

PakFactor

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 30, 2019
7,141
0
12,920
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
And yet they have made this "strategic blunder" as you call it. They have removed support from us for multiple strategic projects including one in a area which has been a major concern for them and where they have invested heavily over the last two decades.

I just want to emphasise again, just how badly this "pivot" has hurt our strategic relationships built up over half a century, something most of our leadership was in denial over and most members here still are. For instance the quoted poster. And again, not only was the pivot not necessary, it was done for selfish domestic political reasons and whats worse is that the relationship didn't need to be dragged into the selfish domestic political reasons, they could have done it without touching on our strategic relationship at all it was done through lack of care.

Fifteen years from now we will be looking back in horror.

If you don't me asking, which strategic projects are you referring to?
 

PakFactor

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 30, 2019
7,141
0
12,920
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I cannot say. But you can guess by looking at threads which have been, awfully inactive these past few months

Yeah, I thought something else was in the pipeline, and it stopped. The old stuff I'm well aware of and the brain drain that occurred. The ego issue is at the forefront, and rationality is left to wander.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
6,622
90
27,122
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
And yet they have made this "strategic blunder" as you call it. They have removed support from us for multiple strategic projects including one in a area which has been a major concern for them and where they have invested heavily over the last two decades.

I just want to emphasise again, just how badly this "pivot" has hurt our strategic relationships built up over half a century, something most of our leadership was in denial over and most members here still are. For instance the quoted poster. And again, not only was the pivot not necessary, it was done for selfish domestic political reasons and whats worse is that the relationship didn't need to be dragged into the selfish domestic political reasons, they could have done it without touching on our strategic relationship at all it was done through lack of care.

Fifteen years from now we will be looking back in horror.
If China has indeed bailed, then as @MastanKhan put it, China has no idea what it's doing.

Just bear in mind, a "strong" Pakistan vis-a-vis India isn't necessary for the U.S. to use Pakistan to encircle China. The U.S. just has to make sure China can't rely on Pakistan for anything, and if what you say is correct, then the U.S. has achieved its purpose. You could argue that of all the countries surrounding the Chinese, Pakistan is the absolute worst one due to the potential Uyghur link.

When the U.S. needed Pakistan, it was willing to put up with all sorts of stuff -- from the nuclear program (in the 1980s) to the "good Taliban vs. bad Taliban" issue and so on. Even when our leadership wasn't trustworthy enough, the U.S. made sure to maintain some kind of presence and, in turn, use it to assert its interests (if not twist a few arms and break a few legs along the way).

China's mistake was taking our leadership seriously. It should've treated them as the fools that they are and, in turn, pursued its own interests by finding the right people to work with from within. The right step would've been to elevate "its guys" to the top and give them the tools necessary to 'clean house' and remove the other factions. Is it invasive? Yes. Is it meddling? Absolutely. But it's a trade the U.S. and U.K have deftly used for decades to ensure their interests; if China doesn't understand it even now, then it'll lose.
 
Last edited:

Trango Towers

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 29, 2016
19,780
-18
23,808
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
One aspect is the Chinese do not see us as a reliable partner long-term, and our pivot within the last few months doesn't shine a good light on us. So then they have to question, how much can we give Pakistan?
Our rulers are haramis. Every last one of them.
If China has indeed bailed, then as @MastanKhan put it, China has no idea what it's doing.

Just bear in mind, a "strong" Pakistan vis-a-vis India isn't necessary for the U.S. to use Pakistan to encircle China. The U.S. just has to make sure China can't rely on Pakistan for anything, and if what you say is correct, then the U.S. has achieved its purpose.
Not a chance China has bailed. This is PDF bs
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
6,622
90
27,122
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Having seen their capacity very intimately I will respectfully disagree. The level of technical expertise, industrial base, and money invested into aerospace that the Turks have is easily 100 times more than us. If they really want to develop ballistic missiles they will. Their command over core technologies is very good. They have focused on developing core technologies over decades while we have been happy with overstaffed idaras making the same 5 systems for decades.

I hope you can tour their facilities to see how much far behind we are. Their work is almost at par with western aerospace companies. Maybe 70-80% there. And they are closing the gap soon.


It's disingenuous to put Pakistan and Turkey in the same aerospace technology tier.

We can continue this discussion on relevant threads if you'd like since this is the JF17 thread after all.



On topic: Ozgur program focused on the JF17 might not be a bad idea at all. However, I don't think Turkey will be doing that for themselves since their lineup is basically occupied. Maybe for export customers.
Türkiye is leagues ahead in every domain.

Let's talk about rockets. They've mastered dual-pulse rocket motor (DPMR) tech well enough to use it for SRAAMs, BVR AAMs, short and medium-range SAMs, and now a long-range SAM (SIPER). This is really complex and intricate stuff. They have had to master a really high level of expertise in metallurgy, solid fuels, and electronics (for the guidance stacks).

Okay, what about cruise missiles? They've literally just tested the indigenous core of their mainline turbofan engine for every one of their cruise missiles, including the SOM, SOM-J, ATMACA, ATMACA KARA, and Gezgin. In fact, their Gezgin GLCM will probably cut way ahead in range compared to the Babur in its very first model (1,200 to 1,500 km).

This isn't even a debate.

India is ahead of Pakistan, and Türkiye is ahead of Pakistan. If anything, the real debate now is seeing who'll cross into the "big leagues" first -- Türkiye or India. Due to some common ties (e.g., religion, the Turkic origins of the Ottomans and Mughals, and the help Muslims in India gave during WW1), they're inviting us to their team. We should humble ourselves, and join.

In fact, I think you remember even 4-5 years ago, I was saying Türkiye was on the cusp of something great. This was all the while "señor membarz" were saying their industry was just stickering Western stuff. Seriously, had we taken the risk back and poured money into their R&D (for Altay, T625, MMU, the TB2, radars, ESM/EW tech, rockets, cruise missiles, etc) back then, we'd be leagues ahead today.
 
Last edited:

MastanKhan

PDF VETERAN
Dec 26, 2005
20,594
165
57,107
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Hi,

If china bailed on pakistan---then china is done and dusted---. Because the rest of the world would say---if you could not take a stand for pakistan---why would you take a stand for us.

A civilisation old as time, and you say it has no idea of diplomacy? You could do with some deference and humility, Mastan.
Hi,

I did not say anything about chinese diplomacy---. That is all they have is---diplomacy---.

But there is a time---you have to take charge of your allies and sometimes twist their arms a little bit and let them know who the Boss is & where their loyalties need to lie---.

Chinese are extremely weak in that field---.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) post defines what I stated---.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom