What's new

New fighter for PAF Doctrine?

AeroEngineer

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Jan 3, 2021
18
0
22
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
The advantage of 'We are better at Dog Fight' has diminished with the invention and deployment of HOBS. Granted, PAF has horned better tactics and should continue to do so to keep adversary far away as possible and keep shooting BVRs.
I speculate that the advantage has diminished more because of flying hours or rather lack thereof. Back in 65/71 with US Military Assistance Program, parts and fuel were not much of an issue (yes there were sanctions after ‘65 but those were still relatively carefree days not like 90s with the crippling sanctions bringing F-16 fleet to a near halt). General Chuck Yeager said this about PAF pilots before ‘71.
“Q: Of all the pilots you've flown iwth, which do you respect the most and why?A: In 1971-73, I flew with the Pakistan Air Force in the war with India. They were the best in the world because they had the most experience - over 75 hours/month.

75 hours a month especially of hassling in the air is the kind of time you get at CCS or Top Gun of yore. With that much experience in the bag you are bound to be at the top of your trade. Now I suspect regular squadron pilots may get 15-20 hours per month at most. This maintains proficiency but not excellence. I could be wrong but my sense is 200 hours is the average outside of CCS instructors. Economy impacts everything. Again speculation on my part.
 

m52k85

FULL MEMBER
May 24, 2013
730
0
737
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
I speculate that the advantage has diminished more because of flying hours or rather lack thereof. Back in 65/71 with US Military Assistance Program, parts and fuel were not much of an issue (yes there were sanctions after ‘65 but those were still relatively carefree days not like 90s with the crippling sanctions bringing F-16 fleet to a near halt). General Chuck Yeager said this about PAF pilots before ‘71.
“Q: Of all the pilots you've flown iwth, which do you respect the most and why?A: In 1971-73, I flew with the Pakistan Air Force in the war with India. They were the best in the world because they had the most experience - over 75 hours/month.

75 hours a month especially of hassling in the air is the kind of time you get at CCS or Top Gun of yore. With that much experience in the bag you are bound to be at the top of your trade. Now I suspect regular squadron pilots may get 15-20 hours per month at most. This maintains proficiency but not excellence. I could be wrong but my sense is 200 hours is the average outside of CCS instructors. Economy impacts everything. Again speculation on my part.
No way the average for PAF is 75 hours/month. We would be seeing completely different aircraft service life if that were true. I think even 200 hrs/ year would be lucky at this point.
 

AeroEngineer

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Jan 3, 2021
18
0
22
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
No way the average for PAF is 75 hours/month. We would be seeing completely different aircraft service life if that were true. I think even 200 hrs/ year would be lucky at this point.
That is what my hypothesis is. The 75 hrs/month was when Yeager was deputed back in 70-71.
 

Raider 21

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Feb 18, 2016
3,019
7
5,385
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United States
200 to 260 hrs was reported in a book about 65 war.
This was even more during Soviet Afghan war amongst the PAF F-16 aircrew
No way the average for PAF is 75 hours/month. We would be seeing completely different aircraft service life if that were true. I think even 200 hrs/ year would be lucky at this point.
Correct, annual is close to 200, 180 hours is around the norm for the operational ones.
 

Khaqan Humayun

FULL MEMBER
Jun 30, 2013
419
0
210
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
First of all, there is no need to write in bolt and second ... what a twisted and simple minded logic? Only since PAC has they have quality to make single engine, they surely can make twin engine fighter aircraft, but the reason why they don't do it are several and here most of all cost.
Just talk about the Idea, How do i write it is not a matter of this forum.
 

Khaqan Humayun

FULL MEMBER
Jun 30, 2013
419
0
210
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Twin engine also have higher maintenance cost, less efficiency, less flexibility and most significantly larger radar returns.
Twin engine jet has its own capabilities, Single engine has another capabilities.
When we send formation of fighter jets we use different aircraft for different role.
 

Khaqan Humayun

FULL MEMBER
Jun 30, 2013
419
0
210
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
View attachment 786349
F-16 XL was the part of F-16 program, some time we have to work on many projects to achieve something best.
F-16xl was the best aircraft with 27 Hard Point, I have seen many documentry on this delta wing F-16xl
due to F-15 US airforce did not bought this then NASA used this exclent Jet for study.

We Must build one JF-17 Super Thunder Delta Wings for study.
 

Deino

INT'L MOD
Nov 9, 2014
10,916
15
18,369
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
View attachment 786349
F-16 XL was the part of F-16 program, some time we have to work on many projects to achieve something best.

Sorry, but can we please leave out such childish proposals from this thread?

There are several indeed most interesting discussions concerning a new fighter for the PAF going on, but even if some are quite speculative, they are all based on real types and not wishful-thinking! So, to think since Pakistan builds a single engines type it could "easily build a twin engined one" or since the J-16E/F was such a fancy type, "Pakistan shoulddo the same with the JF-17" are either plain naive or at best "Kindergarten-level" and should not be continued here in this section!
 

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
8,595
72
14,397
F-16xl was the best aircraft with 27 Hard Point, I have seen many documentry on this delta wing F-16xl
due to F-15 US airforce did not bought this then NASA used this exclent Jet for study.

We Must build one JF-17 Super Thunder Delta Wings for study.
OK! At the expense of losing my sanity let me explain a few things to you in the hope that you will understand how air force procurement works. The fighter that you see was a tech demonstrator. This means that Lockmart thinks that given the resources it can develop such a fighter with such qualities. The US govtt would look at it and say we have a better fighter in F15 which can carry the same amount of ordinance therefore we will stick with F15. Now if they had decided to go for the XL, Lockmart would ask them to appropriate funding for extensive research so that the fighter can be prepared. This maybe little as the base research is already there or a lot if a problem develops in the fighter on further use/development.
Now if PAF were to go and ask Lockmart"please can we have the XL, they would ask you to foot the development cost of the fighter. UAE put in 800million(PLEASE CORRECT IF Iam wrong) for the AESA integration on the Desert falcon. So even before you can get the fighter you will agree to foot the costs of integration and development which could be any where between 500 million to a couple of billion. The Lockmart may have to set up facilities to build the XL as I do not think they would do it on the current site. So it might either add to your costs or delay the project till they are done with the current order and then rejig the assembly for the XL as it will require a different assembly setup for the XL.
Now add that cost to your bill. Now add the cost of 36 fighters which you will need. The cost will be astronomical considering you will be paying 120-150 million (plus2 billion÷36+rejigging costs which could be a billion ÷36).
Now that you have this fighter you have issues with the US government and its tendency to sanction you which comes into your reckoning. Add to that the risk of having a fighter which no one else owns in the world including the parent air force in your calculus making you dependent on any issue resolution on Lockmart which will be added to the cost. Spares will have to rely on the US alone as no one else has the fighter( you can bet your dirty chaddi the US is going to use equipment which can only be repaired in US).
NOW do you perceive any risk in the buy? Is it a good idea to buy the XL in your view and how do you get the money and mitigate the risk of developed fighters sitting on some boneyard while the US govtt devises new ways to screw the PAF And the state of Pakistan?
If you still think it is a good idea then I give up trying to explain things to you.
A
 
Last edited:

m52k85

FULL MEMBER
May 24, 2013
730
0
737
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
There was an analysis on Quwa from 3-4 years ago that suggested something could become a possibility. Well, it became a reality (by sheer coincidence, no knowledge on my part). I won't point that article out, but it's still on the website. If you find it, you'll know that's the one.
Please point it out now, since its been a few months and the thing is here already.
 

Basel

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 31, 2013
9,399
2
7,029
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The advantage of 'We are better at Dog Fight' has diminished with the invention and deployment of HOBS. Granted, PAF has horned better tactics and should continue to do so to keep adversary far away as possible and keep shooting BVRs.
PAF will also be fielding HOBS AAM with JFT block-3 i.e. PL-10.
 

KaiserX

FULL MEMBER
Apr 6, 2019
1,660
-1
2,846
Country
United States
Location
United States
PAF will get around 50 J10CE as stop gap until AZM matures. I would not discount the possibility of J31 procurement/production since many components are shared with the JF17 (Engine, avionics, etc...).
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 3, Members: 1, Guests: 2)


Top Bottom