Search results

asdsadsafsadasd sad asd

What about French aircraft? Do you think PAF should have spent their J-10, F-16C/D and F-16AM/BM upgrade money on Rafale instead?

Why didn't PAF go for the Embraer 145 platform for Erieye? Almost the same range and cargo/crew capacity as Saab 2000, higher ceiling and speed, IFR capable. Even if Saab 2000 is a lot more fuel efficient at low speed, the Embraer can be refuelled in the air. I guess the Swedes told them if...

Blain sir, do you mean to say PAF's Saab 2000 Erieye will be equipped with IFR probes? Can I ask about the source of this information? I have not read anything like that on the internet.

What kind of civil defence procedures does Pakistan have in place?

They can easily sell a downgraded version. Fatman17 is ex-PA, he doesn't need to pretend anything. Grow up and show some respect.

For 230 flankers? Yes it is. A single mki will jettison nearly all BVR/WVR missiles as soon as an inbound AMRAAM or SD-10 is detected. 2 pilots means InAF loses more each time one aeroplane gets shot down. 2 engines means mki has to spend double the time in maintenance, flies less missions...

Take a look at the J-10B's nose. You probably know that the grey part is where the radar is. Notice the straight line between the grey part and the yellow fuselage. The line is at an angle. Many believe this means J-10B will have an ESA (also known as phased array) radar . Why? Fighters with...

But it is possible in an emergency, right? Surely they would have strengthened the roof sufficiently to ensure the antenna weight would not cause a problem when landing/taking off on improvised airstrips, if not rough fields.

Because they realised that when its a fair fight (unlike Cope India), they aren't so superior to the latest F-15 and F-16 as some people wish they were.

Just ignore him, he knows the answer.

Looks great, the thing has 12 antennas, not including the ESM antennas. JF-17 data-linked to these will give those flankers something to think about. Munir, will this and Saab 2000 be able to take off from unprepared airstrips and rough fields and so on? Could this be the main reason why PAF...

What makes you think they operate three kinds of missiles? I doubt they still operate Shrike, it is a very old system. Why turn down MAR-1 just because they have HARM? Word is it came with transfer of technology.

What ridiculous idea? Those defences have never been tested in battle and there is no evidence whatsoever they would work against a modern manoeuvrable/MIRV warhead using ECM and decoys, never mind a saturation attack.

Yes, and Pakistan's principle is clearly to make friends with those who treat it fairly. I don't see China trying to take control of Pakistan's water supplies.

Not that I doubt you Gambit, but can I ask what these estimations are based on?

Rubbish. In 1965, F-104 scared InAF but gnats were nicknamed "sabre slayers". It was InAF's fault for thinking F-104 was some kind of wonder plane when it simply was not - it was just very fast. Of course they realised that by 71. In 1971: - InAF had Mig-21, superior to F-86 and a far better...

It isn't just time to build Rafale, it takes time to deliver them, train pilots to fly them, train engineers to fix and maintain them, and most important: many many years to pay back the loans for them. They are extremely expensive. You know they are at least twice the price of the J-10...

Nice one PAFAce, just some minor points:

PAF F-86 Sabre downing InAF Mig-21. Want to ask about the inferior PAF numbers against superior InAF numbers too?