A JF-17 equipped with Aselpod & SOM cruise missiles ?

[RAMPAGE]

They are there and are upgraded from their basic forms we had them in some ten-12 years ago. Which is why something like the SOM is superfluous for Pakistan's need.

I was referring to the Maverick-like capability? Can't they (H-2/4s) to the job?

I've never supported SOM acquisition. If the military thinks that Ra'ad needs an IR seeker and structural modification/changes, It'll get it done. And it has to considering that those mirages aren't going to be around forever.

 

[Quwa]

Turkey is working on many projects like ER version of Mizrek missiles and their version of Maverick missile, so in this department they can help Pakistan to develop a good solution.



you forgot that JFT is capable of carrying CM-400AKG 200+km range weapon with supersonic speed and ability to hit moving targets.

I was referring to the nuclear strike package too - Ra'ad is integral for that. Basically what I am now reading is that standoff strategic element sits with the 50+ year old Mirages of ours. What happens when they're gone? We either find another platform that could carry the Ra'ad, create a smaller and lighter ALCM for JF-17, or lose the capability entirely when the Mirages wear out. If we have such an advanced program, then it'd be logical to assume that we have a solution (e.g. Ra'ad II or new fighter) on the roadmap, but now especially, I've learned not to assume when it comes to Pakistan.

 

[SQ8]

@Blue Marlin I told you man, one cannot take any of this stuff for granted. Pakistan's SOW programs are 'good enough' as per the PAF's parameters, not ours, and the PAF's SOW strategy for JF-17 centers on glide bombs and other PGBs. LACM isn't on the roadmap!

I would disagree that it is not on the roadmap. It is, but not an immediate priority since the platforms for the SOW's we have now are still active.

The JF-17 had the following design priority schedule.
1. Provide a potent BVR and intercept capability to replace F-7s.
2. Provide a anti ship capability to replace the Mirages at Masroor.
3. Provide a CAS capability to replace Mirages and F-7s in the role.
4. Provide a intermediate OCA capability.

In that lineup, see what stage we are in now.

 

[Quwa]

I would disagree that it is not on the roadmap. It is, but not an immediate priority since the platforms for the SOW's we have now are still active.

The JF-17 had the following design priority schedule.
1. Provide a potent BVR and intercept capability to replace F-7s.
2. Provide a anti ship capability to replace the Mirages at Masroor.
3. Provide a CAS capability to replace Mirages and F-7s in the role.
4. Provide a intermediate OCA capability.

In that lineup, see what stage we are in now.

So a new ALCM is there as a further out need, something that isn't a priority today, but as an issue has been accounted for and will be addressed when necessary.

 

[RAMPAGE]

@Oscar

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

The JF17 has very little clearance between the fuselage and the ground---. A flat tire on take off would create problems.

 

[Basel]

I was referring to the nuclear strike package too - Ra'ad is integral for that. Basically what I am now reading is that standoff strategic element sits with the 50+ year old Mirages of ours. What happens when they're gone? We either find another platform that could carry the Ra'ad, create a smaller and lighter ALCM for JF-17, or lose the capability entirely when the Mirages wear out. If we have such an advanced program, then it'd be logical to assume that we have a solution (e.g. Ra'ad II or new fighter) on the roadmap, but now especially, I've learned not to assume when it comes to Pakistan.

If JFT is not capable of carrying RA'AD ALCM then it will be in future, because it is meant to replace all legacy fighter jets, which means retaining old capability while adding new ones in new platform.

@Oscar

please share details about it.

 

[SQ8]

I was referring to the Maverick-like capability? Can't they (H-2/4s) to the job?

I've never supported SOM acquisition. If the military thinks that Ra'ad needs an IR seeker and structural modification/changes, It'll get it done. And it has to considering that those mirages aren't going to be around forever.

No they cant, you need to have a weapon suited to that weight requirement. Anything like the Raad and H-2/H-2 are more suited to taking out deeper targets. The H-2 was brought in to hit Indian tactical command centers behind the battlefield which were then kept under cover by Sa-6's(and today by Akash) batteries. They also can be used to hit artillery positions and other defended targets.

 

[544_delta]

for naval version i think we can use raad missile with 350 km range.

but wouldn't a carrier have that large a defensive parameter? IN's carriers will pose a major threat in a naval conflict

 

[Piper]

Why would there be any limits and if so,could you explain what these are?
Take a look at the neighbours of China and the situation in the SCS,Pakistan is the only real ally of China incase of a war with whome ever.

Pakistan is hardly going to support China in case of war. Pakistan still gets most of it's exports and aid from US and Europe and not China. Also Pakistan does not have a navy to speak off which can make a difference in Sino-US confrontation.

Furthermore soon will come a stage where Pakistan army will be mainly equipped with Chinese systems and weapons barring F-16s which it anyway cant use to help China so for all intents and purpose all Pakistan will be contributing is man power which China does not lack for itself.

The key thing to note here is that Indians will never go to war with China and for that matter neither will US as it is a loose loose situation. Keeping Pakistan surviving is in China's interest - Agreed! but China will not give stuff for free unlike US - that is simply not how China works and Pakistan as i said is running out of things to give China which it does not already have. Infact if Pakistan is not careful it can become a liability for China.

In my opinion we have to see how CPEC pans out and how dependent China becomes on CPEC. Whether CPEC becomes a artery of Chinese commerce and Gwadar it's navy hub or these things are merely a economic gambit where China gives highly profitable loans and utilities to Pakistani consumers and in the end all CPEC is just a profit making venture.

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar

Still pretty heavy to kill tanks. The Israelis have the Nimrod missile that is of that weight class.
We need a missile that can be carried at least 6 at a time and kill that number of tanks at least 90% of the time.
If you are facing an advance of over 100 tanks, you need to be able to kill at least 33% of them to cause massive cohesion and morale disruptions.

 

[Quwa]

Hi,

The JF17 has very little clearance between the fuselage and the ground---. A flat tire on take off would create problems.


Hi,

What made you believe that a new launch platform is not in the process?

From your posts it looks like you are digging very hard to get tidbits for your next article---.

Out ALCM program is pretty advanced. We have worked on the Hatf 8 for a longtime now---. You just cannot keep jumping from one toy to another.

Also remember----the Turks did not get Tomahawk cruise missiles---we did. There is a good possibility that some thing has been in works for the air launch capability as well.

You should be ashamed for making a baseless accusation. When word came of Pakistan's assault rifle program on this forum, I didn't publish a thing about it on my website until ISPR leaked the footage. When people on this forum were learning about Pakistan's interest in the T-129 and Mi-28NE, I also didn't say a thing on my website until the Turkish MoD and Jane's confirmed the news. When Haris Khan brought up the 40 plane news, I didnt rush to write an article on it, I just took it for interesting forum talk, and continued writing an article on the Rooivalk (which you'll see Monday 8:00AM Pakistan time).

Not every push at hard knowledge is driven by an agenda, I just care enough to be assured that the PAF is keeping tabs on all fronts of possible concern. I have a perspective on how things ought to run in the armed forces, yes, it is natural in the West since politicians play a bigger role in defence matters here. Am I right all the time? Of course not, but I have opinions and I express them, and I let others try and talk me out of it.

But for you to push back is mighty hilarious (and double-standard) considering you were accusing the PAF of criminal negligence over the F-16s not too long ago. And not once did I go after you about it.

You're telling me our ALCM program is advanced... what does 'advanced' mean here? That we have a cruise missile we can only use from a 50 year old plane?

Believe me sir, I want to believe it is advanced, truly, it'd make me happy knowing it, even if meant never being able to say a word about it.

PS: If you want an integrity check about me, feel free to ask any of the members who knew me from 2006, if not earlier (since 2003 in the Pakistani Defence Forum days). But please reflect thousands of years of civilizational progress by not hurling baseless claims about someone without hard proof.

 

[HRK]

@Oscar

he is not suggesting any particular system but required characteristics to tackle CAS duties against 'battle group at ground' (specially in the scenario of IBG thrust) for this I think C-701 would be more suitable with approximately ~100 Kg weight class with 20-30 KM range & 30 Kg warhead size with different guidance systems such as ARH, IR & TV guidance

 

[Quwa]

Still pretty heavy to kill tanks. The Israelis have the Nimrod missile that is of that weight class.
We need a missile that can be carried at least 6 at a time and kill that number of tanks at least 90% of the time.
If you are facing an advance of over 100 tanks, you need to be able to kill at least 33% of them to cause massive cohesion and morale disruptions.

You're basically talking about wanting a JAGM like system. At its core, you're looking at a standard laser-guided air-to-ground missile (e.g. Hellfire, Mokopa, Mizraak), but for fire/forget, you'd need an IIR or - in Brimstone's case - active mmW homing. The active mmW homing is tightly held by MBDA UK, so Pakistan's best bet would be IIR. Lest someone accuse me of being a Roketsan or Denel lobbyist, I'd suggest Mizraak or Mokopa. But a Chinese variation of the HJ-10 with a slightly beefier warhead and IIR seeker can be plausible too.

 

[MastanKhan]

You should be ashamed for making a baseless accusation. When word came of Pakistan's assault rifle program on this forum, I didn't publish a thing about it on my website until ISPR leaked the footage. When people on this forum were learning about Pakistan's interest in the T-129 and Mi-28NE, I also didn't say a thing on my website until the Turkish MoD and Jane's confirmed the news. When Haris Khan brought up the 40 plane news, I didnt rush to write an article on it, I just took it for interesting forum talk, and continued writing an article on the Rooivalk (which you'll see Monday 8:00AM Pakistan time).

Not every push at hard knowledge is driven by an agenda, I just care enough to be assured that the PAF is keeping tabs on all fronts of possible concern. For you to push back is mighty hilarious considering you were accusing the PAF of criminal negligence over the F-16s not too long ago.

You're telling me our ALCM program is advanced... what does 'advanced' mean here? That we have a cruise missile we can only use from a 50 year old plane?

Believe me sir, I want to believe it is advanced, truly, it'd make me happy knowing it, even if meant never being able to say a word about it.

PS: If you want an integrity check about me, feel free to ask any of the members who knew me from 2006, if not earlier (since 2003 in the Pakistani Defence Forum days). But please reflect thousands of years of civilizational progress by not hurling baseless claims about someone without hard proof.

Hi,

Relax my man---when you write---it is normal to be inquisitive---. There is nothing wrong with it---. This time---your questions were very pointed---like up playing the turkish products and down playing the pakistani products---.

Keeping your past writings in the background and then seeing your comments was a little strange---I mean to say---here is a guy who has a lots of information---so what is he try to achieve here----what's at play here---! Why is he he down playing something and uplifting the other-----?

That was all---. I am not hurling any claims at you---this was just an observation.