Air Force Question Thread

[Chrome9]

The Egyptian Air Force is an example of the benefits of allying one's self with the Americans. They have a massive f-16 force, albeit one with severely limited capability. But a nation cannot traitorously switch sides and then be expected to be trusted fully; especially when it's hobby was to repeatedly attack one of America's core allies. Two of the four largest operators of f-16s are Muslim nations. Our issue cannot then be as simple as America constantly trying to destroy the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Our failure to procure more f-16s is a byproduct of the the double agent like role Pakistan has played in WOT; a guilty conscious.

At no point after 9/11 has it seemed that the Pakistani government or populace felt the Americans would follow through on their promises. Military deals were slow to form and few in number. Until the Pakistani military could be sure of covering all corners in a potential scenario of all encompassing sanctions post-WOT, it was reluctant to procure anything but the most rudimentary equipment. While the history of US-Pak relations completely justifies the paranoia; it does not explain the self fulfilling prophecy the whole ordeal has turned into. While we never trusted the Americans, we had no qualms in going behind their back and supporting the very entity they were trying to eliminate. Our fear that the Americans would eventually abandon us, resulted in us creating the very situation that turned the worst case scenario into reality. Through out this last decade, it has been Pakistan that has come across as unreliable and untrustworthy.

Today, it is all irrelevant. The damage is done, the Americans have seen past Pakistan's game and would be unlikely to supply anything of importance ever again. But there was a time when the future path of US-Pak relations was in our hands. We hedged our bets and failed miserably in the endeavor. We could have technically made deals for far more US equipment, but it is my opinion that Pakistan never expected the relationship to last. For that I blame our government for letting the past cloud their judgement to the degree that they squandered the present and future. Of course, in an ideal world, we would avoid embroiling ourselves in grand games with the US and quietly toe the line. But the reality is we attempted to enter into a relationship of equals with the US; failed to benefit from it and now find ourselves cursing the Americans for not being more helpful.

We should have done as the Turks, the Saudis, and the Egyptians did. Quietly fall in line with the wishes of the super power and then reap the benefits. Those other nations were not thinking of some noble global Islamic cause. Why were we? Our problem was India, we needed equipment to face the IAF, IA, and IN...much like the Turks armed themselves to dominate the Greeks. One must pick his battles; sacrifice and compromise in one corner in order to benefit where it is needed most. We should have sold out everyone from the Taliban, to the TTP, to any other entity the Americans perceived as the enemy. Had we crushed them, not only would we no longer be fighting a long and protracted war with those same elements. We would have a far more potent force singularly focused on the western border. Once again, I am no fan of our master-servant relationship with the US or China. But in a world where we repeatedly jump into an ocean filled with sharks, we must stop trying to fight a creature that will finish us in one bite. Either play along or don't swim at all.

Skewed analysis and quite self pitying point of view you have there - I agree with muse here - At no point should Pakistan abandon it's own national interest for that of another country. Our Geo-political and strategic interests are sacrosanct and under no circumstances come secondary to any foreign power - be that the USA.

The two air forces you site as references namely Turkey and Egypt are hardly models Pakistan should follow. I'd take what Pakistan has over what Egypt has any day of the week - We don't have a toothless over burdening F-16 fleet which can't be used against our number one adversary in the time of need. Turkey is hardly comparable but even the Turks are beginning to get weary of uncle SAM's tight bear hug. What the the PAF did was the best it could under the prevailing circumstances - Build an almost Parallel air force of Chinese and western origin air craft with maximum redundancy and minimum dependence.

As for hedging our bets with the Taliban - well the results are in front of all to see - The Us and its allies are withdrawing in 2014 and actively seeking dialogue with the Taliban and attempting to accommodate them in any future set up in some elaborate re conciliatory effort.

 

[Donatello]

Pfpilot:

Please don't present history in such personal terms - The problems between US and Pakistan are not new (see Friends Not Masters ) - and should have quietly just fallen in line? That's just what it did - Please understand that the dominant narrative in both countries runs counter to the aims of the govt , that is to say that it's problematic, politically speaking - that's just reality - And therefore, time to move on, for both the US and Pakistan - if we can craft relations based on economic or commercial relations that are fortified by if not a respect than certainly not disrespect for the civilization heritage that we are from, all the better, but don't hold your breath for that to happen in the near future.

Anyways, let me ask, if US is now an ally of India (and it is), why is it that you are suggesting that we continue to see the Indian as an enemy, does not that not by extension mean we continue to see US as an enemy?? To clarify, I'm not suggesting some love fest with the Indian, but perhaps we may move away from hysterics and towards sobriety - See, we can, if we had to, vaporize the Indian, in the blink on an eye, we would be dead, but so would they -- all this F16 stuff has now outlived it's utility - Tomorrow if the US wants India to throw it's weight around, how will 1000 PAF F16 that US controls (Who How and When), effect the situation?? It seems some argue that just the possession of F16 is somehow meant to induce sobriety in an adversary, whereas in the case of Pakistan, the terms under which Pakistan may operate the system are designed to introduce sobriety not on an adversary but rather the operator, is this not the case? Should we not, now, therefore, use this time to build our domestic industrial defense capability and infrastructure?

MastanKhan's point has been that JF-17 is not a bad deal, it's just it came too little too late. JF-17 in the next 5-10 years might be even superior to F-16blk52s, but it comes too late.

That's the issue.

 

[MastanKhan]

MastanKhan's point has been that JF-17 is not a bad deal, it's just it came too little too late. JF-17 in the next 5-10 years might be even superior to F-16blk52s, but it comes too late.

That's the issue.

Hi,

Thank you sir---that is all there is to weapons systems----it is all in the timing---. What you are going to deploy today---you had to decide 5---10 years ago and plan accordingly---


PFpilot,

What a great post---. You see pak did not have to show any allegiance to taliban---because they had nowhere else to run to than pakistan----which means that they were a captive audience---. The taliban should have been punished and made to ralize of their folly in supporting al qaeda---.

But the main problem stays with pakistanis themselves---a lack of identity---a nation not sincere to itself---a citizenery who cannot honor their identity mand pride of ownership of the land that they live in---they don't deserve to be a nation and h
ave a land to call their nation.

Well sir, in that case it is Karma catching up with you.

You have often remarked that a superior weapon system could lead to a satisfactory solution of Kashmir issue. I disagree. After Kargil, no weapon system can substitute the strategic damage done by ourselves. Your estimation of the impact of a weapon system perhaps reflects your background. But do understand that the world does not necessarily run its course according to how one wishes to see it happen. Reality is far more complex than what you allow for in your analysis relating to acquisition of a particular weapon system and its purported impact.

Sir,

You are going around in circles----an example of those who just want to justify in-action by stating that it would be worthless---.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Sir,

You are going around in circles----an example of those who just want to justify in-action by stating that it would be worthless---.

Have I advocated inaction? I do not believe so. I have just emphasized the importance of action in improving our economy. The way I see events unfolding, for the next two to three years, there are zero chances of war. After this time, we shall be in better shape. Our energy woes might be on decline (Neelam - Jehlum Power project, other misc. hydel power projects, at least three thermal power projects, Iran-Pak Gas pipeline, etc...). Our economy would likely be looking to grow beyond current 3%. Post 2014 fallout of WOT would definitely have been managed.

We desperately need to spend on infrastructure and social services otherwise there is no hope. No expensive weapon program would help us here.

Where do you see JF-17 program post-2015? In better shape I hope?

 

[Pfpilot]

Pfpilot:

Please don't present history in such personal terms - The problems between US and Pakistan are not new (see Friends Not Masters ) - and should have quietly just fallen in line? That's just what it did - Please understand that the dominant narrative in both countries runs counter to the aims of the govt , that is to say that it's problematic, politically speaking - that's just reality - And therefore, time to move on, for both the US and Pakistan - if we can craft relations based on economic or commercial relations that are fortified by if not a respect than certainly not disrespect for the civilization heritage that we are from, all the better, but don't hold your breath for that to happen in the near future.

Anyways, let me ask, if US is now an ally of India (and it is), why is it that you are suggesting that we continue to see the Indian as an enemy, does not that not by extension mean we continue to see US as an enemy?? To clarify, I'm not suggesting some love fest with the Indian, but perhaps we may move away from hysterics and towards sobriety - See, we can, if we had to, vaporize the Indian, in the blink on an eye, we would be dead, but so would they -- all this F16 stuff has now outlived it's utility - Tomorrow if the US wants India to throw it's weight around, how will 1000 PAF F16 that US controls (Who How and When), effect the situation?? It seems some argue that just the possession of F16 is somehow meant to induce sobriety in an adversary, whereas in the case of Pakistan, the terms under which Pakistan may operate the system are designed to introduce sobriety not on an adversary but rather the operator, is this not the case? Should we not, now, therefore, use this time to build our domestic industrial defense capability and infrastructure?

That's an astute observation. I may have done, what is akin to cherry picking facts. If there is a defense, then it was my interest in (relatively) fast tracking the argument I was presenting. I already have a tendency to write in a 1000 words what more capable members can explain in 200.

While you aren't suggesting a love fest with India, I have actually been very vocally supportive of such a future. I don't see any reason why we shouldn't have extensive friendly relations. But that is my opinion. My original point was made while keeping the geopolitical reality in mind. A military as powerful as ours (politically) cannot exist if there is no enemy. If I am to propose that the Taliban and the likes be dealt with, it invariably requires a renewed focus on "aggressor" India. If we suddenly stopped seeing enemies like mirages in the desert, then this whole conversation is irrelevant. We wouldn't need f-16s or even f-7s if there wasn't a constant boogeyman at the doorstep.

I actually do feel that a large force of f-16s would have provided a deterrent in their very presence. My issues with the platform only extend as far as procurement of highly fatigued USN airframes. Otherwise it's potential presence in large numbers would have been a game changer in the approx. 15 year gap in the initial procurement and arrival of Rafales in the IAF. I say this because I am of the opinion that any chance of a Pak-Indo peace that doesn't skew the compromises in India's favor was required in the 2000s. The Indian growth is too strong today and the head start they have on us is too formidable for us to make any dent in the disadvantaged situation we find ourselves in, relative to them. With the leverage India has at this point, peace is unlikely without sever concessions from Pakistan. As such, it is almost impossible. The f-16s could have made a difference before this became a reality, before Pakistan's own equally formidable short term growth was proven to be unsustainable.

The impact of US restrictions has been overblown. What the sanctions would do to PAF after a war does not diminish what it will be able to accomplish during the war. And that is most likely the view of the IAF. The idea is to have a force formidable enough that any future war, of any intensity is so potentially damaging to Indian assets that they are forced to the peace table. The fact that the force would be unable to fight again at that same level would not be much consolation to the Indian forces if Pakistan was causing tangible damage to it's adversaries war fighting capability in the here and now.

As others have pointed out, capabilities are relative and the f-16 in numbers could have done what the jf-17 won't be able to do when it is a matured platform. That is to swiftly close the gap between the IAF and PAF. Minimum deference? Sure, but anything more than maintaining the status quo is impossible with our current procurement plans.

 

[muse]

My original point was made while keeping the geopolitical reality in mind. A military as powerful as ours (politically) cannot exist if there is no enemy. If I am to propose that the Taliban and the likes be dealt with, it invariably requires a renewed focus on "aggressor" India...

I actually do feel that a large force of f-16s would have provided a deterrent in their very presence. My issues with the platform only extend as far as procurement of highly fatigued USN airframes. Otherwise it's potential presence in large numbers would have been a game changer in the approx. 15 year gap in the initial procurement and arrival of Rafales in the IAF. I say this because I am of the opinion that any chance of a Pak-Indo peace that doesn't skew the compromises in India's favor was required in the 2000s. The Indian growth is too strong today and the head start they have on us is too formidable for us to make any dent in the disadvantaged situation we find ourselves in, relative to them. With the leverage India has at this point, peace is unlikely without sever concessions from Pakistan. As such, it is almost impossible. The f-16s could have made a difference before this became a reality, before Pakistan's own equally formidable short term growth was proven to be unsustainable.

The impact of US restrictions has been overblown. What the sanctions would do to PAF after a war does not diminish what it will be able to accomplish during the war. And that is most likely the view of the IAF. The idea is to have a force formidable enough that any future war, of any intensity is so potentially damaging to Indian assets that they are forced to the peace table. The fact that the force would be unable to fight again at that same level would not be much consolation to the Indian forces if Pakistan was causing tangible damage to it's adversaries war fighting capability in the here and now.

As others have pointed out, capabilities are relative and the f-16 in numbers could have done what the jf-17 won't be able to do when it is a matured platform. That is to swiftly close the gap between the IAF and PAF. Minimum deference? Sure, but anything more than maintaining the status quo is impossible with our current procurement plans.

Thank you for your post, I do take your point about putting together your thoughts at a 1000 words a minute, I find myself in that situation often - You will note the I have bolded and highlighted some points you made

 

[MastanKhan]

Pfpilot,

My assessment is that paf got carried away by the idea of the JF 17---a plane manufactured by an air force for an air force---. They were pis-sed of at the americans and they wanted to show the americans that the paf could not be messed with-----an utter stupidity on the part of paf---.

All the planning of the paf got shoved right up when the americans told the french not to proceed with the radar and electronics package for the jf17---.

Jf 17 would have been a good idea for a state with no serious worries from an enemy state----just to play around develop the technology--but to make this aircraft the backbone of the pak airforce and then failing with the project and not supplying the state of an air worthy and a tactically capable air craft in A TIMELY FASHION is tantamount to gross negligence rather treason.

 

[muse]

MK

but to make this aircraft the backbone of the pak airforce and then failing with the project and not supplying the state of an air worthy and a tactically capable air craft in A TIMELY FASHION is tantamount to gross negligence rather treason

.

That's rather harsh MK, Are you certain that the JFT is not air worthy and not tactically capable?

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

I am not harsh---I am just writing what I am looking at---paf has lied all through these years---. You have to go back and read what I wrote about this aircraft initially---. I told you guys as to how long it would take to integrate this aircraft---you remember how members over here made fun of me----now all their mouths are shut in shame----they have not apologized yet---.

If I was right about this aircraft step by a step----3 years ago---there has nothing come up so far that would change my assessment---as a matter of fact---it would have lesser capabilities than before---originally with french electronics and weaponery would have compensated from other weaknesses----.

Paf stuck with this aircraft out of shame and embarrassment----of what india or others would say---F16's new and used were the weapon of choice after 9/11----if cost was a factor---.

Why do you want to be 15 years behind the curve after 5 years

 

[muse]

MK

You are offering rhetoric, not facts - block 15 is not as capable of 52, it takes time for any platform - how much time for JFYT I don't know - but I don't think we can come to conclusion you have, because we don't have information to conclude either way - secondly JFT from the start was to replace the Mirage, A5 and later F7, it was not claimed that it is the technological answer to every aircraft.

I'm not suggesting that your conclusion is right or wrong, just that we don't have the information to do so - I think we might keep our powder dry on that.

As for the contention that we have to worry about Indian on a priority basis - that's a tough sell -

 

[Contrarian]

As for the contention that we have to worry about Indian on a priority basis - that's a tough sell -

It would not be a tough sell were there to be a major terrorist attack on Indian soil.
And Pakistan Army is the singular greatest beneficiary of the fall out - uncannily.

So unless there is a decided political mandate from the Pakistani Govt to the Pakistani Army, so strong and unequivocal, maybe even threatening, that PA - as immune as it is from any kind of Govt pressure and oversight - does not violate it. Then you have lasting peace.

Edit: Although it has to be said that GoI has now realized the limited control over PA, and the noises made by political leaders after 26/11 were most helpful - to the extent that Pakistani's dont even realize - in averting a natural military kick back that GoI would have started. Very helpful indeed.

 

[fatman17]

MK

You are offering rhetoric, not facts - block 15 is not as capable of 52, it takes time for any platform - how much time for JFYT I don't know - but I don't think we can come to conclusion you have, because we don't have information to conclude either way - secondly JFT from the start was to replace the Mirage, A5 and later F7, it was not claimed that it is the technological answer to every aircraft.

I'm not suggesting that your conclusion is right or wrong, just that we don't have the information to do so - I think we might keep our powder dry on that.

As for the contention that we have to worry about Indian on a priority basis - that's a tough sell -

my dear muse - it would be good to put the record straight. in the early 2000's, the JFT project was in the doldrums until the late ACM MAMir decided to 'delink' the selection of the avionics and weapons package from the main project. this basically 'fast-tracked' the development. design and selection of the powerplant and the aircraft was able to make its 'maiden' flights and six prototypes were quickly built. the rest is as they say is history. with the a few modifications like the 'air-intakes (DSI) etc the JFT is very close in design (only) to the JAS Gripen. and yes the JFT was developed to replace all our 60's designed aircraft in the next 5-7 years which was / is an ambitious plan. replacing nearly 300 aircraft! wow!. while this is going on, rightly or wrongly, the PAF continues to convince the US to supply more F-16's through EDA or new built - this was / is a good strategy to have a mix of high / med tech aircraft in the inventory. additionally the chance to acquire 40 odd J-10's as a 'back-up' if the US decides to not supply (which it hasnt) more F-16's. what has 'delayed' all this planning has been the lack of 'funds' at the right time to keep this program on 'track'. we can only hope that the economy improves (it cannot get any worse than it is today) and for the armed forces to 'overtly' demand such funds at this time would be very bad PR (they arnt good at this anyway). only the 'real' experts can tell us how good the JFT is performance wise but from the looks of it, it aint doing too shabbilly.

 

[MilSpec]

@Pfpilot and @MastanKhan, Maybe Jft is an interim option along with the limited f16's til the 2020 and then PAF might have a bigger plans of fielding , mix of J20's and j31 or unspecified chinese 5th gen a/c against perdominantly 4/4.5th gen IAf with few 5th gen pakfa's... PAF might just pull a fast one on IAF...

 

[Gentelman]

@Pfpilot and @MastanKhan, Maybe Jft is an interim option along with the limited f16's til the 2020 and then PAF might have a bigger plans of fielding , mix of J20's and j31 or unspecified chinese 5th gen a/c against perdominantly 4/4.5th gen IAf with few 5th gen pakfa's... PAF might just pull a fast one on IAF...

PAF for 5th gen will choose one of chineese jet you mentioned.....
well in 4-4.5 gen JFT would be developed...
as long as it takes it to develop and mature i suppose PAF would look forward for F-16 blkC/D or J-10B(more improved as PAF requirements)...
bt main concentration of PAF is on locally produced jet for airforce(developed with china JFT)....
as 4.5 gen i suppose blk 3 of JF-17 was aimed with AESA,IRST,Hardpoints and engine improvements and more load to carry,more composites and RCS lowered...
britans offered AESA for blk 1 bt was rejected by PAF and then PAF was blacklisted coz of nuclear experiment..
bt not sanctions are removed soo we can hope that Block 3 would be that what was pre planned.....

 

[MilSpec]

PAF for 5th gen will choose one of chineese jet you mentioned.....
well in 4-4.5 gen JFT would be developed...
as long as it takes it to develop and mature i suppose PAF would look forward for F-16 blkC/D or J-10B(more improved as PAF requirements)...
bt main concentration of PAF is on locally produced jet for airforce(developed with china JFT)....
as 4.5 gen i suppose blk 3 of JF-17 was aimed with AESA,IRST,Hardpoints and engine improvements and more load to carry,more composites and RCS lowered...
britans offered AESA for blk 1 bt was rejected by PAF and then PAF was blacklisted coz of nuclear experiment..
bt not sanctions are removed soo we can hope that Block 3 would be that what was pre planned.....

I am quite skeptical about the Britain offered aesa part!!