BVR and Remote Targeting

[foxhound]

Salaam!

I was just wondering that in the light of the PAF allocated resources from the defence budget - is the PAF still embarking on a cost-effective strategy or is there room to be more effective with the limited resources at its disposal?

In view of the future trend that most air combat would be at beyond visual range (and a very low chance of actual 'dog fights' as in previous conflicts)....would it be better for the PAF to upgrade it's 'old' or 2nd/3rd generation aircraft with BVR capability and support it with AWAC/AEW and electronic warefare aircraft?

My point is that since Radar is a primary means of offensive detection, but as an emission it is easily detectable by an adversary, which can usually gauge the degree of threat from the mode used, and take appropriate countermeasures - electronic or maneuver. For this reason, the most appropriate radar mode for many situations is standby, activating it the last possible moment.

There is an alternative, which I think looks very attractive. This is remote targeting, in which missile launch data is provided from off-board sources, such as other fighters, AWACS, or ground control. The air combat equivalent of the discovered check in chess, this allows surprise attacks to be made from unexpected quarters.

So in a nutshell....A fighter using its radar to detect its prey at once reveals its presence, its position, and often its intent. The answer is remote targeting, in which ground radar and/ or AWACS provide target information via a secure data link. This allows missile launch without direct contact, and without the target being alerted.

Would it be feasible for the PAF to upgrade (on cheap basis) it's older aircraft (BVR capable) and cause a would be adversary some 'serious' problems in the event of a conflict?

 

[foxhound]

Any comments in response to the above thread? Can it be a feasible option for the PAF?

 

[su-47]

Salaam!

I was just wondering that in the light of the PAF allocated resources from the defence budget - is the PAF still embarking on a cost-effective strategy or is there room to be more effective with the limited resources at its disposal?

In view of the future trend that most air combat would be at beyond visual range (and a very low chance of actual 'dog fights' as in previous conflicts)....would it be better for the PAF to upgrade it's 'old' or 2nd/3rd generation aircraft with BVR capability and support it with AWAC/AEW and electronic warefare aircraft?

My point is that since Radar is a primary means of offensive detection, but as an emission it is easily detectable by an adversary, which can usually gauge the degree of threat from the mode used, and take appropriate countermeasures - electronic or maneuver. For this reason, the most appropriate radar mode for many situations is standby, activating it the last possible moment.

There is an alternative, which I think looks very attractive. This is remote targeting, in which missile launch data is provided from off-board sources, such as other fighters, AWACS, or ground control. The air combat equivalent of the discovered check in chess, this allows surprise attacks to be made from unexpected quarters.

So in a nutshell....A fighter using its radar to detect its prey at once reveals its presence, its position, and often its intent. The answer is remote targeting, in which ground radar and/ or AWACS provide target information via a secure data link. This allows missile launch without direct contact, and without the target being alerted.

Would it be feasible for the PAF to upgrade (on cheap basis) it's older aircraft (BVR capable) and cause a would be adversary some 'serious' problems in the event of a conflict?

Remote targeting is possible with AWACS. Since pakistan is getting Erieyes, these can guide missiles fired by fighters. i dont think Ground based radar can guide air-to-air-missiles though.

And about converting old jets into BVR capable planes, i think its a bad idea. Just coz a plane can fire a BVR missile doesnt make it good. If that were the case, there'd be no need for F-22s, Eurofighters or any other top range fighter. Everyone would have just fit AMRAAMs or R-77s on MiG-21s and old model F-15s and F-16s.

There are many other factors beside missiles that determine air-to-air combat victory, like avionics, radar, RCS etc.Pakistan would be much better off investing in new fighters than wasting money vamping up the old ones