Thanks for the answer. But my main issue that i can see in it is the ToT and the level of ToT that is on offer.
furthermore, JF17 is less advanced then J11/J10. would it not be better that Pakistan seek joint venture on J10 or J11, cut the number of JF17 its going to order, work on having AESA Radar and work on ToT on J11 forging long term partnership in future projects as well like 5 gen projects the way India is doing with Russia.
if we do do go that way what are the pros and cons of adopting all Chinese airframes from PAF while updating the radars and other bits and bobs wherever necessary...
i think this will give a strategic direction to PAF and we will know where do we want to go in future what are the strengths, weaknesses and opportunities, threats. Rather then going around from time to time and see what we can get and what we can not get... and meanwhile having nothing much to rely on.
We desperately need a strategic partnerships now more then ever. I wouldn't call JF17 a strategic partnership as China itself isnt that interested in buying them. it would have been a partnership if China was to induct substantial numbers into PLAAF.
Other question that arises from above is that how flexible is Kamra? if we want to move from JF17 to FC20 (assuming we take strategic partnership with china) how much can we carry over from existing pool of resources? would we have to develop totally new assembly lines or the current ones can multi role. I am sure Human Capital will be versatile enough......
Sellers like Saab etc will not want to deal with Pakistan if they have a bigger buyer like India with much bigger orders to place. we can see that many main brands are bending over backwards to get India buy their products. its only a matter of time that USA offer them F35 as the marketing model of F35 is very similar to F16 and India can be a good market for it (depending on Russian PAK-FA developments)
any comments?
Well Sir, when JF-17 was being made or started, PAF did knew about J-10 and even when Musharaf went to China to sign the agreement he was shown the J-10 manufacturing plant also. So with Pak-China history it can be safely assumed that PAF was and must have been shown the J-10, but if it still went for the JF-17 means PAF evaluated its strategic objectives and opted for the JF-17 which full fills the role it has been been selected for. Well i have no idea about the PAF mindset, but some of the logic behind JF-17 comes to mind would be first of all price, as its half the price of any modern 4th gen fighter aircraft, even half the price of J-10. 2ndly it has been seen to have good export prospects as a lot of airforces around the world would like to have an aircraft like JF-17 in this price range which can replace a lot of old outdated aircraft of these air forces and especially if PAF is using them, it raises the stakes of export, and exports would be revenues which would help us fund other major fighter aircraft programs. 3rdly we don't have much of a huge airspace to defend, width wise our country lacks dept thus these fighters don't have to go at lengths to intercept incoming enemy aircraft, plus major Indian air fields and strategic locations vital for us are within a few hundred miles of the border, where JF-17 can easily reach and accomplish its mission. And smaller the aircraft, smaller the RCS, harder for radars to detect at longer ranges, so if a mission can be accomplished by a JF-17, why send a J-10 for it. PAF main objective is to defend its airspace and if possible attack the enemy vital installations, which both functions can be done by a JF-17, so why use a bigger more expensive more fuel guzzler J-10 or even F-16. Let these heavy aircrafts do the fight against the other heavy weights.
And most important of all, JF-17 has still to go a long way to become a mature platform, composites are still left to be used, AESA radars and many other things, which will make into a deadly platform fully capable enough to defend pakistani airspace.
We need a capable SAM system to augment the fighter aircrafts, as our first priority is to keep our airspace clean and have a power punch, which BVR precision weapons like Ra'ad, JDAMs kind and cruise missiles can provide.
So no need for J-10 ToT as we most probably would be full with export orders. Plus the new JF-17 plant is big enough as its specifically made for plane production, hope you have seen the pictures of the new production infrastructure.
PLAAF has not yet officially rejected the JF-17/FC-1 nor any official news has surfaced. One of the major issue hampering FC-1 order may be the engine as per Chinese websites as China is already depended on Russian engines fully for their J-10 and J-11 fighters, their main strike weapons, so if another aircraft also needs dependence on russian engines would be less attractive for them. So let a Chinese engine for FC-1 come then we would be for certain whether FC-1 is required by PLAAF or not. By the way a 6th Prototype Pt-06 with Chinese communication equipment is still being flown in China, which may suggest its still going through testing and evaluation with fully Chinese systems.
As for J-11, first russian won't allow as its their designed fighter aircraft, IPR issue, and then the engine would be the major issue as again its a much superior engine then RD-93 that we currently got. India may never allow it nor would Russia. And most importantly PAF doctrine is not for twin engine fighters as they are more expensive to maintain and operational maintenance nearly twice the time of a single engined fighter, requiring nearly double human resource too. Plus we don't need a twin engine aircraft to do the functions required to achieve the objectives as per PAF doctrine.
Anything left, plz do let me know.
Hope i was brief, as still had so much to write
