I am a bit skeptical. What niche would JF-17 fill in PLAAF that other types (J-10B, JH-7A, J-16, etc.) doesn't already fill? Seems like it will actually complicate inventory significantly.
I simply dont see a role for the JF-17 in the PLAAF(the PLANAF is not even in the picture).
Each force has certain needs, needs on which it builds a requirement.. a doctrine. This doctrine takes into account
1.threats
2.geography.
3.finances of the force.
4.International standing of its nation..access to weapon purchase.
Based on these factors, its staff come up with what it requires to meet the challenges in 1 & 2.. it then looks at 3 & 4 to see what it can get to meet these requirements to the best possible ability. the UAEAF for e.g. has one major threat in the north over a short expanse of water. while it is constricted for geography it also needs to be able to rapidly and effectively neutralize the threats ability to project force near its coast. for that it needed a medium weight, advanced aircraft as its mainstay that could effectively fly well into the threat territory and perform any task asked of it. It already had dedicated bombers and fighters in its M2K-9s but what was needed was an aircraft that could do any task on the fly at any time.. and be a bulldozer on the north. The aircraft that suited it was the F-16.. but they wanted the best of it.. so they invested in the development of the Block-60.
The RSAF.. by contrast.. focused on a dedicated interceptor.. a dedicated bomber.. and a multirole aircraft for its needs.
However, its large expanse demanded a larger aircraft.. and its ample pockets allowed it to pay for it. By contrast.. the Israelis needed a mainstay medium light fighter to tackle the threats that they face. The F-16 fit their bill perfectly.. even today.. the number of F-16s outnumber the F-15s in the IDF-AF by 1:4..
To the IDF-AF.. the F-16 is not a light component.. its their medium weight mainstay.. However, the F-15I is their premium strike component.
But to the Jordanians.. the F-16 forms their highest tech components.. and the F-5E/F were long standing in as the air intercept reserve.
Similarly, the PAF has particular roles set out for its wants in terms of the equipment and assets it needed.
1. Strike deep into the heart of the enemy..and his key installations and strategic nodes..much like the heart and kidneys: A Strike focused asset capable of carrying carrying lots of fuel along with respectable bomb load.
2. A Medium weight Multirole asset to perform the body punches breaking bones.. the enemy's ribs... his arms.. reducing his ability to hit you..while at the same time.. being able to block his key punches to your organs and bones. While this asset will also be able to strike deep if needed, it was never envisaged that it would be dedicated to doing so nor was it supposed to carry that much punch.
3. An Air defense asset. Block the enemy's blows as much as possible over your own space..As such, it does not need to travel that far.
When it first came out.. the F-16 was in the words of a former PAF Chief.. almost an exact interpretation of their Air Staff Requirement. There is a reason why the PAF loves the F-16.. it embodies everything the PAF wants to achieve as a piece of equipment.. as a merging of man and machine.
However, the PAF also needs an air interdiction and strike aircraft. Back in the mid 90s to early 2000s.. a role they had kept for the Mirage..and a role that the Mirage fills/ed to this day very well; was found to be best suited for the mirage-2000. It is a great strike aircraft. Eventually, the PAF evaluated the upgraded F-16 and new F-16... and found that the former was still perfect for its role in at 2.. and the latter fit the role of 1 quite well too..but it needs more of those.
The last component was always going to be the JF-17..in whatever form it came. However as the aircraft was found to be more and more versatile at what the PAF could hang off it and make its electronics do. They found that they could make the JF-17 do Task 2 as well. Task 1 was always going to be for a dedicated strike aircraft..and the PAF still lacks numbers(not capability) in the force that has to go in deep and strike deep.. along with being successful and coming back.
But task 2 is now filled quite well... along with task 3 too.
Why all the discourse about the PAF??
Lets look at the PLAAF the same way?.. what Tasks will it set out for itself?
It has similar requirements.. but unlike the PAF.. the Chinese coastline.. and the Chinese threat paradigms are MUCH larger to defend and project power to. It also has to consider the last two factors when making its doctrine which are finance weapons access(although it has really on its way to nearly diminishing the latter factor). Despite the massive economy.. China's military budget is still a drain on it self and cannot be overly huge. With its fund size.. the PLAAF has to make decisions.
It cannot have too many overlapping roles.. and buy aircraft just for the heck of it when it does not need to.
In the new PLAAF.. the J-10 is the light component.. designed for the inner circle of Task 3 which it carries out with J-11 and Su-27SKs. Task 1 and 2 are taken up by the Su-30MKK.. Here, the JF-17 has no fit. While it can serve the same role that the J-10 currently serves quite well.. it has little value otherwise.. It cannot perform the Task 1 and 2 that the PLAAF needs because of its size. The PLAAF was till recently a very DEFENSIVE force. It has only recently come out as offensive. As such its J-7s, Q-5s are quite useless to its offensive needs today as the collapse of the Soviet Union has all but ended the threat from the north. So where does the JF-17 fit then?? if at all?
The only possibility I see for the JF-17 in the PLAAF is in a defensive role in a Formosa Strait conflict. Acting in coastal A2/AD roles. that too is a longshot..
It will give great boost to program.
