Deep precision strike capabilities of missiles vs fighters

[Dark Eradicator Warlock]

Assalam o Alaikum

We been discussing to upgrade JF17 to its teeth and acquiring heavy jet for deep precision strike for ages.

Since PAF is more focused on defence rather than offence, and there is no possibility of indian strike since it would not be that different than nuke strike. Why spending that much resources without reason to practically apply them.

Also considering that we have the deep precision strike capability with missiles (without using nukes) why acquiring and investing in heavy platforms.

What do you think. Please elaborate the advantages if you think a heavy jet is a must.

 

[C130]

obviously missiles, but Pakistan does need fighter bombers something like the JH-7B


but for missiles the light weight F-16 can carry 4 JSOW-ER and the JF-17 2 easily.

that's over 400KM+ range right there.

 

[SipahSalar]

Missiles are better, but they are too expensive. When you need to carry out hundreds of sorties, missiles simply won't cut it.

That said, countries that can afford it, do have thousands of missiles. For example the Russian Iskander tactical missiles. The will be launched pre-emptively in thousands of numbers to saturate enemy airfields.

 

[RazorMC]

Depends on which missiles you're talking about? There are so many categories with different goals.

 

[Signalian]

What do you think. Please elaborate the advantages if you think a heavy jet is a must.

PAF own circles convey that surface to surface is the way to go.

 

[Itachi]

What do you think

In my opinion, while we develop Block 3 of JF-17, we should focus of super and hypersonic versions of CM's like Babur or better versions of it. The rest of the post answers your question(s) too.

Missiles are better, but they are too expensive.

A CM comparable to Babur is JASSM-ER (1000+ km range; a lot better range than Babur lol) and has a price tag of 1.359M while a Block 2 JF-17 costs ~28 M and the planned Block 3 ~32 M. So, if we use a better stealthier CM with range of 1.5k KM, let's say it's price is 3M? That's like 10 CM's Vs. 1 JF-17 Block 3 that can't go 1000km into enemy territory. Plus, we have to send squadrons of fighters for Ops against enemy AD's. So, let's say we get 100 of the above, stealthier, 1.5k KM range CM's? 300M price? That's like ~10 Block 3 JF-17 lol and 100 CM's with good capabilities will be more than enough for any AD put against us by India.

Depends on which missiles you're talking about? There are so many categories with different goals.

Got your answer^

 

[leftfordead]

Missiles are better option than some cheap and less capable Bombers ..
increase range , lower RCS , better counter measures , stand-off firing Capabilities .. and boom