Defence.pk's exclusive interview with a PAF topgun, Air Commodore (R) Kaiser Tufail.

[Kompromat]

I've noticed the following points:

1. F-7 (Mig 21) endurance is known to be less than an hour. JF-17's endurance, reportedly, is more than 3 hours. There is a good deal of difference in their respective ranges as well. I wonder why AC (R) Kaiser Tufail considers JF-17 short-legged?

2. Canard deltas have better high-altitude capabilities because of much more wing area. But Commodore Tufail highlights F-16 and JF-17's low supersonic drag as being helpful in high altitude performance. But neither of these can super-cruise despite their respective TWRs. Now, while I can understand how speed can compensate for lower wing area at high altitude, I can not see how either of these can sustain high speed, high altitude performance since they would need to use afterburner. Is there something I fail to read between the lines? I think that effectively Commodore Tufail has side-stepped the issue.

Specifically I am thinking about Rafale, if and when IAF inducts it. But then Commoder Tufail has said that we can not afford to be complacent while PAF's rival (IAF) improves its assets.

3. I would like someone to expand upon Commodore Tufail's comments about HMTS. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that at least our F-16 Block 52 had that capability. Is it that he is specifically talking about JF-17 without saying so?

specifically talking about JF-17 without saying so?

Yes

 

[Pakistanisage]

He is also a Published Author. I like this man. Thanks for the Thread.

 

[CrazyPaki]

just checked out his site, was reading the stories of 1971 very interesting got me glued till the last word

 

[nana41]

Very interesting interview, thanks.

Btw Kaiser (written exactly like that, incl. capital K) means emperor in German language.

Not a bad name for a man of his caliber huh?

The correct spellings is with Q.....Qaiser,this word in arabic also means the the emperor.

 

[Chronos]

I like this guy

 

[sajid93]

Very Interesting interview. Thanks !

BTW Raptor has canard wings? I dont think so...

 

[Kompromat]

Very Interesting interview. Thanks !

BTW Raptor has canard wings? I dont think so...

Raptor's wing isn't a conventional one. We are talking about a clipped delta, not canards in this case.

 

[Windjammer]

@Aeronaut
Great piece of work dear by you and all others....... i guess i missed out on Q & A session.

​

 

[Indus Falcon]

@Aeronaut
Great piece of work dear by you and all others....... i guess i missed out on Q & A session.

​

Where have you been? Missed ya!!!

 

[jaibi]

@Aeronaut great interview, yara! Aero we should add in the intro the URL of his blog too.

I was told by an AVM that Lahore provides the backbone of PAF that was such a proud moment for me

He does.....Commodore Sahib lives in my beloved Lahore !

 

[Zarvan]

Lahore

So after this interview what do you think Pakistan has completely dropped the idea of going for J-10B or not ?

 

[Mughal-Prince]

I've noticed the following points:
1. F-7 (Mig 21) endurance is known to be less than an hour. JF-17's endurance, reportedly, is more than 3 hours. There is a good deal of difference in their respective ranges as well. I wonder why AC (R) Kaiser Tufail considers JF-17 short-legged?

I've also noticed it he has mentioned both PG and JFT are short legged in endurance when he refers to ariel refuelers.
Any one who exactly know what he was talking about.



@Horus @Oscar @Manticore @Windjammer

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Horus - dont know what to say. AMAZING WORK!

Given that there's plenty of knowledge on the forum for members like you, the right questions were asked and the perfect answers were given

Thank you.

 

[vizier]

Valid points only thing I would ask would be the delay of induction of high altitude sams part. For point defense needs HQ 16 satisfies the low speed cruise missile interception that can target your airbases. For higher speed cruise missiles like brahmos and low-mid range ballistic missiles HQ 9 would fill that gap at least a starting point for further development. For affordability countries like vietnam purchased S300s. Greece operates both f16s and S300s.

A case study of the need of sams can be comparing 1967 and 1973 arab israeli wars. israel in 1967 destroyed airfields that lacked sam protection and its quick reaction time for point defense compared to interceptors. They tried the same in 1973 but couldnt manage it because of sams.

So in my opinion point defense like airbase or nuclear site protection with quicker reaction time, engagement of higher speed targets and expandable quantities sams are better than interceptors. For longer ranges, large area defense interceptors are better than sams. especially at longer ranges exact detection to guide sams against low observable aircraft gets more difficult. So a 100-150km range 20km altitude fast missile with good low altitude protection of already available HQ 16 would satisfy point defense needs of PAF.

Considering you have valuable assets like nuclear arsenal in need of upmost protection the acquirement of HQ-9 at least a limited number to only protect nuclear sites and major airfields is a necessity that cant be delayed further. China already has HQ9 variants and India has S300 there seems to be parity among those technologies and not a cold war between the sams except radar and ecm gets improved as a natural process.

 

[nana41]

Promotion above a certain rank has more to do with politics than abilities, sadly.

........Especially if you are found to be IQBAL SHANAAS,....believe me.