I have had enough of this.
Kharian Beast, I am sorry but I found quite a bit of amateurish stuff and not-so-well thought out ideas in your post, making it look like we live in some utopia. Not only are some of your ideas very vague and biased to support your argument, but you have also choose to use an argument against JF-17 and completely ignore it when it comes to your ideas.
May I ask why?
Here's a rebuttal to some of your points.
Factual error No. 1: The JF-17 project was started in 1999 and at that time, no Rafale, no EF, no Gripen, no F-16 was available because Pakistan was under sanctions. And nobody in PAF was an astrologist to predict that 9/11 will have and sanctions would eventually be lifted.
Prior to 1999, we know what PAF had wanted and you know what happened ( with french mirages and Mr. 10%).
Factual Error No 2: Please, let me know who is selling 100 Rafales for $8.5 billion. May be you are ignorant of the Brazillian deal?
And why are you omitting the cos associated with "possibilities of building some at home". So the JF-17 will require the cost of setting up of assembly line, etc and the Rafale won't? Considering the airframe of Rafale is quite advanced, maybe you should tell us how much they will cost and remember they will be built by Dassault?
Oh, and as usual, depreciation and inflation only applies to JF-17. The Rafale is going to stay at constant price, won't it?
Factual Error No. 3: Pakistan had just committed to 150 planes. Anything above that will depend on our needs and our purchasing power. If you have the funds, we can go for higher numbers of F-16s, Rafales or even F-22 (Hey, we are living in fantasy so why not)
Also did you take the operating cost into account? Please do check that the cost of flying an aeroplane is in the thousands of dolloars per hour. So it matters a lot of what no only you want to fly but you can afford to fly. Least, you have your planes sitting on a tarmac and your pilots poorly trained and inexperienced.
Sure, a US$41million per plane upgrade and that too without an engine upgrade on an outdated and less complex Mirage sounds as seamless an integration and true growth as you have beautifully said in one phrase.
Sure, Sir...what a brilliant strategy!
While your 100 Rafales won't let anyone come close to the upper half of the country, the enemy would be having a walk in the park in the southern part because you do not have enough planes to field there.
Oh, and must I remind you that the last time we engaged in such fantasies of taking our F-16s over anything didn't work out because the sanction-prone F-16s were watching Kargil at home on Satellite TV.
Suppose things change and we are sanctioned again in 5 years time, would you switch gear and say "I had been shouting going indigenous and self sufficient all the time"?
Would you please enlighten us as to how many BVR missiles have been shot to date, what was their predicted kill ratio and what was the actual kill ratio? and at what range were these missiles fire?
And while we are at it, please let us know how a SD-10 or MICA is a World War 2 missile.
Sure JF-17 is no break-through in the world of aviation and nothing that will take as ahead of the race, but are we willing and are we financially capable of joining this race? The USSR was a superpower, a big economy, all the technology, everything but what happened? Did it loose to F-22 and B-2? Do we want to follow the same tradition?
The PAF (and Pakistan) has no choice but to retain a minimum deterrence strategy. And no the JF-17 is not the "flying kite" and "little better than a trainer" that you have tried to convey to us. If we can afford and get our hands on a good avionics and missile, it can give any moder 4.5th generation fighter a run for its money.
If I've to defend an air space as large as ours, and with a budget as tight as ours, I will definitely go for 250 JF-17s over a (doubtful) 100 Rafales anytime of any day.
P.S. I do not mean any disrespect but the above points are purely for the sake of discussion here. I was rather surprised (and disappointed) by some of the arguments you have presented.
Kharian Beast, I am sorry but I found quite a bit of amateurish stuff and not-so-well thought out ideas in your post, making it look like we live in some utopia. Not only are some of your ideas very vague and biased to support your argument, but you have also choose to use an argument against JF-17 and completely ignore it when it comes to your ideas.
May I ask why?
Here's a rebuttal to some of your points.
Factual error No. 1: The JF-17 project was started in 1999 and at that time, no Rafale, no EF, no Gripen, no F-16 was available because Pakistan was under sanctions. And nobody in PAF was an astrologist to predict that 9/11 will have and sanctions would eventually be lifted.
Prior to 1999, we know what PAF had wanted and you know what happened ( with french mirages and Mr. 10%).
Factual Error No 2: Please, let me know who is selling 100 Rafales for $8.5 billion. May be you are ignorant of the Brazillian deal?
And why are you omitting the cos associated with "possibilities of building some at home". So the JF-17 will require the cost of setting up of assembly line, etc and the Rafale won't? Considering the airframe of Rafale is quite advanced, maybe you should tell us how much they will cost and remember they will be built by Dassault?
Oh, and as usual, depreciation and inflation only applies to JF-17. The Rafale is going to stay at constant price, won't it?
Factual Error No. 3: Pakistan had just committed to 150 planes. Anything above that will depend on our needs and our purchasing power. If you have the funds, we can go for higher numbers of F-16s, Rafales or even F-22 (Hey, we are living in fantasy so why not)
Also did you take the operating cost into account? Please do check that the cost of flying an aeroplane is in the thousands of dolloars per hour. So it matters a lot of what no only you want to fly but you can afford to fly. Least, you have your planes sitting on a tarmac and your pilots poorly trained and inexperienced.
Sure, a US$41million per plane upgrade and that too without an engine upgrade on an outdated and less complex Mirage sounds as seamless an integration and true growth as you have beautifully said in one phrase.
Sure, Sir...what a brilliant strategy!
While your 100 Rafales won't let anyone come close to the upper half of the country, the enemy would be having a walk in the park in the southern part because you do not have enough planes to field there.
Oh, and must I remind you that the last time we engaged in such fantasies of taking our F-16s over anything didn't work out because the sanction-prone F-16s were watching Kargil at home on Satellite TV.
Suppose things change and we are sanctioned again in 5 years time, would you switch gear and say "I had been shouting going indigenous and self sufficient all the time"?
Would you please enlighten us as to how many BVR missiles have been shot to date, what was their predicted kill ratio and what was the actual kill ratio? and at what range were these missiles fire?
And while we are at it, please let us know how a SD-10 or MICA is a World War 2 missile.
Sure JF-17 is no break-through in the world of aviation and nothing that will take as ahead of the race, but are we willing and are we financially capable of joining this race? The USSR was a superpower, a big economy, all the technology, everything but what happened? Did it loose to F-22 and B-2? Do we want to follow the same tradition?
The PAF (and Pakistan) has no choice but to retain a minimum deterrence strategy. And no the JF-17 is not the "flying kite" and "little better than a trainer" that you have tried to convey to us. If we can afford and get our hands on a good avionics and missile, it can give any moder 4.5th generation fighter a run for its money.
If I've to defend an air space as large as ours, and with a budget as tight as ours, I will definitely go for 250 JF-17s over a (doubtful) 100 Rafales anytime of any day.
P.S. I do not mean any disrespect but the above points are purely for the sake of discussion here. I was rather surprised (and disappointed) by some of the arguments you have presented.
