Have The Paf Disclaimers Sabotaged The Sale Of The JF17's!

[_NOBODY_]

With publicly available data and videos as shown above. SOM cruise missile is more advance than Ra'ad.

If Turkey is willing to sell SOM to us for our F-16s and if Uncle Sam would allow the integration of SOM on our F-16 then it is going to be awesome.

 

[ghazi768]

If I have to take a guess when we say 1000 KG it means it is the maximum payload it can carry. Normal and optimal weight would always be within 940-980 KG.

I dont know if it is lack of will or capability or finance but LACM and ALCM both are stuck at the same specs since their first tests. There is no use of composite matieral usage or else we would have seen short and compact cruise missiles or increased ranges . And to bring ALCM weight from 1100 to 940-980 KG without advance manufacturing techniques is not in our capability or skill set sans what you suggested by taking a performance hit i.e reduced warhead weight. But its been what 9 years since fist test of Ra'ad ? We would have seen raad on the inner wings of JF-17 after root strengthening but still latest test was from Mirage. So the speculation stands whether if it is lack of will,skill set or finances.



I dont believe there will be any structural changes in height or length. If there were any JF-17 B would have been the test bed for such changes. See the official specs of A and B from AVIC

View attachment 304084


Lets see if a 1 meter increase in wing span will introduce two extra hardpoints on B version or not.

I think chances of actual weight capacity of each weapon station to get out in open is extremely low because of association with certain kind of gravity bombs. But I am amazed by level of discussion on this forum, some users who's knowledge of even basic flight information is abysmally minimum but still they do not stop from slinging mud at PAF and are such pig-headed that when pointed out than they start having english comprehension problems as well. I am thinking that now users will start mentioning foreign options without worrying about that MTCR will limit range and warhead options severely.
Fuel is usually the heaviest by volume item in jet fighters as well as jet engine based cruise missiles, using it to calculate if a fighter is able to carry it or not is plainly stupid.
With the insignia you are showing with your name, If you want to have a guesstimate of what a weapon station is able to carry find an airforce pilot and find out what is the largest drop tank this fighter is able to carry, multiply those litres with roughly .8 to get a good guesstimate.

 

[MastanKhan]

If I have to take a guess when we say 1000 KG it means it is the maximum payload it can carry. Normal and optimal weight would always be within 940-980 KG.

I dont know if it is lack of will or capability or finance but LACM and ALCM both are stuck at the same specs since their first tests. There is no use of composite matieral usage or else we would have seen short and compact cruise missiles or increased ranges . And to bring ALCM weight from 1100 to 940-980 KG without advance manufacturing techniques is not in our capability or skill set sans what you suggested by taking a performance hit i.e reduced warhead weight. But its been what 9 years since fist test of Ra'ad ? We would have seen raad on the inner wings of JF-17 after root strengthening but still latest test was from Mirage. So the speculation stands whether if it is lack of will,skill set or finances.



I dont believe there will be any structural changes in height or length. If there were any JF-17 B would have been the test bed for such changes. See the official specs of A and B from AVIC

View attachment 304084


Lets see if a 1 meter increase in wing span will introduce two extra hardpoints on B version or not.

@MastanKhan

Sir, You should stop stealing my Ideas. First it was the JH-7B and then the Medium weight variant of JF-17. They were just ideas, Aap tou dil pai hi lai gai hain.

Now I regret giving voice to them.

Hi,

Look they already produced it---1 meter larger wing----now build a SINGLE SEATER around it---and guess what---suddenly you increase you loiter time by another 30 minutes if you stored more fuel in that area and kept the shape the same as that of the twin seater.

Plus you may have the ability to put an extra hard point.

But the real achievement would be a very simplistic design change---change the shape of the fuel to tanks to the ones like that of the Gripen NG---that squarish design---which would carry more fuel.

So the utility of the oxygen supply for 3 1/2 hours could be utilized to the max.

J10 is a good aircraft, but not in line with PAF plans.

Hi,

If the prime minister decides to order the J10's---they will suddenly become in line with the paf plans.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

When I talked about My BLK4 type of design change for the JF 17---I had confidence and have confidence that it was not a major major structural change that would need an outrageous amount of money or time---or was impossible---plus there is so much information available in the books and on the web---.

Because 10-20 % modifications are within the limits of the existing MODULAR DESIGN structure frame---it is not unheard of---and it is not something of an engineering miracle that a few can perform this change and is very difficult.

A mechanical structure is not an electronic module---which is designed to use the minimum space for maximum utility and once designed---it is impossible to modify---unless options are provided.

Metal structures are open to those factors that are " within a reasonable change of design parameters ".

So---you are going to see that in the JF17 B---the dual seater---and I would not be surprised---if in the future---you may see it in the future BLK of the JF17.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Issue is simple

• 1 Platform was being inducted under a grant
  
• Other platform JF17 thunder was part of a local project active for last 11-15 years (Paid for)

My opinion on the matter is that JF17 Thunder came to birth the main goal for the project was as follow

a) Locally manufactured plane that will fuel the airforce's demands for 20-25 years
b) An aircraft that we can induct in number and retire older generation aircrafts
c) Sale of the craft was a interesting component but it was lower priority vs first Arming the Pakistan Airforce
d) Was the vision of Block by Block upgrade of the craft (i.e Block 1, Block 2, Block 3)


So when we view the today's situation JF17 thunder has already achieved its success parameters.


Now question with respect to the F-16 , I think the reason why our Airforce liked the idea of inducting the Block C/D was in order to benefit from Available FMS program , which allowed allies to induct modest number of military units as part of the coalition cooperation understanding in war against Terror.

Why should Pakistan Use F-16 C/D vs JF-17 thunder well simple , the Western frontier (Afghan Province) is merely a uncontrolled areas and since the coalition force and allies had run operations in that area it was only fair that the tools provided by the coalition force were used in this operation

Why would we put mileage on JF-17 , for this purpose , if there is a program available to help recover the Mileage and wear and tear on our fleet (F-16 C/D) it made sense to benefit from the program like most air-forces of the word benefit from such programs.


1- Pakistani Airforce fleet is taking in mileage on its planes which do operations in Border areas
so a meaningful benefit from the prorgam FMS was to recover the loss of mileage on planes and wear and tear
not forgetting the ammo / bombs we use are all going to waste

2- FMS program obviously will not help recover the mileage and wear and tear on JF17 thunders so it is not ideal for that purpose and also the first few squadrons are mainly for (Air Combat Training School for Pakistan)


Summary:

If Pakistan Airforce , requested F16 C/D it was only because of the reason we were part of a coalition program to help fight terrorism

We were part of international coalition against Terrorism and such it demanded a plane provided by the FMS program for a common enemy and I think we had a Understanding

We requested brand new planes becasue as you know our fleet is old just had a MLU , so made sense to induct new F16 C/D planes so that they could absorbe the stress of rigorous missions (on Western Frontier) and it would not effect our existing fleet which is for National defense


Example:
When students go to University or college they get Scolarship ?
Why do students chase after scolarship , when they can pay for it themselves , simple
They chase Scolarship , as it is a "GRANT" . It is an acknowledgement of the effort by the student


Same with PAK airforce , if it had a grant available why would we not induct such a plane if we were part of a coalition against Terrorism

Pakistan Military / Airforce / Navy all went in conducted operations with intent of disrupting the Terror infrastructure - example "Operation Zard-e - Azab" and many other operations , example of the solid operations run by Pakistan Military

 

[Quwa]

@Bratva I'd do one one better and actually just ask TUBITAK SAGE to help us develop a Ra'ad II - i.e. lighter, compact, and more extensibiliy (especially in terms of guided sub-munitions warheads). Looking at the SOM, they seem to have the baseline expertise to develop a lightweight airframe, at least.

Interesting note - in 2008/2009 we did sign an MoU with Turkey to jointly develop and produce sub-systems that very clearly were meant for a new cruise missile. I imagine 'the Zardari' scuttled it, but we ought to revive it:

Pakistan agrees to further defence co-operation with Turkey

Lale Sariibrahimoglu JDW Correspondent - Ankara

Pakistan and Turkey have agreed to co-operate in research and development (R&D) on a broad range of defence projects, including the joint production of cluster bombs.

Talks on the progress of co-operation are due to be held in April, when a Pakistani military delegation is scheduled to visit Ankara. The meeting is also intended to prepare the agenda for annual bilateral military talks in Islamabad in November.

The first meeting, which took place in Ankara between 18 and 21 October 2007, identified the areas of potential co-operation in defence, research, technology and production.

According to details obtained by Jane's , the main development and production projects the two countries will concentrate on are:

- NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical) detection, protection and decontamination equipment produced in Turkey;

- 81 mm mortar ammunition;

- production of cluster bombs with 300 to 400 bomblets each for different missions;

- production of precision-guided munitions;

- stealth technology to lower the radar cross-section of aircraft;

- detection systems for use against improvised explosive devices;

- precision-guided bomblets for conventional munitions;

- turbojet motors;

- co-operation in the sale and production of 122 mm short- and long-range multiple rocket launcher ammunition (Turkey's Roketsan and Machines and Chemical Industries Board are proposing sales and joint production with Pakistan);

- co-operation on AB103-104 MK82 fuses to train Turkish military personnel (as Pakistan sold the ammunition to Turkey in 2006);

- co-operation on producing automated combat manoeuvring instrument systems; and

- co-operation on early warning suites - including jammers for communication and radar sensors - for CN-235 aircraft

 

[Dazzler]

About SOM missile, Pakistani engineers are helping them make the missile. My close friend, a PH.D, is there for five years and is representing a very prestigious company and providing valuable input. This happened when turkey showed interest in Pakistani cruise missile tech few years ago.