would never come
Old design other than payload offer no upgrade over JF-17 in fact it will require escort armed with BVR during the whole operations
How many .... ???
also tanker would be required to fly far distance from shores of Pakistan prior to the strike package, this mean
- We either have to provide constant air cover to tanker which further mean engagement of additional aerial assets for the operations than numbers would normally required
- Or would have to make Aerial refuelers fly without air escort this will expose our tankers to Indian ship based SAMs or Carrier Based Fighter Jets.
This mean development of a completely New Fighter Jet Design which will take at least a decade to initiate manufacturing then additional years to attain full Operational Status
Tankers just need to fuel aircrafts once they are up as thats time where 30% fuel goes...they dont need to go deep
Jh17 is old but it will be dedicated aircaft not a multirole..
IMO best option is acquire j31/j35 in next 3-5 years
Second best (train has gone) was to make jf17 bigger like gripen NG but engine was the issue(lack of 100-110kn engine). With rd93 ma i would expected them to get a taller landing gear to allow larger payload under the belly but apprently that didnt happen
J10 can do as well and is multirole fighter
Lastly none of IAF carriers are as capable as USA group carriers
Neither do they have the escort strong enough to defend against PAF solo 1 antiship jf17s (if you launch a dozen) nor do they have the launch capacity(lack of CATBOR) or payload capacity to remain beyond 500km
We can also invest on antiship version of babur that can hit at 800km range..sure an expensive but a necessary deterance
My assessment is that any IN carrier group has to come within 500km for any meaning full impact and thunders can carry a strike role with 2c802 within 800km using a standoff antiship weapons(200-300km range)
Or single antiship cruise missle(like raad at 450km)
Obviously not ideal but better then what mirages use to offer