JF-17 Block-3 -- Updates, News & Discussion

[Big_bud]

Good discussion.

You are right some people don't get it that JF-17 still uses Martin Baker Ejection Seats. The British MoD still can sanction Pakistan's JF-17. This was not my point. My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

I wanted to see how people think of the West. Pakistan received more than $35 billion from the U.S. since 9/11. Reference https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

People don't understand sanction when they talk about EU and US sanctions. CAATSA has different purpose not just sanction willy-nilly. Turkey was sanctioned for buying arms from Russia because Turkey is a NATO member. India will be sanctioned for buying S-400 from Russia.

Germany, Italy, France and UK supply arms to all Southeast Asian countries. Pakistan is a democratic country. Pakistan Army is not going to walk into Prime Minister's office and take power. Pakistan is in a complex geopolitical tug of war. Its highly unlikely that Pakistan will be sanctioned for buy Mi-35 helicopter and RD-93MA engine for Russia.

Not to mention half of this payment was for services rendered by Pakistan to NATO forces. It was a payment against services received, not a favour. 2ndly, as already pointed out. The burden to our economy for being a US ally was 120 Billion $, the human loss is not calculatable.

No, there can be no "sanctions" on JF17. At most what they can do is stop supplying a life saving equipment for?? Unknown pettiness?? There are alternatives to that as well. West is an unreliable partner, Pakistan has moved ahead from transactional behaviour of west. You get your soldiers and people killed for us, we will give you F16s, time for that is long gone. PS Pakistan is not in a geopolitical war, its the other way around. Some countries act as alliance of goons who think they have the right to push others around.

Also, JF is designed to be marketed at developing countries who cannot afford western products. If it gets a western engine, its market and demand would greatly reduce because then it can be easily sanctioned. Even post sales, the buyer can have huge problems to obtain spares. This is the exact problem with west, they decide your worth. They decide what sort of defence you can have or not have? Despite having directly or politically invaded dozens of countries, west has a habit of blaming others as having a problem. Maybe they don't want to sell you good stuff because later they might want to invade you? Lol... that's a dilemma!

 

[Thorough Pro]

There are one-time purchases and then there are repeat purchases.
Ejection seat you buy once and fit it and then you don't need any spares. The engine needs regular maintenance and spare parts, that is what hurts you when sanctions hit.

Good discussion.

You are right some people don't get it that JF-17 still uses Martin Baker Ejection Seats. The British MoD still can sanction Pakistan's JF-17. This was not my point. My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

I wanted to see how people think of the West. Pakistan received more than $35 billion from the U.S. since 9/11. Reference https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

People don't understand sanction when they talk about EU and US sanctions. CAATSA has different purpose not just sanction willy-nilly. Turkey was sanctioned for buying arms from Russia because Turkey is a NATO member. India will be sanctioned for buying S-400 from Russia.

Germany, Italy, France and UK supply arms to all Southeast Asian countries. Pakistan is a democratic country. Pakistan Army is not going to walk into Prime Minister's office and take power. Pakistan is in a complex geopolitical tug of war. Its highly unlikely that Pakistan will be sanctioned for buy Mi-35 helicopter and RD-93MA engine for Russia.

There are one-time purchases and then there are repeat purchases.
Ejection seat you buy once and fit it and then you don't need any spares. The engine needs regular maintenance and spare parts, that is what hurts you when sanctions hit.

If we didn't have what you called Russian baggage, JF-17 would still be a dream or piggybacking some truck, like Tejas.

 

[MastanKhan]

Good discussion.
I wanted to see how people think of the West. Pakistan received more than $35 billion from the U.S. since 9/11. Reference https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

Hi,

That is a misconcept in the west---. The pakistani leaders did not know how to negotiate with the americans.

The only thing pakistanis are clever is at stealing land for the weak and corruption at all levels.

Pakistan advanced the US over a billion dollars each year for the services that it provided for the "AMERICAN war on terror".

Pakistan did not actually charge enough---. Pakistani politicians don't say nothing because they get their kids green cards and US univ education and then an opportunity to retire in the US---. Same goes for the generals as well.

I will tell you one thing---the fckuk ups of the US military were royal---these superstar generals had jello in their legs---indecision and cowardice was the name of the game. All of them looking for better opportunities in the private sector after the fact---.

 

[Marker]

My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

JF-17 which PAF is using is customised for PAF. Other foreign customers have option to have either Chinese or Russian engine. Similarly MB or Chinese ejection seat are left to customer's choice.

Upgraded Chinese engine was tested recently on JF-17 Blk 3 clearly reveals that China is pitching this engine to the foreign customers.

IMO availability of choices for possible customers to select critical parts while configuring JF-17 will definitely increase export potential. Some may want Russians instead of Chinese or UK brand or vice versa.

 

[Tamiyah]

So-called Latest image of Blk-3.. with PL-10E.

 

[Dazzler]

So-called Latest image of Blk-3.. with PL-10E.

Six months old.
Wingss..

JF-17 which PAF is using is customised for PAF. Other foreign customers have option to have either Chinese or Russian engine. Similarly MB or Chinese ejection seat are left to customer's choice.

Upgraded Chinese engine was tested recently on JF-17 Blk 3 clearly reveals that China is pitching this engine to the foreign customers.

IMO availability of choices for possible customers to select critical parts while configuring JF-17 will definitely increase export potential. Some may want Russians instead of Chinese or UK brand or vice versa.

PAF is the co-developer of FC-1/ JF-17. Not just a user.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

An engine is like the heart & soul of the aircraft---this engine has not failed the PAF to date.

The " Russian Baggage " has made this aircraft what it is today. The RD93 has an excellent service record and reliability for the PAF.

It is sanctions free---and there are no kill switches on the engine management control systems.

Are there better engines out there in the market---. Yes there are---.

But are they worth the trouble & the baggage they bring along with it---I do not think so.

 

[Marker]

PAF is the co-developer of FC-1/ JF-17. Not just a user.

I never denied or omitted the fact that PAC is a co-developer of FC-1/JF-17.

However, JF-17 which PAF inducting is being customised to satisfy PAF needs (mission requirements).

 

[Valiant]

Yup thats me. Unfortunately a lot of members changed their names so I don't remember Who is who.

Great to see you, mate. I'm from the 2005-2006 era as well. Couldn't use my previous ID hence this new one

 

[ziaulislam]

Good discussion.

You are right some people don't get it that JF-17 still uses Martin Baker Ejection Seats. The British MoD still can sanction Pakistan's JF-17. This was not my point. My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

I wanted to see how people think of the West. Pakistan received more than $35 billion from the U.S. since 9/11. Reference https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

People don't understand sanction when they talk about EU and US sanctions. CAATSA has different purpose not just sanction willy-nilly. Turkey was sanctioned for buying arms from Russia because Turkey is a NATO member. India will be sanctioned for buying S-400 from Russia.

Germany, Italy, France and UK supply arms to all Southeast Asian countries. Pakistan is a democratic country. Pakistan Army is not going to walk into Prime Minister's office and take power. Pakistan is in a complex geopolitical tug of war. Its highly unlikely that Pakistan will be sanctioned for buy Mi-35 helicopter and RD-93MA engine for Russia.

They can but there is already an alternative for MB seat
It was choosen because it is used fleet wide in Paf and mostly is not a sanctionable item but even if it is an alternative exists..so this is a stupid point

Good discussion.

You are right some people don't get it that JF-17 still uses Martin Baker Ejection Seats. The British MoD still can sanction Pakistan's JF-17. This was not my point. My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

I wanted to see how people think of the West. Pakistan received more than $35 billion from the U.S. since 9/11. Reference https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

People don't understand sanction when they talk about EU and US sanctions. CAATSA has different purpose not just sanction willy-nilly. Turkey was sanctioned for buying arms from Russia because Turkey is a NATO member. India will be sanctioned for buying S-400 from Russia.

Germany, Italy, France and UK supply arms to all Southeast Asian countries. Pakistan is a democratic country. Pakistan Army is not going to walk into Prime Minister's office and take power. Pakistan is in a complex geopolitical tug of war. Its highly unlikely that Pakistan will be sanctioned for buy Mi-35 helicopter and RD-93MA engine for Russia.

35b was approved but only about 18b released
This is not even enough to pay for the infrastruture damage from transits..pakistan was royally screwee because alot of money went into private pockets of judges generals and politicans

 

[Keysersoze]

Great to see you, mate. I'm from the 2005-2006 era as well. Couldn't use my previous ID hence this new one

What was your previous ID?

 

[Valiant]

What was your previous ID?

Janbaaz, I think. You may not remember me

 

[messiach]

Which russian 'baggage'?

Good discussion.

You are right some people don't get it that JF-17 still uses Martin Baker Ejection Seats. The British MoD still can sanction Pakistan's JF-17. This was not my point. My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Good discussion.

You are right some people don't get it that JF-17 still uses Martin Baker Ejection Seats. The British MoD still can sanction Pakistan's JF-17. This was not my point. My point was that JF-17 could have a huge export potential if Pakistan removes Russian baggage from JF-17.

I wanted to see how people think of the West. Pakistan received more than $35 billion from the U.S. since 9/11. Reference https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41856.pdf

People don't understand sanction when they talk about EU and US sanctions. CAATSA has different purpose not just sanction willy-nilly. Turkey was sanctioned for buying arms from Russia because Turkey is a NATO member. India will be sanctioned for buying S-400 from Russia.

Germany, Italy, France and UK supply arms to all Southeast Asian countries. Pakistan is a democratic country. Pakistan Army is not going to walk into Prime Minister's office and take power. Pakistan is in a complex geopolitical tug of war. Its highly unlikely that Pakistan will be sanctioned for buy Mi-35 helicopter and RD-93MA engine for Russia.

The British cannot sanction JF-17. It has the option for Chinese ejection seats on the customers request as with Burmese JF-17. This is like the 100th time I’m saying this on the forum, people don’t bother to check. They use MB ejection seats on Pakistani models because Pakistan wanted to use them, PAF has a good history with MB.

Whats wrong with Russian “baggage”? Most countries do not care about the Russian engine, besides, the Chinese one is ready in case some country wants that. Just because it’s western doesn’t mean it’s better.

 

[Dazzler]

Which russian 'baggage'?

Rd-93