What's new

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

People keep quoting J-10s Max loadout somehow as if it's anything special. But when compared to any of the euro canards, which would be it's contemporary fighters, it shows how subpar it really is in the strike role.
Aside from some hard points useful for only carry small gravity/dumb bombs, what advantage does it actually offer over the Thunder when loaded out for strike missions. Let's not forget you can have two Thunders for the price of one J-10
 
.
People keep quoting J-10s Max loadout somehow as if it's anything special. But when compared to any of the euro canards, which would be it's contemporary fighters, it shows how subpar it really is in the strike role.
Aside from some hard points useful for only carry small gravity/dumb bombs, what advantage does it actually offer over the Thunder when loaded out for strike missions. Let's not forget you can have two Thunders for the price of one J-10

You have a good point but two JF17s still cant give you the AESA performance of one J10c or the EW performance of one J10c. We need modern medium weight fighters that can stay longer in the air in war, if not required for deep strike. We only have 18 modern F16s and we cannot go to war with this limited number. We need numbers in the same category and the only viable option is J10c.
 
.
So J-10 will cost twice as much and offer just a marginal improvement over the Thunder? Sounds like complete misappropriation of funds.
PAF has never made any efforts to get a deep strike fighter in it's history. Everyone knows it will primarily be fighting IAF in its own airspace and strikes against India will be limited to airbases and targets near the border and in support of ground troops. "Deep strike" inside India is a fantasy and a fools errand given their ADGE.
Hitting targets a few hundred km inside India has always been possible even with A-5s and Mirages and now with extended ranged weapons already in service and better ones in the horizon the range is not a big deal.
Infact I would argue that spend those billions in making better munitions for the Thunder instead of buying a new platform with the same weapons kit that you already have access to.
I completely disagree with that and would like to see backed up by a testimony of a PAF officer. Gwalior is very much a target in the offensive list for an air campaign. The M2K was pursued for this purpose as well.

As foe incremental , please quantify what you keep asking me to? What is basis for your statements?
 
.
This is incorrect.
If the jf17 can have a ASEA radar fitter why not the PL15. Sadly people make up stuff on the net
No I just wanted to get to the bottom of what @Blacklight was saying. I know that post 27th Feb 100 PL15 Missiles were delivered to PAF from PLAAF stock. There would not have been any sense in getting the missiles if they could npt have been mated to the JFT. I have to date not been able to get a satisfactory answer as to why the J10 is needed at the time when we are looking to move generations. We have never gotten an air asset and not used it for a couple of decades at least so it seems unlikely the J10 could have been a stop gap arrangement.
The only 2/3 points which I can agree with regarding the J10 acquisition are.
A. The Chinese ability to manufacture them fairly quickly as against the 12 fighter projection for JFT to compensate for fleet obsolescence. The loan from China would also allow PAF an easier and more convenient way to replace fighters rather than from its own sovereign funds.
B. Interoperability of a common platform can make war time'atrition easier to replace.
C. Buying J10 gives PAF some protection against the US in case it sanctions us or by other means stops us using the F16s against the Indians.
However the cost of 60 million a pop makes it an expensive venture none the less.
A
 
.
No I just wanted to get to the bottom of what @Blacklight was saying. I know that post 27th Feb 100 PL15 Missiles were delivered to PAF from PLAAF stock. There would not have been any sense in getting the missiles if they could npt have been mated to the JFT. I have to date not been able to get a satisfactory answer as to why the J10 is needed at the time when we are looking to move generations. We have never gotten an air asset and not used it for a couple of decades at least so it seems unlikely the J10 could have been a stop gap arrangement.
The only 2/3 points which I can agree with regarding the J10 acquisition are.
A. The Chinese ability to manufacture them fairly quickly as against the 12 fighter projection for JFT to compensate for fleet obsolescence. The loan from China would also allow PAF an easier and more convenient way to replace fighters rather than from its own sovereign funds.
B. Interoperability of a common platform can make war time'atrition easier to replace.
C. Buying J10 gives PAF some protection against the US in case it sanctions us or by other means stops us using the F16s against the Indians.
However the cost of 60 million a pop makes it an expensive venture none the less.
A
Unless the J-10 is coming on lease and will be returned?
 
. .
No I just wanted to get to the bottom of what @Blacklight was saying. I know that post 27th Feb 100 PL15 Missiles were delivered to PAF from PLAAF stock. There would not have been any sense in getting the missiles if they could npt have been mated to the JFT. I have to date not been able to get a satisfactory answer as to why the J10 is needed at the time when we are looking to move generations. We have never gotten an air asset and not used it for a couple of decades at least so it seems unlikely the J10 could have been a stop gap arrangement.
The only 2/3 points which I can agree with regarding the J10 acquisition are.
A. The Chinese ability to manufacture them fairly quickly as against the 12 fighter projection for JFT to compensate for fleet obsolescence. The loan from China would also allow PAF an easier and more convenient way to replace fighters rather than from its own sovereign funds.
B. Interoperability of a common platform can make war time'atrition easier to replace.
C. Buying J10 gives PAF some protection against the US in case it sanctions us or by other means stops us using the F16s against the Indians.
However the cost of 60 million a pop makes it an expensive venture none the less.
A
Now that you have gotten to the bottom of it, can we expect a donation from you for at least half a squadron of Blk3's ? :partay:
 
.
I completely disagree with that and would like to see backed up by a testimony of a PAF officer. Gwalior is very much a target in the offensive list for an air campaign. The M2K was pursued for this purpose as well.

As foe incremental , please quantify what you keep asking me to? What is basis for your statements?
Testimony of a PAF officer?? Sure thing ... Actions speak loud enough for me to come to that conclusion. Mirage 2000 was pursued in the early 90s and due to the embargo on F-16s, nothing to do with deep strike requirement. If PAF was so hardpressed to fulfill that role, we would have seen movement on it already in the last three decades since then.

PS did a PAF officer tell you about Gwalior as a target for an air campaign by the PAF? Or something you would like PAF to have the capability to target effectively?
 
.
Testimony of a PAF officer?? Sure thing ... Actions speak loud enough for me to come to that conclusion. Mirage 2000 was pursued in the early 90s and due to the embargo on F-16s, nothing to do with deep strike requirement. If PAF was so hardpressed to fulfill that role, we would have seen movement on it already in the last three decades since then.

PS did a PAF officer tell you about Gwalior as a target for an air campaign by the PAF? Or something you would like PAF to have the capability to target effectively?
Not necessarily - back when it was available(2005) and so what the Gripen & F-16 the PAF still wanted the M2K as a strike platform.

As for Gwalior, yes it was a PAF officer(now AVM) with whom I discussed deep strike and who outlined PAF plans to get to the deeper targets via a combo of AAR and standoffs with some effectiveness. To improve which he talked about replacing the Mirages with a better strike platform capable of 900km combat radius.
 
. . . .
Unless the J-10 is coming on lease and will be returned?
China at this point is not in the mood for a hand me down fighter. We are at a very difficult juncture in our lives with pressures being mounted on china from all quarters. They will be OK with a sale but lease they might not be Ok with.
A
Now that you have gotten to the bottom of it, can we expect a donation from you for at least half a squadron of Blk3's ? :partay:
Bhai I live in UK and get taxed at 40%. Yahan ghar ki gari chalana mushkil hai aur aap 1/2 squadron kay liye donation maang rahe ho. Kuch to khayal karo. 😁😅. But what I want to know is why you think J10 is coming?
A
 
Last edited:
.
I completely disagree with that and would like to see backed up by a testimony of a PAF officer. Gwalior is very much a target in the offensive list for an air campaign. The M2K was pursued for this purpose as well.

As foe incremental , please quantify what you keep asking me to? What is basis for your statements?
The PAF's been trying since at least the 1970s. We almost got the 110 A-7 Corsair IIs from the U.S., but the latter pulled it due to our nuclear program (because they were worried, perhaps rightly, that we'd use it for the nuclear attack role). In the 1980s, the PAF was well aware of the F-16C/D and, at some level, imagined acquiring 50 or so (atop of the 110 F-16A/Bs) for the strike and maritime roles.

Finally, the ASR of AZM clearly says, 'twin-engine'. However, everyone under the sun knows that the PAF fulfilling its vision of 100+ strike-capable and maritime aircraft would greatly alter the security environment in South Asia. Heck, I'd say beyond South Asia and into the Gulf, Central Asia, and Northeast Africa (long-range fighter plus AAR plus a Ra'ad-II-type ALCM). Pakistan may be the bumbling fool on world affairs, but the world knows that individual Pakistanis are truly capable. However unlikely, Pakistan could change from being the Ralph Wiggum of world affairs to the Bart Simpson. You don't want to risk that... The line between "servant of American/Chinese interests" and "Mercenary State" is very thin, but the latter is a very different and signficantly more vicious beast.
 
.
Bhai I live in UK and get taxed at 40%. Yahan ghar ki gari chalana mushkil hai aur aap 1/2 squadron kay liye donation maang rahe ho. Kuch to khayal karo. 😁😅. But what I want to know is 2hy you think J10 is coming?
A
There is more to it, than just a "quantitative gap" being filled. There is a serious qualitative leap as well.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom