JF 17 is The Wrong Omnirole Aircraft For PAKISTAN

[syedali73]

I beg to differ this was smart move as European concept of aerial combat is quite different with data link support and communication with other planes ,SAMs they are going more towards Ecentric Networks ,Where as Chinese started to work in this field with better EW suites now but overall capabilities are much inferior .My arguments gets strength by facts like guarding of F-16 by Americans even in Pak for sensitive tech

By working with Chinese does not mean PAF has changed her approach or doctrine that is based on Western style of warfare. While Chinese may not physically see what is in Blk-52, Pakistani pilots are their eyes and ears and they continuously get useful feedback on improving their systems, particularly those that are made jointly and for PAF. Secondly, it is always good to let the world recognize your technology and capabilities as inferior for war is all about surprises.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Hi,

I am a firm believer that the purpose of a major weapons system is not to win you the war ( even though that is the purpose ) but the purpose is to bring your opponent to the peace table. Because then it becomes futile to be in a stalemate and it is not worth it to continue the fight.

That is where Pakistan was between 2003 and 2005. The sanctions were off---funds were available---aircraft were available---but the paf had no urgency. It was an easy choice between the F 16 and the F 18's. They should have picked either aircraft, signed the dotted line and released the funds in a timely manner.

But no---there was drama----a year on the grippen 2 years on the rafale---a total wastage of time---pissed off the French---pissed off the swedes. After wasting all that time---they decide in 2005 or 2006 to order F 16's. The earthquake hits in 2005---money is wasted---now instead of 72---they can only afford 18. Looking at Pakistan financial condition----india changes its mind on the peace deal. The rest is down hill.

The Jf 17 does not do anything for Pakistan to bring the temperature down---it does not project power.

Years ago---on this forum I wrote about the power of BVR battle----how it is as great an equalizer of things as was the inception of AK47 into the battle field. There were not too many believers over here. A smaller aircraft with a better BVR missile will turn the tables on its larger opponent---but for show---psychological warfare size matters.

JF-17 is a budget version of JSF/ F-35 for Pakistan. meant to do all but not as a specialist can do

 

[Zarvan]

JF-17 is a budget version of JSF/ F-35 for Pakistan. meant to do all but not as a specialist can do

Sir you are kidding right. Budgeted version of F-35

 

[syedali73]

Sir you are kidding right. Budgeted version of F-35

Learn English comprehension... meant to do all but not as a specialist can do.

 

[araz]

that might be an off-topic discussion .... therefore would not go into the detail .... but would like to raise one or two points .....

A ballistic or cruise missiles with 500 KG conventional warhead is equivalent to a single 1000 lbs dumb bomb so as their destruction power.... for a large area of 9000 x 900 feet runway & adjacent facility 170 M-9 type (let say Shaheen-I) missile with unitary warhead are required ... now what is the cost of Shaheen missiles .... ?? plz compare it with the lethality radius of that type of missile with unitary warhead ... what should be the cost effective option ...??

now consider another scenario ...
View attachment 247240

these are the roughly sketch area of Indian IBG movements to create a desire thrust into Pakistani territory ..... would we just start firing our missiles at these IBGs or would 'first' like to use aircraft to halt or slowdown their movement ...

so the simple point is Missiles are suitable for deep targets but targets at near borders will be struck with aircraft ....

Thank you for a very informative and relevant post. This is exactly what I have been saying. Now the question is whether we need to have heavies for this or can we rely on the JFT/ M3/M5 and the 16s to do this. I suspect the M3/M5 currently hold this responsibility. The 16s bl.52 could also do it. However for deep strike Iam glad to see you agreeing that these planes are not suitable and were never meant to do that job. For deep strike we will require the missiles.
Araz

 

[RazorMC]

Although I find that the Thunder offers a very suitable platform for PAF, I also believe that we have been in love with multiroles for far too long.

Budget constraints prevent procuring dedicated attack aircraft, but we are in desperate need of air-superiority fighters.

PS: F-16 is a lighweight AC not medium (like the F-18).

 

[Zarvan]

Thank you for a very informative and relevant post. This is exactly what I have been saying. Now the question is whether we need to have heavies for this or can we rely on the JFT/ M3/M5 and the 16s to do this. I suspect the M3/M5 currently hold this responsibility. The 16s bl.52 could also do it. However for deep strike Iam glad to see you agreeing that these planes are not suitable and were never meant to do that job. For deep strike we will require the missiles.
Araz

We can't only depend on the missiles we need jets for Strike role but first we need another good jet for defending our Air Space and some strike roles

 

[abdulbarijan]

Darn @MastanKhan You've done it now -- On a lighter note its funny how we call out Mastan Bhai when he says something like "JFT is a wrong aircraft for Pakistan" -- while not many of us were as enthusiastic to do the same, when he quoted an article which said something along the lines of "If an F-16 can get a kill on F-35 in WVR, so can a JFT" --

However, for some of our angry members, atleast read his posts with a cool head-- they are not a jab or a diss at the JFT -- they are more inclined towards pointing out the FACT that JF-17 as great as it is and as much as it provides us as indicated in many posts from @Viper0011. to @araz -- It does not however "project power" -- In other words its more of a jab/criticism on our defensive doctrine then on the jet itself ..

I believe we still make our conventional strategies like PAF's defensive doctrine based on our nuclear doctrine of first use and the assumptions that the Indian conventional forces won't cross a certain line ... Now that might be effective with sane minds in the top hierarchy of your opponent -- but every once in a while there are a few individuals who determine the lines by crossing them .. Hence to deter those type of maniacs we need to possess equipment through which we can project power and deter them ...

With regards to the JF-17, we've only seen a little of what its true capable of ... and in its current form it can go toe to toe with the Migs and Mirages of the IAF ... with force multipliers on its side it can possibly do alot of damage against the MKI's as well -- but with the slated upgrades of block III with HMS and 5th gen WVR with HOBS, along with AESA,an internal IRST and upgrades on the SD-10 we are looking at somewhat of a beast ... either we go to the west or Chinese or possibly both remains a decision that PAF will have to take soon enough ...

Bottom line, to really deter your opponent one needs to have the means to project the statement of "mess with us and we'll F*ck you up" as crude as it maybe--- and with IAF struggling with acquisitions its time where we started looking at options that let us achieve that psychological effect over our opponents ...

What it will be ultimately -- more second hand F-16's with MLU's -- possibly a Russian option --- or one of the Chinese high end options -- or bombers like JH-7B -- we will have to wait & see -- and that too is dependent on if PAF thinks that its doctrine needs a make over or not --- or how the new fighters would fit in the current one if the are indeed pursued -- One thing is for sure with the CPEC and the EEZ the need an aerial arm for the navy is there .... and a specialized version of JH-7B along with JFT for support will be the ideal fit ...

 

[Foxtrot-Bravo]

I would rather disagree, size doesn't matter, skills and maneuverability does.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Learn English comprehension... meant to do all but not as a specialist can do.

thanks for saving my time and understanding

@Zarvan
let me explain for your benefit
just like F-35 is meant to replace A-10, F/A 18, F-16 of army, navy, air force and marines of the US military.

we are touting our JF-17 to replace dedicated interceptor F7 PG, dedicated strike fighter Mirages and to compliment yours truly F-16s that keep IAF at bay.

still with me?

 

[araz]

Hi,

As usual---I have stuck my head up to my neck in the hornets nest----is that anything new---..

Now---as a complimentary and associate aircraft----it is a great asset---and in numbers of around 300---350 it will provide massive support and compliment to the main strike force.


There are no ifs and buts about it that Pakistan needs the heavies----not too many of them----but at least 2 sqdrn's for its naval strike missions and something for air superiority..

Mastan Khan.
There is no argument to the paragraphs that I have highlighted. We are already in full agreement and the need for a couple of squadrons of twin engined planes is agreed universally across the board. The question is from where and how to create a financially viable model which makes the acquisition feasible. We need some commonality between engines and armaments to do this. This is why the SU35 does not make sense. The US is out and I need not elaborate the reasons for this. The Chinese have the j11/16 which is a viable option but no one seems to come out and say whether the Chinese will actually sell them to us. The engine will be different so will remain a problem. The J31 fits the bill perfectly.
PAF is currently busy with the JFT. They will remain so till 2020 inducting 200 odd JFT. What will happen to J31 in that time. If we start negotiations with the Chinese for J11/16 which could easily take a year to 18 months with evaluation recommendations and implementation of changes.we are into the beginning of 2017. It will take 2 yrs to deluver the fidst plane and another couple of years for PAF to write the "play book" (you used the term first..!). We are into 2021. With an induction date of around 2020. J31 fits all the bills perfectly. Even if delayed by a year or 2 we do have time and more importantly finances are a bitch. So in short the lead in time for a twin is similar to the time of induction of J31. PAF is in cloze contact with our Chinese friends. There will surely be collaboration beyond JFT. So why not with j31?
Araz

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Darn @MastanKhan You've done it now -- On a lighter note its funny how we call out Mastan Bhai when he says something like "JFT is a wrong aircraft for Pakistan" -- while not many of us were as enthusiastic to criticize him when he quoted an article which said something along the lines of "If an F-16 can get a kill on F-35 in WVR, so can a JFT" --..

Babu Saab in that thread and master quote, he was just a messenger. that wisdom came out from Pakistani fanboy

 

[ziaulislam]

its money man, all about money..PAF has budget of less han a billion dollars, it cannot do anything in that budget..

what i would have liked was to reduce the size of pak army and funnel some funds into PAF, PN..

but to think you can get more funds i dont think so, there is too much pressure on domestic and international levle..we are doing even poorly than african countries when it comes to health and education..

if you need a long term deterant you have the nukes, if you need a small term deterant you have to rely on what you have than whats perfect/ what you should have

this where i bring up the LCA, in 80s and 90s india didnt thought it could afford a medium fighter, but time changes now it can, so IAF doesnt want LCA ..LCA is similar short legged may be more than thunder while india being a huge huge country..
yet we are seeing after MRCA falling , due to money and india is going back to LCA even though their airforce hates the LCA

 

[Zarvan]

thanks for saving my time and understanding

@Zarvan
let me explain for your benefit
just like F-35 is meant to replace A-10, F/A 18, F-16 of army, navy, air force and marines of the US military.

we are touting our JF-17 to replace dedicated interceptor FC PG, dedicated strike fighter Mirages and to compliment yours truly F-16s that keep IAF at bay.

still with me?

Yes Sir F-35 will eventually replace F-16 but it would take at least 30 more years. Pakistan on the other hand is not going to get 5th Generation Fighter for at least next 10 years. Sir we need a Fighter like SU-35 or J-11 D to do two roles for us countering intruders and than attacking targets inside enemy territory. F-16 and JF-17 have their limitations. @MastanKhan is 100% right on this issue, in fact he also suggests JH-7 B but for me it can be 4th Jet if some how budget massively increaes within a year, which is not gonna happen so we need to get one more and a bigger beast.

 

[araz]

easily available? ?? you can't print them like chocolates. ..

As compared to other aircrafts. We are manufacturing most of it. So contextually correct. Now if you are through with your nitpicking then go and sit in a corner quietly. If you have anything positive to contribute please join the debate.
Araz