JF 17 is The Wrong Omnirole Aircraft For PAKISTAN

[Viper0011.]

Hi,

I think the posters are taking a few liberties on their own on my account----. The aircraft can be any heavy---any version of the J---be it the J11, or the 16 or the JH7B---which is based more on the TORNADO than the SU25.

The only reason the JH7b is being mentioned again and again is its COST---weight carrying capacity---its new aesa radar and its grower type capabilities.

I remember during the 1965 war---there was a big fear about the anti aircraft batteries----that if approached at a certain angle----it looked impossible to beat the flack during the strike missions----but then some in the planning came up with the formulae of how the strikes would be carried out and how the aircraft will approach the area of flack----.

You have to plough thru the enemy's electronic net and clear a path for your strikes to be successful. With the air to ground weapons reaching 100---200---300 miles----the enemy does not even need to come into our side to do the damage.

All our cities and bases are vulnerable to their strikes from far away---.

So---let me gie an example for a lay person to understand----because many are too clever.

Consider Pakistan to be a car a HONDA CITY for its comparable size----now consider India as a Cadillac Escalade-----.

You are the Defender of Pakistan---ie the Honda City and you have to destroy the Cadillac----. You are given a 5 Lbs hammer to destroy the Cadillac.

OTOH----the indian is given a 25 Lbs sledgehammer to destroy the Honda City----.

The only other handicap that you have is that you little baby is also riding with you in that Honda City----. Now justify your attack strategy----and share with me why would you do what you want to do and what will be the results.

Dear MK, I have a lot of respect for you, specially now that I've learned about your background a little bit more. However, instead of playing analogies, I am going to write a DIRECT conflict scenario for you, which should mimick a potentially real one. With all due respect, I don't think the example of hammer applies here. So let's refine it so it makes sense to a layman like myself.

Let's say a War starts (I hope it never does), and India has estimated 500 jets on her disposal for Pakistan, leaving a couple hundred on other borders and they don't have a war going on with China.

Now out of the 500 jets available, they will pick 150-200 SU-30's and over 100 Mirage 2000's and Mig-29's for attacks inside Pakistan's airspace. That's combined 250-300 dedicated multi-role and interceptor air-crafts, with about about 40 Tornados for strike / ground support.

They've left 50 SU-30's and about 80-100 Mig-29's, Mig 21's, etc for air-defense and point defense inside India, supplemented by Hi-Lo SAM tier (Russian + Israelis AAM).

Now, the PAF sends 5 JH-7A's from Mushaf to attack an Indian air-force base in Punjab. The Phalcon on the other side of the border tracks these jets the second they get airborne (and the Phalcon system is 100 Miles inside the Indian airspace). The Phalcon system not only tracks these guys the second they took off, it knows their payload, etc too.

As there is always going to be some SU-30's inside the Pakistan airspace, or right around the Pakistani airspace, (due to the sheer volume of the strike force to like 250-300 jets), the Phalcon directs two SU-30's to target this formation. The SU-30's can see these guys the second they took off too as their radar has 400 KM range.

Without even changing the formation or any fight they may already be in, both the SU-30's fire BVR AAM's (out of 6-8 BVR's for attack carried by each, 3 are fired by one, 2 by the other one).

What will happen? May be out of 5, 3 JH-7's will survive and will be lost. And then what? Another formation of SU-30's elsewhere fires on them from 60-100 KM's away, potentially assigned to air-defense role inside India. Now you might lose 1 more and now you are crossing India. Well, you have dedicated defense waiting on you, SAM tier and then the Migs and remainder of SU-30's or what you have.

Can you make it to the target? Let alone coming back.......remember, by now, out of the 5, you have 1or 2 JH-7's flying. And this is my guesstimate. If Each SU-30 fired two missiles towards each JH-7 jet, you could have all down before you even penetrated the Indian airspace, or, you barely got inside. Whatever escapes from the SU-30's, will have to now go through SAMS and then point defense Mig 21's..... by the way, in this entire process, due to the SU-30's radar and missile ranges being much greater, the JH-7A couldn't fire on any SU-30, but the lone one, did fire two missiles and took out one of the SU-30's. Then what? It'll hit the SAM tier and point defense and will be taken out like a sitting duck!!! No going back as I suggested. No matter how emotional and superman anyone gets.

Anyone with their sane head reading the above would know the chances of reaching the target, let alone coming back. Now, we used 5 JH-7's, so 5*$ 20 million = $ 100 million worth of 5 jets downed in ONE mission, without success.

But, $ 100 million gives you 200 Cruise missiles for the price tag (if each missile costs around half a million dollars). If you can build those cheaper, even more can be build. But let's take a 100 for now. A 100 missiles fired on an Indian airbase for example, will result in say 30-40% hit ratio, that is, if the Indians had a very capable ABM system. They do have Barak so I'll give them credit there. But, even with 30-40% meaning 30-40 missiles hitting GPS based targets, that's a LOT of damage. No loss of airplane, a failed mission and all.

If someone can question this scenario, which is actually written down to serious amounts of lower level details, then I have no further answers.

All I'll say to our fanboys and to our senior members is that, this isn't the 65 or the 71. The tactics used back then and the entire game was different. Hell, India isn't the India of 1990's, just looking at their air-defense coverage tells you they have multiple tiers from within India, reaching out to the borders from deep inside.

The PAF knows these realities too and that's why the H2, H4, Stealthy Raad were developed. I don't like to make statements that I don't truly know or have 100% assurances that X was true; but based on what I am seeing is that the PAF wants multi-role. The JH-7A or B or C, will not be inducted in the PAF. It brings more risk, maintenance, less capability in THIS theater (current Indo-Pak, not 65, not 71).

The J-xx or SU-35 or even FC-20 would be more beneficial than a JH-7A, supplemented by more -16's too.

 

[al_asad_al_mulk]

They all are.

Then why all the pictures on net carrying dummy blue missiles?

 

[Viper0011.]

Most certainly you have only studied Gulf wars, imagine a war between two nuclear nations, deep strike missiles may be used but most probably will not be used indiscriminately as you have suggested unless rogues are handling the show. Even wars are fought with cool heads, mostly hot heads are not at the helm of affairs.

Since you asked me to pay attention to topic, my question is to you what is the topicJF17 vs another plane or use of missiles? Block 52 can tackle SU30 and Rafale by using larger number of planes and flying more sorties otherwise it appears that both planes have some advantage over F16. Su 30 has one disadvantage i.e. turnaround time is more than f16 but is a superior plane otherwise and Rafale has a short history but specs are superior. Now how men handle and what tactics are used it is a different story.

Where I said the days of missiles are over. Before we jump to missiles we need an air superiority plane. Planes can come back, missiles cannot be reused. Both have their utility.

Look man, to be frank here, you aren't making any sense. I don't mean to be rude or disrespectful. But unfortunately, you are not making sense.

I've actually video taped the Gulf war to study tactics. I can go back to WWII and tell you how the Battle of Normandy was won. I can also tell you, some of you guys on here from the PAF, have great talent and some of you are from the 65's and the 71. But its not 65 and 71, the theater itself has changed, India and the IAF isn't that air-force that would fire and miss by 2 miles at times (some of the videos of battles I've seen, it happened, specially around Dhaka).

Its human nature to keep your memories fresh of stuff that you went through. When I hangout with old folks here, EVERY time I meet certain individuals (fathers and relatives of friends and family), some of these guys are veterans of the Vietnam and some from the Koren wars. So ALL you hear about, is those incidents.

If you flew a F-22 right in front of them, they'd associate it with an advanced version of the F-4 (as the times have changed to them but the level of advancement is hard to understand, specially coming from pre-computing era). They don't grasp the fact that you can shoot enemy jets from being 75 miles or more, away and never be seen.
Its because they never say the world. To work up the throttle, you have 4 knobs to go through in the Korean war, before the F-86 and F-4 joined.

So similarly, the need from the 65 and the 71 is gone, doesn't exist due to extremely sensor rich environments, much better train Indian air-force with much larger numbers. Both India and Pakistan will see each other coming. But due to PAF being a defensive force and to maintain control over its airspace, the PAF will be FULLY utilizing its assets to defend.

The way to win here, isn't to try to do the unknown, which is trying to do a direct attack inside their airbases which would make the PAF lose planes fast. The smart way is to use serious net-centric warfare in defending Pakistan and take down a serious chunk of invading jets. You've won the war. The second they realize they have lost 30-50% of their SU-30 fleet....the war is practically over. They would never want to loss some parity with China as it'll take like 5+ years to build up to today's force, while the Chinese will be advancing without stopping. Now add a serious punch of standoff munitions, you got the right mix.

Different times call for different war fighting techniques. The strategy behind Iraq war number 1 was drastically different than the war number 2, and it would be entirely different if we were to attack Iran, a complete plan of which did and still exists. Similarly, the PAF knows the real need and benefits of a "dedicated" strike platform. They'd rather get SU-35,J-xx or FC-20, then getting a JH-7 as it doesn't fit the war theater for Pakistan in today's time and doesn't meet strategical goals the PAF has.

For bombing role for striking deep inside enemy territory SU-34 or up coming JH-7 B will be best but they can be considered only after either we get J-10 B or SU-35 in large numbers than if we want we can go for these.

Absolutely, that's what I am saying. The first priority needs to be how to defend Pakistan. The second one should be build numbers of capable platforms to defend Pakistan and sustain inbound aircraft. The third is, if the first two are done, let's now see if a strike platform is needed or if the JFT block III can somehow fulfill the need. If there is a real need for the dedicated attack jet at that time, then the case is made. But you can't ignore the defensive requirements and go buy a strike platforms that itself requires defensive / escorts. That's putting more burden on an already low jet numbers air-force.

 

[Humble Analyst]

Look man, to be frank here, you aren't making any sense. I don't mean to be rude or disrespectful. But unfortunately, you are not making sense.

I've actually video taped the Gulf war to study tactics. I can go back to WWII and tell you how the Battle of Normandy was won. I can also tell you, some of you guys on here from the PAF, have great talent and some of you are from the 65's and the 71. But its not 65 and 71, the theater itself has changed, India and the IAF isn't that air-force that would fire and miss by 2 miles at times (some of the videos of battles I've seen, it happened, specially around Dhaka).

Its human nature to keep your memories fresh of stuff that you went through. When I hangout with old folks here, EVERY time I meet certain individuals (fathers and relatives of friends and family), some of these guys are veterans of the Vietnam and some from the Koren wars. So ALL you hear about, is those incidents.

If you flew a F-22 right in front of them, they'd associate it with an advanced version of the F-4 (as the times have changed to them but the level of advancement is hard to understand, specially coming from pre-computing era). They don't grasp the fact that you can shoot enemy jets from being 75 miles or more, away and never be seen.
Its because they never say the world. To work up the throttle, you have 4 knobs to go through in the Korean war, before the F-86 and F-4 joined.

So similarly, the need from the 65 and the 71 is gone, doesn't exist due to extremely sensor rich environments, much better train Indian air-force with much larger numbers. Both India and Pakistan will see each other coming. But due to PAF being a defensive force and to maintain control over its airspace, the PAF will be FULLY utilizing its assets to defend.

The way to win here, isn't to try to do the unknown, which is trying to do a direct attack inside their airbases which would make the PAF lose planes fast. The smart way is to use serious net-centric warfare in defending Pakistan and take down a serious chunk of invading jets. You've won the war. The second they realize they have lost 30-50% of their SU-30 fleet....the war is practically over. They would never want to loss some parity with China as it'll take like 5+ years to build up to today's force, while the Chinese will be advancing without stopping. Now add a serious punch of standoff munitions, you got the right mix.

Different times call for different war fighting techniques. The strategy behind Iraq war number 1 was drastically different than the war number 2, and it would be entirely different if we were to attack Iran, a complete plan of which did and still exists. Similarly, the PAF knows the real need and benefits of a "dedicated" strike platform. They'd rather get SU-35,J-xx or FC-20, then getting a JH-7 as it doesn't fit the war theater for Pakistan in today's time and doesn't meet strategical goals the PAF has.



Absolutely, that's what I am saying. The first priority needs to be how to defend Pakistan. The second one should be build numbers of capable platforms to defend Pakistan and sustain inbound aircraft. The third is, if the first two are done, let's now see if a strike platform is needed or if the JFT block III can somehow fulfill the need. If there is a real need for the dedicated attack jet at that time, then the case is made. But you can't ignore the defensive requirements and go buy a strike platforms that itself requires defensive / escorts. That's putting more burden on an already low jet numbers air-force.

All I am saying is hear me out, JF17 is not the answer to all questions, we need a platform which is true Air superiority plane, can afford it or how we can afford it is a different thing. I will not make sense because you cannot imagine what I am saying. You may have a lot of modern warfare knowledge but India Pakistan were not nuclear capable during 65 0r 71. F4 were used for SEAD operation now it is a different plane for that role. A conventional war tactics and strategies change with time but the core stays the same. If we do not have good planes we cannot deny SU 30 from using Stand off weapons. JF17 has a clearance limitation when it comes to carrying certain armament. It has limitations. y the way won't reply to you any further as you cannot understand what I am saying.

 

[MastanKhan]

Dear MK, I have a lot of respect for you, specially now that I've learned about your background a little bit more. However, instead of playing analogies, I am going to write a DIRECT conflict scenario for you, which should mimick a potentially real one. With all due respect, I don't think the example of hammer applies here. So let's refine it so it makes sense to a layman like myself.

Let's say a War starts (I hope it never does), and India has estimated 500 jets on her disposal for Pakistan, leaving a couple hundred on other borders and they don't have a war going on with China.

Now out of the 500 jets available, they will pick 150-200 SU-30's and over 100 Mirage 2000's and Mig-29's for attacks inside Pakistan's airspace. That's combined 250-300 dedicated multi-role and interceptor air-crafts, with about about 40 Tornados for strike / ground support.

They've left 50 SU-30's and about 80-100 Mig-29's, Mig 21's, etc for air-defense and point defense inside India, supplemented by Hi-Lo SAM tier (Russian + Israelis AAM).

Now, the PAF sends 5 JH-7A's from Mushaf to attack an Indian air-force base in Punjab. The Phalcon on the other side of the border tracks these jets the second they get airborne (and the Phalcon system is 100 Miles inside the Indian airspace). The Phalcon system not only tracks these guys the second they took off, it knows their payload, etc too.

As there is always going to be some SU-30's inside the Pakistan airspace, or right around the Pakistani airspace, (due to the sheer volume of the strike force to like 250-300 jets), the Phalcon directs two SU-30's to target this formation. The SU-30's can see these guys the second they took off too as their radar has 400 KM range.

Without even changing the formation or any fight they may already be in, both the SU-30's fire BVR AAM's (out of 6-8 BVR's for attack carried by each, 3 are fired by one, 2 by the other one).

What will happen? May be out of 5, 3 JH-7's will survive and will be lost. And then what? Another formation of SU-30's elsewhere fires on them from 60-100 KM's away, potentially assigned to air-defense role inside India. Now you might lose 1 more and now you are crossing India. Well, you have dedicated defense waiting on you, SAM tier and then the Migs and remainder of SU-30's or what you have.

Can you make it to the target? Let alone coming back.......remember, by now, out of the 5, you have 1or 2 JH-7's flying. And this is my guesstimate. If Each SU-30 fired two missiles towards each JH-7 jet, you could have all down before you even penetrated the Indian airspace, or, you barely got inside. Whatever escapes from the SU-30's, will have to now go through SAMS and then point defense Mig 21's..... by the way, in this entire process, due to the SU-30's radar and missile ranges being much greater, the JH-7A couldn't fire on any SU-30, but the lone one, did fire two missiles and took out one of the SU-30's. Then what? It'll hit the SAM tier and point defense and will be taken out like a sitting duck!!! No going back as I suggested. No matter how emotional and superman anyone gets.

Anyone with their sane head reading the above would know the chances of reaching the target, let alone coming back. Now, we used 5 JH-7's, so 5*$ 20 million = $ 100 million worth of 5 jets downed in ONE mission, without success.

But, $ 100 million gives you 200 Cruise missiles for the price tag (if each missile costs around half a million dollars). If you can build those cheaper, even more can be build. But let's take a 100 for now. A 100 missiles fired on an Indian airbase for example, will result in say 30-40% hit ratio, that is, if the Indians had a very capable ABM system. They do have Barak so I'll give them credit there. But, even with 30-40% meaning 30-40 missiles hitting GPS based targets, that's a LOT of damage. No loss of airplane, a failed mission and all.

If someone can question this scenario, which is actually written down to serious amounts of lower level details, then I have no further answers.

All I'll say to our fanboys and to our senior members is that, this isn't the 65 or the 71. The tactics used back then and the entire game was different. Hell, India isn't the India of 1990's, just looking at their air-defense coverage tells you they have multiple tiers from within India, reaching out to the borders from deep inside.

The PAF knows these realities too and that's why the H2, H4, Stealthy Raad were developed. I don't like to make statements that I don't truly know or have 100% assurances that X was true; but based on what I am seeing is that the PAF wants multi-role. The JH-7A or B or C, will not be inducted in the PAF. It brings more risk, maintenance, less capability in THIS theater (current Indo-Pak, not 65, not 71).

The J-xx or SU-35 or even FC-20 would be more beneficial than a JH-7A, supplemented by more -16's too.

Hi,

Thank you very much for the post----. The JH7B's wo---their primary missions would be over the Arabian sea---anti ship and against the naval bases----.

But if it used over land----then my preference would be to use it in the Growler type of aircraft mode. With their AESA radar---and jammers---they will assist the F 16's and the JF 17's---it will be more potent than the SU30 from a distance as well---. Supposedly---the aesa for the JH7B has around1600--1800 T / R modules----. The aircraft with the ability to shoot the SD10B bvr missile---and with their heavy jamming capabilities and aesa radar---they will be a match for the SU30/s from a BVR distance.

In the fighter aircraft mode---the JH7B can carry as many BVR missiles as the SU 30 can---. With its aesa---it will see and lock onto and launch at the SU30 before it is noticed----. If the SU can carry 8 BVR's so can the JH7B----.

The J can launch its 8 BVR missiles and then high tail back----as well.

The thing over here is not what kind of beating can Pakistan take---the thing is that what kind of losses the IAF take for the SU30's before they have some major issues---.

The attrition rate will be high for both the sides. Indian airforce will need to have air superiority within the 48--72 hours----. To deny that---paf needs heavies----.

Now---the thing is that people don't understand what the pak military would be doing in this instance----. As our deployment of the troops is must faster and we can deploy more troops---our goal is to penetrate into indian real estate as deep as we can.

We also have our COLD START DOTRINE policy as well. Actually---the cold start doctrine was tailor made for us---whomsoever wrote it---they wrote it for the pak military.

So---if India can have 40 dedicated Tornado aircraft for strike purposes and all their su 30 can also be used for strike purpose----then where lay the problem for not going for the strike platform. Oh---they also have their M2K's also for strike missions----

As I mentioned before the JH7 is just for the cost purpose---any other J would be preferred. And checking out comparable aircraft---it is compared to the SU24, Tornado, F111 aardvark, F15 strike eagle---and nowhere mention of the SU25----. The SU25 is the A10 of the Russian air force.

If the the newly refurbished B52 can protect itself against the latest fighter aircraft with its new heavy aesa radar and BVR launch capability on strike missions---why can the JH 7 B not do with the similar setup.

 

[Zarvan]

Look man, to be frank here, you aren't making any sense. I don't mean to be rude or disrespectful. But unfortunately, you are not making sense.

I've actually video taped the Gulf war to study tactics. I can go back to WWII and tell you how the Battle of Normandy was won. I can also tell you, some of you guys on here from the PAF, have great talent and some of you are from the 65's and the 71. But its not 65 and 71, the theater itself has changed, India and the IAF isn't that air-force that would fire and miss by 2 miles at times (some of the videos of battles I've seen, it happened, specially around Dhaka).

Its human nature to keep your memories fresh of stuff that you went through. When I hangout with old folks here, EVERY time I meet certain individuals (fathers and relatives of friends and family), some of these guys are veterans of the Vietnam and some from the Koren wars. So ALL you hear about, is those incidents.

If you flew a F-22 right in front of them, they'd associate it with an advanced version of the F-4 (as the times have changed to them but the level of advancement is hard to understand, specially coming from pre-computing era). They don't grasp the fact that you can shoot enemy jets from being 75 miles or more, away and never be seen.
Its because they never say the world. To work up the throttle, you have 4 knobs to go through in the Korean war, before the F-86 and F-4 joined.

So similarly, the need from the 65 and the 71 is gone, doesn't exist due to extremely sensor rich environments, much better train Indian air-force with much larger numbers. Both India and Pakistan will see each other coming. But due to PAF being a defensive force and to maintain control over its airspace, the PAF will be FULLY utilizing its assets to defend.

The way to win here, isn't to try to do the unknown, which is trying to do a direct attack inside their airbases which would make the PAF lose planes fast. The smart way is to use serious net-centric warfare in defending Pakistan and take down a serious chunk of invading jets. You've won the war. The second they realize they have lost 30-50% of their SU-30 fleet....the war is practically over. They would never want to loss some parity with China as it'll take like 5+ years to build up to today's force, while the Chinese will be advancing without stopping. Now add a serious punch of standoff munitions, you got the right mix.

Different times call for different war fighting techniques. The strategy behind Iraq war number 1 was drastically different than the war number 2, and it would be entirely different if we were to attack Iran, a complete plan of which did and still exists. Similarly, the PAF knows the real need and benefits of a "dedicated" strike platform. They'd rather get SU-35,J-xx or FC-20, then getting a JH-7 as it doesn't fit the war theater for Pakistan in today's time and doesn't meet strategical goals the PAF has.



Absolutely, that's what I am saying. The first priority needs to be how to defend Pakistan. The second one should be build numbers of capable platforms to defend Pakistan and sustain inbound aircraft. The third is, if the first two are done, let's now see if a strike platform is needed or if the JFT block III can somehow fulfill the need. If there is a real need for the dedicated attack jet at that time, then the case is made. But you can't ignore the defensive requirements and go buy a strike platforms that itself requires defensive / escorts. That's putting more burden on an already low jet numbers air-force.

Yes so agree first priority should be getting more F-16 and producing JF-17 at more speed and getting preferably SU-35 in large numbers if not that than either J-11 D or J-10 B. After we get them if want a bomber than upcoming JH-7 B can be best option for both completely destroying India's cold start doctrine as well as doing massive strikes inside Indian territory. @MastanKhan

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

People don't realize that the AESA equipped JH7B can carry 8 BVR missiles as well---it also might have anti radiation paint---.

Its aesa radar will have around 1600--1800 T/ R modules----it is a massive aesa radar. It can lock and launch and then high tail from the battle field before the SU 30 can even see it. It is basically a BVR truck like the SU30---but rather cheaper model---.

It is a poor man's bvr fighting machine. JH7B is totally opposite from the JH7A----in technology.

 

[Zarvan]

Hi,

People don't realize that the AESA equipped JH7B can carry 8 BVR missiles as well---it also might have anti radiation paint---.

Its aesa radar will have around 1600--1800 T/ R modules----it is a massive aesa radar. It can lock and launch and then high tail from the battle field before the SU 30 can even see it. It is basically a BVR truck like the SU30---but rather cheaper model---.

It is a poor man's bvr fighting machine. JH7B is totally opposite from the JH7A----in technology.

8 BVR well than that is a really good number and with other weapons but if we decide to go for JH-7 B and not SU-35 than we should get it with TOT. Other wise first priority should be getting either SU-35 or J-11 D or J-10 B than focus on JH-7 B. Still 8 BVR that is mind boggling.

 

[Humble Analyst]

8 BVR well than that is a really good number and with other weapons but if we decide to go for JH-7 B and not SU-35 than we should get it with TOT. Other wise first priority should be getting either SU-35 or J-11 D or J-10 B than focus on JH-7 B. Still 8 BVR that is mind boggling.

It has 9 hard points.

 

[MilSpec]

By the way, given the choice, I would go for SU-24M instead of Torando GR4, as Fencer would be cheaper.

.

Fencer has the same payload as the JF17,

Hi,

I think the posters are taking a few liberties on their own on my account----. The aircraft can be any heavy---any version of the J---be it the J11, or the 16 or the JH7B---which is based more on the TORNADO than the SU25.

The only reason the JH7b is being mentioned again and again is its COST---weight carrying capacity---its new aesa radar and its grower type capabilities.

I remember during the 1965 war---there was a big fear about the anti aircraft batteries----that if approached at a certain angle----it looked impossible to beat the flack during the strike missions----but then some in the planning came up with the formulae of how the strikes would be carried out and how the aircraft will approach the area of flack----.

You have to plough thru the enemy's electronic net and clear a path for your strikes to be successful. With the air to ground weapons reaching 100---200---300 miles----the enemy does not even need to come into our side to do the damage.

All our cities and bases are vulnerable to their strikes from far away---.

So---let me gie an example for a lay person to understand----because many are too clever.

Consider Pakistan to be a car a HONDA CITY for its comparable size----now consider India as a Cadillac Escalade-----.

You are the Defender of Pakistan---ie the Honda City and you have to destroy the Cadillac----. You are given a 5 Lbs hammer to destroy the Cadillac.

OTOH----the indian is given a 25 Lbs sledgehammer to destroy the Honda City----.

The only other handicap that you have is that you little baby is also riding with you in that Honda City----. Now justify your attack strategy----and share with me why would you do what you want to do and what will be the results.

Given a X number of Squadron strength would you prefer to have a swing role a/c with limited payload and munitions that can perform both offensive and defensive roles or a strike platform that can take the fight to the enemy. With strike element you will also risk higher attrition.

Now adding a twin engine new platform to strike element will cause a bit of logistical issue too, we know it very well because we have been facing it for a long time. If your single platform is replacing 5 variants, I don't see the necessity to add another one.

Say you have 325ci and 545i, for commute, and that works quite well for you, adding a M5 will sure make your weekends fun, but you can live without it.

 

[MastanKhan]

Fencer has the same payload as the JF17,


Given a X number of Squadron strength would you prefer to have a swing role a/c with limited payload and munitions that can perform both offensive and defensive roles or a strike platform that can take the fight to the enemy. With strike element you will also risk higher attrition.

Now adding a twin engine new platform to strike element will cause a bit of logistical issue too, we know it very well because we have been facing it for a long time. If your single platform is replacing 5 variants, I don't see the necessity to add another one.

Say you have 325ci and 545i, for commute, and that works quite well for you, adding a M5 will sure make your weekends fun, but you can live without it.

Hi,

You have been here long enough on this forum to know what I preach---. For me---a major weapons system is something that brings the opposing parties towards peace---where a powerful adversary thinks---that it is not worth it to fight---because of a fear of loss or whatever.

And if the adversary does not think of peace---it at least gets serious of the looming threat. The JF 17 does not display any such qualities---.

But for the M5---it really depends on what I want to project----be an ar-sehole 24/7 or only on the weekends----.

The 5 variants the single engine is replacing----is because they are beyond retirement---but while those 5 are being replaced----it is also going to face something twice or three times stronger----.

 

[Hussain Farooqui]

Trends for developing indigenous technologies are very rare in the subcontinent region. All the countries of the subcontinent are mostly dependent on acquired technologies. Acquired technologies will always keep the countries of the subcontinent behind the modern world.

 

[Eagle Claw]

For bombing role for striking deep inside enemy territory SU-34 or up coming JH-7 B will be best but they can be considered only after either we get J-10 B or SU-35 in large numbers than if we want we can go for these.

We should go for atleast 1 of these.
Su-34 or JH-7B.
And I would Keep J-10B away from PAF as we have Thunder !
We don't have Spare money for more or less same thing.
Su-35 or J-11D is the Only and Only Option for Air-superiority and PAF should order it as soon as possible.

Yes so agree first priority should be getting more F-16 and producing JF-17 at more speed and getting preferably SU-35 in large numbers if not that than either J-11 D or J-10 B. After we get them if want a bomber than upcoming JH-7 B can be best option for both completely destroying India's cold start doctrine as well as doing massive strikes inside Indian territory. @MastanKhan

We are not in Economic Conditions to go for Large Numbers. Only few numbers will do the Job for PAF like 24-30 Pieces.

Regarding JH-7B, it can even now be inducted and startegy should be to send Thunders and cover of few F-16s when they go for Bombing or any other Roll. Though JH-7 carries WVRs, Better Radar let say PESA or AESA will also let it carry BVR.

The Main Important thing is JH-7Bs Payload and Hardpoints. Which is much needed.

 

[Hussain Farooqui]

JF17s soon with AESA radar will be enough for PAF to defend the mother land. Cheap,easily available with respectable configuration makes JF17 a perfect back bone of PAF.

Regarding PAF, well if they had been that incompetent, as per the topic starter, IAF would had carried out numerous surgical strikes inside Pakistan but they didn't despite of tremendous 'hindu' wish in India.

JF-17 is a type of milestone in our efforts of developing indigenous technologies. Indigenous technologies can lead us on the real path of progress.

 

[GURU DUTT]

JF-17 is a type of milestone in our efforts of developing indigenous technologies. Indigenous technologies can lead us on the real path of progress.

just curious sirji can you tell me what are pakistani made systems on JF-17