@
Oscar, we also need a replacement of our fast ageing mirages and while JF-17 is a good replacement for A-5 and F-7 in terms of added performance, it does not seem to be the same for mirages specially the upgraded ones.
Actually, the JF takes care of most of the mirage's capabilities as well except its potency as a strike platform. This is back in 2004 when I had the opportunity to ask a senior aide of our then president about the PAF getting the Gripen.. and his reply echoes plain today: the PAF did not want another fighter, it already had the JF.. it wanted a bomber and was at that time looking to acquire some M2Ks. It had the F-16s, but it was vary of going the US way again due to the rather shaky nature of the relationship. However, as things were the US was forthcoming with its assurances and the best thing available to the PAF was the block-52+.. which we went for.
The same rings true for why the FC-20 was envisioned in the first place, the PAF wanted a strike fighter that could make it all the way deep into the east to successfully strike a target(
whether they make it back or not is not certain given the increasing disparity). This staff req came about after it was decide to ALWAYS have an asset that was free of sanctions that could do what the PAF wanted. The F-16-52 is completely( and VERY VERY) capable of doing that job mentioned before and will probably make it back as well, but they come with strings that are on very taut pull. The FC-20 was to assure that we have something that does exactly what the F-16-52 is capable of and can be kept flying even if the US of A says its cutting spares off or not giving us the support we get for certain system via the US defence attache for certain systems we have on board the jet.
Sadly, comes the PPPP government and its imbeciles who leave us with no funds, and the PAF decides that it would rather get the JF-17 program afloat instead of trying to get the FC-20 going on more loans and lose ground on the JF-17. The US also gives us assurances on the F-16s and we decide that we are good with some 80 F-16s and 150 JF-17s to form our forces till close to 2020.
At no point was the fanboy ideal of the FC-20 coming to match the MKI or Rafale ever true. The PAF needs less of the Air combat assets since it has enough, it needs more capable strike platforms that can wreak havoc across the eastern border with precision and survivability. The PAF has been however, smart in a way that it tried to compensate for the lack of a modern(or brand spanking new) strike asset by focusing on heavy development of stand off systems and upgrading its existing assets for enough survivability that it allows them to employ these assets from their respective ranges with a considerably higher chance of success. I mentioned this before elsewhere, the IAF was a little flummoxed by this whole flanking by the PAF and ended up with a lot of consternation in the late 90s and early 2000s.
You might be shocked cause when did we expect nukes being exploded or Babur or tactical nukes in Nasr... But I do have to agree with you. Do we have to pay for that little more? PAF seems to agree with you cause we do not see a deal (yet). But what will happen if India signs Rafale in three months? I would not be that shocked... Just like the fact that I am not shocked to see suddenlt MIL mi 35 being ordered in big numbers. Upgraded Mil mi 24 but still... No Cobra's...
I am not shocked, the budget for SPD is a black hole. However, I was shocked to know that despite the huge budget.. we still have people in these sensitive place allocating funds for new Landcruiser V-8s and Iphone 5s's for their personal use instead of R&D.. but that is a different topic.
The PAF doesn't agree with me, I just knew what the PAF was going to do three years ago while everybody here(and on supposedly "authentic" forums) was beating the drums of the FC-20. I dont know if in those three years the plans have changed or not, but from the looks of it.. they have not.