What's new

JF-17's ECM & Design Limitations

Syed Hussain

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
265
Reaction score
1
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Syed Hussain.
Kindly stop your rude attitude. If you had opened your eyes and read the post i have quoted the price to you both of EJ200 and RD93. The difference is substantial. The point remains that Pakistan cannot afford the EJ200 series engine as the cost differential is not sustainable for the fleet substittution that PAF is looking for. So no need to remind me to do the maths for I have laready done it .
PAF designed the JFT for a specific purpose. It was not meant to go toe to toe with XYZ, but to establish aviation industry in Pakistan with a product which would be easy to integrate and absorb. It will be upgraded as per requirements and available finances. not on your whims.
PLAAF has just released J10 A for sale. To date there is no news that J10 B or C is up for sale. If you have any resource to suggest that please produce. The last we heard from Pshamim of pakdef.info was that the Chinese wanted 40 million per unit for 40 J10 A(20110-12) PAF offered or estimated the cost per plane to be 28 million. We now do not even have money to pay the 28 million much less establish infrastructure for an additional 4th generation fighter.
Funny that PAF pilots as per windjammer andHkhan of pakdef.info have reported flame out of J10 engines during the recent PAF and PLAAF exercises in China. No one has actually come out with how the JFT performed in comparison to J10 series. Your assumptions regarding Chinese avionics are unproven and need verification. Needless to say that once technologies mature PAF will incorporate these into JFT as it has earlier.. Perhaps you are unwaware of the recent 2 crashes of j10Bs which are curerently being investigated.
Whatever I have asked you I have asked you civilly, dont respond to a civil post with rudeness. If you dont want to respond to me please feel free to put me on your ignore list.
A
Believe me dear, JFT's designing was even more "whimsical"(driven by situations) than my comments :) It's good only cuz we operate it. All the detail given as "designed by an Air Force" and a "Pakistani Jet" are nothing more than propaganda tactics and we both know it. All the states does so but people believe it to be propaganda as far as it's not related to their own state.
JF-17 has the same case as F-35 and that is "too big to fail" when talking in our financial parameters and the time, money(Pak) and reputation(CAC) that went into it. Around the world people try to make compensation measures for their mistakes but in here we come up with excuses to legitimize our mistakes. "It was not meant to go toe to toe with XYZ" but a cheap air craft that can be inducted in mass numbers and would be handy in just "keeping our pilots in the air"- are the kind of excuses now made due to the fact that in both of the first blocks(that means at least 100 units) it's good for nothing. To build the backbone of our air defense on something this much low end is only a fatal folly for a nation like us under threat of enemies many times stronger in both numbers and technology. And the "whims" that people make in here are the possible solutions that can turn this flying lemon into something that will be of some avail.
And plus that Auditor General of Pakistan reported a corruption of 500 million dollars in PAF during the time period of 2007 to 2014 and that was enough "finance" to support all the "whims" regarding JFT :tup:
And secondly dear, with all the due respect and civility along with apology for previous talk... I will say that "please, let's not even talk about J-10" cuz I am totally going to lose it here.
 
.
Believe me dear, JFT's designing was even more "whimsical"(driven by situations) than my comments :) It's good only cuz we operate it. All the detail given as "designed by an Air Force" and a "Pakistani Jet" are nothing more than propaganda tactics and we both know it. All the states does so but people believe it to be propaganda as far as it's not related to their own state.
JF-17 has the same case as F-35 and that is "too big to fail" when talking in our financial parameters and the time, money(Pak) and reputation(CAC) that went into it. Around the world people try to make compensation measures for their mistakes but in here we come up with excuses to legitimize our mistakes. "It was not meant to go toe to toe with XYZ" but a cheap air craft that can be inducted in mass numbers and would be handy in just "keeping our pilots in the air"- are the kind of excuses now made due to the fact that in both of the first blocks(that means at least 100 units) it's good for nothing. To build the backbone of our air defense on something this much low end is only a fatal folly for a nation like us under threat of enemies many times stronger in both numbers and technology. And the "whims" that people make in here are the possible solutions that can turn this flying lemon into something that will be of some avail.
And plus that Auditor General of Pakistan reported a corruption of 500 million dollars in PAF during the time period of 2007 to 2014 and that was enough "finance" to support all the "whims" regarding JFT :tup:
And secondly dear, with all the due respect and civility along with apology for previous talk... I will say that "please, let's not even talk about J-10" cuz I am totally going to lose it here.
I think there is one fundanmental point you missed .
Purpose of JF17 (To replace all 3rd Gen fighters with 4th Gen) i think that will sum it up .Also there is one noticeable thing JF17 with all its deficiencies is still able to give two things that no F16/F18/F15 or F35 can give to Pakistan

1. Understanding for building aircraft from scratch (I dont want to say about it what some of the CNC machines acquired for JF17 is pretty beast itself in terms of accuracy and precision so one can understand how important is this for upcoming programs.
2. Most importantly just like Russians in 2nd world war with advent of T34 which was crude but massive in number won war against German superior tanks .
I agree with you narration about how propaganda took place but this should also be in consideration
 
.
Believe me dear, JFT's designing was even more "whimsical"(driven by situations) than my comments :) It's good only cuz we operate it. All the detail given as "designed by an Air Force" and a "Pakistani Jet" are nothing more than propaganda tactics and we both know it. All the states does so but people believe it to be propaganda as far as it's not related to their own state.
JF-17 has the same case as F-35 and that is "too big to fail" when talking in our financial parameters and the time, money(Pak) and reputation(CAC) that went into it. Around the world people try to make compensation measures for their mistakes but in here we come up with excuses to legitimize our mistakes. "It was not meant to go toe to toe with XYZ" but a cheap air craft that can be inducted in mass numbers and would be handy in just "keeping our pilots in the air"- are the kind of excuses now made due to the fact that in both of the first blocks(that means at least 100 units) it's good for nothing. To build the backbone of our air defense on something this much low end is only a fatal folly for a nation like us under threat of enemies many times stronger in both numbers and technology. And the "whims" that people make in here are the possible solutions that can turn this flying lemon into something that will be of some avail.
And plus that Auditor General of Pakistan reported a corruption of 500 million dollars in PAF during the time period of 2007 to 2014 and that was enough "finance" to support all the "whims" regarding JFT :tup:
And secondly dear, with all the due respect and civility along with apology for previous talk... I will say that "please, let's not even talk about J-10" cuz I am totally going to lose it here.
And for further enlightenment, read this link and get an insight about the driving factors of our "top brass" and keep it in mind before taunting an "armchair bandit" for being a lowly civilian who can't reach to the high thinking of our decision makers.
Army's Budding Mansurul Haq: The Rush to Pay Extra $21m in French Deal
Army's Budding Mansurul Haq Pays Extra $21m in Hush-Hush French Deal

By M T Butt

pix_tank3.jpg
ISLAMABAD, June 30: For the first time in Pakistan Army’s history, intimate details of a multi-million dollar weapons deal have been leaked to the media by angry middle ranking officers who point to a massive scandal which has already left the Ministry of Defence and most of the senior officers in the GHQ wondering how bold and blatant some people can get.



These officers have released all the details, including names, places, time and dates about the deal, raising a plethora of questions about the manner in which specialized defence equipment is being purchased in a blatantly roughshod manner, without any financial oversight. They say if no action was taken now, more details of many more scandals would also be made public including some personal scandals of Generals which many would not like.

According to an expert, who has studied Pakistan military purchases for years, such deals and over-payments are a very common occurrence in the Pakistan Army but what is new and different in this case is that the details have been leaked to the media for the first time while the deal is still in the process of being wrapped up.

“These officers cannot reconcile with the fact that an extra 21 million dollars are being paid to a French company in extra-ordinary haste and that too to buy inferior quality equipment already discarded by most countries, including Pakistan Army itself,” an E-Mail received by the South Asia Tribune disclosed.

The details of the deal are bizarre and the two top most Army Generals under General Musharraf are being named as the interested parties who are forcing the violation of all rules and regulations. Both are due to retire in 2007 and one of them may survive to become the Army Chief as well.

“This violation is happening in the Army Headquarter right now and can possibly be stopped if General Musharraf or the helpless politicians occupying the posts of the Defence Minister or the Prime Minister, intervene and stop these Generals from making quick money at the expense of national defence and even country’s exports,” a concerned official said.

According to the details, a quick fire, Restricted Tender was floated on June 17, 2005 by the Director General of Defence Purchases seeking to buy 900 Thermal Image Sight (TIS) Fire Control System Units (Pix Above) for the main Pakistani battle tanks – Al-Khalid and Al-Zarrar, T-85 & T-80U.

Surprisingly for such a large purchase through Tender No: 1338/49/TISight/DGDP/PC-3B Dated 17th June, 2005, only four days were given for submission of bids. June 21 was set as the last date.

This was ostensibly done because the Weapons and Equipment Directorate (W&ED) of the Army GHQ in Rawalpindi, had already pre-qualified and short-listed two French companies, through a long process of tests, trials and final technical evaluation by the ITD-Directorate and I&E Directorates in the first week of June, 2005. So both the companies were practically ready to bid.

These companies were Sagem and Thales, the first being Europe's third largest defence and security electronics company, while Thales is France's largest military company. Adnan, son of late Maj. Gen. Jamsheed Malik represents Sagem in Pakistan while Thales is represented by a Colonel Wazir and Mr Shibli from F.A. Enterprises.

The tests and trials had included draft contract proposals, including commercial and technical offers, which were sought by the W&ED on May 24 and May 26, 2005 from these two companies. Both gave their offers and both were pre-qualified/short listed by GHQ.

Then the W&ED sent the files to DGDP for final purchase contract before June 30, 2005. DGDP floated the tender asking for bids in 4 days. Both Sagem and Thales separately submitted their technical and commercial offers on June 21 in the presence of DGDP and their own representatives.

First the technical offers were opened and evaluated by the technical departments, I&E and ITD Directorates of GHQ and after two hours both were declared technically qualified with 4 technical observations made on Sagem’s offer and 35 technical observations on Thales bid.

The most significant difference in the two offers was that Sagem bid for the Generation-3 (G-3) TIS Units while Thales offered the older Generation-2 (G-2). The Tender had asked for both types although G-2 is almost obsolete.

Why were G-2 units put on the tender is a big mystery because Pakistan Army has already been using the G-3 which are mounted on Al-Khalid tanks being manufactured by Pakistan for which Islamabad and the GHQ have been trying hard to secure export orders from the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and other countries.

The angry Army officers say G-2 units were not being mounted on Al-Khalid tanks because of integration, stabilization and target identification problems. In all the demonstrations to potential foreign buyers, the GHQ has been displaying Al-Khalid tanks with G-3 units.

Side by side, the Pakistan Air Force has upgraded all the F-16, Mirage and Helicopter Gunships with G-3 units bought in 2001 or thereafter. These were purchased from Sagem in 1997. Sagem is also the main contractor in collaboration with Kamra Avionics Company. It introduced Kamra to the international export market for which General Musharraf is said to be very proud and keeps referring to.

All NATO armies and Russians are using G-3 because it is light weight, has no payload problems on air and is more reliable than G-2. In 2002 the Pakistan Army GHQ and Weapons and Equipment Directorate decided to install G-3 in all its main battle tanks.

Sagem was also offering transfer of technology which is included in the quoted price along with state-of-the-art Technical Ugradation Package to upgrade all the existing tanks from G-2 to G-3. That in itself promises a huge export market.

Thales, on the other hand, was not even a qualified supplier until early 2004 and only Sagem was in the run. Then came General Tariq Majeed, the Chief of General Staff with his background of Military Intelligence (MI). He ordered that Thales should also be included in trials and tests which continued until November last year. More trials were done in February/March this year until Thales was pre-qualified, although it was offering only G-2 Units.

The big envelopes of bids were opened on June 21, 2005 after the technical offers of both the companies were approved. Lo and Behold, Sagem had offered each G-3 TIS unit for 59,000 Euros or a total of 53.1 million Euros (US$64.5 million) for 900 units. The price of Thales was an unbelievable 78,000 for each G-2 unit or a total of 70.2 million Euros (US$85.3 million).

On Thursday June 23, 2005, Lt. Gen. Tariq Majeed, Chief of General Staff took the decision, with the knowledge of the Vice Chief of Army Staff, General Ahsan Saleem Hayat, ruling out all technical and other objections to give the contract to Thales, the highest bidder, for its inferior G-2 equipment.

His decision was given on the last day of his work as Gen Majeed proceeded the very next day on an official trip abroad.

The decision stunned many who were involved with the project. There were so many angry officers who found it unpatriotic to keep quiet. Some of them believe the use of brute authority to reward a company which did not offer competitive technology has created a big problem for General Majeed who is being likened to Admiral Mansurul Haq of Pakistan Navy, the convicted former Navy Chief who made millions in submarine purchase deals and paid off a tiny percentage to get off the hook.

The Ministry of Defence has been kept totally out of the loop in the deal. All the files were kept under control of the GS Branch headed by General Majeed. But there were other Generals heading other Directorates involved, who had to agree.

These Officers and Directorates included Director General Armored Corps, Maj. General Saeedullah Khan, DG Weapons & Equipment Directorate Maj. Gen. Ejaz Bakhshi who was assisted by Brig. Zawwar Shah. The Military Operations Directorate under Major General Yousuf and his Technical Director Brig. Khalid Asghar also had to approve the purchase. The ITD Directorate was also involved.

The angry officers of the Army say all these Generals and Brigadiers were put under severe pressure to approve the deal. “Maj General Ejaz Bakhshi was under tons of pressure, so was Major Gen. Yousuf but Technical Director Brig. Khalid Asghar was so terrorized he was almost crying, but he had obey the orders to keep his job and secure a pension,” one officer recalled.

The reason is that General Majeed is the senior most General after the current Vice Chief of Army Staff, General Ahsan Saleem Hayat, who retires in October 2007. General Majeed has the outside chance of becoming the Army Chief as he is due to retire on December 30, 2007 and could thus be a possible replacement of General Musharraf, if he is not kicked out earlier.

The Editor of the South Asia Tribune contacted the Thales company through its given Email on its web site to confirm the deal. An Email sent to 'tosasales@fr.thalesgroup.com' asked Thales whether it had finally got the contract from Pakistan Army of 900 Thermal Imagers at Euro 78,000 per unit for Pakistan’s Main Battle Tanks.

Thales was also requested to confirm whether the TIS Units were of Catherine-QW type, whether the imagers were Generation-2 or Generation-3 and whether Transfer of Technology (ToT) was also part of the contract. No response was immediately available from the company.

The decision to buy G-2 units from Thales has many implications for the Army and Pakistan as well. Firstly Pakistan will be paying an extra US$21 million to buy inferior grade technology which is being phased out by all the armies the world over, including the Pakistan Army.

Secondly by putting in these old Generation units, Pakistan is seriously going to compromise its export potential for Al-Khalid and other tanks as all buyers are looking for the latest technology when they purchase weapons at such a scale.

Thirdly after a few years Pakistan will in any case have to upgrade these tanks and install the new technology which would again cost a bundle to the Army and the country.

Why all this blatant favoritism is being done by some Generals is obvious but no one is still ready to give out a guess of what will happen to the new Admiral Mansurul Haq in the making.

What it, nevertheless, proves is that General Musharraf has turned a totally blind eye on whatever his key position holders in GHQ may be doing because he wants them to stay happy, healthy, wealthy and content and not challenge his authority as the Army Chief, although he has crossed his retirement age years ago.
 
.
Believe me dear, JFT's designing was even more "whimsical"(driven by situations) than my comments :) It's good only cuz we operate it. All the detail given as "designed by an Air Force" and a "Pakistani Jet" are nothing more than propaganda tactics and we both know it. All the states does so but people believe it to be propaganda as far as it's not related to their own state.
JF-17 has the same case as F-35 and that is "too big to fail" when talking in our financial parameters and the time, money(Pak) and reputation(CAC) that went into it. Around the world people try to make compensation measures for their mistakes but in here we come up with excuses to legitimize our mistakes. "It was not meant to go toe to toe with XYZ" but a cheap air craft that can be inducted in mass numbers and would be handy in just "keeping our pilots in the air"- are the kind of excuses now made due to the fact that in both of the first blocks(that means at least 100 units) it's good for nothing. To build the backbone of our air defense on something this much low end is only a fatal folly for a nation like us under threat of enemies many times stronger in both numbers and technology. And the "whims" that people make in here are the possible solutions that can turn this flying lemon into something that will be of some avail.
And plus that Auditor General of Pakistan reported a corruption of 500 million dollars in PAF during the time period of 2007 to 2014 and that was enough "finance" to support all the "whims" regarding JFT :tup:
And secondly dear, with all the due respect and civility along with apology for previous talk... I will say that "please, let's not even talk about J-10" cuz I am totally going to lose it here.
Thank you for a very kind projection of your view point. My problem as a nontechnical analyst( if there could be any such thing as that) is that I have to rely on information that is available on the net. For the available resources I still think it was a sound plan to construct with Chinese help a platform that is affordable. and BVR capable. That end is achieved in my view. The other aspect is one of modernization./alteration is newer technology comes on line. Now if you are saying to the contrary then the burden of proof lies with you and you need to prove your point of view. The problem lies with your knowledge base( ie acquired or observed first hand). Iam sure you would not want to declare your source for making such claims.
Please understand that I have no way of knowing who you are and what your source of knowledge is. So whatever you can share which makes you think that your assertions are correct would be appreciated.
As to the J10 issue,I have nothing against you losing it on the forum as long as you direct it on the set of circumstances leading to the bad decision being taken.
I actually will look forward to a response from you.
Regards
A
 
Last edited:
.
And for further enlightenment, read this link and get an insight about the driving factors of our "top brass" and keep it in mind before taunting an "armchair bandit" for being a lowly civilian who can't reach to the high thinking of our decision makers.
Army's Budding Mansurul Haq: The Rush to Pay Extra $21m in French Deal
Army's Budding Mansurul Haq Pays Extra $21m in Hush-Hush French Deal

By M T Butt

pix_tank3.jpg
ISLAMABAD, June 30: For the first time in Pakistan Army’s history, intimate details of a multi-million dollar weapons deal have been leaked to the media by angry middle ranking officers who point to a massive scandal which has already left the Ministry of Defence and most of the senior officers in the GHQ wondering how bold and blatant some people can get.


These officers have released all the details, including names, places, time and dates about the deal, raising a plethora of questions about the manner in which specialized defence equipment is being purchased in a blatantly roughshod manner, without any financial oversight. They say if no action was taken now, more details of many more scandals would also be made public including some personal scandals of Generals which many would not like.

According to an expert, who has studied Pakistan military purchases for years, such deals and over-payments are a very common occurrence in the Pakistan Army but what is new and different in this case is that the details have been leaked to the media for the first time while the deal is still in the process of being wrapped up.

“These officers cannot reconcile with the fact that an extra 21 million dollars are being paid to a French company in extra-ordinary haste and that too to buy inferior quality equipment already discarded by most countries, including Pakistan Army itself,” an E-Mail received by the South Asia Tribune disclosed.

The details of the deal are bizarre and the two top most Army Generals under General Musharraf are being named as the interested parties who are forcing the violation of all rules and regulations. Both are due to retire in 2007 and one of them may survive to become the Army Chief as well.

“This violation is happening in the Army Headquarter right now and can possibly be stopped if General Musharraf or the helpless politicians occupying the posts of the Defence Minister or the Prime Minister, intervene and stop these Generals from making quick money at the expense of national defence and even country’s exports,” a concerned official said.

According to the details, a quick fire, Restricted Tender was floated on June 17, 2005 by the Director General of Defence Purchases seeking to buy 900 Thermal Image Sight (TIS) Fire Control System Units (Pix Above) for the main Pakistani battle tanks – Al-Khalid and Al-Zarrar, T-85 & T-80U.

Surprisingly for such a large purchase through Tender No: 1338/49/TISight/DGDP/PC-3B Dated 17th June, 2005, only four days were given for submission of bids. June 21 was set as the last date.

This was ostensibly done because the Weapons and Equipment Directorate (W&ED) of the Army GHQ in Rawalpindi, had already pre-qualified and short-listed two French companies, through a long process of tests, trials and final technical evaluation by the ITD-Directorate and I&E Directorates in the first week of June, 2005. So both the companies were practically ready to bid.

These companies were Sagem and Thales, the first being Europe's third largest defence and security electronics company, while Thales is France's largest military company. Adnan, son of late Maj. Gen. Jamsheed Malik represents Sagem in Pakistan while Thales is represented by a Colonel Wazir and Mr Shibli from F.A. Enterprises.

The tests and trials had included draft contract proposals, including commercial and technical offers, which were sought by the W&ED on May 24 and May 26, 2005 from these two companies. Both gave their offers and both were pre-qualified/short listed by GHQ.

Then the W&ED sent the files to DGDP for final purchase contract before June 30, 2005. DGDP floated the tender asking for bids in 4 days. Both Sagem and Thales separately submitted their technical and commercial offers on June 21 in the presence of DGDP and their own representatives.

First the technical offers were opened and evaluated by the technical departments, I&E and ITD Directorates of GHQ and after two hours both were declared technically qualified with 4 technical observations made on Sagem’s offer and 35 technical observations on Thales bid.

The most significant difference in the two offers was that Sagem bid for the Generation-3 (G-3) TIS Units while Thales offered the older Generation-2 (G-2). The Tender had asked for both types although G-2 is almost obsolete.

Why were G-2 units put on the tender is a big mystery because Pakistan Army has already been using the G-3 which are mounted on Al-Khalid tanks being manufactured by Pakistan for which Islamabad and the GHQ have been trying hard to secure export orders from the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and other countries.

The angry Army officers say G-2 units were not being mounted on Al-Khalid tanks because of integration, stabilization and target identification problems. In all the demonstrations to potential foreign buyers, the GHQ has been displaying Al-Khalid tanks with G-3 units.

Side by side, the Pakistan Air Force has upgraded all the F-16, Mirage and Helicopter Gunships with G-3 units bought in 2001 or thereafter. These were purchased from Sagem in 1997. Sagem is also the main contractor in collaboration with Kamra Avionics Company. It introduced Kamra to the international export market for which General Musharraf is said to be very proud and keeps referring to.

All NATO armies and Russians are using G-3 because it is light weight, has no payload problems on air and is more reliable than G-2. In 2002 the Pakistan Army GHQ and Weapons and Equipment Directorate decided to install G-3 in all its main battle tanks.

Sagem was also offering transfer of technology which is included in the quoted price along with state-of-the-art Technical Ugradation Package to upgrade all the existing tanks from G-2 to G-3. That in itself promises a huge export market.

Thales, on the other hand, was not even a qualified supplier until early 2004 and only Sagem was in the run. Then came General Tariq Majeed, the Chief of General Staff with his background of Military Intelligence (MI). He ordered that Thales should also be included in trials and tests which continued until November last year. More trials were done in February/March this year until Thales was pre-qualified, although it was offering only G-2 Units.

The big envelopes of bids were opened on June 21, 2005 after the technical offers of both the companies were approved. Lo and Behold, Sagem had offered each G-3 TIS unit for 59,000 Euros or a total of 53.1 million Euros (US$64.5 million) for 900 units. The price of Thales was an unbelievable 78,000 for each G-2 unit or a total of 70.2 million Euros (US$85.3 million).

On Thursday June 23, 2005, Lt. Gen. Tariq Majeed, Chief of General Staff took the decision, with the knowledge of the Vice Chief of Army Staff, General Ahsan Saleem Hayat, ruling out all technical and other objections to give the contract to Thales, the highest bidder, for its inferior G-2 equipment.

His decision was given on the last day of his work as Gen Majeed proceeded the very next day on an official trip abroad.

The decision stunned many who were involved with the project. There were so many angry officers who found it unpatriotic to keep quiet. Some of them believe the use of brute authority to reward a company which did not offer competitive technology has created a big problem for General Majeed who is being likened to Admiral Mansurul Haq of Pakistan Navy, the convicted former Navy Chief who made millions in submarine purchase deals and paid off a tiny percentage to get off the hook.

The Ministry of Defence has been kept totally out of the loop in the deal. All the files were kept under control of the GS Branch headed by General Majeed. But there were other Generals heading other Directorates involved, who had to agree.

These Officers and Directorates included Director General Armored Corps, Maj. General Saeedullah Khan, DG Weapons & Equipment Directorate Maj. Gen. Ejaz Bakhshi who was assisted by Brig. Zawwar Shah. The Military Operations Directorate under Major General Yousuf and his Technical Director Brig. Khalid Asghar also had to approve the purchase. The ITD Directorate was also involved.

The angry officers of the Army say all these Generals and Brigadiers were put under severe pressure to approve the deal. “Maj General Ejaz Bakhshi was under tons of pressure, so was Major Gen. Yousuf but Technical Director Brig. Khalid Asghar was so terrorized he was almost crying, but he had obey the orders to keep his job and secure a pension,” one officer recalled.

The reason is that General Majeed is the senior most General after the current Vice Chief of Army Staff, General Ahsan Saleem Hayat, who retires in October 2007. General Majeed has the outside chance of becoming the Army Chief as he is due to retire on December 30, 2007 and could thus be a possible replacement of General Musharraf, if he is not kicked out earlier.

The Editor of the South Asia Tribune contacted the Thales company through its given Email on its web site to confirm the deal. An Email sent to 'tosasales@fr.thalesgroup.com' asked Thales whether it had finally got the contract from Pakistan Army of 900 Thermal Imagers at Euro 78,000 per unit for Pakistan’s Main Battle Tanks.

Thales was also requested to confirm whether the TIS Units were of Catherine-QW type, whether the imagers were Generation-2 or Generation-3 and whether Transfer of Technology (ToT) was also part of the contract. No response was immediately available from the company.

The decision to buy G-2 units from Thales has many implications for the Army and Pakistan as well. Firstly Pakistan will be paying an extra US$21 million to buy inferior grade technology which is being phased out by all the armies the world over, including the Pakistan Army.

Secondly by putting in these old Generation units, Pakistan is seriously going to compromise its export potential for Al-Khalid and other tanks as all buyers are looking for the latest technology when they purchase weapons at such a scale.

Thirdly after a few years Pakistan will in any case have to upgrade these tanks and install the new technology which would again cost a bundle to the Army and the country.

Why all this blatant favoritism is being done by some Generals is obvious but no one is still ready to give out a guess of what will happen to the new Admiral Mansurul Haq in the making.

What it, nevertheless, proves is that General Musharraf has turned a totally blind eye on whatever his key position holders in GHQ may be doing because he wants them to stay happy, healthy, wealthy and content and not challenge his authority as the Army Chief, although he has crossed his retirement age years ago.
Thank you for your post. It is not for the first time that such shady deals have been highlighted. From Anwar Shamim to the Luna scandle to lobbying for french deals to save their swiss chalets to the regional office of SAAB being sighted in the and acceptance of bribes to do Zia in(to name a few of the ones I know.). These are all part of the fabric of a very unfortunate Pakistan. However it still does not translate into JFT being a bad platform. The point,and please feel free to correct me, you have tried to project is that the RD93 change is essential to the AC Performing better and RD93 in its current form is a bad choice. That needs to be justified. I will fully agree with you that it is not the best out there but given our pathetic financial condition what other choice do we have and how do we argue to make it a viable solution for the PAF?
A
 
Last edited:
.
Thank you for a very kind projection of your view point. My problem as a nontechnical analyst( if there could be any such thing as that) is that I have to rely on information that is available on the net. For the available resources I still think it was a sound plan to construct with Chinese help a platform that is affordable. and BVR capable. That end is achieved in my view. The other aspect is one of modernization./alteration is newer technology comes on line. Now if you are saying to the contrary then the burden of proof lies with you and you need to prove your point of view. The problem lies with your knowledge base( ie acquired or observed first hand). Iam sure you would not want to declare your source for making such claims.
Please understand that I have no way of knowing who you are and what your source of knowledge is. So whatever you can share which makes you think that your assertions are correct would be appreciated.
As to the J10 issue,I have nothing against you losing it on the forum as long as you direct it on the set of circumstances leading to the bad decision being taken.
I actually will look forward to a response from you.
Regards
A
Enough friends and family in military as well as a skeptical eye are my sources.
If you are asking about the scandal,,, it's not a hidden matter but rather an ignored one.

Financial irregularities of Rs 50 billion detected in PAF

Rs5.5 billion foul play in defence funds-Auditor General of Pakistan report

There is no way to beat our natural enemy in numbers or diversity of the platforms so quality was the "only" option that we could have taken benefit from. Cuz no matter how much you produce them, for every JFT, India is going to have an MKI and there goes the affordable thing down the toilet, an MKI will shoot down JFT before it can catch it on the radar despite its massive RCS(cuz of 110km & 400km radar ranges), and there goes the BVR thing down the.......!
Yar for a moment, stop taking in notice what our officials say and think with your own perspective and then tell me.
(& I am not comparing both jets here but giving comparison of numbers and quality, as you might want to mention F-16 when it comes to mention MKI but India has many options on the table, we have only 2).

Thank you for your post. It is not for the first time that such shady deals have been highlighted. From Anwar Shamim to the Luna scandle to lobbying for french deals to save their swiss chalets to the regional office of SAAB being sighted in the and acceptance of bribes to do Zia in(to name a few of the ones I know.). These are all part of the fabric of a very unfortunate Pakistan. However it still does not translate into JFT being a bad platform. The point,and please feel free to correct me, you have tried to project is that the RD93 change is essential to the AC Performing better and RD93 in its current form is a bad choice. That needs to be justified. I will fully agree with you that it is not the best out there but given our pathetic financial condition what other choice do we have and how do we argue to make it a viable solution for the PAF?
A
I have said in my previous comments as well, let's ditch the thought of new engine for a moment, it would have been still somewhat acceptable if RD-93 would have been built around the MK standard(available since 2002). That would have meant a 4000 hours service life(with longer MTBO) despite the increased thrust & increase in reliability due to the use of modern materials, no smoke cuz of a revised combustion chamber & the substantial advantage of FADEC. But surprisingly this point is not just being neglected to begin with but is not even on the objectives list for the future.
PAF did not needed to get the "best" to put & make JFT a worthy platform but it was possible even with a few minor extra steps(as the MK standard & the next point). The twin seater that is just now under development(with aerial refueling) if inducted from day one in first 100 units could have fulfilled our need for the advanced trainer, making the JFT much more useful than it is right now as a LIFT platform.
& there are so many wondering points to neglect that one starts to feel lost. But the bottom line will remain the same that we are here only for our own catharsis and not for any avail.
 
Last edited:
.
I
2. Most importantly just like Russians in 2nd world war with advent of T34 which was crude but massive in number won war against German superior tanks .
I agree with you narration about how propaganda took place but this should also be in consideration

Hi,

That is a lie that pakistanis want to believe in---.

The fact is--the german industrial base---its capacity to produce new machine in large numbers was being destroyed---the industrial complexes were being bombed to kingdom come---.

That is the reason for the results---.
 
.
Financial irregularities of Rs 50 billion detected in PAF

Rs5.5 billion foul play in defence funds-Auditor General of Pakistan report

There is no way to beat our natural enemy in numbers or diversity of the platforms so quality was the "only" option that we could have taken benefit from. Cuz no matter how much you produce them, for every JFT, India is going to have an MKI and there goes the affordable thing down the toilet, an MKI will shoot down JFT before it can catch it on the radar despite its massive RCS(cuz of 110km & 400km radar ranges), and there goes the BVR thing down the.......!

I agree with some parts of your post but the bold part. There was a scandal in PN a few times in the past and I won't be surprised if one exists in the PAF also.

But on the MKI, its totally false to assume an MKI can fire at the JFT from 400 KM's away or the BVR option becomes useless for the JFT. The reality is, say you fired a BVR at me from 100 KM's away, and my operating base or FOB is 80 KM's away from the border (the case for Pakistan). I can turn back around and really land if I wanted to. Do you really think the BVR can find me?

Also, there are many other tactics to confused a BVR fired from that far away. I can simply turn around and fly 30-40 more KM's inside my territory, and making the missile run out of fuel with a really week lock, almost useless anyway!! The most effective lock parameter for any modern BVR is around 50-60 KM's (that's a BVR with over 100 KM range). And even then, it is suggested during training to fire two BVR's at one target to achieve a 90% kill ratio within 50-60 KM's. So there is nothing guaranteed. The best BVR kills have actually taken place way below 50 KM (or around 40 NM).

So in Pakistan and India's scenario, the MKI's massive radar is really a great advantage towards the Chinese due to hundreds of miles worth of mountains in between before you face the enemy's plane. I know for a fact that the PAF's sector commanders can watch everything inside Afghanistan, over 100 miles, and over 80 miles inside India. And these are ground radars.

In JFT and MKI's case, the PAF will scramble the JFT within 60-80 KM's of the border during hostilities with FOB's being used. Inbound MKI will be within 20-40 KM's when the scramble takes place. 10-20 KM's will pass by in acquiring lock and all and directing the aircraft towards the vector. So both the jets will be within 70-100 KM's of each other. Meaning, they will both fire their BVR's within seconds of each other. I'd suspect 2 BVR's per plane will be fired. After that, the winner is who has better radar evading tech and tactics, the distance reduces the probability as is by 20-30%.

MKI's larger RCS would pose a risk as the missile will easily obtain a lock. But its TVC and other tech gives it advanced ability to evade the missile. Thrust Vectoring is great to defeat any missile, but ONLY the first one. If there is a second missile which was fired a few seconds after the first one, it would find the MKI like a helicopter and would have no issues in hitting it as the MKI would be recovering from the Cobra or other TVC maneuvers with energy already bled and drag taking its toll for the next 30-45 seconds. But if only one missile was fired, due to MKI's larger fuel carrying capacity, it can come back into the fight after it dodges the first missile. While JFT, after out maneuver the first missile could only go home and land for refuel.

So as you can see, there are MANY variables here. Having a bigger radar gives you a bigger threat perception, but it doesn't mean that you can take down others from hundreds of KM's that easily. There are dozens of variables involved. In a BVR missile chase, both the planes have their own strengths and weaknesses, and both can evade one missile fired from over 60-70KM away easily.
 
.
MKI can also can be seen from far away because of it's size and you having too many options is good thing it going to make your air force useless because u have to maintain too many platforms which u also not making fully inside your own country if u think having too many options are good thing then why Russia is working on T-14 or US working on F-35 and why United Kingdom Germany Italy working on one single plane euro fighter i am not trying to say that JF-17 is better then euro fighter or SU-30 but it give us good enough capability Su-30 can surly destroy JF-17 can JF-17 do the same yes it can and bvr missile are also on JF-17 there is no problem with JF-17 the problem is your expectation you are hopping it can do every thing better like every other plane it has it's faults but we have some plane which can do every thing we need it turn circle can reduce with better engine loading limit is can be improve with lighter air frame it can be more lethal with better avionics it never going to better then SU-30 or euro fighter but can be good as those plane in functionality
 
.
I agree with some parts of your post but the bold part. There was a scandal in PN a few times in the past and I won't be surprised if one exists in the PAF also.

But on the MKI, its totally false to assume an MKI can fire at the JFT from 400 KM's away or the BVR option becomes useless for the JFT. The reality is, say you fired a BVR at me from 100 KM's away, and my operating base or FOB is 80 KM's away from the border (the case for Pakistan). I can turn back around and really land if I wanted to. Do you really think the BVR can find me?

Also, there are many other tactics to confused a BVR fired from that far away. I can simply turn around and fly 30-40 more KM's inside my territory, and making the missile run out of fuel with a really week lock, almost useless anyway!! The most effective lock parameter for any modern BVR is around 50-60 KM's (that's a BVR with over 100 KM range). And even then, it is suggested during training to fire two BVR's at one target to achieve a 90% kill ratio within 50-60 KM's. So there is nothing guaranteed. The best BVR kills have actually taken place way below 50 KM (or around 40 NM).

So in Pakistan and India's scenario, the MKI's massive radar is really a great advantage towards the Chinese due to hundreds of miles worth of mountains in between before you face the enemy's plane. I know for a fact that the PAF's sector commanders can watch everything inside Afghanistan, over 100 miles, and over 80 miles inside India. And these are ground radars.

In JFT and MKI's case, the PAF will scramble the JFT within 60-80 KM's of the border during hostilities with FOB's being used. Inbound MKI will be within 20-40 KM's when the scramble takes place. 10-20 KM's will pass by in acquiring lock and all and directing the aircraft towards the vector. So both the jets will be within 70-100 KM's of each other. Meaning, they will both fire their BVR's within seconds of each other. I'd suspect 2 BVR's per plane will be fired. After that, the winner is who has better radar evading tech and tactics, the distance reduces the probability as is by 20-30%.

MKI's larger RCS would pose a risk as the missile will easily obtain a lock. But its TVC and other tech gives it advanced ability to evade the missile. Thrust Vectoring is great to defeat any missile, but ONLY the first one. If there is a second missile which was fired a few seconds after the first one, it would find the MKI like a helicopter and would have no issues in hitting it as the MKI would be recovering from the Cobra or other TVC maneuvers with energy already bled and drag taking its toll for the next 30-45 seconds. But if only one missile was fired, due to MKI's larger fuel carrying capacity, it can come back into the fight after it dodges the first missile. While JFT, after out maneuver the first missile could only go home and land for refuel.

So as you can see, there are MANY variables here. Having a bigger radar gives you a bigger threat perception, but it doesn't mean that you can take down others from hundreds of KM's that easily. There are dozens of variables involved. In a BVR missile chase, both the planes have their own strengths and weaknesses, and both can evade one missile fired from over 60-70KM away easily.
For your tactics report I would only say that if you can guess it then how come are you expecting IAF to be blind to these aspects and unprepared? And I didn't do the comparison like that of a conventional and stealth platform where one side is completely blind. I am telling you that once MKI comes into the "detection only range" of KLJ-7v2, the JFT will already be well within a "no escape" range of the BARS-N011M. And unlike MKI, JFT has no adequate ECM capability to fool the missile or maneuverability/speed to dodge or evade it. Then there is the missile difference, SD-10 indeed is a great weapon but not in par with R77. Your comparison sounds like a test between two equally capable systems or merely different ones. 75km of "track range" to 200km of track range is a difference that you can't compensate through "words", & it's not just range here but also a 2 generations of gap between the technologies of both radars. Being bigger is not just about more fuel to stay longer in the air. It means many folds increase in radar range cuz of radar size and available power output, and also the liberty of going faster in order to give the missile a faster start that will enable it to exploit its full "theoretical range".
 
Last edited:
.
For your tactics report I would only say that if you can guess it then how come are you expecting IAF to be blind to these aspects and unprepared? And I didn't do the comparison like that of a conventional and stealth platform where one side is completely blind. I am telling you that once MKI comes into the "detection only range" of KLJ-7v2, the JFT will already be well within a "no escape" range of the BARS-N011M. And unlike MKI, JFT has no adequate ECM capability to fool the missile or maneuverability/speed to dodge or evade it. Then there is the missile difference, SD-10 indeed is a great weapon but not in par with R77. Your comparison sounds like a test between two equally capable systems or merely different ones. 75km of "track range" to 200km of track range is a difference that you can't compensate through "words", & it's not just range here but also a 2 generations of gap between the technologies of both radars. Being bigger is not just about more fuel to stay longer in the air. It means many folds increase in radar range cuz of radar size and available power output, and also the liberty of going faster in order to give the missile a faster start that will enable it to exploit its full "theoretical range".
At this stage the JF-17's ECM capabilities are not fully understood. Jane's said the ECM was from Indra, and while that could simply be limited to the ALR-400 RWR, it is possible (albeit unconfirmed) that the ALQ-500 is also being used.

That aside, it's going to be mad tough for the JF-17 to deal with the Su-30MKI. I think the PAF would need to really hone in on LOAL tactics with BVRAAMs. It definitely isn't an ideal solution, but there are scarcely few other ways to get around the Su-30MKI's radar range with a lightweight fighter.
 
.
For your tactics report I would only say that if you can guess it then how come are you expecting IAF to be blind to these aspects and unprepared? And I didn't do the comparison like that of a conventional and stealth platform where one side is completely blind.

I am telling you that once MKI comes into the "detection only range" of KLJ-7v2, the JFT will already be well within a "no escape" range of the BARS-N011M. And unlike MKI, JFT has no adequate ECM capability to fool the missile or maneuverability/speed to dodge or evade it.


See your post's bold above. Do you have ANY experience or clue about this area? Gossip is great when done on topics not critical or important. But you can't do that on facts and Physics.

The "No Escape Zone" you mentioned above......has NOTHING to do with BARS-N011M.........:rofl: :angel: :hitwall: . Radars don't have the no escape zone in real life. The No Escape Zone is really a range where a Semi Active or an Active BVR can be the most lethal and can score a kill ( I am trying to make it simpler to understand). It still doesn't mean that it is REALLY a "no escape zone", its like someone asking if they'll live to be 80 years old and they are very healthy and fit at the age of 55. Does the probability exists based on existing excellent, disease free health? Absolutely. Can a Doctor guarantee it? HELL NO!!!!! There are a million factors outside of just health, what about a Bus hitting this man 2 years after this medical check up at 55? What about Floods or Eath Quake hitting his house? So just like that, the no Escape Zone isn't a guaranteed zone. Its a highly probably area where the BVR missile can be the most effective in scoring a kill. But if the other side can break the lock, or make the missile run out of fuel somehow...well, the no escape zone became the dead zone for the missile itself!!

I believe the JFT does carry a module to confuse the radar signals and incoming missile's seeker, I think there is chaff dispensers on the plane too, some of the most common things jets used today. Another advance POD like the one found on the Growlers was also recently seen on J-16's and J-11B's. So there are things probably good enough to confuse missiles, specially the Russian ones as their frequencies and lock parameters are well known by the Chinese as they use them themselves.

SD-10 indeed is a great weapon but not in par with R77. Your comparison sounds like a test between two equally capable systems or merely different ones. 75km of "track range" to 200km of track range is a difference that you can't compensate through "words", & it's not just range here but also a 2 generations of gap between the technologies of both radars. Being bigger is not just about more fuel to stay longer in the air. It means many folds increase in radar range cuz of radar size and available power output, and also the liberty of going faster in order to give the missile a faster start that will enable it to exploit its full "theoretical range".


Track range of what? You didn't read my post did you? And if you DID read it, you should know that an MKI flying 300 miles away, can't see a JFT sitting on the Tarmac 60 miles from the border on a FOB. You can replace a BARS radar with a long range land radar, you can't see the JFT airborne, period. This is common sense. When something isn't airborne, how do you detect it?????

So now, the MKI is headed towards the border and is being tracked as soon as it enters in that 80 mile radius that the AD radars in Pakistan use to watch inside India (if an AWACS was up, he'd detect the SU-30 way before 300 KM's, but majority of Indian basis are within 200-240 KM's). So a scramble is sent when the MKI is around 40 KM away. The JFT at this time, is 60-80 KM's away from the border, plus the distance from the border to the MKI (40 KM) = 100-120 KM.

By the time the JFT is airborne and directed towards the vector, and above a certain height where the MKI can see you, about 20-30 KM's more would've passed by. So really, the JFT would see the MKI right between 60-80 miles. Even if the MKI saw JFT at 120 miles, the JFT would see it also. But either one firing their BVR, will waste missiles. Once they get into the optimal range (not no escape zone, that's much closer than 80 KM's we are discussing), they'll both fire their weapons and will start to do defensive maneuvers to throw off the lock from the incoming missile.

To the last point, both Indians and Pakistanis know this, this isn't some rocket science for a professional air-force to not know. But these are the rules of engagement.....I don't know what you expect from either side, be at the IAF or the PAF. Air-battles are fought through jets, not Star Trek spaceships that travel at the speed of light and that shiit......is also FANTASY, not real, no Lasers exist till 2020 that would take out jets just yet. No F-16 or the JFT can fly to Mars in 30 minutes :fie: :disagree::nono:

@Windjammer : would you like to add something to this topic under discussion? This gentlemen has some serious delusions about how air-defense actually works in Indo-Pak environment.
 
.
Hi,

The no escape range of a 100 km range BVR missile would be like if it is launched from a range of 20-30 km.

The problem I see over here is that the base would be under strike from surface to surface munitions----so---most of the fighter will have to be up in the air---farther back---.

So---again in this scenario---the short legged plane will lose----.

Then it also brings back the need for a heavy aircraft---you need to divert the attention of the enemy from your jugular vein to their jugular vein---.

The bottomline over here is that regardless of what the PAF says----under their current doctrine---pakistan's integrity is doomed---.

India has too much heavy fire power for pakistan air force to fight in a defensive mode---.

They have to have offencive strike aircraft----that can target mumbai and neighboring areas---.

Otherwise it is a reminder of the 1973 Ramazan war---the egyptians would go down to refil after 30 minutes and the israelis would pounce on them with their phantoms---.

The is no war in the history where a larger enemy with a massive and heavy fighting force has lost to a smaller enemy with a lighter force ON FLATLANDS.
 
Last edited:
.
Hi,

The no escape range of a 100 km range BVR missile would be like if it is launched from a range of 20-30 km.

The problem I see over here is that the base would be under strike from surface to surface munitions----so---most of the fighter will have to be up in the air---farther back---.

So---again in this scenario---the short legged plane will lose----.

Then it also brings back the need for a heavy aircraft---you need to divert the attention of the enemy from your jugular vein to their jugular vein---..

MK.....you are bringing in a whole different argument to this one. We are not talking about the need for a heavier aircraft right now. The current discussion with the guy above is on the BVR engagement between the MKI and the JFT, and how he thinks the JFT is useless in BVR. So please provide inside on that.

A BVR launched from 20-30 KM's would have a whole lot different "no escape zone" compared to a BVR launched from 80-100 KM's away. The former would have MUCH higher chances of hitting the target (I'd give advance BVR missiles like the AMRAAM about 100% chances of hitting the target when fired from 20-30 KM's), also the AIM-9X and later ones, also have 22 KM's range as a standard, so 20-30 KM's isn't real BVR anymore. But definitely over 90% kill probability for sure in this flight envelop.

On the last point on bases being under attacked, that would ALSO be the case for Indian bases too. As in any war, airbases, AD stations,, etc, would be attacked immediately through stand off munitions and missiles. So their SU-30's will have to be pushed back also, eliminating serious element of any surprise as the AD and AEW assets of Pakistan can then track them from like 200-350 KM inside the Indian territory.

That's a LOT of area the MKI will have to go one way so he'll be short on fuel too. The PAF jets, even pushed behind, don't have much depth due to Pakistan's size. So their fuel load may be 20-30% lesser than flying from an FOB. But MKI's would be burning a LOT more fuel due to added distance of it being pushed out to tier II bases being used, deep inside India.
 
Last edited:
.
Hi,

The no escape range of a 100 km range BVR missile would be like if it is launched from a range of 20-30 km.

The problem I see over here is that the base would be under strike from surface to surface munitions----so---most of the fighter will have to be up in the air---farther back---.

So---again in this scenario---the short legged plane will lose----.

Then it also brings back the need for a heavy aircraft---you need to divert the attention of the enemy from your jugular vein to their jugular vein---.

The bottomline over here is that regardless of what the PAF----under their current doctrine---pakistan's integrity is doomed---.

India has too much heavy fire power for pakistan air force to fight in a defensive mode---.

They have to have offencive strike aircraft----that can target mumbai and neighboring areas---.

Otherwise it is a reminder of the 1973 Ramazan war---the egyptians would go down to refil after 30 minutes and the israelis would pounce on them with their phantoms---.

The is no war in the history where a larger enemy with a massive and heavy fighting force has lost to a smaller enemy with a lighter force ON FLATLANDS.
yes PAF need a heavy fighter there only few options for pakistan buy euro fighter but it is too expensive OK let see a another one SU-35 which India would not let us buy it how about Chinese J-11 or J-15 still expensive but let's say we gave the order of 40 planes and when we going to get India going to receive rafale in 2020 if they signed the Final contract now the problem with 4th+ generation of fighter in my opinion is in very short future there will be many 5th generation fighter like chines J-20 or J-31 Russian Sukhoi PAK FA japness Mitsubishi X-2 turkey TAI TFX or USA F-22 or F-35 those are few exp you have 2 options 1st buy 4th+ heavy fighter now add it in your air force in 5 or 6 year with all the maintenance and pilot training or make your current aircraft better make it more lighter that sort of stuff and wait for 7 year and buy a 5th and you will be in next gen of fighter with your enemy

and MastanKhan what you said India have more heavy air power India can not even maintain half of there SU-30 if that happened with India with their economy what will going to happened with us
JF-17 can destroy Su-30 it is not that difficult the only problem is with JF-17 is loading limit because it is a light weight fighter it is going to have and flue capacity because of it's small size which can be solve by air refueling if u think BVR missile is magic i can not help u man it can be dodge by signal jammier or flares or maneuvering JF-17 is a fine plane in it's class it is a light weight fighter it bound to have some problems but not able to fight is not one of them
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom