Kashmir front - High Wing loading JF17, F-16 and Mi35

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Thank you for those images, I sincerely hope you read the post before you took the road to "enlightenment". Its more about penalty induced while take off at high altitude and not service ceiling if you know the difference.

im not a fighter expert but I do know that TWR plays an important part in things like "take off" etc..


As for underpowered etc.. I simply asked if you know the TWR of the so called underpowered JF.. Which was confirmed by PAF at Paris Airshow.

 

[Tipu7]

Again the same problem in comprehension.

You asked for pics in Mountainous area, and I do believe these are mountains. What you think?

Thats what I was saying when you got your best machine why dont you use it against your worst enemy? Why not chose it like that.

I don't understand the logic behind your this statement.
F16 carry advance targeting pod, thanks to CFT has much more range and obviously more payload. So why use Jf17?

First time I am hearing to this terminology of "defensive fighter jet"! Its amazing how creative people can become.

You heard it, so learn from it.
The ''doctrine'' of air force determine which air craft will serve which role in combat.
How will you use a short leg air craft with limited payload and lack of ability to avoid SAM systems during war?
Will you send it to hostile territory? Or will you use it to intercept the enemy aircraft by taking advantage of AWACS and SAM above your own territory? Ask yourself

Never knew JF-17 was so potent that it can do what F-16 cant, mind to list some of those "actions"?

Well in present
It carries Ant iradiation weapons which PAF F16 don't
It carries anti ship missiles which PAF F16 don't
In future
It will carry ALCM which PAF F16 can't
It will carry home grown stand off munitions which PAF F16 will not.
It will carry HOBS missiles which PAF F16 will not
It will carry IRST which PAF F16 will not
It will carry AESA whcih PAF F16 will not
etc etc
There are enough ''actions'' which Jf17 can perform and will perform which PAF F16 will not............

I highly doubt that as I recall an interview by your ACM or AM stating that F-16s are essential in anti terror roles which no other aircraft in your inventory can perform or something to that effect.

Anyway as already stated, JF-17 is a short legged aircraft and in Indo-Pak scenario you wouldn't dare to bring your refueling aircraft within range of Indian borders. There will be always be a trade off b/w fuel and ammo. F-16s and heavier crafts like SU-30s don't suffer from this limitation.

Such interviews are eye wash as it was part of strategy to show United States that how badly we needed those 8 F16s other wise Pakistan war against terror will compromise.

And I don't want to comment on your second para

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

@DESERT FIGHTER and others, I know talking about JF 17 touches some nerves but its not a just another thread about how glorious or inferior JF-17 is, I am talking about specifics, about a certain aspect of design.

If you can contribute about that, I will be more than thankful else please dont derail this thread in d!ck measuring contenst. Also mods please remove offtopic posts.

Thanks to all for understanding. Hope to make this a discussion worth reading and not some 100 pages troll fest.

Site do you see me trolling?

I'm barely mentioning the future upgrades and ops undertaken by JF.

 

[Spectre]

Or the fact that they have ordered ASELPOD for the very reason..

You can fill JF-17 to the brim with latest in avionics while it will give it parity in home ground, in away matches it will still suffer badly on account of the trade offs it has to make b/w fuel and ammo. This is possibly the biggest limitation of your main stay fighter jets.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I have no doubt regarding that. We have similar plans for our Tejas.

What both these aircrafts suffer from is the range limitations by the virtue of them being smaller and lighter aircrafts. This is something which cannot be easily modified if ever.

For Pakistan the range issue is ever more acute with India being much larger in size thus necessitating deeper strikes. Central India onwards to the south if Pakistan wishes to strike Indian installations - pilots would have to be prepared for a one way trip specially for your JF-17s where as most of Indian aircrafts like Mirages, Su-30 etc can strike quite deep within Pakistan and still hope to make it back.

I hope you understand this critical limitation because this allows India to position it's jets further back and still be in range while denying Pakistan that luxury.

The thread isn't about the range of JF.. Is it?

I mean common the ABs of both countries are almost right on the border .. And within the range of both countries as proven by the past wars.

You can fill JF-17 to the brim with latest in avionics while it will give it parity in home ground, in away matches it will still suffer badly on account of the trade offs it has to make b/w fuel and ammo. This is possibly the biggest limitation of your main stay fighter jets.

The only trade off I can think of right now is the range as you yourself mentioned..

 

[Spectre]

Such interviews are eye wash as it was part of strategy to show United States that how badly we need those 8 F16s other wise Pakistan war against terror will compromise.

That is your assumption. It might be right or may not be.

And I don't want to comment on your second para

This is your priviledge, you can cherry pick to your heart''s content.

I mean common the ABs of both countries are almost right on the border .. And within the range of both countries as proven by the past wars.

In past wars India didn't have long range fighter jets. Now it does allowing it to modify it's tactics at the same time giving it a strategic edge.

However as I have earlier stated - despite this advantage, India is unlikely to do anything because role of fighter jets in absence of capability to establish air superiority is limited. Costs will be very high and India is unlikely to pay that except in dire circumstances.

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

You asked for pics in Mountainous area, and I do believe these are mountains. What you think?

Was more interested in fully equipped fighter take off and not just some drop tanks or one or two sidewinger. Anyways I already thanked you for pics.

I don't understand the logic behind your this statement.
F16 carry advance targeting pod, thanks to CFT has much more range and obviously more payload. So why use Jf17?

I was talking about Mi35 not F16 or JF16.

Well
It carries Ant iradiation weapons which PAF F16 don't
It carries anti ship missiles which PAF F16 don't
It will carry ALCM which PAF F16 can't
It will carry home grown stand off munitions which PAF F16 will not.
enough ''actions''...........?

So that upgrade program for Block 52 wont provide this capability to F-16? anyways lets stay on topic.

Site do you see me trolling?

I'm barely mentioning the future upgrades and ops undertaken by JF.

No sir you are not trolling but there are thousand of other threads with upgrades and capabilities, I was more interested in keeping this discussion related to this aspect else other will reply to you and you will reply to them on these ignoring the topic completely.

 

[Tipu7]

I was talking about Mi35 not F16 or JF16.

Mi35 are for special forces.
We don't intend to use it as front line gunship.

So that upgrade program for Block 52 wont provide this capability to F-16?

I specially mentioned ''PAF F16'' instead of just ''F16''.
As Uncle Sam is very moody person, so he just don't approve some advance features of weapon systems they are giving.
Like He didn't gave us Aim9X, Leigon pods, AESA radar or a Tanker with Boom probe. So for PAF, Jf17 will cover the gap.

Was more interested in fully equipped fighter take off and not just some drop tanks or one or two sidewinger.

Well it is equipped with 2 drop tanks, two BVR and two WVR missiles.
What else you want on it?

 

[surya kiran]

Basics 101. Mountain warfare, you need artillery. High precision artillery backed by infantry and mechanised infantry. Anybody, even remotely suggesting air power for dominance in mountain warfare has read too much of fiction.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

That is your assumption. It might be right or may not be.



This is your priviledge, you can cherry pick to your heart''s content.



In past wars India didn't have long range fighter jets. Now it does allowing it to modify it's tactics at the same time giving it a strategic edge.

However as I have earlier stated - despite this advantage, India is unlikely to do anything because role of fighter jets in absence of capability to establish air superiority is limited. Costs will be very high and India is unlikely to pay that except in dire circumstances.

In the past there were no LRSAMs or AWACS or cruise missiles either.

PAF isn't going to strike anadaman islands or in south india either..

Was more interested in fully equipped fighter take off and not just some drop tanks or one or two sidewinger. Anyways I already thanked you for pics.



I was talking about Mi35 not F16 or JF16.



So that upgrade program for Block 52 wont provide this capability to F-16? anyways lets stay on topic.


No sir you are not trolling but there are thousand of other threads with upgrades and capabilities, I was more interested in keeping this discussion related to this aspect else other will reply to you and you will reply to them on these ignoring the topic completely.

Yara MI-35Es are for the Special Forces SQD.

The anti armour role will be fulfilled by Vipers & T-129/Z-10s.

The fennecs will be scouts.

 

[Spectre]

In the past there were no LRSAMs or AWACS or cruise missiles either.

PAF isn't going to strike anadaman islands or in south india either..

Just apply a simple rule of thumb - what you have, we have. We also have a wee bit extra. That doesn't mean we will win or you will loose but it makes our job bit easier and yours a bit harder.

 

[Dazzler]

That is your assumption. It might be right or may not be.



This is your priviledge, you can cherry pick to your heart''s content.



In past wars India didn't have long range fighter jets. Now it does allowing it to modify it's tactics at the same time giving it a strategic edge.

However as I have earlier stated - despite this advantage, India is unlikely to do anything because role of fighter jets in absence of capability to establish air superiority is limited. Costs will be very high and India is unlikely to pay that except in dire circumstances.

your so called long range fighter has less than 50% availability for sortie generation while our has more than 90%.

I have just started,

 

[TOPGUN]

Indians always making their own fairy tale war stories , laughing by themselves, crying by themselves, trolling by themselves and being left alone by themselves never talk about peace so many behind the screen hero's here but they never talk about friendship and peace for once rather then talking about star wars. War is nothing pretty their will be massive damage on both sides a lot of lives lost and etc lets hope and pray for peace for once.

 

[Spectre]

your so called long range fighter has less than 50% availability for sortie generation while our has more than 90%.

I have just started,

Availability rates are a function of necessity beyond anything else. The more money you spend, higher will be the availability rates - in peace time we don't need the expense of keeping all the SU-30 flying all the time so we manage in the cost effective way by rationing the spares. When necessary for eg in Red Flag all the SU-30s had 100% availability rate. Similarly during war time, availability rates will rise.

Then you come to mirages, upg Mig-29s etc etc and you would realise we have more than enough.

While you having limited no of op aircrafts which can be used for counter terror ops in absence of pods and at the same time F16s are conducting active ops thus maintain a higher availability which should come at no surprise when compared to IAF which faces no such emergency roles.

And yeah..go on, no need to stop on my account

 

[gslv mk3]

your so called long range fighter has less than 50% availability for sortie generation while our has more than 90%.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ty-could-go-up-to-75/articleshow/50075387.cms