No J-10B for PAF | A.C Khalid, calls for a focus on 5th generation platform instead.

[Kompromat]

@Munir, so this PS image may after all not be out of place, we'll just have to wait for some Moons to pass us by.

You cant be serious. This is Gripen NG level of upgrades.

 

[Bilal.]

You cant be serious. This is Gripen NG level of upgrades.

Considering current JF-17 is not far off from the gripen c/d then it's not impossible to imagine for block III to be close to Ng/E.

@Munir you made my day sir! Thank you.

 

[Zarvan]

There is no deal. We will keep buying F-16s and build 250 Thunders.

Well if we can get 126 F-16 total and 250 JF-17 Thunder total than after improving economy if needed we can go for 36 to 54 J-10 C

 

[Kompromat]

@Munir . Sir i must mention that UAE paid 3 Billion for the development of Block-60. To build a JFT with similar capabilities in mind is going to blow our budget.

 

[Informant]

To Munir



In Reply

Russia China India = flankers Mig29
USA ISRAEL Japan Saudi South kOREA =F15/F18
UK FRANCE & Germant Luftwaffe = Typhoon Rafale

They also happen to be the 10 Strongest Air forces in the world.

Twin Engines give you massive operational adbvantages

F22 PAK FA & J20 are all Twinengines

Indeed it gives a capability unmatched, but also look at the area they have to cover. Or their enemies are far away from their territories. Plus the capability of having bigger budgets give them the advantage of using twin engine fighters.

@Munir . Sir i must mention that UAE paid 3 Billion for the development of Block-60. To build a JFT with similar capabilities in mind is going to blow our budget.

It's going to Puncture PAF more or less.

 

[Munir]

aeronaut Shahib, If you buy a whole foreign team and make something from scratch... Yes, that is expensive. If it is known technology and even improved/simplified/stolen and build in a cheap labor nation... Would it cost the same?

 

[Kompromat]

aeronaut Shahib, If you buy a whole foreign team and make something from scratch... Yes, that is expensive. If it is known technology and even improved/simplified/stolen and build in a cheap labor nation... Would it cost the same?

Your point is valid, though creating such a jet doesn't solely depend on the reduced labor costs. If we are to increase the composite materials usage to reduce the weight to have a higher TWR, it is going to push the costs up as those material by no means are cheap. Then you have IRST, Retractable IFR, AESA radar, Full FBEWCS or Fly by light, new increased thrust engine, new weapon systems and sensors with an upgraded package of avionics, HMS and holographic HUD.

All of the above are included in Gripen NG and they come at an increased cost. I am unwilling to buy the narrative of a Gripen NG like JFT without raising per unit cost. It is possible for us to do it only if our economy recovers and funds become available.

 

[Donatello]

Your point is valid, though creating such a jet doesn't solely depend on the reduced labor costs. If we are to increase the composite materials usage to reduce the weight to have a higher TWR, it is going to push the costs up as those material by no means are cheap. Then you have IRST, Retractable IFR, AESA radar, Full FBEWCS or Fly by light, new increased thrust engine, new weapon systems and sensors with an upgraded package of avionics, HMS and holographic HUD.

All of the above are included in Gripen NG and they come at an increased cost. I am unwilling to buy the narrative of a Gripen NG like JFT without raising per unit cost. It is possible for us to do it only if our economy recovers and funds become available.

Aeronaut, JF-17 is superior to the F-16s of the earlier days blk15. We managed to create an aircraft of better capability with less money. Did F-16 cost 15-20 million in 1970s80s figures? Probably not. So the next incremental step would be not that costly. JF-17 needs advanced avionics, probably IRST and AESA and also more hardpoints. Otherwise it is a very potent platform and with more f-16s incoming, it forms a good strike force.

 

[Munir]

Your point is valid, though creating such a jet doesn't solely depend on the reduced labor costs. If we are to increase the composite materials usage to reduce the weight to have a higher TWR, it is going to push the costs up as those material by no means are cheap. Then you have IRST, Retractable IFR, AESA radar, Full FBEWCS or Fly by light, new increased thrust engine, new weapon systems and sensors with an upgraded package of avionics, HMS and holographic HUD.

All of the above are included in Gripen NG and they come at an increased cost. I am unwilling to buy the narrative of a Gripen NG like JFT without raising per unit cost. It is possible for us to do it only if our economy recovers and funds become available.

I do not think I only meant labor costs... If you made AIM9X. I just get the info which parts are used. I make these same items without years of research... That is a lot cheaper.

Besides that, Donatello has it correct. The JF17 preserves kinetic energy better. It has a smaller rcs then F16 back then. It has MAWS while F16 had it much later. Wven the cockpit of JF17 is far more flatscreen then F16block52...

I do not mean it personally but you are blinded by marketing material that F16 is the best. Even Chuck YEager told that people are thinking that the tilted seat was build for better performance... Well it helps little but the reality is that it was tilted to reduce frontal area... If the pilots sits normal then it has huge frontal canopy and drag... Trust me. The JF17 might be simpler or cheaper... By no means it is inferior. I bet that a well trained JF17 pilot can cause enough headache for f16 pilot.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Your point is valid, though creating such a jet doesn't solely depend on the reduced labor costs. If we are to increase the composite materials usage to reduce the weight to have a higher TWR, it is going to push the costs up as those material by no means are cheap. Then you have IRST, Retractable IFR, AESA radar, Full FBEWCS or Fly by light, new increased thrust engine, new weapon systems and sensors with an upgraded package of avionics, HMS and holographic HUD.

All of the above are included in Gripen NG and they come at an increased cost. I am unwilling to buy the narrative of a Gripen NG like JFT without raising per unit cost. It is possible for us to do it only if our economy recovers and funds become available.

It is understandable costs will go up but PAF just can't be stuck in the same Generation forever. Technologies are evolving eventually Block III/IV will have to go somewhere if it wants to have successful sales or and survive/thrive in the Future otherwise it is going to be another F-20. You see already Block II costs have gone up so PAF itself contradicted that costs will be kept low. The original envision 17-19m has gone up to 24-25m as long as Block III/IV remains under 38m it is definitely an excellent price. B.A.E hawk costs 30m what more do we want A 4++ advance Gen under 40m.

 

[Kompromat]

@Luftwaffe

All of your points are reasonable. The bottom line remains our ecinomic recovery. Better GDP growth means larger budget, which means spare cash for such projects.

You know that i have been a long supporter of the JFT program. Its a blessing for our aviation industry. Given the economic recovery, we must keep upgrading them into more blocks than 3.

We should create SMEs in our aviation industry to foster a research and development culture at a smaller and industrial level.

 

[Luftwaffe]

@Luftwaffe

All of your points are reasonable. The bottom line remains our ecinomic recovery. Better GDP growth means larger budget, which means spare cash for such projects.

You know that i have been a long supporter of the JFT program. Its a blessing for our aviation industry. Given the economic recovery, we must keep upgrading them into more blocks than 3.

We should create SMEs in our aviation industry to foster a research and development culture at a smaller and industrial level.

We cannot compete with Gloabl Air Forces, our focus is IAF lets be honest, their fulcrums, lca, mirages, jaguars are here to stay for the next 2 decades. We have on our hands a platform that we need to modernize and customize to give them run for the money and perform well and exceed the expectations. Finances is the problem but once 150 numbers is reached we need to get/add few numbers from time to time as needed requirements which i believe is attainable...

 

[Donatello]

It's the avionics that count more than ever. If i can see you, target you before you can see me, i am done with my job. In case WVR fight takes place, i should have good jamming and above all a good coordination with my fellow fighter planes. In IAF vs PAF scenario it will be literally 100 or more fighters in the sky in a short area. A pilot will need to know where his partners are and where his enemies are. The technology that both IAF and PAF posses has never been tested in a full battle scenario anywhere in the world.
When was the last time we saw so many fighters equipped with BVR weapons going head to head? Iraq-US gulf war was a joke. In terms of electronic technology, Vietnam air wars are an obsolete concept. So there is not much to draw from in real scenario. Plus in the case of IAF vs PAF we can't really draw parallels from the past of 1965 or 1971. Those were antique World War 2 fighting strategies. You bomb targets by flying over them. You dogfight, the better pilot and machine wins. That's not gonna happen anymore. Missiles on both sides are deadly. And so are stand off weapons. No need to fly F-16s over Indian bases. You drop JDAMs and other glide bombs and go back home. So it is getting extremely complex. And then we have the fighter to fighter communication links, better radars and above all AEWACs. The scenario has totally changed. IAF had a BIG advantage with it's BVR, but still it never fielded them in a war. Now PAF has massively closed the gap with AIM120 an SD10s. IF AIM9Xs come to PAF, the whole scenario changes again.

My only reservations with JF-17 are the fact that since it needs at least 2 drop tanks for a typical strike mission, it leaves 5 hardpoints of any use. If one is used up by a pod, then only four are left for Air to Air. These hardpoints should be at least 9 or 10. 2 WVRs, 4 BVRs gives JF-17 a tremendous strike capability, while allowing the remaining hardpoints to be used for 1000lb bombs, pods etc.

Another thing perhaps PAF can do is develop dedicated JF-17 EW versions, like the F-18 Growlers. So maybe out of 20 or so in a squadron, 4 can be dedicated EW platforms. It's quite possible since the engineering of this plane is entirely in our hands. The only limiting factor is our imagination, foresight and of course, funds.

We cannot compete with Gloabl Air Forces, our focus is IAF lets be honest, their fulcrums, lca, mirages, jaguars are here to stay for the next 2 decades. We have on our hands a platform that we need to modernize and customize to give them run for the money and perform well and exceed the expectations. Finances is the problem but once 150 numbers is reached we need to get/add few numbers from time to time as needed requirements which i believe is attainable...

Well, at least under this government i see some improvement in finances coming. Economy has stabilized somewhat.

@Oscar , would you like to add anything?

 

[VelocuR]

Haq's Musings: World Bank: Pakistan Ranks Among World's 25 Largest Economies

Our economy is improving a bit, we should not have any problems to purchase J-10B next few years? You can disagree with biased opinions by Air Commodore Khalid Mehmood.

 

[Munir]

[1] My only reservations with JF-17 are the fact that since it needs at least 2 drop tanks for a typical strike mission, it leaves 5 hardpoints of any use. If one is used up by a pod, then only four are left for Air to Air. These hardpoints should be at least 9 or 10. 2 WVRs, 4 BVRs gives JF-17 a tremendous strike capability, while allowing the remaining hardpoints to be used for 1000lb bombs, pods etc.

[2]Another thing perhaps PAF can do is develop dedicated JF-17 EW versions, like the F-18 Growlers. So maybe out of 20 or so in a squadron, 4 can be dedicated EW platforms. It's quite possible since the engineering of this plane is entirely in our hands. The only limiting factor is our imagination, foresight and of course, funds.

[3] Well, at least under this government i see some improvement in finances coming. Economy has stabilized somewhat.

@Oscar , would you like to add anything?

[1] I guess that they will get CFT when a better engine is introduced. Right now it would cause drag issues that cannot be reduced by dropping fuel tanks... But I think with more and more smart weapons the planes are less needed to carry huge weight. And with IFR and belly tank it is not that bad. Pretty good if you ask me. How far is India? How deep do we have to go?

[2] With AWACS and dedicated jammers we do not need to make a light plane a lot heavier... But... It has already library of all possible radars and DRFM included. And it has links... Only AESA would be nice extra. Read my lips... Block 3.

[3] I do not see lending huge sums is good for anyone. Certainly not with less then 8% improvement. Nawaz is hardly improving the economy, remittance are.