PAF Deploys to Northern Territories

[TOPGUN]

What???

I thought you were talking about FC-20 !!

 

[MastanKhan]

If we buy f22 people will say j10 is dud too...
Everyone knows j10 is better than jf17
Does it bring local manufacturing, freedom of weapon integration, cost?..

Hi,

There was never any objection to that---. As a matter of fact---the chinese would have borne most of the weapons / systems integration cost---.

 

[GriffinsRule]

@MastanKhan I don't know about the 'someone at the top part' but the point you brought up might have a little validity ... and I concurred as much, in that J-10 is a better aircraft then the JF-17. To what degree however, that is up for debate. Since it is larger, it offers more range and carrying capability and is more expensive, but in the same vein, the F-16 is better still. JF-17 is not competing against the J-10s or F-16s so I don't know how much weight your argument carries though, esp since you can not compare an off-the-shelf purchase with a program designed to build a manufacturing base in the country.

As for @LKJ86 your argument flies in the face of what PLAAF has in its inventory (hundreds and hundreds of J-7 and A-5s) and now newer version of the former in the guise of FTC-2000. China, regardless of its size is in no realistic position to replace all those aircraft with "heavies". So yes, they reneged on their part of the agreement to do a split buy of the JF-17 and I would even say it hurt the aircraft's sales prospects. But Pakistan has still gained from the program and I am hopeful they will continue to keep going in that direction with project AZM and so forth.

 

[MastanKhan]

@MastanKhan I don't know about the 'someone at the top part' but the point you brought up might have a little validity ... and I concurred as much, in that J-10 is a better aircraft then the JF-17. To what degree however, that is up for debate. Since it is larger, it offers more range and carrying capability and is more expensive, but in the same vein, the F-16 is better still. JF-17 is not competing against the J-10s or F-16s so I don't know how much weight your argument carries though, esp since you can not compare an off-the-shelf purchase with a program designed to build a manufacturing base in the country.

As for @LKJ86 your argument flies in the face of what PLAAF has in its inventory (hundreds and hundreds of J-7 and A-5s) and now newer version of the former in the guise of FTC-2000. China, regardless of its size is in no realistic position to replace all those aircraft with "heavies". So yes, they reneged on their part of the agreement to do a split buy of the JF-17 and I would even say it hurt the aircraft's sales prospects. But Pakistan has still gained from the program and I am hopeful they will continue to keep going in that direction with project AZM and so forth.

Hi,

Just for a moment---let us agree that J10 & the JF17 are very similar---but the thing is that the J10 is about 5-10 years ahead of the JF17 in venues of integration.

What the JF17 would give to the pilot after 5 years from now---the Paf current pilot would be ahead of that time curve by 5 years on a J10---if Paf had opted for them---.

So---TACTICALLY---& STRATEGICALLY---the JF17 brings out an inferior product when compared to the J10---because of the TIME FACTOR involved---.

 

[GriffinsRule]

I would disagree again with that very simplified assertion. J-10A was a flawed product in fact. You can clearly see the poor engineering in the fact that they had to reinforce the intake with strakes in the early models. Since that is the aircraft PAF was supposed to have bought, I am glad we did not. Who knows what else was substandard from both production and design stand points (it was after all the first newer generation aircraft made in China and clearly had teething issues) and reasons why it did not end up in the PAF?

So tactically and strategically it was a good move to not rush into buying the J-10A and the end result happened to lead us towards JF-17.

 

[LKJ86]

As for @LKJ86 your argument flies in the face of what PLAAF has in its inventory (hundreds and hundreds of J-7 and A-5s) and now newer version of the former in the guise of FTC-2000. China, regardless of its size is in no realistic position to replace all those aircraft with "heavies". So yes, they reneged on their part of the agreement to do a split buy of the JF-17 and I would even say it hurt the aircraft's sales prospects. But Pakistan has still gained from the program and I am hopeful they will continue to keep going in that direction with project AZM and so forth.

1. The fighters in production now for PLAAF and PLANAF are J-10C, J-11B, J-15, J-16, and J-20, and they are replacing the J-7, J-8, and JH-7. There are no Q-5s in service now.

2. FTC-2000G is just for export. And JL-9 is a trainer, not a fighter.

So, there is no place in PLAAF and PLANAF for light fighters, like FC-1.

 

[GriffinsRule]

So PLAAF is going to be a 3 type aircraft type airforce? J-10, SU-27 variants and J-20?
I don't have concrete up to date numbers on PLAAF inventory (excluding PLAAN) but roughly fighters they have to replace per you are some 400 J-7s, ~150 JH-7s, and ~200 J-8s.
They have bought about a 100 or so Su-30/35s and produced maybe 300 J-11/15/16 variants and maybe 300-400 J-10s? So basically they have to effectively half of their air force to replace still ... I see plenty of room for JF-17s unless they opt to stick to J-10s. but it will take them another decade to get there. Given that the JF-17/FC-1 would have been inducted a decade in the past, yeah they should have bought it along with the PAF, but anyways, what is done is done. PAF needs to be vary of getting into an agreement with the Chinese where it ends up in a single-user situation again (read no J-31)

 

[LKJ86]

So PLAAF is going to be a 3 type aircraft type airforce? J-10, SU-27 variants and J-20?

No matter you believe or not, it is what PLAAF and PLANAF are doing.
Besides, J-10 always has to take two or three drop tanks on its missions, so you can understand what PLAAF and PLANAF want from that.

I would disagree again with that very simplified assertion. J-10A was a flawed product in fact. You can clearly see the poor engineering in the fact that they had to reinforce the intake with strakes in the early models. Since that is the aircraft PAF was supposed to have bought, I am glad we did not. Who knows what else was substandard from both production and design stand points (it was after all the first newer generation aircraft made in China and clearly had teething issues) and reasons why it did not end up in the PAF?

So tactically and strategically it was a good move to not rush into buying the J-10A and the end result happened to lead us towards JF-17.

I think you should know that, J-10A had beaten Thailand's JAS-39 in 2017, while Su-27 lost in 2015.

And the supersonic flight performance of J-10A is better than that of J-10B/C.

 

[CriticalThought]

I would disagree again with that very simplified assertion. J-10A was a flawed product in fact. You can clearly see the poor engineering in the fact that they had to reinforce the intake with strakes in the early models. Since that is the aircraft PAF was supposed to have bought, I am glad we did not. Who knows what else was substandard from both production and design stand points (it was after all the first newer generation aircraft made in China and clearly had teething issues) and reasons why it did not end up in the PAF?

So tactically and strategically it was a good move to not rush into buying the J-10A and the end result happened to lead us towards JF-17.

And if indications on the forum are to be believed, Block 3 should shut the mouths of critics. This is in keeping with a passing remark of previous ACM when he said we cannot afford to make any mistakes with Block 3. Things hinted on the forum so far:

1. Better stationary to take off times due to new power pack.
2. Dedicated variants for specific roles.
3. Engine enhancements.

I think time shall give the best response to naysayers. @messiach do you have anything to add here?

 

[Roybot]

Initially it was reported that PLAAF will buy 250 and PAF 150 JF-17s.
This article from 2007 also mentions this.

http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2007/10/jf-17-and-plaaf.html

They must have realised that the JF-17 is not good enough for their Air Force.

 

[Aasimkhan]

India is not in a position to capture territory of pakistan, but to safe guard its current border.There will no major war between India and Pakistan.It is up to pakistan to decide if they want another war by provoking India, since India never start any war in first place.

It is like provoking a tiger and expect the tiger to be nice with you.

India tiger? HAHA, u can call them a snake

4 of them were flying on my head

View attachment 501192 View attachment 501193

when and where was this pic taken ?

If we buy f22 people will say j10 is dud too...
Everyone knows j10 is better than jf17
Does it bring local manufacturing, freedom of weapon integration, cost?..

A dud JF17 with KJL7A radar and WS15 missile is better than any other aircraft. A plane is hardly anything other than radar and missile. Its just a carrier platform. 80% of the battle will be fought in BVR regime. JF17 priced at 20-30 million dollar is an ideal choice. trust me it will prove to be an SU30 killer

 

[araz]

Except you don’t see the B-52s falling out of the skies on regular intervals



The Chinese operate the Su-30MKK while the Malaysians deploy the SU-30MKM. The SU-30MKM is basically the SU-30MKI with avionics differences. As far as I know, PAF never trained against the SU-MKMs nor has it trained against the Egyptian or Qatari Rafaels

My understanding is that the MKK and MKI have basic characteristics in common due to origin. Just because they have a few minor differences does not change their flight characteristics.
A

 

[Raider 21]

1. The fighters in production now for PLAAF and PLANAF are J-10C, J-11B, J-15, J-16, and J-20, and they are replacing the J-7, J-8, and JH-7. There are no Q-5s in service now.

2. FTC-2000G is just for export. And JL-9 is a trainer, not a fighter.

So, there is no place in PLAAF and PLANAF for light fighters, like FC-1.

Depends but I believe it was being used as an advanced jet trainer for PLAAF. I know a bunch of pilots from Pakistan, Germany, Canada and South Africa who were writing up the course syllabus for the PLAAF.

 

[LKJ86]

Depends but I believe it was being used as an advanced jet trainer for PLAAF.

FTC-2000G is based on the JL-9H.
JL-10/L-15 and JL-9 are the advanced trainers for PLAAF and PLANAF.

FTC-2000G for export:

JL-9H trainer for PLAN:

JL-10 trainer:

 

[MastanKhan]

I would disagree again with that very simplified assertion. J-10A was a flawed product in fact. You can clearly see the poor engineering in the fact that they had to reinforce the intake with strakes in the early models. Since that is the aircraft PAF was supposed to have bought, I am glad we did not. Who knows what else was substandard from both production and design stand points (it was after all the first newer generation aircraft made in China and clearly had teething issues) and reasons why it did not end up in the PAF?

So tactically and strategically it was a good move to not rush into buying the J-10A and the end result happened to lead us towards JF-17.

hi,

Strengthening the intake is a very minor issue---.

The wings of the JF17 had to be strengthened---. That was a major issue---amongst many others---.

What else on the JF17 needed HELP---we won't know because Paf would hide it---.

India tiger? HAHA, u can call them a snake


when and where was this pic taken ?


A dud JF17 with KJL7A radar and WS15 missile is better than any other aircraft. A plane is hardly anything other than radar and missile. Its just a carrier platform. 80% of the battle will be fought in BVR regime. JF17 priced at 20-30 million dollar is an ideal choice. trust me it will prove to be an SU30 killer

Hi,

It is good to have trust---but if you have something behind it to GUARANTEE it---that is even better---.

You cannot live on "trust" alone---.