PAF Single engined Doctrine Good or Bad.

[epinephrine]

Masterkhan,


The chinease have come along way no doubt but a $15m dollar plane costs this amount because they have intentionally left out some very expensive tech in the first build.

That can include a lack of composites in the build, small radar based on MSA scanning, small EW suite and limited sensors.
You obtain the plane quickly to fill squadrons quickly and its cheap and easy to maintain.

In large nos ie 100+ its a effective system backed by ground based radar and AWACS...

But effective only in PAK AIRSPACE..

well if an aircraft is equipped with aesa radar,irst,hmcs,in flight refueling system,bvr missiles,glide bombs,air launched cruise missiles it will be good enough to strike all of ur forward bases.we r getting all these systems in the form of F-16,jf 17 n j10.for deeper bases we have missiles so we have got u completely by ur balls.bvr tech gives an advantage to any force using it.we have got the world's best bvr missile in the form 0f aim 120c.jf -17 with sd 10 which is same as r77 .even the effectiveness of bvr decreases with range.dont think dat ur sukhois will fire bvr missile from asam n they will hit jf-17 flying our baluchistan.sukhoi will have to come close to jf-17 to increase kill probability of its missile n in that range it ll itself present a bigger n easier target for paf jets.

regarding the numbers of the aircraft.i think iaf has been folloowing the policy of large numbers of flying coffins since inception.mig 21s r the most numerous aircraft of iaf.an old piece of sh*t.n in future ur airforce will be replacing its mig fleet with large number of cheap n low 4th gen lca.so ur airforce is following the same old policy of filling its sqns with kites.yes sukhoi is a capable plane in ur air force n mmrca will be good too but it will definitely gonna take long time because u live in india where evrery thing is delayed due to corruption political reasons

 

[Super Falcon]

only single word hell of the stupidity we have investedt 120 percent in single engine even for future too our think tank is nuts you must have diiferent type of capabilities in order to win the war this is not im saying this is history saying in past wars see what happened with japan they dont have plan B and dont have different type of weapons and look what USA did with them they do not had atmoic bomb but our enemy have atomic bomb too what makes us one step ahead of them nothing just nothing

 

[Pfpilot]

With all my Respect i have to say that i said v could use bvr so as them. i didn,t go in deep because that is not on the topic as you can read PAF Single engined Doctrine Good or Bad. if you want me to go in ranges and quality of bvr i can go mr but i don,t i aviod fact was i remain stick with topic i know what is bvr on 4th gen and what is on 5th gen so i know these stuff but i don,t go in deep i said both can use bvr i refer using bvr right just using so both becomes equal and other thing you said the pakage payload and other they test this engine how much it can pick the payload how many hard points i think no difference with double engine if f-16 can pick 11 hard points with singal engine with thrust to w ratio 1.1 so whats the problem?

other thing you said they lock down with bvr high quality and you are finished but the thing is in the pakage there are some avionics and safty tools from air-to-air missile well 100 million aircraft don,t have safty function thats impossible they don,t build 1 so there must be some mystry behind this i m not enginner of aircraft so i can,t tell you in detail so leave this topic we are not discussing about bvr or rcs

you said about habbit i agree with you but we are not competing with american or rassian we get average tools but we are some how competing with india so they compare with them if they have average they compare it and we have better then india than understanding 2 u is easy i guess we are not not getting high class you can say average but we are trying to make it best
time 2 time we are improving that you can,t deny

well when it comes to fight for life and death brain get active more than before so impossible things happans but i remain with realistic explaination
1: brain activity 2: professionals : 3 training 4: metally strong 5: how to use there tools when your enemy is superior than you

i think till paf get superior tools they won,t be waiting the plane will comes then we can destory them no they won,t be siting around for years and do nothing think nothing to defeat superior planes i hope they might have some backup planes if you understand then you should better this time

you said some resreach---------- start a bvr topic i,ll be there for you at first time trust me i m new at this my post are not enough but i daily read comments here just for usefull information and how pakistan is making prograss that just make me happy nothing else so you can say i m selfish to become happy and wait all day for new news and read and read that all

My man, you are missing a very simple point. An aircraft could have all the engine thrust it would ever want, but the rapid advancement in BVR missile technology is reducing the relevance of high power engines and super maneuverability. What will doing acrobatic maneuvers accomplish, when the enemy has a lock on from 70km...to him, the maneuvering aircraft will hardly look as if it is changing direction on the HUD, due to the distance involved.
Accordingly, the importance of BVR today requires each side to try and procure the missiles that will provide the best compromise between accuracy, maneuverability and range...the idea being that missiles will do all the work that aircraft did 30 years ago. Which is why procuring those amraams was such an important development for Pakistan.

 

[Luftwaffe]

My man, you are missing a very simple point.

Add Maneuverability. So if the Aircraft is on a SEAD A2G mission, it's in his best interest to hit assigned targets quickly so to get rid of weapons load meanwhile if while in enemy territory the aircraft is spotted by patrolling fighter most likely such an a mission is in jeopardy and in trouble with two choices either to dump weapons and runaway or face it incase or facing it, its a sitting duck if superior missiles like AMRAAMs are fired.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

First you make a strong base---then you build on it. When you make an engine for the JF 17 as strong as the F16---then you are taking things to the next level----. Now being all things un-equal----where do you look for to equality and edge when you know that you cannot compete in numbers---.

Your only outlet is the electronic suite and your BVR missile--both long range bvr and medium range range bvr--. So--even though the su 30 is an extremely extremely potent platform---with a massive amount of fire power---the aim120 that we were given by the u s---has put a great big dent upon its capabilities---the 95% kill range of this missile is much longer than what the iaf has in its inventory---so as long as there is that edge available to a smaller air force like the paf---it will be able to make its impact.

But when you are building the base---you cannot forget the environment that you are living in---who you are going to confront---what the opponent has and what do you have to offer---.

Remember---we don't live in ETHER----the reason we have millitaries---is that we have an enemy to fight against----and we have weapons and weapons systems to compete---beat and neutralize the enemy's weapons systems---they have to match in shape, size, form and matter---in their form and function against what the enemy is going to put forward----not in numbers exactly---but definitely in performance----.

Again---the bottomline in having a better weapons system is to bring the enemy to the peace table---that is what it is all about----but once you get behind---and start lagging in fulfilling the needs of the defence forces----you can't catch up---unless the enemy blunders----.


The catch up game is not a good game----.

 

[drunken-monke]

I have red all the replies on this thread. Few ones like Mastan Khan, Windjamer, pfpilot, Storm force have contributed well in this thread. I would like to read thoughts from Antibody and Santro if they can. I want details thoughts of theirs over this issue..

 

[INDIAISM]

I think the main reasons why PAF is not considering to procure twin engine aircrafts are-

A}Land Area...i mean they don't have huge land area like China,Russia or India to Defend...

B}They don't have any Global ambition like America, Britain or France...

C} Economy...its Easy to buy Merc...but who will afford the running cost..i mean the oil and the spare parts...flying cost of these twin aircraft is almost three times then single engine aircrafts

D}Oil Reserve during war time....twin consume huge amount of fuel and during war it can become your week point...

 

[Storm Force]

Reply to Pak National.

Re Thunder unit price is around $15m each for block 1 version ie the current 33 + 17 to be delivered. GOPwhere granted a SOFTLOAN of $650m 2009 for the first phase of thunder programme.

As for Amraam c5 BVR missle is great weapon and great deterrant as long as Pakistan can retain USA frienship into the future.
What good is AMRAAM C5 if the usa are neutralising the amraam threat by passing details to their ally india in next big kick off.

I wouldnt be comfortanle with USA equipment in future south asian conflict as USA will not provide spares and may well side with india passing intelligence, real time data and counter measures to F16/C5 amraam.

THAT IS A NOT FAR FETCHED POSSIBLITY as the national security adviser of USA is in new delhi this week " i notice he did not stop in pakistan"

 

[Alchemy]

nice post but dont be so relaxed.we can hit india anywhere we like to not by air crafts but with missiles.

When we come to threads about strengths of Indian and Pakistani missiles you can try to scare us with your missile threats ...the thread here is "PAF Single engined Doctrine Good or Bad" !!!

 

[Storm Force]

Re:

Pdf members argument that F16 single engine is the answer please read hyper link from F16 NET

SOME OF THESE ARE FORMER PILOTS i trust their observation far more than any one else be it indian or pakistani

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-13755.html

Partcular attention to scorpion about a upgraded flankers winning on most parameters

HIS COMMENTS ARE

I don't think that these two types compare to well. The F-16 was the USAFs low part of the 4th gen mix, while the Su-27 was the high part of the soviet 4th gen mix.
The Su-35 is very likely a more capable fighter with its powerful radar and other sensors and likely superior performance in most areas. With JHMCS+AIM-9X the Viper shouldn't fare bad in dogfighting situations and the AIM-120C-5 might indeed offer some advantages over the R-77, the question in which state are all those AAMs proposed by the Russians since so many years. In the strike role the F-16 is likely to benefit from a broad range of more advanced PGMs and better TGP, the Flanker scores in terms of payload and range and can employ some weapons not available to the F-16 such as supersonic capable ASMs and stand-off missiles.

 

[Storm Force]

If you recall i have previously useds terms like

FLEXIBILITY of operation
range, payload
no of bvrs and types of seekers

over whelming the adversary with salvos of 4 bvrs at a time.

pretty much what i was referring too

(and this excludes mmrca threat)

 

[SBD-3]

Re:

Pdf members argument that F16 single engine is the answer please read hyper link from F16 NET

SOME OF THESE ARE FORMER PILOTS i trust their observation far more than any one else be it indian or pakistani

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-13755.html

Partcular attention to scorpion about a upgraded flankers winning on most parameters

HIS COMMENTS ARE

I don't think that these two types compare to well. The F-16 was the USAFs low part of the 4th gen mix, while the Su-27 was the high part of the soviet 4th gen mix.
The Su-35 is very likely a more capable fighter with its powerful radar and other sensors and likely superior performance in most areas. With JHMCS+AIM-9X the Viper shouldn't fare bad in dogfighting situations and the AIM-120C-5 might indeed offer some advantages over the R-77, the question in which state are all those AAMs proposed by the Russians since so many years. In the strike role the F-16 is likely to benefit from a broad range of more advanced PGMs and better TGP, the Flanker scores in terms of payload and range and can employ some weapons not available to the F-16 such as supersonic capable ASMs and stand-off missiles.

I would not expect such a gross argument.......Name a type of weapon which F-16 doesnt carry or can not carry, F-16s arsenal is infact much more diversified and broad as it is a true multirole aircraft. I said it before and i am saying again that with evermore growing weapons sophistication, the need to carry more is to a good extent has been replaced. All one need to carry is some PGMs instead of large number of blind bombs. Btw Russian lag in sensor technology to an extent is exposed by what we saw on PAK-FA (using radars as substitute to DAS), what is left is radar, in which russians are new. F-16s are operational with AESA for a while with upgrades available, whereas till date who is operating SU-35?........

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Reply to Pak National.

Re Thunder unit price is around $15m each for block 1 version ie the current 33 + 17 to be delivered. GOPwhere granted a SOFTLOAN of $650m 2009 for the first phase of thunder programme.

Read:

25 million $.
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...s_D1Ag&usg=AFQjCNGi-zR5sUdQDl1K6WKPbSlsTvXrBQ

As for Amraam c5 BVR missle is great weapon and great deterrant as long as Pakistan can retain USA frienship into the future.
What good is AMRAAM C5 if the usa are neutralising the amraam threat by passing details to their ally india in next big kick off.

Yeah right.. which info? the detail is already out there on the internet n to buyiers.

I wouldnt be comfortanle with USA equipment in future south asian conflict as USA will not provide spares and may well side with india passing intelligence, real time data and counter measures to F16/C5 amraam.

What the hell r u talkin abt? do u think USA can trace the missiles trajectory or smthin? or hack into our AWACS n provide info to india?

Ur a real fan boy.

THAT IS A NOT FAR FETCHED POSSIBLITY as the national security adviser of USA is in new delhi this week " i notice he did not stop in pakistan"

Lol.. whatever. no MRCA,no M777.. a few cargo planes n u think USA will go ga ga over india? ROFL FAN BOY... BS posts frm u a usual.

 

[Zabaniyah]

I have looked at al the top air forces in the world they nearly all carry a twin engined option

China J11/SU30/27 & FC20 /J10
Europe typhoon & rafale tornado
Saudi typhoon & f15
Israel F15 & F16
Japan F15 & F16
Korea F15 & F16

Twin engined fighters give you so much in options and range both over land & sea.

IMAGINE a 50 fleet of J11 flankers/ or rafales backing the thunders & f16s with cruise missles strapped totheir bellys.

Historically, Pakistan has operated twin-engined aircraft like the F-6 and the A-5. It's not a doctrine at all.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Well having 36 J11 would be great psychological boost

I mean I see why it cannot be done , China makes the planes, and we can request only 36 planes which is not alot for disturbing regional balance infact it balances out things.

But the question it would these J11 be assigened to protect NAVIES and be operation at Sea or with defense of Air Space

Surely if we had 36 J11 today we would not be worried about our western borders not one bit

Is it true that the Chinese J11 is BETTER then the Sukhoi based on avionics and some upgrading by Chinese ?

I really doubt if PAF can acquire J-11Bs. I am not saying this just because of the cost issue.