PAF Single engined Doctrine Good or Bad.

[Windjammer]

Once again, the PAF checked out both the EF Typhoon and the Rafael,... they simply didn't fit into it's doctrine.

 

[Windjammer]

the question is not fitting,its of cost buddy.

Knowing that we couldn't afford them,...we just went for a joy ride. !!! right.

 

[Windjammer]

we also went for ride of gripin,f-16in,f-18,mig-35

In fact you have been on a no joy for over a decade.

 

[DarK-LorD]

I don't think Pakistan has the money to buy EFT's.It's too costly for their economy.

 

[GURU DUTT]

to all indian members why the hell you guys so concerned about PAF or what it needs . Anyway they are our enemy so dont tell them where they are wrong let them chill thanks.

 

[Edevelop]

I don't think Pakistan has the money to buy EFT's.It's too costly for their economy.

We don't need them cuz we are gonna get J-10. Arguably matchable in terms of performance.

 

[Zarvan]

The issue is not of affordability they issue is other because far poorer Nation have planes with double engines

 

[ANG]

Hi, as long as the single engined jets have a high thrust to weight ratio (TWR), the PAF should be fine. However, double engined jets generally can carry a much higher payload.

Also to reiterate Mr Zarvan's point, and quote a few examples, Ethiopia and Uganda operate the Su-30 and Eritrea, North Korea, Yemen and Myanmar the MiG-29s. There are countries poorer than Pakistan, but have double engined platforms.

 

[Major Sam]

we will have whenever we needed that

 

[Windjammer]

all the process started from post 2008

The IAF projected a requirement for about 126 aircraft in 2001, when the strength was at 39.5 squadrons (down from 45). There is an option for an additional 74 aircraft.[18] Initial requirements appeared to be for a 20-ton class fighter aircraft with the Mirage 2000 as the strongest contender. However, the 20-ton MTOW limit requirement has reportedly been removed. Also, considering the delays in the bidding, it is very likely that the LCA would be ready for induction by then. The IAF then would require replacements for its frontline strike aircraft like the MiG-27 and Jaguar, which would be retiring by 2015. India's future 5th-generation aircraft, namely, the Russo-Indian Sukhoi/HAL FGFA and the indigenous Medium Combat Aircraft will not be ready before 2018,[19] and 2025,[20] respectively, thus providing the need for a replacement. Thus, the MRCA tender is more likely to be a medium-weight aircraft (MTOW of ~24 tons). This has led to a renaming of the competition as the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) tender.

 

[untitled]

F-20 tiger shark was offered also rejected by PAF .

Its predecessor the F-5 Tiger was a twin engined aircraft but the F-20 itself was a single engined aircraft .... powered be a single F404 engine.

 

[untitled]

It is not about single engine, 2 engines, 3 engines

First advantage that comes in to mind with multiple engines is redundancy ...... If a engine fails you still have power (in case of multiple engines)

One or two efficient engines are far more economical than multiple unreliable engines

Case in point

F-20 Tiger shark .... efficient version of the F-5 Tiger

The Boeing 777 (twin engined) delivers the same performance as an Airbus A340 (four engined)

 

[untitled]

The correct tittle of the thread should have been

Why Pakistan has not invested in heavy fighters ?

MiG-29 is a twin engined aircraft but its western equivalent is the single engined F-16 not the F-15.

 

[SQ8]

Did not mistake re gripen santro

your getting wrong end of stick

i sugessting

2 single seaters and one twin engined heavey for PAF would be better

ie

RAFALE , THUNDER ,, FC20

OR follow china with Flankers & j10

What advantage would twin engines bring, to a PAF in its current operational environment and requirements.?
let me ask you that..
There are already strike assets with Standoff weapons that will hit the targets needed to be hit the most.
most major enemy assets are ten minutes from the border.. east OR west.
Loiter time will be increased by AAR... incorporated.

Also, carrying more weapons , doesn't mean that there is a higher chance of surviving.
You may fire four out of ten of your missiles, but if the second missile from the guy carrying only four is going to get you, its a waste of resources.

If you need to hit a single target, why carry twenty CM's when two at most will do the job.. and current single engined craft can do that.

 

[untitled]

The Canadian government had second thoughts about the F-35 because it a was single engined aircraft unlike the Hornet. It only signed the deal when it was assured of the F-35 will be as reliable as any twin engined fighter.