Pakistan Air Force needs to replace 190 planes by 2020

[Imran Khan]

Does Pakistan have the $ for 60 F-16s?


How did PAF put itself in a position that it had to replace 190 aircraft in a five year period?



Doesn't mean anything. Debt servicing, paying for imports take up most of it. In addition, Pakistan's army and navy also have their needs.

i swear we will never ask you to pay the bill and sure we will replace them there is no other option

 

[muhammadali233]

And we're expected to believe that? Are we morons? So the terrorists are precision bombed by high tech F-16s whilst hiding in a crowd of civilians without causing collateral damage?

These planes are to be used against India. Period!

omg national secret has been leaked to a local indian?pffft ffs These planes are to be used to sharp shoot the goons offered to Pakistan by endia,so yeah you can take that way,if pak ever goes to war with endia Jf 17 will probably sum up the day by totalling RCS guzzlers mig and sukhois

 

[Tank131]

PAF would go for 150 F-16's at the most. 150-200 JF-17's.
This still leaves about 100 aircraft short from the 400-450 requirement as mentioned in the article.
Pakistan Navy is also interested in getting about 50-70 aircraft.

These figures are going to be around 200 aircraft at the end that are required.

The article says 350-400 fighters not 400-450. As for the F-16, they will have 96-120...not more. More than that is foolish because in case of sanctions you cant fly them for more than 5yrs. The ideal solution is more JF-17 with evolving block and a scaling up of the airframe size (a la super hornet/ gripen ng/ F-2).

@bluemarlin: the MKI is a hangar queen mostly due to bad IAF maintenance protocols/practices. Is it expensive to maintain...yes, but why does China not have the same maintenance problems despite more flankers? Cuz they have more $. As for the AL-31, In what world is it underpowered? Its most up-to-date versions have 32,000lbs of thrust. They are by no means underpowered for J-10 or flankers. A scaled up JF-17 would ideally be built around them.

But regarding you point regarding sales of F-16, yes the US MAY be a source but the sale would still likely need to go through congress (look at what happened with the OHPs). That being said, it would not likely be as difficult given that the recent sail went through with just loud complaining but in the end the move to block was killed 74:25

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

The article says 350-400 fighters not 400-450. As for the F-16, they will have 96-120...not more. More than that is foolish because in case of sanctions you cant fly them for more than 5yrs. The ideal solution is more JF-17 with evolving block and a scaling up of the airframe size (a la super hornet/ gripen ng/ F-2).

@bluemarlin: the MKI is a hangar queen mostly due to bad IAF maintenance protocols/practices. Is it expensive to maintain...yes, but why does China not have the same maintenance problems despite more flankers? Cuz they have more $. As for the AL-31, In what world is it underpowered? Its most up-to-date versions have 32,000lbs of thrust. They are by no means underpowered for J-10 or flankers. A scaled up JF-17 would ideally be built around them.

But regarding you point regarding sales of F-16, yes the US MAY be a source but the sale would still likely need to go through congress (look at what happened with the OHPs). That being said, it would not likely be as difficult given that the recent sail went through with just loud complaining but in the end the move to block was killed 74:25

400 aircraft for PAF

100 aircraft for Pakistan Navy.
The total is 500 aircraft.

Sanctions are a problem but PAF would have thought of some thing to counter them.

 

[Blue Marlin]

@bluemarlin: the MKI is a hangar queen mostly due to bad IAF maintenance protocols/practices. Is it expensive to maintain...yes, but why does China not have the same maintenance problems despite more flankers? Cuz they have more $. As for the AL-31, In what world is it underpowered? Its most up-to-date versions have 32,000lbs of thrust. They are by no means underpowered for J-10 or flankers. A scaled up JF-17 would ideally be built around them.

But regarding you point regarding sales of F-16, yes the US MAY be a source but the sale would still likely need to go through congress (look at what happened with the OHPs). That being said, it would not likely be as difficult given that the recent sail went through with just loud complaining but in the end the move to block was killed 74:25

how many j10 have crashed due to the engines. also note i mentioned reliability as well as it being underpowered.
now to add also its un economical too.

the problem with an upscaled jf-17 is thats its stupid. why reinvent the wheel when its already invented! if you want to make the jf-17 to the size of the j10 then scrap the idea and buy the j10. problem solved, and you have saved time and money. if they want to compete with india on the rafale forsay then the only options are the typhoon which is expensive , the su-35 which is viable i guess.[india will be pi$$ed though]. or a more advanced version of the f16.
sure they ca buy the j10, no problem but in the end everything rolls down to money. hence why they went for american jets as it will be subsidized. if they had money they would have gone for they typhoon.
also the deal for 8 jets had a few purposes. firstly to add more jets obviously also to test the waters of reaction. now thats this has gone through how easy would it be to buy more? also the united states would not mind as they know you need them to maintain them, which Pakistan is aware of hence the heavy stock up of parts.
i thought the notion was 71:24?

 

[muhammadali233]

Cart Items
Euro Fighter :
Tracking Range Against Small fighter: EFA-2000 (ECR 90): 160-175 km
Tracking Range Against Bombers:EFA-2000 (ECR 90): 370 km
Estimated RCS:EFA 2000: 0.1m2
Costs around : 1)317 million$/aircraft (2016) For Tranche 3 (estimate taken from Kuwait deal with full weapon system)
2)194 (and difference) million$/aircraft (2007) For Tranche 2 (estimate taken from Saudia Arab Deal with
full weapon system.

Gripen:
Tracking Range Against Small fighter: JAS.39 Gripen (PS-05): 90 km
Tracking Range Against Bombers : JAS.39 Gripen (PS-05): 190 km
Estimated RCS (frontal view): JAS.39 Gripen: 0.5m2
Cost around: US$ 68.9 million (2014) for JAS 39C

SU-35:
Detecting target of RCS = 3m2 at the range of 350 to 400 km away --> 307 ~ 351
Tracking Range Against Small fighter: Su-27M/Su-35 (N011 Zhuk-27): 100 km (front), 55 km (rear) and
Su-27M/Su-35 (Zhuk-PH): 165 km (front), 60 km (rear)
RCS: Not sure different sources but averages around 2 m2
Cost Around: 83 million$ /aircraft (estimate taken from Chinese deal)

From all of these SU 35 seems legit because with such a price tag and getting 12 hard points is more bang for buck and cover full length of Pakistan without refuelling

 

[Syed Asif Bukhari]

India has emphasis on Rafale due to no string attach to engine. Otherwise , all eurpean fighter or swiss fighter has US engine. All these plane need US approval for 3rd party export.

For your Kind information. EF Typhon uses British engine not US.

 

[Tank131]

400 aircraft for PAF

100 aircraft for Pakistan Navy.
The total is 500 aircraft.

Sanctions are a problem but PAF would have thought of some thing to counter them.

PN is not getting 100 fighter aircraft. It has no need for that many given its role. It needs 2-3 sqd and thats it. These should be geared for mod-heavy strike/interdiction.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

PN is not getting 100 fighter aircraft. It has no need for that many given its role. It needs 2-3 sqd and thats it. These should be geared for mod-heavy strike/interdiction.

PAF has 2 dedicated squadrons for the NAVY and now Navy want to have an independent air arm consisting of fighters hence the requirement of 100 aircraft.

If you search the forum you would find a thread regarding the PN looking at getting the JF-17's. As Gawadar and the EEZ has to be guarded 2 squadrons are not enough.

PAF 36 JF-17 + PN 36 JF-17 = 72 JF-17's
There is still the requirement of 2 sqd. of long range aircraft, That would make 36 aircraft on top of the 72 already in the pipeline.

So now you would get the estimates of around 500-550 fighter aircraft in all.

PAF was also looking to enhance LIFT capability and the two aircraft that might be on offer are the T-50 Golden Eagle or YAK-130. The Chinese are also interested in selling one of their aircraft now which might be added is still not known.

The Pakistan Army is also looking for COIN aircraft and it might be possible that the Turkish Hurkus might be entering service. As the requirements are from other forces budget hence the numbers quoted by PAF might be for them alone and not cover the real requirements..

 

[C130]

how much would this cost

72- J-31
72-J-11
24-JH-7B
22-J-16


that would be pretty deadly

 

[Quwa]

@Tank131 The issue basically isnt replacing the F-7s or non-ROSE Mirages, the gap between them and JF-17 is so wide that the JF-17 is a substantive upgrade.

The problem is the Mirage ROSE-I, a decent BVR capable multirole fighter, and ROSE-II/IIi, which are essentially our bombtrucks.

The Su-35 would be the ideal successor for the ROSE line. It is a capable multirole fighter and it has the payload to be a bombtruck. It is also common enough with the Su-34, which could make for an excellent second strike, maritime ISR, and special mission (dedicated EW/ECM) asset.

If not Su-35/34, then I agree with you. For the bombtruck and special mission role the JH-7B is the way to go. The ROSE-I can be phased out by more F-16s.

The JF-17 doesn't need to be scaled up into a medium weight fighter, for that we'll have FC-31. The JF-17 needs to be brought to the level of Gripen NG. In other words, we need a more composite driven airframe, RD-93MA (or EJ200), etc.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

PAF seems to be more inclined towards the russian jets this time. most likely the su 35. the reliability of the russian tech is doubtful. indians always rate the su 30 mki as the king of fighters but the recent reports regarding the 55% availability show the crude hardware of the jet. such reports also came to surface during the red flag exercises and the US F-15 pilot( guy that indians really love) made fun of the "king of fighters". the chinese J-10 uses the same engine of su 30 and it is a single engine jet so it's safety can be a factor to be considered. rafale and eurofighter are simply too expensive for pakistan to acquire in large numbers. grippen NG may be considered.

Forget the Gripen E...
Will not be approved by the Swedish Government.

 

[ziaulislam]

@Tank131 The issue basically isnt replacing the F-7s or non-ROSE Mirages, the gap between them and JF-17 is so wide that the JF-17 is a substantive upgrade.

The problem is the Mirage ROSE-I, a decent BVR capable multirole fighter, and ROSE-II/IIi, which are essentially our bombtrucks.

The Su-35 would be the ideal successor for the ROSE line. It is a capable multirole fighter and it has the payload to be a bombtruck. It is also common enough with the Su-34, which could make for an excellent second strike, maritime ISR, and special mission (dedicated EW/ECM) asset.

If not Su-35/34, then I agree with you. For the bomb truck and special mission role the JH-7B is the way to go. The ROSE-I can be phased out by more F-16s.

The JF-17 doesn't need to be scaled up into a medium weight fighter, for that we'll have FC-31. The JF-17 needs to be brought to the level of Gripen NG. In other words, we need a more composite driven airframe, RD-93MA (or EJ200), etc.

jf-17 can carry as much as munition as any mirage including the rose

mirage 5 version, has 5 hard points with total maximum payload of 4000kg
it does employ a weaker engine and older airframe

 

[KN-1]

72- J-31
72-J-11

J-31 will not be ready before 2020, and export version will not be ready till 2025..

China cant export J-11 bocz of Russian design.

 

[Tank131]

@Tank131 The issue basically isnt replacing the F-7s or non-ROSE Mirages, the gap between them and JF-17 is so wide that the JF-17 is a substantive upgrade.

The problem is the Mirage ROSE-I, a decent BVR capable multirole fighter, and ROSE-II/IIi, which are essentially our bombtrucks.

The Su-35 would be the ideal successor for the ROSE line. It is a capable multirole fighter and it has the payload to be a bombtruck. It is also common enough with the Su-34, which could make for an excellent second strike, maritime ISR, and special mission (dedicated EW/ECM) asset.

If not Su-35/34, then I agree with you. For the bombtruck and special mission role the JH-7B is the way to go. The ROSE-I can be phased out by more F-16s.

The JF-17 doesn't need to be scaled up into a medium weight fighter, for that we'll have FC-31. The JF-17 needs to be brought to the level of Gripen NG. In other words, we need a more composite driven airframe, RD-93MA (or EJ200), etc.

In my post i agreed with you that it is the ROSE Mirages that need to be replaced 1:1. The options we agree on (more F-16s, Flankers or JF-17). But i disagree with you that the JF-17 doesnt need to be scaled up. The end reality is that eventually PAF will need to replace the F-16 with the ideal replacement being FC-31. The issue is that PAF wont be able to afford 1:1 replacement and as such would lose vital strike capabilities. An enlarged JF-17 would not be an expensive solution in the long run and would probably still be less expensive than F-16 and definitely less than 1:1 FC-31 Replacement. I dont see flankers or jh-7b coming which is why i make this suggestion.