Pakistan Air Force | News & Discussions.

[Armchair]

PAF is stronger today than at any time in the past.

There are 100 JF-17s armed with BVR
almost 80 F-16s armed with AMRAAMs
150 odd Mirages, out of which about 60 are BVR capable with R-Darter and now this is possibly replaced with AMRAAM.
F-7PG has BVR - R-Darter and now possibly replaced with ???

R-Darters in PAF service had 60 km range according to Prasun Sengupta (they were improved from the regular R-Darters). They are being phased out or have already been phased out (???)

that's a total of nearly 300 BVR capable aircraft!

 

[denel]

PAF is stronger today than at any time in the past.

There are 100 JF-17s armed with BVR
almost 80 F-16s armed with AMRAAMs
150 odd Mirages, out of which about 60 are BVR capable with R-Darter and now this is possibly replaced with AMRAAM.
F-7PG has BVR - R-Darter and now possibly replaced with ???

R-Darters in PAF service had 60 km range according to Prasun Sengupta (they were improved from the regular R-Darters). They are being phased out or have already been phased out (???)

that's a total of nearly 300 BVR capable aircraft!

Friend there is no confirmation of PGs with R-Darter. This has been noted before as well.
For Mirage there is a thread already and we cannot put it in this bucket; they are antiques and should be excluded from this list. Please refer to the Mirage thread.

 

[Armchair]

Friend there is no confirmation of PGs with R-Darter. This has been noted before as well.
For Mirage there is a thread already and we cannot put it in this bucket; they are antiques and should be excluded from this list. Please refer to the Mirage thread.

Prasun Sengupta's site notes that the PGs also had R-Darters installed. Senior posters on this forum including people with insider knowledge also noted the same - that the PGs had BVR.

@denel, my friend, a BVR is a BVR, whether from a Mirage or an F-16. AMRAAM integration would not be a problem on Mirages as the radar is compatible and the French equipment is not blocked by the US.

Sengupta also notes another interesting fact - PAF F-16s were BVR capable BEFORE the AMRAAMs came - they had Sparrows, but this was not openly admitted. Zia must have been a hell of a good bargainer.

@denel can you confirm the extended range of the PAF R-Darters? Sengupta claims 60km range.

 

[denel]

Prasun Sengupta's site notes that the PGs also had R-Darters installed. Senior posters on this forum including people with insider knowledge also noted the same - that the PGs had BVR.

@denel, my friend, a BVR is a BVR, whether from a Mirage or an F-16. AMRAAM integration would not be a problem on Mirages as the radar is compatible and the French equipment is not blocked by the US.

Sengupta also notes another interesting fact - PAF F-16s were BVR capable BEFORE the AMRAAMs came - they had Sparrows, but this was not openly admitted. Zia must have been a hell of a good bargainer.

@denel can you confirm the extended range of the PAF R-Darters? Sengupta claims 60km range.

Yes it is 60km.

 

[Armchair]

Off-topic but @denel I've seen some images of a Chinese AAM that looks remarkably like an R-Darter. Do you think the Chinese got a hold of these from the Israelis? I can't find the image just now, but it looked remarkably like an R-Darter.

 

[denel]

Off-topic but @denel I've seen some images of a Chinese AAM that looks remarkably like an R-Darter. Do you think the Chinese got a hold of these from the Israelis? I can't find the image just now, but it looked remarkably like an R-Darter.

Not sure friend. They are cloning a lot of things but always a question of quality not quantity; for example, we have taken apart their manpacks and comms gear - plainly put really poor in terms of functionality and quality and easily breakable; in an heavy EW/ECM would not work but because most countries dont know better they just buy on the looks and paper specs without putting them through a standardised battery of testings including taking them to antartica.

 

[Armchair]

thank you for the info!

Not sure friend. They are cloning a lot of things but always a question of quality not quantity; for example, we have taken apart their manpacks and comms gear - plainly put really poor in terms of functionality and quality and easily breakable; in an heavy EW/ECM would not work but because most countries dont know better they just buy on the looks and paper specs without putting them through a standardised battery of testings including taking them to antartica.

 

[MastanKhan]

Not sure friend. They are cloning a lot of things but always a question of quality not quantity; for example, we have taken apart their manpacks and comms gear - plainly put really poor in terms of functionality and quality and easily breakable; in an heavy EW/ECM would not work but because most countries dont know better they just buy on the looks and paper specs without putting them through a standardised battery of testings including taking them to antartica.

Hi,

Thank you for the post---. Pakistani kids and adults live and die by specs---. They are clueless as to what makes the specs work.

They will throw the specs left and right having no understanding of the engineering behind it---.

Poor things---so illiterate about the world of weapons---.

 

[Armchair]

Hi,

Thank you for the post---. Pakistani kids and adults live and die by specs---. They are clueless as to what makes the specs work.

They will throw the specs left and right having no understanding of the engineering behind it---.

Poor things---so illiterate about the world of weapons---.

I always put the gear I use to field test. I've consistently found that the chinese stuff doesn't always work as advertised, but then you get these gems sometimes. There is a lot of trial and error involved. I remember buying 150 USD night vision and they worked unbelievably well.

Regarding jet fighters, sadly since we aren't military men, we can only go by specs, as we can't actually go and kick the tires, so to speak.

 

[denel]

Hi,

Thank you for the post---. Pakistani kids and adults live and die by specs---. They are clueless as to what makes the specs work.

They will throw the specs left and right having no understanding of the engineering behind it---.

Poor things---so illiterate about the world of weapons---.

One thing which was always blatant with chinese RF equipment - filters; just attrocious and never consistent. They barely make the filter specs; expose them to varying temperature and humidity (which the manpacks are sealed off from); they shift off the mark. Even the basic hop is too predictable on the top end units with complete miss on sync - in this capability they are were we were back in 70s with first gen hops; try to send a data packet over it - does not work. These are just basic stuff i am allowed to write; only thing good for them was their casing and colour.

I always put the gear I use to field test. I've consistently found that the chinese stuff doesn't always work as advertised, but then you get these gems sometimes. There is a lot of trial and error involved. I remember buying 150 USD night vision and they worked unbelievably well.

Regarding jet fighters, sadly since we aren't military men, we can only go by specs, as we can't actually go and kick the tires, so to speak.

Yes, never get chinese binoculars or even those made in India . Really bad. My preference is always in i can get my hands of Novosibrsk made equipment; too heavy but precise.

 

[Armchair]

One thing which was always blatant with chinese RF equipment - filters; just attrocious and never consistent. They barely make the filter specs; expose them to varying temperature and humidity (which the manpacks are sealed off from); they shift off the mark. Even the basic hop is too predictable on the top end units with complete miss on sync - in this capability they are were we were back in 70s with first gen hops; try to send a data packet over it - does not work. These are just basic stuff i am allowed to write; only thing good for them was their casing and colour.


Yes, never get chinese binoculars or even those made in India . Really bad. My preference is always in i can get my hands of Novosibrsk made equipment; too heavy but precise.

Their binoculars are pretty bad but I did add a small monocular that cost me like 5 dollars. Its fast, easy to carry and gets the basic work done. Most people were blown away by the effectiveness of the 150 dollar NVG I got - gen 1+ and did the job brilliantly!

They are now selling thermals for 200-300 USD!!! Can't wait to try it.

I used to spend a lot of time testing Chinese equipment I use. Some work, some do the job, some are just ridiculous. And their supposedly "high end" stuff somehow is sometimes more expensive than western counterparts, but not necessarily better.

PS: not being a military person I don't really get a lot of opportunity to use my collections. The major thing binoculars were used for were by my then apartment-mates to look at girls down the street or through their window. You don't really need high quality lens for that.

 

[fatman17]

https://twitter.com/x/status/998559920495751168

 

[fatman17]

F16D Block 52M of Pakistan Air Force.
Currently, its most advance aircraft in South Asian region. There are rumors which suggest that Pakistan is considering option of Surplus F16s from European Market. https://t.co/DFsNa4N9q9

 

[fatman17]

Congratulations to Flight Cadet @osamafarqaleet of Pakistan Air Force- waving the Pakistani flag at his graduation from the United States Air Force Academy Colorado Springs, USA on May 23, 2018! [emoji1258][emoji1191] We are proud of you! May you be a be a bridge of unity between our nations. https://t.co/f5eCGzaCTA

 

[Armchair]

Yes, that's what they are sent there for, to become "bridges of unity". This is the core problem in PAF imho.

You need to send diplomats to build such "bridges". Not compromise your national security by creating a block of your military personnel whose ultimate loyalty will be effected by such "bridge building" exercises.