Pakistan Air Force | News & Discussions.

[Zarvan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1050765528652890112

 

[denel]

I wouldn't underestimate the operating cost of the Flankers either. I can't say if it's because of the Flanker in of itself or due to Russia's vertically tight after-sale support structure, but flying Flankers isn't easy.

It might sound like a cop-out, but as you'd explained, the PAF procures based on finely-tuned plans and processes.

You'd have to rework a lot of things to accommodate for the Flanker and, at some point, you might as well ask if it's even worth it (will you cede 1 meter for a 1 foot gain?). I doubt the Flankers would factor much beyond maritime -- and even then, the goal would be to deter (truly valuable gains). However, can you sustain it if your availability rate starts tanking due to a lack of spare parts (or the Russians being slow)?

I remember an uncle told me about how the PAF looked at the Jaguar and Tornado at various points. There was no doubt that those fighters had value in their intended roles, but the platforms were either dependent on others or in truth needed a complete domestic support chain for long-term value (esp. Jaguar).

The Flanker falls in the latter, and there's no fault on the Chinese I think for pursuing it -- lest they end up like the IAF with at one point a low serviceability rate. I doubt the Russians would cede as much to Pakistan.

So we either work out a bespoke deal for Chinese Flankers and pay Russia fees for licensing the design, which I don't think flew otherwise the PAF would've likely done it, or we go for something else.

I'd hope the Chinese make the J-10C available at some point soon, it would make for a pretty good all-round air-to-air and air-to-ground platform. It also benefits from the scale of the PLAAF, so the production and cost of parts and support shouldn't be an issue. It'd also link up with key Chinese munitions, esp. supersonic AShM.

I concur TCO for flankers is just too high; with J10c if it becomes available is ideal

 

[Quwa]

PLAAF is very satisfied with J-10C. It has a good performance during the training with Su-35, and is also deployed on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau (says hello to our Indian friends).
View attachment 504722

I concur TCO for flankers is just too high; with J10c if it becomes available is ideal

Right now AVIC is only marketing the J-10A. I hope we see the J-10C become available soon, it'd be the right solution for the PAF (i.e. leverage the SD-10A and C-802A inventory, integrate with CM-302? etc).

 

[LKJ86]

Right now AVIC is only marketing the J-10A.

But the production of J-10A has stopped long ago. Will it restart for export?

 

[Quwa]

But the production of J-10A has stopped long ago. Will it restart for export?

It's odd. But I haven't seen AVIC market the J-10B or J-10C, you'll only find mock-ups of the J-10A at their stalls and exhibits during events. If not J-10C, then I guess AVIC's priority is to market the JF-17 and, later on, FC-31?

 

[MastanKhan]

the PAF procures based on finely-tuned plans and processes.

You'd have to rework a lot of things to accommodate for the Flanker and, at some point, you might as well ask if it's even worth it (will you cede 1 meter for a 1 foot gain?).

I doubt the Flankers would factor much beyond maritime -- and even then, the goal would be to deter (truly valuable gains). .

Hi,

This is once in a lifetime when I just take the pointers out of a post---.

If Paf procurement was so finely tuned---then it should have bought the F16's in 2003-04.

See---I agree with you and the general / uncle you spoke to---Paf is finely tuned to procurement---.

But it is not finely tuned to procuring the right equipment at the right time in a timely manner---.

It gambled on the F16 purchase---and the nation lost an extremely strong fighting force---.

The Paf gambled on the JF17---and the project is 10 years behind schedule---.

Now if nigeria or myanmar or thailand were 10 years behind the project---it would not matter much---but when you are in constant fear of war---and you constantly chicken out to make a conventional stand against the opponent---then that is a big big issue---.

So---being clever in procurement---has resulted in being " too clever " overall---.

As for the maritime role---that is the most important battle front in the coming war for fighter and strike aircraft---.

The problem with the Paf is that it has been an over land operating air force primarily---and over the water was a secondary option---.

Now---over the water is the primary focus---and it that field----it has so far failed miserably---@denel

 

[Quwa]

Hi,

This is once in a lifetime when I just take the pointers out of a post---.

If Paf procurement was so finely tuned---then it should have bought the F16's in 2003-04.

See---I agree with you and the general / uncle you spoke to---Paf is finely tuned to procurement---.

But it is not finely tuned to procuring the right equipment at the right time in a timely manner---.

It gambled on the F16 purchase---and the nation lost an extremely strong fighting force---.

The Paf gambled on the JF17---and the project is 10 years behind schedule---.

Now if nigeria or myanmar or thailand were 10 years behind the project---it would not matter much---but when you are in constant fear of war---and you constantly chicken out to make a conventional stand against the opponent---then that is a big big issue---.

So---being clever in procurement---has resulted in being " too clever " overall---.

As for the maritime role---that is the most important battle front in the coming war for fighter and strike aircraft---.

The problem with the Paf is that it has been an over land operating air force primarily---and over the water was a secondary option---.

Now---over the water is the primary focus---and it that field----it has so far failed miserably---@denel

The tuning you see from the PAF is from real resource constraints. When the Pak Gov't is at the start of every term asking the IMF for hard currency infusions, then you don't have much flexibility in terms of technology or time. The exception to the rule was Mushy's time when there was a lot of aid dollars flowing through, and I fully agree, a lot of money was squandered.

 

[CriticalThought]

The tuning you see from the PAF is from real resource constraints. When the Pak Gov't is at the start of every term asking the IMF for hard currency infusions, then you don't have much flexibility in terms of technology or time. The exception to the rule was Mushy's time when there was a lot of aid dollars flowing through, and I fully agree, a lot of money was squandered.

Even today, a production plan where we acquire manufacturing rights and make Russia an a benefactor in any sales coming out of an uprated Thunder type aircraft can be pulled off. You have 500 million dollars just from the Myanmar deal. The B version is already slated for export. Use the base of JF-17 Thunder to plan your next move. If you think creatively, there are many things that are possible.

 

[Quwa]

Even today, a production plan where we acquire manufacturing rights and make Russia an a benefactor in any sales coming out of an uprated Thunder type aircraft can be pulled off. You have 500 million dollars just from the Myanmar deal. The B version is already slated for export. Use the base of JF-17 Thunder to plan your next move. If you think creatively, there are many things that are possible.

The Russians won't openly upset the Indians. So the trick is to find out what the Russians can subtly do to help you in the near and long-terms. So the Russians can't help with Su-35s and S-400s, but they might be flexible through expertise, technology inputs, industry inputs, resources, etc that go into fighters and SAM tech. Take the South Korean KM-SAM as an example.

 

[CriticalThought]

The Russians won't openly upset the Indians. So the trick is to find out what the Russians can subtly do to help you in the near and long-terms. So the Russians can't help with Su-35s and S-400s, but they might be flexible through expertise, technology inputs, industry inputs, resources, etc that go into fighters and SAM tech. Take the South Korean KM-SAM as an example.

Money speaks. Use the Thunder program to generate enough cash to lure the Russians. The SU-35 would be a very good addition. And I am thinking both in terms of naval power, AND potentially countering the F-22. You never know what the future holds. It is extremely short-sighted of us to disregard the American threat. And if we position the F-22s stationed in Afghanistan properly in front of the Russians, there is no reason why they won't help to prop us up. There was a time when American F-16s helped to shoot down Russian Su-22s. Revenge must feel sweet for the Russians, and we should offer to facilitate.

 

[Safriz]

Two things ruined Pakistani participation in J-10 program.. The corruption of Zardari regime who only released 65% of PAF budget, and Chinese inviability to make own engine on time .

 

[LKJ86]

I hope we see the J-10C become available soon, it'd be the right solution for the PAF (i.e. leverage the SD-10A and C-802A inventory, integrate with CM-302? etc).

J-10C with PL-10, PL-15, KD-88, YJ-91, and LS-500J

 

[denel]

Right now AVIC is only marketing the J-10A. I hope we see the J-10C become available soon, it'd be the right solution for the PAF (i.e. leverage the SD-10A and C-802A inventory, integrate with CM-302? etc).

It will be a matter of time i think before j10c are offered.

 

[TOPGUN]

J-10C with PL-10, PL-15, KD-88, YJ-91, and LS-500J
View attachment 504726
View attachment 504727
View attachment 504728

I am in love, this is what PAF needs they just don't get it !!

 

[denel]

Even today, a production plan where we acquire manufacturing rights and make Russia an a benefactor in any sales coming out of an uprated Thunder type aircraft can be pulled off. You have 500 million dollars just from the Myanmar deal. The B version is already slated for export. Use the base of JF-17 Thunder to plan your next move. If you think creatively, there are many things that are possible.

That is where the problem is overall; there is no fresh open ideas and this closed mindset is what has lead to the present scenario