What's new

Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

.
Hi Bilal,

Thank you for your post---what you are writing is just the tipped of the imcompetence---.

The Paf is a totally incompetent organization when it comes to procure the right aircraft for the defense of the nation---.

Its role should be left just to plan for war and be ready to support and fight---procurement should be taken away from it---.

I guarantee---whatever aircraft is shoved down their throats they will fly it good---.

The mentality of the Paf generals is like a kid in a candy shop with a quarter in his hands and cannot decide what candy to buy---.



Syed,

That guy is a pro---. Paf cannot do it---because it does not have a fall back plan.

When the idiots in the blue uniform openly state that the F16 is the best and the J10 is not that good---in layman terms you are handing out your ballz to the other party and telling them---you can squeeze them anytime that you want to.

There should be no doubt that as whole package F16 block 52+ appears to be better than J10. Though later versions of J10 have some advantage due to resolution of engine issues and AESA radar.

When PA considered J10 at hat time J10 was evolving no AESA, Chinese based ECCM,ESM, FBW problems and Russian engine with issues.

Even now it's better to go for J11 series version for Naval and Ground deep strike missions. Sane move is to go for Fc31 get it customized as per PAF requirements.

There is not point in cursing PAF leadership alone for past. Past has gone now look for future. The main issue of Pak is political turmoil which has caused various defense deals to be either delayed or terminated.
 
.
Generally speaking, decisions as to whom Pakistan has (or will have) "good relations" with should be left to the government. However, the situation in Pakistan is such that GHQ, AHQ and NHQ are quasi-foreign affairs offices and have taken upon themselves to make decisions that should be left to the Prime Minister or Foreign Minister. I mean, USAF is pretty friendly with the PAF, but I don't think the White House or DoD give a hoot about what USAF thinks.

Sure, let's leave it in the hands of Foreign Minister cum Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, or even better, Hussain Haqqani. They will invite the Americans to kindly take away all the nukes and then force you to shower in Ganga and drink what comes from the wrong end of the cow.

I mean, are you really serious? Did you just write that?

what i am saying is not purely the supply issue but the customization options
the french gave PAF complete independence in procurement its own weapon systems on mirage 5 Rose but this was not the case for F 16s. even today all the weapons including GPS kits are from outside, limiting use for strike missions. PAF should have forseen this and probably not opted for spending 2+ billion dollars 18 new instead went for just upgrading the older ones may be

Yes, Mirage 5 is a legacy platform. Some months back there was some guy pitching Mirage 2000s as well. He seemed to have all the answers. Customizations? All allowed. Carrying nuclear missiles? No questions asked. Etc. etc. Except, acquiring a new platform is a project of its own, and investing limited finances into it means PAF will forever stay behind on the technology curve. Try asking the French to release details for Rafale so we integrate our own weapons. They won't even sell you a screw. Everyone tries to lock you down into the 'entire package' because that's where they make all the money. It takes extremely deep relationships such as Inida/Russia, USA/Israel, USA/Japan, USA/S. Korea, and of course China/Pak to customize latest model jets according to one's own specifications.

Consider this: even with the partnership we have with China, adding non-Chinese customizations faced resistance.
 
. .
For those who might not have known of it :

http://hdwon.co/video/category/Pakistan-Air-Force-in-Red-Flag-Exercise-2016.html

You'll get quite a few videos of the Red Flag PAF presence
and others too if you dig a bit.

Good day all, Tay.

upload_2017-8-5_17-35-41.png
 
.
I know mate but thanks; I corrected it while you wrote.

:enjoy:

I'll try to get the vids out of there 1 by one if links exists.
Later, Tay.
 
.
Sure, let's leave it in the hands of Foreign Minister cum Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, or even better, Hussain Haqqani. They will invite the Americans to kindly take away all the nukes and then force you to shower in Ganga and drink what comes from the wrong end of the cow.

I mean, are you really serious? Did you just write that?
I was referring to the role of the institutions in general, not Nawaz Sharif et. al specifically. It's precisely because Pakistan's FO and PMO are bad that the PAF has to engage in diplomacy in order to acquire what it needs. However, had these very institutions been up to mark, then the PAF would have been kept at a distance (along with the Army and Navy) from the U.S. from the onset.
 
.

First one, more coming here with edits ...


. . .
and actually no, the other vids all link to
that one sadly, part of the deception OFC.

Sorry for the false hopes, Tay.
 
. .
There should be no doubt that as whole package F16 block 52+ appears to be better than J10. Though later versions of J10 have some advantage due to resolution of engine issues and AESA radar.

When PA considered J10 at hat time J10 was evolving no AESA, Chinese based ECCM,ESM, FBW problems and Russian engine with issues.

Even now it's better to go for J11 series version for Naval and Ground deep strike missions. Sane move is to go for Fc31 get it customized as per PAF requirements.

There is not point in cursing PAF leadership alone for past. Past has gone now look for future. The main issue of Pak is political turmoil which has caused various defense deals to be either delayed or terminated.

Hi,

FC31 is about a 15-20 years project for total integration if the production starts now.
 
.
I was referring to the role of the institutions in general, not Nawaz Sharif et. al specifically. It's precisely because Pakistan's FO and PMO are bad that the PAF has to engage in diplomacy in order to acquire what it needs. However, had these very institutions been up to mark, then the PAF would have been kept at a distance (along with the Army and Navy) from the U.S. from the onset.

Sir, one thing that is very wrong with Indian Air Force is the politicians trying to be politicians in military matters. Here is how to do military procurement right: Understand the threat, present and future. Identify solutions that can neutralize the threat. Identify pros/cons for each solution. Pick the best. Use it against the threat in simulated/actual environments as available. Repeat. Politicians have no business doing any of this.

For the general discussion of 'being friendly with nations', I ask you: does the Pentagon control foreign policy or not? It is unrealistic to expect an institution of the calibre of Pak Army/ISI/PAF to not have useful inputs on foreign policy. Foreign affairs is an intricate game of power play, power projection, and power deflection. The Armed Forces are in the best position to advise on these matters. What we need is a solid relationship between civilians and military. Only in unison can this nation succeed.
 
.
Sir, one thing that is very wrong with Indian Air Force is the politicians trying to be politicians in military matters. Here is how to do military procurement right: Understand the threat, present and future. Identify solutions that can neutralize the threat. Identify pros/cons for each solution. Pick the best. Use it against the threat in simulated/actual environments as available. Repeat. Politicians have no business doing any of this.

For the general discussion of 'being friendly with nations', I ask you: does the Pentagon control foreign policy or not? It is unrealistic to expect an institution of the calibre of Pak Army/ISI/PAF to not have useful inputs on foreign policy. Foreign affairs is an intricate game of power play, power projection, and power deflection. The Armed Forces are in the best position to advise on these matters. What we need is a solid relationship between civilians and military. Only in unison can this nation succeed.
Note: I never spoke about the politicians determining technical requirements, the point was specific to the issue of determining the states that are Pakistan's friends and foes. The PAF might love its F-16s, but if the foreign relations environment is such that the US is using the F-16s as an excuse to vilify Pakistan on the world stage - whilst also appeasing India's interests for the sake of containing China - then sorry, the PAF (and Pakistan as a whole) has no business showing an amenable face to the Americans.

Generally, the ones who have the jurisdiction to make foreign relations decisions are the people's elected representatives. The armed forces can have an input, but a strong and able government has the mandate to make the final decision and execute it in all matters of policy. When that government is weak or ineffective, then yes, dysfunction reigns and we end up with the armed forces (and others) assuming that role, for good or for ill.
 
.
Note: I never spoke about the politicians determining technical requirements, the point was specific to the issue of determining the states that are Pakistan's friends and foes. The PAF might love its F-16s, but if the foreign relations environment is such that the US is using the F-16s as an excuse to vilify Pakistan on the world stage - whilst also appeasing India's interests for the sake of containing China - then sorry, the PAF (and Pakistan as a whole) has no business showing an amenable face to the Americans.

I see this as "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" for the PAF. On this very forum, people lambast the PAF for 'giving away funds in flood relief instead of buying fighter jets'. On the other hand, 'PAF has no business showing an amenable face to the Americans'. What do you really want from them?

On this very forum you find very senior members clearly stating we have no conflicts with the Americans. And yet, PAF maintaining relations is somehow a wrong thing?

I fail to see the logic in using PAF as the whipping boy.
 
.
I see this as "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" for the PAF. On this very forum, people lambast the PAF for 'giving away funds in flood relief instead of buying fighter jets'. On the other hand, 'PAF has no business showing an amenable face to the Americans'. What do you really want from them?

On this very forum you find very senior members clearly stating we have no conflicts with the Americans. And yet, PAF maintaining relations is somehow a wrong thing?

I fail to see the logic in using PAF as the whipping boy.
There would be no mutually-damning scenarios if the PAF kept to its role of being a military service arm.

Pakistan's wider dysfunctions, such as a weak government (esp. on the foreign relations side) and the resulting inability (or unwillingness) to fight for Pakistan's interests has resulted in the PAF doing diplomacy work. There's a void and it is trying to plug that gap.

But as you let the armed forces engage in such works, then you might as well also live with ill-informed media outlets, Hussain Haqqanis, Asma Jehangirs, etc, doing the same thing. They're also non-elected entities filling up the diplomacy void left by a weak Pakistani government.

Basically, there is no other point than the obvious: it isn't the PAF's job nor its right to determine who its (and, by extension Pakistan's) friends are... The fact that this is happening isn't an indictment on the PAF in as much as it is an indictment on Pakistan's government. Even if you wanted a pro-U.S. government, why is the ACM going to Washington to convince it of F-16s? Shouldn't this be done by the MoD, FO and an army of experts (incl the PAF but also civil rights activists, locals from FATA, Pakistani as well as neutral Western defence analysts, lobbyists, etc)?
 
Last edited:
.
There would be no mutually-damning scenarios if the PAF kept to its role of being a military service arm.

Pakistan's wider dysfunctions, such as a weak government (esp. on the foreign relations side) and the resulting inability (or unwillingness) to fight for Pakistan's interests has resulted in the PAF doing diplomacy work. There's a void and it is trying to plug that gap.

But as you let the armed forces engage in such works, then you might as well also live with ill-informed media outlets, Hussain Haqqanis, Asma Jehangirs, etc, doing the same thing. They're also non-elected entities filling up the diplomacy void left by a weak Pakistani government.

Basically, there is no other point than the obvious: it isn't the PAF's job nor its right to determine who its (and, by extension Pakistan's) friends are... The fact that this is happening isn't an indictment on the PAF in as much as it is an indictment on Pakistan's government.

If you're talking about the F-16 diplomacy, well it was started by Gen Zia, bumbled by Benazir who wanted wheat instead of F-16s, went out of question after nuclear tests, was brought into fashion by another military dictator, and continued by Zardari. The PAF received this benefit because of diplomacy played by other arms of government/military. Why hold PAF responsible for this?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom