PAKISTAN’S MIRAGES: SPECIALISTS ENDURING OUT OF NECESSITY

[New World]

Yes, it should; height is good so taking on should be fine. Only issue with Su-34 is the Russian maintenance; parts supply chain never reliable.

how about su-35.
full of packs.
Air superiority
Deep penetration
Naval strike
Ground strike
Air fight/ Dog fight

 

[MastanKhan]

how about su-35.
full of packs.
Air superiority
Deep penetration
Naval strike
Ground strike
Air fight/ Dog fight

Hi,

SU35 is not good for strike missions---it is more of an air superiority aircraft.

Yes, it should; height is good so taking on should be fine. Only issue with Su-34 is the Russian maintenance; parts supply chain never reliable.

Hi,

Thank you---and that again brings us back to the JH7's---.

 

[ziaulislam]

PAF have two routes
either buy a new plateform j-10/flankers
or built/modify stand off weapons for jf-17 block 3

 

[Super Falcon]

Paf is tooo lazy in procurment if Jf 17 take it out we have 40 yrs old jets

Issue is jf thunder will only replace. Jets like mirages fantans and F 7

F 16 is not our primary fighter any mire we need one front war fighter if 4.5 gen jet and iin numbers

 

[Armchair]

Hi,

SU35 is not good for strike missions---it is more of an air superiority aircraft.




Hi,

Thank you---and that again brings us back to the JH7's---.

That's an important and interesting point - to what extent the Su-35 is capable of naval strike or strike. Like you mentioned on Mumbai industrial complex. I don't really actually know. How far its multirole capabilities are actually effective.

At the same time, Chinese J-11 / J-20 subsystems could easily go into the JH-7Bs

 

[MastanKhan]

That's an important and interesting point - to what extent the Su-35 is capable of naval strike or strike. Like you mentioned on Mumbai industrial complex. I don't really actually know. How far its multirole capabilities are actually effective.

At the same time, Chinese J-11 / J-20 subsystems could easily go into the JH-7Bs

HI,

SU35 is an air superiority fighter---. It cannot compete with the JH7A's in low flight naval strike missions---. Even the SU34's would have a hard time against the JH7's---they did in the xercizes last year in china---.

Just because it is newer---does not mean it is better in all aspects---. We get carried away in the euphoria that has been created for the newer machines.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

The beauty of the slumbering " slow pokes " is in their utility---. It is all about using an aircraft from its position of strength and not what you want it to do---if you learn to make the compromise and start using the machine on its own merits---you will find ways to push the machine to its farthest limits---.

If the aircraft takes off from Pasni---which is right next door to Gwadar---flies straight down---makes a sharp left to mumbai----launches its missiles from standoff distances---turns around and bugs off.

The enemy would have to put in multiple sqdrn's of aircraft on this coastline and disperse their SA batteries as well to protect its assets---.

 

[ziaulislam]

What options we have assuming PAF can only spare 4 billion dollars very generous ..i doubt we can)

1. J 10 = 30% More range and payload but same weapons and package as jf-17

2. Su 35... Very costly in maintaince ...would be very diffiuclt to maintain 50 % serviceability and would require frequent overhauls in russia (from Indian experience )

3. Chinese Flankers not available, typhoon, Rafals all cost above 8 billion dollars for 2 sq(36 acs)

4. Old non multirole aircarfts like mastan sahab favourite jh-7
issue would be an aircaft that has only one role in situation where you would like to have multi role ac given the large IAF

now if block 3 can get AESA, HMD, CFTs and new rd 93 ma. It would neutralize any advantage j10 has to offer, if not than PAF should opt for it...

And no used F16 is not available and will not be available

 

[ziaulislam]

CFTs can double the range and will spare two hard points as well.this would be a huge boast but is not possible without 20% stronger rd 93 ma

 

[Armchair]

No matter how much you "upgrade" the JF-17, you simply cannot get the range of a large aircraft like a JH-7B or a Flanker. Trying to compare a JFT to a FLANKER or a JH-7 is like comparing a goat with a cow. They are just different animals.

 

[Mentee]

4. Old non multirole aircarfts like mastan sahab favourite jh-7
issue would be an aircaft that has only one role in situation where you would like to have multi role ac given the large IAF

Umm how about using it for buddy refueling as the illusions have to take a beating in any case and we got only 4 of em - - - - - - .

Or with a lil modifications - - - make a Pakistani version of EA-18 growler - - - - -.

The deal is promising , from which ever angle you look at it.

 

[Armchair]

Hi,

The beauty of the slumbering " slow pokes " is in their utility---. It is all about using an aircraft from its position of strength and not what you want it to do---if you learn to make the compromise and start using the machine on its own merits---you will find ways to push the machine to its farthest limits---.

View attachment 473724

If the aircraft takes off from Pasni---which is right next door to Gwadar---flies straight down---makes a sharp left to mumbai----launches its missiles from standoff distances---turns around and bugs off.

The enemy would have to put in multiple sqdrn's of aircraft on this coastline and disperse their SA batteries as well to protect its assets---.

I've looked at the map and done the measurement. On a theoretical straight flight South and then a "right hook" to Mumbai measures 1600 km. JH-7 has a combat radius with a single refueling of 1760 km, while only 900 km unrefueled. So I am afraid this will be more complicated with a waypoint requiring refueling...

An Su-35 on the other hand has the theoretical range to hit anywhere from Mumbai to Kochi...

Or perhaps the figures are better than advertised for the JH-7A, or can be made better with an upgraded variant...

 

[Ultima Thule]

No matter how much you "upgrade" the JF-17, you simply cannot get the range of a large aircraft like a JH-7B or a Flanker. Trying to compare a JFT to a FLANKER or a JH-7 is like comparing a goat with a cow. They are just different animals.

AAR is available for JF-17, other option will be CFT for JF-17 if develop for JF-17 t increase range @Armchair

 

[ziaulislam]

AAR is available for JF-17, other option will be CFT for JF-17 if develop for JF-17 t increase range @Armchair

CTF+rd 93MA will give jf-17 range of any of the above..but it would require alot of investment..more like building another aircraft and will depend whether rd 93ma is developed and available or not..

PAF has to get out of f-16 day dreams, they need to accept that f16s are not coming

 

[MastanKhan]

I've looked at the map and done the measurement. On a theoretical straight flight South and then a "right hook" to Mumbai measures 1600 km. JH-7 has a combat radius with a single refueling of 1760 km, while only 900 km unrefueled. So I am afraid this will be more complicated with a waypoint requiring refueling...

An Su-35 on the other hand has the theoretical range to hit anywhere from Mumbai to Kochi...

Or perhaps the figures are better than advertised for the JH-7A, or can be made better with an upgraded variant...

Hi,

" The aircraft can fly at a maximum speed of 1,808km/h. Its cruise speed is 903km/h. The normal and ferry ranges of the JH-7 are 1,759km and 3,700km respectively. The service ceiling of the aircraft is 16,000m. The aircraft weighs around 14,500kg while its maximum take-off weight is 28,475kg ".

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/xianjh7fighterbomber/

http://errymath.blogspot.com/2014/12/jh-7b-flying-leopard-fighter-bomber.html#.WvdyJYgvzcc

That would work with buddy refueling---.

The SU34 would have the legs---.

See---you are not looking for the combat radius at this time---if you get in combat---drop your weapons---drop your tanks--you are done---run---hide and come back some other time---.

So---the normal strike range is 1750 KM---build larger fuel tanks like the israelis did---and you can increase the range---.

See---you are not jettisoning your fuel tanks before launching the weapons load---.

It is not a conventional bombing run at the target---it is from 250-500 miles away---you pop up to launch height---release the load---make a sharp turn and be gone---.

AAR is available for JF-17, other option will be CFT for JF-17 if develop for JF-17 t increase range @Armchair

Hi,

When you are flying that far---you need to have the ability of a " DOUBLE TAP "---.

What if one missile and the only one you are carrying fails to ignite---and after all the good luck that you had of getting into enemy territory---you got nothing to give---.

My children---I really want you kids to think---.

I want you to think this way---why is this old man saying just the opposite of what everyone else was telling us---.

Over the centuries---men have stood up and have said things different than anyone else---things different than the norm---some had their heads chopped off---some were burnt on the stake---some became prophets---some became statesmen---some became gurus---some became Wali---some became saints---but there remained one thing common amongst them---the majority did not believe in them---I claim to be none of them.

I wanted to say it to PSHAMIM---he was one of those who got a lucrative job because of the F16's---but I did not---but he understood me loud and clear.