SAC - FC-31 Grey Falcon Stealth aircraft for PAF : Updates & Debate

[MastanKhan]

Tomorrows air combat, including that in the India Pak arena will be less about turning around in dogfighting and more about getting the first shot of without the other person knowing..and then running away. The IAF knows that already, which is why it did not insist on TVC with the Rafale...and most air displays with the MKI rely on showing off its superior aerodynamics.. and not the rather limited utility of its TVC.

Hi,

When I made that statement 6 --- 7 years ago on this board---shoot and scoot---there were posters on this board after my head---and on that board pakdef.org 10 + years ago---they ran me out---specially that idiot Hkhan.

 

[SQ8]

Hi,

When I made that statement 6 --- 7 years ago on this board---shoot and scoot---there were posters on this board after my head---and on that board pakdef.org 10 + years ago---they ran me out---specially that idiot Hkhan.

I'd rather not discuss Pakdef.. they are the intellectual equivalent of Bharat rakshak.. privy to half baked information courtesy of Mamoos and Chachas.

The shoot and scoot argument is one that is supported by most western air warfare analysts(if you disregard rebels-for-the-sake-of-attention like Pierre Sprey). Just because an idea was misjudged in the era of the Vietnam war does not mean that the same mistake will be repeated.

Unless the Russians or the Chinese come up with a point defence system for aircraft(like CIWS on a ship) based on energy weapons or otherwise. The day of spinning around in circles is fairly limited.

HOWEVER, that being said it would be overly presumptuous of us to say that in the future turning fights will not occur. There could be various scenarios where manoeuvrability would be important.. but how much is the real question. Considering that there are advances in counter measures and counter counter measures.. there may be a period again where air combat manoeuvring comes into its own(albeit with a twist) so it will continue to remain an essential part of training syllabi.


But for today, as of right now and for the next ten years or so.. An aircraft with a superior dogfight missile like the A-darter or Aim-9X combined with a good helmet fighting system will equalize the fight between one with TVC and a similar system.

Our well respected member Chogy who was a F-15 driver with the "Gorillas" himself had the same opinion.

@gambit regardless of the hoopla on the other thread.. would be nice if you pitch in about this.

 

[Donatello]

Yes, i believe Gambit is best left to sort the technical aspects here......where we can actually learn something.

 

[Basel]

@Oscar China don't need Russia to built energy weapons, they have just developed one to take out UAVs and low flying objects, they will improve it and Pakistan should look into it for future needs as the system can be mounted on a truck.

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar China don't need Russia to built energy weapons, they have just developed one to take out UAVs and low flying objects, they will improve it and Pakistan should look into it for future needs as the system can be mounted on a truck.

I dont I mentioned either that they need the Russians for that. But their weapon is far from being able to be mounted on an actual combat platform..

 

[Basel]

@Oscar check below links of western media which shows China have developed and mounted laser on truck although it can not take out all threats but still first step in right direction.

China Develops Anti-Drone Lasers | The Diplomat
.
Why China is using lasers to take down drones - Yahoo News

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar check below links of western media which shows China have developed and mounted laser on truck although it can not take out all threats but still first step in right direction.

China Develops Anti-Drone Lasers | The Diplomat
.
Why China is using lasers to take down drones - Yahoo News

And these are rather low powered lasers that have lesser value on targets with thicker skin.

 

[Basel]

@Oscar I have said similar thing in my post, but it is good development as they can field laser weapons and now they will definitely field high power system soon.

 

[zaid butt]

You are right. TVC makes sense on the heavies. I've given a very detailed explanation to this topic below. But FC-31 should have the TVC as its considered a Medium to Heavy jet with twin turbines. Single engine tvc (JSF for example) doesn't make sense as there is not a real scenario. The recovery on a single engine from a tvc related maneuver is very complex and it takes time. While the plane may be a sitting duck for the second missile or guns for a good few seconds. JSF for the Marines and for the Navy would have tvc as its going to use STOVL and will use aircraft carrier based platforms.

Twin engines recover almost instantaneously, see the Raptor's recovery below:

what a jet excellent

 

[Asian.Century]

I thought one of our mods said, Pakdef Forum has links with the most authoritative DefenceNews.com, Janes and Pakistani Establishment as a fact.

We can agree that not all the time PakDef Forums could be correct but a high intellectual forum, like our sister forum, nevertheless.

 

[Donatello]

And these are rather low powered lasers that have lesser value on targets with thicker skin.

Technology has its own natural evolution. How long did it take for the Steam engine to spread across:
1-Britain
2-Europe
3-World
??

 

[SQ8]

Technology has its own natural evolution. How long did it take for the Steam engine to spread across:
1-Britain
2-Europe
3-World
??

Around 10 years for England.. 20 for europe.. and 60 for the world.
That meant that for ten years.. the British had the best in the technology.. and so on.
In this context, it means that the Americans will continue to have their lead in the tech for some time. However, moore's law does apply where certain technological advancements are concerned.. so the Chinese may not have a better laser(unless they can gain it via espionage) but they will have a comparable targeting system.

 

[Hyperion]

Whenever it's a matter of national security, I feel as if the Chinese will be able to/will replicate almost any system they focus on. It's always about how deep ones pockets are, and at the moment and for the foreseeable future, their pockets seem pretty deep.

Regarding Energy Weapons, IMO, they'll go the espionage + R&D way (from historical data). If they can target it, other part of the equation will become much simpler to solve.

Around 10 years for England.. 20 for europe.. and 60 for the world.
That meant that for ten years.. the British had the best in the technology.. and so on.
In this context, it means that the Americans will continue to have their lead in the tech for some time. However, moore's law does apply where certain technological advancements are concerned.. so the Chinese may not have a better laser(unless they can gain it via espionage) but they will have a comparable targeting system.

 

[Donatello]

Around 10 years for England.. 20 for europe.. and 60 for the world.
That meant that for ten years.. the British had the best in the technology.. and so on.
In this context, it means that the Americans will continue to have their lead in the tech for some time. However, moore's law does apply where certain technological advancements are concerned.. so the Chinese may not have a better laser(unless they can gain it via espionage) but they will have a comparable targeting system.

That is what i precisely meant. What is unique and relevant to one party today, will be eventually in the hands of another. Time has it's way of correcting imbalance. But it favors only those that understand the value of time. It does not mean Pakistan or Vietnam will have a laser weapon in the development.

 

[cirr]

And these are rather low powered lasers that have lesser value on targets with thicker skin.

If only China would reveal to the public its laser weapon programmes which are rather extensive to say the least、