What's new

The Brilliant Capabilities of PAF Engineers

Any machine that sustains damage is going to have issues simply because its gone through a lot of stress.

The foreign assistance was necessary because will power alone does not conjure up knowledge out of thin air.
Yes all said and done, the fact is Lockheed declared the aircraft a ''write off''.... some how the PAF had acquired the knowledge to address a much newer and complicated platform like the SAAB AWACS not sure why would a system it had been operating for almost 40 years prove so difficult.
 
.
Dear ,Nothing is beyond repair the term and phrase used is actually a short of term saying that It's better to build new one since man hour required are huge and In US/Europe the cost of man hours are huge it's just opportunity cost ,Pak is not as rich and influential country to buy these expensive toys so an alternate route is to spend more time in terms of capability ,real win is to incorporate this knowledge into future ventures
 
.
72 Pakistani technicians were trained in Turkey during the time our F-16s were receiving MLU upgrades in Turkey
Via both classroom and on-the-job training TAI has also been providing training to 72 PAF technicians, so that they can subsequently work alongside its workforce on upgrading the F-16s.
http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article4885.html
so it is understandable that now at least we have the capabilities to repair the fuselage of F-16 in house, but it does not mean that we can independently maintain the F-16.
 
. .
Dear ,Nothing is beyond repair the term and phrase used is actually a short of term saying that It's better to build new one since man hour required are huge and In US/Europe the cost of man hours are huge it's just opportunity cost ,Pak is not as rich and influential country to buy these expensive toys so an alternate route is to spend more time in terms of capability ,real win is to incorporate this knowledge into future ventures

What he said ... From Lockheed's or USAF's perspective, the cost and time to repair an old F-16 is probably not worth the trouble. Of course PAF is in a different position and it is their top fighter, and that too a dual-seater, so they would choose to repair it as it can not be replaced by another F-16.

As an example, USAF took 6 years to repair their top fighter, an F-22 that had belly landed and skidded down the runway and caused major damage to the aircraft (even though it looked fine from the outside to a layperson). F-16s are our F-22s for the moment =)
 
.
72 Pakistani technicians were trained in Turkey during the time our F-16s were receiving MLU upgrades in Turkey

so it is understandable that now at least we have the capabilities to repair the fuselage of F-16 in house, but it does not mean that we can independently maintain the F-16.

Raw materials still need to be sourced from Lockheed Martin or else America can easily void the warranties on F-16 Fleet
 
.
Making such bold claim is rather unfair to the people who worked so hard to make the aircraft operational again through indigenous means.... this is the word from the top.

''People should know that the Americans had declared it beyond repair, yet we made it airworthy again. The same happened to the SAAB which was damaged in a terrorist attack. It was repaired 100% by Pak engineers and technicians and SAAB people were absolutely amazed.''
They may have worked on it themselves, but the structure repair drawings still have to be approved by Lockheed. PAF is not under full embargo, meaning they still deal with Lockheed for parts and spared, doing anything without their official approval would void any warranty that they may have from Lockheed.

P.S
And mechanics fix airplanes, engineers don't. Engineers at Lockheed approved the repair design and PAF mechanics did the repair themselves.

When PAC repaired the Erieye they had to get their repair design approved from Saab. Its been said on teh record by the person in charge of that project.
 
.
Albeit, @Areesh is a good friend :D.... however there is a thread posted on the incident but nothing on how the PAF localy managed to repair the aircraft.
I posted this picture here long time ago man...and now someone took it from my post and posted on fb where it got copied by multiple pages...just saying.
 
.
I would also add here that 72 PAF engineers and technicians were trained in Turkey under the Peace Drive II program and after their training, they worked with TAI in Turkey during the MLU upgrades of the 41 F-16s there. That means we have experience working on both avionics and structural modernization of our fleet.
 
.
As an example, USAF took 6 years to repair their top fighter, an F-22 that had belly landed and skidded down the runway and caused major damage to the aircraft (even though it looked fine from the outside to a layperson). F-16s are our F-22s for the moment =)
Indeed a very important example its called in economics of Scarcity Cheers
 
.
What he said ... From Lockheed's or USAF's perspective, the cost and time to repair an old F-16 is probably not worth the trouble. Of course PAF is in a different position and it is their top fighter, and that too a dual-seater, so they would choose to repair it as it can not be replaced by another F-16.)

Hi,

Thank you---. A tech at lockmart might get paid around $40-60---ie an hour---Rs 4000 - 6000 / hr= Rs 48000 / Rs72000 per day + 1 1/2 times O/T

Pakistani technician on the other hand is working at what Rs2000---Rs3000 per day.
 
.
I posted this picture here long time ago man...and now someone took it from my post and posted on fb where it got copied by multiple pages...just saying.

Right Sir, i have asked my source regarding the picture which you claim to have posted here, it however seems that the image belongs to some aviation photographer called Ahsan Malik who allegedly has his own profile page hence once posted on the net it's somewhat free for all.
Let me give you another example, i was most probably the first person to acquire the bottom image of PAF's Block-52 with conformal fuel tanks and post it here on PDF back in 2010 or so, until then no one was convinced that the US had actually supplied CFTs to PAF's fleet. Once i posted the image here on PDF, it was picked up by virtually everyone under the Sun and they were all claiming credit by adding their own watermarks.... you OTOH posted an image which originally belonged to someone else....just saying.


received_1121163561362000.jpeg



kk.jpg
 
.
Right Sir, i have asked my source regarding the picture which you claim to have posted here, it however seems that the image belongs to some aviation photographer called Ahsan Malik who allegedly has his own profile page hence once posted on the net it's somewhat free for all.
Let me give you another example, i was most probably the first person to acquire the bottom image of PAF's Block-52 with conformal fuel tanks and post it here on PDF back in 2010 or so, until then no one was convinced that the US had actually supplied CFTs to PAF's fleet. Once i posted the image here on PDF, it was picked up by virtually everyone under the Sun and they were all claiming credit by adding their own watermarks.... you OTOH posted an image which originally belonged to someone else....just saying.


View attachment 457563


View attachment 457564
Lala g i never claimed it to be my own picture..and yes its from Ahsan Malik who is from Sgd and took the picture there.
My point was that its not fresh news and the topic had already been discussed when I posted it.
You can check here:
Post#10092
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan-f-16-discussions-2.15226/page-673
 
. . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom