What if PAF had no Thunder?

[Umair Nawaz]

Now coming to think about it, what if PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder? New F-16s or even an upgrade on the original 32 F-16s were no where in sight.

Really glad how it played out and how effective JF-17 Thunder has been so far not just helping Pakistan Air Force cover the technology gap but maintenance too, looking at the current situation of the economy.

Any idea what would PAF be like, if the PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder?

Mirage 2000?

@TaimiKhan @blain2 @fatman17

We would have Gripen then........

 

[Informant]

Really 1/3 less than the cost of F16s, why is that? surely the JF-17s are much more fragile machines and need servicing./ repairing more often, for eg the RD-93 has an engine life of 2000 hours compared to almost double that for western jets, or have we taken on our western jets experience and have incorporated the same qualit of parts and thus the repairs - maintenance would not be the same level as for say a MIG-29.

Yup the core reason being this plane is homebuilt. With more flexibility in our hand and knowing it inside out. This drastically reduces cost, plus the monopoly on the plane's parts not being into play. Cheaper labor. All these variables go into play. RD-93 is cheaper than GE engines on F-16.

Plus much more @Oscar.

 

[Liquidmetal]

Yup the core reason being this plane is homebuilt. With more flexibility in our hand and knowing it inside out. This drastically reduces cost, plus the monopoly on the plane's parts not being into play. Cheaper labor. All these variables go into play. RD-93 is cheaper than GE engines on F-16.

Plus much more @Oscar.

I see, of course you are right, there are a lot of reasons why the JF-17 is so much cheaper for us to run and it is much cheaper than an F16 even though it is approx 70-80% as capable. I was trying to ascertain the life cycles cost of a TFT for say Egypt with 2 sqdns of TFTs what would be the total cost vs say Gripen or even a F16?

It would be an interesting comparison.

Once again many thanks for the replies.

@Oscar

 

[TaimiKhan]

Now coming to think about it, what if PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder? New F-16s or even an upgrade on the original 32 F-16s were no where in sight.

Really glad how it played out and how effective JF-17 Thunder has been so far not just helping Pakistan Air Force cover the technology gap but maintenance too, looking at the current situation of the economy.

Any idea what would PAF be like, if the PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder?

Mirage 2000?

@TaimiKhan @blain2 @fatman17

Had it not been JF-17s, PAF would have done something rather then have sit ideally.

Options were many, but procuring them would have been the main issue. We may not have been provided with the best, Chinese would have been the option all way along, but which fighter, that is the question and with what.

If i see at the time period since we started the JF-17, i believe and think that JF-17 has been the best decision. No F-16s, could not get a brand new fighter in large numbers to replace the aging fleet, Indian MMRCA making things more difficult, Russians a NO, and i think its good we did not got the Mirage 2000s, only option would have been to wait for J-10s with either Russian engines or Chinese turbojet / turbofan engines.

So, in the end, its good we got JF-17s, if it gets exported, we can earn some money, we have received good experience while designing and making this jet. We learned how to test fly new jets into service, got good human resource base, got and learned new technologies in the process, and by using all these things we can look at the future and design something more for our own requirements.

 

[SQ8]

Yup the core reason being this plane is homebuilt. With more flexibility in our hand and knowing it inside out. This drastically reduces cost, plus the monopoly on the plane's parts not being into play. Cheaper labor. All these variables go into play. RD-93 is cheaper than GE engines on F-16.

Plus much more @Oscar.

I see, of course you are right, there are a lot of reasons why the JF-17 is so much cheaper for us to run and it is much cheaper than an F16 even though it is approx 70-80% as capable. I was trying to ascertain the life cycles cost of a TFT for say Egypt with 2 sqdns of TFTs what would be the total cost vs say Gripen or even a F16?

It would be an interesting comparison.

Once again many thanks for the replies.

@Oscar

The question lies not whether the JF-17 is cost effective for Pakistan( As the opportunity cost, sunk costs and all those other nice terms that go into intangible costs) as it helped establish a manufacturing industry. But whether it will be cost effective for other customers. The maintenance of the Rd-93 depends on the quality of engines and its users. Indian experience with the early RD-33s was not good at all, and their engineers made it plain clear to the Russians to improve the quality. The CAG report on the IAF Mig-29 identified a 74% failure rate in the engines. However, the RD-93 has been reported by Klimov to be based on the improved Rd-33 with increase in MTBO(with proper maintenance) and greater overall lifespan. The engine is still a leaky turbojet much like the GE F-404(interestingly, the RD-93 is more efficient than a GE-404 at military power..but is less efficient in afterburner) and so is not as fuel efficient as a pure turbofan like the PW F-100(The JF-17 would probably fly a lot further with a turbofan)...while engines like the Rd-93 are fairly simple. I will not say rugged as the PW-100 is a very rugged engine as well.

Then it comes to wear and tear.. lubricants.. replacement for avionics.. etc. At the end of the day.. the number of parts you have to replace after every other flight.. after a mishap.. and generally.. is what counts. In that contrast, the JF-17 that Pakistan has still has certain expensive bits that come from countries other than China.. however, a more Chinese JF-17 will use cheaper sourced parts. If Egypt only buys them and does not set up a assembly/manufacturing facility.. it may not be cheaper to maintain than say a Gripen.. but the overall lifecycle cost will still be lower.

 

[fatman17]

Now coming to think about it, what if PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder? New F-16s or even an upgrade on the original 32 F-16s were no where in sight.

Really glad how it played out and how effective JF-17 Thunder has been so far not just helping Pakistan Air Force cover the technology gap but maintenance too, looking at the current situation of the economy.

Any idea what would PAF be like, if the PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder?

Mirage 2000?

@TaimiKhan @blain2 @fatman17

without a chinese engine, the J-10 could not have been inducted. without additional F-16s, the only option was Mirages and F-7PG's in large numbers. not a very good option - no BVR access - i shudder to think the PAF mindset v. IAF acquisitions.

 

[HariPrasad]

M2Ks or rafales

Rafales are too costly to buy for pakistan.

No doubt if Pakistan buy it, It will be a cause of concern for India unlike JF 17.

 

[Nexus]

maybe more j-10 and new **** version of j-11. but mi-2000-5 is great choice for any air force.

 

[fatman17]

according to Alan Warnes, BAE Systems’s chances of selling 60 Typhoons to the UAEAF&AD have improved since the last Dubai Show. It would be a major coup to pip the Dassault Rafale which is still the favourite to win the competition to replace the UAEAF&AD’s Mirage 2000-9.

would PAF be interested in buying these M2K-9s from UAE?

 

[kaykay]

according to Alan Warnes, BAE Systems’s chances of selling 60 Typhoons to the UAEAF&AD have improved since the last Dubai Show. It would be a major coup to pip the Dassault Rafale which is still the favourite to win the competition to replace the UAEAF&AD’s Mirage 2000-9.

would PAF be interested in buying these M2K-9s from UAE?

In my view even today those Mirage-2k9s would be double or even more the cost of JF-17s. So I personally think that PAF in no way buy a second hand aircrafts in that money when It can buy 2 JF17s in the same money.(though m2k9s would be superior to 17s in one on one)

 

[MilSpec]

Retrofitted
Hongdu L-15 - Perhaps

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.4
• Ferry range: 3,100 km
• Service ceiling: 16,000 m

F-7P (additional)

• Maximum speed: Mach 2.0 (2,200 km/h (1,189 knots, 1,375 mph)) IAS
• Ferry range: 2,200 km(1,187 nmi, 1,367 mi)
• Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,420 ft)

Guizhou JL-9

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.5
• Range: 1600 km (863 nm)
• Service ceiling: 16,000 m (52500 ft)

Northrop F-20 Tigershark (similar vintage to f16)

• Maximum speed: Mach 2+
• Ferry range: 2759 km
• Service ceiling: 16,800 m

Compare to


JF 17

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.6
• Ferry range: 3,482 km
• Service ceiling: 16,920 m
  

 

[Zabaniyah]

LOLLZ

your logic is as dumba$$ as the poster who posted that thread

Seriously if a whiner who has zero knowledge about aviation post a dumba$$ thread does it refer to as SOME
indians .are questioning the Rafale deal, ??

on top of it RAFALE deal has not even signed & it has not been inducted like Jf-17 for pakistan thats another thing

U equated that morronic member with an admin of this forum who has been posting since 7 years ,

Oh common gimme a break

CHEERS

I don't think it was moronic. I think it was an interesting discussion

 

[araz]

Now coming to think about it, what if PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder? New F-16s or even an upgrade on the original 32 F-16s were no where in sight.

Really glad how it played out and how effective JF-17 Thunder has been so far not just helping Pakistan Air Force cover the technology gap but maintenance too, looking at the current situation of the economy.

Any idea what would PAF be like, if the PAF didn't opt for JF-17 Thunder?

Mirage 2000?

@TaimiKhan @blain2 @fatman17

Firstly PAF would have not reduced its orxers of Bl.52s and we would have had 75 of those. The second thought would have been of getting either the embargoed Bl 15 OCUs(all 28of them)or at least 2 sq. Of Bl.40s and MLUed them. Thirdly if it was upto me I would get a couple of sq. Of J11 and give the J10 a miss.In a way I am glad we did not as it would have made us more prone to embargoes. The JFT is the best thing that could have happened to the PAF.
Araz

 

[Storm Force]

Not sure i agree that JF17 was the best thing that could have happened.

IMAGINE another 50 of these

Or indeed

50 OF THESE

They call it OPPORTUNITY COST

Those 2 options above admittedly only 50 planes each ie around $2 billion

you will get 150 of these

Bigger numbers defo BUT better fighter no not so sure

 

[Imran Khan]

according to Alan Warnes, BAE Systems’s chances of selling 60 Typhoons to the UAEAF&AD have improved since the last Dubai Show. It would be a major coup to pip the Dassault Rafale which is still the favourite to win the competition to replace the UAEAF&AD’s Mirage 2000-9.

would PAF be interested in buying these M2K-9s from UAE?

sir its too too late for M2k9s now we have to stick in home made and then future gen .in 90s it was best time for M2