What's new

What twin engine Jet Fighter Suits PAF Doctrine?

what is the range of a cft and eft equipped F-16 ?

A CFT gives maximum increase of 40% more range with no fuel tanks.

A single 300 gallon tank under belly gives 25% more range.

A 340 or 370 Gallon fuel tank can also be used.

If 2 X 370 gallon fuel tanks are used, the range increases by 60-70 %.

Combat Radius [F-16C]
  • 740 nm (1,370 km) with 2 X 2,000-lb bombs + 2 AIM-9 + 1,040 US gal external tanks
  • 340 nm (630 km) with 4X 2,000-lb bombs + 2 X AIM-9 + 340 US gal external tanks
  • 200 nm (370 km) AND 2 hr 10 min patrol with 2 X AIM-120 + 2 X AIM-9 + 1,040 US gal external tanks

    F-35 can carry 2.5 Times more internal fuel than that of F-16.
 
Hi,

When facing an enemy the size of india----where the bottom 2/3rds won't even feel the pain of war---pakistan is in a losing preposition---it will actually be only 1/8th of india directly effected with a war with pakistan.

Now change the prepopsition of 60-80 % of india under strike range thru conventional means---we have a different ball game.

A deep strike force---will split up the indian air force---it will take away its concentration away from punjab and spread it put wider over a larger area----.

By releasing the pressure over western punjab---Paf will have more flexibility and ability to strike and dominate.

J31 needs a BVR truck to be the launch platform for the weapons----.
Any fighter that PAF has or is gonna have is not going to split IAF . Then completely forgetting IN and its air wing? Despite all that from where you are to launch such deep strike aircraft? and what exaclty you intend to strike deep in India ,which is going to have any value in outcome of the war?
Sorry PAF needs more than a twin jet and good reason .
 
Any fighter that PAF has or is gonna have is not going to split IAF . Then completely forgetting IN and its air wing? Despite all that from where you are to launch such deep strike aircraft? and what exaclty you intend to strike deep in India ,which is going to have any value in outcome of the war?
Sorry PAF needs more than a twin jet and good reason .

Sir,

This not a versus thread---it is about the need of Pakistan---. Check out the earlier posts please
 
I am not trolling and apologize in advance if you think im getting personal......but mate....Tornado :) ...i laughed really hard after reading this post

No offence taken. This thread does not seem to have gone the way of most threads on PDF nowadays.

My reasoning was as follows:

1. It is inevitable that PAF will get the 5th Generation planes from China, once ready. You, therefore, do not want to invest too much of your resources on the current set.

2. You also want it quickly. Which means, a plane which is ready and proven. The plane can fire the Brimstone, Taurus and the Stormshadow. If you have money, you could even procure the ecm package offered by BaE. There is also an upgrade package for the avionics, which was not applied to all the European planes because of the imminent induction of the Typhoon. The RSAF, if I am not mistaken is going in for this.

3. You need a fighter which will act as a bomber. Not an interceptor. Range-check. Proven low level attack-check. Next gen ammo-check. Spare availability-check.

I am not saying, it is the best in the world. But, practically, it can do the job for the PAF at the lowest cost at the earliest.

What do you think of this post-----a brilliant idea---don't you think

It would have been, till the advent of the MFSTAR in an Indian CBG. Also, ballistic missile for all its capabilities of maneuverability would need to have guidance which updates real time against a moving target. And you do not want to go nuclear. Not to mention, a strike group of aircraft coming in low over the horizon with multiple cruise launches are more unpredictable compared to a ballistic missiles.

Of course, am not an expert on anti ship ballistic missiles.
 
@Irfan Baloch @Khafee

What do you think of this post-----a brilliant idea---don't you think----:undecided::undecided::undecided:
irrelevant and out of scope of the discussion although I would have asked him how he would locate the Indian ships in first place in open body of water? via google map or a Naval asset and then convey back to someone in say pakpatan or rajanpur to deploy the missile which will take from 40 minutes to maybe hours to prep and then fire .

In event of war, Ballistic missiles are more than enough to take care of IN Carrier Battle group in ranges of thousands of km.

I have already shown that PAF F-16 and JF-17 along with other support aircraft can strike IN warships in 500km area considering PN subs are hunting IN subs and are not available for taking out IN surface warships coming close to strike Pakistan.
its not that simple. what those missiles will be armed with? if you are suggesting non-conventional payload then thats just another discussion which is out of scope and a troll invite.
I am aware of ground based ballistic missiles only and suggesting their use without any way to identify a moving target in the deep sea? I dont know , but lets stay within scope of discussion.

and your last comment about PN subs shows lack of basic knowledge of Naval warfare and roles of different Naval vessels. our subs are not dedicated sub hunters , its the job of surface ships like frigates that too are multi role. subs are either missile platform and are part of strategic weapon system like American boomers or essentially meant for ships. Pakistani subs are multi-role and they might be able to take out another sub but their primary function is against ships which cant be divorced.

I suggest we go back to the air again
 
Last edited:
Asking these two wont do much however asking china for Df-21 and Df-26 can certainly help

unfortunately, weapons like the df-21 and df-26 asbms are not stand alone weapons, to use them one would require a vast sensor net, the kind of which very few countries can build or afford, for china to sell such a system effectively means allowing the buyer to use the full chinese sensor network, from land based sensors to uavs to satellites, which effectively means china is involved in whatever conflict the weapon is used automatically.

if you dont use the fully capabilities, then you might as well just go with traditional asms

F-18 is possible but then Pakistan will have to downgrade its relations with China.

what do you mean. i bet beijing would love it if pakistan gets some, they would be overjoyed if pakistan gt the f-35 or f-22

Sir, PAF is involved in the development of the J-31 from day one, just like the JF-17. They KNOW what they are getting themselves into. IF they decide to procure it tomorrow, it won't be because the Chinese say it's a 5th Gen aircraft, it's because the PAF knows it fits the bill.

would need some evidence for a claim as tall as this.

as far as we know the j-31 isnt even a plaaf program, its a purely company sponsored program which is why it only has one prototype this entire time while the j-20 is already in initial production.

Dear what abt A2A capabilities of JH7B, though it is an upgraded platform yet I doubt it is a true multi role platform. In case of budget constraints Pak require true multi role fighter jet ideally may be allocated for deep strikes both on land and enemy naval assets without any escort of fighter jets.

the jh7 series flies like a truck,because that's what it's designed to be - a bomb truck
it is not ever supposed to fight in A2A except as a desperate last measure
but it does its job very well, deliver a large amount of long range munitions at a very good price.
 
irrelevant and out of scope of the discussion although I would have asked him how he would locate the Indian ships in first space? via google map or a Naval asset and then convey back to someone in say pakpatan or rajanpur to deploy the missile which will take from 40 minutes to maybe hours to prep and then fire .


its not that simple. what those missiles will be armed with? if you are suggesting non-conventional payload then thats just another discussion which is out of scope and a troll invite.
I am aware of ground based ballistic missiles only and suggesting their use without any way to identify a moving target in the deep sea? I dont know , but lets stay within scope of discussion.

and your last comment about PN subs shows lack of basic knowledge of Naval warfare and roles of different Naval vessels. our subs are not dedicated sub hunters , its the job of surface ships like frigates that too are multi role. subs are either missile platform and are part of strategic weapon system like American boomers or essentially meant for ships. Pakistani subs are multi-role and they might be able to take out another sub but their primary function is against ships which cant be divorced.

I suggest we go back to the air again

There are numerous ways to locate ships, its not finding a needle in the haystack. Naval intelligence of every country has this duty to start with. whenever countries go to war, their spies are tasked with locating about enemy formations be it land, air or sea to save themselves from surprise. In any case, Pakistan has numerous times used help from Chinese satellites in the absence of a substantial platform for detecting enemy movement.

I am not sure if Pakistani missile assets are located at Pakpattan or Rajanpur, i have a very different information about that. Shows your lack of knowledge on locations of PA missile elements.

Talking about 40 minutes or an hour for prep to fire a missile again shows your lack of knowledge of how PA formulates its operational status and target acquisition for such missile attacks. Let me give you a hint, 90% targets are marked before a war. The status is ready when escalation draws near.

To know about conventional or non conventional warheads, read about DF-21 to get more knowledge.I think your observation on this thread skipped my post.

and about my last comment. I never called myself an expert. PN subs can be engaged anywhere in the sea, be it any mission. My point was of their absence and use of Air assets, i was never defining PN subs mission scope. I could also have talked about PN surface ships engaging in combat too or maybe they are docked at the pier in the entire, so what, we are talking of strike by Air . However, if you would like to make this a naval thread and start a discussion, go ahead.

we can surely go back in the air again, a long range multirole aircraft can be intercepted by IN a/c carrier if its vectoring on sea to strike any indian target south of Gujarat in India. Taking out IN a/c carrier by SU35 J11 JH-7 is out of question.and in any naval ops, sooner or later PAF will come across this IN carrier.

You can continue this thread as long as you want, but fact remains that PAF needs a 5th gen fighter to counter anything that IAF can fly in the air and no 4.5 gen fighter can offer stealth to make a long range attack. Let IAF go for Rafale, if PAF picks up a 5th gen, Rafale loses its edge over PAF straightaway.

unfortunately, weapons like the df-21 and df-26 asbms are not stand alone weapons, to use them one would require a vast sensor net, the kind of which very few countries can build or afford, for china to sell such a system effectively means allowing the buyer to use the full chinese sensor network, from land based sensors to uavs to satellites, which effectively means china is involved in whatever conflict the weapon is used automatically.
Mate, we will have to take this discussion somewhere else for the sake of OP sanity. OP is getting paranoid when i give other options like missiles.
 
There are numerous ways to locate ships, its not finding a needle in the haystack. Naval intelligence of every country has this duty to start with. whenever countries go to war, their spies are tasked with locating about enemy formations be it land, air or sea to save themselves from surprise. In any case, Pakistan has numerous times used help from Chinese satellites in the absence of a substantial platform for detecting enemy movement.

I am not sure if Pakistani missile assets are located at Pakpattan or Rajanpur, i have a very different information about that. Shows your lack of knowledge on locations of PA missile elements.

Talking about 40 minutes or an hour for prep to fire a missile again shows your lack of knowledge of how PA formulates its operational status and target acquisition for such missile attacks. Let me give you a hint, 90% targets are marked before a war. The status is ready when escalation draws near.

To know about conventional or non conventional warheads, read about DF-21 to get more knowledge.I think your observation on this thread skipped my post.

and about my last comment. I never called myself an expert. PN subs can be engaged anywhere in the sea, be it any mission. My point was of their absence and use of Air assets, i was never defining PN subs mission scope. I could also have talked about PN surface ships engaging in combat too or maybe they are docked at the pier in the entire, so what, we are talking of strike by Air . However, if you would like to make this a naval thread and start a discussion, go ahead.

we can surely go back in the air again, a long range multirole aircraft can be intercepted by IN a/c carrier if its vectoring on sea to strike any indian target south of Gujarat in India. Taking out IN a/c carrier by SU35 J11 JH-7 is out of question.and in any naval ops, sooner or later PAF will come across this IN carrier.

You can continue this thread as long as you want, but fact remains that PAF needs a 5th gen fighter to counter anything that IAF can fly in the air and no 4.5 gen fighter can offer stealth to make a long range attack. Let IAF go for Rafale, if PAF picks up a 5th gen, Rafale loses its edge over PAF straightaway.


Mate, we will have to take this discussion somewhere else for the sake of OP sanity. OP is getting paranoid when i give other options like missiles.
I have read some interesting arguments of you but the point just is to think out of the box and keep all of your options available and open!!
i.e You can have 2 options in a scenario that you can chose CM-400 or a twin engine fighter..
Now cut of that second option.... No twin engine! You are left with one choice....
and to strike a battle group at sea deep inside with things like CM-400 or cruise missiles, you need to have a powerful radar, pin point accuracy, Naval intelligence and God knows what...
Last but not least! We are talking about just one scenario!!
duel engine= expensive+high maintenance costs+ less stealthy but also longer range, more altitude+ ferry range+ more time in air+ more payload+ more space(better ECMs and radars and powerful engine)..... :coffee:

Personally I don't see any twin engine before J-31 officially induced in PLAAF and then specified according to PAF needs and lastly China fund some soft loans....
 
I have read some interesting arguments of you but the point just is to think out of the box and keep all of your options available and open!!
i.e You can have 2 options in a scenario that you can chose CM-400 or a twin engine fighter..
Now cut of that second option.... No twin engine! You are left with one choice....
and to strike a battle group at sea deep inside with things like CM-400 or cruise missiles, you need to have a powerful radar, pin point accuracy, Naval intelligence and God knows what...
Last but not least! We are talking about just one scenario!!
duel engine= expensive+high maintenance costs+ less stealthy but also longer range, more altitude+ ferry range+ more time in air+ more payload+ more space(better ECMs and radars and powerful engine)..... :coffee:

Personally I don't see any twin engine before J-31 officially induced in PLAAF and then specified according to PAF needs and lastly China fund some soft loans....
I agree with you.
But for attack variant better have twin-engine fighter in your backyard.
There are more Postive points than Negative for twin-engine fighter dude!!
 
Read my Post# 48 and #51 as well. First PAF have to assess and analyze for what role a twin-engine fighter is required for. There will already be a lot of Multi-roles in PAF in the likes of more capable F-16s and JF-17s. The place where our Air Power seriously lacks is the Naval Air Arm. IMO Pakistan has to set up a dedicated PNAF arm after the increase of Pakistan EEZ and more increase in parity b/w PN and IN. Multirole fighter is a jack of all trades but master of none.
So in my simple opinion we need a Naval attack role specific kind of plane with an adequate A2A capability. But primary role should be utilizing AGM/ASM missiles and A2A should be a secondary role. JF-17 or F-16s can also escort to provide Air cover in case of extremely intense enemy CAP area. Now JH-7B seems to be the most possible option. Su-35 would be the best possible option (under Pakistan case keeping in view all the geopolitical and financial situation)

A naval air arm, already exists. I think what you meant is a Naval Fighter Arm, with dedicated fighters under the Navy.

Given the grievances of the other forces against PAF, it makes sense why PA has built up it's air defence capabilities, and continues to do so. IF the PN were to ask for dedicated squadrons under their command, that would be understandably justified.

The more I think about it, the more PN fighter squadrons makes sense to me.

In event of war, Ballistic missiles are more than enough to take care of IN Carrier Battle group in ranges of thousands of km.

I have already shown that PAF F-16 and JF-17 along with other support aircraft can strike IN warships in 500km area considering PN subs are hunting IN subs and are not available for taking out IN surface warships coming close to strike Pakistan.
@Irfan Baloch @Khafee

What do you think of this post-----a brilliant idea---don't you think----:undecided::undecided::undecided:

@Sarge

1) Can Ballistic missiles track, maneuver and hit moving ships? How accurate is it? More importantly, will China give PK that technology?

2) When an IN Air Craft Carrier is sent towards Pakistan, it won't be alone, it will part of a Battle group, with dedicated destroyers having ABM capabilities like Barak etc. How many Ballistic Missiles are you going to fire, to over whelm an ABM?

3) Which has a higher probability of getting through: 40 aircrafts launching 80 Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles, or 80 Ballistic missiles?

4) The problem with a single engine aircraft over water is, IF you loose that single engine, you not only loose a multi-million dollar aircraft, but possibly the pilot as well, whose loss cannot be counted in monetary terms.
 
1) Can Ballistic missiles track, maneuver and hit moving ships? How accurate is it? More importantly, will China give PK that technology?

2) When an IN Air Craft Carrier is sent towards Pakistan, it won't be alone, it will part of a Battle group, with dedicated destroyers having ABM capabilities like Barak etc. How many Ballistic Missiles are you going to fire, to over whelm an ABM?

3) Which has a higher probability of getting through: 40 aircrafts launching 80 Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles, or 80 Ballistic missiles?

4) The problem with a single engine aircraft over water is, IF you loose that single engine, you not only loose a multi-million dollar aircraft, but possibly the pilot as well, whose loss cannot be counted in monetary terms.

Its not just the Indian CBG. Forget that for one minute.
Assume, a Torndao takes off from Karachi. Moves 700 kms south of Karachi over the Arabian Sea. Then moves towards Mumbai. It will be able to make the distance without any refueling. Without getting into whether it will be able to penetrate the defences, you will have an aircraft which can provide the threat parameter.

What it will also do is provide you with an aircraft which can potentially reach Delhi and return without refuelling. You also threaten the Gujarat cities of Ahmedabad with the ability to get back to base.
 
Back
Top Bottom