Bilal Khan (Quwa)
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2016
- Messages
- 7,004
- Reaction score
- 97
- Country
- Location
Fair enough, though those of us who were following this program in the late 1990s and early 2000s heard very differently about the PLAAF. However, I will say that China might be helping in other areas, like being a source for loans for third-party buyers of the JF-17.That's your own speculation, JF-17 AND 250 FC-1 were designed to export, not for induction to PLAAF, we have different priorities, China's potential rival is nothing short of US airforce, the best of the best in the world, we are not fighting insurgencies nor countries like Afghanistan and India, JF-17 AND 250 FC-1 are not up to par for our future tasks. so for JF-17 AND 250 FC-1 we would prefer technology transfer than co production in the long run.
I 100% agree with you on the sharing/development of sensitive technology, there's no parallel to China for Pakistan on this point. I've never doubted that, and never will. But that's not the point I'm making; I'm not talking about the development of certain technologies, but something very specific, supply chain access.Turks were never and never be permitted for collaboration. We offered them a 'proposal' some two decades ago, straightforward turned down by unnnnncleSam. This is for records.
I want to clarify for records, there was never any such agreement to prodeuce FC1 for PLAAF. Instead from the CGP sharing, common controls were derived for both testlines and two seperate fighter assemblies were produced consequently, one for PLAAF, other for PAF. There is nothing else to it.
I was at IDEAS 2018, and I heard it straight from Turkish Aerospace and an SSB official, that talks were under way to contract production work to PAC for various Turkish projects (adding to the production work PAC did for the Anka a while back). Sure, it could be inherently simple parts or work, but that's the work that's notching up our defence export figures, and that's the work bringing in foreign currency.