Pakistan Air Force [PAF] News and Discussions

[shujaatK]

Thats a good one :rotfl, the avionics, sensors are whats makes an a/c, no way can j-10 match that kind of capability, i wouldnt say that Rafales are "much superior" to F/A-18 EF BLOCK 2s

Whats a good one?? The Super Hornet is a carrier specific Mach 1.8, 7.5G aircraft with add. payload for mud moveing , range and fleet defence .
The J-10 A is a Mach 2+, 9G, highly agile aircraft (with canards and possibly Thrust vectoring). It can also handily outclimb the F-18 E/F.(Chalk and cheese comparasons make no sense!)
As no specific info. is available on how the PAF will equip its J-10s , so reserve your jugment.
What is the relevence of the "Rafale" comment?

 

[ali.uaf]

ali.uaf; it doesnt matter what discussions are going on other forums. Discussions wont put any engine onf JF-17. AFAIK there are only two (Known) options. One is RD-93 [will be used on early batch - already in Chinese/CAC stock] 2nd is WS-13 [Under development - Chinese version of RD-93].

As for AVM's claim that XYZ engines can fit on JF-17, well he is an AVM - airforce/aircraft expert. He knows what he is saying, but the thing is "did he say it". I certainly did not come across any such news/report/interview.

hmm ok fair enuf .........
but i cetainly wana know opinion abt rafale ... guyz we shud think abt a aircraft which can serve us in the longer run and provide sufficent abilty to counter new breed of fighters ....

 

[XEROX]

Whats a good one?? The Super Hornet is a carrier specific Mach 1.8, 7.5G aircraft with add. payload for mud moveing , range and fleet defence .
The J-10 A is a Mach 2+, 9G, highly agile aircraft (with canards and possibly Thrust vectoring). It can also handily outclimb the F-18 E/F.(Chalk and cheese comparasons make no sense!)

I wouldnt say F/A-18s are carrier specific, yes the USN uses them but so do the marines and 7 othr nations who dont operate carriers.

So what if the J10 is mach 2+, do you think it can outmanouver a mach 4 going A2A missile pulling more Gs, nope.

As no specific info. is available on how the PAF will equip its J-10s , so reserve your jugment.

Your the one posting X amounts of info and comparing them Y

 

[ali.uaf]

At last deal is done ?????


http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=2224

well dats wt dis article shows but i seen a slid on ARY digital a Pakistani news channel that deal has been challenged in Congress by sum congressmen ....

any one got sum info on it ??

 

[webmaster]

ali.uaf,

Apparently, you missed this:

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=3088

Cut the crap, write properly - this isn't a chat room nor a hip hop joint.

 

[kams]

At last deal is done ?????


http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=2224

well dats wt dis article shows but i seen a slid on ARY digital a Pakistani news channel that deal has been challenged in Congress by sum congressmen ....

any one got sum info on it ??

Ali,
Just google Pakistan, F-16 and hit the News button. You will get all the news stories on the F-16 sale. Remember to sort by Date.

 

[zoolander]

J-10s and future versions of J-10s should not even be considered yet. It is not battle proven and future modifications are just pure speculation. China has not mentioned anything about exporting them.

 

[aaaditya]

Do not underestamate the J10A. With the WS-10A or the B (with thrust vector) and canards, it will be one of the most agile aircraft. It is a Mach 2+ aircraft that can pull 9Gs. It can climb at 60,000 FPM.
The Super Hornet was designed for significantly increased carrier suitability, with grater range and payload and an extended radius of 40%, depending upon mission profile.
However it remains a Mach 1.8, 7.5 G aircraft, and no match for the J-10 A (or the expected "C") in a dog-fight. It cimbs at around 50,000 FPM.
The F-18 can carry 12 AIM-120, for BVR, which it will fire in a ripple pattern, but the PAF can ill afford to do so.The JHMCS + AIM-9X combination makes an average pilot into an Ace (the J-10 also has a HMS).
The J-10s radar, under development, should be as good.

you have forgotten something ,in the modern day combat speed,alotitude performance is negated by the use of superior avionics,if we go by your parameters then even a chinese f-7 is superior is to the f-18 since it has higher max speed and better ceiling altitude.

the reason why the f-18e/f can be considered superior to the f-10 as of now is that it has a highly advanced radar (an-apg-79 aesa) which currently the f-10 does not have.off course there may be a chinese aesa under development,but by the time it is inducted on the f-10 ,the an/apg-79 would be a more mature product .

and by the way the top speed of rafale is also mach 1.8 also the rafale does not have tvc.

 

[aaaditya]

Whats a good one?? The Super Hornet is a carrier specific Mach 1.8, 7.5G aircraft with add. payload for mud moveing , range and fleet defence .
The J-10 A is a Mach 2+, 9G, highly agile aircraft (with canards and possibly Thrust vectoring). It can also handily outclimb the F-18 E/F.(Chalk and cheese comparasons make no sense!)
As no specific info. is available on how the PAF will equip its J-10s , so reserve your jugment.
What is the relevence of the "Rafale" comment?

canada uses the f-18,australia does and so does malaysia and quite a few countries ,but none of them have carriers so it is not fair to call the f-18 as a carrier specific aircraft,there are several advantages that the f-18e/f has based on its carrier background 1) is that it has an exceptionally robust undercarriage ,since greater loads are placed on an aircraft landing on a carrier ,than one landing on land,hence it has the ability to take greater damage to the undercarriage. 2)it has short take off and landing capability by default (without the use of tvc) ,3)exceptional control at low speeds ,since this is very necessary when trying to land on an aircraft carrier which looks like a small speck in the ocean moving at a speed of 25-30 kts.

besides the f-118e/f can carry a bomb ordinance of upto 8000 kgs which is more than that of the f-10.

 

[shujaatK]

canada uses the f-18,australia does and so does malaysia and quite a few countries ,but none of them have carriers so it is not fair to call the f-18 as a carrier specific aircraft,there are several advantages that the f-18e/f has based on its carrier background 1) is that it has an exceptionally robust undercarriage ,since greater loads are placed on an aircraft landing on a carrier ,than one landing on land,hence it has the ability to take greater damage to the undercarriage. 2)it has short take off and landing capability by default (without the use of tvc) ,3)exceptional control at low speeds ,since this is very necessary when trying to land on an aircraft carrier which looks like a small speck in the ocean moving at a speed of 25-30 kts.

besides the f-118e/f can carry a bomb ordinance of upto 8000 kgs which is more than that of the f-10.

Only the USA uses the Super Hornet. All efforts to export it by Boeing have not been successful.The E/F is 25% larger and uses the more powerful F414-GE-400 engines. One can hardly compare it to the F-18 A. So what if it has a heavy undercarriage and can land at slow speeds.Any aircraft can be so modified if required.How will this help in a dog-fight or on a bombing run?
Check FLIGHTs "World Aircraft & Systems Directory". Third Edition Page 150. This specificaly states that the Super Hornet is carrier specific. I can dig up other refs. if you like.
How do you know what the J-10 A (or C) can carry? I thought the Chinese had kept this secret. Could you give me refs., or are you quoting guesstimates!

 

[shujaatK]

you have forgotten something ,in the modern day combat speed,alotitude performance is negated by the use of superior avionics,if we go by your parameters then even a chinese f-7 is superior is to the f-18 since it has higher max speed and better ceiling altitude.

the reason why the f-18e/f can be considered superior to the f-10 as of now is that it has a highly advanced radar (an-apg-79 aesa) which currently the f-10 does not have.off course there may be a chinese aesa under development,but by the time it is inducted on the f-10 ,the an/apg-79 would be a more mature product .

and by the way the top speed of rafale is also mach 1.8 also the rafale does not have tvc.

The F7 PG has known to have "held its own" in dog-fight exercises against the mighty SU-27! (Air Forces monthly).
Do not pre-judge the J-10s electronics. Only the Chinese know what they are going to be, at the moment.
We all know that superior electronics,and 100G Mach 5 missiles are the name of the game, but superior performance gives that slight edge;or the C-130 mounted with 100 missiles will have been the fighter of choice!
I am not aware of any Air Force rushing to induct the Rafale, except France! Could this be one of the reasons? I agree that speed is not so importaint, but the ability to out climb is vital in a dog-fight.

 

[shujaatK]

J-10s and future versions of J-10s should not even be considered yet. It is not battle proven and future modifications are just pure speculation. China has not mentioned anything about exporting them.

Pakistan has orderd 36.

 

[kursed]

ISLAMABAD: A Chinese defence delegation will soon visit Pakistan to showcase their country’s Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) – following Islamabad’s recent announcement to purchase a similar Swedish system, sources have said.

The AWACS is believed to be the most cost effective and powerful system for early warning, and command and control missions. According to sources, Pakistan needs a surveillance device to ensure the security of its borders and underwater communication system.

Source: DailyTimes, PakTribune

How'd operating two different types of AWACS from different sources affect the operation capability of the two? Would it be easy to integerate and combine radar, sigint information from the two sources?

 

[tphuang]

I will just make a small comment on what J-10 can carry.

currently, it's limited to Chinese AAMs --> PL-8, PL-11, PL-12
although ARM like YJ-91 and AShM like YJ-83 maybe carried on J-10B.

It's true that current only 6 hardpoints are allocated to AAMs. But, we know that J-10 can carry multi-weapon racks, so it can carry more AAMs than 6. Although why you would want to carry more than 6 in a defensive mission is kind of puzzling.

As for payload, this has been speculated to no end. Most people are guessing it based on the figures of Lavi and F-16C. Even the maximum takeoff weight of J-10 actually came from the maximum takeoff weight of Lavi. So, if you want to guess J-10's payload before it gets officially released. You could take a look at Lavi and F-16:
Empty weight: 7,031 kg
Maximum Take-Off: 19,277 kg
Maximum payload: 7200 kg (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/aircraft/lavi/Lavi.html)

F-16 block 30 http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article6.html
Empty weight: 18,238 lb (8,272 kg)
Maximum takeoff: 42,300 lb (16,875 kg)
Maximum payload: 5000 kg?

Another one is J-8II (this is bigger than J-10)
Empty weight: 9,240kg
Max take-off 17,800kg
Maximum payload: 5000 kg

So, you can make some estimates toward J-10's payload from the above information.

 

[SABRE]

Pakistan has orderd 36.

Pakistani Prime Minister has given approval to buy 36 J/F-10, Pakistan is yet to order it. No deal has taken place as yet. I think Pakistan would want to settle the F-16 deal 1st than start on J/F-10.

 

[SABRE]

dats true the F-16 will come widout the abilit to deliver neuclear weapons ..... well with the recent bill prestend in congress to block the deal i would certainly like this bill to b passed rather dan again faceing sanctions in future (post Bush scenario) as happend in past ....... with 5.1B $ we can get a gud 50/60 Rafale and beside that French are time tested.

The session has ended without any attempt to block the deal, hence the US govt can now sell F-16s to Pakistan.

I think we have very smart people in our airforce who can come up with very out of the box creative solutions to maintain the deterrent without the F-16s. I find it very foolish to tie a rope around our neck and hand it over to a bully to drag us all over the place and then complain that he is being unfair. $5Billion can help us build many more relationships with many other suppliers around the globe from Denel to Dassault and from Saab to Sukhoi. We need to think out of the box. It is depressing to see how the entire nation is fixated on this one aircraft.

ali.uaf;

I am not a mod or Admin, so I am not suppose to control you. But as an old and senior member here I would like to ask you - what are you trying to do here ? First you were using Chat slang in your posts and now You are copy pasting posts from "PakDef" here - The above part of the post is copy pasted from Sargam's post at "PakDef".

Post#373
http://www.pakdef.info/forum/showthread.php?t=8489&page=15&pp=25

 

[Sharif Smuggler]

How many of these Chinese AWACs is the PAF after?

 

[SABRE]

How many of these Chinese AWACs is the PAF after?

There are no AEW&Cs/AWACS in PAF at this moment. PAF has ordered 6 to 7 Swedish ERIEYE Systems, while China just showed off its AWACS to PAF officials few days back. Chances are 4 Chinese AWACS might also be purchased.

 

[WAR]

PAF Air Chief's Re-assurance on F-16s.

Link:
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp#7147

Armed forces fully capable of defending the country: Air Chief
Updated at 1555 PST

LAHORE: Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Chief, Tanvir Mahmood Ahmad has said that the armed forces of Pakistan have all the capacity to defend the country and Pakistan’s prime minister would not have to wail helplessly in any gathering like that of the Lebanese PM.

Following a meeting with the Punjab Governor, Lt. Gen. ® Khalid Maqbool here in the Governor House, he told this to newsmen.

PAF chief told that he was grieved of the attacks on Lebanon. He said that the weakness turns out into inability, but ‘Al Hamdolillah’ Pakistan was not weak.

Quizzed on acquiring F-16 from the US, Air Chief Tanvir Mahmood Ahmad told that the US Congress has given the final approval to the delivery of 44 F-16 to Pakistan. He said that these included 18 new and 26 those previous aircrafts made for Pakistan in 1990 and were being delivered now equipped with high-tech long- range weapons almost free of cost.

He told that we were also upgrading our existing 34 old F-16 and after acquiring the fresh lot from the US soon, Pakistan’s fleet of F-16 would make a total of 78.

He said that the PAF in next seven years would get so much stronger that none could even conceive of committing aggression against Pakistan.

=================

This is the latest on F-16 procurement vis a vis figures by the PAF Chief. Though not something new, but a reassurance.

 

[mysterious]

Pakistan close to F-16 fighter purchase

WASHINGTON: Pakistan appears close to signing a potential $5 billion deal for an advanced F-16 fighter-jet package, despite stepped-up security demands pushed by US lawmakers, the official responsible for the sale said Friday.

Air Force Lt-Gen Jeffrey Kohler, head of the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency, said he expected a government-to-government pact locking in the purchase to be wrapped up as early as this month or the middle of next month.

The agreement would clear the way for the US Air Force to complete a so-called foreign military sales contract with Lockheed Martin Corp., which builds the F-16, as soon as November, he said in reply to queries from Reuters.

But Washington has demanded what it calls unprecedented steps to safeguard the advanced F-16C/D models, their spare parts and munitions from third parties — especially China, which has closed military ties to Pakistan.

Despite these stiff precautions, Pakistan would get a fighter said by Washington to be stripped of a cutting-edge offensive capability, supposedly incapable of delivering nuclear weapons and subject to US government say on when it could be flown overseas.

The initial security plan for the F-16s was presented to Congress on July 20 by John Hillen, the assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, who described it as “extraordinary” and “unprecedented.” In testimony to the House of Representatives’ International Relations Committee, Hillen highlighted segregation of the aircraft from third country-origin aircraft and munitions, semi-annual F-16 inventories and more frequent looks at associated systems by US personnel.

Still, the House panel’s top Republican and Democrat demanded even more US monitoring and oversight. Rep. Tom Lantos, the top Democrat, said he supported the sale, but was worried about technology security in a country “that produced the AQ Khan nuclear network.” After a follow up July 20 closed-door session with Lantos and others, Bush adminstration officials beefed up the F-16 related security plan in ways not made public.

“We responded to reasonable requests from members of Congress,” Kohler said by email through a spokesman. “And the changes should not be viewed as onerous by Pakistan.” The Pakistani embassy declined to comment. Hillen, in his testimony, disclosed the United States was withholding unspecified technologies “that would usually go with an F16,” including ones that would let it “be used in offensive ways to penetrate air space of another country that was highly defended.” Reuters

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\08\12\story_12-8-2006_pg7_31

What I would like to stress here if that IMHO, F-16s would not really help provide PAF that much needed punch afterall if they are going to be stripped of 'cutting-edge offensive techs' which help penetrate enemy airspace (other than not being able to deliver nuclear weapons), that 'usually go with them'.

Someone want to elaborate what exactly these techs are which PAF would not receive?