I just made a thread in the aviation forum on aircraft prices brahmos. You might wanna check it out.
Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for? [Recent F-16 deal news, etc]
- Thread starter Mukesh Patel
- Start date
no prob. But i still prefer the chinese inventory.
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
PJ forty is a modest amount and they will have to eventually buy more, its not the price per-unit that gets expensive its the Cost of maintenance for entire life of the equipment, But since PAF will have all the Overhaul technology, it would only make more sense in getting a substantial amount of them something like 80 for a decent capability.
PJ forty is a modest amount and they will have to eventually buy more, its not the price per-unit that gets expensive its the Cost of maintenance for entire life of the equipment, But since PAF will have all the Overhaul technology, it would only make more sense in getting a substantial amount of them something like 80 for a decent capability.
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
yeah 27 mill is insignificant compared to the actual cost that PAF would incur during the lifetime of the Grippen, each grippen would cost a X amount of Sum to maintain and keep in air, the Price of maintenance would traditionally increase by x amount after a certain time. what i mean to say is that, the way we amateurs see an ac is not the right way, we never count inn the Total Logistical and training price per unit. which i think the grippen excels at !!
when for instance we buy a car, we pay an certain amount for it. It may be higher purchase, so we pay an interest over it. then we need to pay for its repairs, and its fuel needs. its MOT cost and then its INsurance... well you get my Point here. and the older it will get the more maintenance it would require.
yeah 27 mill is insignificant compared to the actual cost that PAF would incur during the lifetime of the Grippen, each grippen would cost a X amount of Sum to maintain and keep in air, the Price of maintenance would traditionally increase by x amount after a certain time. what i mean to say is that, the way we amateurs see an ac is not the right way, we never count inn the Total Logistical and training price per unit. which i think the grippen excels at !!
when for instance we buy a car, we pay an certain amount for it. It may be higher purchase, so we pay an interest over it. then we need to pay for its repairs, and its fuel needs. its MOT cost and then its INsurance... well you get my Point here. and the older it will get the more maintenance it would require.
Yeah PJ apparently this is old news!! this was when PAF had sanctions and had very little options, Flanker is a high performance and a HIgh cost AC, its not feasible for PAF, PAF has always had poor poor funding, management of such AC's would of been a problem. But the Flankers were coming for cheapPJ-10 BrahMos said:
dabrownguy
New Member
Why would PAF buy the Gripen? its more expensice than the Flanker and you can get Thunder for half the cost. Are they doubting the Thunder? Gripen is not even a high end fighter, it can be taken. Not much diference between the Thunder and Gripen.
mysterious
New Member
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
Not much difference between Thunder and Gripen? You sure you're ok?? Gripen is a 'front-line', 'fourth generation' aircraft made by the SWEDES!!!! Thunder is a low-tech, BULK fighter (can be said to be of 3rd generation) to form the backbone of PAF in 'numbers'!! Two are very different things for very different purposes. A comparison would be unfair between the two. :smokingc:
Not much difference between Thunder and Gripen? You sure you're ok?? Gripen is a 'front-line', 'fourth generation' aircraft made by the SWEDES!!!! Thunder is a low-tech, BULK fighter (can be said to be of 3rd generation) to form the backbone of PAF in 'numbers'!! Two are very different things for very different purposes. A comparison would be unfair between the two. :smokingc:
myst even after reading all I've posted about the Thunder u say it's a low-tech aircraft.U seriously need to go through u'r aircraft research once again. :eek
A comparison between the production Thunder and the Grippen will be fair.Prod Thunders will be fullfleged 4th gen fighters.
U my friend, clearly need help!(jk)
A comparison between the production Thunder and the Grippen will be fair.Prod Thunders will be fullfleged 4th gen fighters.
U my friend, clearly need help!(jk)
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
On the other hand, the electronic systems of JF-17 are still under development. So we dont know how much capable the JF-17 be as far as avionics are concerned. Lets not forget, Zimbawe is trying to get JF-17s to counter South African Gripens.
And lastly, the JF-17 is a Medium-Tech Air-Superiority fighter which can fulfill PAFs F-16s needs.
Gripen uses composite materials. Its semi-stealth. its electronic systems make it a very capable aircraft.mysterious said:
On the other hand, the electronic systems of JF-17 are still under development. So we dont know how much capable the JF-17 be as far as avionics are concerned. Lets not forget, Zimbawe is trying to get JF-17s to counter South African Gripens.
And lastly, the JF-17 is a Medium-Tech Air-Superiority fighter which can fulfill PAFs F-16s needs.
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
theres too much talk of word stealth !!, well its stealthier not Semi stealth or Stealth. it probably has a lower RCS, but i doubt its stealthy in any way look at its huge air Inlet, someone jump inn and explain the concept !!Oqaab said:
umair how can you say that !! 50 percent!! i thought the Thunder was simple non exotic high/med tech bulk fighter!! as claimed by PAF ACM. i doubt 50 percent of it would be Composite.umair said:
if that was the case then mirage 2005 mk2 and grippens wouldn't be under consideration. thunder is an unproven simple fighter AC which fulfill the 3rd generation bulk fighter gap in PAF inventory. it's designed on the same philosophy as the F-16. simple cheap effective and Robust.
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
to add that level of composite would require alot of the AC to be redesigned, something CAC would be unwilling to do. PAK Karma lacks the capability to implement this design stage at this point in time. I am very optimistic about the effectiveness of this thunder platform, but we shouldn't jump teh Gun here, its a fairly new platform and its gogin to be PAK and china's first indigenous Designed AC. it will obviously lack in many area something that an excellent pilot could compensate for.
If 50 percent of the Airframe is converted to Composite constructions it would mean massive redesigning, including reinforcement of the structure to support the composite Shell. this would complicate the AC,and could make the AC very pricey. this is the reason why the UAE's F-16 were so pricy the Development cost on the JF-17 would be enormous, as PAF does not have the capability (at this point in time) and would have to out source for Help.
to add that level of composite would require alot of the AC to be redesigned, something CAC would be unwilling to do. PAK Karma lacks the capability to implement this design stage at this point in time. I am very optimistic about the effectiveness of this thunder platform, but we shouldn't jump teh Gun here, its a fairly new platform and its gogin to be PAK and china's first indigenous Designed AC. it will obviously lack in many area something that an excellent pilot could compensate for.
If 50 percent of the Airframe is converted to Composite constructions it would mean massive redesigning, including reinforcement of the structure to support the composite Shell. this would complicate the AC,and could make the AC very pricey. this is the reason why the UAE's F-16 were so pricy the Development cost on the JF-17 would be enormous, as PAF does not have the capability (at this point in time) and would have to out source for Help.
I say it cause I know.The basic concept yes was for a med-tech fighter, but the fighter has continued to evolve over it's development duration, many changes have been made in the original specs which are unfortunately not available on the net(even I don't know about all the changes,my sources tell me only the general outlin).If u know anybody on a high rank in the PAF ask them and they'll confirm what I've been posting/telling u guys here.As far as the ratio of composites goes, it can be done very easily because Pakistan has had the capability to manufacture,weave and mould advanced composites since the 1990's both in the private and public sectors.
Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?
umair as far as my knowledge goes i think Composite structures for AC is expenive and to produce them is a very delicate process, first you need an inverse mould, then you need the Composite/carbon type material( which is pre prepped for its role, tailor made) and then a long winded process of cutting out Composite material and placing it on the mould evenly. then various other process take place before the recipe is complete the whole Mould is then placed in a high pressure Heating oven. the right temperature is required for the right kind of material.i guess you get my point i don't know how PAf would attempt this process. but i think GF would know the actual process in more detail !! i would appreciate Comments and corrections here.
umair as far as my knowledge goes i think Composite structures for AC is expenive and to produce them is a very delicate process, first you need an inverse mould, then you need the Composite/carbon type material( which is pre prepped for its role, tailor made) and then a long winded process of cutting out Composite material and placing it on the mould evenly. then various other process take place before the recipe is complete the whole Mould is then placed in a high pressure Heating oven. the right temperature is required for the right kind of material.i guess you get my point i don't know how PAf would attempt this process. but i think GF would know the actual process in more detail !! i would appreciate Comments and corrections here.