Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for? [Recent F-16 deal news, etc]

[corsair7772]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Corsair, I actually get to speak to people in Rosoboronexport at military exhibitions and military conferences etc about technology issues, it may not be totally open (as in unclassified) but it is very very open about what they see as their future threats. They have no interest in selling China any of their technology which would threaten their position. China gets the export items only. They've already had China build unlicenced mods of the AK-74, AK-47, RPG-7, Kilos and they suspect that China is building more Su-27's than what they are licensed to do. Re the Su-27, Russia refused to provide China the technology to make their own blanks by with holding a 5 axis press. That is akin to refusing to give Ford Moro Company the machinery to transfer the chassis drawings onto a metal product (in one piece) - That is a huge statement of distrust

Also, Russia at a conventional level would wipe China on the battlefield with not much effort. As long as they didn't seek to invade and occupy they would crush them rather quickly.

I always find it interesting that people who don't have an involvement with military issues at a work level think that the answers are so transparent.

btw, Rosoboronexport is the govt - they are private in name only - but they are a Government Business Enterprise. They aren't the russian equivalent of a Boeing or LockMart but are more like GIAT or EADS in structure. Hence they will abide by Russian foreign policy because they are Russian Govt by association.

I just wonder why a lot of people think that money will buy everything - after all, China has had the money, and the EU still refuses to lift the arms embargoes (except for the French who some suspect are selling by stealth anyway).

Money does not buy every trinket that a country wants - the very belief that this is so shows that you haven't observed recent (last 30 years) arms sales. Gripen being a tacit example, Phalcon being a tacit example, that money will not always get you what you want.

The French are acknowledged within the industry as being the "whores of arms sales" and they don't sell their best kit, or even some of their kit just to make some extra Francs.

I act as an agent for some French ballistics technology, and even though I act as their agent in Australia, I cannot onsell the equipment if it clashes with or contradicts their Foreign Policy.

If you saw the processes required to sell US equipment (which involves a laborious and very documented process that has to be vetted and approved by the US State Dept) you would understand that money and a willingness to purchase means nada, zip, zilch, zero for some countries. I can assure you that Russias attitude to China is very very distinct. Most Russians I deal with actually see that they will end up in a shooting war with China over Siberia and Mongolia - so they have no intent of giving them any technology which is considered sophisticated enough not to be countered or might come back in an unwanted manner.

gf, i admit tht you have first hand experience in military affairs but ive been working with ppl frm the ukrainian and chinese defense departments though not much experience with western companies ( also havin bein able to visit ukraine when i was a kid thought tht doesnt count ) and blv u shud see how confident these people are and how seriously they work on export orders. you think ive been sitting around smoking dope like a guru while the gripen was being analysed and the phalcon ordered? After some 4 years of work with chinese and ukrainian officials i can assure you that the level of independence from the russians is a lot more than you think, which is exactly why im arguin with you here in the first place. RUSSIA WOULD SELL CHINA STUFF IT IS CONFIDENT IT CAN BEAT. Suppose china makes 300 su-27s and BANG war begins. Russia by this time would have about 100 su-37s and numerous other aircraft of hi tech incorporating stealth technology based on plasma and any other gadget they can lay there hands on. BANG again and there goes the chinese dragon back to the politiburo complaining about a bad head ache courtsey of Russia and allies.

And speaking of russia, if you had even a whiff of the corruption that ruled the arms sales agencies in the 90s after the collapse youd swear on any holy book nearby that youd never step inside the complex world of bribery and money making. Contracts are never cancelled after there signed. Russia is just lucky tht the contract wid china was a formal one. Cuz if it wasnt there wudnt have been a series of shows and examinations of russian aircraft. But if china wants it can change contract rules in its own manner. Money doesnt buy everything. but it can sure buy a lot of corruption and love from illegal arms dealers.

Real sorry if i sound like im doubting ur career experience. see while uve been selling missiles in australia ive been havin chit chats with chinese and ukrainian officials related to defense, courtesy of rich and influential friends in army.;-) so i know the game tht runs there though i admit ur knowledge of western companies is superior to mine.

I always find it interesting that people who don't have an involvement with military issues at a work level think that the answers are so transparent.

What i find even more interesting is that sales men seem to take us poor civilians in military uniforms as rather shallow.

 

[umair]

Real sorry if i sound like im doubting ur career experience. see while uve been selling missiles in australia ive been havin chit chats with chinese and ukrainian officials related to defense, courtesy of rich and influential friends in army.

Well corsair this is the same reason why I know that the PAF rejected Flankers and Fulcrums(though I used to be in their favour too).I have relatives and friends/acquaintances who either still are or in the recent past were on high posts in the PAF.
Oh and the main rejection reason was (as adsh put it) Flankers and Fulcrums had a lot higher maintenance downtime and cost than the western types PAF is accustomed to.Also the engine for the Thunder is an improved version which has lower maintenance downtime and costs than the original RD-33 which was in the Fulcrums we evaluated.

 

[corsair7772]

lol umair you win but im still not gonna buy a T shirt that says I HATE FLANKERS.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

What i find even more interesting is that sales men seem to take us poor civilians in military uniforms as rather shallow.

I am definitely not a salesman.

I'm a consultant, I make recommendations about specific weapons solutions in specific military areas.

none of my work is in australia.

If you want to really pi$$ me off - then call me a salesman, they are the scum of the earth in my book.

 

[corsair7772]

lol no hard feelings Gary. I just took it the wrong way.

 

[adsH]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

If you want to really pi$$ me off - then call me a salesman, they are the scum of the earth in my book.

"GF" "Victora" might not like what you said :lol

 

[Revival_786]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Originally by gf0012-aust

Also, Russia at a conventional level would wipe China on the battlefield with not much effort.

Wow really? :eek

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

If you want to really pi$$ me off - then call me a salesman, they are the scum of the earth in my book.

"GF" "Victora" might not like what you said :lol

I was talking about military "box floggers" Not salesmen in general.

(think Adnan Kashoggi etc...)

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Originally by gf0012-aust

Also, Russia at a conventional level would wipe China on the battlefield with not much effort.

Wow really? :eek

Yes, Russia still has a substantial technological edge over China. SHe is probably still the world leader in battlefied rocket technology, and has demonstrated that she can use them as a PGM.

China has mainly mass and volume, and that is not necessarily going to help in a modern battlefield. I'd argue that she is at least 8-10 years away from having a conventional capability to take on Russia.

 

[SABRE]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Originally by gf0012-aust

Also, Russia at a conventional level would wipe China on the battlefield with not much effort.

Wow really? :eek

Yes, Russia still has a substantial technological edge over China. SHe is probably still the world leader in battlefied rocket technology, and has demonstrated that she can use them as a PGM.

China has mainly mass and volume, and that is not necessarily going to help in a modern battlefield. I'd argue that she is at least 8-10 years away from having a conventional capability to take on Russia.

8-10 yrs is still very short time. It would be like China performing miracle (like it has always). So it seems that Russia is going down while China is coming up or Russia is staying where it is and China is the only one going up. They might end up at the same possitions.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

I can't see the Russians giving up no: 2 spot without trying. Recently Putin has indicated that defence spending will be boosted by some 40%

Thats a considerable effort. Don't under-estimate the Russians.

 

[VICTORA1]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Adsh--gf,
Salesman---hahn---I don't care if you like me or not-----but as you guys are here, can I get your business. Just sign on the dotted line would you please.

Just tell you guys an incident----a lady came in looking for a car. I greeted her---I guess it was around 10 or 12 years ago----right from the gitgo she stated ' you sales people are shysters---blah blah blah. My husband used to own a dealership. I know every thing about you guys'. I asked her if she was still married to him. She stated yes. I told her just like that " Ma'am, you mount the devil-in-chief every night. You enjoy the money that he made and you are here insulting me for something I didnot do. I don't want to assist you any further". My supervisor got a real kick out of it when he learnt about the incidence later.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Adsh--gf,
Salesman---hahn---I don't care if you like me or not-----but as you guys are here, can I get your business. Just sign on the dotted line would you please.

Vic1, I was referring to military equipment box floggers.

 

[SABRE]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

I can't see the Russians giving up no: 2 spot without trying. Recently Putin has indicated that defence spending will be boosted by some 40%

Thats a considerable effort. Don't under-estimate the Russians.

Totaly agreed. Russia is rising and it will take more than 9 or 10 yrs for China to come at Par. China needs an out side help, specialy from West. It should boost its ties with France and stop seeing South Koria as its foe. This will bring in first hand Technology to them. South Koreans have habit of For give and for get.

 

[adsH]

According to Air Forces Monthly, September 2004 issue, there is news story 'Hawkeye Update' in which it is stated that "Northrop Grumman is preparing information for the requirements of India's Navy and Pakistan's Air Force. The US Government is involved with both and is providing programme availability information. The Indian Navy has a carrier requirement and consequently needs new-build aircraft with a full carrier life. In contrast, the Pakistan Air Force will probably opt for upgraded aircraft". (Hawkeye Update, page 21)

Also in the same issue, in another news story ’Gripen Looks to the Future’: “The company confirmed it had held discussions with the Pakistan Air Force over the purchase of the Gripen (believed to be for 60 aircraft). However the sanctions situation in that country has to be carefully addressed before any deal can be finalised.†(page 23)

__________________

 

[SABRE]

According to Air Forces Monthly, September 2004 issue, there is news story 'Hawkeye Update' in which it is stated that "Northrop Grumman is preparing information for the requirements of India's Navy and Pakistan's Air Force. The US Government is involved with both and is providing programme availability information. The Indian Navy has a carrier requirement and consequently needs new-build aircraft with a full carrier life. In contrast, the Pakistan Air Force will probably opt for upgraded aircraft". (Hawkeye Update, page 21)

Also in the same issue, in another news story ’Gripen Looks to the Future’: “The company confirmed it had held discussions with the Pakistan Air Force over the purchase of the Gripen (believed to be for 60 aircraft). However the sanctions situation in that country has to be carefully addressed before any deal can be finalised.” (page 23)

__________________

About Gripens; I once emailed Gripen's communication director abt PAkistan buying them. He replied by saying that discussions arent on the table. Apperently he was right at that time. Pakistan went into negociations in july n it is still going on. This is ve learned from my political sources. Some ppl have told me that Sweden is willing to sell Gripens to Pakistan but it wants commitment from us. Dnt know what sort of commitments.
Anyways I too believe that Gripen deal is still alive & we might just get them. If the deal was dead we would be seeing ACM giving press conference on that n lookin for some other Jet.

 

[Oqaab]

Londo Molari's sources are very credible. I remember, he once said that Sweden has denied any any weapons sale to Pakistan, and after 2-3 months, the news report appeared on the Internet about Swedens refusal.

 

[SABRE]

Re: Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for?

Ya n few days after that Media reported tht Sweden will sale SAAB 2004 & AWACS to Pakistan.

Real dnt knw whome to trust.

 

[srirangan]

don't trust anyone unless a confirmed report of the deal being signed comes up in national media.

 

[adsH]

don't trust anyone unless a confirmed report of the deal being signed comes up in national media.

its harder to tell these days since some actually prefer not to go public with the deals, it is there right not to.