Pakistan Air Force [PAF] News and Discussions

mysterious

New Member
It would make sense for Pakistan to opt for the additional 18 aircraft, providing the PAF with some menacing punch. Would be particularly interesting if the Americans agree to include AESA in the extended order if it goes through.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
It would make sense for Pakistan to opt for the additional 18 aircraft, providing the PAF with some menacing punch. Would be particularly interesting if the Americans agree to include AESA in the extended order if it goes through.
With AESA radar upgrade programs including SABR and RACR available for F-16 fighters, I suspect it will be but a matter of time, before the PAF enhances their F-16's with this sort of capability, though the APG-68v9 is no doubt a capable radar system...

India will doubtless acquire a fighter under MMRCA with AESA capability and Pakistan should have a sound argument for "maintaining regional parity" and be authorised to acquire same.

Until that time, the Block 52 F-16's and upgraded earlier variants will provide a credible air combat capability for the PAF but hardly an "over-matching" capability.
 

good_old_viper

New Member
Hey,

Is there any chance Pakistan Airforce could change/replace this diffilcult and rather un-attractive new name FC-20 Fighter with a good name for the J10 Fighter. FC-20 name looks so dull and kills the repu of the jet. There was talk about naming J10 Pakistani modified version with J10-Pak or J10P or something like J10P 'Vulture'. What happened? Just as Jf17 Thunder is a kool name why cant it be like J10P Vulture Fighter or J10-Pak as was suggested earlier ??
The export version of chinese planes is 'F', so it will be F-10 or something like that if it were kept to the original name (just like F-7). JF is for 'joint fighter' so it cannot be a JF since it is not a joint project. FC is for fighter china and 20 for a number higher than 17.

Given how hard Pakistani engineers and technicians are working in improving the Chinese J10, I humbly request a better new name than this difficult 'FC-20' name as its going to be the next possible work horse of PAF in times to come.
J10 is a completely chinese project. No engineer or technician has been working to improve it. Maybe you are confusing with the JF-17 project which is a joint venture?

One more question is about the SAAB Ereiye AWE&C. How many Pakistan is looking to buy or any chance of a possible new acquisition in line with a combo package with Gripen NG?
Gripen was rejected because of it is prone to sanctions by US since it contains US contents. Also, PAF doesnt want to add different platforms unless it intends to change to that platform and go for a large numbers. The F-16 were bought since they are already with PAF and we have extensive experience with it.


Also is there any possibility of increasing the order of F16 Block 50/52 if Pakistan gets the current order of 18 delievered on time? Given the changing scenario I think Pakistan should have gone for the Gripen NG or Rafale or Russian Migs(through increasing contacts) or invest more in the JF17s? Pakistan needs a new set of 4.5 Generation or 5th Generation Fighters immediately and yet no deals in foreseeable future are seen why is that? Is it the wait for MMRCA of India but i think Pakistan must look at world scenario than just India.
JF-17, F-16 blk 52, FC-20 are all 4.5 gen, with JF-17 being the lighter, cheaper version to be bought en mass and the other two being heavy, more advanced versions to complement each other.

The main question of PAF acquisition is finances. We cannot afford Rafales/EF off the shelve and even the FC-20 is being pushed back due to finances (and upgradation). PAF has already announced its plans...I don't think they are waiting for MMRCA...for the foreseable future. Anything apart from that would only happen if finances permit it which do not look likely in the current scenario.


How many Jf17s are in operation now? And will Pakistan receive the next 42 on time which is suppose to be completed by this dec 2009? How many JF17s are to be built in Pakistan and how many in China?
Thanks
Who gave you that date of Dec. 2009 for 42 planes?? its utterly wrong. Only the first squadron is supposed to be up by end of this year (maybe end of this month or next month). The first batch will go into 2010-11.

The planes are partly built in Pak and partly in China. The first few were built in china while the assembly line was being prepared. From July 2009 onwards, the planes are part in Pak and part in China with Pak contents gradually increasing as more and more manufacturing facilities get installed over the next two years.
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
It would make sense for Pakistan to opt for the additional 18 aircraft, providing the PAF with some menacing punch. Would be particularly interesting if the Americans agree to include AESA in the extended order if it goes through.
think about the cost. If each F-16 cost $80 million after servicing and spares and some weapons (and this is based on Greece's 2005 contract), 18 would cost $14.4 billion. In the future, it'd be even higher due to inflation. Pakistan has to think about how it wants to spend its money.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
think about the cost. If each F-16 cost $80 million after servicing and spares and some weapons (and this is based on Greece's 2005 contract), 18 would cost $1.44 billion. In the future, it'd be even higher due to inflation. Pakistan has to think about how it wants to spend its money.
I don't disagree with you and IMO, the new Pakistani Vipers are the sharp end of their sword. On a broad strokes basis it is OK to try to look at other operators with block 52s but not block 60s. However, if you read the Sept 2009 issue of Air Forces Monthly (click here for another DT thread and read post #15), it is clear that even amongst block 52 Vipers, there are significantly different configurations. There are different choices for the F-16s (engines, targeting pods, radar, EW, HMDs) and depending on what you pick, the price can be very different.

On a side note: I just wanted to add that the UAE block 60s, with the F110-GE-132 engine, APG-80 AESA radar and integrated electronic warfare suite (which includes the ALQ-165 electronic countermeasures system) are a bit more expensive than the block 52 Vipers Pakistan ordered (with the F100-PW-229 engine and the APG-68(V9) radar).
 
Last edited:

zeven

New Member
T

Gripen was rejected because of it is prone to sanctions by US since it contains US contents. Also, PAF doesnt want to add different platforms unless it intends to change to that platform and go for a large numbers. The F-16 were bought since they are already with PAF and we have extensive experience with it. .
Incorrect.
Gripen was rejected because the Swedish government said NO. Had nothing to with US sanctions at all. Sweden authorities allowed the Erieye AWAC system to be exported to PAK because its used for defence psurposes ONLY..

Swedish export laws are very harsh especially when it comes to military hardware..

Cheers.
 

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
Incorrect.
Gripen was rejected because the Swedish government said NO. Had nothing to with US sanctions at all. Sweden authorities allowed the Erieye AWAC system to be exported to PAK because its used for defence psurposes ONLY..

Swedish export laws are very harsh especially when it comes to military hardware..

Cheers.
& under very same law they are trying to export Gripen to India?
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
think about the cost. If each F-16 cost $80 million after servicing and spares and some weapons (and this is based on Greece's 2005 contract), 18 would cost $14.4 billion. In the future, it'd be even higher due to inflation. Pakistan has to think about how it wants to spend its money.
I would think that bringing it's entire F-16 fleet up to a Block 52 (equivalent) level would be a more pressing priority than acquiring another 18x new-builds. That would give PAF a force of around 60x Block 52 equivalent F-16 fighters (IIRC), which is nothing to be sneezed at...

It would be interesting to hear if anyone has heard how the PAF MLU/STAR upgrades are proceeding? I believe PAF sent 4x aircraft to the USA in 2007/8 for work to commence?
 

suryaaa

New Member
Why in the world PAF is going for F-16 which is as discussed above is costlier .Is it because of US pressure,[American money should be spent on American items.].

They got good options like JF-17 and J-10.Also i heard that F-16 offered to PAF doesn't have CFT's .Is it true

SABRE
& under very same law they are trying to export Gripen to India?

zeven
Yes sounds weird i know. i would guess the diplomatic ties are better with India than with Pakistan.
This is because India is a matured state [No offense].And the Money factor 10+ billion is huge.Even Americans cant resist it.
 
Last edited:

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
It would be interesting to hear if anyone has heard how the PAF MLU/STAR upgrades are proceeding? I believe PAF sent 4x aircraft to the USA in 2007/8 for work to commence?
I haven't been following the program but I "believe" couple (or more) F-16s are in Turkey.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
This is because India is a matured state [No offense].And the Money factor 10+ billion is huge.Even Americans cant resist it.
Sadly, this is one of those urban myths that has got a life of its own.

American defence exporters can only sell what State Dept allows them. It doesn't matter what tech they have, unless its cleared then it doesn't go offshore. I know this is so because I've seen it first hand with things such as sub technology.

US companies are free to act within the commercial sphere and sell whatever is not ITARs locked. Hence why when India asks for ToT to test the mettle, it's not always going to come off.

Commercial reality is that US companies will sell whatever they can (the same as the French, poms, swedes, germans and russians) - but that doesn't mean that all the gear is up for sale. - Its clearly not.

This belief that the US companies will sell whatever they can ignores the political and legal restrictions - and the proof of that is the number of US companies that get penalised for breaching ITARs
 

Blue Streak

Banned Member
Grow up.

America will slate you for the next 50 years. And build at least 150 in technological dominance.

Read and study your History.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Why in the world PAF is going for F-16 which is as discussed above is costlier .Is it because of US pressure,[American money should be spent on American items.].

They got good options like JF-17 and J-10.Also i heard that F-16 offered to PAF doesn't have CFT's .Is it true
DSCA says that Pakistan has requested CFT's for it's F-16's and nothing I've read says otherwise. I see no reason why they would be denied. The range enhancement they provide can be achieved in other ways if necessary (though perhaps not as elegantly) so denying them would hardly achieve a foreign policy objective of the USA.

They are not a particularly high level of technology (being only fuel tanks afterall) and certainly fighter aircraft with the range (or greater) of a CFT equipped F-16 are already present in that region.

As to why F-16, they are a very combat capable aircraft, even today. New build orders are still being placed by a number of Countries and the F-16 platform is in contention in other fighter competitions around the world.

The JF-17 and J-10 have a LONG way to go to proving they have anything like the combat capability of the F-16 Block 52 and Pakistan needs to upgrade it's fighter force. A strengthened F-16 capability is certainly an efficient and credible way of demonstrating a commitment to their own defence. By the time they are all delivered and the earlier models upgraded to a similar standard, PAF will equip 3 or 4 squadrons worth of Block 52 equivalent jets.

It is not a trivial capability by any means, but hardly the most expensive option around...

As to American pressure, Pakistan requested the sale of the jets formally, not the other way around...
 

good_old_viper

New Member
Incorrect.
Gripen was rejected because the Swedish government said NO. Had nothing to with US sanctions at all. Sweden authorities allowed the Erieye AWAC system to be exported to PAK because its used for defence psurposes ONLY..

Swedish export laws are very harsh especially when it comes to military hardware..

Cheers.
I don't think a formal request was even put forward to raise the question of a yes or a no.

There are 3 things that went against the Gripen...which was being considered to be a main stay fighter in lieu of the JF-17.

- The US (GE) engine and 'some other contents'.
- Not meeting PAF requirement of a multi-role fighter
- Issues relating to ToT and the capability of local industry to handle it.

And ofcourse, the cost issue. Mind you it was the JAS-39 that was being considered not the NG and it was to form the backbone of PAF in place of the JF-17.

It doesn't make sense to go for just 18 planes of a new platform so it wasn't seriously considered. US engine was a major issue since PAF was under sanction from US and the issues of serviceability was a major concern.
 

good_old_viper

New Member
Why in the world PAF is going for F-16 which is as discussed above is costlier .Is it because of US pressure,[American money should be spent on American items.].

They got good options like JF-17 and J-10.Also i heard that F-16 offered to PAF doesn't have CFT's .Is it true
In addition to what Aussie digger has said, I would like to add that the contract was a "broad-based" one that included 36 (later reduced to 18) new F-16s, up-gradation of old ones and lots of ammunition. I don't think the remaining contract would be the same if new planes were not bought.

Secondly, PAF has a vast experience with the F-16 so it is something their pilots are well trained at. And PAF also has a trained maintenance facility/technicians as well as the MLU program ensures that the F-16 are here to stay for a while.

Thirdly, other similar options say EF or Rafale would be way much costlier. As noted above, JF-17 and J-10 are still not mature platforms or combat proven. Also training pilots on either platform is a long term task.

Finally, like any other nation and based on past experience, I don't think it is wise to put all your eggs in one basket. PAF will continue to operate a mix of chinese/western military hardware for the foreseeable future. Also, the contract was partly financed by FMF so another reason to utilize the money on F-16s.

As opposed to the earlier F-16 contract where the F-16s were supposed to be the backbone of the PAF, now that will go to the JF-17 with F-16s and FC-20s sharing the medium weight category requirement. Hope the decision to go for the F-16s make more sense now.
 
Top