Leave Crobato out for a moment, as he uses intelligent arguments & not sheer arrogance like you, and wins others respect, by adding to other’s knowledge.

don’t be so bitter.

Howevere, you only have to look at your own numerous posts (in many forums) arguing furiously that PLAAF would NOT be interested in JF-17, and only J-10s. I will not waste any of my time digging those posts. You can do that, and see contradiction in your own statements.

i know what my views are and have always been. I don’t need you to tell me. My views are well stated in my blog.

China surely one day will have to face F-22s & F-35s, but not with a lot of its existing J-6/J-7’s that PLAAF currently flies, a handful of J-10s and imported Russian “Monkeyed” aircraft as its front line aircraft, barely catching up with Taiwanese forces – forget the dreams of facing F-22’s for another 20 years. By then, where would America be? So, carry on dreaming in your virtual world.

we don’t fly any more J-6s. Yes, the flankers we imported are monkey versions, that’s why we don’t import them anymore. Why don’t you keep on embarrassing yourself with such apparent lack of knowledge. If you read my blog, you would get an idea of when the next generation fighters of PLAAF will come out. I don’t need to state them here if you just bother to have a read? Keep on insulting China if you want, but Pakistan will be buying planes from us for the foreseeable future.

We know you are a software coder, the lowest form of creature in software developmment hierarchy – have you ever heard of ‘Enterprise Architect’ – over the other end of spectrum. Therefore, I am confidant of my ability to pay. But the question is what are your taste buds like? Have they improved beyond the McDonalds ‘Big Mac’ meal stage yet? We all remember, peasant chinese queuing up for blocks, ready to part with their weeks wages just to buy a McDonalds meal, when the store first opened in Peking.

tphuang, now that you have escaped poverty of China and have started to live half decently in an advanced society, for Gods sake have some humility, and drop this arrogance. It will be a long time before China is any where near USA technologically and economically, to justify your misplaced arrogance. Keep repeating to yourself – CHINA IS NO USA YET.

I am closing this useless debate with you, as sure enough I have not a hope in hell in succeeding where your pa***** failed so miserably.

wow, so you can only continue by insult me. Clearly, you have no ability to argue or debate in a civil manner. Unless you are making in the 7 digits in USD, I’m pretty sure I’m doing better than you are. And if I get taken out by someone who is incapable of carrying out a civil conversation like yourself, it better be a $500 French place. I know one on the upper west side. In fact, I even have connection to one of the chef. I can get us in for sure.

Again, you are incorrectly using a term applied to the USSR that can’t be applied to the track record of Chinese exports.

And again, the F-8IIM when it was first introduced in 1996 was better than any of the J-8II variants, the PLAAF had at the time. Aside from the few armed with PL-11, the vast majority of the J-8IIs, including the then new J-8D were armed with PL-8 as their “long range” missile. The F-8IIM was armed with the R-27.

You have no idea what the term means, TPhuang, so don’t use it and let this thread return Pakistani missiles.

I know exactly what it means. This is not 1996 anymore. I’ve mentionned many times already what was offered as F-8IIM at the Beijing airshow from this month. It is clearly not at the same level as J-8F. The radars offered with export version of the planes are all developed by 607. Not in the same league as the 14th institute radar.

Crobato,
It is your level headedness and sensible arguments, as opposed to tphuang’s irrational and misplaced arrogance, that have earned you my (and no doubt of many others too) respect. We learn from each other in these forums, and your above post has once again helped me clarify and understand the issues as follows:

1. What China WILL NOT or CAN NOT export to another country is its sovereign prerogative OR lack of its M.I.C capability and no one can argue about either. If what China decides NOT to (policy) OR is NOT able to (present Chinese M.I.C capability level) exports does NOT meet another country’s needs, then it is also the importing country’s prerogative to seek the required capability equipment from a third country, albeit at much higher prices. F16 block 52+, and current post block1 JF-17 avionics from France are contemporary examples.
2. Due to China’s enormous geo-political challenges, it would be prudent for China NOT to sell certain top of the range defence equipment that she deems to be crucial / sensitive for strategic reasons. No one can dispute Chinese sovereignty in this respect either.
3. However, what China decides to release for export does not have to be “Monkey” stuff. In order to compete in such competitive world market China may (as Crobato illustrated by providing SD-10 / PL-12 example) export SD-10 missiles to Pakistan with a different seeker, but otherwise SD-10 being as potent as PL-12. This seeker difference is ALL important, otherwise effective counter measures could be developed against it – say by USA through their espionage within Pakistan – USA may then use this information to neutralise Chinese BVR missiles in a possible future conflict, say over Taiwan.
4. Future war fares, and especially air war fares are going to be electromagnetic centric. Whoever dominates electromagnetic spectrum (EM / ECM etc.) would be in strong position to determine the battle / war outcomes. Therefore, each and every country jealously guards their war fare mode frequencies and electromagnetic signatures. Recent example being that Indian SU-30MK2s had their key equipment turned off during their exercises in the West. So, if China decides to export a top notch product, the least prudence that China is expected to exercise is to NOT export the same frequency / counter measure modes etc. that its forces might be called upon to use in a future conflict. But I do not fathom how tphuang uses term “Monkey” for such changes.

I believe that the scenario put forward by Crobato is much more credible and makes a lot more sense than tphuang’s continued and untenable rhetoric that “China never exports its top defence equipment”. If we are to accept tphuang’s argument, then China being 10 years behind the West in high tech defence electronics, its older export version would then be least 13-15 years old, making this out dated equipment suitable for perhaps Zimbabwe or Sudan, but certainly would not be of much use for Pakistani air force, who have to defend against one of the best equipped air forces in the world.

Yet, in reality we continue to see proliferation of Pakistan-China collaboration into more and more cutting edge fields, and the imports of more and more high tech equipment such as JF-17 / SD-10 and possibly J-10 & AWACS in the near future. These facts prove Crobato’s reasoning to be more credible and sensible than tphuang’s arrogant hot air.

I think what’s clear is that you cannot come up with any explanation for my examples and have to blindly state your own opinion. Export versions are not as good as domestic version

Do you think the main change being in the seeker, not other parts of the missile i.e modifications on the body or different motor in the missile. Any more information available on those seekers, their effectiveness.

PL-12 is supposed to also have better kinetic performance.

One, the F-8IIM was first offered in the Zhuhai airshow in 1996. The J-8F first entered service in 2003 and is just appearing in numbers now. Since the vast majority of J-8s (of any variants) weren’t even armed with a bvr missile in 1996, the F-8IIM was certainly not inferior at the time.

Two, there were never any news of Iran asking for the J-8F aside from forum rumors.

It is entirely erroneously to think the F-8IIM was a “monkey” or downgraded version of the J-8II.

Beyond that, no J-8II of any variant was ever sold to anyone. Claiming that it was “denied” to Iran is fallacious since we can’t tell whether China is keeping its best at home or simply nobody wanted the aircraft anywhere.

We do know that aircraft that people did want — F-7, K-8, etc. — definitely were NOT inferior in their export variants. The J-7G, for example, was derived from the PG and came into the PLAAF after type flew with the PAF.

hmmm, that’s the F-8IIM offered at the current Beijing airshow. (The version offered now is definitely different than the one from 1996) So, it’s not from over 10 years ago. The story about Iran definitely happened. I’ve seen enough “big shrimps” on Chinese forums confirming it. The exact reason was that China did not want to offer its best to other countries.

I actually made a mistake with it, it wasn’t even offered with Kunlun I, it was offered with WP-13B.

F-7 and K-8 are the lowest of plaaf procurement. Having good version of them exported is not a big deal.

Besides, you do realize that a lot of the J-7Gs are flying with WP-14 right? Does that sound like inferior to F-7PG to you?

My concern is not with what equipment China might have sold or previously denied to Iran (J8s etc.), or whether or what ”Monkey” versions of FC-1s China might or might not sell to Zimbabwe, or Sudan tomorrow. When Chinese F-6 / 7s were being delivered to Pakistan, US pilots were busy ferrying F-14 Tomcats to Iran. The post-Shah foreign policy route Iran took had a direct bearing on how China chose to treat Iran.

My concern, and the basis of contention with you tphuang, has been specific to Chinese / Pakistani defence relationship, which is long, stable and a very special one. Their joint development of JF-17 is a contemporary example. And I very much hope, J-10 being exported to Pakistan, before any other country will be another.

In this context, while Pakistan / China being staunch allies, it seems odd to me how you, at every opportunity, look down and disparage Pakistan, Pakistan’s indigenous technical capabilities and doubt the fact that, as a sovereign nation, Pakistan is competent to enter into defence collaboration with a nation other than China. The specific example being:

Pakistani development of ‘Raad’ air launched cruise missile. You readily insisted, as usual, that it was a rejected Chinese programme. As has been clearly demonstrated to you by other posters, Pakistan has long and ongoing defence collaboration with South Africa. Therefore, it is quite conceivable that ‘Raad’ might have its genesis in this collaborative effort too. That is how Pakistan achieved its present BVR capability (albeit a limited one), long before any of AMRAAMs or SD-10s get delivered to Pakistan.

As Crobato correctly pointed out, that rather than pursuing MBT-2000, China has branched off into better tank development projects. Pakistan, I believe, also did not accept the original MBT-2000 in its original Pakistani /Chinese version, and modified and upgraded it with various European sub-systems, and has not stood still ever since, ending with a quite capable tank called Al-Khalid. And you might be surprised to know that Al-Khalid II development might not be so China-centric. There could even be a totally new tank development, in collaboration with yet another great friend of Pakistan – Turkey plus another country, but not China?? This is all speculation, and I promised to let you guys know the exact situation, after I visited HIT in Texla, later this year.

So let us celebrate the phenomenal technological advancement of Chinese M.I.C, and 50 years of Pakistan / China friendship and collaboration, by agreeing to adhere to some basic principles in our future posts:

• Let us not ‘look down’ at any country – especially when they are close, long standing allies too.
• All countries, being sovereign nations, have the competence to enter into defence collaboration to the exclusion of China.
• That the arrogance is a sign of ignorance, as no individual or a country has claim to being omniscient or omnipotet.

How am I looking down on Pakistan? The truth is that China does not export its best stuffs regardless of what you might want to believe. When it does export it’s best platforms, they are in downgraded forms. Stuff like JF-17, MBT-2000 and F-7 are not the top of line stuff in China, so pla can allow a non-downgraded version of these things exported. But they are not used as the front-line unit in China. In the case of MBT-2000, it’s not used at all. Nothing against Pakistan, that’s China’s policy toward every country.

Therefore, although I have a lot of respect for your knowledge and significant contributions in many forums, I would re-assert what I said in my previous post that, being in catch up stage China has to do its utmost, and offer its best to compete against the west – as is the case with JF-17 presently, and with J-10 in the next few years. Otherwise, very large orders running into hundreds of millions, if not billions, may be lost to the West. JF-17 and then J-10 are defining moments for China to showcase its newly acquired advanced Air defence technology to the world. The best way to do this would be to win the FIRST export order from Pakistan. JUST LOOK AT IT FROM A THIRD PERSON’s perspective

JF-17 does not define anything for China, only J-10 is. China will not offer its best stuff and release its top technology for money. It has plenty of money.
Simply look at the firm offering the radars, 607. That’s 3rd in the line below 14th and 38th.

As for this J-10’s radar not being good enough for PAF? Let’s look at the realities here:
1. China has not decided what it will export to PAF yet
2. It’s not known whether or not PAF has submitted the entire requirements
3. J-10 is a pure A2A platform for plaaf, whereas PAF is looking for a multirole, you obviously can’t use the same radar.

Yet, according to you, China cannot come up with a radar that fits Pakistan’s requirement.

I refer you to my last post to Pinko and Crobato, and if after reading that post again, rather than contemplating and trying to understand the underlying issues, you still go on and on about more speculations (no classified data available to either one of us) and continue to put each other down, then there is a medical term for that condition….

Whenever possible, I try and read all posts related to Pakistani and Chinese defence developments related to present & future Pakistani defence. I learn a lot more from reading other posters views and debates, rather than adding further to these speculations and arguments.

However – for my contribution – I have made a list of a lot of questions raised, and claims made in various forums about JF-17 (its current status, capabilities & post batch 1 plans), J-10 (as far as Pakistani future acquisition plans are concerned) and Al-Khalid II development plans etc. This fall I am hoping to visit the related factories in Pakistan, when I hope to get some definitive answers to these questions from responsible high ranking PA & PAF officers. I shall share that information with you guys. Understandably, no official would impart classified information, but I shall share whatever first hand information I received, absolutely honestly – even if it smacked right in the face of some posters making exaggerated claims about Pakistani involvement or Chinese capabilities.

Clearly, you need to observe China more, if you want to improve your understanding in Chinese defence development.
Since China does not export its top line stuff, you cannot gage Chinese capability by export products.

You state that you have no interest in tanks, and only the “navy and airforce”. But, I find no credibility in your statement, as you still have the cheek to make such definitive statements about what tanks China rejects and who ends up with these rejected Chinese tank projects, as if you were a member of the central planning committee of PLA or its industrial complex. You see, an armchair expert like you can easily make such definitive statements, just by reading blogs and BS released by authorities, for public consumption.

which statement has no credibility?
It’s well known that MBT-2000 was from T-90 (which lost out to T-99), I don’t need to follow land forces extensively to know.
I’m an armchair expert? What are you? Have you made any contribution to this forum other than attacking Indians?

As for why should you see the real thing, and avail an opportunity of sitting in a brand new fighter like JF-17, examining its cockpit, asking pertinent questions from the people who know? – I agree with you – why should it matter to you, or any one else living in virtual world – the reality belongs elsewhere.

As to who’s life revolves around this virtual world? A simple count of your posts in various defence forums would testify to your existence in virtual world. It is your thousands of posts versus my 20 something in total. I shall let others decide.

Rather than getting off your backside and doing something real, such as checking out if the JF-17 (or J-10 for that matter) cockpit is actually as good as it has been made out by Chinese / Pakistani authorities, you would rather prefer to make definitive statements from the absolute authority of your armchair.

you’ve shown nothing except your bigotry, your lack of ability to control your emotions.
But as for cockpit, we’ve seen pretty much every inch of that cockpit. Do you actually get classified data, because unless that’s the case, what else can you get from those people that we’d actually care about. And yes, I don’t need to sit in the cockpit to know that J-10’s avionics is much better.

INFINITELY MORE than the speculative BS spouted by various armchair experts, living in their little virtual worlds.

you have not shown to know an iota of knowledge from your posts. Do you have any idea how many times where we have proof that JDW source is wrong. Do you want me to show a few cases? Do you?

I do not know, and NOR DO YOU. Armchair experts, spending their lives in virtual worlds, can only regurgitate what the authorities or manufacturers shoved down their throats.

All I was referring to was, that it was no less than Chinese Premier / vice Premier, who had to make special trip to a tiny country of less than 10 million, begging for the return of Harpy’s that a country of 1.5 billion had bought, actually paid for, and were there for upgrades.

have you read the article on it? The reason he did that was not because the harpy was that important (since only a few harpies were sent), but rather it was to tell Israel face to face that China is not to be messed with.

According to DEBKAfile’s political sources, the Israeli prime minister’s and defense minister’s offices have known the general content of the message since the middle of last week.

These are its main points.

1. It is time for Israel to appreciate that China is a world power.

2. Israel is stepping out of line for the second time on a defense transaction. In 2000, the Barak government called off the sale to China of Phalcon surveillance craft under US pressure. (Ex-prime minister Ehud Barak brought the news to President Clinton at the Camp David conference with Yasser Arafat). China received $350 million indemnity from Israel for defaulting on the deal.

3. This time, Beijing will not accept monetary compensation. The drones must be returned. Sold to Beijing several years ago, they now bear Chinese military markings. Withholding the craft is tantamount to illegal seizure of a Chinese weapons system and will bring down on the Jewish state serious reprisals.

4. The Chinese government does not accept the pretext that the Harpy drones are being held back because of the Americans. The Israelis are bound to work the issue out with Washington.

5. Failure to send the UARs back to their owners will be detrimental to Chinese-Israeli diplomatic relations and prejudicial to the interests of Israeli firms operating in China.

If China was so advanced that it could have developed something better than Phalcons, then why go beg, and get turned down by the same little country. And then, you having the audacity to claim with such exuberant arrogance that China gives its “rejected projects” to other countries. Come on tphuang, continue amusing us, but spare us your arrogance, as CHINA IS NO AMERICA YET. Let alone America, it is not even the aforementioned little country of 10 million yet.

we buy a lot of things when we have something equal or better in service/development. For example, J-10/Flankers, Sov/052B/C, Kilo/Yuan. The list goes on and on. It’s simply to ensure we have something that works in case the domestic projects don’t go as well. But of course, you clearly haven’t followed PLA at all or else you would actually know this.

China has been stopped from your “monkey” products, like toys, being exported to America. It is exactly these Chinese “monkey” products that Pakistan does NOT want in its post 1st batch JF-17s. And it is exactly the Chinese “monkey” products like the tank diesel engines, transmissions, fire control electronics that I found missing from Al-Khalid production line.

if you don’t want it, don’t buy it. As clearly seen with J-8F and Iran, China is not going to let a few dollars take precedence over national interest. And we will see once the second batch of JF-17 comes out what it will use. There was far more news coming out against Chinese avionics for first batch of JF-17 and it still used Chinese ones. I’ve read a billion things about Selex, Grifo and now Thales. Until the second batch is ready to come out and Pakistan has evaluated the Chinese offer for the second batch, there is nothing new.

If you were talking about Iris-T specifically being the missile most often mentioned in connection with Pakistan, you need to make that much clearer. Your original post sounded like you were doubting the capability of South Africa’s industry to deliver a 5th-generation SRAAM and going by the other replies in here I can tell I’m not the only one who took it that way.

I’m saying both. One, I don’t know how you can say it is a 5th generation SRAAM when the program just got launched, who knows how good it’s going to turn out to be. And second, Iris-t is the one that is mentionned in connection with Pakistan recently. But my main point is still that as of recent times, Darter is not the SRAAM talked about for JF-17, outside of Chinese AAMs, Iris-t is.

Pakistan is widely believed to have gotten their hands on several TLAM airframes that crashed on its territory on their way to targets in neighbouring Afghanistan. Considering the obvious similarities between the two missiles I’d say Tomahawk was the main source of inspiration, with quite possibly some minor input from Chinese designs as well. As pointed out before, the external resemblance to any known design from China is superficial at best – and why should Chinese paper projects carry more weight than other countries’?

even if you get a couple of used missiles, there is still quite a way to go and parts that Pakistan previously might not have the capability to produce. For example, a small turbojet engine needed for the missile. And knowing the military cooperation between the two countries (including the sale of C-802 cruise missile to Pakistan), you have quite the precedence.

South Africa actually has two ALCM projects, of which MUPSOW was flight tested several years ago (not to mention target drones that could be considered dual-use technology). AFAIK TORGOS has not reached the hardware stage yet, but that’s beside the point. Pakistan could buy (and may already have done so) MUPSOW off the shelf, right now. If South Africa is prepared to sell (and they don’t seem to have any problem selling their stuff all over the place) and Pakistan thinks it meets their requirements better than a Chinese inspired missile, why not?

FWIW, we have not really seen a Chinese mid-size ALCM in this class (something like StormShadow, Taurus, MUPSOW, JASSM) sofar – only converted antiship missiles like KD-88 (which is more like SLAM-ER, Kh-59M or Pop-Eye turbo) or strategic missiles like DH-10. YJ-62 is neither airlaunched nor a land-attack missile at this point, although converting it *in the future* should not be problematic. Plenty of reasons for Pakistan to (have) turn(ed) elsewhere in the meantime.

http://disarmament.un.org/UN_REGISTER.nsf
no indication of any export to Pakistan listed here.
So, we are down to whether or not it’s inspired. Again, we come back to China having things that already have been in service for years compared to South Africa with one thing in development and another just have flight tested.

IGNORANCE:
1)A-DARTER is not a fifth gen missile.
2)Pakistan does not use/used any darters.
3)South Africa is not capable of producing an air launched cruise missile.
4)Pakistan does not have a strong defense relationship with anyother country which could be source for it’s defense development projects other than China.

you expect to me accept that a missile program that just got launched this year to be as good as Iris-t or AIM-9X? For all I know, it might end up with the fate of Rooivalk (the other Denel project that all internet warriors seem to be excited about) Other than this mysterious U-Darter missile, what else is Pakistan using (not speculating, using right now)? Is any of SA’s LACMs in service?

Arrogance:
1)Pakistan is some what bound to only receive “rejected” projects from China and Pakistan can in no way look to other sources and has not done so in past.

China has high requirements, our rejected projects are not necessarily bad.

ust one addition – what you perhaps missed out is tphuang’s persistent arrogant and derisory tone, each time he speaks about Pakistan. I am glad he has calmed down a bit in his latest post, but he still needs to grow up and come down a notch or two in his arrogance and looking down at other countries capabilities. The other thing I tried to tell him by saying “CHINA IS NO USA YET” is that, presently, China is at its technical development stage, where it has to offer its best (especially to a close strategic ally as Pakistan) for other countries to even consider buying its products, let alone being in a position as USA is – refusing F-22, and offering F-35.
China will have to improve J-10 quite a lot before Pakistan is prepared to place an order, just as Chinese had to work so hard, and offer its best avionics for JF-17 to be acceptable to Pakistan (some of the stuff was not even available on J-10s yet) – even then, only the first batch will be produced with Chinese avionics etc.

aren’t you the same kid who was trying to get on my case on DT or SDF about my insistence that J-10 is much better than JF-17 and plaaf might not put an order for the plane? bitter huh.

As for this stuff about JF-17 getting best avionics, that’s a totally ignorant thing to say. If you have no idea the difference in the performance of the J-10’s radar + avionics in general vs JF-17, then go read it up. First batch? That’s the first 50 (read it, 50). And after that, China will just offer something which will match whatever requirements PAF has and be cheaper than anything else PAF can get its hands on. As for J-10 with PAF, I’ve stated exactly on PDF what PAF is interested in. And yes, China rejects plenty of requests, it does not sell its best stuff. There are many things off the limit. If you want to see what’s going to happen with J-10, look at the entire J-8F/Iran Fiasco. And if you don’t know what happened in that case, go search it up.