In which case why hasn’t the USAF also retired their F-15Es?

They’re not comparable. TSR.2 relied purely on evading interceptors with speed at low altitude much like the F-111 the Strike Eagle replaced. The F-15E is a self escorting high altitude strike fighter that can outfight its interceptors. The 1991 Gulf War proved high altitude is the way to go.

For the TSR.2 to do the high altitude mission the RAF will have to buy F-15s to escort them.

The presence of what appears to be an afterburner on recent images of Chinese UCAV have led some to speculate that the aircraft is intended to include a supersonic attack profile. So far as I am aware this is an approach as yet unexplored in American and European UCAV programs and is therefore well within the purview of this thread as representing a distinctively Chinese way of war.

The UAV has a typical subsonic UCAV plane form. Maybe the afterburner is for short take off. It would be very useful for operating off island bases and small carriers/amphibious assault ships.

ROC really blew it with a promising domestic aircraft industry. Some of their people behind the F-CK-1 went to work on the South Korean T-50 program. A project that could very well have been done in Taiwan.

As far as their submarine program goes, it’s lack of one gives an indication of how poorly run their domestic industry has been as a whole. For an economy of their size and sophistication their defense industry has been a disaster. Just look how much further the Swedes and Israelis have come with a smaller population and GDP. There’s no getting around the fact that they just don’t take it that seriously.

The presence of what appears to be an afterburner on recent images of Chinese UCAV have led some to speculate that the aircraft is intended to include a supersonic attack profile. So far as I am aware this is an approach as yet unexplored in American and European UCAV programs and is therefore well within the purview of this thread as representing a distinctively Chinese way of war.

With Taiwan being so close offshore, might it be more useful to have a fast UCAV rather than a stealthy one?

No PAF JF-17 is going to cover half of anything India for very long. To think so is a trip to Fantasy Island.

Are you suggesting PAF wants to establish air supremacy over half of India? That would be insane, but no one shares that insanity.

There’s been threads on this site on WI the Iraqis mounted an all out attack before the coalition built up in 1991. Seems to me this is PAF’s mission in case of war. They’ll hit hard and do as much damage as possible before they get wiped out. JF-17 is a light bomb truck with enough range to do the job, cheap enough to buy and operate in quantity during peace time. Not gonna win a war of attrition anyways, why buy Finbacks? It’s a better interceptor, but so what?

even if old, it has faster acceleration bigger radar and logner range missile than jf17.

You know what they say, the best defense is a good offense. PAF needs to concentrate it’s limited resources on offensive platforms like the JF-17. Besides the heavy bomber runway requirement of the J-8 makes it too vulnerable given Pakistan’s lack of strategic depth. JF-17 can take off with 500 meters of runway. It’s basically a cheaper Gripen that the Pakistanis can build themselves.

Maybe they can get JF-17 once WS-13 is ready?

It’s a possibility, but first the sanctions will have to be lifted, and Iran’s poor relationship with China’s friends and oil vendors in the region doesn’t exactly help. Pakistan may not even object to arming Iran. They are a country with limited domestic capability that has made enemies with way too many people.