You forgot the rejoinder to the French about Chinese avionics. ”You may not sell to us, but the Chinese are coming out with solutions matching or exceeding your systems.” And that was 2 years ago.

Ok so, what Chinese system is being integrated on the JF-17 that would match the Mica-IR & datalink combo, which would have allowed entirely passive BVR shots to be made. The use of the Chinese AEW&C with ARH missiles will still trigger the RWR.

The French upgrade package – which is now apparently present in a similar fashion for the IAF Mirage 2000 upgrade, would have allowed the PAF this USP, as as far as I am aware nobody else – even in Europe, US or Asia, currently has developed anything equal to the Mica-IR for BVR intercepts with IIR seeker capability.

And the latest news coming out of the web is that the next fifty Thunders wont have Chinese systems.
http://www.thenational.ae/news/worldwide/south-asia/arms-race-between-india-and-pakistan-takes-to-air

His comments came after an announcement on May 21 by the Pakistani minister for defence, Ahmed Mukhtar, that Pakistan is to acquire 50 advanced JF-17 Thunder warplanes, to be co-produced with China at a factory about 50km west of Islamabad.

The new warplanes would carry an Italian “avionics package” that is far superior to the Chinese technology installed on the 30 aircraft currently being acquired by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF), military officials close to the project said.

The F-16 edge in systems like the Sniper, Goodrich pods, integrated low level strike autonav modes (which require close coupling of radar and FCS) etc will remain, but the statements above are directly contrary to the assertion the PAF is entirely satisfied with Chinese systems alone.

So what you are saying is you selectively pick and choose what you believe. Thats what Black Archer pointed out & you seem to concur.

Ok, then do you agree with the final statement as well?

“the asymmetry between the capabilities of both air forces was a certain amount in the past. That has somewhat [been] reduced now. The PAF is going in for a fast-track induction of beyond visual range air-to-air missiles and precision-guided munitions. These are things that actually tend to reduce the gap. But they won’t catch us up.”

Note the part in bold in specific.

Now, lets see the actual details as they stand. Currently, the IAF’s BVR armed fleet is:

60+ MiG-29s (R-27), now being upgraded to R-77
50+ Mirage 2000 H’s (Super 530D) now in negotiations for Mica IR/IM
120+ Su-30 MKIs (R-27, R-77)
120+ MiG-21 Bisons (R-27, R-77)

So, 350 aircraft in the IAF today, BVR capable.

Now tell me how many aircraft in the PAF are BVR capable? 18 F-16s…the first four F-16 upgrades are to arrive in December. And even here, the PAF has reportedly (at least going by earlier pronouncements) signed up for around 20-30 MLU kits for the 46 F-16 A/B legacy fleet.

Now by which time, will the PAF get more BVR capable aircraft. AFAIK- even the first 30 JF-17s are not yet BVR capable.

By the time the PAF actually acquires significant BVR capability (beyond a couple of showpiece squadrons), the IAF will have added its remaining 150 Su-30 MKIs, completed its upgrades for its older aircraft, and begun inducting its next tranche of BVR capable fighters including the MMRCA, LCA etc and even begun with the Su-30 upgrades.

So tell us, how exactly is the PAF going to match or even field a proportional force equal to the IAFs, when, as the recent Wikileaks statements show, even paying for existing contracts has been delayed & the PAF leadership itself admits that affordability is a big issue (dont offer us equipment we cannot afford to the US). Second, Wikileaks notes the US professional evaluation that it will take 2-3 years for the PAF to even get some proficiency with BVR tactics. So its not just getting the equipment.

Financing these systems as I noted previously will continue to be a challenge. Pakistan, per Wikileaks, is behind on payments for the JF-17, Swedish AWACS and even the F-16s. So despite all the magazine articles about a 150-200-250-300 JF-17 force, where is the money, for rapid induction & operationalization.

In contrast, they note the IAF has been training and operating with the BVR for a long time. India acquired its BVR weaponry in the 80’s and has been updating and modernizing since then as well. Such institutional knowledge in depth, transferred across multiple squadrons and crew is missing in the PAF.

OK, so they could have gotten away in MMRCA tender by giving offsets for artillery and helicopters ? i doubt it :rolleyes:

Well, defence offsets are defence offsets, and considered as such..

Re Erkokite,

Plus, PLAAF’s “internal trainings” – the PLAAF has not exercised in BVR against the USAF, French AF, RAF, but the IAF has, multiple times. Net.., IAF won’t fight the way PLAAF does, so internal exercises can only go so far.

Regardless rayrubik can not have expected to post those leaks without any response… Even when it was clearly a cheap shot, one which he seemed to derive some pleasure out of.
But fair enough, i’m sure the otherside would have posted similar articles if they could find them.

Why don’t you counter the argument instead of attack the person. Would it have made a difference if somebody else had posted this bit of news from Wikileaks apart from Ray? Plus, it would have eventually ended up here.

Plus, it was informative. I for one always was curious about how exactly the PAF managed to fund so many high budget acquisitions despite the tough economic conditions. The wikileaks excerpt about “Both Tareen and Defense Minister Mukhtar have admitted they are not sure if Pakistan can continue to pay. Post firmly believes that the GOP cannot afford to continue to make these payments, and we do not expect this situation to change. The GOP is also reportedly behind in payments to China, Sweden and other countries for JF-17s, Erieye Airborne Early Warning And Control(AEW&C) radar and other aircraft/programs.” was informative.

Also, so was this bit about the US’s balancing act:

We have and will deny arms sales that we believe would upset the regional balance of power, as we have with the recent GOP request to buy the Coastal Targeting Suppression System, which enables Harpoon missiles to be fired at land or near-land targets using GPS technology.

I believe the PAF was likewise not sold HARM & HTS along with the F-16s either.

The bit about the IAF’s edge in BVR, etc & the US assessment of the time to be taken by the PAF, view on the JF-17, concerns about TOT etc was also interesting. Overall, a lot of details for those genuinely interested in the topic, and one wouldn’t have known about these articles if Ray hadn’t posted them.

My point is that PA regularly calls on PAF to assist in FATA — they call air support when they need it — ie when they are in a ‘tight spot’ — whether this leak is suggesting that PA will deny PAF’s assistance or as you interpret it – it is suggesting that PA will deny that it calls on PAF when it is in a tight spot — both statements make no sense. Example – when do coalition forces call for air support in Afghanistan?

The PA may regularly call the PAF for support. Its a different thing though, given their preeminence in the Pak establishment whether they’ll acknowledge whether the help was a plus, or the reason for their survival in the tactical event. Thats what the AVM is wrly referring to.
Second, coalition forces can hardly be compared to Pak., and its completely different milieu.

So even if this leak is a correct reflection of what AVM said (and there is no guarantee of that) and your interpretation is correct — how do you know it is ‘grounded in fact’ and not designed specificaly to get the US to as you yourself say clear ‘the F-16, the Sniper pod, and large quantities of both LGBs and JDAMs which would have otherwise caught US SD attention over Indian objections’. Although if Indian objections are taken so seriously – does beg the question why 100’s of AMRAAM’s were also released.

See the rest of the Wikileaks, the US knows that just supplying a few hundred AMRAAMs and merely 18 new F-16s will do nothing to prevent the IAF from dominating the PAF, at best it might, buy them a couple of days, and that too optimistically speaking by which time the US thinks it may intervene to prevent the conflict from escalating further. Even that is not a given. Furthermore, the US clearly took Indian concerns into account by not releasing SEAD type of items like the targeting system mentioned in the wikileaks document. Whatever they did release, apart from the AMRAAM can be used for COIN ops.

The reference clearly makes a note of the comment being made by the AVM himself, off the record, in a “dry manner”, i.e. he was speaking sardonically.

In other words, its not hard to understand what he is getting at, that the PAF is critical to land ops & the PA regularly gets into tight spots which require the PAF to bail them out. That the latter won’t acknowledge this should be fairly obvious as well, given the PA is the dominant service in Pak. Its one thing to say the PAF helps, another thing entirely to say, regularly get into tight spots which need the PAF..

Hardly any grounds for misinterpretation or to call the AVM or the one who noted what the AVM said as “one who does not know even the basics”..

FWIW, the US appears to have taken him at his word though, given they cleared the F-16, the Sniper pod, and large quantities of both LGBs and JDAMs which would have otherwise caught US SD attention over Indian objections. So the COIN argument worked or was seen as credible by the US, adding further weight to this “leak” being grounded in fact and a faithful reproduction of what was said.