Okay, now that our Pakistani forum members have agreed that the “joint” in the JF-17 is not a serious title and that the FC-1 is basically a CAC show with PAC playing a “learn and copy” role, we can move on. Phew, it took hundreds of posts for people to admit the most logical and obvious conclusion.

Anyway, as to the press conference today, it cracks me up to see that PAF/PAC officials use every opportunity to say – “Ours is bigger than India’s” – Is it some kind of complex?

Source

The PAC chief said according to the production plan, Pakistan and China will manufacture 150 and 250 planes, respectively, over the next few years for their air forces.

The JF-17’s Beyond Visual Range (BVR) capability, he added, would be superior to that of Indian Air Force jets.

The plane doesn’t have a radar, avionics and missile and this guy talks of a superior BVR ability than India!

CAT-1 – You asked me about bombast and bluster that I noted a few posts above. This is an example.

They are already named F-16E/F Desert Falcons!

Most airforces give their own name to foreign made fighters that they induct. I suspect that given the $$ UAE plumped in, this is the least LM could do.

The point is that does giving $$ and providing specs make it a “joint design and production.”

The way it looks like – PAF gave half of the initial funds to CAC and gave design specs and in return CAC built them a plane and promised to give them ToT, set up local production facility and a limited license to market the plane. To think of it it seems similar to the Chinese J-11 arrangement.

AFAIK, painting is a step in manufacturing, unless design requires special type of paint 😮

If I go to a restaraunt and ask the waiter to make a particular dish without onions and less spicy, it doesn’t mean that I’m qualified to be a chef.

From the replies above it seems that some of our Pakistani friends have grudgingly admitted that Pakistan’s contribution to the FC-1 is with the money and a few test pilots and little else.

One picture is worth a thousand words.

So if I take a picture of mine in front of NASA, that makes me a lead scientist? 😀

If you don’t have a direct answer, admit it. This kinda BS makes you look, well… you get the picture.

Arshad,

It has not been answered even once. And guys like you laugh at requests for neutral sources because you don’t have the aukaat to produce them. 😉

I take it that that you cannot answer the question, so move on.

1 .The Engine is still in doubt unless we see a quote from a PAF/Pak govt official stating what the engine is going to be. A cut/paste from a blog is useless.

2. This is an international aviation forum where people ask tough questions. Again, if you can document what exactly Pakistan’s contribution to the FC-1 project is (other than name and initial funds), then I’ll be glad to delete my posts with apologies. If my claim is baseless, then you should be able to find a neutral source that says what technologies Pakistan has contributed to the FC-1, right?

Lying and blustering is not unusual for the country in question.

Pakistan has no role in the plane other than applying a coat of paint. It’d be cheaper for RMAF to buy it from the source – China. But given that MY wants to have appearance of good relationship with other Islamic countries, they may throw Pak a bone.

The Tale of Kargil

1. Country P sends 5000 soldiers to “bravely” occupy empty posts.

2. Country I realizes this and sends soldiers to attack from below despite heavy odds.

3. Country I uses air force to pulverize supply routes

4. Country P’s leader rushes to Washington to find face saving exit

5. Country P loses 3000 men to bombing and starvation despite holding heights

6. Country P refuses to honor its own soldiers and will not accept their bodies

7. Country P’s airforce refuses to fight despite its armymen dying

8. Country P declares victory after losing 60% of invasion force and humiliating withdrawal.

🙂