Golden_ArrowGA
This is News to me. I had come across his general comments about engine, but not these specific. However, i have no reason not to believe u in this regard…so no need to share audio. As to why he said this, well as star mentioned…one possibility is that PAF also needs AMRRAM equipped F-16s as well as Harpoon equipped P-3s to combat terrorism. Introduction of a few F-16s into PAF (be it old ones from Belgium or new ones from US) would also have drastic affects on regional stability and creat an imbalance. Need i say anymore?
The F-16/Harpoon comment is nonsense. The State department itself said that the F-16s are not for the war on terror but to give a sense of security to Pakistan. And in the same interview Rashid was asked if the F-16s came with the condition of not using against India and he said that the F-16s were for security against India and the US knows it. So don’t bring in BS and that other joker who is not worth replying to.
I repeat, can you tell me why a Pakistani official spokesman would say that the FC-1 has engine supply troubles if everything is hunky dory?
Of course, its a possibility…but with alternative possibilites.
…
No. Im merely trying to draw your attention to alternative possibilities
The difference is that I’m giving you direct evidence and a chain of events for which the engine change is the most likely explanation while you come up with **** and bull stories.
1. Minister says there is a serious engine supply issue
2. Intake size changes significantly
3. Russia says no RD-93 to Pak
but you want to say “Factory opened” so everything above is to be ignored? :rolleyes:
Golden_ArrowI’m simply asking u a few questions. Just a few days ago, u claimed that intake changes in FC-1 mean that JF-17 wont be using this engine no more. Then we suddenly get this news that China has already placed an order for 100 RD-93. Now u r saying that china may have bought these for ‘clonning’ or ‘borrowing’ subsystems from them? How do u fit all these claims into one? I mean, i admit that much of what i say is based on ‘assumptions’ or ‘non-specific’ information. Do you?
China hasn’t ruled out the FC-1 for PLAAF AFAIK. So it could very well be for PLAAF.
Didn’t you know that JF-17 design R&D and other projects, i.e. avionics/weapons etc. were ‘decoupled’ a few years back???
Please :rolleyes: If you’re going to “decouple” major subsystems then doesn’t it make it more possible that the engine could also be changed, especially when you see significant structural changes being made?
For everything you keep coming back to “Faactory was inaugurated, so all other reports are false” :rolleyes:
Now please answer my above question since I answered yours.
Golden_ArrowVikas,
Actually, let’s get out of the sarcasm.
Can you tell me one good reason why Pakistan’s information minister would officially say that the FC-1 is dependent on China getting engines from a European source and there is uncertainty about the engine supply?
If you want I’ll share the audio snippet with you.
Golden_ArrowYes Vikas, bravado and false claimsare totally alien to your culture isn’t it?
I guess mind rays from Mars made your info min say that officially…;)
BTW, AFAIK, aviomics, radar and weapons are still to be sorted out but I guess the inauguration of the factory is proof enough that PAF has arranged for AESA Radars and F-22 level avionics for $0.01 😉
Golden_ArrowVR,
The order numbers don’t matter much because despite the ToT claim, for a long time the Kamra facility is likely to be doing assembly work as it slowly learns other things. The engine was always going to come in independently.
THe number China has ordered could mean a lot of things. They may need a lot of RD-93s to break apart and figure out how to clone them or “borrow” subsytems from them. For example, the few production versions of even fighter planes in the US typically include a few that are deliberately broken apart, so that crews get hands on experience in repair.
If PAF wants 150 FC-1s, why didn’t China order 150 RD-93s? 😉
Anyway, at the end of the day, it is amazing to see Pak have its so called main fighter totally dependent on illegal or backdoor acts by China to get the engine and associated spares.
Golden_ArrowHi,
there was a talk about some modifictaion in new prototype..changes in intake..it could be a diffrent engine..now let see ..how many engines are in market of RD-93 Class..May be answer lies there?
Golden_ArrowOkay. But I’d like to point out that while the facts I listed pertain directly to the engine while the facts you look at can only indirectly pertain to the engine, at best.
Regardless of my political views, it boggles my mind to see Pak base a large part of its acquistion for the next decade on China breaking contracts or use subterfuge to deliver engines. Regardless of what China may have promised, I’d be reluctant to put my airforce at risk if for instance some defect is discovered with the engine (as Russian engines have prone to ;)), PAF may be in a position of using secret and underground channels to get them fixed.
Golden_ArrowUS offers to put sale of F-16′, F-18′ aircraft on fast track
NEW DELHI, APR 21 (PTI)
In a bid to bag lucrative deal from India which is seeking 126 Multi-Role Combat Aircraft, the United States has offered to put the sales of its F-16’s and F-18’s on fast track Government-to-Government basis and said the companies would offer major sops in the form of technology transfer and co-production.A high level US Defence team led by Lt Gen Jeffrey B Kohler today held marathon discussions with the top Indian Air Force officials and submitted detailed technical parameters of the two fighters, the F-16 Fighting Falcons manufactured by Lockheed Martin and Boeing’s twin engined upgraded F-18 Super Hornets.
US officials sought to assure India’s fear on sanction by saying “stakes were much higher now and the two sides would have to think twice before precipitating any such action”.
After a round of meetings to submit the Request for information(RFI), Kohler, Director Defence Security cooperation Agency said thde two US companies had been allowed to bid for Indian purchases and the aviation majors would be offering the most upgraded version of their fighters to India.
He said more detailed presentation would be given by the company officials themselves when they bring their Fighters to India for trials.
“Both Lockheed and Boeing have applied to the State Departmen for licences to supply the aircraft to India, which would be cleared soon”, Kohler said.
Top US Pentagon officials said some more advanced co-development armament programmes were also likely to be cleared in the next few months during the Indo-US defence policy group meeting in Washington and state visit of the Defence Minister Pranab Mukurjhee to US next month.
The Americans are the last of the four countries to send their bids for the IAF deal, with French Dassault, Swedish Grippen and Russian companies already having submitted their technical bids.
Kohler said along with the clearance of sales of fighter platforms the US had also given its nod for sales of advanced weapons systems to be integrated in the fighters including some of the Most advanced beyond range Visual air to air strike Missiles, Air to ground missiles as well as precision guided bombs and munitions.
From PTI
Golden_ArrowCAT1,
So a Pak govt’s Information Minister’s on the record interview is not “official”? You are moving goalposts to fit your theory. On March 25 – Pak minister says FC-1 has engine issues. On April 19, you have a report saying Russia will not allow RD-93 engines to be sent to Pakistan.
Golden_ArrowAs I said before the reason why the engine is not a problem for Pakistan is anyones guess – the few above are possibilities – it wouldn’t be the first time China has tweaked and re-exported Russian technology. Incidently a version of the Kunlun is very similar in appearance to the RD-93.
I find it highly ilogical that although Pakistan alegedly just had it confirmed that they have no engine for this project – they go ahead and launch the assembly / production facility anyway – and reconfirm the delivery schedule – just because the Chinese leader is visiting (who didn’t even go to the inaugoration).
Also highly ilogical that China is ploughing ahead with aquiring 100 plus of a fighter it has never shown any interest in (other than responding to Pakistan’s requirements) while Pakistan is left high and dry looking for a new engine.
So everything goes by “logic” is it? Can you explain why your info minister said there were engine troubles and now we see reports confirming that?
I have the recording of the info min’s interview and can email you. PM me if you’d like.
Golden_ArrowCAT1,
India has opened up an LCA production even when the IAF says that it will not order more tahn 40 with the GE-F404 engine.
The Kamra plant is going to get a full engine from China and will likely never manufarcture the powerplant. These are political statements, especially the opening was tied to Premier Wen’s visit.
There is also a logical answer. China has a few RD-93s in stock and the PAF might be willing to take in a first few with RD-93s as another engine is getting ready. Similar to IAF taking in first few LCAs with F-404 as Kaveri gets ready.
Golden_ArrowCAT1,
The Kamra factory is just going to assemble planes to begin with and there is no chance of engine manufacture.
If China is going to break the contract, well and good but PAF will be dependent on an illegal act by China for its mainstay for the next 30 years. There is always a cahnce that Russia can stop shipment of further RD-93s if China’s violation is discovered. There is also the issue with spares. The very fact that China is ordering so many RD-93s suggests that they don’t have a domestic equivalent capability.
India has so many pending contracts with Russia from Artillery to Tanks to Aircrafts to Ships, so it can at any point tell Russia that it will order more if Russia stops Engine supply to China, especially if China has already broken its contract.
If I was PAF chief, I’ll be very wary of having the future of my homegrown mainstay dependent on Russian and Indian actions.
Golden_ArrowBVRAAMs come after the engine.
Today’s news from Russian Paper Kommersant Daily
Russia to Supply Engines for Chinese Fighters
Rosoboronexport signed a contract with China on supplying 100 RD-93 engines for Chinese fighters FC-1. According to unofficial information, China intends to export FC-1 to Pakistan. However, to avoid complications in Russian-Indian relations the Russian engines will have to be removed from the fighters China plans to export to Pakistan.
FC-1, also known as Super-7 is the first Chinese multifunction fighter, created for sale at international markets. Chinese Chengdu Aircraft Industry Company had been developing the planes since the beginning of 1990s. Other companies participating in the project were China National Aer0Technology Import and Export Corporation, Pakistan’s Aviation Integrated Company, Israel’s IAI and Russian OKB Mikoyan Engineering Center. Pakistan covered about 50 percent of the total cost ($75 million). The take-off weight of FC-1 single-seater is 9.1 tons. It is equipped with Russian 8300 kilogram force RD-93 engine, allowing it to reach the speed of 2000 km/hour at the height of 16.5 km. FC-1 was tested for the first time in August of 2003.
Chinese People’s Liberation Army Command had made the decision to equip RC-1 fighters with Russian RD-93 engines in 2000. RD-93 is a deep modification of RD-33, installed on Russian MiG-29 fighters, and it will be manufactured at the Moscow Chernyshev Machine Works. In 2002-2003 a pilot lot of RD-93 was sent to China to be tried on three FC-1 planes. A few days ago Rosoboronexport signed a $267 million contract to supply the first 100 engines, including spare parts and service. The possibility for further purchases of up to 500 RD-93 was also discussed during the negotiations.
However, the contract had almost become a reason for complications of Russia’s relations with India, its strategic partner. According to unofficial information, China signed a contract with Pakistan on supplying it with 150 FC-1, named JF-17 Thunder. India, considering Russia its strategic partner, opposes Russian supplies of military equipment to Pakistan, since Delhi has traditionally tense relations with it. According to Kommersant source in the Federal Service on Military and Technical Cooperation, “to avoid misunderstandings with Indian partners, the contract for supply of RD-93 to China has been designed in such way that it assumes only direct supply, without it being given a right to reexport the engines in any way, including it being a part of a plane. The contract also does not assume the granting of a license for RD-93 manufacturing in China. Therefore if Beijing desired to supply FC-1 to Pakistan, it would have to look for a substitute for RD-93.”
Golden_ArrowInteresting piece.
VIEW: F-16s and Pakistani military strategy —Ahmad Faruqui
The debate continues to rage on whether a poor nation like Pakistan, where a third of the population lives in extreme poverty and more than half is illiterate, should be spending billions of dollars on sophisticated multi-role fighters like the F-16. This is a very important issue and the debate should continue not only in the media but also in universities and think tanks and ultimately in the National Assembly. The point that national security depends as much on softer factors such as social, economic and political development as on harder military factors cannot be over-emphasised.
However, there is another question that needs to be debated in parallel. It has to do with the role of F-16s in Pakistan’s military strategy. There are three main views on this subject.
The first school of thought opines that the weapon will be used in a purely defensive role, to deter an Indian invasion. Should the IAF intrude into Pakistani airspace, the F-16s would be used to intercept and destroy the invading aircraft. Lesser aircraft in the PAF inventory, such as Mirages and F-7s, would be used in a ground attack role to take out units of the Indian army.
The second school holds that the weapon will be used in a purely offensive role to carry out a nuclear air strike deep inside India. Presumably, such an air strike would be launched only if India has invaded Pakistan, cut off its main north-south communication arteries and destroyed the bulk of Pakistan’s armoured and artillery units. The purpose of the nuclear strike would be to prevent a final surrender.
A third school believes that the weapon would be used in both roles. But the numbers being provided to the PAF are clearly insufficient for undertaking both roles with a reasonable probability of success.
As with anything else related to the F-16 deal, there is controversy about the number of aircraft that would be provided to Pakistan. Initial press reports suggested 25. However, others have argued that there is no limit to the number. One source suggests that the number is 100, another 200.
It is unclear who will pay for the purchase of 100, let alone 200 F-16s. At $60 million a copy, a 100-aircraft shopping basket would run up a price tag of $6 billion. This rises to $12 billion for 200 aircraft. The mid-point of this range represents about 10 percent of Pakistan’s gross domestic product and is clearly beyond Pakistan’s financial reach, even if the economy continues to grow at the Shaukat Aziz projection of 8 percent a year. Phantasmagoric numbers should not underpin Pakistan’s strategic calculations.
A more reasonable shopping basket might be 40-50 aircraft, which when added to the 32 in the current inventory, would be sufficient to equip six squadrons.
The other question is when would the aircraft be delivered. It takes years to build an F-16. Late 2008 would be the earliest time of delivery if new planes are supplied. If more than 25 aircraft are ordered, final shipments may run into 2009-11.
The controversy not withstanding, what is the best military use of the F-16s? The answer depends on what is Pakistan’s military objective vis à vis India.
In IAF, the PAF faces one of the best-equipped air forces in Asia. It outnumbers the PAF by 6:1 in frontline aircraft and is likely to keep at least a 5:1 edge in the years to come. Aircraft in the IAF inventory include the first-rate SU-30 and MiG-29 multi-role fighters that can easily take on the F-16, especially if they are equipped with beyond-visual-range missiles. In addition, India has one of the best air defences in Asia. The Indian army is much better equipped than the Pakistani army and double the size. The disparity in forces is even more pronounced when we compare the two navies.
The PAF would be foolhardy to assume that its F-16s can penetrate Indian airspace at will. The F-16s would be detected at take-off and face a very high risk of being shot down within seconds of entering India.
Also, very sophisticated avionics are needed to deliver nuclear warheads by F-16 aircraft. It is unlikely that the US will provide such capability to Pakistan. Of course, Pakistan may be able to “bootstrap” such capability through other means. But this carries the risk of equipment malfunction. Finally, there is the worst scenario – the possibility that the F-16s would be destroyed on the ground in a pre-emptive air strike by India.
It may be in recognition of these difficulties that the war planners in Islamabad embarked on a ballistic missile development programme years ago. The solid-fuel Shaheen I and II missiles are capable of delivering nuclear warheads almost anywhere in India. Those, rather than the F-16s, would be the preferred weapons in a doomsday scenario. However, like any other scenario, this has its risks. For Pakistan, the risk would be destruction of the missiles and/or their launchers.
War games at numerous institutions suggest that Pakistan’s armed forces are not in a position to hold off a full-scale Indian invasion. The IAF enjoys air superiority over the PAF and Indian air defences are much better than Pakistan’s. This military imbalance cannot be overcome with bravado alone.
Should the IAF be prepared to sacrifice its own aircraft, it can destroy the PAF within a couple of days. Without air cover, the army is expected to fold in seven days. Gwadar may save the Pakistani Navy from being bottled up in the Karachi harbour, as happened in Karachi in 1971. However, it cannot save Pakistan from losing the ground battle.
Thus, the most valuable use of the F-16s is a purely defensive one, to ward off an Indian invasion by making it prohibitively costly to India. A nuclear war is a journey from which few come home. It is so much better to embark on a journey of peace and friendship. Perhaps the bus journey from Srinagar to Muzaffarabad will transform the relationship between India and Pakistan to the point that war ceases to be an option for settling disputes.
Dr Ahmad Faruqui is an economist and author of “Rethinking the National Security of Pakistan”. He can be reached at [email]faruqui@pacbell.net[/email]
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_15-4-2005_pg3_2
Golden_ArrowWe’ll see.Today’s statement talks of immediate deliveries, which may be possible with USAF reserves.
Sign In
