CAT1Yes and the atlantique was indeed on a training mission on the indian side of the border 🙂 . The mig-29 lock on on the antiquated F-16’s must have really upset PAF if they are willing to settle for junk like the J-10.
I assume you have access to the J10’s technical specs – the ones you have used as a basis for labeling it ‘junk’ — do share.
CAT1Boss, see the hearing video where the SD official says a couple of times that USAF people will be on PAF bases that station the F-16s all the time. He also says that PAF will not be allowed to station the F-16s in bases other than the ones they get cleared by US and PAF will not be allowed to base the F-16s in any of their bases where non US aircraft is also based.
As to two-finger salute, we saw that in Kargil. Oops, that was the PAF’s salute to PA when they refused to fight when called upon. But that’s another story for another day.
You are right about Kargil being another story for another day – as I recall 2 IAF fighters made the mistake of crossing the border – 1 was shot down by ground fire and the other – according to IAF itself – fell out of the sky of its own accord – damn good job the PAF didn’t get involved.
Back to the F-16’s – there is no logic to the concept that the PAF is spending over $5 Billion on a fleet of aircraft that cannot fight. Even if there are no other options there is no logic to any airforce doing this. All the talk of controls, signed confirmations, monitoring including the secretary of states statement are aimed at one thing — pacifying those members who are critical of the deal — I can understand why some people would want to transform all of this into ‘these aircraft are useless’ — if believing that makes the sales more acceptable to them — great — thats the whole idea.
CAT1Boss we know how super duper smart PAF people are. That is why they are spending $5 billion on a plane that they once paid and got soya beans in return.
However, the fact is that US officials are on the record saying that PAF F-16s are incapable of offensive operations against well defended airspaces and that Pakistan cannot fly the plane outside its borders without US permission. The US is also insistent that US govt people will be in PAF F-16 bases 24-7. PAF also agreed not to base the F-16s in bases of its choice.
Yes, there are still AIM-120s and JDAMs but what is the use if you need permission from Uncle to use them or face cutoff?
BTW, I agree PAF is full of geniuses. 🙂
Please share sources where it says US officials will be at PAF bases ’24-7′ and the US will decide which bases they are stationed on. I’m glad you agree with my views of PAF.
CAT1The “feeling” mentioned is not by you and me but by the US officials in charge of the sale. These officials have given sworn testimony to Congress that PAF will not get several key technologies that normally come with Block 50/52s and PAF F-16s will be useless for offensive action against well defended airspaces.
These “feelings” have more value than what you may want to believe.
Vikas Rehman
The statements made by US govt along with Congressional notifications are form statements. Thailand, Taiwan and every other US ally is mentioned in the same way.
I suggest you watch the hearing in full. The State Dept official says that this sale is totally different from any other US sale in the last 30 years because of security concerns and dangers that the technology will be used inappropriately. Congressmen were comparing this to the F-14 sale to the Shah of Iran. The official said that “we have safeguards” to ensure that if Musharraf “falls”, then they have means to ensure that these weapons are rendered useless.
This is not about US goodwill for India but common sense. The US is not going to give advanced tech to a country that could not even safeguard its nuclear technology unless US is able to put monitors and safeguards.
Pakistan cannot buy from elsewhere because everyone needs cash. Without US aid, Pakistan’s ability to buy reduces to near zero. That is why PAF has accepted all these humiliating conditions and the watered down versions.
Watered down versions? With AMRAAMS,helmet cueing,conformal fuel tanks etc etc etc– sure, sure these certainly fit the bill as ‘useless for offensive action’ :p
It is utterly ilogical to believe that the PAF will spend this kind of cash on ‘useless’ fighters. Sure nuclear delivery and the odd other technology has been witheld — but seems to me these are acceptable ommisions in view of requirements and the result of lengthy and well considered negotiations.
Incidently – did anyone notice how straight after Bush’s South Asia visit – where he showed clear US leaning towards India —- Pakistan anounced a drastic cut in F-16CD’s to be requested and announced it would be buying J10’s — As I said before the PAF is not stupid — it knows the risks and will have contingencies covered.
CAT1Whatever else you may say about the PAF — it is not a stupid force. If the F-16’s are not going to be of any use in war they would not be buying them.
Peoples ‘feeling’ that the F-16’s will be downgraded versions is not supported by the technical specs given to Congress.
CAT1Given that the sale is going through – many will hope for ‘stripped down versions’ to be supplied. There doesn’t seem to be much evidence of this from the specifications notified to Congress. 🙂
CAT1Thanks for the take off pic and great 3 sided view – Goldendragon. 🙂
This could be the camo selected by the PAF, similar to their F-16’s but lighter shades.
CAT1The following is an extract from an article by associated press of Pakistan — I’ve just seen the same reported on the GEO telivision network. I always saw the J10 going to the PAF as inevitable — looks like it will be sooner rather than later 🙂
Giving details about the meeting of National Command Authority, held with President General Pervez Musharraf in the chair, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said it allowed the purchase of F-16 aircraft from the US and high-tech aircraft from China.
He said the batch of F-16 aircraft would include “A & B” type (delivery of the same aircraft was denied by the US in 90s following Pressler amendments) and “C & D” modern versions.
The high-tech aircraft FC-10 type to be purchased from China would be in addition to the JF-17 (Thunder) aircraft being built jointly by Pakistan and China, he said.
CAT1Lockheed F-16 Sale to Pakistan Passes First Test (Update3)
June 8 (Bloomberg) — A U.S. House committee today refused a lawmaker’s call to block the sale of military aid to Pakistan, including Lockheed Martin Corp. F-16 fighters, unless it grants access to the alleged leader of the world’s largest black-market nuclear supply network, now under house arrest.
Representative Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat and a co- chairman of the Congressional India Caucus, introduced a measure aimed at the sale during the House International Relations Committee’s debate on legislation that would fund the State Department in fiscal 2006.
Two senior members of the committee — Iowa Republican James Leach and Thomas Lantos, the panel’s senior Democrat — led opposition to the amendment, and it was defeated, 28-14. Lantos, in an interview later, predicted the panel will approve the sale of fighters to Pakistan when it’s formally proposed.
“There is a recognition that Pakistan is an important ally on the global war on terrorism,” he said.
Lantos, during panel debate, argued that blocking the sale would undermine the tenuous political position of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf as he supports the U.S. in the face of domestic opposition.
The Bush administration in late March signaled its intent to sell Pakistan an unspecified number of Lockheed F-16 fighters and upgrade its existing inventory. The sale was approved in the 1990s, then canceled as part of U.S. sanctions over Pakistan’s nuclear program. India at the same time was offered the opportunity to replace its fleet of older MiG-21 aircraft with U.S. fighters.
Access to A.Q. Khan
The Bush administration renewed the offer of F-16s to reward Pakistan for its cooperation in the war on terrorism, including stationing thousands of its troops on its northwest Afghanistan border to stop Taliban and al-Qaeda infiltration and arrest terrorist suspects.
The Pentagon and State Department haven’t said when they’ll formally propose the sale to Congress. Details regarding the number of planes, their armaments and technology are still being discussed with Pakistan, spokesmen said.
At issue for Ackerman is the extent to which U.S. intelligence can directly interview the man seen as most responsible for developing Pakistan’s nuclear program: Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the scientist who admitted transferring nuclear technology to other countries.
Seven Democrats
Ackerman’s amendment — the “Pakistan Proliferation Accountability Act” — would stop all military aid to Pakistan until President George W. Bush certified the U.S. was interviewing Khan.
Joining Republicans in opposing the measure were seven Democrats. In addition to Lantos, they included Ileana Ros- Lehtinen, the Florida Republican who co-chairs the India Caucus along with Ackerman.
Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan. Lantos said many there view him as a national hero for his role in developing Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Khan in February 2004 confessed to leading a black-market ring of at least seven associates who investigators believe sold nuclear weapons technology and uranium-enrichment materials to North Korea, Iran and Libya, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
Musharraf, citing Khan’s contributions to the nation, granted him a conditional pardon and has not allowed the U.S. access for interviews, instead providing second-hand information — a situation Lantos said was “acceptable” if not “ideal.”
Ackerman today pressed his case that the U.S. knows little about the Khan ring because it hasn’t been granted access to the scientist.
Instead of endorsing Ackerman’s amendment, the committee’s bill contained a section on the A.Q. Khan network that the U.S. and Pakistan should continue to dismantle Khan’s network and that the U.S. “should request and Pakistan should grant” access to interview Khan. However, the approved provision didn’t direct any punitive measures against Pakistan if it didn’t grant access.
CAT1A more detailed article………
Pakistan seeks as many as 75 new F-16 warplanes
(Reuters)
26 May 2005
WASHINGTON – Pakistan has asked about buying as many as 75 new F-16C/D Falcon fighter aircraft since the Bush administration announced it would resume sales, the head of the Pentagon agency handling the matter said on Wednesday.
Pakistan also has asked about buying 11 used F-16s, said Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kohler, head of the Defence Security Cooperation Agency, which runs US government-to-government arms sales.
Many experts had expected Pakistan to seek only about two-dozen F-16s, said Richard Aboulafia of Teal Group, a Virginia-based aerospace consultancy.
The numbers cited by Kohler show Pakistan wants to make the F-16 a mainstay of its combat aircraft fleet, he said, terming this “very ambitious in terms of regional strategy and very costly.”
The single-engine, multi-role F-16 is built by Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin Corp. The new purchases would flesh out a fleet of about 32 F-16s acquired before Congress cut off sales in 1990 over Pakistan’s nuclear program.
The potential Pakistan orders could keep open the F-16 production line, which is scheduled to close in 2008. The line employs about 5,000 people in Fort Worth, Texas. A Lockheed spokesman, Joe Stout, declined to comment on the size of Pakistan’s possible order.
Downsizing a possibility
Kohler, in an interview with Reuters, said Pakistan had requested prices for F-16 Block 50/52 aircraft, the most modern F-16s flown by the United States and the current production standard. Similar aircraft have been exported to Poland, Greece, Chile, Oman and Israel.
Only the United Arab Emirates flies a more advanced variant, Block 60, with improved radar, defences and range.
Asked about any Pakistani interest in the Block 60 model, Kohler said: “They did not ask for it and I don’t think they could afford it.”
Kohler held arms-sale talks with defence ministry officials in Pakistan and India last month.
“I think when we go back and talk to them about the cost of the new systems my guess is that they will downsize slightly the (request for) new and they may increase slightly the used,” he said.
The Bush Administration announced on March 25 that it would resume sales of F-16s to Pakistan after a nearly 16-year break. The about-face was widely seen as a reward for Pakistan’s support in the US-led global war on terrorism.
At the same time, the administration said it would let Boeing Co. and Lockheed compete for a potential $9 billion market in India for as many as 126 combat aircraft.
Lockheed is pitching India the same F-16 Block 50/52 and Boeing is offering its dual-engine F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the most modern combat US aircraft currently in full-rate production.
The F-16C/D Block 50/52 sells for $40 million to $45 million each, depending on options. Boeing’s Super Hornet is expected to go for $50 million to $55 million, based on the price of the US Navy’s next production batch, Kohler said.
India has not yet asked about acquiring state-of-the-art F-16 Block 60 aircraft, he said.
He said India was seeking to co-produce or co-assemble domestically the majority of the aircraft it eventually buys. It also apparently had invited bids from Sweden, France and Russia, Kohler said.
For Pakistan, US government officials were still weighing the weapons systems, targeting pods, radars and electronic warfare equipment that would be offered as part of a package.
A deal could perhaps be notified to Congress toward the end of the summer, the first step in a process that could lead to deliveries three years after an agreement is signed, Kohler said.
CAT1‘In reply to a question, he rejected all the rumours about the non-availability of the engine of the aircraft by Russia saying there was no substance in the news, which was merely based on the press statement of Russian Defence Minister prior to his departure for India.
He said the engine supply contract of Russia with China is well intact and there is no ambiguity in it’
After all the debate on this issue its – sweet – to see this. Inaugorating the factory and restating delivery schedule never was consistant with any problems on the engine front.
CAT1Flight International 10 May 2005
Pakistan has increased its requirement for new Lockheed Martin F-16s to at least 55 aircraft and plans to decide on a configuration within the next few weeks, writes Brendan Sobie.
Industry sources say government-to-government meetings held in Pakistan last month resulted in a letter of request for 55 F-16s, plus 20 options. This is in line with the 71 additional F-16A/Bs Pakistan ordered before an arms embargo was imposed by the USA in 1990, but well above the 24-36 Lockheed was expecting.
Another meeting is planned for later this month in the USA with the addition of representatives from Lockheed. Sources expect this meeting will result in a decision on a configuration, most likely Block 50/52 aircraft, and a letter of agreement.
The US government will then be able to notify Congress of the proposed deal, giving it 60 days to consider it. A final contract could be signed as early as September for delivery from late 2008.
The White House in March unveiled a policy allowing the export of new fighters to Pakistan and India (Flight International, 5-11 April). Islamabad’s F-16s are to be funded partly by a five-year military aid package the USA has guaranteed Pakistan in exchange for its role in the “war on terrorism”. Pakistan will have to find additional funds from its defence budget, but sources say it is uncertain whether it will receive enough for all 55 aircraft.
CAT1‘Hence we can deduce that the PAF believes that Chinese avionics are not as good as western ones, well daaaa, but now the PAF is having to accept these avionics perhaps by force or to keep the price down.’
While his words are open to some interpretation – I’m baffled by how you got to that conclusion.
CAT1[I]’PAF’s Westernised ideas? What is that? Change the name? A system is either Western or not. Your guy says he will not accept Chinese stuff. But all of a sudden the Chinese system becomes great because PAF put some “ideas” into it? If PAF had the ability to instantly improve aircarft subsystems then why go for a cheap Chinese plane? They might as well take an F-7, apply their “Westernised ideas” and make it into an F-22, no?’[/I]
I posted what the AFM Editor said – if you don’t like it / want to believe it thats your problem.
[U]’I thought you held PAF brass and project directors to higher standards. Are you now saying they are of the same level as anonymous internet posters?’[/U]
How you can turn what I said into this is amazing – you must have one hell of an imagination.
CAT1‘I presume your eyes went blank in the section where AVM Shahzad Aslam of PAF said that PAF will never operate a Chinese aircraft with Chinese avionics. He also added that PAF has been trying to integrate Western avionics with the FC-1 and had faced problems’.
You are correct there did appear to be a contradiction in what the two men had said – thats why at the time I e-mailed Alan Warnes to clarify this point – a copy of his response is below:-
‘Nice to hear from you. Yes, they are painting Mirages in this new scheme, when
I was at Masroor a number of their aircraft are also in these new marks.
What AVM Marshal was saying and I should have expanded on it, was that the PAF
would never go with a Chinese fighter with chinese avionics that they suggest,
ie never buy one without any of the PAF’s westernised ideas in it.The last sentence ended with “Mianwali”, which is the next article.
Alan’
Now its upto you if you let your eyes go blank or not.
Sign In
