InsigBut then the very fact that PAF is actively considering and has been negotiating with western vendors for avionics and missiles for the JF-17 would indicate that things are not quite so rosy with Chinese avionics or weapons.
I mean, when you have SD-10 available, why bother to look at the hyper-expensive MICA ? if the KLJ-7 is good enough, why bother to look at the RC-400 or the Grifo ?
unless there is a difference in performance, which makes up for the difference in costs (western weapons, especially European, are very expensive), why would the PAF want expensive gadgets in a fighter whose biggest pro is that its cheap ?
on another note, I was looking at youtube videos of the JF-17 and even with the newer RD-93, the engine exhaust is quite visibly smoky.
is there any news on what engine will be used for the second batch of JF-17s that the PAF will buy ? is there a Chinese option ?
I think it is pretty normal to look at the whole range of weapons and go for diversity. Besides that the plane is offered for export. Why limiting by just one vendor? You want radar x with weapon Y? You ask they deliver. And it is not different from Gripen offering. You can go for Israeli, US or European weapons. Besides that PAF had Chinese, French, US and inhouse variants for F7P. During wvr combat you still have the suprise. There is no conclusion possible that relation is not rosy. Former ACM was very positive about recent developments. It is all about cost effective. If you have no idea what you want/need and you get all the money you will act like a spoiled kid and order everything everywhere. You start an order here and there and then change your mind. If you do have to look at your investment to make it cost effective there and you focussing on export at the same time you do offer alternatives.
About smokey. Every plane is smokey at certain throttle settings and it is nothing if compared to the Indian Mig29A. They had the different engines in mind and as far as I know they will offer alternatives.
InsigWhat makes you think that, just because it won’t able to meet IAF’s ASR conditions, so I should make it and call it as an Inferior?
But how did you manage to make out what exactly that particuler poster meant?
Inferior to LCA?
I see that as rhetoric question. 😉
InsigZOOM seems to have the word hard cash, economical situation as showstoppers. I disagree. PAF has been cashing up cause they could not buy expensive items for the last 2 decades. That explains that IFR, AWACS are bought. They would not buy these items if they cannot do with the fighterjets. It is handy that China financed JF17 and US provides assistance (for WOT efforts and not for free) but the block52 are paid. Repeating ZOOM’s logic looks childish to me.
About PAF and Chinese parts. Well, the Chinese seem to improve their products fast and by delivering the same (or almost the same) for fraction of the price one should be stupid not to buy the parts. But at the same time the could no deliver ejection seats a la Martin Baker so PAF went for non Chinese. I think PAF is doing the most effective and healthy job for giving all parties the option to provide and it does select what is the best for PAF. If China can deliver better or cost effective solutions then indeed J10B or JF17 parts will be Chinese. Nothing more then logic.
InsigThanks for the same, but unfortunetly ASR conditions of IAF is so tough that this paper plane can cope up with the same.
I disagree with that. It is part of MRCA and I doubt SAAB delivered inferior planes sofar. Saab is one of the diamonds in aviotion world.
I think the poster meant that why risking another development and not go for a ready option. Well, one of the reason is to develop national industry and less depending on foreign customer. If that means producing not the latet then so be it. So did every other nation. Look at Israel, China etc.
InsigWill the Chinese offer the latest J 10 B variant to Pakistan though ? I remember a heated debat between plawolf and a few Pakistani forumers on this a while back. I think they will in limited numbers.
If it is delivered in 2014/15 then I would find it strange that they go for the older J10A. It is like LCA is ready and operational in let us say 8 squadrons and India moves on with a newer version (almost everything redesigned). Would you as an export customer still go for the first plane? Theoretical pssible but the reality would be different. There seems to be rumours of indeed j10B if you buy latest COMBAT AIRCRAFT mag. And PAF seems to go for latest versions when we look at F7PG. Even then they would go for customized version. In the case of J10 means that lot of avionics would be western. That is in line with what ACM have said. Just like that they were not fully satisfied with the older J10A.
InsigYes, but the difference between those speeds is not going to matter greatly for AAM range performance.
What DOES matter is high supersonic speed AND high altitude. 2 aircraft one at M0.93 and one at M1.08 both at 30,000 feet for example are not going to have a tactically significant difference in weapons range if both are using the same weapon – AIM-120C5 for instance.
One aircraft at 30,000 feet flying at M0.93 and one at 50,000 feet at M1.6, is of course another story altogether and one where weapons range will be significantly different…
I think we should keep it as ceterus paribus and higher speed means having better kinetic energy that can turned into advantage. If possibel you can create longer missile range and if you use it to bug out the opponent will need more time to get near you. If we start adding hight, engine performance, wing shape then there is no end of discussion.
Insigany chance that the FC-1’s next version may get the J-10B’s AESA whenever it becomes operational instead of looking for the French or Italian radar ? and is the PLAAF looking to upgrade its existing J-10A’s to B standard or keep them as they are ?
The radar is an option but sofar the comments the conclusion is that it would be western avionics. I think there will be a choice from the PAF. They produce in blocks and every block can get different set and others can be upgraded.
Insigwhat is plaaf requirmeent of J-10B ? when will it go on full production ?
A lot probably. But I think they need atleast one year of testing. So what about 2012? Intresting question but rather difficult to answer knowing the nation and the plane.
InsigLet me move on. Here some pics of Pakistani air assets in the war on terrorism.
InsigIn my opinion, you first need to bring in some solution to counter Mig-21 Bisons of IAF, then thinking about dealing with half of the IAF.
3 posts. Seriously. It doesn’t work here. That is my opinion and I am happy to give it to you. 🙂
InsigBefore making stupid remarks on my side. I do think that China, India and in a certain way Pakistan are making tremendous efforts and results in aviation industry. Don’t take me wrong. Not many nations can do that and certainly not in the conditions these nations are. Not financially (different in Pakistani case) but in starting from scratch (China did make 60/70 era copies and India had some projects like Marut) and being able to produce a neat plane which does not look bad end would end up nicely if it had better conditions. I add that if we do look in a very “hostile” way to the project then things in writing look a bit hard but sometimes it must be said that one has to be open to other facts/opinions and honestly you cannot be happy about every plane.
Back to the topic. License build in China means copying and often without paying for it. India does take the rules a lot more strict. They keep buying the original parts for high price. I do not think labour is much different. China has probably more factories going for the fast copy part.
It was sarcasm. If things worked out it would be same speed as JF17. There is not much difference in that. With sarcasm you get the message. It took a lot of time and it could be done better. I do not want to point at the product but at the politics around it. In case of JF17 it as either do or die. That works better then having money and lots of options.
I think it would be wise to go for alternative. It could be done. But the advatage of internal product is huge IF you wanna pay for it. Only China is that crazy to go for everything but they do hardly have a choice, don’t they?
Insig1. No It will be the case. Anything in similar price range/capability is cheaper to make in India. It is cheaper still to make in China.
2. a, Tejas MK2 is not for sale yet, b. By the time it is ready it will have a working homegrown AESA. c. Astra will be integrated by then as well, As for weapons SAAB do not offer homegrown weapons either.
3. Because many foriegn things are being replaced by Indian things in the MK2. The Radar some of the weapons etc for example. Even in the current LCA most of the cockpit instrumentation, RWR, Mission computer etc are homegrown. You are overestimating the foriegn content in LCA to start with.
I also want to make a point that as a whole package the Gripen NG will be much better than the Tejas MK2. And if I had the funds I would always choose it over the LCA. My argument is only based on the fact that for many countries the cheaper Tejas may seem a better solution.
1. It is because China makes own parts and not jumps into technology that needs huge investments and time to evolve. It has nothing to do with cost of labour. Both nations are cheap compared to the rest of the world.
2.By that time we probably will have 8th gen aircrafts that are cheaper. No serious. LCA is not a succes yet and I doubt it will be looking at the price and alternative. There is no market for it. Who will go for a fighterjet and depend on one supplier?
4. You mean homegrown is getting bigger. That is normal case but still not comparable with what China achieved. So you have everything homegrown made in India. Will that make customers going for it? Even the Kaveri would mean that other nations will go for alternatives. Even in case of China some customers would still love the usual parts. Lok At Pakistan. FC2 is nice but highly customized for PAF. Look at K8. Still the MB. And that part returns in JF17. Even if China delivers cheaper parts.
InsigAnkush, of the top of my head PAF used mushak/super mushak, T-37/K-8, and FT-5/FT-6 before the pilots went to (normally chinese made) A-5 or F-7 units for conversion. I know there was talk of FT-5 upgrade to keep in service for a while longer (till a long term solution could be found), though Im not sure what came of it. As for PAF’s future options, as of now it seems they would go the chinese way, i.e. JL-9 (most likely) or L-15, may be depending on the current situation with FT-5. As for PAF expressing a desire to use K-8 as IJT/AJT, its possible as long as they find a replacement for FT-5/FT-6 before their conversion at squadron level.
There is a batch upgraded to have some few hundred hours more flight time but after that it will be replaced by K8. It was published in AFM.
InsigI think Pakistan in general has this wrong assumption that India want to teach Pakistan a lesson etc. The fact is that India have shown great restrain in the wake of many attacks. This is not necessarily due to fear of crossing the Nuclear Threshold. It could be because-
1. India has a bigger game plan, Its economy is growing well even at a time of grave economic crisis, any war with Pakistan will negatively affect its ongoing economic march.
2. India has more to lose in a war than Pakistan. Because it sees itself as a major player in the world in the near distant future, it is unwilling to jeopardize its situation fighting a war with Pakistan.
3. You have to realize that in the wake of Mumbai attacks the overwhelming public opinion aided by a war-hungry media was to go to war with Pakistan. The government showed great restraint at the face of adverse pressure from all quarters, whether it will have or show that resolve in future is something that both countries cannot risk.
I do not think India is the peaceloving nation in the neighbourhood. Every neighbour has some “situations” with it. The problem is that th eIndian politicians need the “superpower” title and if that means instability then they take that for granted. The main problem between India and Pakistan is that Kashmir issue is not solved. It was part of Pakistan but India did not agree with it. Now India is not willing to settle the dispute so the whole arms race will go on till it is settled. About restraint of the Indian government. 🙂 I do have to smile. They were already talking about Pakistan and taking punitive actions. They even sended heavily armed MKI to show muscles. I do not think that it shows restraint. It is like shooting down unarmed trainer plane cause it “crossed” accroding them in a swamp area. I think it shows cowboy mentallity. It was unreal to see how Indians were stealing pars to show them ito the press. Inhumane and certainly disrespectful to the many aviators that were killed.
InsigI guess it has something to do with India paying for the weapons she buys with her money compared to buying American weapons with American aid.
To my knowledge India was one of the biggest reciepts of humanitarian aid in the past. But as already explained. “Aid” is in this case something iil defined. If you ask to fight a war (which cost soldiers, weapons) and become the transport route (you do know how much goes through Pakistan) then getting paid is probably better definition. Besides that nations like Israel (which your group seems to adore) cannot survive minutes without it. Whether it is to build illegal settlements, steal land, terrorize certain groups, passing Geneva conventions, genocide (Sabra and Satilla/Gaza) but surely getting weapons. How come I never hear you about that? Aaa… 😉 And India. Well, if you ask me then India should invest in those paria/dalits which have been seen as lower castes and abused terrible. I think if you have hundreds of millions that have no food then getting a superpower title is less needed. I know the usual trick to start posting about the mid sectiopn of India but it is my opinion. I am not intrested in that perspective and you cannot look at the nouveau rich to say how well a nation is. I do have the same opinion about it when it comes to other nations. So if we add ethics and finance to weapons then you do have something difficult to explain. Let us stay at something called the love for airplanes and skip the sidelines which clearly have the idea to derail the topic. Thank you.
Sign In
