dark light

aced_inc

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 86 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2595713
    aced_inc
    Participant

    When the damage is done already and the battle lost, we can still draw the “atomic-option”. I am really impressed.

    Psychic ?

    I know the ATUM BUM itches. But remember hun bun, it was India that forced Pakistan to take up the nuclear option. We didnt go for unconventional weapons. Pak was forced to take up this option after Bharat’s “peaceful” nuclear explosion in the 70’s. So why’re you crying over spilled milk now ?

    So, according to your logic, Pakistan was always ready to fight conventionally, you weren’t.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2595737
    aced_inc
    Participant

    All this in times, when the Pakistani government claimed, that the prohibitiv high outlays for nuclear arms are neccessary to prevent the danger of war for Pakistan. Something is wrong about that logic. It seems, that atomic weapons are not enough to prevent a conventional war. So you have a double burden or why more new conventional weaponary at all?!

    Because ‘we care’. We would hate to nuke the hell out of our enemies in the first place. Conventional weaponry will be used first. If the enemy refuses to be humbled, then unconventional weaponry comes into consideration.

    See, after all, we’re not that bad at heart.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2596465
    aced_inc
    Participant

    Yeah but why isn’t it the FC-2? The JF-17 is the FC-1, not the FC-10.

    Are they implying that the J-10 is 20 times better than the JF-17? That was a joke, by the way 😀

    ermmm….yes good joke.

    Well the term FC-20 has more to do with psychology. They didn’t want to use the term F-10. How can an aircraft F-10 be better than F-16 (10<16). 😀
    Thats why you have JF-17 (16+1). All this is for public consumption…what matters is the aicraft as a whole in the end.

    So yeah the FC-20 ‘n all is nothing but a psychological thingy for public consumption.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2596488
    aced_inc
    Participant

    What in the world is an FC-20? It doesn’t even make sense, the JF-17 is the FC-1, not the FC-10 :confused:

    FC-20 is the PAF term for J-10.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2596508
    aced_inc
    Participant

    This is a very smart decision. Yes PAF seems to be playing its card svery very well. They are not only purchasing Block 52’s, but also building on their relationship with CATIC. JF-17 has progressed beautifully so far, which makes their trust in FC-20 (J-10) natural. I was wondering if someone could elaborate on this :

    The expenditure on the entire package would be met from PAF share in Armed Forces Development Programme (AFFDP-2019), the document says. The Cabinet, according to the document, has allowed PAF to set up Joint Working Group (JWG) with CATIC for procurement of 36 FC-20 aircraft.
    The government would also help PAF in securing long-term credit financing for the FC-20 aircraft from Chinese government, besides allowing PAF to initiate a Letter of Request (LoR) for the F-16 package and equipment through the Defence Ministry.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2596632
    aced_inc
    Participant

    The numbers are back up to 77 for the F-16’s. Our Eastern neighbour has pushed us to come to this state. I hope we put the order of the J-10’s/F-10’s on a faster rate, We have growing needs. If we do not recieve the AIM-120, this order is not satisfying. For those of you ranting for the AIM-9X, you can forget it. We just recieved 300 new AIM-P/M’s (or something) just last year. The AIM-9X would only raise the burdon being put on our Air Force.

    Let me take you guy on a little math lesson.

    1 F-16 costs 45 million.
    We are getting 77 F-16’s

    45,000,000 x 77 = 3,465,000,000

    1 AIM-120 costs 300,000
    each of our F-16’s should carry 2 AIM-120’s

    77 x 2 = 154 , 154 AIM-120’s aren’t enough because we need spares and others…So we will probably have about 170-190 AIM-120’s (note i am trying to make a realistic scenario)

    180 AIM-120’s cost 5.4 million

    3,465,000,000 (the cost of our F-16’s)
    + 5,400,000 (Our 180 AIM-120’s)
    ————–
    3,470,400,000 The total cost of our order.

    It says 3.5 billion is the max cost of our order from all the credible information. SO the rest 30 million would probably be used on other things. Probably the exact cost of the F-16’s would fill in that 30 million but since i dont know. WHAT CAN I DO? 😀

    You can say goodbye to 77 F-16’s.

    Its gonna be around 35 J-10’s, 25 F-16A/B’s and 18 F-16C/D’s for now.

    And of course the F-17’s.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2596858
    aced_inc
    Participant

    http://www.app.com.pk/n18.htm

    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.

    Nothing new with the JF-17 and J-10 episode.

    What matters is how long before the F-16 is actually brought infront of U.S. Congress with all the goodies..i.e. AMRAAM, JDAM, AIM-9X etc. :rolleyes:

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2596916
    aced_inc
    Participant

    Here is a news that many have been waiting for.

    Fed. Cabinet approves purchase of aircrafts from U.S., China

    Islamabad: The Federal Cabinet has approved the purchase of F-16 aircrafts from United States and the multi-role combat aircrafts FC-1 from China on Wednesday.

    Dude, i will only believe the F-16 crap once i see U.S. Congress approving the deal. GoP approving it doesnt mean sh**. What matters is when will this deal go through U.S. congress. Its been long enough since the offer.

    in reply to: FC-1 Prototype 04: the Saga Continues #2597894
    aced_inc
    Participant

    Maybe post some more pics of the foreign helicopters that recently were gettin’ jiggy wit it all over Pakistan?

    how do helicopters get “JIGGY WITH IT” ?? 😀 😀 😀 . I am beginning to like this Sancho Pancho dude.

    in reply to: The IAF – March-April 2006 #2598106
    aced_inc
    Participant

    Yes. You willing to buy or what?

    Nah, i’d rather buy a Glider.

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2598110
    aced_inc
    Participant

    From F-16.net : Once the air force is certified as a credible flying organization by its nation, and the required hours per pilot are guaranteed to be respectably above the NATO lowside standard of 180 hours/year, then more exotic weapons, systems, and tactics can safely and effectively be employed and maintained.

    My points still stand. WAKE UP

    Whatever helps you sleep better tonight. 😀

    You said NATO standard was 200+. I proved you wrong, 180 flight hours is still part of the NATO standard.

    I rest my case.

    in reply to: The IAF – March-April 2006 #2598123
    aced_inc
    Participant

    8m$ for a LCA
    Mr Varun Gandhi tusi gr8 ho

    Do they accept Interac ???

    in reply to: The IAF – March-April 2006 #2598136
    aced_inc
    Participant

    btw I just realized even Katrina is a londonistan import :rolleyes:

    Actually she is half Kashmiri half Londonistani. And although from a Muslim background, she is in NO WAY linked to Muhamamd Kaif the cricketer. 😀

    in reply to: Pakistan AF News and Discussions 2006 #2598148
    aced_inc
    Participant

    Only the F-16’s were under sanctions (and the C-130’s ?) were they not ? And there were only 32 F-16’s then. So it could’nt have been the sanctions. And if the F-16’s were under sanctions , what was their flying hours then ? Even lower tham 100 hours ?

    F-16’s, C-130’s, P-3’s, T-37’s are some platforms that were hit harder due to the sanctions. I am not too sure about the French factor.

    But that was not the only reason. Pakistan’s economy was in a very bad situation particularly during the 1998-2000 stage. This couldve been another reason for such reduced flying hours. Its good to know the situation was quickly improved after 2000. Now that they fly to NATO standard.

    Plus, its normal for AF’s to reduce flight hours for a certain period of time due to some difficulties. The Russians have done it, so have the Germans at some stage for a few platforms. I read a report by Kenneth Allen that Chinese also reduced flying hours at some stage. What matters is to overcome the situation and bounce back. 🙂

    in reply to: The IAF – March-April 2006 #2598161
    aced_inc
    Participant

    some of them need to visit indian airports and experience the “kingfisher” *ing yana gupta . blank asylum forms will be supplied :diablo:

    http://www.businesswireindia.com/attachments/Kingfisher_Uniform.jpeg

    Too bad even Yana Gupta is not indigenous. She is imported from Czechoslovakia. 😉

    Calm down.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 86 total)