Farooqdon’t get the joke I guess?
Nope i didnt get the joke.
when did Barbur become Tomahawk?
I guess you had a problem with a Cruise missile being called radar-evading system.
First of all it is Babur and not “Barbur” 🙂
Then the makers have made that claim not me. Then there is this whole connection of Tomahawks that fell in Pakistani hands and were probably shared with China.
NESCOM has mantained radar-evasion low detectability part from the very begining . There was an animation that was shown at the time of first test which said the same thing (they didnt explain how though).
FarooqThey call it the Hongniaostan on Chinese forums, lol
lol, i am sure the same Chinese forums you never fail to condemn for their speculations and made up articles.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31153-2002Aug17?language=printer
“The U.S. intelligence community predicts that a dozen to two dozen countries will have land-attack cruise missiles by 2015. But the most advanced capabilities evident in the Tomahawk — such as radar-evading features, ramjet propulsion and in-flight targeting — still appear far out of reach of most potential competitors.
“
FarooqEspecially if none of these significantly improve its combat value..
I think the main idea was affordability. What was considered affordable back 10 years ago may not be the case now. Maybe 20 million dollars is considered affordable now and so on for next 10 years until the final production run ends.
Then they want to export this plane as well and if they get few orders that should help in offseting the price.
The upgrade of FBW was mentioned by numerous PAF officials. Latest is the interview of Gen Ehsanul-Haq with Kanwa. Tphunag translated that interview and here is the link (the very last item)
http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2007/03/complete-translation-of-that-jf-17.html
It also mentions that PAF wants to acquire more than initial requirement of 150. It was again stated by a PAF official (who also mentioned 200-250 as final number) and now Janes have that news as well as posted by PLA-MKII.
Regarding the capability of this plane, if you look at the interview it states yet again (like so many times before) that this is not going to fulfill all their needs and thats why they are going for F-16s and J-10s as well.
FarooqFarooq,
Of course such a thing is possible…one might suggest that the political dynamic is now changed and that the cold war rivalries that made Iran important to the US are now dead and gone. Iran’s state sponsorship of terrorism and pursuance of nuclear weapons, denied or not, does put it back in the US sights of course but these are much more negotiable issues than 70’s era nuclear ragnarok.Currently though the US seems to be content to let diplomacy run its course on the Iran issue just as they have with North Korea. Iraq was a special case, as I see it, in that they did actually commit aggression that the UN opposed, proceeded to flout UN Security Council Resolution after Resolution and, possibly worst, really got up the nose of the sitting US Presidents daddy!.
Now, apart from the small issue of threatening to turn Israel into a self-illuminating car-park (something personally I feel the Israelis should be, and are, more than capable of forestalling by themselves!), even Iran’s current Regime arent in the same league. The rumblings are that Ahmadinejad aint that popular at home and the Iranians are not the Iraqi’s when it comes to being unhappy with the political leadership!.
The point being that, without the Iranian Revolution, there would have been little reason for the US to be involved with machiavellian plots supporting Saddam, now, with no new Iranian Revolution feasibly on the horizon there seems little reason for the US to interfere with any new Iraqi political machinery.
Steve,
I would respectfully disagree on this. I would have been more than happy to agree with the notion of “cold war realities” dictating absolute and desperate measures resulting in coups like the ones that i mentioned.
Actually this very Operation Iraqi Freedom negates any such notions. The
way hysteria was built up in media, everyone was made silent and compliant. Those who didn’t buy the cooked up nuclear weapons threat ended up being branded non-patriotic at home and anti-american abroad.
Even though cold war is over, there can always be found “the next big evil” to rally the nation and it’s devices.
IMHO, it’s the will and agenda of a given president and establishment that seals the fate of entire nations and put em through the turmoil. And i am not just talking about our times, at the very start of century Theordre Teddy made it his personal business (he had felt the lack of support from pacific fleet in cuban campaign due to the lack of a shorter route to gulf of mexico)to “liberate” panama from columnbia.
Alot of nations, small nations specially feel threatened by all awe inspiring govt of US which even though could get elected in a campaign run on domestic issues could throw nations in the fire of wars and civil wars. The most funny part is most americans would feel surprised when they come across the animosity of affected nations. After all they did was elect a president who would fix their social security or health care for example.
FarooqAmen.
Perhaps it is naieve, but, I think the Iraqi people have a better chance now, without Hussein, to grow and develop than they had.
The next decade would be hard for them either way, but, the difference is that in 10 years, without Hussein, they might arrive at a system of government with a genuine popular mandate. With Hussein it would’ve been more mass graves, malnutrition and fancy palaces.
Jonesy,
Lets for the argument’s sake accept your optimism. Lets say Iraqis are able to put behind the whole sunni shia issue and arrive at a system of government with genuine popular manadate.
What is the guarantee that CIA won’t plot another coup against that government because they feel that Iraqi govt is not good for their “interests” in middle east. And just to clarify, those “interests” have got nothing to do with liberty,democracy and other good “American” things in life.
For example
Exhibit#1
Don’t you think we will come back a full circle, another dictator serving US national interests commiting crimes against Iraqi people and west turning a blind eye to it until ofcourse he is no use to the west and some US president has to make a point to his home audience with another war?
Sealordlawrence.
I have come across bigoted,prejeduced, mindless people in life alot of times. Almost all of the times it was the way they were brought up and the society around them that never allowed them to think rationaly .
What is your story? The kind of arguments you come up with are insults to the basic concept of a rational debate.
FarooqOne has to be careful with the terminology. A twenty-ish percent number is probably correct for F-22 if you are talking about structural weight. Structural weight includes bulkheads/frames, keels, spars, stringers, stiffeners, skins, doors, fasteners, inlets, wing/empennage boxes and edges. Structural weight is a fraction of empty weight which also includes engines, avionics, AMADs, pumps, generators electrical load centers, plumbing wiring, actuators, switches, sensors, Etc.
15-20% is typically done by designing composite skins for wings, tails, ailerons, flaps and doors. These are items that can be replaced wholesale if they are damaged severely and deemed unrepairable (lack of adequate inspection and repair is a major drawback to composite use).
To increase the percentage of composites becomes very difficult because you are now dealing with bulkheads/frames, keels, spars and inlets. These items are buried deep within the structure and are impossible to replace if severely damaged (basically, you throw away the airplane if they cannot be repaired in place). In the case of F-22, the inlets and edges are composite, which boosts the % slightly higher than 20%. But the major buried structure is still metallic.
The only aircraft that get close to being “all composite” are disposable missile airframes or purpose-built test aircraft. JASSM, Bird of Prey and Polecat fit into this category. Since their useful life is very short, you don’t have to worry about repairing deeply buried primary structure.
Thanks Djcross for your detailed reply.
Could it be that LCA designers were able to avoid the possiblity of severe damage to the parts you mentioned by means of their design? It’s a small plane compared to F-22 so potentially the parts you mentioned might not be as much out of reach when maintainence is required….your thoughts ??
If this kind of damage is unavoidable, does it mean LCA can potentially face problems in terms of maintainence and repairs once it is inducted ?
sferrin,
Why only few spars were changed back to titanium and not all of em?
FarooqJust two questions guys,
Is it true that F-22 is 22% composites by weight?
If it is true then why we have some people who think anything less than around 45-50 percent by weight composites is rather ordinary? Any particular reason?
FarooqI’m now puzzled,why “March 23rd”?What the very day is?
National Holiday marked by parade and fly past in Islamabad (Pakistan’s capital). The holiday celebrates Pakistan resolution
FarooqThanks Nick.
The MRCA deal gets mentioned with lots of strategic/political considerations and in there, atleast i have lost track of technical aspect of it. Taking out the TOT part this is what i got (feel free to add to it or correct me on something you feel is wrong)
1) Heavier multirole fighter (which would translate into greater range and payload, most probably a twin engine plane).
2)AESA radar.
3)Air refueling capable.
is IAF leaned more towards greater strike role or greater Air to air capability?
(being replacement of Mig-23/Mig-27 would indicate strike role as the primary consideration IMO)
Farooq230 MKI
Could be any type bar the F-16 or Gripen, which are too light for IAF requirements.
Is there a document/link/news source that pens out IAF requirements for MRCA? Would appreciate it.
FarooqTwo questions guys.
Does anyone know the parts that i have encircled in red?
What kinda missile is that?
Thanks
FarooqI would wait until March 23rd to see if JF-17 flies or not. If it doesn’t then i would have serious doubts about timely induction of JF-17.
The opinion that it is dead (and the arguments put forward by Sean) doesn’t sound too subtle to me. All the work that has been put into JF-17 and even WS-13 points to contrary.
FarooqIndiadaily is definitely not credible. Just look through some of the stories there, and you’ll know.
Having said that, the IAF has always been tasked with defending India in worst case scenario- which is a two front war. Before the MKI deliveries began, the IAF CAS publically deposed in front of the House standing committee on defence, that the IAF could no longer face both the PAF and PLAAF aggressively (ie take the fight into their countries) thanks to the PLAAF modernisation. Thereafter, the MKI program was expanded and the IAF given more resources. You could see the effect of the funding flow post Kargil, especially the EW fits!
Thanks for the calrification.
FarooqYou are simply dreaming of a two front war , I am sure thats the dream of GHQ too :rolleyes:
Austin,
I am not sure if India Daily is a credible news source or not, but i did come across some kind of news item describing IAF’s plan to fight off combined Chinese Pakistani attack.
FarooqI think a mix of Tejas, Su-30MKI, the new MRCA, and perhaps the Jaguar OR MiG-27 fleet is all that is needed at the most.
I would certainly add Mirage 2000 to this list. IAF considers it very valuable.
Sign In
