IIRC this $10 billion dollar figure originates from the initial MMRCA idea (or was it less?) and it just stuck. We have known for a very long time that any Rafale deal with TOT plus gizmos would cost a lot more than that.

On a lighter note, considering MMRCA has been discussed to death and revived again and again, I think mods should lock this thread for a year and open it only if the deal goes through.

Assuming the SU-35 deal goes through.. it’ll mean Pakistan will operate the most advanced Flanker variant in Asia..
it also continues a trend that when given the choice, Pakistan will opt for non-Chinese alternative (and if stuck with Chinese, will insist on western modifications).

For Russia, it simply expands a market. They already sell to both Armenia and Azerbaijan, China and Vietnam, and now India and Pakistan.
and why not, the US sells F-16s to Pakistan and offered a better version to India.

Potential things in Pakistan that need replacement
T-37s with Yak-130s (although they recently got a crapload of T-38 Talons from Turkey).
Mi-28 or Ka-52s instead of Z-10s
T-90s over T-84s and MBT-2000s and 3000s
Gorshkov frigates

No! At least not in the near to mid term future, for the reasons that I’m sure have been discussed before on this forum on multiple occasions. Also, I don’t think this question merits a separate thread.

Does this indicate that PAF has decided (funding permitting) on acquiring a twin engine platform to hit Indian mainland through the Arabian sea and conduct long range maritime strikes?

For now I don’t think this is anything more than pressure tactics at this time point. However, it does indicate that both countries have warmed up to each others’ needs and relations have considerably improved.

Firstly, the PAF pilot to aircraft ratio is around 2-1 (compared to 1-1 in IAF) , secondly 8 F-16 aircraft were lost over a period of 30 years. So it would work out at around 3.6 crashes per 100,000 hours . This compares to 6 crashes per 100,000 hours for IAF SU-30s that are relatively new and have never once seen combat.

PAF F-16s also were

1) Spare parts were sanctioned
2) They flew combat missions against the Soviets
3) They are currently conducting combat missions against the Taliban

Can you see now again, just how bad 6 crashes per 100,000 hours (your estimate is) and how it is not “darn good” (your words).

PS No such person as AM Ayaz Amir ever in the PAF, again, you really need to check your facts before you start posting stuff.

My bad! I was only quoting from memory. The official was retd AM Ayaz Ahmed Khan and not Ayaz Amir. The article was published in defencejournal and titled air accidents: in spite of high efficiency or something like that. Please read online if you could spare a minute.

As for F-16 in PAF, I’d used it as an example to highlight the high crash rate at the start which was followed by a number of accident free years. IAF are operating a much higher number of MKIs and 6 crashes over 15 years or so is not something that is unheard of. F-16.net has some good information about F-16 crashes over the years with some airforces such as RNLAF losing more than 20% of their fleet over 35 years. Even USAF has lost more than 320 machines.

As for having a 2:1 pilot ratio, I don’t think it would be feasible to keep that many active duty fighter pilots unless they are spending a lot of time on simulator/smaller types to keep their hours up. An israeli official was quoted by AFM almost a decade ago (to the effect) that their F-15 pilots have to make up their hours on smaller types because of the high costs per flight hour for F-15 (it was around 15-18k)…one of the reasons I have always been surprised with IAF’s decision to go for such a huge MKI fleet despite the advantages offered by a larger machine.

Agreed, and according to the latest info we have to hand fleet availability (especially amongst the SU and MIG types) is very poor, so could mean IAF pilots are getting much fewer hours, which ironically could have something to do with more human error in accidents. “Simple logic dictates” to use a term you like to

Involves assumptions. The availability could have been lower than norm, but if you start number crunching you will see what I mean, e.g. 100 machines doing only 100 hours each (very conservative), that’s 10000 hours. Over the 5 yrs that’s 50000 hours. 3 crashes over 5 yrs is darn good.

Simple logic dictates that older aircrafts r more difficult to operate in various situations and hence pilots are more prone to making mistakes when flying those. Compare the cockpit of a bis with that of LCA, the concept of HOTAS in modern jets against what a pilot has to go through when flying an older machine and you will know what causes higher probability of HE in older machines.

So no surprises there.

yes, indeed just take the example of the Mumbai terrorist attack mastermind getting bail and barely any action being taken by Pakistan against the terrorist organizations that plotted and carried out the attack..despite proof being provided on multiple occasions, how many Pakistanis would say that the *******s that plotted the terrorist attack are indeed guilty and ought to be handed over to India? They’ll just parrot the establishment’s line that the proof provided is not adequate. A shameful and cowardly act that the Pakistani establishment will definitely know was plotted on their territory but will take no action against the perpetrators.

Not an appropriate thread to discuss such matters. But for the record, I for one, would support prosecuting anyone involved in that heinous crime regardless of where they are based. I don’t know if pak/ind have a treaty in place or not to cover such issues, i.e. handing over of accused to each other, and if not it should be established asap.