vikasrehmanIts interesting when you read Indian defense blogs or forums that are obviously targeted at Indian readers. The comment section, is more open and lively interms of critical analysis of HAL and DRDO (success,failures, progress etc).
When you come to here (international forums), this is not the case. Before you counter, yes the same can is true with other non Indian members. More open in own respective forums but not on international forums.
To all, you might not like what I say now, Pakistan is now in process of making jets with TOT for the first time. The Indians have been licensing manufacture of jets for a long time and are planning to buy more jets with TOT. The Indian aerospace industry is way ahead, but that is not a massive complement because Kamra is handicapped by lack of resources and future does not look bright.
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Its probably (what I call) a freaky show of nationalist ego displaying itself in an international forum-applicable to any nationality. We-some of us more than others-can be extremely self critical (yet still be proud) when amongst (please allow me to say) our own kind. But when we find ourselved amongst other kinds, it could suddenly come down to ‘mine is bigger than yours’ situation. A small pebble might start an avalanche. Human psyche…I guess:confused:
vikasrehmanIf India has only great fighterjets like LCA and the best pilots then why would they invest billions of USD buying foreign trainers, fighterjets and training? They have the golden plane called LCA that can counter anything inside Pakistan. I would expect a downgraded LCA for other developed nations. Surely a bit irony but it shows that we can counter these Ankush statements with a simple smile.
LCA is still a development that needs a lot of time to get anywhere. The naval version is not even going to start cause no one is intrested in helping. India joins PakFa cause it needs a partner that gives 100% input. India want a foreign trainer, transporter, choppers, fighterjets cause it can not develop it without any help. You can make anything out of that but these are the facts. And if some wants to say that MKI is Indian. Latest AFM says is perfectly. There is an article about Irkut prodution of MKI. Everyone is invited to read that. And if some still think that adding a RWR is making a multimillion plane suddenly build somewhere else then so be it.
In my humble opinion, LCA to IAF and India is what JF-17 is meant to be to PAF and Pakistan. But the two airforces and the two countries have taken different routes-rightly or wrongly, thats another discussion-to achieve what they wanted. While we can discuss about either’s choices, we can only speculate about the respective fighters/performances, and should stay away from degrading anyone’s achievements/attempts-though I know that its not possible due to what we can call nationalistic pride/ego.
vikasrehmanthis shows how much the IAF expects and how the PAF will make do with what it gets. the Tejas weights 6500 kgs empty, the JF-17 weighs 6800 kgs empty. the F-404IN20 engine of the Tejas Mk.1 produces 20,200 lbs (9163 kgs) of thrust in AB, the RD-93 of the JF-17 produces 8300 kgf /18,260 lbs of thrust with AB. so, the JF-17 weighs more than the Tejas and in AB produces less thrust, meaning a poorer T/W ratio. yet, the IAF wants a more powerful engine to fully exploit the Tejas, whereas the PAF is thrilled that its getting the less capable and less sophisticated JF-17. its a question of what options are there- PAF cannot afford an expensive fighter, so it is ready to make compromises to keep the costs down and meet a tighter schedule, even if it means a less capable fighter.
not as good compared to what ? the still in development 3rd generation JF-17 ? or the F-7PG or ROSE Mirages ? or the F-16 Block 50 that is going to be the “uber” fighter for the PAF in the coming 5-6 years ? its fine if you think its a lousy or over-hyped fighter. the IAF is very happy with it and those who’ve fought it in exercises have praised its capabilities.
While such figures differ from site to site, according to the official display at IDEAS-2008, empty weight for JF-17 is 14,520 lbs, NTOW is 20,000 lb (includes wingtip missiles), and thrust for RD-93 is 19,200 lbs.
As for what PAF and IAF want from their fighter, I think we all recognise what each airforce wants from its respective fighter, and its not a good idea to talk in such terms.
vikasrehmanof course the development of the MKI was done by Russia. However, unlike the JF-17, where no Pakistani has any idea what Pakistani component is used (because there is none) and where the only Pakistani effort was to specify the requirements, oversee the Project Management, and do test flights, the MKI actually has several Indian developed components, including mission computer, RWR, EW and others. google it for yourself.
and even with all the hand-holding that the Chinese have done for Pakistan, the assembly process at PAC Kamra will be heavily supervised by Chinese. the entire engine will be Russian supplied, with no associated ToT anyway.
regarding MKI, either you’re totally unaware of its Phase wise program, or you’re simply trolling- if not, take a look at what Teer posted about the MKI a page before. Phase 4 will have Indian sourced raw materials for the MKI, and because of the compression of the schedule by 3-4 years, there are more MKIs that will use Russian sourced raw materials, parts, etc.
21Ankush, Unless one has specific inside knowledge, I think one should refrain from making authoritative statements such as because there is none. I hope you would see as to why this should be the case.
Regarding the assembly, let me clarify something. According to the current plans, it would be assembly from semi-knocked down kits, then completely knocked down kits, then raw materials (wherever they can and depending on ToT) and so on. In other words it would be a Phase Wise Programme. How much they stick to these plans would depend on how much technology they could absorb (its a first for PAC) and the number being inducted annualy, i.e. how quickly PAF want JF-17.
vikasrehmanyes 40 + 50 will be direct import from Russia and will be MKI-3 chances of this birds having Stealthy modification is also high. such as internal weapons bay which has been done to a mki airframe recently by Russia
Any idea about what sort of affect this would have on other performance parameters such as fuel capacity and range? Also how many weapons could be carried internally? Would such a modified airframe be heavier and bigger than normal MKI and if so would it use a more powerful engine?
vikasrehmanTheir combined air strike and air defence capabilities are good. Specially note about their recent acquisitions.
Could you please elaborate?
Pakistan is getting 18 F-16 as far as I know. I did mentioned about them. AEW is a good force multiplier but you need good fighters as well to finish the job. JF-17 is a good fighter but how it will stand in front of other more modern fighters? About J-10, we don’t know so much to speculate but we know about Chinese aircraft industry and their reliance on Russia. Currently our Mig-21 also got BVR and WVR capabilities but still IAF will phase them out soon. If Pakistan could get 36 Rafale or Gripen (as PAF wanted) instead of J-10 than the situation would changed.
They are getting 18. But their old ones will be upgraded to the same standard…I know that the current contract is for a certain number (35 or so), but I assume all the old ones will be upgraded eventually (for standardisation if fornothing else). Both JF-17 and FC-20 would be multirole platforms (true we can only speculate about their effectiveness for the time being), with the later being more advanced than the former. Regarding Mig-21 Bison (would retire around 2015 or so), we know this 50s design (with 80/90s avionics) proved itself against F-15s (4th gen), and considering the fact that all the above mentioned fighters are more than likely to carry 4-4.5 gen avionics, we can speculate about their effectiveness in air defence role. As for getting a european version, I think PAF is simply trying to reduce the types in service and would simply concentrate on JF-17/F-16/FC-20 henceforth…primarily due to their limited resources.
vikasrehmanI mean wrt other modern dominant air forces i.e. India, China, Iran, UAE, SA, etc, not Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bhutan etc etc. I don’t think Pakistan fell in he category of BD, SL or Af forget Bhutan or Maldives.They currently do not have a good 4th generation fighter other than few F-16 MLU. By 2015 they will get arge number of medium tech fighters which are nothing in front of other mentioned air forces. They could get small number of 4.5 generation fighters like EFT, Rafale, SU-30 or even Gripen NG, that could pose a serious threat.
How does Iranian AF qualify for this group of dominant airforces?
By 2015, PAF is to have in place around 4-5 squadrons for multirole F-16s as well several squadrons of JF-17. Add to this their airborne early warning systems and aerial refuelling capabilities. I cant see them getting any other russian/western fighters by then, but they are currently negotiating for up to 36 FC-20 to be delivered by around that time. Every single one of these fighters will be equipped with both BVR & HMD-WVR capabilities. Does this make PAF a dominant AF? No. But taken together it does make them a capable defensive AF, and that is their goal.
vikasrehmanRegarding our initial discussion vis-a-vis J-10/FC-20, I found the following in a recent article by Janes (Interview: Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman, Pakistan Air Force Chief of the Air Staff, August 8, 2009). See paras 4 & 5.
http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/2009/08/interview-air-chief-marshal-rao-qamar.html
It appears that negotiations for FC-20 (Janes refers to it designated as J-10 in China) are currently going on. According to the article, .“[The technical proposal] is more or less finalised now. There are some changes that are required, which [the Chinese] are making,”. On another note, FC-20 is meant to be more advanced machine than JF-17, would go towards countering Indian acquisition of MMRCA (a very advanced machine indeed), and would come in around another 4-6 years time (my own estimate). Now what does or would China have in its invetory that can fit the description? Only J-10 and J-11B, I guess. J-11B is a no go area for various reasons, which leaves J-10 as the only alternative. F-8IIM and JH-7 dont fit the bill.
negotiations for a more advanced fighter than JF-17 are ongoing
vikasrehmanI believe the book that details PAF’s years through 90s (the one before Alan Warnes latest version) has exact numbers of Pakistani engineers/technicians in K-8 program in which Pakistani participation was 25%( financial ). If i am not wrong it puts total numbers close to hundred(anyone can correct me if i am wrong). I would not doubt that it is more than that in case of JF-17 which was a much more high profile project for PAF.
Also you have to keep in mind that JF-17 project involved things which were ground breaking even for the Chinese. A new MMI for the cockpit, DSI (which was authorized back in 2000 ),open avionics architecture, hybrid FBW (Chinese were working on full FBW for J-10 at the same time) etc. So we can safely assume that Pakistani side involved with the program would have seen and taken part in these things from the beginning to the end. And these are the things which were not mere repetition on Chinese part due to their’ as you put it, reverse engineering experience with Soviet technology.
A picture to chew on.
Thanks for posting this pic Farooq.
I must add that I cant remember seeing this pic before, and neither have I read Alan Warnes’s latest book. Yet I have seen similar pics before and would post the link whenever I come across again.
On another note, I do agree with what 21 Ankush said that It is impossible to gain such massive experience in the various fields that are required to design a fighter- from structures, systems, aerodynamics, flight control laws, to integration, detail design, etc. without having had several Pakistani institutions actively working with the Chinese on the program from the initial stages. What I would like to add, however, is that every country has to start somewhere. As I stated before that Pakistan has been involved in this programme from its inception and more so lately (someone else mentioned K-8 programme too). What PAC et al. are capable of doing right now, for example integration of weapons is taking place in Pakistan, was probably inconceivable a few years back. But it is happening now and we can safely assume that more would come on line as they gain expertise in other fields. I have always thought that Pakistanis appear to be well aware of their own limitations, and hence are trying to learn (from someone who is willing to teach them) at a gradual pace rather than taking on something more than they could chew. Does this mean that Pakistan could have a totally independent and self-sufficient aviation industry over next couple of decades? My personal opinion would be NO. Because Pakistan lacks the sources for such an industry, its moving at an extremely fast pace and Pakistan would always play catch up, and future aviation industry would be a lot more inter-dependent than what it is at the moment. Knowing their own limitations, I think Pakistanis would concentrate on certain aspects of aviation industry and try to be good at those.
vikasrehmannot flaming, but how could they get design experience when the Chinese side was totally responsible for that part of the project ? assembly and manufacture experience they’ll get transferred from the Chinese, but design knowledge cannot be gained without participating in it.
Hundreds of Pakistani engineers & technicians have been involved in this project since its inception, and more so since mid-late 90s. A large number of them have worked with their chinese colleagues in all sorts of departments at CAC. While Im not aware of any typical contributions to this project and Im not saying that PAC engineers might be able to design an equivalent tomorrow, they have been involved in all sort of stuff, most of all learning if not doing anything else. All in all, it was not a simple case of we pay and you develop for us.
the JF-17 would suffice in roles that replace the Mirage-3 and -5 and the A-5, but there is one distinct advantage in the J-10’s favour- more payload. for a bigger A2G loadout, it could still carry self-defence missiles. on that note, how mature is the J-10’s A2G strike capability right now ? what weapons does it use in this role ?
Apparently that advantage was not good enough, and JF-17/F-16s were good enough to meet PAF needs for the time. As for its present A2G capability, I cant really say much of the top of my head. But I assume that by now it can carry out precision attacks to say the least.
vikasrehmanSo if the J10 was available in 2004, why do we not see any in PAF colours even today? Is it normal to secure a deal a decade before the planes are supposed to be delivered?
There have been consistent reports, backed up by other evidence I have already mentioned before, that the PLAAF has suspended J10 orders for the time being. The most likely explanation being that they are waiting for the J10B.
Now, if the J10 was available as early back as 2004, does this not strike you as a perfect opportunity for the PAF to get some orders in and be able to take delivery of J10s probably before now instead of waiting another 5, 6 years?
Even if the PAF wanted to wait for the J10B, do you think CAC would pass up this opportunity and not try to secure some export orders from elsewhere?
The fact that they are not even trying to market the J10 should give you a pretty good indication of its status wrt exports.
Its always been China’s national defense policy to never export their most capable domestic fighter.
If the J10 has become available to the PAF, it is because the PLAAF has, or will very soon have access to something better. That something better looks almost certain to be the J10B. Thus if China offers J10s for export, it wont be the J10B.
They might throw in the superficial mods like IRST and DIS, but the real difference between the J10A and J10B, the radar and avionics suit, will not be available for export. And things are likely to stay that way as much of the systems used in the J10B are also intended for the XXJ.
Being available does not mean that you would definitely purchase it. Even back in 2004, my personal opinion was that PAF would not purchase J-10 in that format, even though it was available. This opinion was based on some very simple reasons.
a. PAF was concentrating on JF-17, and at the time they were hoping that the series production would start in 2006/07. As a programme, it was meant to bring in a whole lot more, i.e. give PAC the basic fighter design/assembly/manufacture experience.
b. J-10 was yet to mature as a fighter in service. Although it would have been superior to JF-17 in air to air mode, but I could not see it offering many distinct advantages in terms of A2G around the time.
c. PAF was negotiating for F-16s. This would have given them their truly advanced multirole platform.
PAF would have been stupid to sign deals for both J-10 and JF-17 while they knew that F-16 was available. They wanted J-10 to be at least on par (if not better) with any F-16 and hence the decision to wait for more advanced and mature J-10, when they knew for sure that F-16 was definitely available.
vikasrehmanAs for PAF not getting the best from China — when they got their F-7’s did Pakistan not request and get a host of improvements over baseline PLAAF examples operating at the time. Same goes for A5’s – look it up.
You ask me not to be clever and then say that the only reasson you can’t give a single example of China refusing to sell something to Pakistan is because that all must have happened behind ‘closed doors’- how convenient.
Funny how PAF getting FC-20’s (J10Bs in my view) is very much public knowledge – using your logic, shouldn’t they have asked for these behind ‘closed doors’ and got approval before announcing — especialy given the apparant long history of Chinese refusals behind closed doors.
I think ‘behind close doors negotiations’ is something we cannot ignore. It happens everywhere as every major defence weapons exporter wants to safeguard its own secrets, and every contry wants to retain the advantage a specific weapon offers. Both China and Pakistan have very cordial defence relations, but neither would want to deny its own armed forces a major advantage. For example, SD-10 might be the export version of pl-12 and might not be as good as the latter. If FC-20 comes with a chinese AESA, it would most likely be a derivative of the radar on J-10 (or a different product) rather than being the same thing. Same could be said of other avionics. As for the platform itself, I think Pakistani statements taken together with the timeframe and various other facts such as Pakistani requirements, do indictate that it wont be the same as current J-10A…most likely J-10B (if its a better bang for buck).
vikasrehmanAnd where exactly has anyone said anything about the J10B being what the CAS was talking about? That is entirely your assumption, and I have already showed you how the same words can easily be interoperated to mean something completely different to what you want it to mean.
Don’t try to be clever and pretend any official in any country has ever said anything that backs up your theory that the J10 version the PAF hopes to get will be the J10B.
China is not developing an export version of the J10 because, currently, the J10 is not for export. CAC is busy working on the J10B and XXJ and that is where the majority of their efforts are going to.
With all due respect plawolf, I would like to add couple of points. Back in 2004, the then CAS for PAF Kaleem Sadaat told Alan Warnes in an interview for AFM that J-10 was available to PAF (sorry I dont remember the month but if im not mistaken it was between May-Oct and it was the lead article on JF-17) . A year or so later, the political clearance was given for the official negotiations (to purchase up to 36 J-10) to start. A number of very high ranking & serving military officials from Pakistan have clearly stated that PAF will purchase F-10/FC-20 at sometime point in future. In the meantime I have never seen any chinese official ever contradicting these statements emerging from Pakistan. Unless one divulges into conspiracy theories such as ‘its a (chinese/Pakistani) pressure tactic vis-a-vis F-16 from US’, I think it is safe and rather logical to assume that J-10 is already available (at least to PAF) for export.
As for what version PAF would get, that’s anyone’s guess. China has its own policies and Pakistan has it own. But the two have cordial enough relations that China does allow Pakistan to request/make its own modifications to the products she purchases. As I said before, if a chinese alternative (that fits PAF requirements) is available then I dont doubt that PAF would go for it for the simple reason that it would provide the biggest bang for the buck.
vikasrehman] Dumb question: do Pakistani A-5s and F-7s use Chinese, Russian, or US bombs and missiles?
I think they can use sidewinders/magic and their chinese equivalents.
vikasrehmanThe basic airfrme for FC-20 (for PAF) would be the same as whatever is operational with PLAAF (call it J-10 B or C or D) around that time period. Where the two might differ is additional features/electronics/gizmos. In the past, PAF used to add western stuff into chinese fighter for the simple reason that chinese equivalents were not available…hence an ex PAF chief (Kaleem Sadaat) said (to the effect) that he cant see PAF operating a chinese fighter in entirety. Things have been changing rapidly and by 2014/15, who knows what chinese equivalents would be available.
Sign In
