vikasrehmanTejas is expected to get the Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) by 2010 and the Final Operational Clearance (FOC) a year later. In all probabilities, the fighter will be inducted into the air force by 2015.
2015??? Now that can’t be right. Another example of subcontinetal defence journalism???
vikasrehmanHowever, i doubt there will be more then two production lines for the JF-17. One in china and One in pakistan. Those should be enough to meet the numbers required. If the demand suddenly is huge however, then ofcourse there may be a need to open another line somewhere. Esp if someone orders big numbers.
The primary production line/s is/are going to be in China, which PAC’s line would start with assembling the a/c. Depending on how much tech the latter is able to absorb, they plan to gradually increase production of a/c components, and depending on requirements, there may be multiple production lines in two countries over coming years.
vikasrehmanAre the Indians gonna hurry-up with their MMRCA RFP, now that N-talks with Washington have broken down?
I must have missed this.:eek: When did that happen?:confused:
vikasrehmanI am surprised you brought this up Vikas! I thought you would have known- the IAF is planning for a heavy-medium-light AF. The MKI/PAK-FA are the heavies, the Jag-MiG-27, Mirage 2K, MiG-29 , MRCA are the mediums, the LCA the replacement for the MiG-21s – the light.
Also consider, the IAF had 70% of its fleet as the MiG-21 at one point of time – is it planning to replicate that? No. The LCA will be around 30% of the IAF at a full run of 220 a/c.
The point is that the IAF “gave up” some amount of medium, light fighters to focus on the “heavy” segment, because of the obvious advantages. And it will have 230 MKIs. Meanwhile the PAF is replacing light with light, and buying a token force of medium fighters!
Nick, while IAF is going for a hev/med/light mix, i think it has been becoming quite obvious that PAF have decided to go for a light/med mix, and not to explore the option of heavy weights (at least for the time being till something more suitbale becomes available…probably a chinese next gen fighter). We all know that its almost impossible for PAF to achieve air superiority over IAF, and in any case that’s not their primary objective. Their primary moto has always been the defence of their air space. They dont have the resources to go for a heavy weight fighter like Eagle/MKI, and would have had to make a lot of sacrifices in other parts. Hence, instead of making these sacrifices, they have decided to go for an AF composed of JF-17/J-10/F-16. Every one of these machines will be multirole, have BVR, data-linked, and air-refuelling capability. In addition to this, Pak is also exploring her options for both med/long range SAMs, and some decisions will be made regarding these in near future. While i agree that light/med fighter may suffer from certain disadvantages against heavy weights, i guess an AF made up of above-mentioned fighter and backed by AWACS/tankers as well as SAMs would form a credible detterrant against anything IAF would have in its stock over next 10-15 years.
Finally, unlike Pakistan, India has to go for a heavy weight class fighter because of its future ambition. India wants to be a global power for which it would need an AF which has the capability to operate globally, and i guess MKI fits that bill. In comparison, PAF intends itself to be a regional AF able to defend its skies, and therein lies the importance of JF-17 for them.
From day1, the PLAAF has been lukewarm on the JF-17. Their money is not infinite, and they want to focus on the J-11, J-10 and the future 5th gen program. Why would they splurge on yet another type? I am sure you are aware it took some serious “calling” by the PAF to have the PLAAF even commit funds to this JV.
They’ll buy it, but it doesnt necessarily mean that they’ll support it anywhere to the level of the J-10.
Just like anyother AF, PLAAF has its own priorities. Of course J-10 programme is of a lot more importance to PLAAF than JF-17, but one should not forget that both J-10/JF-17 are the product of one company, and each will benefit the other. Considering the fact that PAF will purchase J-10 (in considerable number in years to come), i guess chinese would remain committed even to JF-17 to a certain extent. Finally, China also has global ambitions, and too large an AF to be replaced entirely by J-10/11…even though they cant/wont replace many of their old types on 1 on 1 basis…and that’s where JF-17 would fit in quite neatly.
vikasrehmanJ-10 beats the JF17 in every criteria, and the PLAAF itself is not keen upon it..what does that tell you?
Lets use MKI vs LCA as an example. Going by the logic used thus far, MKI is better than LCA in almost every aspect, and yet LCA’s development is still going ahead at full pace. Why do u think that is the case? I dont think LCA is purely PAK or China-centric or only to defend air bases or merely to replace Mig-21s…or is it?
Both J-10 and JF-17 have their own places in PAF’s future plans. While PAF has already started receiving JF-17, no one in their right mind expects J-10 till (i guess) F-16 deliveries have been completed. By then J-10 and its associated technologies would be more mature and probably even more advanced. It seems that PAF has decided to form its AF around these 3 machines, and that’s how they will go about it.
Regarding PLAAF’s interest in JF-17, i take such statements with a pinch of salt. Do we have any official statements from chinese that they wont buy
FC-1 (If yes, please point us in the the right direction)? For years and years, we kept hearing that JF-17 will not come into PAF with RD-93. While chinese kept quiet (i cant remember them making any official statement prior to late 2006), all we heard from PAF officials (and without any reasons) that there is nothing to worry about. Now we have 2 RD-93 equipped JF-17s in PAF with more to come soon. Of 16 LSP aircraft, 8 will go to PLAAF, and i think i would rather take PAF official’s word who have said that China will buy FC-1.
vikasrehmanIts a question of payload and range plus sensor package- the MKI can choose its battles to its advantage, a light fighter comes in with a severe disadvantage.
Nick Are you referring to light vs heavy? or simply light aircraft on its own having sever disadvantage?
vikasrehmanIs there any open source info available about chinese ready to share source code for avionics with western radar manufacturer in case PAF chooses a western radar. Also what about the western radar manufacturer with chinese.TIA
Very interesting question, to which unfortunately i dont think any of us here has the right answer or at least im not aware of any open literature source which gives us any details regarding this. Hence, we can only speculate:)
One thing we know is that any radar-western missile integration would be done in Pakistan. French companies are more keen than ever to do business with chinese while Grifo has always been keen to sell their Grfo S7 in spite of JF-17’s close association with SD-10. Grifo 7/7PG already exist on PAF F-7s wired to fire a mixture of chinese/western missiles. However, one still cannot say with certainty as to what would happen vis-a-vis BVR. Pak’s decision to go with KLJ-7 may also have someting to do with SD-10 integration besides other factors. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.
vikasrehmanSo Nick, in your opinion, where should India and/or IAF be going from here, and where do you think it would go?
vikasrehmanBefore some people become carried away about the JF-17 and its Chinese avionics. “According to our delivery plan, the first two squadrons to convert to the JF-17s will be the two A-5 squadrons;” The benchtest results from the KLJ-7 radar were compared to APG-66 from the 70s. Why to talk with Italians and French about more recent radars otherwise. A bubble canopy looks different, just to note another shortcoming.
Sens…replacing A-5 squadrons does not mean that JF-17 would also be used in the same role, i.e. CAS. A-5 have been gowing long in the tooth for sometime, and need replacement. JF-17 is a brand new machine off the assembly line, and although it has been in developmental testing for sometime, PAF would need a little extra time to test this plane more thoroughly for operational/tactical purposes. Which PAF would be next in line to be replaced? Your guess is as good as mine, but i think it might be the oldest mirages.
Regarding Italian radars, one should remember that Grifo S7 was offered to PAF, and it was PAF who chose KLJ-7 ove it while telling the italians to do more work on their product. Now their interest/trust in chinese avionics is such that they would only be interested in a western radar if it’d be comparatively better than what chinese have to offer. Its simple business.
vikasrehmanIts not an issue of “reasonable”- its an issue of not juggling around with a customers prospective modernisation plans by hiking prices and stuff because the original plan was not well thought out. Besides, there is the issue of overdependence and the perception of the MiG series in the IAF. Useful planes but poor supply chain.
Overdependence…that’s a good point Nick, and also something that goes against India’s future ambitions. However, this is where i guess the dilemma is, and makes one wonder as to how much of a room India has available for manuevering vis-a-vis MRCA. Going Russian means overdependence though cheaper overall, while going American means increasing AF’s maintainenace issues/increasing operational cost, though it would bring in diversification.
vikasrehmanOne can argue that a second or a third block of this fighter is going to be significantly different. I dont agree on this, however. Because in the presence of the J-10 air superiority fighters and possible induction of newer F-16s (which I believe PAF will never get), PAF wont allocate major resources in making JF-17 more capable. And one indication is that PAF is not as much eager on BVR capability of JF-17 as it used to be previously. Another clue is, despite the serious shortage of fighters in the air superiority squadrons, PAF is talking to induct this fighter in squadrons that are not responsible for air superiority. So clearly, JF-17 is meant not only to replace A5, F7 and Mirages, it is also meant to do the job of the airplanes it is replacing.
qsaark, in his recent interview with AFM (see AFM June issue), PAF chief is quoted as saying…we will also equip JF-17 with a BVR missile…and i think his word (not an opinion) should carry some weight. While buying/upgrading those F-16s with AMRAAMs would undoubtedly allow PAF some extra breathing space thus allowing them more time to consider their future options for JF-17, BVR capability is one of primary requirments for JF-17s and would remain so regardless of F-16/J-10. According to PAF chief, KLJ-7 to equip first 50 JF-17 on the test bench looks much better than APG-66 (on present PAF F-16s) and that a western radar may only have a chance to compete for next batch of JF-17 if its really good (They are also looking at the possibilities of AESA). Do u think, PAF would be contemplating such a radar on JF-17 and not putting a BVR on it?
Right now PAF operates different tyes of F-7s/Mirages/A-5s/F-16s. From the way things are going, it is quite obvious that they have decided to base their entire AF around 3 types, namely F-16/J-10/JF-17, and all three types would be true multirole, giving them enough flexibility to interchange their ops. This would allow them to maintain the diversity as well as reducing operational costs. The times when an AF could afford to have different machines for different ops have passed, and PAF is planning to use these machines in all sorts of roles.
vikasrehmanWell, India will have to make a change at some point? That said, she will get loose many olders types in the near future. (i.e. Sea Harriers, Mig-21’s, and Mig-27’s) Personally, for the MMRCA I would drop the Medium part and order more of the larger SU-30MKI’s or live with yet another type and purchase the very capable American Super Hornet.
True, changes will have to be made. But question is how soon. If im not mistaken, Mig-21-Bisons are to serve till at least till 2015. Recent (and planned???) Mig-27 upgrades also suggest the same, and if im not wrong Harrier will be upgraded with Israeli Derby. While Harriers would probably be the first ones to be retired of the types you have mentioned, AJT is another purchase (albeit with technology transfer) from Britain, and adding another type from US/Sweden would undoubtedly further complicate already existing nightmares for longer.
vikasrehmanSo much debate, so many points of views, and i guess we are still no way near, and it remains anyone’s guess.
Someone recently posted an article in IAF discussion thread which quotes former IAF chief S.P.Tyagi ((in reference to India’s fleet of warplanes manufactured in France, Britain and Russia) that “It is the biggest nightmare to run an Air Force with planes of different origins,” and that Indian Government has now decided in principle not to go for multiple origin planes.
If so, then at least in theory this rules out F-16/F-18/Gripen.
Typhoon is prohibitively expensive (or so i think) with Rafale coming quite close.
This leaves Mig-35…but would then India be willing to de dependent on a single source for most of its advanced fighters that are to serve for many many years to come???
Some real hard choices to make, and i dont envy those who have to make them.
vikasrehmanWhat it comes down to is a bigoted presumption on your part that Pakistanis could not have created the Babur on their own just because India needed help for the Brahmos. It’s an entirely silly and fallacious argument.
GD, i dont think one can blame people making such assumptions (rightly or wrongly) about such pakistani/chinese projects. These projects are so secretive and so little is known about their (in particular Pakistan) real military R&D capabilities that anyone would be tempted to jump to the most logical conclusion.
vikasrehmanIf FC-1 does get a twin-seat version, I am sure it will be optimized for strike roles more so then being relegated as a trainer.
Of course there will be a twin seat version and PAF hierarchy has mentioned it on more than one occassion, and of course it will be optimised for strike roles.
Sign In
