Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Dmurphy » 30 Dec 2008 12:14

Philip wrote:Boycott all german goods! Protest to Frau Merkel about her latter day Nazis supporting Islamist Nazism.
Thats not gonna happen, IMHO. 60% of world's environmental products and the best engineering equipments is sourced from Germany. We would stand to lose equally if not more. Our industries are sourcing and depending heavily from them,.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rohitvats » 02 Jan 2009 00:01

A question to senior maulanas learned in the ways of aviation: The LCA has been undergoing through various stages like LSP models, the PV models and with each stage being used to validate a set of parameters. The parameters set has been expanded gradually with the aim of reaching IOC and FOC in due course of time.

How come we never heard anything of this sort with JF-17? There have been no reports of weapons firing from the a/c? The aircraft is yet without a radar. Isn't it just more than simply adding a Radar set from vendors? Wouldn't they have to validate the flight regime with the new radar and associated stuff? Then how come they've inducted the a/c and will be raising/converting a sqn. for it.

Thanx in advance.

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Postby ArmenT » 02 Jan 2009 01:04

Frankly, have there been any pictures of the JF-17 flying after the two that flew on their independence day celebrations 3 years ago? IIRC, those two planes were flown back to China right after their public appearance and then the engine technology transfer issues with the Russians started. Has anyone seen a picture of a JF-17 in flight since then?

James B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2249
Joined: 08 Nov 2008 21:23
Location: Samjhautha Express with an IED

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby James B » 02 Jan 2009 01:11

^^There are some pictures posted in dumb and deaf Porki forums. Just google it to find them.

The reason for not seeing any test flights etc is because most of the JF-17 manufacturing is done in China and chicoms being secretive not much of it is let out in the open.

kmc_chacko
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 10:10
Location: Shivamogga, Karnataka

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby kmc_chacko » 02 Jan 2009 09:14

Serial production of JF17 aircraft to start soon: NA body told

ISLAMABAD, Jan 1 (APP): Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) would soon start serial production of multi‑role fighter aircraft (JF‑17 Thunder) in collaboration with China, Standing Committee of the National Assembly on Defence Production on Thursday was informed. The Committee headed by Sheikh Aftab Ahmad visited the PAC and was given detailed briefing about the ongoing projects being undertaken by the prestigious organisation in the defence production sector.

The Chairman PAC Air Marshal Khalid Chaudhry HI (M) T Bt gave detailed briefing about the projects whereby informing that the PAC has set up the factory for initiating the serial production of JF‑17 Thunder aircraft.

He said PAC has the capability to manufacture 75 % avionics and 58 % of air‑frame of the modern fighter aircraft.

About other project being carried out by PAC, he said PAC had been overhauling around 180 engines of various fighter jets and 60 aircraft a year. As during the last three years, since he joined as Chairman of PAC, around 160 aircraft and some 580 engines of the aircraft have been overhauled.

He also informed that the Mirage Rebuild Factory, which is a part of PAC has been rebuilding 35 years old version of the Mirage aircraft which were bought as scrap from various countries.

In the avionics sector he said state‑of‑the‑art machinery recently imported from various developed countries has been installed to manufacture various gadgets for different versions of the aircraft in the inventory of Pakistan Airforce.

In reply to a question, he said PAC has the capability to manufacture 50 aircraft annually and as soon as the project was approved by the government the factory would start its production. In line to meet with the PAF’s future requirement of fighter aircraft, he said, the factory has to work on war footings as prototype project, small batch production and serial production have to be run simultaneously.

He said PAC was awarded a contract worth US $ 15 million for manufacture of different parts of Boeing aircraft and the PAC had been successfully supplying the parts to the US aircraft manufacturing firm.

The Chairman as well as members of the Committee highly appreciated the work being carried out under the dynamic leadership of Air Marshal Khalid Chaudhary at PAC. They assured their full support to the management of PAC and help them in overcoming various impediments on the successful completion of various projects at PAC.

Later, the Committee went around various factories at the Complex and took keen interest in the sophisticated and modern work being carried out by the skillful workforce.


http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?opt ... emid=1>

atleast 10 JF-17s are presently in PAF inventory and they had put them into action during recent flypast drama.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vavinash » 02 Jan 2009 09:48

They are as useful as the 50 F-7's they had purchased without radars.

ovein
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 48
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 16:53
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ovein » 02 Jan 2009 14:41

Analysis of the PAF vs. IAF - Air Combat Over the Subcontinent

by M. Hussain

Pakistan and India. Two regional powers, frequently at war, armed to the teeth, possessing nuclear weapons and with no end in sight to their mutual animosity. War in the Subcontinent today has very high stakes. But none higher than in their respective air arms. Given the importance of air combat to modern warfare, a crucial factor to analyze the outcome of any conflict between them becomes analyzing the viability of each air force. For wars today always begin in air combat, and the successor there often has Fate decide in its favor.

The Pakistan Air Force has traditionally been known as one of the most professional air forces in the world. But the 1990s was a tough decade for the PAF and much of their prestige was lost. Pakistan chose to invest in nuclear weapons and diverted resources there. Damaging sanctions against Pakistan also hurt the PAF more than any other armed service. Thus, a decade was lost and PAF was left behind.
The Indian Air Force meanwhile, found the 1990s most fruitful. They progressed in leaps and bounds, as the Indian economy expanded, military equipment from the West and Russia opened up, and the IAF started learning and incorporating Western standards of air combat. Yet, there were times when India's political environment forced itself upon the IAF. Forced to wait for a local replacement for its MiG-21s that has been in development for over 20 years, and forced to abandon purchases because of political interference from within India, the IAF, on the turn of the century, found itself restrained.

Pakistan meanwhile gained momentum. Years of sanctions led to the development of a joint project with China - the JF-17. Unlike the Indian effort, this bore fruit quickly, under the able leadership of the PAF and astute decision making on the part of their military leader Musharraf. And after 9/11, the doors to Western equipment and military aid opened up again. But constant stalling plagued them such that little of concrete and operational value has been inducted. The PAF is nevertheless modernizing, and by 2012 would have caught up with the IAF. With induction in numbers of JF-17s and J-10s by the end of 2009, the PAF will see the gap vis-à-vis the IAF close rapidly.

Yet, in the Winter of 2008/2009, the PAF is yet half-made and the threat of war is thrust upon her. The PAF and IAF are on their highest alert, as the IAF sees its last opportunity to break the PAF, and the PAF holds strong and does not back down. The vital question thus becomes, what will happen if war broke out now? Today? Would the PAF collapse? Such a question cannot be answered without looking carefully at the assets and capabilities of both air forces.

The first salients we notice is that the IAF is far larger, with about 740 combat aircraft versus the PAF's approximate 400 aircraft. We see that the IAF has over 100 FLANKERs that are modernized and top-rate against the PAF's handful of early block F-16As. The IAF fields BVR missiles in platforms ranging from the MiG-21 Bisons to the Su-30 MKI against a PAF which officially does not have BVRs.

Yet, everything is not as it seems. What at first glance seems overwhelming odds against the PAF, on closer examination, do not seem as overwhelming. The IAF has far lower serviceability of its aircraft, their pilot training, as evidenced by recent Red Flag exercises with the US is also not yet up to par with the PAF, their maintenance crews are not as diligent, their mainly Russian/Soviet technology is generally less reliable and less effective than advertised, and a large part of their fleet of MiG-21s and MiG-27s are outdated. PAF aircraft are either of Western stock or Chinese and are far more maintenance friendly. Pakistan has also been upgrading their aircraft massively and have incorporated a complex combination of technology from across the globe – from China to Brazil, from South Africa to the US. PAF also very likely has BVRs that are not advertised of South African and Chinese origin. PAF pilot training is on par with the best in the world, and its maintenance crews are trained on the level of Western maintenance crews. Lastly, fighting an air war over Pakistan gives the PAF a home advantage and makes their radar and SAM infrastructure very relevant.

IAF aircraft are mainly of Soviet/Russian origin and are not designed for easy maintenance. The Soviets designed aircraft for mass production and on the view that combat aircraft would have short lives in a full scale conflict. As such, ease of maintenance was the last item on their mind. Even the latest Indian acquisition of Russian aircraft, the Su-30 MKI is known for being highly maintenance intensive and extremely fragile. Modifications to the FLANKERs have made them even more difficult to maintain – and example being that IAF sometimes faces tire shortages because the increased tonnage of the Indian FLANKERs make their tires burn out very rapidly.
Indian maintenance crews are also not up to par – at least compared to Western air forces. The large number of IAF crashes is indicative of this, one of the highest rates amongst air forces of the world. What compounds this problem is the age of large sections of the Indian fleet which has large numbers of MiG-21s and MiG-27s that are, besides the Bisons, highly outdated and are sometimes referred to as “Flying Coffins” by their pilots. It is no wonder that India has a hard time recruiting and retaining pilots .

Pakistan on the other hand has no problems recruiting pilots – the PAF has one of the highest rejection rates amongst air forces in the world. The PAF also has a better pilot to aircaft ratio than the IAF, meaning it could sustain a greater sortie rate over a protracted conflict. PAF aircraft are also “pimped” in that they have been extensively modified. Thus, while on paper PAF is flying ancient Mirages that were bought second hand from the Australians, when one actually examines any such model, one is surprised at how extensively they have been rebuilt – almost from scratch and the hardware is extremely lethal. Other than the secretive BVR AAMs, the PAF has extensively incorporated the strike element into its Mirages, at a level only matched by the IAF’s Mirage-2000s and Su-30 FLANKERs, and even then, some of the equipment has no IAF equivalent.

Let us also remember than any conflict between the two forces would last a maximum of 2 weeks as neither side has either the logistics or the political will to fight a longer war. This means that the smaller air force can sustain itself on a more equal footing for the briefer period of time.
The IAF’s fleet of MiG-21s are very short legged. the PAF’s F-7s have better ranges and also don’t need to fly as far given that they would be defending. Considering how large the IAF’s fleet of MiG-21, this becomes a rather relevant point. It would be hard to imagine IAF’s MiG-21s being able to sustain a presence over Pakistani airspace. Meanwhile, Pakistani cruise missiles and ballistic missiles are significantly more developed, effective and numerous than their Indian counterparts. This means that many of the forward Indian air bases would effectively be discounted, further compounding the problem for the IAF.

All these factors suggest a far more complex and mixed picture of the balance between the two air forces. To quantify military power in a more concrete way and to see how this balance plays out, let us look at a model of the PAF and the IAF.
Let us consider three main elements - number of aircraft, how valuable each aircraft is in battle and aircraft serviceability. We have the number of aircraft as a given. We assign percentages for serviceability, and assign a value between 0 and 1 for how effective each aircraft is. To get a broadly accurate picture, these numbers do not have to be absolutely accurate, but relatively accurate. The Table below illustrates this model:



We find the aggregate combat value by multiplying each of the factors and the number of aircraft. As you notice, I have not included factors such as home advantage to the PAF, PAF’s higher pilot ratio or PAF’s better training. I have also not included the short-legged nature of the MiG-21s and India’s likely inability to lose (or risk not losing) their forward air bases, effectively rendering them nonoperational. These factors are more intrinsic and are harder to quantify, so I will leave the reader to judge by how much to upgrade the PAF’s score on these parameters, or discount the IAF’s.

I am assuming that Air-to-Ground capabilities will also be an important aspect as destroying enemy aircraft on the ground or important installations is a significant element of the air war. I therefore am holding higher numbers of effectiveness for aircraft on both sides that otherwise would be completely redundant such as the IAF MiG-27. Of course, Air-to-Air is more important generally but strike missions should also be considered relevant. As such the model is only moderately biased towards air-to-air capabilities.

Conclusion
It would appear that the IAF is still the superior force. And while accounting for the exogenous items in this model would further lower the gap than the massive 37% gap shown in the table, depending on how it is discounted, it is still decidedly in India’s favor. However, given the short nature of any conflict between India and Pakistan, the gap does not lend credibility to India attaining air superiority over Pakistan under any scenario as could be concluded if we took the 82% gap in numbers. The PAF would likely sustain significant causalities but would likely be able to deny the IAF any semblance of air superiority over Pakistan, at least for any conflict lasting up to a few weeks. As long as PAF can deny the IAF air superiority, it can be considered to have done its job and would be ready to pick the pieces up from where it left it in the last conflict over Kargil.


http://www.grandestrategy.com/2009/01/4 ... f-air.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I couldnot copy the table properly. Please look for yourself.

Another article cought my eye

http://www.grandestrategy.com/2007/10/l ... f-air.html

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby krishnan » 02 Jan 2009 14:49

two regional powers


i stopped reading after this.

parshuram
BRFite
Posts: 322
Joined: 28 Feb 2006 09:52

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby parshuram » 02 Jan 2009 15:15

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

.....Even the latest Indian acquisition of Russian aircraft, the Su-30 MKI is known for being highly maintenance intensive and extremely fragile. Modifications to the FLANKERs have made them even more difficult to maintain – and example being that IAF sometimes faces tire shortages because the increased tonnage of the Indian FLANKERs make their tires burn out very rapidly.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rohitvats » 02 Jan 2009 15:23

ovein: ?Please do not post such half baked and asinine articles by day dreamers and self acclaimed analyst here. This whole thing is bull crap and does not deserve space on this forum. This is another example of delusion that brothers across the border surround themselves in. Some really gr8 variety they are smoking there.

Post if you must, please provide a URL link with short commentary on the arcticle or excerpt thereof. Even any one thinks its worthy of attention (and I doubt anyone would), they can follow the link.

amanpuneet
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 09 Oct 2008 19:45

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby amanpuneet » 02 Jan 2009 17:36

Article by M. Hussain,is for paki defence forums so instead of posting them here they should be in humor thread and will make good reading there.

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1085
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re:

Postby Hiten » 11 Jan 2009 10:44

sunilUpa wrote:Latest AW&ST has an article on FC-1.
Highlights:
The current model doesn't have surface attack capability. According to Li Pei (MD Catic) incorporating surface attack in the first production model involves too much effort. China will decide whether it will purchase the fighter in next 2 years. Stealth may be introduced by modification to Nose, Cockpit and inlet. Stealth (Radar signal reduction as per Pei) effort will involve new material and no changes to airframe. Currently 2 radars are available from China.


An old news, but I don't think it has been posted here

JF-17 GOES STEALTHY
In what is seen as a counter to India’s effort to jointly develop the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) with Russia’s Sukhoi Aircraft Corp, Pakistan’s Kamra-based Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) and China’s Chengdu Aerospace Corp (CAC) last October inked a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to jointly develop an advanced, stealthy, single-seat and single-engined derivative of the JF-17 Thunder fourth-generation light multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) that is already being co-developed by PAC and CAC. Consequently, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) is expected to induct only 100 JF-17s into service between this year and 2014, and subsequently switch over to the acquisition of another 150 JF-17-derived fifth-generation stealthy MRCAs between 2015 and 2025. Present plans call for the latter MRCA to be powered by SNECMA Moteurs’ M88-3 twin-shaft bypass turbofan, incorporate a digital glass cockpit and open-architecture avionics suite, and use SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems’ Vixen 500E X-band multi-mode active phased-array radar, or AESA, an integrated electronic warfare/defensive aids suite being developed by China’s CETC, along with a helmet-mounted sighting-cum-cueing system for which systems from THALES, BAE Systems and Denel Aerospace are being evaluated. The M88 turbofan for this aircraft will have variable camber inlet guide vanes, while its high-pressure compressor will have a sixth stage, and its exhaust nozzle will be of the ejector type. The turbofan will deliver 50kN (11,250lb) of dry thrust and 75kN (17,000lb) with afterburning. The primary offensive armament to be carried by this aircraft will be two underwing-mounted Hatf-8 (also called ‘Raad’ or ‘thunder’ in Arabic) air-launched cruise missile, which has a range of 350km. For air combat engagements, the stealthy MRCA will be armed with three types of air-to-air missiles: 60km-range PL-12 beyond visual range missile; 15km-range PL-13 within visual range missile; and PL-14 ramjet-powered 100km-range missile. The latter two have been developed by China in cooperation with South Africa’s Denel Aerospace.
In contrast, the JF-17, which is due to enter service late next year, is a light MRCA that will be eventually replace the PAF’s existing CAC-built F-7P Skybolt and F-7MG light MRCAs...

ajay_ijn
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:43

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ajay_ijn » 11 Jan 2009 11:17

cash starved country is facing problems in defence spending. yet they find money to purchase Erieyes, U-214s etc, simultaneously beg US & China weapons, and also IMF aid.
Pak cuts other expenditures by 20% to meet defence needs

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1197
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Nihat » 11 Jan 2009 11:23

ajay_ijn wrote:cash starved country is facing problems in defence spending. yet they find money to purchase Erieyes, U-214s etc, simultaneously beg US & China weapons, and also IMF aid.
Pak cuts other expenditures by 20% to meet defence needs


This is exactly what we need , while we expect 7% growth in a global recessionary economy . TSP bleeds itself to counter us in defense , even if we were to increase our military spending by 1% to 3.5 % of GDP , TSP will have to increase theirs to 7% of GDP from the current 5%

Neilz
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 90
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 21:09

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Neilz » 11 Jan 2009 12:48

Gurus afters reading so many posts I had an idea that China is not so technologically advance but then what is this "JF-17 GOES STEALTHY" :shock: . It appears they got few extra mile ahead which we never anticipated. Or it is the same hype funda of pla. plzzzzzz trainers enlighten the trainees. :cry:

Nihat wrote:
ajay_ijn wrote:cash starved country is facing problems in defence spending. yet they find money to purchase Erieyes, U-214s etc, simultaneously beg US & China weapons, and also IMF aid.
Pak cuts other expenditures by 20% to meet defence needs


This is exactly what we need , while we expect 7% growth in a global recessionary economy . TSP bleeds itself to counter us in defense , even if we were to increase our military spending by 1% to 3.5 % of GDP , TSP will have to increase theirs to 7% of GDP from the current 5%


I seriously want PAK = failed state. that is the easiest solution to get rid of pigs. We need not to spend a single bullet...... bcoz of their nuke, rest of world will do the very desire job.

Neilz
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 90
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 21:09

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Neilz » 11 Jan 2009 14:31

Well as far as topic gpoes like "Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc"

So I think I can post this good news........

http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/connect/Daw ... ent+to+paf

QUETTA: The Balochistan Cabinet has cancelled over 63,000 acres of land allotted to Pakistan Air Force in the coastal area of Lasbela district and restored divisional commissioner-rate system in the province.
:D :mrgreen: :lol:

I was wondering in pak forum for amusement and the comment/anguish following the news is more encouraging....... They were cursing the baluch for india favour mentality... I know i cant give any pak forum link here :roll: but it was real fun reading though.......

This sic pig always think pak is correct.... when will they understand pak = napak

ajay_ijn
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:43

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ajay_ijn » 11 Jan 2009 19:06

Neilz wrote:Gurus afters reading so many posts I had an idea that China is not so technologically advance but then what is this "JF-17 GOES STEALTHY" :shock: . It appears they got few extra mile ahead which we never anticipated. Or it is the same hype funda of pla. plzzzzzz trainers enlighten the trainees. :cry:

The only thing India wouldn't want is Pak getting western origin arms. I also think our armed forces are not so worried to see Pukis getting more chinese arms. We have much more options to widen the technology and numbers gap between us and them, especially with Israel and America in our defence market besides our traditional partners like europe and russia.

The Evil Yahudi-Hindu-Amrika Axis :twisted:

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby KrishG » 11 Jan 2009 21:56

I would say that the JF-17 is sell-off version by China! My question is why wouldn't the PLAAF induct JF-17 if it were to be sooooooooooooooo good. PLAAF has a lot of junk like J-7s and J-8s which would require replacement. Yet, until now they have been reluctant.

I just saw a YouTube video posted by some Pakistani about 2 JF-17s successfully intercepting 4 SU-MKIs! What a dream :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I scan't believe people go about comparing JF-17( Junk Fighter - 17 ) to Tejas! I have already discussed this on wikipedia and some senior members including RAF pilots have concluded that Tejas is more comparable to J-10 than Junk Fighter ! :) :) :)

At the same time our poor neighbours remain in their dream world about JF-17 being comparable to Su-MKi and J-10 being comparable to F-35 !!! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Rahul M » 11 Jan 2009 22:02

neilz, jf-17 is at about the same level of the upgraded mig-21, the bison with some marginal improvements.
it is good only if you say the same for the mig-21 bison ! :wink:

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10018
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby sum » 11 Jan 2009 22:21

Actually, the Bison can be called "stealthy" if we go by the words of Col.Fornoff of Red Flag fame who mentioned that the bison is almost invisible to legacy F-15s/F-16s. No prizes for guessing which of our enemy has legacy F-16s as its "premier" fighter. So, the Bison is the Indian F-22 for the Pakis since their fighters wont be able to notice the Bisons until the first R-77 has struck them....

James B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2249
Joined: 08 Nov 2008 21:23
Location: Samjhautha Express with an IED

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby James B » 11 Jan 2009 23:20

sum wrote:Actually, the Bison can be called "stealthy" if we go by the words of Col.Fornoff of Red Flag fame who mentioned that the bison is almost invisible to legacy F-15s/F-16s. No prizes for guessing which of our enemy has legacy F-16s as its "premier" fighter. So, the Bison is the Indian F-22 for the Pakis since their fighters wont be able to notice the Bisons until the first R-77 has struck them....


Will it be the same case once F-16s are linked to SAAB AWACS by PAF?.

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 779
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Shameek » 12 Jan 2009 00:00

Interesting article on the Pak Nuclear doctrine or the lack thereof. While it has been written based on the US perspective, the Indian concerns are quite apparent.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/magazine/11pakistan-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=ig

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5033
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 12 Jan 2009 01:44

ovein wrote:Analysis of the PAF vs. IAF - Air Combat Over the Subcontinent

by M. Hussain

Pakistan and India. Two regional powers, frequently at war, armed to the teeth, possessing nuclear weapons and with no end in sight to their mutual animosity. War in the Subcontinent today has very high stakes. But none higher than in their respective air arms. Given the importance of air combat to modern warfare, a crucial factor to analyze the outcome of any conflict between them becomes analyzing the viability of each air force. For wars today always begin in air combat, and the successor there often has Fate decide in its favor.



you're posting this article by a chutia Puke poster PLA MkII on Keypubs ?! its so ridiculously biased and so full of BS, its not even funny.

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Yogi_G » 12 Jan 2009 03:58

sum wrote:Actually, the Bison can be called "stealthy" if we go by the words of Col.Fornoff of Red Flag fame who mentioned that the bison is almost invisible to legacy F-15s/F-16s. No prizes for guessing which of our enemy has legacy F-16s as its "premier" fighter. So, the Bison is the Indian F-22 for the Pakis since their fighters wont be able to notice the Bisons until the first R-77 has struck them....


Also their RWR should tip them off even before the BVR missiles hit them, I would believe...

ajay_ijn
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:43

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ajay_ijn » 12 Jan 2009 09:11

raghunath wrote:
sum wrote:Actually, the Bison can be called "stealthy" if we go by the words of Col.Fornoff of Red Flag fame who mentioned that the bison is almost invisible to legacy F-15s/F-16s. No prizes for guessing which of our enemy has legacy F-16s as its "premier" fighter. So, the Bison is the Indian F-22 for the Pakis since their fighters wont be able to notice the Bisons until the first R-77 has struck them....


Will it be the same case once F-16s are linked to SAAB AWACS by PAF?.

I think our best assets will be deployed in destroying the AWACS, Early Warning Radars and Ground based Air defence C2. we would definitely need a deadly standoff weapon for Radars and Bunkers.

Ravishankar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 43
Joined: 30 Aug 2008 16:32

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Ravishankar » 12 Jan 2009 19:36

India Stunned as Brazil Sells 100 Advanced Air-to-Surface Missiles to Pakistan

http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4132

During the Falkan waragainst Argentina, a Vulcan developed a snag while returning from a sortie. Brazilian F-5 fighters escorted the aircraft back. The Royal Air Force plane landed at a Brazilian airfield and returned after the technical fault was removed. But the Shrike was held back by the Brazilians. The missile was returned later but not before the Brazilian engineers had taken a “good look” at it.

There is a general belief in Brazil that Mar-1 (Missil Anti-Radiacao 1) was developed out of the episode although little is known about its features. It has an autonomous target search and GPS. Indian officials said the deal signed in December is being closely watched. It came as a surprise as Brazil has close military relations with India.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1659
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Khalsa » 14 Jan 2009 02:54

Slightly off topic but where was the Avro Vulcan based ? Its a bomber and I would be intrested to know where it was operating from.
Surely not UK ? Fishy ?!?!?!

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1085
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Hiten » 14 Jan 2009 03:14

Khalsa wrote:Slightly off topic but where was the Avro Vulcan based ? Its a bomber and I would be intrested to know where it was operating from.
Surely not UK ? Fishy ?!?!?!

posted here
viewtopic.php?p=600955#p600955

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1659
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Khalsa » 14 Jan 2009 03:55

Hiten wrote:
Khalsa wrote:Slightly off topic but where was the Avro Vulcan based ? Its a bomber and I would be intrested to know where it was operating from.
Surely not UK ? Fishy ?!?!?!

posted here
viewtopic.php?p=600955#p600955


Thanks

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Yogi_G » 14 Jan 2009 04:57

Does anyone know whatever happened to the lone mig-21 aircraft that the Taliban used against the Northern Alliance in the late 90's??

I couldn't think of any other thread to raise this question especially Pakistan = Taliban and Taliban = Pakistan these days :lol:

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Yogi_G » 15 Jan 2009 02:33


kmc_chacko
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 10:10
Location: Shivamogga, Karnataka

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby kmc_chacko » 15 Jan 2009 08:51

Yogi_G wrote:JF-17 better than LCA, PM leaders told Jihaadi logic.... :lol:


Pak President, PM get briefing on war preparedness
Ramesh Vinayak

Chandigarh, January 14, 2009

Comment Print Email A A A Share Facebook! Digg it! Newsvine! Reddit! Del.icio.us! Technorati! StumbleUpon! RSS Feed
CloseIndia Today expert view on Pak President, PM get briefing on war preparednessTaking the sabre-rattling to a new high in the backdrop of escalating tension with India, Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Wednesday attended a briefing about JF-17 Thunder aircraft built jointly by Pakistan and China, according to a latest report in the leading online portal Geo News.

Both leaders were informed that in terms of performance, cost efficiency and availability, JF-17 jets are better when compared with Indian Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).

Minister for Defence Ahmed Mukhtar, Finance Advisor Shaukat Tarin, Chief of Air Staff Air Marshal Tanvir Mehmood Ahmed and other concerned officials were present at the briefing in Islamabad.

The JF-17 Thunder aircraft are lighter in weight and fit for all weathers.

Quoting official sources, Geo News said the president and prime minister expressed satisfaction on the operational capabilities of Pakistan Air Force.

They said the armed forces are well-prepared and ready to safeguard the country.


Performance - Equal to LSP-2

Cost efficiency - Naturally as Chinese produce the worlds chepest (their policy it self use & throw) and when you have no radar, EW suite, missiles it will be very cheap.

Availability - Already 10-15 operationalized armed with two fuel tanks - you guys know the reason (when it will sees Su-30MKI then . . . . . . . need not to say).

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Neilz
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 90
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 21:09

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Neilz » 15 Jan 2009 15:34

Rahul M wrote:neilz, jf-17 is at about the same level of the upgraded mig-21, the bison with some marginal improvements.
it is good only if you say the same for the mig-21 bison ! :wink:


For a little more clarification I will add some collected data which I think is not so happy tune.... I am now more confused. Please help Rahul.

1. Pakistan had begun negotiations with British and Italian defence firms over potential avionics and ECM/EW systems for JF-17.
2. One of the radar options for JF-17 is the Italian Grifo S7/Elta EL/M 2032. But not confirmed
3. Can be connected to AWACS.
4. It will have BVR capability.
5. And we know "the Bison can be called "stealthy" if we go by the words of Col.Fornoff of Red Flag fame who mentioned that the bison is almost invisible to legacy F-15s/F-16s" So it also stands some point for jf-17 because of its small size.
6. Stealth factor again not confirmed

So, if we take all the above point in positive note then it will become a potent weapon platform. Still fall short of LCA but a good war doctrine and the numbers PAF planning to induct can be real worry. It will definitely give them a modest point defensing capability. Our bison itself proves how good it could be as primary interceptor / point defense.

But my confusion is why China outright rejected this, when with western avionics it seams to have a modest future.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1644
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sid » 15 Jan 2009 16:55

^^^

AFAIK China has a policy of not inducting any foreign maal until its localized or intended to be localized. Take for example their SP howitzer PLZ45. It was exported to a gulf country (i think Kuwait) but similar system was not inducted in PLA because it used western GPS and other equipment. They might induct it, but with localized content just like they produced F-7PG based on Pukes requirements but have their own version. Their rejection of JF bunder means it might be totally targeted for pukes (because of extensive foreign maal in it), just like MBT2000 as they already have much superior J10 and J11 in their inventory.

Also pukes boost about decoupled development of avionics and airframe in bunder. But isn't avionics supposed to be integrated along with airframe development especially if its supposed to be a FBW. How can they be decoupled? One cannot just plug-in FBW, environment control, stores management and other subsystems or develop them in isolation from airframe design.

I don't know, maybe some guru can throw light on this topic....

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20512
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Philip » 15 Jan 2009 17:14

The position of the PAF in the future looks brighter than the past,because of the arrival of the J-17.This aircraft has been assidiouly designed and built by China,with many inputs from the Lavi to other aircraft in its inventory.Begging,borrowing and stealing,China has produced a cost-effective multi-role fighter.US reports themselves have also shown the huge strides made by China in the field of AAMs,where Russian missiles used on Chinese Flankers have been initially copied and even improved upon by the Chinese.Pak hopes to acquire with local production 260+ of these aircraft.Thus it hopes to narrow the numbers gap with India through this fighter.US or western fighters it is hoped,will make up the remaining quality component of the PAF.Here US military aid is being leveraged.

The failure of the LCA to arrive on time and with the designed fighting capability is a serious setback to India.The MK1 version will be overweight by a
reported 100kg,and will carry only a limited number of missiles and until the Mk2 with a more powerful engine arrives in sufficient numbers each year,the IAF will have to augment its inventory through imports t0o maintain its fighting strength.

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1197
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Nihat » 15 Jan 2009 18:44

Currently I think 8 JF-17 are with TSP and possibly 4 more by mid of this year - thats not even a squadron .

Besides the qualitative gap between IAF and PAF keeps on increasing every year with us Inducting a new squadron of MKI's and Phalcon joining in.

Qualitative superiority is really not the worry for us as regards TSP , it's the numbers which are bothersome . Along with the tardy pace of LCA induction , we may end up losing more aircrafts per year than adding new ones.

ajay_ijn
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:43

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ajay_ijn » 15 Jan 2009 19:02

Neilz wrote:2. One of the radar options for JF-17 is the Italian Grifo S7/Elta EL/M 2032.

Israeli Radar for Pakistan!!!!

The failure of the LCA to arrive on time and with the designed fighting capability is a serious setback to India.The MK1 version will be overweight by a
reported 100kg,and will carry only a limited number of missiles and until the Mk2 with a more powerful engine arrives in sufficient numbers each year,the IAF will have to augment its inventory through imports t0o maintain its fighting strength.

right now we have no other immediate option but to count on migthy flankers, bisons, vajra/baaz upgrades. Its also a good time to plan for future flankers (who knows India might have to fund the future engine and radar development too). Since Russian Air force doesn't have Su-30s, its entirely on part of India to decide on future flankers and upgrades especially considering IAF was first one to order such an advanced flanker. AL-41/Irbis-E/R-74/R-77 Ramjet. IAF will have to check out how much of these are really tested n matured and how many are just mockups airshow.

we may end up losing more aircrafts per year than adding new ones.

we can still get Mirages from French air force on lease. if we are giving so much importance to numbers there are hundreds of Mig-29s or flankers with Russian air force which can be upgraded and leased.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Igorr » 16 Jan 2009 04:47

Pakistani tank advertising video. However, they say Al-Khalid commander has only a light enhancer (image intensifier) for the night vision (if I understood right). WTF for the gunner isnt clear for me. Early I was in the opinion that they use French IR.

Yugandhar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 68
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: Bendakaalooru

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Yugandhar » 17 Jan 2009 11:55

Pakistan receives 8 Chinese-made jet trainers

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Pak_receives_8_Chinese_jet_trainers/articleshow/3990556.cms

The planes — known as Hongdu JL-8s in China and Karakoram K-8P trainers in Pakistan, were formally handed over at an unidentified Pakistani air force base, according to a statement from the air force public relations office.


why such a secretive handover for a trainer :roll:

I shudder to think what they would do for the stealthy JF17 handover :((

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1085
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Hiten » 17 Jan 2009 12:12

Yugandhar wrote:I shudder to think what they would do for the stealthy JF17 handover :((

The handover might be so "stealthy" that even the paf wouldnt know they've been inducted and ready for [dis]use


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests