PLAAF doctrines require that they do not have to replace equipment one on one frequently. PAF doctrines - I am not sure about that -they need to have equipment to match an opponent that will wipe the floor with them anyday. If I were to be PAF, my best option would be to buy several thousands of Mig-17 and Mig-19 clones for dirt cheap prices. As long as they can send some flying object in the air that needs to be shot down at a very very high operational and military cost to the IAF, the better it will be for them to prevent the IAF from attacking other high value targets.
Originally posted by Johann:
-As far as any one can tell, PLAAF combat pilots get less flying time, for reasons of cost and a desire to minimise accidents.
- The PAF has had far more exposure to modern air forces in terms of training and exercises than the PLAAF.
- The PAF has had more direct air combat experience than the PLAAF in the last 40 years.
- PLAAF doctrine is far more limited, which directly impacts the range of missions they are trained and equipped to perform.
- The problem of obsolescence is far more acute in the PLAAF than the PAF, in part because the PLAAF can not afford system upgrades for such a vast fleet.
- It is not clear if the PLAAF's air surveillance network is as well developed as the PAF's.