Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

JimmyJ · Post by **JimmyJ** » 20 Jul 2010 23:20

Here it goes

General Atomics Gains Approval to Sell Predator Drones to Pakistan

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 20 Jul 2010 23:36

^^^ Crap. khan does it again

Pak will slip the design and mission modules instantly to the panda, claiming one of them crashed beyond recovery. It is true amirkhan has moved on to jet powered and stealthy versions, but these can be potent amongst the Himalayas. LCH design's insistence on high altitude and upward looking optronic ball thingy makes sense now.

btw, as I commented earlier,the huge design changes in JF-17 either proves the lack of good computer simulations or poor theoretical work by the panda designers. Probably JF17 is handled by a second string bureau, compared to the J10. Plus I think their MIL is more a "let us have a TFTA prototype asap for the public" than the super cautious SDRE's flosolver approach

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jul 2010 13:27

While US sh*tworms are willing to sell Pak anything,here's some welcome news.Russia is not selling Pak RD-93 Klimov engines for the JF-17.

"Future production could be in jeopardy",says a Russian report,quoting Sukhoi boss Pogosayan who has written to the Russian govt. recommending refusing to sell China more engines as it would harm Russian aircraft sales.Until China perfects its own WS-13 engine,supposedly with 10% more thrust,the sino-Pak fighter will be up the creek!

http://in.zinio.com/reader.jsp?issue=416133050&o=ext

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Jul 2010 13:55

>> Probably JF17 is handled by a second string bureau, compared to the J10.

that may be correct. said to be composed of a fairly young team, while the A-listers are on more important projects.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 Jul 2010 14:01

JimmyJ wrote:Here it goes

General Atomics Gains Approval to Sell Predator Drones to Pakistan

SH is out of my favorites list. I hope neither F-16 or SH make the MMRCA shortlist..

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 21 Jul 2010 14:04

JimmyJ wrote:Here it goes

General Atomics Gains Approval to Sell Predator Drones to Pakistan

This story is absurd and outrageous!

Wouldn't the sale of a UCAV like the Predator that has a range of nearly 2000nm and can carry a payload of nearly 500 kg be against the MCTR ?? Or is that irrelevant now that it is inconvenient to US interests ?
At the very least even an "export version" of the Predator would be an utter betrayal of the spirit of the MCTR that the US and Europe have continually used to beat over India and Israel and other "have-not" countries. Even an ICBM could be sold in a "export variant" sham by various minor alterations to meet the letter of the MCTR.

X-posting and quoting from Sunny y's post in International Aerospace discussion

From MCTR website http://www.mtcr.info
Greatest restraint is applied to what are known as Category I items. These items include complete rocket systems (including ballistic missiles, space launch vehicles and sounding rockets) and unmanned air vehicle systems (including cruise missiles systems, target and reconnaissance drones) with capabilities exceeding a 300km/500kg range/payload threshold; production facilities for such systems; and major sub-systems including rocket stages, re-entry vehicles, rocket engines, guidance systems and warhead mechanisms.

The remainder of the annex is regarded as Category II, which includes complete rocket systems (including ballistic missiles systems, space launch vehicles and sounding rockets) and unmanned air vehicles (including cruise missile systems, target drones, and reconnaissance drones) not covered in item I, capable of a maximum range equal to or greater than, 300km. Also included are a wide range of equipment, material, and technologies, most of which have uses other than for missiles capable of delivering WMD. While still agreeing to exercise restraint, partners have greater flexibility in the treatment of Category II transfer applications.

Either Pakistan has the State Department in their pocket or Bloomberg has made a mistake because otherwise the news is simply preposterous and something India and Israel should strongly protest about. Giving the Arabs and a rouge state like Pakistan such sophisticated equipment that clearly skirts the MCTR and significantly ramps up their tactical capabilities is tantamount to financing and facilitating war against India.

neeraj · Post by **neeraj** » 21 Jul 2010 15:29

India eyes Patriots, Javelins and more Hawks

Speaking about India interest in the Patriot ground-based air defence system, Joseph Garret, Vice President of the Raytheon's Patriot Programmes, said: "A number of exchanges have taken place between the government of India and the US and information has been given to India at the classified level."

Replying to questions, he said tests of the Patriot system, which has been procured by 12 countries, by India's Defence Research and Development Organisation and other agencies had been "highly successful".

On India developing its own missile defence shield, Garret said, "Patriot system gives a major boost to any country's defence capability. India may be developing its own system, but Patriot is a combat-proven weapon system."

Hope MMS infatuation with US does not kill our ABM

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 21 Jul 2010 20:56

JimmyJ wrote:General Atomics Gains Approval to Sell Predator Drones to Pakistan

From the report, Pakistan will get the unarmed version

Secondly, Predator is useful in areas with no air defence. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_At ... onal_units

1995 – At least two Predators were lost during Nomad Vigil, one of them to hostile fire.
1999 - A second aircraft (serial 95-3019) was lost on May 13, when it was shot down by a Serbian Strela-1M surface-to-air missile over the village of Biba. A Serbian TV crew videotaped this incident.[28]

We have a superior missile already in service, 9M37/9M333 Strela-10 (SA-13) in service for ages. And Akash and Spyder and Barak-8 by the time Predators are delivered to Pakistan.

A third aircraft (serial number 95-3021) crashed on May 20 near the town of Talinovci, and Serbian news reported that this, too, was the result of anti-aircraft fire.[28][29]

A shot down RQ-1 Predator in the Museum of Aviation in Belgrade, Serbia

An Iraqi MiG-25 shot down a Predator performing reconnaissance over the no fly zone in Iraq on December 23, 2002. This was the first time in history a conventional aircraft and a drone had engaged in combat. Predators had been armed with AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles, and were being used to "bait" Iraqi fighters, then run. In this incident, the Predator did not run, but instead fired one of its Stingers. The Stinger's heat-seeker became "distracted" by the MiG's missile and missed the MiG. The Predator was hit by the MiG's missile and destroyed.[43][44]

Predators are toast to Flycatcher cued L-40/70 and ZSU-23-2 and everything above. An older generation MiG-29 shot down a Hermes 450 in Georgia.

So are Herons, and the Searcher-2 downed in 2002, but we now have Cartosat

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Jul 2010 21:36

^ Boss the issue is Predator has long legs it is in a different league than the Falco and other tweeny stuff TSP has , self defense is not a UAV USP (until now) however what is noteworthy is being an unmanned platform operator can take more chances with our Radar coverage hoping to sneak in through blind spots .

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 21 Jul 2010 22:03

Negi, vital assets like airbases and probable enemy ingress and egress points have radar coverage. Maybe the rest of our aerospace doesn’t.

Blind spots are useful for fighters to sneak in and attack from a least expected direction using speed to give defenders less time to react.

However, ADGE is being fast upgraded (more in the radar thread).

A lumbering predator with 14.8 meter wingspan (compared to 10 meter wingspan F-16, hence more prominent target) and 165 km/h cruise speed 217 km/h top speed won’t be too difficult to knock off, would it?

And we dont have any issues with it recceing any non strategic territory, do we?

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 22 Jul 2010 06:38

The problem is not whether the versions doled out to Pak is armed or not: the long endurance aspects that make the Predator really cool will be closely studied by panda and they "magically" come up with a similar version for land and naval patrols. THAT version would be armed and available to Pakis.

In an all out war, they would be shot out of the skies, but for infiltration support..... we wont know what happened to a remote border post that got blown up at night "by brave mujahideens" till after lengthy investigations.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 22 Jul 2010 08:39

Not only the Long endurance but also the fact that Pakistan has already modified the US Harpoon cruise missiles to strike land targets means that they could very easily modify the Predator to function as a bomb delivery platform. Despite the Americans selling a dumbed down version, the main components like the engines, the airframe and the controls systems would be pretty much the same and those technologies are restricted for export under various laws by themselves.

Aside from the obvious proliferation of these technologies to the Chinese, the Pakistani's themselves have demonstrated a reasonable capacity to reverse-engineer and produce substandard knock-offs as "indigenous" technologies. The eventuality of a Pakistani built drone based on the Predator's technologies that could carry a nuclear bomb and sneak into Indian territory becomes a very REAL possibility should the deluded Americans actually sell the Pakistanis the Predator "export" drone. Such a capability would give Pakistan an immense tactical edge that India would be hard pressed to counter unless India develops and builds in numbers its own long range High altitude UCAV.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Jul 2010 08:51

they can also integrate the south african 'raad' air launched missile and the brazilian ARMs on it.

a predator guided by GPS waypoints could fly deep out over the ocean , make landfall on goa and escape again before
anyone figures out where it came from. extensive use of composites in UAVs no doubt makes its RCS quite low.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 22 Jul 2010 23:51

And we thought that our DDM was capable of rubbish..wait till you read this article !

Pakistan offers jet fighter to Indonesian Military
Dicky Christanto, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Thu, 07/22/2010 10:17 AM | National A | A | A |
Pakistan Defense Minister Chaudhary Ahmed Mukhtar offers his Indonesian counterpart the latest jet fighter called the JF-17 during his visit to Jakarta on Wednesday.

Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro responded to the offer, saying that further discussion would be conducted in October.

Minister Mukhtar was here to sign the Defense Cooperation Agreement between the two countries at the Defense Ministry.

“We will see it first before we decide if we have an interest in purchasing the aircraft,” Purnomo said.

He said the JF-17 jet fighter was the product of a joint production between Pakistan and China. The manufacturers claimed the jet to be cheaper and stronger than the US F-16.

Purnomo said he learned there had been 500 JF-17 jet fighters produced; 350 are allocated for Pakistan and the remaining 150 are for China.

“I have been informed that Pakistan’s jet fighter’s level is above the US F-16 jet fighter, as well as Russia’s Sukhoi. But we need to see it first hand,” he said.

Minister Mukhtar said the jet fighter project was a result of years of engineering improvements that was made by the Pakistan defense industry back home.

“We have developed our defense industry properly, we have prepared for those who plan to disrupt our peace,” he said.

Pakistan Ambassador to Indonesia Sanaullah, who also attended the press conference, promoted the product, saying the aircraft had met the requirements to be used by the Indonesian military.

The Defense Ministry is currently developing its own jet fighter project with South Korea. Dubbed the KFX project, the project is aimed at providing both countries with five jet fighter prototypes before 2020.

Mass production of the KFX jet fighter is expected to take place after the project reaches its break-even point of 200 aircraft units.

Bhatara Ibnu Reza, Imparsial’s research coordinator, warned that the Indonesian military should prioritize the improvement of its own defense industry.

He said if offers like that from Pakistan contributed to the reinforcement of the country’s defense industry, then Imparsial suggested Indonesia take advantage of it.

“I strongly suggest that we pay serious attention to rebuilding our defense industry so it becomes a strong backbone for the future,” he told The Jakarta Post.

In addition to offering the jet fighter, the Pakistan defense minister also tightened cooperation in the field of education and sharing intelligence on counterterrorism.

Both countries have also planned to conduct a joint naval exercise in December this year.

“We face similar internal security problems here. Therefore cooperation will enable us to tackle these problems,” he said.

The Pakistani defense minister visit is the latest, after China’s Central Military Commissioner, Guo Boxiong, visited the country in May.

this is marketing at the most nanga level..better than F-16 and Su-30 it seems

, yet PAF is happily inducting F-16s and asking for more as well..and now its 350 JF-17s for the PAF and 150 for PLAAF..

Indonesia better wait and watch..PLAAF will not induct a single one of these when it has superior J-10s and J-11Bs to induct.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 23 Jul 2010 00:36

Most certainly PLA wont induct them. They just low tech toys which TSP can induct in large numbers, good for breast beating but hardly give PAF a significant edge. PLAAF would give them for free as they see it as a means of containing India without indulging in a direct act of War.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 23 Jul 2010 08:22

Paki pilots training on Chini Su-30MK

Currently flying Su-30MK1 for the Chinese Nav

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Jul 2010 08:34

Dmurphy wrote:Paki pilots training on Chini Su-30MK
Currently flying Su-30MK1 for the Chinese Nav

Let them have fun , may be they will get some reverse engineered Flanker from China

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 23 Jul 2010 09:08

Dmurphy wrote:Paki pilots training on Chini Su-30MK
Currently flying Su-30MK1 for the Chinese Nav

Good, at least they will know what they are up against and stop flying those f-7 junks and claiming "PAF thrawted attacks" kind of story.

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 10:01

Dmurphy wrote:Paki pilots training on Chini Su-30MK
Currently flying Su-30MK1 for the Chinese Nav

This is not good but not surprising either !! Its always good to know the enemy aircraft - the weakness and strengths of the aircraft -- this was amply demonstrated by Israelis when they managed to train against a Mig 21 before the Yom Kippur war. This helped them immensely. Israeli's came to know that if you are on the tail of Mig 21 and if you just stay below Mig 21's altitude - mig 21 will not be able to see you due to poor observability.

IMHO i feel that pakis are pro active in certain areas - they have to be considering the opponents that they are facing.

I hope we are doing the same excercises with Israeli F16 or some other forces -- i guess we will never have access to JF 17.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2010 11:01

I think we have experience flying DACT with F-16 of Singapore Air Force.....

A thought - The thrust from PLAAF in terms of Su-27/30 and J-10 may mean that PLAAF wants to do away with F-7 category of fighter - that is, a point defense fighter. J-11 and J-10 to me represent the USAF model of F-15 and F-16...with J-11 to be replaced by J-XX in future. If this assertion holds, then I can understand PLAAF not keen on induction of JF-17. Which further means that we may not see thrust from China to further invest in the product and may be come up with MKII version.

From China's perspective, JF-17 (even in current form or some refinement) may well serve as a foreign policy tool - to be sold to people who won't bother much with fancy stuff. But in case of PAF, it wants the bells and whistles - and will need to pay for them. Whether it pays the Chinese or the Western countries is moot. And this is only for current JF-17 and to bring it to decent levels. I don't see Chinese investing in any iterative development on their own - unless, PAF coughs up the money.

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 11:29

^^ It is one thing to practice DACT with a nation and its another if you are stationed with a friendly air force to learn the tips and tricks from that air force which is not present in our own. Performing dact against singapore just doesnt offer this capability !
If we have pilots on a transfer basis with I(srael)AF then this would be the best place to learn -- Israelis can at the same time benefit from operating Su's since it may present them a viable threat.

Pakistan has been excellently proactive in this area -- with pilots flying amongst all 'brotherhood' nations. I personally consider only Turkey and China AF where Pakistanis would be learning most.

This leads to a question -- why is there no DACT between IAF and IsraelAF -- one of the best AF around ?? The relationships are good , so why not make best of it.

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 11:30

rohitvats wrote: A thought - The thrust from PLAAF in terms of Su-27/30 and J-10 may mean that PLAAF wants to do away with F-7 category of fighter - that is, a point defense fighter. J-11 and J-10 to me represent the USAF model of F-15 and F-16...with J-11 to be replaced by J-XX in future. If this assertion holds, then I can understand PLAAF not keen on induction of JF-17. Which further means that we may not see thrust from China to further invest in the product and may be come up with MKII version.

From China's perspective, JF-17 (even in current form or some refinement) may well serve as a foreign policy tool - to be sold to people who won't bother much with fancy stuff. But in case of PAF, it wants the bells and whistles - and will need to pay for them. Whether it pays the Chinese or the Western countries is moot. And this is only for current JF-17 and to bring it to decent levels. I don't see Chinese investing in any iterative development on their own - unless, PAF coughs up the money.

China might simply be waiting for JF17 to mature as platform at the expense of Pakistan before ordering its own fighters -- a very wise strategy !!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 23 Jul 2010 11:48

naird wrote:China might simply be waiting for JF17 to mature as platform at the expense of Pakistan before ordering its own fighters -- a very wise strategy !!

and pray why would PLAAF want the FC-1 when it can have the J-10B and J-11B in addition to the sukhois they already have ? there has been absolutely no indication that PLAAF is interested in the FC-1. moreover pakistan funding jf-17 is complete hogwash, pakistan's complete economy runs on donations from abroad, they don't have nearly enough moolah to fund a fighter project. you can be sure that jf17 has been funded by the PRC itself for its own needs.

This is not good but not surprising either !! Its always good to know the enemy aircraft - the weakness and strengths of the aircraft -- this was amply demonstrated by Israelis when they managed to train against a Mig 21 before the Yom Kippur war. This helped them immensely. Israeli's came to know that if you are on the tail of Mig 21 and if you just stay below Mig 21's altitude - mig 21 will not be able to see you due to poor observability.

chinese su-30mkk is not same as IAF su-30mki, don't let the name fool you, they are completely different aircraft with different avionics, handling qualities and manufacturers.

I hope we are doing the same excercises with Israeli F16 or some other forces -- i guess we will never have access to JF 17.

we do yearly exercises with the RSAF F-16's in addition to other countries. I doubt very much if the IAF is losing sleep over not being able to fly against the jf17, you seem to have bought the paki propaganda hook line and sinker.

it's not nearly as capable as you think it is.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 23 Jul 2010 11:50

naird wrote:
Pakistan has been excellently proactive in this area -- with pilots flying amongst all 'brotherhood' nations. I personally consider only Turkey and China AF where Pakistanis would be learning most.

Don't forget the UAE and Saudi AFs. UAE flies the Mirage-2000 and one of the most advanced F-16 versions outside the US. The Saudis will soon get the EF.

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 12:19

Rahul M wrote: and pray why would PLAAF want the FC-1 when it can have the J-10B and J-11B in addition to the sukhois they already have ? there has been absolutely no indication that PLAAF is interested in the FC-1. moreover pakistan funding jf-17 is complete hogwash, pakistan's complete economy runs on donations from abroad, they don't have nearly enough moolah to fund a fighter project. you can be sure that jf17 has been funded by the PRC itself for its own needs.

Rahul - If chinis have not ordered the plane then what can be the needs for this persistent JF17 development ? Is it because of Pakistanis ? And if JF17 was a result pf purely China's funding why let Pakistan market it in farnborough and other places ? India never markets Su 30 MKI even though it has some good amount of Indian components ..I would say there has been a funding -- to what extent i dont know -- I am not even sure if its financial -- it may leasing a supposedly crashed F16 to Chinicoms ....but its there and my opinion its real.

chinese su-30mkk is not same as IAF su-30mki, don't let the name fool you, they are completely different aircraft with different avionics, handling qualities and manufacturers.

Its doesn't matter IMO. If you are flying a F16 Block A/B or if you are flying the F16 Block 40 then flying characteristics basically remains the same. Sure Avionics changes -- but thats out of equation since it always changes. A su 30 MK or Su 30 MKI would still offer the same basic flying characteristics which can help enemy air forces devise tactics around it -- sustained turn rate , climb rate , speed , advantages -- would all remain same or very close between mk and mki -- avionics is a different matter altogether.

we do yearly exercises with the RSAF F-16's in addition to other countries. I doubt very much if the IAF is losing sleep over not being able to fly against the jf17, you seem to have bought the paki propaganda hook line and sinker. it's not nearly as capable as you think it is.

not at all -- but i am just concerned and i fail to see the same amount of efforts being put by IAF. Like i said conducting a few dact missions with RSAF -- IMO is ok but not that great. I wish we had our own pilots on a transfer basis with other airforces -- for example Israelis. They can be considered the masters of F16 and who better can share with us air tactics than one of the best AF on the earth.
I confess - I have a reason to say this. Last night i watched a programme on military channel where they showed about Yom Kippur war. They showed how Mossad managed to sneak in a Mig 21 fighter to Israel ...and how Israel painstakingly learned the fighter characteristics in a period of 6 months of continuous flying and how the devised tactics around it-- This helped immensely in their confrontation with Mig 21 -- I believe Ron Hen (not sure his name) an ace (7 kills) is on record that without this they would have been sitting ducks against Mig 21.

With regards to JF17 -- dont care if its capable or not -- but its always good to be prepared -- our not so capable Gnat fighter was pain in the ass for sabres

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 12:24

Prasad wrote:
naird wrote:
Pakistan has been excellently proactive in this area -- with pilots flying amongst all 'brotherhood' nations. I personally consider only Turkey and China AF where Pakistanis would be learning most.
Don't forget the UAE and Saudi AFs. UAE flies the Mirage-2000 and one of the most advanced F-16 versions outside the US. The Saudis will soon get the EF.

A/C is a different matter -- the pilots are a different matter -- as a thumb rule it is generally said that arab air forces are one of the lousiest bunch when it comes to fighter tactics , training , etc -- hence my point of pakis have to learn something then it may be from turkey or china (i dont even know the training regime of china)

vonkabra · Post by **vonkabra** » 23 Jul 2010 13:28

negi wrote:^ Boss the issue is Predator has long legs it is in a different league than the Falco and other tweeny stuff TSP has , self defense is not a UAV USP (until now) however what is noteworthy is being an unmanned platform operator can take more chances with our Radar coverage hoping to sneak in through blind spots .

Chill, dudes. The article clearly states that the drone has been cleared for sale to the Middle East - last I heard, Pakistan isnt part of the Middle-East. The article also says Pakistan is interested in the drone - it doesn't state that Pakistan has been cleared to receive the drone.

Pakistan may have been cleared to receive the Predator, but that can't be inferred from this article. More corraboration required before pressing the panic button, please.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2010 13:58

We do have exchange pilot with other airforces and even the USAF....I clearly remember GOI turning down request from USAF to award some medal to Indian Squadron Leader (from Jaguars) who was an exchange pilot with F-16 Squadron in Alaska. He was in instructor role and USAF were zimply too impressed with him.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2010 14:02

naird wrote:China might simply be waiting for JF17 to mature as platform at the expense of Pakistan before ordering its own fighters -- a very wise strategy !!

I really don't see the situation that way - from every possible media source it is clear that J-10X is the darling of PLAAF, something which showcases the Chinese Aeronautical capabilities...compratively, there is hardly a peep on the JF-17. As it is, given the geography of China and money in their coffers, a light/heavy mix of J-10/J-11 seems to be the goal.

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 23 Jul 2010 14:16

@naird

With Due respect i felt obliged to enter into discussion

1. Can India Independently Market SU 30 , I believe not, The basic airframe, engine are patented by Russians so until unless they want to pitch in i guess we can't. Moreover IAF Su -30 MKI 's has been now travelling round the globe and has acclaimed praises with top air-forces in various high profile exercises so again that is also a way to marketing your product

2. well If you are trying to say that with different versions there is no formidable difference, I am afraid this can never be, else what is the need of different versions in first place , A simple difference with F-16 versions would be without BVR which was no so late case with PAF and with BVR which they have now upgraded to, the threat level has indeed changed to a new benchmark.

3. I believe IAF actively has exchange programs with other air forces -> Amerikans , French and i beleive Isralies too. and i don't believe IAF is anyway taking threat of JF -17 lighter, but there are also simply not overdoing it, We have our own aircraft being built that is indeed superior then JF-17 and the acquisition's {planned and ongoing }are indeed very high end that any airforce would like to have and PAF to envy.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 23 Jul 2010 20:13

Now you'll all agree that Pakis have had nothing to do with developing the JF-17 except for funding it and giving tips on aesthetics and flight testing. At most they've developed an item or two here or there, no Paki online knows where. Maybe a little bit of outsourced design work to Pakis, but that is nothing great and if that makes the JF-17 a "cooperative" Paki design effort then rejoice because then several civilian liners like the A-380, 787, 747-8, etc are also a "party Indian" cooperative design efforts.

So what differentiates the J-10, another single engined Chinese product from the JF-17 ? The cost difference is nearly 100% and more between the 2. The J-10's quoted price is around $35-40 million as against the $15 million being touted for the JF-17..a million or two might be for the more expensive Al-31 engine, but what about the rest ? The reasons are that its likely made of more exotic materials (more Ti and alloys, more expensive Al alloys, etc.) but like the Bandar, its composites usage is minimal compared to Tejas and other 4th gen jets. Another way to explain the price difference through other systems is to assume that being smaller, the JF-17's raw material and machining costs are lower. But not so much lower, since airframe costs are only a portion of the total aircraft's cost. What is the big contributor to costs are the avionics systems on board, the self-protection suites, the EW suites, etc. This is where the JF-17 seems to have skimped as against the J-10. My guess is that the specs for almost each and every part on the J-10 will be better than those on the JF-17 which is why the PAF is looking to induct the J-10 but in much smaller numbers. (likely the AESA equipped J-10B variant).

As far as design goes, its basically an enhanced 1980s Super-7 design. Keypub had a pic posted by a Chinese guy that showed the design evolution from MiG-21 to Super-7, which was being designed in collab with Grumman. Very few changes made to that except for the LERX and DSI intakes. Some MiG-21 influences such as the poor pilot visibility are still inherited by the JF-17, as one can see from pics..the canopy starts at the pilot's shoulder level, much higher than the Tejas and even the Mirage, partly because the fuselage's flow (the little bit of area ruling they've done at the wing-body join section) seemed to dictate that. It is very reminescent of the MiG-21 in that sense.

Some Paki air marshal was commenting on how the labour rates in Pakistan are only $2-3 per hour and that helps keep cost of production low. Being a first time aircraft manufacturer, PAC Kamra will have quality issues for sure. It happens with the best and PAC Kamra are nowhere near being the best having been tinkerers and overhaulers rather than manufacturers in the past. Plenty of rejected, defective parts will without a doubt be an issue as they bring a workforce upto speed and I'm sure that the Chinese will be hand-holding them extensively. This issue is a non-starter with Chinese built aircraft..There was an article by ACM Krishnaswamy about his stay in Iraq where he flew J-7s (MiG-21-F13 ripoff) and if I recall correctly, he'd said that the build quality was the best amongst all MiG-21 variants that he'd flown. This after he'd flown MiG-21s in IAF service both of Russian as well as HAL manufacture.

My personal opinion of the JF-17 is that it’s structurally a firmly 3rd gen fighter, with decent systems on board but with time, it will get better thanks to the relentless Chinese push coupled with firm customer support from Pakis (the IAF has a lot to learn in this respect). The KLJ-7 radar won't be in the APG-68(V)5 or RDY-2 capability range, but will be most likely better than the Kopyo on the MiG-21 Bison with a bigger antenna and hence range as well..The Bison has a small 500 mm antenna and the JF-17 will comfortably outsize that with a radome that is quite large. The Pakis did evaluate the Kopyo, FIAR Grifo, some Brit radar and even Elta 2032 for the JF-17 it seems but eventually went for the cheaper Chinese set for the first batch so it won't be a slouch for sure. They now have a raging hard on for the French RC-400, a derivative of the RDY radar (it was initially marketed as the RDY-3) but that along with the MICA will be a costly set. Will easily drive up the cost of the JF-17s, but their radar and BVR capability will be quite a threat to the IAF.

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 22:17

rohitvats wrote:We do have exchange pilot with other airforces and even the USAF....I clearly remember GOI turning down request from USAF to award some medal to Indian Squadron Leader (from Jaguars) who was an exchange pilot with F-16 Squadron in Alaska. He was in instructor role and USAF were zimply too impressed with him.

Rohit -- Never knew about that !! Can you provide more info ? Any other such incidents ?

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 22:18

rohitvats wrote:
naird wrote:China might simply be waiting for JF17 to mature as platform at the expense of Pakistan before ordering its own fighters -- a very wise strategy !!
I really don't see the situation that way - from every possible media source it is clear that J-10X is the darling of PLAAF, something which showcases the Chinese Aeronautical capabilities...compratively, there is hardly a peep on the JF-17. As it is, given the geography of China and money in their coffers, a light/heavy mix of J-10/J-11 seems to be the goal.

Not sure about that...i had seen a link from chinicom paper claiming that China is actively considering inducting JF17 to replace some of the F7's. They consider it as a cost effective option, let me search for a link.

naird · Post by **naird** » 23 Jul 2010 22:29

parshuram wrote:@naird

With Due respect i felt obliged to enter into discussion

1. Can India Independently Market SU 30 , I believe not, The basic airframe, engine are patented by Russians so until unless they want to pitch in i guess we can't. Moreover IAF Su -30 MKI 's has been now travelling round the globe and has acclaimed praises with top air-forces in various high profile exercises so again that is also a way to marketing your product

Thanks Parashuram for the inputs. Sure i agree with you. But the question is why is China allowing Pakistanis to market JF17 if there is no paki funding as per Rahul. I was merely saying that -- it is not true. China has received Paki funding -- to what extent i dont know.

parshuram wrote: 2. well If you are trying to say that with different versions there is no formidable difference, I am afraid this can never be, else what is the need of different versions in first place , A simple difference with F-16 versions would be without BVR which was no so late case with PAF and with BVR which they have now upgraded to, the threat level has indeed changed to a new benchmark.

But then airframe is the same -- engine is the same -- flying characteristics between various blocks would be approximately same (i do know that block 52 and up is not as agile compared to earlier blocks due to heavier weight)...Avionics between various blocks will be different.

parshuram wrote: 3. I believe IAF actively has exchange programs with other air forces -> Amerikans , French and i beleive Isralies too. and i don't believe IAF is anyway taking threat of JF -17 lighter, but there are also simply not overdoing it, We have our own aircraft being built that is indeed superior then JF-17 and the acquisition's {planned and ongoing }are indeed very high end that any airforce would like to have and PAF to envy.

Never knew about the exchange programme. Can you point me to the right direction ?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 24 Jul 2010 01:35

naird wrote:But then airframe is the same -- engine is the same -- flying characteristics between various blocks would be approximately same (i do know that block 52 and up is not as agile compared to earlier blocks due to heavier weight)...Avionics between various blocks will be different.

Airframe is not the same. the Outer mould line is somewhat same, but the F-16 has seen many changes internally to its airframe. Engines as well as avionics have changed from block to block and the Block 50/52/60/60+ are all up-engined with new engines that generate more thrust than earlier blocks so that the 9G/-3G performance is there on all F-16 blocks.

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 24 Jul 2010 02:20

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Pakistan- ... 76447.aspx

Pakistan is "very satisfied" with the performance of the frigates it bought from China and hopes to further strategic maritime cooperation with the nation, a top Pakistani official said. "We are very happy with the performance, and some technology is as good as in Western countries," Admiral Noman
Bashir, Pakistan's chief of naval staff, was quoted as saying by China Daily.

Two of the four F-22P frigates Pakistan ordered from China are already in service its navy, with the third one scheduled to be commissioned in September this year.

Pakistan also hopes to buy bigger ships with more firepower from China, he said.

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 24 Jul 2010 02:27

Pakistan to produce fast attack Naval warships
http://dailymailnews.com/0710/16/FrontP ... x.php?id=9
Quoting in full as this may not be archived later...

Islamabad—Pakistan is going to enter in the realm of shipbuilding as the country is likely to initiate the indigenous production of fast-moving platform for carrying missiles and heavy weaponry, in collaboration with Peoples Republic of China, said Managing Director Karachi Shipyard Admiral Rao Iftikhar on Thursday.

Briefing the Special Committee of Public Accounts Committee, the Managing Director said first fast attack craft is being constructed in China while another one would be built in Pakistan that would take two-year time, and for this purpose Karachi Shipyard company has given RS200 million. Rao Iftikhar said

under the contract signed between the two states, another two such crafts would be constructed later. “It would be a healthy addition in the naval fleet. The frigate p 22 would help the Pakistan’s naval forces to face the upcoming challenges during war times,” he said.

He told the committee that due to efficient policies and economic management the Karachi Shipyard has earned a profit worth Rs 400 million. He said Pakistan has also signed a 20-year agreement with Saudi Arabia for building shipyards: one in Jeddah and other in Dammam.—Agencies

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 24 Jul 2010 10:53

Surprise surprise..

'Pak using US funds for war on terror to bolster military might'

"Most of the payments allotted to it for global war on terrorism under major heads are not being utilized for what it is originally meant. We assess that most of it is being diverted to buying conventional weapons. And it could also be diverted to strategic weapon acquisitions," a senior member of the security establishment told TOI.

Pakistan receives funds under numerous heads, but the big payments come under three major programmes. Under the Coalition Support Funds, Pakistan has received $8.1 billion since 2002. This is officially Pentagon's "reimbursement" of Pakistan for its support to US military operations in the region.

Indian security establishment assess that just 15% of it is being directly utilized in the war on terrorism. A senior source told TOI that at least 80% of it is going into modernisation of the Pakistan military, especially in purchase of conventional weapons from China and European countries such as Germany and France.

Pakistan has received another $2.1 billion under the Foreign Military Financing programme, between 2002 and now. This entire amount is utilized by Pakistan officially for military weapons purchases from US companies. Pakistan can decide the kind of hardware it needs from US companies and Pentagon then processes the purchases. Pakistan has utilized this entire amount in buying up new F-16 fighters, helicopters, artillery guns etc.

Pakistan Counter Insurgency Capability Fund was started in 2009. In just the last two years, Pakistan has received $1.1 billion from the US under this head. Indian security establishment believes Pakistan will receive at least $1 billion in the coming year too.

Besides these three, there are six other heads under which Pakistan receives security related funds. Those six heads together add up to $1.17 billion. Thus, under security-related heads, Pakistan has received a total of $12.57 billion in these nine years. Under various heads meant for economic assistance, Pakistan has received $6.04 billion from the US.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 Jul 2010 11:20

naird wrote: Rohit -- Never knew about that !! Can you provide more info ? Any other such incidents ?

Sorry, don't have links...something I simply remember. This news article also mentiond that, at that point in time, two IAF pilots were destined for some F-16 Squadron while similar number of USAF pilots would cross train in India (I don't know which a/c type)

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 24 Jul 2010 12:50

shukla wrote:Surprise surprise..

'Pak using US funds for war on terror to bolster military might'

"Most of the payments allotted to it for global war on terrorism under major heads are not being utilized for what it is originally meant.

It was always clear that this will happen.. it wont be a surprise if that baksheesh is given by americans keeping military spending in account..
If somehow amriki baksheesh stops now,this will enable them keep threatening us for another decade ,...we did not learn from history .
apart from sanctions after nuclear tests in 1998, usa is their biggest arms supplier since 2001..