Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

[Kartik]

it is the high speed of the CM400AKG that I'm referring to- nearly hypersonic speed as what some PAF person said..how much of a detection time does that offer to the CBG? Since this is not appearing all of a sudden over the horizon thanks to its not being a sea-skimmer, does that imply that its path can be detected nearly all the way from the time it is launched by the JF-17 (assuming that the Bandar does manage to get within 200 km of the CBG)..

the Dubai air show article talks of IR/TV seeker guidance for terminal maneuvering, so those fins must be movable.

[Kartik]

Thats where the MiG-29K offers a quantum jump in fleet defense capability over the SHar..should be able to tackle such threats from well outside the range at which the JF-17 could launch such a missile..

in any conflict, any unidentified fast movers approaching the fleet will have to be treated as potential anti-carrier threats and will have to be downed, no questions asked. a very potent AEGIS like bubble will be needed around the carrier.

[Austin]

Would a Barak-1/AK-630 combo be able to tackle a threat that is approaching supersonically in a parabolic trajectory, almost akin to a ballistic trajectory?

Dont think Barak-1/AK-630 knowing their range and top dive trajectory can take care of it as standalone system due to reaction time , Also it possible even if the missile is hit while on dive it may continue towards the ship and hit it.

We need layered defence to deal with such kind of target something like

1 ) Aster-30/Barak-8 ( Outer Cover )
2 ) Aster-15/Shtil-1 ( Medium Range )
3 ) ECM/EW/Soft Kill System
4 ) CIWS ( AK-630/Barak-1 )

Probably the only single capable serious threat to IN ships from PAF if the specs are true , If they can deploy in numbers and can employ mass volley of missile coming from different direction then it would be a serious threat to any ship out there.

[Kartik]

none of those AD systems are in service as of now except for the Barak-1 and AK630..if this thing has a TV seeker then decoys may not even work..but then how does a TV seeker work when the missile is whizzing at high supersonic/hypersonic speeds? the tip of the missile must be burning hot coming from a height towards its target..

[Aditya_V]

Karthik, 2things

1) The missile unlike normal anti ship CM is not powered in terminal phase so will be coasting like a BM to the ship. Unlike lightweight AAM's, such a heavy missile coasting may not be able to do manuvers near he target will rather head in a parabolic tragectry, it may not be that successful against a moving target.

2) Not sure but a TV seeker generally means manual guidance, doubt that can be done at Mach 4 and the guiding aircraft must be within 40KM of the target or have unusually high powered TV link.

My guess this will be more of a threat to ships closer to the Paki coast.

Frankly apart from being air launched, they are using a Prahaar/Pragati type BM to try and take out moving ships without terminal radar guidance. can it deal with a ship a KM away from the position when the aircraft is targeting it? How useful is manual updates at mach 4. This seems to be a miniature DF-21D

[member_20453]

To start with, as already demonstrated during trials, The Vikra's EW suite + extensive jamming abilities will ensure no one including Long Range awacs can paint it on their radars, so Bunder with its mediocre radar certainly won't even pick it up till its too late. The Saab could possibly see a large set moving vessels but will have no idea on how to differentiate or paint the carrier battle group, going on a hunch of a large target set, if they do launch Bunders and Falcons to sink it in deliberate suicide missions as well. Seeing an unknown target from over 450km, the battle group will always pick up the Saab Erieye first and can simply scoot, change course and disappear, sensing a threat if the carrier is not to change course with other set objectives, 1 or 2 Fulcrum Ks take off and vector to interrogate threat. The biggest threats IMO to the carrier are the PLAN and PN subs. Hence we really need to order 16+ eventually 100 S-70I for ASW. That deal cannot wait or be stalled. More P-8Is, IMO about 36 in total should be acquired, this will allow to monitor vast swaths of sea. This will also give ability to take PLAN in its own backyard.

[Rahul M]

any gun based CIWS is not a good option to defend against top dive missiles, because even if the missile is destroyed, at that speed much of the debris would fall on the ship and damage relatively delicate items like radars and injure personnel.

barak-1's ability to tackle this would depend on its radar's ability to track a 4 mach missile, if that can be done barak can shoot down a flying bullet without much problem IMHO. but I'm not sure it is designed to and might need mods.
I don't know much about barak's FCR. more knowledgeable folk, please step in.

soft kill measures like jamming its guidance link could be very effective too.

systems like barak-8 and AAD, if navalized should be able to deal with this comfortably. but that's in the future. there's no denying this is definitely a threat in the short term.

of course, the best way to deal with this is to shoot down the delivery vehicles i.e the JF17's before they can acquire the target.

answering my own question, from http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/FILES/9/35469.pdf

Missile acquisition at 15 Km
Fighter aircraft acquisition at 30 Km
Effective Surface-to-Air missile guidance up to 10 Km
Effective surface gunnery up to 20 Km, gun dependent
Effective air gunnery up to 4 Km, gun dependent
Surface target acquisition up to radar horizon

if this radar starts tracking a mach 4 (~ 1.3km/s at sea level) missile at 15 km it has only about 10 sec to react and launch a barak SAM. don't think that would be enough. that's assuming it has the processing power to accurately track a mach 4 target in the first place.

a missile like this has to be shot down at longer ranges, no ifs and buts. the shtil, which is on all our current capital ships (except carriers and tankers) should be able to do it comfortably.

==================
@kartik, I don't think it's maneuverable per se, in the sense of a brahmos or MARV. the fins would at most give it course correction ability, nothing more.

btw, if we ever want to test against a CM400AKG type missile, we have almost a perfect match in the prahaar/pragati.

[Aditya_V]

How accurate will the BM type missile be against a maneuvering ship? even an ac can start turn after launch and the missile might fall in the water, a TV seeker for mach 5.5 parabolic missile, will it be able to manuver when a ship changes direction? And being solid fuelled the missile will be only coasting in its terminal phase.

[Rahul M]

it's reported as mach 4 class, when did it become mach 5.5 ?

yes, course correction should be possible given the short reaction time that would be available for ships. how far away can a ship move in a few tens of seconds. I have my doubts about the accuracy of that TV guidance thing, perhaps they mean an EO seeker.

[Lilo]

Which is why methinks an AEW asset like carrier capable E-2 Hawkeye will be needed to ward off thundaar bundars by vectoring Mig 29k s on CAP before they reach the bomb release envelop around the carrier.

DRDO better be fielding one integrated on an foreign platform by the time we have a 3 carrier navy.

[Aditya G]

Why are we restricting our scenarios only to Vikramaditya? Satpura, Delhi and Kolkata are our capital ships as well and the missile may be launched against those too.

[Rahul M]

we are not. as I mentioned above, all our current capital ships i.e destroyers and frigates sport the shtil and should be able to handle this. if it works properly the vik's defence system won't even be pinged.

[NRao]

Which is why methinks an AEW asset like carrier capable E-2 Hawkeye will be needed to ward off thundaar bundars

What am I missing? A Phalcon with a supposed range of 400 Kms (public source) should be able to detect as a Thunder takes off. In the worst case detects them as they head out to sea.

?????

Then the famous vanishing trick of the Vicky - where no Russian asset was able to "see" it. Such jammings should reduce the range of this Chicom missile - I would think.

[Paul]

The Navy will continue to rely on Kamov air picquet Helos till they get the E-2 Hawkeyes. That is ruled until INS Vishal joined the force.

Methinks IN will not spend Forex on land based surveillance aircraft as CBGs need to operate 500 - 1000 Km out at sea for arab sea and even further for eastern oceans and these AWACS will also require land based escort fighters....Hence Kamovs it is for the next 15 years or so. They should focus on improving the radar range on the Kamov for the interim period.

[NRao]

What is the length of the Paki coast line? 7-800 Kms? I would think placing a few ships along that coast (say 100 Kms out) and then basing a Phalcon to cover so areas would provide a decent early warning of PAF/PN assets leaving the Paki mainland. ?????

[Paul]

100 Kms out is too close for this will enable land based Cruise missiles to be launched with impunity on the CBGs. They will need to be placed at least 300 - 400 kms out so that only air based assets are launching their wares.

Phalcons are few and out of the question under current conditions

[Leo.Davidson]

The Ka-31 cannot stray beyond 100-150 kms from their mothership, also helis cannot fly at AWACS altitudes so their coverage areas are comparatively smaller. The kamov also has an endurance of a couple of hours. The Ka-31 is not the perfect naval awacs solution, it barely suffices the requirements.
We do not have sufficient IL-76(A-50)'s to cover the naval & aerospace along porkistan.

[Aditya_V]

I have a question regarding the targeting of ships by the Chinese BM type anti ship missile, unlike a land based launcher fro pre planned surveyed, the missile will need to calculate the launcher speed direction vis a vis target and then launch into a parabolic trajectory to the target. Seems to rely heavily on GPS

[TSJones]

I have a question regarding the targeting of ships by the Chinese BM type anti ship missile, unlike a land based launcher fro pre planned surveyed, the missile will need to calculate the launcher speed direction vis a vis target and then launch into a parabolic trajectory to the target. Seems to rely heavily on GPS

The Chinese missile system that is suposed to hit a/c carriers from thier mainland requires satellite assistance. That is why any conflict with China will start as an anti-satellite war. You can't afford to let their satellites target you. They, in turn, will target your satellites. That is why long range, high altitude drone recon airplanes are so important. If your satellites are gone you've got have the eyes and ears of the drones. That is the reason for the big push for long range high altitude drones. They are darn near invisible and very stealthy. Nearly impossible to take out especially over the Indian Ocean or the Pacific oceans, yet the drones can cover and scan 1000's of square miles at a time and communicate with disparate naval forces and other airplanes. The P8 will fit in with these drones. Thus, the satellites will be sacrificed first in the event of war. Will this prevent a first strike by the Chinese? Obiviously no. But it will be the last naval strike by the Chinese.

[Leo.Davidson]

I compared the specs of the Mig-25 vs Su-30MKI and they are relatively similar. Why don't we setup a specialized squadron of Su-30MKI specifically modified with high altitude sensors & systems. flying at 55,000 feet and armed with the K-100, it should be able to take out a satellite.

[Avinandan]

The below news is causing lots of distress in Pakistan. Could someone translate it? It is in urdu.

^^ http://www.express.com.pk

[Aditya_V]

JUst thinking out aloud here, any chance we can have a few AAD with swordfish radars fitted on INS Vikramaditya, Kolkotta class and few of our capital ships.

Now that Chinese satellites have become an important tool for the Pakis, its time we conduct an anti satellite test.

[srai]

Would a Barak-1/AK-630 combo be able to tackle a threat that is approaching supersonically in a parabolic trajectory, almost akin to a ballistic trajectory?

Dont think Barak-1/AK-630 knowing their range and top dive trajectory can take care of it as standalone system due to reaction time , Also it possible even if the missile is hit while on dive it may continue towards the ship and hit it.

We need layered defence to deal with such kind of target something like

1 ) Aster-30/Barak-8 ( Outer Cover )
2 ) Aster-15/Shtil-1 ( Medium Range )
3 ) ECM/EW/Soft Kill System
4 ) CIWS ( AK-630/Barak-1 )

Probably the only single capable serious threat to IN ships from PAF if the specs are true , If they can deploy in numbers and can employ mass volley of missile coming from different direction then it would be a serious threat to any ship out there.

...
AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.

A list of system features appears to confirm an unusual characteristic associated with the CM-400. Unlike most high-speed cruise missiles, which fly at low altitude to avoid detection, the CM-400 uses “high [altitude] launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability”, according to the video.

A fighter such as the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 would launch the missile at speeds between Mach 0.7 and M0.9 at an elevation between 26,200ft and 39,400ft, according to the AVIC specifications.
...

If the JF-17 were to get close enough to launch CM-400 then LR-SAM would be the best defence against a missile with more of a ballistic trajectory. Unless the CBG is close to shore, I don't see how JF-17s would be able to attack a CBG flying at 26,200-39,400ft at Mach 0.7-0.9 from less than 240km range. But it does mean that the IN ships will have to avoid operating close (>300km) to Pakistan's shoreline if there is no air cover.

[Lalmohan]

i see a lot of references to "Kolkotta" or "Kolkatta"on this thread
afaik, the city is called Kolkata
and i presume the ships are named after the city

[VinodTK]

All eyes on new Pak army chief Raheel Sharif

Lt General Raheel Sharif, Pakistan’s newly appointed chief of army staff, will take charge on Friday and is considered as a soldier’s soldier by some for his family background and as a thinking soldier by others because of his emphasis on training and operational thought. He is said to be
the man behind the doctrinal response of the Pakistan Army to the Indian Army cold start doctrine.

He will be the country’s fifteenth army chief and comes from a decorated army family which includes an elder brother, Major Shabbir Sharif who was awarded a Nishan-e-Haider, Pakistan’s highest military award for valour against Indian forces. Shabbir Sharif was earlier given the Sitara-e-Jurrat and that makes him Pakistan’s highly decorated military officer. General Raheel’s uncle was Major Aziz Bhatti, another receipant of the Nishan-e-Haider.

Born in Quetta, Raheel Sharif is the son of Major Sharif, an army officer who at the time was serving at the Command and Staff college there. While the Sharif family is originally from Gujrat city in Punjab, it traces its roots to Kashmir. But for most part of his education, General Raheel sharif spent time in Lahore.

He attended the Government College Lahore, the alma mater of PM Sharif. Prior to his appointment as COAS, Lt Gen Sharif was working as the Principal Staff Officer to General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani as well as the Inspector General Training and Evaluation.

Talking about PM’s new choice, Professor Shaun Gregory, Chair in International Security, School of Government and International Affairs of University of Durham said, “I think the choice of COAS is not unexpected, but it does indicate Nawaz Sharif reaching beyond the seniority order of succession to the younger man, as he did before with Musharraf (let’s hope that is not a precedent!). Indeed I understand the new COAS was a Musharraf protege at one point.” “His roles in leading education and training in the Pak Army have also kept him out of the more difficult theatres (FATA/KPK/AFG, Kashmir, etc) but may suggest some creative thinking by Nawaz Sharif about the future evolution of the Pakistan Army,” Gregory added.

[Austin]

Jf-17 Thunder at Dubai Air Show 2013

[Aditya_V]

Bhandar could complete a 5g turn through the video and pull out from vertical loop half way. seems its maximum rating is for a 5g turns.

[Aditya G]

http://military.china.com/news/568/2013 ... 91088.html

[World Wide Web roundup, according to Canada, "Chinese Defense Review," 10 Journal reported that China has recently imported from the former Warsaw Pact countries, a number of RD33 engines. Articles that these engines and their parts most likely to Pakistan.

The article quoted from the European aviation industry, the news source said that China imports from WTO countries, a number RD33 old engines. These engines or parts most likely purchased for Pakistan. Rather strange that JF-17 Xiaolong fighter production. Currently only two squadrons equipped Pakistan Xiaolong fighter squadron in 2012 no new facelift Xiaolong , whether it means that the annual production Xiaolong fighter is questionable. All in all, the Pakistan Air Force does not seem eager to dress Xiaolong , but is actively selling to third countries Xiaolong .

So you can see the Pakistan Air Force 's facelift focus is most likely F-16 is preferred. In the absence of limited funds in the case of Pakistan was not involved in Xiaolong fighter two-seater development work. Two-seater Xiaolong at the Paris Air Show for the first time on display, in fact, the body structure of large changes, increasing the volume of conformal fuel tanks back and so on.

Another possibility is that the Pakistan Air Force may lack funds and therefore Xiaolong facelift work slower, while China imported second-hand RD33, seems to be that Pakistan needs engine parts, used parts are relatively cheap, in fact it is very dangerous This means that the factory does not use second-hand parts of the engine to provide maintenance support. Pakistan Air Force has been using the same technique to repair used parts Mirage fighters.

[Aditya G]

Randomn shots

[arun]

X Posted.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s brand new Chief Uniformed Jihadi, General Raheel Sharif , assumes office with a resume burnishing attribute that lives up to the motto of the Pakistan Army namely “Iman, Taqwa, Jihad fi Sabilillah” or translated “Faith, Piety and Jihad in the path of Allah”, of having lived less than a kilometre away from the last residence one of the world’s most famous deceased un-uniformed Jihadi Mohammadden Terrorists, Osama Bin Laden.

Interview of our former ambassador and last Consul General to Karachi, Mr. Rajiv Dogra :

New Pakistan army chief lived less than a kilometre from Osama in Abbottabad: Rajiv Dogra

[Karan M]

Latest AI and Combat Aircraft have updates on PAF Mirages and JF-17.

Both articles are over the top with positivity and lauding the PAF etc etc as is to be expected from these sort of pieces, and especially Alan Warnes when it comes to the PAF.. the PAF has a long tradition of maintaining a set of "cordial" journalists who give it nice coverage.

Having said that, there is enough to read.. especially for us old dawgs who can and will look between the lines.

Few comments. PAF is in a bad way, when it comes to aircraft. They intend to use the JF-17s to replace the J-7s first versus the Mirages, that they will keep these obsolete, long in the tooth aircraft around even so, just shows how bad the J-7s really are.
Mirages have been kept alive by local remanufacture, upgrades and constant scrounging for available airframes which are cannibalized for spares. Some 7 squadrons of which 1 is an OCU. Bewildering sets of aircraft of differing blocks, national origin and variants. One can imagine the challenge PAF is having in keeping these aircraft around. A revealing snippet. That when the A2G stuff was required in FATA, their recce stuff was so out of date that processing a single camera film took a day. They now have Goodrich pods on F-16s so the recce role is gone from the Mirage side, but it speaks volumes about limited capabilities.
Despite Rose-2 and 3 being night attack, Rose-1 being multipurpose, its pretty clear, given airframe life limits and limited new inductions (only JF-17 and few F-16s) that these are carefully husbanded assets managed for limited airframe hours and to stretch life out. One squadron has reportedly got H-2 and H-4 PGM capabilities with SAfrican assistance. Thats basically Raptor series from my memory. That only 1 squadron is mentioned with this capability, indicates limited inventory available.

The JF-17 - all positivity and fluff - but keeping a fair eye out, this is basically a poor man's light fighter. The FBW is only in name, and in pitch alone. It doesnt even a HMS, though its being "worked on". Radar range is matched to that of SD-10 and is scaled down from J-10 (speaks volumes about how a positive spin has been given to something pretty limited). For jamming it carries a non Chinese pod (which shows the Chinese are yet to meet PAF/world standards). A datalink has been developed by PAF for the aircraft but they have to connect it to Link-16/AWACs. Per my understanding, as usual, they have roped in a foreign vendor to do the 90% work with a COTS unit and are going to be dependent on US to see if it can be made compatible with Link-16. No clear idea when that will happen. JF-17 is compatible with Beidou compatible GPS guided bombs but Beidou itself will be fully available only 2020 and beyond. But a useful capability no doubt.
J-7 requires 170 people in maintenance per squadron and JF-17, 120 for 16 aircraft. Service life 3000 hours. Positive statements apart, initial aircraft were not "technician friendly"...a single throwaway line hidden amongst reams of positive fluff.. compare and contrast that to the whining over Indian programs by many Indian officers, Like it or not, the PAF is far more aware than the IAF of how to support its local programs, in the media at least.
Also speaks volumes that despite claims of QRA, A2G has not been cleared and nor has the JF-17 seen employment in that role. Only exercises so far.

However, all said and done, JF-17 will be a huge step up for the PAF from its current Mirage and J-7 heavy fleet, which seem to be just kept in place till newer replacements are available. WS-13 is yet to mature per Russian claims (only 300 hrs TBO) and Pak claims agreements are in place with Russia to get as many RD-33s as possible. PAF claims RD-33 is perfect, yada yada and everything has been hunky dory. Knowing the challenges India has had in adapting that powerplant & the extensive effort required, it just speaks volumes about how the PAF routinely pulls a nice sheet of look the other way, everything is fine over every contentious issue. They even claim that agreements are in place with Russia to get as many RD-33s as required. Which tells us, that PAF claims apart, there is space for India to put more effort on Russia to delay/scupper RD-33 deliveries which will definitely affect PAF in the short term.

[srai]

^^^

Russia can supply a limited quantity of RD-33s for PAFs JF-17s as long as there is a "hidden" agreement with India that if there is a conflict between the two countries Russia will stop deliveries of all part supplies for the engines. IMO, that would give India much more leverage than a complete ban on engines.

[Karan M]

Will reread Mirage article and post excerpts. But its interesting to see how old the fleet is and how there are multiple blocks of different upgrades. Only their ROSE-1 unit can truly be called multirole (A2A, A2G) with proper Grifo-M radar. Rest ROSE2, Rose 3 are FLIR dependent. And only limited airframes of each.
In contrast, India's plan to have a fleet of 270 odd MKIs, 60 upg MiG-29s, 50 Mirage 2000s, 100 Jaguars plus new accretions like LCA/ Rafale can clearly tear the heart out of the PAF if employed with decision. Leaving aside the older MiG-21, 27s.

No wonder the PAF is constantly doing a crying game internationally about the IAF.

[Karan M]

^^^

Russia can supply a limited quantity of RD-33s for PAFs JF-17s as long as there is a "hidden" agreement with India that if there is a conflict between the two countries Russia will stop deliveries of all part supplies for the engines. IMO, that would give India much more leverage than a complete ban on engines.

Not a bad idea but problem is Pak can then maintain enough spares for the JF-17s to tide over a short conflict. OTOH banning the RD-33 would mean WS-13 development takes priority and long term strategic autonomy. But that will happen anyways, hence my suggestion to hurt the PAF even in the short term and to hurt the JF-17 program as much as possible.

[Rahul M]

how different is the RD-93 from the RD-33, can they swap one for the other if push came to shove ? because RD-33 parts and even whole engines (2nd hand) might be available in the black market.

also, unless PAF's chinese origin AEW&C craft are link16 compatible, JF17's would necessarily be slaved to one set of AEW birds only. or would they carry 2 sets of datalink systems ?

more than anything else, the mirages with radars would be highly susceptible to modern jammers. those without i.e the strike version has little hope of surviving in an Indian ADGES unless it's limited to CAS and may be not even then.

[Rahul M]

^^^

Russia can supply a limited quantity of RD-33s for PAFs JF-17s as long as there is a "hidden" agreement with India that if there is a conflict between the two countries Russia will stop deliveries of all part supplies for the engines. IMO, that would give India much more leverage than a complete ban on engines.

Not a bad idea but problem is Pak can then maintain enough spares for the JF-17s to tide over a short conflict. OTOH banning the RD-33 would mean WS-13 development takes priority and long term strategic autonomy. But that will happen anyways, hence my suggestion to hurt the PAF even in the short term and to hurt the JF-17 program as much as possible.

better leave the russians to their usual method. that would automatically serve the purpose much better than any chankian scheme

> it's very cheapski, at 10% rate. you can have it tomorrow
(order placed)
> price just went up
> p.s. did I say tomorrow ? it would be next year
> btw you need to pay 50% upfront or we will sell it to xyz
(payment done)
> that's not enough, I'm sorry. price has gone up by 75% if you want to have it on time
> I forgot to mention, there's another year delay
> price has gone up some more.
etc

this will cripple their thandaar fleet quite easily.

[Karan M]

Need to read more about the engine.. when i get time i guess.
Their datalink situation is bizarre for sure. Two sets of aircraft only able to talk to each other (that too perhaps!) if some ground eqpt can facilitate it.

BTW from October AFM interview of PAF Chief

The JF-17 has been flying since March 2007 and it is no mean feat setting up aircraft production in a country where there is no real aerospace labour force or experience. The Chief continues, “JF-17 production is moving along smoothly. Planned milestones have been achieved to date and a total of 45 JF-17s have been inducted. These aircraft are operating in two squadrons and a flight test unit established at Pakistan Aeronautical Complex, Kamra. Plans to raise a third squadron this year is on but is being held back due to some administrative compulsions. Whenever these are addressed one of F-7 squadrons will be replaced”.

“The F-7Ps and Mirages are expected to be replaced by the JF-17 Thunder over time, with production of JF-17 Block 1 almost complete, they should start replacing F-7Ps this year.” CAS adds.

The first 50 Block I aircraft are the basic version, but production of the next batch of 50 Block IIs is expected soon. These aircraft will include new radar upgrades, air to air refuelling probes and more sophisticated weapons. The CAS would not be drawn on when production of these aircraft would commence, preferring just to say, “A lot of activity including activation of the JF-17 Block II has taken place during the past 18 months. Numerous operationalization and training activities have been accomplished. We have also established a centre of excellence (COE) for maintenance requirement of the fleet. The JF-17 participated in Zhuhai Air Show last year and the project received the Aviation Laureate Award for the best collaboration effort, between Pakistan and China. JF-17s will also participate in Dubai Air Show during November”.

In practical terms, JF-17 Block1 status and numbers is similar to that of LCA Mk1 FOC standard. And JF-17s are working upto a full FOC themselves and in practical terms are actually behind LCA in terms of tech and sophistication by a huge level already. Block 2, will be minor upgrades of Block 1...and PAF is struggling to finance those as well. All said and done, positive spin apart, PAF is facing challenging times thanks to economic situation in their state.

[Karan M]

better leave the russians to their usual method. that would automatically serve the purpose much better than any chankian scheme

> it's very cheapski, at 10% rate. you can have it tomorrow
(order placed)
> price just went up
> p.s. did I say tomorrow ? it would be next year
> btw you need to pay 50% upfront or we will sell it to xyz
(payment done)
> that's not enough, I'm sorry. price has gone up by 75% if you want to have it on time
> I forgot to mention, there's another year delay
> price has gone up some more.
etc

this will cripple their thandaar fleet quite easily.

ROTFL - true that. Expect to see a lot of whining and complaining about dastardly Russians then.
Perhaps its already started, ref the reports about Chinese scrounging for second hand RD-33s in Europe for cheap spares?

[Aditya_V]

Apart from wiki claims of 150km detection range and AESA due, very little is actually known aircrafts actual radar performance, power output, ew suite, wake penetration tests, weapons tests, actual G rating, winter trials, summer trials, challenges faced whether any composites Titanium used. There is much more information on J-10B.

Why Pakistan is paying CATIC USD 10 billion for 150 aircraft, why export customers are not lining up- especially Ummah brothers. If a Paki\Chini aircraft is half decent atleast 24 countries will stand in line like the F-7.

And why isn't CHina buying this cheap Joint developed aircraft?

My personal observation, apart from the nosecone and intakes, the JF-17 has uncanny resemblance to thee f-7PG a.k.a Mig-21, this almost looks like a next generation of Chinese JL-9 with J-20 shaped intakes.

for reference link to pic of Chinese JL-9

Pic of Chinese J-9

[Aditya G]

RD-33: Reality is that PAF is acquiring Second-Hand engines from MiG-29 operators to sustain production.

Thanks in part to aircraft projects being controlled by PAF directly @ PAC Kamra, they are able to improvise in secrecy, just like they have done for the Mirage fleet. On paper they have a reasonably large fleet - equipping 3 full squadrons - but this strategy will show its limitation during build upto war when flight tempo goes up. Recall Air Cmde Tufail's comments on F-16 availability in 1999.

The plus side for the JF-17 is that these are new build airframes, and thus provide PAF force levels ... the fighter as a platform itself can launch modern weapons where PAF has been luckier.

@Karan M: Any updates on the Ra'ad missile?