JF-17 PFX program

[air marshal]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

The idea that Pakistan can simply “buy more J‑35AEs” is a YouTuber fantasy, not a strategy. A 5th generation fleet is not a toy you pick off a shelf, it is one of the most expensive and institutionally demanding capabilities on earth. Pakistan’s current economy cannot afford the procurement, sustainment, or infrastructure required for such jets, especially when corruption, tax evasion, and money laundering already drain billions from the state.

And let’s be realistic: China will not provide meaningful ToT on a 5th‑generation platform. No country shares stealth materials, sensor fusion, or advanced EW.

Even the JF‑17 ToT was limited to airframe work, Pakistan builds the frame, while the majority of avionics, electronics, radar, and critical systems come from China. Without Chinese support, the entire JF‑17 program collapses. That’s the reality.

This is why the statement “we will sell JF‑17s and won’t need the IMF anymore” is not just unrealistic, it’s absurd. The JF‑17 is a joint program heavily dependent on Chinese supply chains. Pakistan cannot magically turn it into an economic engine when it doesn’t even control the core technologies.

Expecting deeper access on the J‑35 is wishful thinking. Buying a J‑35 doesn’t solve Pakistan’s real problem, a weak economic base and a fragmented defense industrial ecosystem. Without reforms, governance, taxation, energy and transparency. Pakistan will remain a buyer, not a builder, no matter what jet it purchases.

The only viable path forward is incremental capability building, not fantasy shopping lists. Pakistan must continue long term cooperation with China and Turkey, strengthen its defense infrastructure, evolve the JF‑17, develop PFX as a 4.5‑generation bridge, and participate in KAAN even at 15–25%. That’s how real aerospace capacity is built slowly, steadily, and sustainably.

Buying a J‑35 is not a plan. Building the national capacity to one day deserve a J‑35 level capability is.

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I have even corrected him. Just because he was ex-squadron leader, doesn’t mean he knows about on going projects. Most YouTubers will exaggerate facts into getting views.

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

I went back to look at the requirement that I laid out; to be able to do what the J-10CE can’t. With two WS-19 class engines (eventually), but even with WS-21 engines it should have enough electrical power and thrust to open up carrying more capable systems and heavier munitions respectively. This jet would also have the range to support the Pakistan Navy, even more so than the J-10CE.

This design also be better suited to design in from the start the focus on controlling UCAVs.

The South Korean KF-21 has a variant proposed to be similar to the EA-18G growler. Something similar could be done to this 5th Gen minus fighter concept.

Yes, we would need economies of scale to bring costs down. The PAF, look at an Indian Air Force set to rebuild to a 45 squadron strength with the following Orbat;
(10 squadrons of Tejas Mk. 1 and 2, 16 squadrons of Su-30MKI (with the super sukhoi upgrade), 10 squadrons of Rafales and 9 squadrons of AMCA),
will be countered by 10 squadrons of JF-17 and J-10CE, 4 F-16s, and 2 J-35AE. Eventually, if the PAF will need more 3 more squadrons of 5th gen fighters (1 more J-35AE and 2 KAAN), but to fill its current 25 squadrons strength will probably need 10 squadrons of this 5th Gen Minus fighter of about 180 fighters to hold some kind of balance, IMHO, especially outclassing all but the AMCA, and even giving that aircraft a run for its money. Supplementation of this ORBAT with UCAVs, and having 3 of the squadrons be “Growler” squadrons should allow the PAF to hold its own.

Btw; here is the KF-21 in “Growler mode”, source weapons detective YouTube video. (Btw this growler version is the Block I KF-21; does not have an internal weapons bay)
View attachment 175304

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Why 5th Generation ‘Minus’ Fighters Are the Future

Last month, the U.S. Air Force made headlines around the world by suggesting that a new “5th generation minus” fighter might be the answer to the branch’s operational cost woes. After years of touting the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter as the future of military aviation, this announcement led to a...

nationalinterest.org

@Michael what do you estimate the R&D timeline of developing such a design would be? And then how long would it take to set up PAC karma to be able to produce the jets, and possibly the WS-21 engines?

Also, how much lower of the price would this design be than the J-35AE?

If most of the PAF squadrons (all JF-17, J-35AE, and the proposed gen 5 minus design) will be using the same WS-21 engine, it would go a long way to streamlining maintenance and increasing availability of aircraft.

In my view, this entire discussion is drifting into wishful thinking. We need to stay grounded in reality. The future of airpower is shifting fast. Most air forces will eventually operate with 20–30% of their strike capability coming from AI‑driven unmanned combat aircraft (UCAV). Turkey and China are already far ahead in this domain, and Pakistan should be joining those programs even at a small percentage, simply to build the institutional and technological muscle memory needed for the next era of warfare.

And let’s be brutally honest, Pakistan cannot afford more than two squadrons of J‑35s, even in the best case scenario. Those would arrive slowly, in small batches 3, then 6, then 6, then maybe 9 or 12 over a decade. That’s not a transformational fleet; it’s a symbolic capability.

This is why Pakistan must stop chasing prestige platforms and start investing in what is actually achievable:

• joint drone development with Turkey and China
• incremental upgrades to the JF‑17
• participation in PFX as a 4.5‑generation bridge
• contributing 15–25% to KAAN to build long term aerospace capacity

The future is hybrid, a smaller number of manned fighters supported by a large, lethal, AI‑enabled drone ecosystem. If Pakistan wants to stay relevant, it must build capability where it can, not where YouTubers fantasize.

In my humble opinion, Pakistan needs to rethink its entire force structure philosophy. The country has historically oversized the army while underinvesting in airpower, but modern warfare doesn’t work that way anymore. Without a strong, technologically advanced air force or at minimum a massive expansion of army controlled air assets, the ground forces are essentially a sitting duck. No army, no matter how large, can survive on the battlefield if it lacks air superiority or at least credible air denial capability.

Every major conflict of the last 40 years has proven one thing, the side that controls the skies controls the war. Tanks, infantry, artillery none of them matter if the enemy can strike freely from above. Pakistan cannot afford to keep repeating the outdated doctrine of “army first, air force later.” The future battlefield is dominated by airpower, drones, precision strikes, and electronic warfare, not massed infantry formations.

This means Pakistan must seriously consider:

• shifting resources from the oversized army toward the PAF
• dramatically expanding army aviation and air‑defense capabilities
• investing in HALE/MALE drones, loitering munitions, and AI‑enabled strike platforms
• strengthening joint operations doctrine where the air force leads, not follows
• prioritizing air superiority, ISR, and long‑range precision strike over manpower‑heavy ground forces

A modern military is built around air dominance, not headcount. If Pakistan wants credible deterrence and survivability, it must rebalance its force structure. A strong air force is not optional, it is the backbone of national defense.

This is for Mr. Munir.

 

[NA71]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Michael]

What is the estimated cost of a J-35AE for the PAF?

Frankly, If the cost is say $75 Million each, and Pakistan needs 12-13 Squadrons of highly competitive platforms, the most effective thing would be to raise a $20 billion budget to purchase these jets over the next 10-15 years. Some amount of ToT would be helpful, to enable better and quicker maintenance, but realistically focusing on a way of raising exports to pay $1.5-2 billion a year till the end of 2040 would be the most cost effective option. With a need for 200-250 jets, as you said, buying from China would be the most cost effective option.

Japan, with a plan to procure nearly 150 F-35 finds it more economical to procure the jets, than wait till its local stealthjets are ready, as is the case with South Korea and the KF-21.

Raising exports would be the best kind of “ToT” China could help Pakistan with, but now we would be venturing into a topic for a different thread.

This is beyond the scope of this discussion.
========================================
1. The specific price of the FC-31/J-35 fighter jets purchased by the PAF depends on the configuration. If the unit price is $75 million, then the configuration is very basic. This does not align with Pakistan's usual practice of purchasing Chinese weapons. Typically, the versions of weapons purchased by Pakistan have slightly higher specifications than the versions used by China itself. (See "054A/P vs 054A" and "J-10CE/P vs J-10C" for reference)
2. "ToT" is meaningless. Pakistan completely lacks the necessary basic industrial and economic environment to produce the FC-31/J-35 fighter jets.
========================================
We don't need to discuss this topic further. For further analysis and discussion, please go to the relevant thread.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

@AeronautIR
Can your videos be provided with standard English subtitles?

YouTube's automatic speech-to-text subtitles contain many errors, and after automatic Chinese translation, the errors become even more numerous, making it very difficult to understand your content correctly.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This plan has no possibility of being implemented. We can completely abandon this fantasy.

Unless, of course, you're referring to the Pakistani-assembled version of the FC-31/J-35 fighter jet as the PFX.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

This is beyond the scope of this discussion.
========================================
1. The specific price of the FC-31/J-35 fighter jets purchased by the PAF depends on the configuration. If the unit price is $75 million, then the configuration is very basic. This does not align with Pakistan's usual practice of purchasing Chinese weapons. Typically, the versions of weapons purchased by Pakistan have slightly higher specifications than the versions used by China itself. (See "054A/P vs 054A" and "J-10CE/P vs J-10C" for reference)
2. "ToT" is meaningless. Pakistan completely lacks the necessary basic industrial and economic environment to produce the FC-31/J-35 fighter jets.
========================================
We don't need to discuss this topic further. For further analysis and discussion, please go to the relevant thread.

@AeronautIR
Can your videos be provided with standard English subtitles?

YouTube's automatic speech-to-text subtitles contain many errors, and after automatic Chinese translation, the errors become even more numerous, making it very difficult to understand your content correctly.

This plan has no possibility of being implemented. We can completely abandon this fantasy.

Unless, of course, you're referring to the Pakistani-assembled version of the FC-31/J-35 fighter jet as the PFX.

@Michael In your view, how realistic is the PFX as a JF-17 Block 3 derivative, featuring significantly higher localization, routine upgrades, and minor fine-tuning?

 

[Michael]

@Michael In your view, how realistic is the PFX as a JF-17 Block 3 derivative, featuring significantly higher localization, routine upgrades, and minor fine-tuning?

My analysis may not meet the expectations of my Pakistani friends.

IMO,
The JF-17 PFX will be a true 4.5th-generation fighter jet and will increase the proportion of local work done by Pakistan (PAC and other relevant organizations). Its appearance will not be significantly or noticeably different from existing fighter jets.

* According to Chinese military standards, neither the JF-17B3 nor the J-10C/CE meets the criteria for a 4.5th-generation fighter jet.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

My analysis may not meet the expectations of my Pakistani friends.

IMO,
The JF-17 PFX will be a true 4.5th-generation fighter jet and will increase the proportion of local work done by Pakistan (PAC and other relevant organizations). Its appearance will not be significantly or noticeably different from existing fighter jets.

* According to Chinese military standards, neither the JF-17B3 nor the J-10C/CE meets the criteria for a 4.5th-generation fighter jet.

Thanks for your reply.

Obviously, views should not be bent to meet the expectations of others; they should be based on reality and one's own independent analysis. Secondly, I did not mean to classify the aircraft into a specific generation. What I wanted to know is, regardless of its current capabilities, to what extent can Pakistan realistically localize it, and in your view, what exactly will the PFX be?

 

[Michael]

What I wanted to know is, regardless of its current capabilities, to what extent can Pakistan realistically localize it, and in your view, what exactly will the PFX be?

Based on a scientific approach and the fundamental logic of industrial production, we can conclude that: "Pakistan cannot independently manufacture any single component or subsystem." However, what Pakistan can do is expand local assembly of more components and subsystems, starting with the processing of a small number of basic, simple parts, and gradually increasing the local share. This step is extremely difficult and will take a very long time. Through this work, Pakistani researchers in relevant systems can gradually understand and master some of the underlying scientific technologies.

If Pakistan invests sufficient resources and its researchers possess enough passion, then Pakistan has the potential to fully master the complete underlying design principles and logic of the JF-17 fighter jet within the next 10-20 years. After that, Pakistan could begin independently exploring more possibilities. (I must say, this step is extremely difficult. The likelihood of Pakistan achieving this capability is low.)

From the perspective of scientific and industrial logic, Pakistan's current development approach is absolutely wrong. However, from the perspective of political and military logic, Pakistan's current development approach is the only correct one. This may seem contradictory, but this is the essence of the matter.

 

[KingQamaR]

Based on a scientific approach and the fundamental logic of industrial production, we can conclude that: "Pakistan cannot independently manufacture any single component or subsystem." However, what Pakistan can do is expand local assembly of more components and subsystems, starting with the processing of a small number of basic, simple parts, and gradually increasing the local share. This step is extremely difficult and will take a very long time. Through this work, Pakistani researchers in relevant systems can gradually understand and master some of the underlying scientific technologies.

From the perspective of scientific and industrial logic, Pakistan's current development approach is absolutely wrong. However, from the perspective of political and military logic, Pakistan's current development approach is the only correct one. This may seem contradictory, but this is the essence of the matter.

Hi

58% of the air frame is manufactured in Pakistan. As Pakistanis complete their own squadrons they are gaining experience in this field.

 

[Michael]

58% of the air frame is manufactured in Pakistan. As Pakistanis complete their own squadrons they are gaining experience in this field.

We have different understandings of what constitutes "complete" industrial manufacturing capabilities.

Of the 58% of manufacturing done domestically in Pakistan, how much of the raw materials are imported? How much of the machinery and equipment is imported? How much of the processing consumables are imported?

By understanding these questions, and then reconsidering this "58%" of domestic manufacturing, you will find the answer.

=========================================

To date, China still needs to import a large number of cutting tools for high-end precision machining tools. While domestically produced precision cutting tools can meet the accuracy requirements, their service life is significantly shorter. When it's possible to import these tools from abroad, we choose to do so. Only when we cannot import them from other countries do we resort to using domestically produced tools. ------ Currently, the Chinese domestic cutting tool industry is still developing, but it has not yet reached the point where it can completely replace imported tools.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Hi

58% of the air frame is manufactured in Pakistan. As Pakistanis complete their own squadrons they are gaining experience in this field.

If Pakistan wants to get serious, about aircraft manufacturing and UCAVs and drones, it has to make the investment in infrastructure to get to the point where it can make 100% of the airframe of the JF17 airframe in Pakistan. That investment can then be used in all the other projects that Pakistan wants to do.

I am talking about the "structural physical airframe"(ie the chassis of the airframe), and not any of the components that go "into" the airframe. The definition of that 58% airframe is actually not precisely defined by PAC btw. Does it consider the radar as being part of the airframe ? The MFDs etc ? Once you get to the point, you can the design physical structural airframe and manufacture that structure locally, and then you can become more selective about which components you want in your airframe from other suppliers and localise where you need to.

Yes, the raw materials may come from China, but you can then start to either indigenize locally or select more other cost effective providers for the raw materials.

Right now, the "success of PFX" is dependent on Chinese manufacturers playing ball with Pakistan to invest time and money in the tooling required to manufacture a larger airframe for the parts that they do for the JF17C.

 

[KingQamaR]

I know this is off topic

But for Pakistanis who are demanding for us to do more high end stuff with JF-17 or future projects

1 investment in Peoples
2 education
3 And tackling corruption

Until you tackle the above, we will not get close to producing our own HUD/AESA ETC

 

[Michael]

Some additional engineering knowledge can help understand the differences.
==============================================
Known conditions:
The RD-93 (RD-33/WS-13 are completely identical) engine has a "4-9-1-1" configuration; the WS-21 engine has a "3-7-1-1" configuration.

Engineering analysis:
Low-pressure stages 3–4, high-pressure stages 5–10, turbine 1+1
Reduced total number of stages + increased single-stage load → Reduced weight, increased shaft power
Shaft power margin determines the available electrical power, which determines the fighter jet's electronic warfare capabilities
Configuration codes clearly reflect differences in single-stage load, total number of stages, shaft power capability, and thrust-to-weight ratio