PAF Future Acquisition Plans

[user]

More than strategic bombers, I think what PAF really needs is an ALBM. PAF's strategic bombers will be constrained within its own airspace due to dense enemy AD environment and other aerial threats and therefore it will just be another missile carrying platform like other air crafts in the fleet. So, it will be pointless to develop or procure such costly platform.

Sir, strategic bombers are still relevant. That's why the US, Russia and China are keeping them operational. In fact, the US has been using it extensively to take out AD and hard targets such as the recent use in Iran War. Stealth and cover by jet fighters will enhance its survivability coupled with earlier operations by platforms for EA and SEAD to suppress AD.

 

[Michael]

Sir, strategic bombers are still relevant. That's why the US, Russia and China are keeping them operational. In fact, the US has been using it extensively to take out AD and hard targets such as the recent use in Iran War. Stealth and cover by jet fighters will enhance its survivability coupled with earlier operations by platforms for EA and SEAD to suppress AD.

Talking about strategic bombers without air superiority is an act of self-destruction.

 

[Zarvan]

For sure, just weir how suddenly people can claim PAF has prioritised this over J-35 without any evidence

They are two totally different machines for different roles. No one in their right mind should suggest that. What they should suggest is that, to train pilots for 5th generation fighter jets, you need a modern trainer jet also. For that, you need a new LIFT plane, and I believe the two strongest candidates are the Hurjet and this new J XX Chinese trainer.

 

[user]

Talking about strategic bombers without air superiority is an act of self-destruction.

Yes Sir, I just talked about a completely integrated strike package, not solo bombers.

 

[Par 5]

Strategic Bomber fleet is expensive and vulnerable. We have that box covered through ground and air launched CM's or our missiles and rocket inventory.

 

[Michael]

Yes Sir, I just talked about a completely integrated strike package, not solo bombers.

Don't have that kind of thinking. That is a surefire way to get yourself killed.

Regarding strategic bombers: setting aside early definitions, the US and the Soviet Union established a clear definition in the 1990 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I), which remains the internationally recognized standard today:
1. Capable of carrying a payload of at least 7.5 tons of ordnance with a maximum unrefueled range exceeding 8,000 km.
2. Capable of carrying nuclear weapons.

This represents a very high technological threshold. Above all, it implies the necessity of ensuring the bomber's own survivability throughout that operational range.

In the international arena, strategic bombers are actually more politically sensitive than nuclear weapons; they are also weapon platforms strictly regulated by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). India has made multiple attempts to acquire strategic bombers from Russia.
Around 2000, India sought to lease Tu-22M3 strategic bombers from Russia. However, due to prohibitive operating and maintenance costs—and the fact that the aircraft's operational capabilities would have to be downgraded to comply with MTCR restrictions—India ultimately opted for the Su-30MKI fighter paired with the BrahMos missile system.
Starting in 2020, there were renewed domestic calls in India to lease six to eight Russian Tu-160M strategic bombers. However, due to a variety of factors, this plan never materialized.

To date, only three nations—the United States, Russia, and China—possess strategic bombers. China's H-6 bomber barely clears the threshold to be classified as a strategic bomber. However, this classification is highly controversial within Chinese military enthusiast circles; many Chinese observers do not consider it a true strategic bomber. Consequently, many enthusiasts pin their hopes on the upcoming "H-20" project.

As for Pakistan, it is best to avoid this topic altogether. Even if India were to acquire strategic bombers, the party that would feel genuinely threatened—and possess the leverage to influence the situation—is China, not Pakistan.

 

[Yasser76]

If Bilal is saying it, then he is not firing arrows in the air, his intel is "usually" solid.

Not debating that, he has been right often, but also wrong often

 

[Yasser76]

Where did AHQ contradict what I'm saying?

Don't gaslight. I literally provided the evidence. The PAF said that LIFT would come before the NGFA, and to date, AHQ has not switched gears to say this isn't the order of priority. Unless there is a statement to the contrary, the plans set by one AHQ will, generally, remain with the next AHQ and so on.


I was responding to this statement of yours, where you said (in reply to me saying that AVIC and Leonardo spoke re: the LIFT back in IDEAS 2018, 2022, and 2024) that AVIC and Leonardo wouldn't reveal anything sensitive.

I said that LIFT was not a sensitive issue and that they (i.e., AVIC and Leonardo) spoke re: it at IDEAS 2018, 2022, and 2024.

Not gas lighting at all, and dont appreciate the accusation.

" The PAF said that LIFT would come before the NGFA," I missed this, where did PAF say this?

No, not at all, PAF plans change as they have often done with many purchases. Your argument relies on that fact a statement 7 years ago will become fact but ignores statements from the much more recent past, can you see how people may find that strange or do you just assume your word should not be questioned?

 

[Yasser76]

They are two totally different machines for different roles. No one in their right mind should suggest that. What they should suggest is that, to train pilots for 5th generation fighter jets, you need a modern trainer jet also. For that, you need a new LIFT plane, and I believe the two strongest candidates are the Hurjet and this new J XX Chinese trainer.

For sure you need a modern trainer, just wanted to understand how that takes priority over 5th Gen. For the record PAF was using FT-5s then sending pilots to F-6 then onto F-16s in the 80s.

 

[Yasser76]

PAF has also said that J-35 is not something they are going to induct yet and are still "looking into" Other fifth gen options, the fact that PAF has literally been evaluating LIFTs for years now but due to air defense, Ew and J-10C inductions those plans have not materialized yet.

PAF has also been evaluating J-35 right? So how do we know LIFT is a priority over that?

 

[user]

Strategic Bomber fleet is expensive and vulnerable. We have that box covered through ground and air launched CM's or our missiles and rocket inventory.

Sir I completely agree with the alternative as economics of defense dictates. But our current missile inventory secures our immediate defense and enables us only to strike surface infrastructure. Ignoring the need for heavy, high-payload strike platforms leaves us with a critical capability gap against deeply buried command, control, and strategic assets in a future theater.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Sir I completely agree with the alternative as economics of defense dictates. But our current missile inventory secures our immediate defense and enables us only to strike surface infrastructure. Ignoring the need for heavy, high-payload strike platforms leaves us with a critical capability gap against deeply buried command, control, and strategic assets in a future theater.

Bro strategic bombers are needed when your enemy is thousands of miles away and our enemy is in our next door, India has S-400 which cover most of Pakistan with a very big radar cross section strategic bombers in Pakistani hands are vulnerable to Indian S-400, So bro we don't need strategic bomber but need a deep strike jets which can defend itself from the enemy like J-16/Su-34/F-15E which are able to carry bunker buster bombs