PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

[Yasser76]

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

Going to be some amazing pics in Aug and Sep AFM issues

 

[Deino]

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

Forget thsi account ... pure nonsense!

 

[RafaleSlayer]

A missile truck with only 4 BVR missiles . First learn the true meaning of a term you are using. F-15 can be a missile truck with near two dozen AMRAAMS. F-16 under any circumstances is NEVER considered a missile truck with 6 AMRAAMS loaded. Because the term requires quantity.

Next, a weapon system isn't built or bought because you "wish and hope" it will work in a kill chain with AWACS. Taking out an AWACS in a battle could take less than 5 minutes if you are capable enough. Then what??

A weapon system is built or bought because it can operate on its own if support aircrafts and aircover of AWACS is gone. With that, you need an AESA in. Otherwise, if I listen to you, we don't even need radars right?

Snide comments don't earn you respect and don't make you an expert!

Since the topic was JF17 block I & II, regardless of how many missiles they carry they still act like missile Trucks/Carriers, though with smaller capacity.

There are no more cowboys in the skies, its a total package that fights the war. AWACS, EW, refuelers, jammers don't carry any weapons, they depend on their escorts and escorts and strikers depend on these force multipliers. Modern day air battles are Team events, not solo performance.

 

[Rational Philosopher]

Snide comments don't earn you respect and don't make you an expert!

Since the topic was JF17 block I & II, regardless of how many missiles they carry they still act like missile Trucks/Carriers, though with smaller capacity.

There are no more cowboys in the skies, its a total package that fights the war. AWACS, EW, refuelers, jammers don't carry any weapons, they depend on their escorts and escorts and strikers depend on these force multipliers. Modern day air battles are Team events, not solo performance.

I wonder how effective it would be to have mobile surface to air missiles mounted on trucks 'track-racing' near the border, and can be data linked by fighters or AEWACs in the sky to fire at targets.

Slight twist to the usual SAM batteries but more networked with all assets for guidance.

 

[Corax]

I wonder how effective it would be to have mobile surface to air missiles mounted on trucks 'track-racing' near the border, and can be data linked by fighters or AEWACs in the sky to fire at targets.

Slight twist to the usual SAM batteries but more networked with all assets for guidance.

This is what I've been advocating. Developing a two stage, dual pulse SAM, data linked to the PAF's link 17, effectively a ground launched air to air missile. The first booster stage gets the A2A missile to say 50k ft Mach 2, giving the upper second stage A2A missile a significant energy status and kill solution. The key to the PAF's success was having data linked missiles, simply replace the launch platform from a fighter to ground based TELs, that would significantly boost the PAF's reach and kill web.

Incidentally, the HQ19 seems to be data linked, so the PAF may be adopting this approach.

 

[RafaleSlayer]

I wonder how effective it would be to have mobile surface to air missiles mounted on trucks 'track-racing' near the border, and can be data linked by fighters or AEWACs in the sky to fire at targets.

Slight twist to the usual SAM batteries but more networked with all assets for guidance.

Sam batteries also work in teams like each sam battery consists of 5 or 6 support vehicles housing different components and multiple missile launchers with varying ranges to use optimum missile for each specific target based on its distance, altitude, speed, trajectory, etc. Ground based radars are way more powerful than air borne radars and require a lot of power, its not a solo truck that can be continuously on the move

 

[Toxic]

Sam batteries also work in teams like each sam battery consists of 5 or 6 support vehicles housing different components and multiple missile launchers with varying ranges to use optimum missile for each specific target based on its distance, altitude, speed, trajectory, etc. Ground based radars are way more powerful than air borne radars and require a lot of power, its not a solo truck that can be continuously on the move

He is saying remove the ground radar from the equation all together, it would just be launchers which would be guided by AWACS

 

[Corax]

He is saying remove the ground radar from the equation all together, it would just be launchers which would be guided by AWACS

It's rumoured the Russians have adopted a similar approach for the S400, where they reportedly intercepted Ukrainian fighter jets by guiding a SAM using their A50 AWACs, although not sure if it's been substantiated. Regardless, the concept is feasible.

 

[RafaleSlayer]

It's rumoured the Russians have adopted a similar approach for the S400, where they reportedly intercepted Ukrainian fighter jets by guiding a SAM using their A50 AWACs, although not sure if it's been substantiated. Regardless, the concept is feasible.

then you will need dedicated AWACS to support SAM batteries, not sure how practical that would be if it is even possible.

 

[Corax]

then you will need dedicated AWACS to support SAM batteries, not sure how practical that would be if it is even possible.

Not necessarily, as long as all assets use the same data link, there's no reason why existing AWACs can't be used to augment SAMs.

 

[RafaleSlayer]

Not necessarily, as long as all assets use the same data link, there's no reason why existing AWACs can't be used to augment SAMs.

What I meant was that in order for the SAM batteries to function round the clock as they should, you'll need assets in the air 24/7

 

[mythbuster]

Not necessarily, as long as all assets use the same data link, there's no reason why existing AWACs can't be used to augment SAMs.

AWACs are expensive to procure , maintain and operate , you can't use them as liberally as you wish.

 

[Rational Philosopher]

This is what I've been advocating. Developing a two stage, dual pulse SAM, data linked to the PAF's link 17, effectively a ground launched air to air missile. The first booster stage gets the A2A missile to say 50k ft Mach 2, giving the upper second stage A2A missile a significant energy status and kill solution. The key to the PAF's success was having data linked missiles, simply replace the launch platform from a fighter to ground based TELs, that would significantly boost the PAF's reach and kill web.

Incidentally, the HQ19 seems to be data linked, so the PAF may be adopting this approach.

It should be considered as a force multiplier, not replacement but aid

 

[Rational Philosopher]

What I meant was that in order for the SAM batteries to function round the clock as they should, you'll need assets in the air 24/7

Think of it as an additional networked capability, especially for during war time, where instead of a single ground based radar part of the battery alone being able to guide the missiles, instead it can take inputs via data link from any radar including AEWACs or fighters in the sky.

This way it gives it more flexibility for targeting and operational use. It the radar has to switch off for protection, or is destroyed, it can take targeting from elsewhere.

 

[RajaBaja]

Snide comments don't earn you respect and don't make you an expert!

Since the topic was JF17 block I & II, regardless of how many missiles they carry they still act like missile Trucks/Carriers, though with smaller capacity.

There are no more cowboys in the skies, its a total package that fights the war. AWACS, EW, refuelers, jammers don't carry any weapons, they depend on their escorts and escorts and strikers depend on these force multipliers. Modern day air battles are Team events, not solo performance.

The comments I made was to only educate you. Because when you are using these terms, they mean something. Wrong use makes you look bad. Not me. We all learn, someone might've taught us something too. You live and learn.

JF-17 is a light category of a Jet. It can't ever be a "truck" for anything. It can be a force multiplies with 4-6 air to air missiles in a larger formation. Similarly, refulers, jammers and others things all come in support package / force multipliers.

Bomb truck and missile trucks are VERY specific terms.