JH-7 as a Missile Hauler

[Bilal]

Yes for sure, but why discussing irrelevant stuff in an old thread when it is totally unrealistic?

Just for fun? But isn't this a bit below your reputation as a think tank/consultant?

Like I said, ignore the thread if it gives you stress. That is a choice you can always make and it’s perfectly fine and let me worry about my reputation myself.

 

[Quwa]

Not all discussions are meant for immediate execution. But they do open up points to bounce ideas. It’s not like we are writing AFDP here.

In lieu of a suitable air platform, I guess the Army and Navy will lean much more on longer-range, surface-launched BMs. The size and weight penalty wouldn't matter as much, as these would be deployed from land. Basically, the heaviest-hitting load will come from land, while the naval and air platforms would need to leverage generally lighter munitions (i.e., focus on more accurate strikes to get use from the lighter-weight warheads). It's basically the direction we're seeing with the Rasoob and AZB-81LR work.

 

[MH.Yang]

In lieu of a suitable air platform, I guess the Army and Navy will lean much more on longer-range, surface-launched BMs. The size and weight penalty wouldn't matter as much, as these would be deployed from land. Basically, the heaviest-hitting load will come from land, while the naval and air platforms would need to leverage generally lighter munitions (i.e., focus on more accurate strikes to get use from the lighter-weight warheads). It's basically the direction we're seeing with the Rasoob and AZB-81LR work.

A low-cost suicide drone production line is sufficient. After all, New Delhi is very close to Pakistan.

 

[MH.Yang]

J16D is ARM / Jammer version. but yes PAF needs J16 class fo fighter for deep strike. However JF17 is not a upgrade version of J7. You are dead wrong there.

The JF-17 originates from the "Super-7", and is essentially still a modified version of the J-7. It's just that its modifications are extensive, or should we say it's completely unrecognizable?

 

[Bilal]

In lieu of a suitable air platform, I guess the Army and Navy will lean much more on longer-range, surface-launched BMs. The size and weight penalty wouldn't matter as much, as these would be deployed from land. Basically, the heaviest-hitting load will come from land, while the naval and air platforms would need to leverage generally lighter munitions (i.e., focus on more accurate strikes to get use from the lighter-weight warheads). It's basically the direction we're seeing with the Rasoob and AZB-81LR work.

Yes, except ground launchers are comparatively easier to track providing predictable ingress paths/trajectories. So defence “can” be prepared preemptively (and in worse case launch points can be targeted).

Rasoob/Azb81 don’t have the same impact/effect due to their smaller warheads, Azb-82+ TJs probably do, but then we are not talking about day one assured strikes and of course, we are pre-assuming large enough numbers of Rasoob /Azb series to penetrate in the early days.

And the range / enemy depth is still not addressed by them.

 

[studsmart]

The JF-17 originates from the "Super-7", and is essentially still a modified version of the J-7. It's just that its modifications are extensive, or should we say it's completely unrecognizable?

Wrong again - let's not digress from the discussion here. There are lots of threads in this forum that can explain it to you; please do some research and get enlightened. For a short answer, the model experimentation started from Saber 2 to Super 7 to FC1/JF17. However, JF17 has nothing in common with Saber 2 to Super 7.

 

[AeronautIR]

Yeah, I can tell you back in 2000s on the grand parent version of PDF (when PAF was a bit averse to HIMADS) similar reactions were thrown when that topic was brought up.

Or 5-10 years ago when people kept nagging about MRAPS/Armoured troop carriers or extensive drone employment in CT Ops it was same reaction about wishful thinking, look where we are now.

There are many examples like this. Instead let’s hypothesize, it’s not as far fetched as a moon base or Death Star.

Again, JH7 itself maybe an infeasible cart in front of the horse but problem statements such as how (if and when needed) VLAAM can be employed or how (if and when needed) proper ALBM capability can be had, given the trend and given the opening day effectiveness they showed recently and given te capability now being introduced in our theater.

I am active on this forum for just 1 year, so don't know about 2000s. If you want to discuss the problem statement, then make a thread about that. You can brainstorm there about ALBM and discuss about the resources issue or best alternatives for this capability. If we can't afford a new aircraft, isn't it better to think about some other solution to achieve similar results? Lastly, do keep in mind the 20 years gap and advancement in technology. E.g., if someone said that PAF should buy J-10A in 2006, it wasn't the same as buying J-10C with PL-15 in 2022.

 

[AeronautIR]

sir for deep srike is arfc is the only option or paf would use something from its arsenal ?

PAF doesn't have numbers in its arsenal. So even if we employ CM-400 and Taimoor, PAF's strike role will be mainly with precision guided Standoff bombs. And that was my point; ideally, we should have every capability but if only one can be picked, it is obvious that PAF will choose air-to-air capabilities. We can ask ARFC to support PAF in strike role. What will IAF do in aerial engagements? Can they ask Indian Army or Navy to help them out in a BVR fight? After Meteor and S-400, they don't have any options except to act as a rocket force from air.

 

[Bilal]

I am active on this forum for just 1 year, so don't know about 2000s. If you want to discuss the problem statement, then make a thread about that. You can brainstorm there about ALBM and discuss about the resources issue or best alternatives for this capability. If we can't afford a new aircraft, isn't it better to think about some other solution to achieve similar results?

100%. And I have to admit, I was a bit lazy not to open a dedicated thread and decided to hijack this one for something that’s been on my mind for a while.

 

[AeronautIR]

100%. And I have to admit, I was a bit lazy not open a dedicated thread and decided to hijack this one for something that’s been on my mind for a while.

No worries... to conclude, look at this question as a whole by including all arms of defence forces, emerging technologies like drones, cyber, space etc. We simply can't afford a new aircraft and so the plan has to be modified. Hopefully J-35 can add some capability to PAF. Otherwise, I don't think fighter aircraft are feasible for us in this role.

 

[Bilal]

No worries... to conclude, look at this question as a whole by including all arms of defence forces, emerging technologies like drones, cyber, space etc. We simply can't afford a new aircraft and so the plan has to be modified. Hopefully J-35 can add some capability to PAF. Otherwise, I don't think fighter aircraft are feasible for us in this role.

Please refer to my reply to @Quwa on ground launched (all arms) approach above. Of course, not to say it’s useless.

 

[AeronautIR]

Please refer to my reply to @Quwa on ground launched (all arms) approach above. Of course, not to say it’s useless.

And let me repeat my point that I mentioned while replying to @maxpane. Air launched cruise or ballistic missiles are a better capability than using ground launchers. Neither IAF nor PAF have top notch capabilities to cover air2air and air2ground roles. They have Brahmos, we have PL-15. Now, I can ask Army to help me out for strikes. What options does IAF has to cover the weakness in aerial engagements? With limited resources, it is better to keep the edge in BVR fight and gain control of air.

 

[MH.Yang]

I am active on this forum for just 1 year, so don't know about 2000s. If you want to discuss the problem statement, then make a thread about that. You can brainstorm there about ALBM and discuss about the resources issue or best alternatives for this capability. If we can't afford a new aircraft, isn't it better to think about some other solution to achieve similar results? Lastly, do keep in mind the 20 years gap and advancement in technology. E.g., if someone said that PAF should buy J-10A in 2006, it wasn't the same as buying J-10C with PL-15 in 2022.

It is a correct choice for PAF not to purchase J-10A, as it has essential differences from J-10C. In fact, PLAAF is also getting rid of J-10A. A portion of J-10A may be sent to North Korea (NK reportedly negotiating authorization for AL-31F with Russia), a portion for training flight demonstration teams, and a portion for training in the Southern Theater Command.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

The JF-17 originates from the "Super-7", and is essentially still a modified version of the J-7. It's just that its modifications are extensive, or should we say it's completely unrecognizable?

No, you're wrong again, when super-7 project was going on

Tiananmen massacre was occured and super-7 project was closed after we reached Chinato replace our F-6 and mirages in mid 90s with new jets so entirely new project that was not related to super-7 project started by China, In fact most says JF-17 is based on Soviet/Russian single engine jet of 80s era that was rejected by VVS (soviet air force) in early 80s namely MIG-33 (not related to upgrades of MIG-29 with same title) so your assessment is totally wrong about JF-17's history​

 

[Bilal]

And let me repeat my point that I mentioned while replying to @maxpane. Air launched cruise or ballistic missiles are a better capability than using ground launchers. Neither IAF nor PAF have top notch capabilities to cover air2air and air2ground roles. They have Brahmos, we have PL-15. Now, I can ask Army to help me out for strikes. What options does IAF has to cover the weakness in aerial engagements? With limited resources, it is better to keep the edge in BVR fight and gain control of air.

My focus was a bit future oriented, not only from the perspective of what they can have (I hope their bureaucracy delays it as usual) and also what we should have, given their depth.

If they show decision agility, they already have a platform right now that can sport air lora / rocks. And in any case, it’s an emerging trend which we can think of now or decide not to.