JH-7 as a Missile Hauler

[Bilal]

Support your assumption with evidence. Which PGM can be launched by India from 150-200 km inside their territory and hitting targets within our depth at 150-200 km?
From top my head, I can't think of anything other than 40 odd Brahmos capable Su-30 and SCALP carrying Rafales. With new air defence systems and EW assets, what will be the interception rate against those missiles?
Nobody can stop an enemy aircraft from launching an ALCM from 400 km, but this threat can be mitigated in various ways.

Brahmos, Rudram series and SCALP.

 

[baqai]

oh no ... Khafee yaad a giya lol

 

[Bilal]

oh no ... Khafee yaad a giya lol

View attachment 220123

Bhai we are flying SU35 in secret already.

 

[Hussain]

oh no ... Khafee yaad a giya lol

View attachment 220123

Bhai we are flying SU35 in secret already.

Have some decency, lets not make fun of the dead.

 

[AeronautIR]

Brahmos, Rudram series and SCALP.

Rudram isn't operational yet and it is anti-radiation I think. Brahmos and SCALP are very expensive ALCM and with limited launch platforms, they can only be fired in limited quantity at a time. So PAF's strategy to defend against missiles instead of spending resources on trying to shoot down IAF aircraft at 400 km makes more sense. As I said before, nobody can shoot a fighter at this range, not even S-400.

 

[Bilal]

Have some decency, lets not make fun of the dead.

Yes, my mistake. May Allah have mercy on him.

 

[Bilal]

Rudram isn't operational yet and it is anti-radiation I think. Brahmos and SCALP are very expensive ALCM and with limited launch platforms, they can only be fired in limited quantity at a time. So PAF's strategy to defend against missiles instead of spending resources on trying to shoot down IAF aircraft at 400 km makes more sense. As I said before, nobody can shoot a fighter at this range, not even S-400.

On cusp of operationalization, given the testing. And I am not talking about being able to shoot at 400Km, but a longer engagement range than the current PL15. But I think I am not able to state my point clearly. Let’s leave it at that.

 

[Quwa]

No, our whole counter was not just that, but I understand if you will not accept PAF's claims without satellite imagery. I have had enough of that and even with Pakistan’s geopolitical rise, members here said it was all a lie, Pakistan is only in limelight due to Gaza force etc etc.
However, the discussion won't be fruitful unless this point is setlttled: Did Pakistan actually gave a strong response on 10th, or is it all propaganda unless we see some evidence?
Also, the Indians failed to achieve anything except Bholari and though it may again start a heated debate, but if Brahmos can't destroy aircraft in HAS, render a runway unserviceable or penetrate an underground C2 node, what is the operational impact of a 5 million dollar ALCM?

One trend I'm seeing across the tri-services is responsiveness. I think they have a real sense now that if they can mount enough heavy strikes fast enough, they can interfere with India's mobilization and momentum.

In my view, that is what ARFC (backed by a growing satellite constellation) and the massive OWA/loitering munition investments are all speaking to. Can Pakistan launch 1,000+ guided munitions (ballistics, subsonic cruise, supersonic cruise, jet-powered OWAs, piston OWAs, and GMRLS) at India on a daily basis? I think that's the question Pakistan is trying to answer.

And while it's all surface-launched, this is the only pathway we have right now to leverage. Even if PAF did have access to the Sino-Flanker, I wonder if the decision-makers would even act on it. They might prefer spending several billion dollars on NESCOM to develop the ballistics stack such that proper hypersonic BMs can be manufactured at scale.

Point is, Pakistan needs to be able to strike fast, and stay resilient by sustaining those strikes.

It's what we're seeing with the Middle East and Russia-Ukraine War. Yes, India will strike Pakistan and get its optics in, but what use are all those optics when Pakistan will strike back? Israel showed the world how they took out Iran's last F-14, but Iran hit Tel Aviv, and people remember that. Likewise, Russia invaded Ukraine, yet people remember Ukrainian strikes across Russia's key infrastructure.

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

The more I research JH7A, the more I think Mastan Khan's initial idea wasn't a bad one. PAF could have invested in an updated version of JH7A with all modern 4.5+ gen bells and whistles to support JF-17.

Was Never worth it. It’s like i am asking Pakistan to build Mirage v from
Scratch.

 

[baqai]

Have some decency, lets not make fun of the dead.

not making fun of him AT ALL, this post reminded me of him, God bless his soul

 

[Bilal]

One trend I'm seeing across the tri-services is responsiveness. I think they have a real sense now that if they can mount enough heavy strikes fast enough, they can interfere with India's mobilization and momentum.

In my view, that is what ARFC (backed by a growing satellite constellation) and the massive OWA/loitering munition investments are all speaking to. Can Pakistan launch 1,000+ guided munitions (ballistics, subsonic cruise, supersonic cruise, jet-powered OWAs, piston OWAs, and GMRLS) at India on a daily basis? I think that's the question Pakistan is trying to answer.

And while it's all surface-launched, this is the only pathway we have right now to leverage. Even if PAF did have access to the Sino-Flanker, I wonder if the decision-makers would even act on it. They might prefer spending several billion dollars on NESCOM to develop the ballistics stack such that proper hypersonic BMs can be manufactured at scale.

Point is, Pakistan needs to be able to strike fast, and stay resilient by sustaining those strikes.

It's what we're seeing with the Middle East and Russia-Ukraine War. Yes, India will strike Pakistan and get its optics in, but what use are all those optics when Pakistan will strike back? Israel showed the world how they took out Iran's last F-14, but Iran hit Tel Aviv, and people remember that. Likewise, Russia invaded Ukraine, yet people remember Ukrainian strikes across Russia's key infrastructure.

That is perfectly fine, if the way forward is a diminished PAF role (excluding its ground based air defense / EW portion) due to ground realities. Since It won’t be able to engage/deter at those extended ranges, it won’t be able to strike at depth of the enemy.

Defence of the air as it was noted will be done via ground based interceptors and EW, counter strikes will be done primarily via ARFC. PAF will play diminished secondary role to take on any stray enemy fighter IF it comes close.