PAF Future Acquisition Plans

[Qureshi]

Have done that already, and in the past did so about the PAF new inductions. My goal is to project and promote PAF/PA/PN capabilities to the West as much as possible because there is no platform currently doing that properly and most of the things are misunderstood.

The reviews about JF17 as a platform weren't great (I don't know why). Some said its looks like a 70's aircraft which I totally ignore about the looks thing, some said the airframe quality and structure is poor quality, some talked against the engine power and maintenance issue due to it being the Russian RD93, some said that its aerodynamics is bad if we compare it with other modern jets like rafale or typhoon. Surprisingly, some even claimed that PAF itself doesn't like JF17 due to these issues and that's why PAF is pursuing other platforms like J10C, which btw they said is more better option than JF17. Even when there were talks about JF17 procurement by the Turkish Airforce, I saw something similar protest by Turks.

Edit: Regarding the JF17 reviews... I also think much of those negative reviews are in part due to the stereotype of Chinese quality being bad and also Westerners are inclined much towards Korean KAI T50 fighter which is a competitor to JF17 because of anti China sentiments. But then again, we should not ignore criticisms and that can be a path to improvement.

Simple graduates sitting on key posts can't understand the word "persuasive marketing".

This all happens when incompetent people takes over.

 

[Reichmarshal]

Already part of the USAF fleet now

Turkish F-35 Jets Await Their Ultimate Fate

Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar has made remarks regarding the status of six F-35A Lightning II fighter jets produced by Lockheed Martin for Turkiye.

www.turkishdefencenews.com

 

[razgriz19]

Official confirmation of the retirement now. Goodbye ZDKs

I believe ZDK system will be retired but not the airframe. They will be repurposed as ELINT aircraft.

 

[razgriz19]

Agree with you in the overall idea of streamlining assets. However Saab 2000 can't do what CN-235 can. Saab is a commercial aircraft, not one designed for military transport purposes with rear ramp, or ability to land on unprepared surfaces and a host of other things.

Operational costs of thess transport are also more manageable than defunct fighter jets like Mirages and F-7s. Fact that more CN-235/295 are being built today and in the foreseeable future means there is no lack of support, or pathways similar to upgrading much much older C-130s. Let's also keep in mind that the "new" Hercs we just acquired are actually 50yrs old and basically an interim solution to a big problem just around the corner.

I remember that during Musharraf era or a bit before, PAF was actually going to acquire 16-20 of these transports from IPTN.

Now I would even be willing to concede to your point had it been actually true. PAF is not streamlining it's fleet or assets. Infact just look at their recent induction ceremony and the number of different vip transport aircraft of all different makes and models so neatly lined up. Look at their own calendar and "air mobility" joke of the year.

PAF is being mismanaged imo. We get blinded by shiny new toys but mid to long term prospects don't look very bright to me.

Just two things - maybebthe role of CN235 is being overtaken by additional C130s.
Other than special forces insertion, (and training) i dont think CN235 was playing a huge role. Maybe it will save PAF a few extra bucks from retiring them and selling them for parts.

Second - that baby bus can also be used for troop transport (which i highly that's whatnits for) for PA and PAF personnel when they go to foreign exercises. Most air forces use airliners not cargo aircraft for such missions.

 

[Corax]

I think the PAF's marketing spiel of "checkmating" its enemies seems to have completely backfired after the Iranian strike. Seriously, less PR and drum beating, and more on doing your job!

 

[hussain]

You are right, SAAB 2000 is not a direct replacement for CN-235 but it will do. It does seem to me like PAF are making decisions that should have been made ages ago, especillay regards to Mirage and F-7. If we get rid of these types we will save so. much in OPEX and manpower. To me this is a very good and long overdue move. Many countries will always have a lot of VIP types, nature of the beast

I'm glad you dont know the saga behind how the Global6000 ended up with PAF, (and possibly another one ) otherwise you'd be really .................

 

[studsmart]

I think the PAF's marketing spiel of "checkmating" its enemies seems to have completely backfired after the Iranian strike. Seriously, less PR and drum beating, and more on doing your job!

pakistan boarders are been breached from all corners

 

[MastanKhan]

Its not in the same class as those fighters. Its a decent buy for Pakistan to replace J-7s and very capable, but not in terms of specs and capabilities. J-10C you can argue, but the JF-17 is limited compared to those fighters.

Hi,

You have no clue what JF17 blk 3 is capable of.---but then that is fine---.

F-16 was a replacement for the phantom---& F-35 a replacement for the F-16---and both these aircraft are way way superior to what they replaced.

But JF-17 cannot be way way superior to what it replaced---.

 

[Oscar]

pakistan boarders are been breached from all corners

That spelling mistake is ironically correct as well

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1747583101222474175

 

[Quwa]

I think the PAF's marketing spiel of "checkmating" its enemies seems to have completely backfired after the Iranian strike. Seriously, less PR and drum beating, and more on doing your job!

Indeed, but in fairness (and I say this with caution), Iran wasn't the focal point of Pakistan's conventional or strategic posture.

From day one (1947), Iran (under the Shah) had supported Pakistan, and since the Revolution, things - while shakey - had never escalated into a cross-border strike of this scope. Iran was never an "enemy" (like India), but, at most, a 'frenemy.' And, until now, the Pakistani leadership thought it could handle this 'frenemy' in a certain way (via their established channels).

My point is that the requisite assets for stopping a ballistic missile or drone strike from Iran weren't there because, until now, Pakistan never expected it to reach that point.

However, Pakistan's failing here is that our intelligence and wider intelligentsia didn't see this coming. Tehran didn't come to this point overnight, and I genuinely think ISI et.al should have picked up the signs and alerted the tri-services of a potential problem.

Anyways, the damage was done. Now, Pakistan will need to post permanent conventional and (IMO) nuclear/strategic deployments to its Western front.

Now, the irony of this problem is that Pakistan can reinforce its West with the F-16s, with the JF-17Cs and J-10CEs handling the East. Iran has opened a pathway for Pakistan to speak to the US about additional F-16s and munitions, especially SOWs. @Oscar A while ago (on the old forum) I said the US could push Pakistan to focus on Iran and Afghanistan. With this one strike, Tehran has made that conversation much easier (for both sides).

 

[hyperman]

Hi,

You have no clue what JF17 blk 3 is capable of.---but then that is fine---.

F-16 was a replacement for the phantom---& F-35 a replacement for the F-16---and both these aircraft are way way superior to what they replaced.

But JF-17 cannot be way way superior to what it replaced---.

lol, the JF-17 was a cheap fighter to build bulk, this idea that JF-17s costing $25M a pop can be the equivalent of Jets built for 3-4x as much, is asenine. The JF-17 neither has the range, nor the thrust, nor the payload capacity, can't refuel in the air, its radar is not as strong a the sensors on the other platforms are bigger, its just not comparable. If the JF-17 was the same, Pakistan would have no reason to buy J-10Cs when India bought Rafales.

I'm not knocking the JF-17, its a good aircraft for its role, but people need stop saying silly stuff about it being comparable to a Viper or the eurofighter.

 

[MastanKhan]

lol, the JF-17 was a cheap fighter to build bulk, this idea that JF-17s costing $25M a pop can be the equivalent of Jets built for 3-4x as much, is asenine. The JF-17 neither has the range, nor the thrust, nor the payload capacity, can't refuel in the air, its radar is not as strong a the sensors on the other platforms are bigger, its just not comparable. If the JF-17 was the same, Pakistan would have no reason to buy J-10Cs when India bought Rafales.

I'm not knocking the JF-17, its a good aircraft for its role, but people need stop saying silly stuff about it being comparable to a Viper or the eurofighter.

Hi,

See---you are not knowledgeable about the J-10 procurement---

When the J-10 was procured---it was the need of the moment---because the JF17 BLK 3 was still going thru the integration of its ECM's / EW package etc---it was not ready.

OTOH---the J10 C was fully operational and we put it into service while getting the JF17 ready---.

The reason the price of the aircraft is cheap---not for the reason you are thinking of---.

It is because the end user is a partner in building this machine---. Our Engineers get paid $5000-6000 a year---our techs are at $2500---3000 a year---our higher end personal may cost us $12000-15000 a year in salary---or maybe a little more.

Whereas your corporate executive maybe making a million dollars a year---an engineer making 120-150K a year---a tech making $60K --- 90 K a year and not to talk about senior executive.

Then your fake overhead costs to offset for profit etc etc etc---.

On the chinese side---the income would be more than the pakistani side---but a $50 part will not go for $500 part but rather stay close to its original price.

Seemingly---you missed out on that---.

 

[Quwa]

lol, the JF-17 was a cheap fighter to build bulk, this idea that JF-17s costing $25M a pop can be the equivalent of Jets built for 3-4x as much, is asenine. The JF-17 neither has the range, nor the thrust, nor the payload capacity, can't refuel in the air, its radar is not as strong a the sensors on the other platforms are bigger, its just not comparable. If the JF-17 was the same, Pakistan would have no reason to buy J-10Cs when India bought Rafales.

I'm not knocking the JF-17, its a good aircraft for its role, but people need stop saying silly stuff about it being comparable to a Viper or the eurofighter.

JF-17 Block-2, JF-17B, and JF-17C/Block-3 can refuel in the air.

Second, please quantify and qualify what you mean by "radar is not as strong."

Does "not as strong" mean it's practically unable to support the JF-17's LRAAMs (like SD-10 and PL-15E)? Is the KLJ-7A AESA radar (used on the JF-17C and, later, JF-17B and Block-2) too weak to support those AAMs? And if the radar is strong enough, then can the JF-17 pose a credible long-range threat to other fighters?

 

[MastanKhan]

JF-17 Block-2, JF-17B, and JF-17C/Block-3 can refuel in the air.

Second, please quantify and qualify what you mean by "radar is not as strong."

Does "not as strong" mean it's practically unable to support the JF-17's LRAAMs (like SD-10 and PL-15E)? Is the KLJ-7A AESA radar (used on the JF-17C and, later, JF-17B and Block-2) too weak to support those AAMs? And if the radar is strong enough, then can the JF-17 pose a credible long-range threat to other fighters?

Hi,

They are getting serious concerns what the JF 17 BLK 3 would do---.

What they are really concerned about it that it would negate any superiority of their aircraft other than the 5th gen machines---.