PAF Future Acquisition Plans

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?
Okay, tell me exactly what the PAF has said that states that the LIFT will not come before the NGFA.

We've established that AHQ said the LIFT will come before the FGFA. Yes, it was in 2019, but it was said, on the record, correct?

Now, tell me, on the record, where the PAF said the plan has changed.

Waiting.

PAF has also been evaluating J-35 right? So how do we know LIFT is a priority over that?
I want proof the plan has changed. Show me.

Because, re: LIFT, we have (1) an ACM saying on the record that it will come before NGFA and (2) clear reports (e.g., @Trailer23 plus anyone who spoke to AVIC at IDEAS) of the L-15 being tested WITHIN Pakistan.

Now, show me, where did the PAF say the J-35AE is coming before LIFT.
 
Okay, tell me exactly what the PAF has said that states that the LIFT will not come before the NGFA.

We've established that AHQ said the LIFT will come before the FGFA. Yes, it was in 2019, but it was said, on the record, correct?

Now, tell me, on the record, where the PAF said the plan has changed.

Waiting.


I want proof the plan has changed. Show me.

Because, re: LIFT, we have (1) an ACM saying on the record that it will come before NGFA and (2) clear reports (e.g., @Trailer23 plus anyone who spoke to AVIC at IDEAS) of the L-15 being tested WITHIN Pakistan.

Now, show me, where did the PAF say the J-35AE is coming before LIFT.

MOD Edit

2019 - PAF did indeed mention LIFT, just like many years before J-10 was mentioned but nothing happened for many years. Since then, nothing, not a word, no planes in Pakistan, no LIFT mentioned in any plans.

Now lets come back top recent times where we see 5th Gen in PAF promo material, PAFG officers specifically mentioning agreements on J-35 and of course the PM's (premature tweet on the matter). These are all very recent, we can both agree on that right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am asking you to apply your own standards to yourself.

When you asked, I gave the official PAF record on the LIFT. And then you changed the goalpost to be more recent.

Okay, let's apply your own standards.

Give me the quote.

Do you have one? Yes? No?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
evaluating J-35 right?
when did that happen ??

as far as we know paf only has observers in j35 program , just like they have observers in the kaan program .

it absolutely makes no sense getting 5th gens
when,
a ) india is nowhere near 5th gen
b) PAF still uses 3rd gen jets , do u not see how insane that is buying j35 when u have to replace so many f7s mirages jf17s and f16s
c) we still fuking train on tweeters ,man behind machine saar but training on baba adam ke zamane ke jahaz

rn Heighest priotry is replacing old jets ,getting LIFTs and maybe think about getting more j10s( ps we will pay for the j10 till 2030)



ALSO THE FUCKING AUDACITY TO QUESTION QUWA lmfao ,
this is your third time arguing with people who legit work or sometimes are directly involved in these things , who do u think you are .
take a break yasser before you start arguing with god too
 
Who this is? What are you talking about? Why are you trying to pick a fight with me for no reason, first you edit in your fantasies on my profile and then you accuse me of being somebody

@Waz @Musings I reported his original post with the foul language @maxpane also saw it and reacted. The point was to insult me and then quickly delete. Can I suggest IP check of this poster as I have received such vile attacks previously that were very similar
 
@Waz @Musings I reported his original post with the foul language @maxpane also saw it and reacted. The point was to insult me and then quickly delete. Can I suggest IP check of this poster as I have received such vile attacks previously that were very similar
looks like old enmity
 
Priority should be to indigenously design an unmanned hypersonic nuclear capable jet.

The entire design needs to be in-house including the engine.

They should aim high, in the age of AI they have access to LLM's that can do the heavy lifting.

PAF also needs to create a Space Force division and begin research on drone warfare in space.
 
IMO.

I do not believe that acquiring LIFT aircraft is a "priority" for the PAF, let alone a higher priority than fifth-generation fighter jets. ------ We need to distinguish between LIFT capability and the possession of LIFT aircraft; they are two completely different things.

The situation is as follows:
Whether it is the PAF or the Uzbekistan Air Force—which recently acquired the J-10CE fighter—pilots operating these aircraft complete their relevant familiarization and adaptation flights in China. This is part of the support services included in the procurement program. Furthermore, reports regarding the Bangladesh Air Force's prospective purchase of J-10CE fighters explicitly outline the cost plan for pilot training to be conducted in China.

4.5-generation or 5th-generation fighter jets have completely moved beyond traditional air combat paradigms. They rely more heavily on the support of an integrated air combat ecosystem than on one-on-one dogfighting between individual aircraft.

This implies that for many economically disadvantaged nations, establishing a simulation-based training environment for 4.5-generation or 5th-generation fighter pilots is virtually impossible. These countries face significant deficiencies in their actual aerial combat support infrastructure, making the allocation of funds for such simulation systems even less feasible. Furthermore, economic constraints limit the scale of their 4.5-generation or 5th-generation fighter fleets, resulting in a low demand for pilots; beyond the initial cohort, the number of new pilots added annually is in the single digits. Consequently, setting up such a training system for such a small number of pilots is clearly not a rational choice.

CATIC provides comprehensive pilot training services to customers for both the J-10CE and FC-31/J-35 fighter jets; in fact, virtually all fighter jet exporters offer such training. Even in the case of Pakistan, when PAC sells JF-17 series fighters to foreign customers, it includes pilot training services. Furthermore, PAC offers the JF-17B variant, enabling customers to conduct their own pilot training—much like the J-10S option available for China's J-10CE.

LIFT aircraft are unlikely to be a top priority for the PAF. While procurement remains a possibility, it is not a primary concern. Modern LIFT aircraft possess genuine combat capabilities rather than serving merely as trainers; should the PAF acquire them, the deciding factor would be their combat utility, not their training functions.

Moreover, LIFT aircraft are not a central consideration in the PAF's future acquisition of fifth-generation fighters. The PAF lacks the resources to sustain a standalone, comprehensive training system specifically for fifth-generation fighter pilots.
You are right to distinguish LIFT capability from ownership of a dedicated LIFT aircraft. But the rest of your argument is combining and equating, three separate things: lead-in fighter training, conversion onto a particular aircraft, and advanced operational training.

The fact that an exporter provides initial familiarization and conversion training does not establish that the customer depends on that exporter for its continuing training system. Nor does it answer whether the customer needs a better lead training stage. Those are different requirements.

Little to none CATIC training services for JF-17 are in operation today.
It is completely in house at this point.
CATIC training services for the J-10 will be phased out barring the simulators that have been delivered.

Pakistan sourced its F-16 simulation infrastructure from L-3for networked F-16C Block 52 training implemented since 2013. Those devices supported new-pilot training, conversion and advanced tactical training.

The JF-17 simulator experience also contradicts the assumption that Pakistan simply relies on whatever training infrastructure CATIC supplies. The simulators delivered with the initial batch were found inadequate and inaccurate in representing the aircraft. When CATIC quoted a price for developing an accurate simulator, the PAF considered it prohibitively expensive which was effectively price gouging, and pursued its own development instead.

You can criticize the failure to negotiate that requirement earlier, but the resulting decision was to develop domestic capability, not accept permanent dependence. Pakistan has also developed full-fidelity Mirage III/V simulators and augmented-reality training systems for the F-16. Its approach has involved both indigenous development and mixed external sources.

More fundamentally, LIFT is not a capability exclusive to 4.5-generation fighters. Pakistan’s interest in modern lead-in trainers was already being discussed in 2015 in relation to preparing pilots for the F-16 and JF-17. It was not something that suddenly became relevant with the J-10CE or prospective fifth-generation acquisitions.

This was based on 2 gaps documented in PAF interviews including those in Air Forces monthly and other places.

- A speed & performance gap: progressively bringing pilots from slower training aircraft into the speed brackets, handling demands and workload of high-performance fighters.

- A technology & training gap: preparing pilots for modern cockpit interfaces, sensors, weapons employment and tactical workflows before they reach frontline conversion units.

Neither gap is exclusive to 4.5-generation aircraft. Similarly, having a LIFT platform capable of preparing pilots for 4.5-generation fighters does not make its usefulness exclusive to those fighters.

So you are incorrect in:

-Establishing the absence of a LIFT requirement.
- Reducing Pakistan’s training demand to the intake for one small, newly acquired fighter fleet.

The PAF’s training system serves a mixed fleet, not merely the initial J-10 conversion cohort.

Your claim is resting on exporter-provided familiarization flights and nothing more.

You can argue that it is not the highest priority without claiming that its training function is incidental, that it depends on Chinese input, or that combat utility would necessarily be the deciding reason to acquire it.
 
You are right to distinguish LIFT capability from ownership of a dedicated LIFT aircraft. But the rest of your argument is combining and equating, three separate things: lead-in fighter training, conversion onto a particular aircraft, and advanced operational training.

The fact that an exporter provides initial familiarization and conversion training does not establish that the customer depends on that exporter for its continuing training system. Nor does it answer whether the customer needs a better lead training stage. Those are different requirements.

Little to none CATIC training services for JF-17 are in operation today.
It is completely in house at this point.
CATIC training services for the J-10 will be phased out barring the simulators that have been delivered.

Pakistan sourced its F-16 simulation infrastructure from L-3for networked F-16C Block 52 training implemented since 2013. Those devices supported new-pilot training, conversion and advanced tactical training.

The JF-17 simulator experience also contradicts the assumption that Pakistan simply relies on whatever training infrastructure CATIC supplies. The simulators delivered with the initial batch were found inadequate and inaccurate in representing the aircraft. When CATIC quoted a price for developing an accurate simulator, the PAF considered it prohibitively expensive which was effectively price gouging, and pursued its own development instead.

You can criticize the failure to negotiate that requirement earlier, but the resulting decision was to develop domestic capability, not accept permanent dependence. Pakistan has also developed full-fidelity Mirage III/V simulators and augmented-reality training systems for the F-16. Its approach has involved both indigenous development and mixed external sources.

More fundamentally, LIFT is not a capability exclusive to 4.5-generation fighters. Pakistan’s interest in modern lead-in trainers was already being discussed in 2015 in relation to preparing pilots for the F-16 and JF-17. It was not something that suddenly became relevant with the J-10CE or prospective fifth-generation acquisitions.

This was based on 2 gaps documented in PAF interviews including those in Air Forces monthly and other places.

- A speed & performance gap: progressively bringing pilots from slower training aircraft into the speed brackets, handling demands and workload of high-performance fighters.

- A technology & training gap: preparing pilots for modern cockpit interfaces, sensors, weapons employment and tactical workflows before they reach frontline conversion units.

Neither gap is exclusive to 4.5-generation aircraft. Similarly, having a LIFT platform capable of preparing pilots for 4.5-generation fighters does not make its usefulness exclusive to those fighters.

So you are incorrect in:

-Establishing the absence of a LIFT requirement.
- Reducing Pakistan’s training demand to the intake for one small, newly acquired fighter fleet.

The PAF’s training system serves a mixed fleet, not merely the initial J-10 conversion cohort.

Your claim is resting on exporter-provided familiarization flights and nothing more.

You can argue that it is not the highest priority without claiming that its training function is incidental, that it depends on Chinese input, or that combat utility would necessarily be the deciding reason to acquire it.
Uh, alright. You caught a small tail.

The Lead-In Fighter Training (LIFT) is a concept originating from Western military systems. There is no direct equivalent to this concept within the PLA system; instead, the corresponding stages are referred to as "战斗入门训练" and "改装训练阶段." The former primarily refers to tactical flight training courses for new fighter pilots, while the latter mainly refers to transition training courses for experienced fighter pilots switching to a different type of fighter aircraft. ------ This is similar to the Western LIFT system, but there are some differences.

* There are no significant differences between the two systems regarding the progression from basic to advanced trainers, nor in the ground-based simulator training; these aspects are not the focus of our discussion.

However, the two systems begin to diverge when it comes to the aircraft used during the tactical training phase. A dedicated LIFT trainer or a twin-seat combat trainer of the same type? Both methods have their respective advantages and disadvantages.

Prior to the advent of fifth-generation fighter jets, the PLA favored twin-seat fighter-trainer versions of the same aircraft models. The advantage of a two-seat combat trainer of the same model is that pilot adaptation training more closely mirrors real-world conditions, and the aircraft itself can be integrated into combat operations. Its drawbacks include higher training costs and the fact that it is compatible only with the corresponding fighter model. In comparison, dedicated LIFT trainer aircraft have lower flight training costs and can simulate a variety of aircraft types.

However, by the 5th-Gen era, the cost difference between this model and the dedicated LIFT trainer model had increased dramatically due to their high manufacturing and flight costs. It rendered the military unable to sustain large-scale pilot training. ------ Although the J-20 series has introduced the twin-seat J-20S variant, the PLAAF has clarified that this model is not intended as a combat trainer, but rather as a MUM-T command aircraft.

So, the core of this issue remains a matter based on considerations of military economics.

As far as the PAF is concerned, the JF-17 series remains its core frontline fighter force (primarily in terms of fleet size), and the existing JF-17B combat-capable trainer is already well-suited to this training role.

Regarding the J-10CE, the future FC-31/J-35, or the KAAN fighter, Pakistan's economic constraints make large-scale procurement difficult; consequently, opting for adaptive flight training services provided by the manufacturer is a more rational choice.

Whether the PAF acquires the JL-10/L-15, the Hürjet, or other similar aircraft, no single platform can perfectly cover the full spectrum of tactical training required for all its fighter types. It is essential to distinguish between an AJT (Advanced Jet Trainer) and a LIFT (Lead-In Fighter Trainer). Alternatively, to put it another way, a dedicated LIFT aircraft represents a hybrid between an AJT (Advanced Jet Trainer) system and a training system based on a twin-seat combat trainer variant of the same aircraft type. Both models have their respective advantages and disadvantages. Countries make different choices based on their own circumstances.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Back
Top