Pakistan Air Force | News & Discussions

[Ali_Baba]

Now that China seems to have moved on to more advanced AAMs (such as PL-17 and beyond), is it possible for Pakistan to get ToT for PL-15 from the iron brothers and then come up with its new variants (such as anti-radiation, anti ship, and air to ground missiles) of its own?

Pakistan got TOT for the SD-10, and it went nowhere as a project after that. So, I am not sure what PL-15 will achieve under TOT.

Pakistan has to fix why TOT projects fail in Pakistan first.

 

[Quwa]

The second paragraph hits hard. We wasted a lot of time because on certain capabilities because of this mindset.

Yep, but thankfully these days there are more options available too, so there's some choice and room for negotiating. The part that worries me is that the tri-services aren't collaborating closely enough (or at all), so we lose out on a real standardization model and, in turn, economies-of-scale.

For ex., the same SR-SAM could be used differently by the PAF and PA. Let's say the PAF opts for a config on an 8x8 truck with a low-level FCR for PDMS; but the same system could also be a mobile SHORADS to cover PA formations.

Pakistan got TOT for the SD-10, and it went nowhere as a project after that. So, I am not sure what PL-15 will achieve under TOT.

Pakistan has to fix why TOT projects fail in Pakistan first.

"FAAZ 2" may suggest that the ToT for PL-12AE was sought. I think they should still go ahead with it, but with the aim of building a proper understanding of the rocket motor tech (esp. if its DPMR) and solid fuel inside.

Use those insights to then develop a homegrown system. The key here is IF the ToT leads to genuine know-how transfer and not just assembling.

 

[gamaji]

tbh the PAF assumes as much (if not more), which is why they're tuning the SR/MR-SAM requirement to deal with this. Now, it's not just about the tech, but also dealing with India's SOW intensity, which will require magazine depth via domestic production.

Things that were deemed 'nice-to-have, but not essential' -- e.g., C-RAM, PDMS, etc, etc. -- are all up for thorough evaluation now.

A war seldom goes by the plan but it always offers lessons.

Whatever the Pak military is doing post May 2025 fighting is a part of that process.

We should be grateful to Allah Almighty that Pak didn't have to ground any assets to re-do its war plans in the middle of war.

 

[PakistaniDefender]

- cheaper
- can carry more of them
- lower RCS

the only advantage a bigger missile brings is a larger warhead, which isn't that important for SEAD since you are only taking out radars

And the difference in RCS would be pretty substantial given the size difference

Range as well. U can't come too close to S400

 

[gamaji]

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

 

[bravo_1]

Contract for another HQ-XX system for PAF is being finalized - even that means, arrival and operationalization in 8-10 months - i won't share any more details till they decide to reveal it officially

Most likely HQ-16FE

 

[ThoroughPro]

Contract for another HQ-XX system for PAF is being finalized - even that means, arrival and operationalization in 8-10 months - i won't share any more details till they decide to reveal it officially

It was already a known fact without being disclosed.

 

[ThoroughPro]

its range is i guess under 50km?
The issue is china have 5th gen aircraft they dont need long range anti radiation missile but for us we will need long range in order to be saved from SAM. china also have UCAV from which they can launch these missiles

50KM range, just like 145KM PL15 range.

 

[ThoroughPro]

IAF seems so confident with Rafale that they want to order 114 more !
Some french sources said it succeed dodging most of the PL15 fired, this is why some were found intact in the ground.

And no, India has not the sole choice of purchasing Rafale. F21, SH18, EF2000, Su35, Mig35, Gripen E are viable options. USA made hard pressure to sell one of its birds.

I thought some were found destroyed on the ground. You are talking about Rafales, Right!

 

[side-winder]

It was already a known fact without being disclosed.

Not HQ-19.

 

[SABRE]

Yep, but thankfully these days there are more options available too, so there's some choice and room for negotiating. The part that worries me is that the tri-services aren't collaborating closely enough (or at all), so we lose out on a real standardization model and, in turn, economies-of-scale.

For ex., the same SR-SAM could be used differently by the PAF and PA. Let's say the PAF opts for a config on an 8x8 truck with a low-level FCR for PDMS; but the same system could also be a mobile SHORADS to cover PA formations.


"FAAZ 2" may suggest that the ToT for PL-12AE was sought. I think they should still go ahead with it, but with the aim of building a proper understanding of the rocket motor tech (esp. if its DPMR) and solid fuel inside.

Use those insights to then develop a homegrown system. The key here is IF the ToT leads to genuine know-how transfer and not just assembling.

Para 1 & 2: That's yet an other ball in the hole from your end, although in your case its always expected. We talk a lot about tri-services jointness in Pakistan, and I suspect we have better coordination than the neighborhood. But in the broader schemes of things, the real jointness is progressing at such a creepingly slowly pace that someone like me, whose looking from outside-in, perceives that there is no jointness. We can talk of specifics but I don't think its the good thing to do on the internet, although its all in the open and one doesn't really need much of an insider info. Sometimes mere observations say a lot too. I will, however, say that both PA and PAF - and perhaps PN as well - should have much closer coordination or joint working mechanism on air-defence. Also this old mantra of missile defence is detrimental (& expensive) for the region and should not be pursued should thrown into the bin now.

Ah, FAAZ-1 and FAAZ-2, where to begin? I agree, they should look into Chinese missile system like PL-12 or perhaps look into something relatively more advanced than that because by the time the systems come to fruition their tech/capability should be relevant to prevalent threat spectrum.

 

[gamaji]

sir, its your choice

yes its all figment of my imagination - nothing for real.

I like this. The 'TallGuy' makes apparently tall claims and then comes the disclaimer 'its all figment of my imagination - nothing for real'. hehehe...

 

[Oscar]

@Oscar It looks like they completed the new SD-10 variant (i.e., PL-12AE). I remember back in 2018 when PAF/PAC folks were saying that a new variant of SD-10 would be considered for the Block-3 (as they weren't sure PL-15 would be available for export, which obv changed to PL-15/E once the J-10CE deal was signed).

Probably still relevant for export block-3s or potentially either an electronics or new license build for Block-2s??

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

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

 

[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

Man, sure am scared IAF now has the signatures for the seekers made in 2015....