Pakistan's Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts

[Zarvan]

no they havent lol prove it

Yes, they did, I saw it myself. They showed this AWAC and wrote new EW platform underneath. It would take me few days to find that video I have seen it myself. There were groups on twitter claiming this before that video came but that wasn't fully confirmed until that video appeared.

 

[Ak01]

Yes, they did, I saw it myself. They showed this AWAC and wrote new EW platform underneath. It would take me few days to find that video I have seen it myself. There were groups on twitter claiming this before that video came but that wasn't fully confirmed until that video appeared.

it is false.

 

[Zarvan]

It is false.

Until and unless PAF has changed its mind, I don't know, but they themselves said this a few months ago in a video when a delegation was visiting.

 

[studsmart]

Until and unless PAF has changed its mind, I don't know, but they themselves said this a few months ago in a video when a delegation was visiting.

yes i do remember that too, but how can convert a AEWCS to ELINT/ EW platform

 

[TallGuy]

These were trash.
I hope they are gone .

what is the problem with it? is it the AEW & C suite or is it the platform?

 

[fameen]

it is false.

I appreciate that some on this forum are insistent that all Chinese systems are poor. But do you have any evidence to substantiate your claim that these systems were sub par? Has the PAF made any statements to this effect?

 

[Zarvan]

yes i do remember that too, but how can convert a AEWCS to ELINT/ EW platform

Very simple first remove the radar than modify the plane according to your own needs. You just have to remove the top radar.

 

[Cipher212]

it is false.

Just make them transport aircraft again. We could use more of those.

 

[Corax]

what is the problem with it? is it the AEW & C suite or is it the platform?

I suspect the Chinese were fleecing the PAF in support and maintenance costs. I might be wrong but the PAF is the only operator of the type, the Chinese don't use it. The ZDK was one of those 'export' only versions, very different to the balance beam version the PLAF adopted. It only found an export customer with the PAF, no one else. Don't think there's anything wrong with the aircraft platform per se, the PLAF use it for a wide array of special mission types, as well as transport, in large numbers.

 

[Ali_Baba]

I suspect the Chinese were fleecing the PAF in support and maintenance costs. I might be wrong but the PAF is the only operator of the type, the Chinese don't use it. The ZDK was one of those 'export' only versions, very different to the balance beam version the PLAF adopted. It only found an export customer with the PAF, no one else. Don't think there's anything wrong with the aircraft platform per se, the PLAF use it for a wide array of special mission types, as well as transport, in large numbers.

This is one of the many( many, many ) reasons why the PAF decided to not go for the FC-31 when it was offered to Pakistan, but waited and waited until China picked the platform for itself, and developed it at their own cost and now will get it as the J-35AE.

 

[Michael]

I suspect the Chinese were fleecing the PAF in support and maintenance costs. I might be wrong but the PAF is the only operator of the type, the Chinese don't use it. The ZDK was one of those 'export' only versions, very different to the balance beam version the PLAF adopted. It only found an export customer with the PAF, no one else. Don't think there's anything wrong with the aircraft platform per se, the PLAF use it for a wide array of special mission types, as well as transport, in large numbers.

Should I address you as a "fool" or a "troll"?

You really ought to take a close look at the timeline of the events in question.

At the time the PAF procured the ZDK-03 AEW&C from China, what AEW&C assets did the PLAAF itself possess?

You launch a direct tirade against your primary arms supplier—all without conducting any background research or analyzing the context of the events? So, tell me: are you a "fool" or a "troll"?

 

[Corax]

Should I address you as a "fool" or a "troll"?

You really ought to take a close look at the timeline of the events in question.

At the time the PAF procured the ZDK-03 AEW&C from China, what AEW&C assets did the PLAAF itself possess?

You launch a direct tirade against your primary arms supplier—all without conducting any background research or analyzing the context of the events? So, tell me: are you a "fool" or a "troll"?

Why don't you enlighten us oh wise master? Don't get your knickers in a twist, the fact that the ZDK03 was produced in such low numbers, was never inducted by the PLAF, and with the PAF the only operator, it meant a high risk for the PAF, clearly it looks like they didn't like that risk anymore.

 

[Michael]

Why don't you enlighten us oh wise master? Don't get your knickers in a twist, the fact that the ZDK03 was produced in such low numbers, was never inducted by the PLAF, and with the PAF the only operator, it meant a high risk for the PAF, clearly it looks like they didn't like that risk anymore.

1. The first ZDK-03 AEW&C aircraft was delivered to the PAF in 2011.

At that time, the only AEW&C platforms in service with the PLA itself were the KJ-2000 and the KJ-200. The KJ-2000 was too large and prohibitively expensive, making it clearly unsuitable for the PAF. The KJ-200, by comparison, was technically inferior to the ZDK-03.

Consequently, at that juncture, the ZDK-03—the system China provided to the PAF—represented the very best product available.

2. By that time, development of China's KJ-500 was already underway. Indeed, it could be said that certain technologies incorporated into the KJ-500 were validated through the ZDK-03 program. The KJ-500 stands as China's first truly mature AEW&C platform; whereas the KJ-2000 and KJ-200 saw only limited production and deployment, the KJ-500 was the first to undergo genuine mass production and widespread deployment. However, the KJ-500 did not complete its maiden flight until 2014 and did not officially enter service until 2015.

At the time, the PLA could afford to wait for the KJ-500 to reach maturity, as it already had the KJ-2000 and KJ-200 in active service; the PAF, however, may not have had that luxury.

=========================================================

Technical risks and opportunities often go hand in hand.

Investing during the early stages of technological development means reaping technological dividends sooner, but it also entails technological risk.
Investing once the technology has matured means your technological risk is very low, but it also implies that it will soon become obsolete.

The J-10 series fighter jets: The PAF did not begin procuring the J-10CE until the platform had reached full maturity. This implies that the PAF faces virtually no significant technical risks. However, China has already initiated the process of phasing out this aircraft. Consequently, China will not undertake any major upgrades or updates to this fighter jet in the future. Furthermore, a decade from now, issues regarding the supply of spare parts for maintenance are likely to arise.

The same issues apply to the FC-31/J-35 and other weapon platforms as well.

 

[Corax]

1. The first ZDK-03 AEW&C aircraft was delivered to the PAF in 2011.

At that time, the only AEW&C platforms in service with the PLA itself were the KJ-2000 and the KJ-200. The KJ-2000 was too large and prohibitively expensive, making it clearly unsuitable for the PAF. The KJ-200, by comparison, was technically inferior to the ZDK-03.

Consequently, at that juncture, the ZDK-03—the system China provided to the PAF—represented the very best product available.

2. By that time, development of China's KJ-500 was already underway. Indeed, it could be said that certain technologies incorporated into the KJ-500 were validated through the ZDK-03 program. The KJ-500 stands as China's first truly mature AEW&C platform; whereas the KJ-2000 and KJ-200 saw only limited production and deployment, the KJ-500 was the first to undergo genuine mass production and widespread deployment. However, the KJ-500 did not complete its maiden flight until 2014 and did not officially enter service until 2015.

At the time, the PLA could afford to wait for the KJ-500 to reach maturity, as it already had the KJ-2000 and KJ-200 in active service; the PAF, however, may not have had that luxury.

=========================================================

Technical risks and opportunities often go hand in hand.

Investing during the early stages of technological development means reaping technological dividends sooner, but it also entails technological risk.
Investing once the technology has matured means your technological risk is very low, but it also implies that it will soon become obsolete.

The J-10 series fighter jets: The PAF did not begin procuring the J-10CE until the platform had reached full maturity. This implies that the PAF faces virtually no significant technical risks. However, China has already initiated the process of phasing out this aircraft. Consequently, China will not undertake any major upgrades or updates to this fighter jet in the future. Furthermore, a decade from now, issues regarding the supply of spare parts for maintenance are likely to arise.

The same issues apply to the FC-31/J-35 and other weapon platforms as well.

Well that only goes to prove the point I was making, the fact the PLAF did not procure that ZDK and instead opted for a more advanced version, the KJ500, meant that the PAF were then left with a high risk high cost, platform. If what you're saying is true, then it seems the ZDK was more of a test bed for the KJ500, and the PAF took the technical risk to procurement this, instead of thr KJ200 or wait for that KJ500. Either way, it was a bad choice.

 

[Michael]

Well that only goes to prove the point I was making, the fact the PLAF did not procure that ZDK and instead opted for a more advanced version, the KJ500, meant that the PAF were then left with a high risk high cost, platform. If what you're saying is true, then it seems the ZDK was more of a test bed for the KJ500, and the PAF took the technical risk to procurement this, instead of thr KJ200 or wait for that KJ500. Either way, it was a bad choice.

With any technology, the sooner you adopt it, the sooner you stand to benefit; however, you simultaneously face a correspondingly higher level of technical risk.

Consider another case in point:

China utilized the JF-17 program to test its proprietary DSI technology. You remain free to criticize this approach as much as you wish.

From Pakistan's perspective at the time, the choice was clear: either accept this arrangement—thereby assuming the associated technical risks within the context of the JF-17 project—or wait until China had fully matured the technology on other platforms before applying it to the JF-17. The latter option, however, could have entailed a delay of many years.

The research findings derived from this initiative were ultimately applied to other fighter aircraft, such as the J-10C and J-20. Nevertheless, the JF-17 holds the distinction of being the world's first mass-produced fighter jet to incorporate DSI technology.

If you believe that Pakistan should have waited for the technology to reach full maturity before adopting it, I invite you to calculate the resulting timeline for yourself.

================

Any perspective that adheres strictly to a rigid, either-or dichotomy is ill-suited for a meaningful discussion of topics such as this.