Air Force Question Thread

[razgriz19]

are IL-78 cost effective planes to operate?
i mean are they cheap to operate or not??

 

[Tanzil]

what was the total strength of the PAF's fleet and IAF's fleet in 1965

 

[Tanzil]

There is a two seat version of J10 which would be the ideal platform for this role.

Could J 10 be compared with F 16

 

[Barrett]

Pakistan tiger
Twin engined aircraft are chosen if the area one needs to cover is large or you think you will need to carry a lot of armaments a long way. Being twin engined, they need morew looking after and are therefore expensive to maintain. Another reaosn is in case you are going over sea as a single engined aircraft developing a fault would nbe lost totally whereas a twin engined aircraft would survive
Single engined aircrafts on the other hand are easier to maintain, more economical and to some extent, on account of quicker turnaround can deliver almost the same amount of armaments.
If you look at pakistan, our main adversary is India and our borders are contiguous. Our strategic depth is not enough to warrant a twin engined plane.Even at sea, ouyr economic zone merely extends a couple of hundred miles and being a defensive force we will most likely not utilize our fighters for deep interdiction strikes, instead using missiles and CM.
Therefore for us it is a logical decision to use single engined aircrafts.
Araz

I will disagree with you. PAF has operated with two twin engine jets F-6 and A-5s and both these planes have served the country very well.
As far as the maintenance issue is concerned PAF has a very professional technical staff who can maintain their birds better then most. The current inventory of aging fleet in good condition and very low crash rate is an example. Relatively newer twin-engine jets can still not be as difficult to maintain as the 30-40 year old single engine jets, you can't compromise your national security based on maintenance issues.
So the twin-engine high maintenance argument is not an issue compared to what you are putting the effort for.

Now lets come to the second point of strategic depth, IMHO with or without strategic depth twin-engine jets are more of a plus then negative at any given day. All the modern Air forces in the world are equipping themselves with twin-engine jets either to play the role of an offensive Airforce or to counter such threats playing the defensive role.

The only reason why we don't operate any modern twin-engine jets is because we don't have such relations with Russia and U.S has never offered us any such planes and we don't have enough in our pockets to buy them even if they were available.

PAF would love to operate modern twin-engine jets, do you seriously think if U.S offers us F-15s instead of F-16s we would say no thanks they are very difficult to maintain and we don't have any strategic depth so we don't want them?

cheers.

 

[Defender.pk]

IT MAY BE DAY ONLY DEWSIGNATION OR DAY/NIGHT ? PLEASE ELOBRATE

 

[hataf]

what was the total strength of the PAF's fleet and IAF's fleet in 1965

here is the link
Aerial warfare in 1965 India Pakistan War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 the PAF was out-numbered 5:1 against the Indian Air Force and, initially, both sides claimed to have downed around 100 aircraft of the opposition during the 23 day war. The PAF fleet at the time consisted of 12 F-104 Starfighters, some 120 F-86 Sabres and around 20 B-57 Canberra bombers.[10] The Indian claim of 100 PAF aircraft downed was proven to be highly exaggerated when 86 F-86 Sabres, 10 F-104 Starfighters and 20 B-57 Canberra bombers were flown in a parade after the war. The InAF is later believed to have admitted the loss of at least 75 aircraft, while the PAF admitted to losing 19 aircraft. The PAF's claim was confirmed by the U.S. Military Assistance Advisory Group. The PAF also claims to have had complete air superiority over the battle area from the second day of operations [11] and it is believed that the Indian Army would agree.[12] Close air support to the Pakistan Army was unexpectedly effective and the PAF is widely considered to have single-handedly neutralised the large difference in military strength of India and Pakistan.[11]

 

[Mike Wilson]

Hello,

Thanks for giving the information about the Air force Question . I like that. Thanks for sharing the useful information about Air force

Thanks
Mike Wilson

 

[sunakaffck]

hey guys before i start i would like to say that this is an excellent forum have read tens of threads and was very impressed.

my question is what the difference between normal version and the naval version combat aircraft's bcoz they cost at least 30% higher than the simple version.

 

[hataf]

hey guys before i start i would like to say that this is an excellent forum have read tens of threads and was very impressed.

my question is what the difference between normal version and the naval version combat aircraft's bcoz they cost at least 30% higher than the simple version.

Naval jet should have more power full engine as short runway on aircraft carrier and employee extra component for stopping the plain in short length

These two things I know, others can be told by seniors

 

[sunakaffck]

ok thanks for the info hataf

 

[zagahaga]

our f -16 MLU would there structure be repaired? like there body.. would they have conformal fuel tanks? what about there radar? and would they be head on with the block 50/52?

 

[gambit]

hey guys before i start i would like to say that this is an excellent forum have read tens of threads and was very impressed.

my question is what the difference between normal version and the naval version combat aircraft's bcoz they cost at least 30% higher than the simple version.

The stress of a carrier landing demand more robust physical construction, especially of the landing gear system. Here is an example of how complicated something can be in the construction of a naval fighter...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/817476-post17.html

The salt water environment demand higher than normal corrosion resistant materials such as alloys and paint. Although advances in the technology of those two items made all aircrafts, not just naval ones, capable of withstanding the sea environment.

 

[jagjitnatt]

our f -16 MLU would there structure be repaired? like there body.. would they have conformal fuel tanks? what about there radar? and would they be head on with the block 50/52?

The structure would be repaired, slight modifications would be made to the airframe. New radar would be installed, along with new flight control computer, Mission Computer, Advanced Identification Friend-or-Foe system, Wide Angle Conventional HUD, new LCD screens, new display generator, A/V recorder, Improved Data Modem, Digital Terrain System, etc etc.

But no conformal fuel tanks for F16 MLU since the older airframe can not support the weight of the tanks.

They wouldn't be head on with the block50/52. They are different planes. Although the MLU upgrade does add quite a lot of features to older F16s but still they becomes equivalent to only block 40 or so.

Block 50/52 is a different plane.

 

[Barrett]

our f -16 MLU would there structure be repaired? like there body.. would they have conformal fuel tanks? what about there radar? and would they be head on with the block 50/52?

The MLU upgrade kits will include: APG-68(V)9 radar; Embedded GPS/INS (EGI); Link-16 data link; APX-113 Advanced Identify Friend or Foe (AIFF); Color Cockpit with Color Moving Map; ALQ-211(V)9 Advanced Integrated Defensive Electronic Warfare Suite (AIDEWS) Pod; Night Vision Imaging System (NVIS) Cockpit and External Lighting; Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod; Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS); Reconnaissance Pod capability; improved avionics systems; JDAM capability; EGBU capability; AIM-120 AMRAAM capability; and AGM-84 Harpoon capability. While many of the avionics systems and capabilities are common with the new Block 52s and the MLU, some significant differences remain between the MLU F-16 Block 15s and the new PAF Block 52s: there are no improvements to the Block 15s mission range and loiter time; there are no engine improvements; and, there are no improvements to payload capacity. Overall, the MLU program will extend the service life of Pakistan’s original F-16 aircraft and very significantly increase the capability of the Pakistan Air Force to conduct Close Air Support and night precision attack missions.

And yes they will be close to the Block 50/52

 

[Defender.pk]

1.) status of Aim 7 sparow in PAF.

2)night precision attack capability of PAF F-16 & mirrages.

3) H2 & H4 ARE PGM OR AA BVR MISSILES?

4) BVR MISSILE USED WITH ROSE UPGRADED MIRRAGES . DEVELOPED INDIGENOUSLY?

ANSWERES OF THESE QUESTIONS ARE NOT FOUND ANY WHERE