Best BVR Capable Fighter in South Asia

[SBD-3]

See, whatever I'm saying here, I post a "link" not like your claims "suppose to be", "this guy confirmed" "under the wrap", "secret", "a replica picture".. etc.etc.

And regarding F-16 block details, its is not a counter claim or so. I paste the link which you only put first, and you HAVE NOT read the same, as I can understand,

And about lost pride, he he he, read most of the post and you will come to know that who has baised claims and are trolling. Do some research dude before just trying to defend yourself

It was a nice thread and you made this very dirty.

just because i questioned your "technical facts"

 

[rockstarIN]

just because i questioned your "technical facts"

This is the only thing you can do...keep doing it.

 

[SBD-3]

This is the only thing you can do...keep doing it.

hay hay hay dont get pissed off......ok lets see since you claim that you only agrue with the help of only verifiable information and "Technical facts" can you do me a favor; provide me with the link that PAF did not have BVR capability in 2008
and a link that MKI did not intruded in Pakistan Airspace and were not intercepted
and a link that PAF dont have SD-10
and a link that PAF have not decided to upgrade mirages with BVR
lets see how much technical facts do you come up with......waiting anxiously

 

[rockstarIN]

Read Sancho's reply, self explanatory

 

[SBD-3]

Read Sancho's reply, self explanatory

I am talking about Links.....

 

[sancho]

@Sancho

I am confused at these two points

1. The ranges of R27-77 extremely vary from 20---170km (online resources); simply because they have huge spectrum of variants; whch variants Indians are using??
2. Like to know if R27/77 are incorporated in Sea-Harriers; a picture will do the job??( as far as I know only Derby can be incorporated in Harriers)

Hi nightcrawler, can't tell you which version exactly is in use of IAF, but according to this source, the range is between 50 - 110Km:

Tactical Missiles Corporation JSC


Also, I didn't meant that Sea Harriers can use the Russian missiles too, but that it is BVR capable just like MKI Mig 29s and 21s. Maybe this explains it better:

IAF

Su 30 MKI - R27 / R77
Mig 29 / 29K - R27 / R77
Mig 21 Bison - R77
Sea Harrier - Derby


PAF

F16 B52 - AMRAAM
JFT B1 - SD 10

We do have a BVRAAM, its called the "T Darter" and was acquired from Denel on full TOT contract. Over the years Pakistan has acquired several products from Denel. The BVRAAM is Fire and Forget, it was further improved by Pakistani/Chinese engineers and has a reported range of 120KM. Its seeker, maneuverability and agility were further improved. I know that for sure Mirage III's with their upgraded Grifo Radars have the capability to fire these weapons and have been tested several times...

Once again, check the thread I posted please (page 2, post #18 for example):

This is a south African Raptor II glide bomb with rocket booster with a 120km range. and in PAF it is called H-4. people usually think that only AAM can be associated with BVR missile which is wrong. any missile be it AAM or AGM that can be fired to a beyond visual target is called BVR missile.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/48729-pakistan-inducts-bvr-missile-h-4-a-2.html


And if you don't believe those senior Pakistani members, simply go by logic please! If PAF would have a BVR A2A missile with a range of 120Km, why would they try to get SD 10, or MICA EM with ranges of less than 80Km for JFT? Doesn't make sense right?

 

[TaimiKhan]

And if you don't believe those senior Pakistani members, simply go by logic please! If PAF would have a BVR A2A missile with a range of 120Km, why would they try to get SD 10, or MICA EM with ranges of less than 80Km for JFT? Doesn't make sense right?

Well, the most senior and respected as well as very much reliable member, pshamim sb, an ex-PAF pilot, himself had revealed that H-4 was in reality an A2A BVR missile with 120 KM range, based on rather ToT version of R-darter missile, ToT given by South African company, the package included other PGM techs also in it and China was a partner to this deal, meaning it got the tech also since it was under sanctions during that era, so it was the silent partner. H-2 was the 60KM PGM and just by adding the rocket booster, the range can go to 120KM, which doesn't needs to be given any new name to it.

So, H-2 & H-4 were two separate programs, one a PGM and another A2A missile program.

For further info, you can check the H-2 & H-4 thread, in which pshamim sb has posted the Crescent Arrow (Pak version of R-Darter) missile, taken by himself, and the original R-Darter missile.

And as for Mica missile, it was or is being considered or PAF rumored to be showing interest due to the RC-400, meaning a package deal. We may not have shown our interest, but most probably the seller may have said to give the radar, if we have a package deal which involves weapons also, as it gives boost to their sales. So, out of necessity, PAF may have been evaluating the Mica missile. Not out of its own option.

Also, since South Africa gave the missile tech to China also, its very likely that the same or improved seeker tech or other missile tech has been used in the newer variants of SD-10 also, as we did heard little from Chinese news sources that the latest variant has some new seeker, not based on the Russian tech as previous missiles had.

And one of the other reason for going with SD-10 would be, to give it more chances of commercial success, as PAF using SD-10 with JF-17s, will give it a good boost to score any export success. So the SD-10 sale to PAF may be for commercial purposes, rather then for actual war purposes, or may be PAF is looking for diversification, in case one BVR gets easily neutralized during war time.

And the reason for getting Pak made BVR missile was to have a stop gap measure for the time till more capable missiles come into service, so who knows may be with Mirages going out of service, the Pak made BVR missile also goes out of service as they may have served their purpose.

Pak made BVR missile gives Pakistan a great advantage and that would be the tech which it will be using will be known to itself and less chances of someone else knowing about it and leakage of info and then the neutralizing of it by the enemy. As pshamim sb did said that we made in house modifications to the seeker technology to make it more deadly and effective as it was already based on Israeli tech, so they might have known about the real product.

Here, read what pshamim sb has to say:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409117

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409139

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409169

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-2.html#post409647

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-2.html#post409757

Chinese transfer of tech being talked about:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-5.html#post413286

Plus you can read the whole thread and get the idea and what pshamim sb had to say in the other posts.

 

[hillman32]

Zordari is the best in BiVi R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[F86 Saber]

Well, the most senior and respected as well as very much reliable member, pshamim sb, an ex-PAF pilot, himself had revealed that H-4 was in reality an A2A BVR missile with 120 KM range, based on rather ToT version of R-darter missile, ToT given by South African company, the package included other PGM techs also in it and China was a partner to this deal, meaning it got the tech also since it was under sanctions during that era, so it was the silent partner. H-2 was the 60KM PGM and just by adding the rocket booster, the range can go to 120KM, which doesn't needs to be given any new name to it.

So, H-2 & H-4 were two separate programs, one a PGM and another A2A missile program.

For further info, you can check the H-2 & H-4 thread, in which pshamim sb has posted the Crescent Arrow (Pak version of R-Darter) missile, taken by himself, and the original R-Darter missile.

And as for Mica missile, it was or is being considered or PAF rumored to be showing interest due to the RC-400, meaning a package deal. We may not have shown our interest, but most probably the seller may have said to give the radar, if we have a package deal which involves weapons also, as it gives boost to their sales. So, out of necessity, PAF may have been evaluating the Mica missile. Not out of its own option.

Also, since South Africa gave the missile tech to China also, its very likely that the same or improved seeker tech or other missile tech has been used in the newer variants of SD-10 also, as we did heard little from Chinese news sources that the latest variant has some new seeker, not based on the Russian tech as previous missiles had.

And one of the other reason for going with SD-10 would be, to give it more chances of commercial success, as PAF using SD-10 with JF-17s, will give it a good boost to score any export success. So the SD-10 sale to PAF may be for commercial purposes, rather then for actual war purposes, or may be PAF is looking for diversification, in case one BVR gets easily neutralized during war time.

And the reason for getting Pak made BVR missile was to have a stop gap measure for the time till more capable missiles come into service, so who knows may be with Mirages going out of service, the Pak made BVR missile also goes out of service as they may have served their purpose.

Pak made BVR missile gives Pakistan a great advantage and that would be the tech which it will be using will be known to itself and less chances of someone else knowing about it and leakage of info and then the neutralizing of it by the enemy. As pshamim sb did said that we made in house modifications to the seeker technology to make it more deadly and effective as it was already based on Israeli tech, so they might have known about the real product.

Here, read what pshamim sb has to say:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409117

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409139

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409169

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-2.html#post409647

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-2.html#post409757

Chinese transfer of tech being talked about:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-5.html#post413286

Plus you can read the whole thread and get the idea and what pshamim sb had to say in the other posts.

Game, Set and Match......... Well said Taimi Bhai.........

Anyone who argues beyond this point will surely be doing it for the sake of it..........

 

[indian navy]

well the fact is now mig 29 is the best one then su30 mki and then f16

 

[SBD-3]

Well, the most senior and respected as well as very much reliable member, pshamim sb, an ex-PAF pilot, himself had revealed that H-4 was in reality an A2A BVR missile with 120 KM range, based on rather ToT version of R-darter missile, ToT given by South African company, the package included other PGM techs also in it and China was a partner to this deal, meaning it got the tech also since it was under sanctions during that era, so it was the silent partner. H-2 was the 60KM PGM and just by adding the rocket booster, the range can go to 120KM, which doesn't needs to be given any new name to it.

So, H-2 & H-4 were two separate programs, one a PGM and another A2A missile program.

For further info, you can check the H-2 & H-4 thread, in which pshamim sb has posted the Crescent Arrow (Pak version of R-Darter) missile, taken by himself, and the original R-Darter missile.

And as for Mica missile, it was or is being considered or PAF rumored to be showing interest due to the RC-400, meaning a package deal. We may not have shown our interest, but most probably the seller may have said to give the radar, if we have a package deal which involves weapons also, as it gives boost to their sales. So, out of necessity, PAF may have been evaluating the Mica missile. Not out of its own option.

Also, since South Africa gave the missile tech to China also, its very likely that the same or improved seeker tech or other missile tech has been used in the newer variants of SD-10 also, as we did heard little from Chinese news sources that the latest variant has some new seeker, not based on the Russian tech as previous missiles had.

And one of the other reason for going with SD-10 would be, to give it more chances of commercial success, as PAF using SD-10 with JF-17s, will give it a good boost to score any export success. So the SD-10 sale to PAF may be for commercial purposes, rather then for actual war purposes, or may be PAF is looking for diversification, in case one BVR gets easily neutralized during war time.

And the reason for getting Pak made BVR missile was to have a stop gap measure for the time till more capable missiles come into service, so who knows may be with Mirages going out of service, the Pak made BVR missile also goes out of service as they may have served their purpose.

Pak made BVR missile gives Pakistan a great advantage and that would be the tech which it will be using will be known to itself and less chances of someone else knowing about it and leakage of info and then the neutralizing of it by the enemy. As pshamim sb did said that we made in house modifications to the seeker technology to make it more deadly and effective as it was already based on Israeli tech, so they might have known about the real product.

Here, read what pshamim sb has to say:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409117

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409139

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm.html#post409169

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-2.html#post409647

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-2.html#post409757

Chinese transfer of tech being talked about:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/28713-h2-h4-aam-agm-5.html#post413286

Plus you can read the whole thread and get the idea and what pshamim sb had to say in the other posts.

well said boss......A reason for PAF looking for M2K in 90s was the BVR capability. But since the deal was scrapped,so started the ROSE Program.

Although both the F-6 and the F-86E had a reasonable capabilities in the close support role, yet there was a need to regain the medium range day/night strike power which had been shared by the F-86F and the B-57 untill 1967. There was also the lingering gap in night air defence. To fulfil these requirements, the PAF turned to French Mirage fighter-bomber series.

With a combined total of 180 Mirage IIIs and Mirage 5s in service in 1998, the Pakistan Air Force is the world's second largest Mirage operator - second only to the French Armee d'l'Air (French Air Force). The Mirage entered service with the PAF in 1968. Mirage IIIs are high-speed, all weather, delta wing, long-range fighter-bombers while Mirage Vs are ground attack aircraft derived from the Mirage IIIs, which itself can also be employed in the interceptor role. The first order comprised of 18 Mirage III EPs, 13 Mirage III RPs, 3 Mirage
III DPs plus 28 Mirage 5 PAs, 4 Mirage 5 DPAs, 30 Mirage 5 PA2/3s. In 1990, PAF obtained 43 used Mirage III Os and 7 Mirage III ODs from Australia and then purchased 40 reconditioned Mirage III Es from France in 1996 pushing the total to 180 aircraft. The Mirage equips No. 5, No. 7, No. 8, No. 22 (OCU) and a CCS squadron.

One of the most elegant aircraft ever flown, the Mirage III has a large delta wing and circular intakes with shock cones. A rectangular recess under the aft fuselage can contain either a fuel tank or a rocket engine. It has improved Doppler navigation system in fairing under front fuselage, gyro gunsight and nose packing containing Omera 40 and 33 cameras. The Mirage 5 was a fair-weather attack development of the Mirage III. It can also be flown as an interceptor. The reduction of electronic equipment allows more fuel and reduces cost.

The project "ROSE" (Retrofit of Strike Element") was set up to reclaim as many airplanes as possible and to upgrade them with latest avionics. Originally it was thought that only 20 - 25 airframes could be made operational but eventually, more than 40 airframes were refurbuished and put back in service. The avionics upgrade included fitting of HUD, HOTAS controls, RWR's chaff / flare and most important of all the retrofit of FIAR Griffo Radar. This radar is the Italian copy of APG-68 and has full look down shoot down capability.

* ROSE: Retrofit Of Strike Element: Is actually the major (Avionics + Radar) upgrade that the PAF Mirage fleet underwent during the 90s.
* ROSE-I: This included upgraded cockpit instrumentation, Grifo-M Radar and weapons system reconfiguration. (BVR-able).
* ROSE-II: This included the Sagem implemented MAESTRO Nav/Attack System. (Strike).
* ROSE-III: This included the Sagem MAESTRO Nav/Attack and FLIR. (Precision Strike). Mirage ROSE-III can carry out surgical strike missions using long-range glide bombs.

Project ROSE at MRF is a special Project, which is supported by Air Headquarters. In financial year 2003-04, Project ROSE was tasked by Air Headquarters to upgrade Avionics of Mirage-V EF aircraft. Rose-III modified 1st serial aircraft was displayed at Paris Air Show from 11 – 19 June, 2005. The participation in such a world renowned forum has given MRF an opportunity to effectively market its products and services in the international aviation industry. In Pakistan the new fighter received the designation JF-17 (Joint Fighter-17) and is planned to replace the F-7, Mirage III/5 and Q-5. Thehttp://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/mirage-5.htm

F-7Ps radar had a range of 37KM which meant it could fire a BVR but the problem was that PAF did not have a BVR at that time. so sancho's post makes sense that eventhough platforms were BVRable but the BVRAAMs were not available for these ACs. However, PAF F-16s did operate AIM-7 Sparrow BVRs (may be a limited inventory)
Pakistan Air Force Equipment
The F-7PGs brought a better radar Grifo-7PG (http://www.selex-sas.com/EN/Common/files/SELEX_Galileo/Products/GRIFO_FAMILY.pdf) than Grifo-7 with enhanced scanning capabilities. There were Two issues however,
1) can the aircraft's wings have the capability to hold this missile
2) Capability of radar to fire the BVR
here is an old discussion between on this in 2003

"If you hang a huge heavy bomb on it then the drag will increase, the weight will increase and the range will be not that good."

500lb bombs have been used on MiG-21s in combat for the last 30 or so years. It's not new, whats new is that several users have/are adopting LGBs of 500lb size.

" And if that happens then the first BVR missile will be attached to this plane cause why using a larger and better radar if no weapon can handle that range?"

and

"So far the constructive discussion we have on this topic means that a BVR missile can hit a target to max of 25Km to 30Km range a the lower altitude."


They can hit at much better ranges than that. All the NEZ is, is the best range to prevent the other guy from running away from the missile.


"As the Grifo-7PG can track the target to the range of 37KM.This range is more than enough to guide any BVR missile."

Only a R-Darter or Derby to thier full range.

and by famous londo molari
Londo Molari

February 1st, 2004, 03:53 PM
The F-7s that Pakistan has have radars with enough range to use a BVR missile (like 50km). But Pakistan has no BVR missiles.

Once the JF-17 is armed with the SD-10, they will probably arm the F-7 with the SD-10 too.

so
1)F-7s and Mirages were BVRable but no BVR missiles were available
2) Falcons were operating AIM-7 sparrows

While in development, Pakistan was offered T-Darter in 1999.

FaisalK10-14-2006, 11:37 AM
PS: I recall some die hard F-16 enthusiast claiming the SD-10 was not even comparable the the R-Darter..
Newer does not always mean better; the argument you implied does not take into account the years and Israeli help South African BVR technology has had over the years. Besides, the R-Darter has been in service since the early-to-mid 1990s - it would be twenty years old when it retires; when was the AIM-120A fielded back after its introduction? In 1999 Pakistan was offered an improved version of R-Darter called the T-Darter; which would IMO still be superior to SD-10 - assuming Pakistan has taken up the project.

That is not to say SD-10 will never improve; currently it is at its "A" form - over the years the Chinese will develop new technology and what not; it will eventually rival the current AIM-120C-series. However the question is when.

Besides, the South Africans currently have high standards; they are likely after METEOR now.

in December, 2003 the following news broke

PAF adds new bombs to its arsenal


By Arshad Sharif

ISLAMABAD, Dec 17: Pakistan Air Force has integrated the H-4 out-of-sight target bombs in its arsenal of fighter aircraft, official sources said. The incorporation of H-4 bombs have added to the capability of the PAF to hit out-of-sight targets from a distance of up to 120 kilometres to evade enemy radars during air strikes. A lighter version of the bomb, H-2 model, can hit the out-of-sight targets from a range of up to 60 kilometres.

"It is a step towards adding the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles to our arsenal for defensive purposes and to address the strategic imbalance in the region," sources said.

The indigenously produced H-4 bombs is an achievement of the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM), which works in close collaboration with Pakistan Missile Organizationand the Air Weapons Complex.

"Three successful tests of H-4, with the latest conducted this year, produced satisfactory results leading to addition of arsenal in the fighter jets," the sources said.

The H-4 bombs have been made through indigenous efforts by modifying the technological design of South African T-Darter BVR missiles. Till the induction of JF-17 Thunder in 2006, with a provision for BVRs, the H-2 and H-4 bombs could be carried by Mirage fighter jets. The H-4 infrared device is said to be comparable to that of the AA11, AA12 and Python 4 in the Indian arsenal.

Moreover, the sources said, fighter aircraft in PAF's arsenal have the "provision" to be fitted with precision-guided munitions and BVR missiles. When asked about advantages of BVR in Indian arsenal, PAF spokesperson Air Commodore Sarfaraz said: "We are aggressively trying to utilize whatever equipment we have to its optimum operational limits through professional training and by pursuing high standards of maintenance."

Mr Sarfaraz said: "We are aware of our technological needs and are vigorously trying to meet those requirements either through procurements or indigenous developments."

The European and the US suppliers were currently not willing to share the technology with Pakistan. However, contacts were being established with China, defence sources said, adding that JF-17 Thunder (to be inducted in 2006), F-16s and the Mirage aircraft in Pakistan's fleet all had the provision to be fitted with BVRs once the technology and the missiles would be acquired.

and T Darter is revealed in 2008

The Darter Business - Denel unveils T-Darter

I am shocked to say the least...the names and numbers just sound too famliar to me.

Link
================================================== ===
Denel conceptualises new missile

BY LEON ENGELBRECHT , ITWEB SENIOR WRITER

[ Johannesburg, 14 April 2008 ] - Denel Dynamics, the smart weapons division of the state arms maker, is conceptualising a new high-performance radar-guided missile that, if it comes to fruition, will provide SA's fleet of Gripen advanced light fighter aircraft its main punch.

The advanced weapon will also have substantial export potential and could gain the country billions of rand in foreign exchange in addition to boosting the local ICT skills and know-how base.

The missile is known as the T Darter and is being designed to replace the R Darter (Radar Darter) currently in service with the SA Air Force (SAAF), where it is known as the V4. Cabinet, in 2003, decided to retire the V4 when the Cheetah fighter jet was withdrawn from service as the missile contained Israeli technology and required continued assistance from that country to remain operational.

Denel Dynamics CEO Jan Wessels says the T Darter will join their A Darter, currently under joint development with Brazil, under the wings of the Gripen, which has just started entering service with the SAAF. Last month SAAF started phasing out the Cheetah and the V4.

“T Darter is a concept radar-guided missile,” Wessels says. “We are [proposing to use] some of our existing technologies and [are] looking for partners for the rest. We will typically provide the nose of this missile, which is the radar and are looking for a partner for the ‘back end'” he says.

Other than the radar, the ‘front end' also includes a number of proprietary processors that guide the weapon to its intended target at ranges that can extend to over 60km – the striking distance of the V4.
Denel conceptualises new missile | ITWeb

so all in all it seems like PAF had very likely accepted the offer and would have had participation in the program yielding it BVR status somewhere around 2001-02 (considering the modifications to T Darter for H-4).....but this is just my analysis....open for discussion

 

[silent hawk]

well the fact is now mig 29 is the best one then su30 mki and then f16

This is an opinion not a fact

 

[SBD-3]

Yeah Thanks God Mr.Technical Facts aka rockstar is not here

 

[rockstarIN]

@hasnain0099

Nice to see you doing some research work, rather than ur usual stuff.

Anyway, I have one important question. If one have a Radar which is well able to track and lock on well beyond visual range and a BVR missile. Is it easy to connect both and incorporate to the aircraft provided both are aquired/produced differently?

Can anybody answer? Chogy?

---------- Post added at 11:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 PM ----------

Yeah Thanks God Mr.Technical Facts aka rockstar is not here

Oh God he started again, cant u stick to the topic and not ruin a good conversation kid?

 

[SBD-3]

@hasnain0099

Nice to see you doing some research work, rather than ur usual stuff.

Anyway, I have one important question. If one have a Radar which is well able to track and lock on well beyond visual range and a BVR missile. Is it easy to connect both and incorporate to the aircraft provided both are aquired/produced differently?

Can anybody answer? Chogy?

---------- Post added at 11:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 PM ----------



Oh God he started again, cant u stick to the topic?

O agya mera dost............btw I do some careful research before posting...you would see most of my posts carrying references I dont like to call my assumptions "Technical facts"