Capabilities of PAF Dassault MIRAGE-III/V.

[MastanKhan]

Onboard indian MKI.


@Tps43


No more smart - getting upto 60.

Hi

Hehehe.

 

[MastanKhan]

I think it's the side-discussion re: a potential Mirage III/5 replacement. As @MastanKhan brought up from the very start (here's ur credit man), the JH-7A is basically the only fighter-bomber solution available to the PAF in as far as lobbing big SOWs (H-2, H-4s, Ra'ad, Ra'ad II, and Mk. 84-based REKs) is concerned.

And, to be honest, he's right -- if doubling down on more JF-17s is the only route, then why not shore-up the heavyweight stuff using the JH-7A while using JF-17s as escorts/support fighters?

Hi,

If the US can convert & modernize the B52 to do miracles in wars of the future---there is no reason that the Paf cannot do the same to the JH7A on a smaller scale---.

The problem over here is not the abiity or the disability of the JH7A---the real problem here is the PAKISTANI---. Once they say no---it is a no---( Khotay wali No ).

Not a single one of you have given any TACTICAL REASONING FOR no JH7A---. Right now it is all copy paste from wiki---.

Never ever forget that these were the same people who Rejected the Rafale and stated that it was not worth it---. Prior to that they had made the same claim about the F7PG's as well---.

See---the man behind the machine is a lie---. The machine has to be superior for the the man to do his thing---.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hi,

If the US can convert & modernize the B52 to do miracles in wars of the future---there is no reason that the Paf cannot do the same to the JH7A on a smaller scale---.

The problem over here is not the abiity or the disability of the JH7A---the real problem here is the PAKISTANI---. Once they say no---it is a no---( Khotay wali No ).

Not a single one of you have given any TACTICAL REASONING FOR no JH7A---. Right now it is all copy paste from wiki---.

Never ever forget that these were the same people who Rejected the Rafale and stated that it was not worth it---. Prior to that they had made the same claim about the F7PG's as well---.

See---the man behind the machine is a lie---. The machine has to be superior for the the man to do his thing---.

USAF B52s fly as they have air superiority/dominance, which PAF will not have in an Indo-Pak war.

The problem is with the JH-7A, not in its availability. And your scenario is so simple, it is not even worth mentioning in the context of justifying PAF/PN buying it. It will be easily detected at very long ranges over the ocean by IAF early warning radars and AEW aircraft and duly intercepted by their Su-30s and Rafales. Even if it turns back in time to avoid being shot down, it will be a failed mission anyways.

PS, I was surprised to read your comments on how cheap this aircraft is to procure even if we lose them easily in war, while completely ignoring how much more expensive those two pilots riding in thing would be. We all should also know that flyaway costs are only a small portion of what it would mean to induct, maintain and fly this junk for another 30 years. Basically a glorified enlarged Mig-21 with terrible build quality.

Also, where and when did the PAF or anyone ever state that Rafale was not worth it? I am curious. Similarly, how can you even imply the same comments were made of the F-7PG when PAF was the first importer of the type and was really excited by its performance from the get go when trialed in China?

You still need a competent person behind the machine to fully utilize it. Technology, while has made some tasks easier and workload less (when concerning basic flying, situational awareness etc) has not made flying easier and pilots nowadays have to work with loads of new data and threats as well as complex scenarios and similarly advanced threats to contend with. So the man behind the machine absolutely matters.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hi,

If you had a tad bit of knowledge---you would NOT have written what you did---.

Low flying aircraft over water are the most difficult objects to be traced---.

Secondly---same with the upgraded B52---. There is no air superiority required to use this vehicle---.

Listen---don't cut your nose to spite me---.

The upgraded B52 is designed to operate and strike from standoff distances without the enemy knowing if it came---.

As you do not know the original analysis by the Paf about the F7PG's and the Rafale years ago---you are not upto PAR to enter this discussion---so please if you can kindly keep away from it---it may benefit the audience---.

Big deal if the pilots are lost---that is what they are there for---. That is why we have the ratio of 3 per aircraft---.

The most important part is the weapon---.

I disagree with your B52 comparison, but I will leave it at that.

If I am so uninformed about PAFs original analysis of Rafale and F-7PG, enlighten me and numerous others on this board so we can learn something new besides taking your word for it.

Ill leave your pilot comment as it does not merit a response.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Sir,

If you did not know about the F7PG and Rafale analysis of Paf---then you could have just kept your mouth shut so not to be embarrassed---.

You want to talk to me----raise your standard and level of knowledge before you jump into the frey---.

You are good at beating around the bush. Put your money where your mouth is, as they say, and raise my level of knowledge. Cant ask more clearly than that.

 

[MastanKhan]

You are good at beating around the bush. Put your money where your mouth is, as they say, and raise my level of knowledge. Cant ask more clearly than that.

Hi,

I am not a BABY SITTER---get your info updated about those two aircraft and the B52 capabilities---.

I understand that it is difficult for me to discuss with pakistani children---but please raise your standards of discussion---be prepared---be informed---be knowledgeable about the subject matter---before you jump in---.

 

[Imran Khan]

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hi,

I am not a BABY SITTER---get your info updated about those two aircraft and the B52 capabilities---.

I understand that it is difficult for me to discuss with pakistani children---but please raise your standards of discussion---be prepared---be informed---be knowledgeable about the subject matter---before you jump in---.

I think you just make excuses every time you get called on your claims. Not the first time either so I should expect it. As for being informed, if everyone here knew it all, there would be no point in coming here. I certainly don't, and neither do I pretend to. But its interesting when asked, you seem to provide no real knowledge or information and are so quick to tell others to go learn on their own.

As for the subject matter ... I didnt realize we all had to be experts here on PAF's decision making centered around platforms. So I would offer you the same suggestion as you did me, that is keep your mouth shut or prove it otherwise.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hi,

I put a lots of time and effort into what I write and then some one comes along and he does not know what happened when the Chinese offered the F7PG's to pak air force in the late 90's and what was Paf's reply---or what the Paf ACM stated about the pre 2005 Rafale testing after the french struck Libya to over throw Qaddafi and how he changed his position about the aircraft---.

Then kindly, do not tell me to shut up next time if you don't feel like "offering up" anything.

As for the F-7PGs, it was only inducted into PLAAF in 1993, and the first time observers got to see it was in 1998 at Zhuhai Airshow. PAF ordered 57 of them in the initial batch the following year in 1999. So I guess we know what happened when the Chinese offered it to us in the late 90s I suppose.

 

[MastanKhan]

Then kindly, do not tell me to shut up next time if you don't feel like "offering up" anything.

As for the F-7PGs, it was only inducted into PLAAF in 1993, and the first time observers got to see it was in 1998 at Zhuhai Airshow. PAF ordered 57 of them in the initial batch the following year in 1999. So I guess we know what happened when the Chinese offered it to us in the late 90s I suppose.

Again---you are just winging it---without knowing the story behind it---.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Again---you are just winging it---without knowing the story behind it---.

And back to square one ... very predictable.

To other members here, who like myself are not privy to the internal decision making of PAF, here is a point to ponder. We are in love with our 60s vintage Mirage III/Vs, albeit updated. We tried, not once but three time to acquire Mirage 2000s from France and then again from Qatar at least once. That is how highly PAF seems to think of Dassault and its products. Now, if someone comes along to tell you, without any supporting evidence, or heck even any context, that PAF thought very little of their latest and greatest fighter jet, to take it with a grain of salt and keep your skeptical caps on.

 

[Code_Geass]

Again---you are just winging it---without knowing the story behind it---.

why dont you tell the story...

 

[aliyusuf]

It will be easily detected at very long ranges over the ocean by IAF early warning radars and AEW aircraft and duly intercepted by their Su-30s and Rafales. Even if it turns back in time to avoid being shot down, it will be a failed mission anyways.

Intriguing point you have raised. Do you know what the RCS of a JH-7A is btw or you are just making a generalization based on size? Is it's RCS more than an Su-30MKI?

 

[Philip the Arab]

Intriguing point you have raised. Do you know what the RCS of a JH-7A is btw or you are just making a generalization based on size? Is it's RCS more than an Su-30MKI?

I think its RCS is much higher than JF-17 and F-16 for sure. It could have similar RCS to Su-27 or Su-30 possibly due to large size. That being said, Israeli systems are state of the art and are probably optimized to look for JF-17 and F-16 radar signatures especially and they will be detected at rather far ranges.

Is Mirage 3/5 the only nuke capable strike aircraft in PAF inventory?

 

[aliyusuf]

It could have similar RCS to Su-27 or Su-30 possibly due to large size

@GriffinsRule

You cannot assume comparative RCS just by looking at the size of an object.

F-22 & B-2 are quite big too. Bigger than JF-17 & F-16. What makes their RCS only a fraction of the latter two?

Very simply put, that would primarily be the shape and then the composition of material used to make it's exposed surfaces. The shape diverts radar signals and the material absorbs them. Hence lesser radar signals get reflected back to make it less visible to the enemy radar.

The JH-7A may quite likely have a big RCS. So does the MKI. And when you have a non-AESA non-LPI radar on board, switching it on increases the RCS greatly. Achilles heel for the MKI.

But the point is that whether the new proposed JH-7AII (equipped with AESA & TDL with Link-17) can effectively launch a number of SOWs from long distance and then scoot before the enemy can do anything about it? If it can, then we have a platform that can hit farther and much harder than what we currently have.

Is Mirage 3/5 the only nuke capable strike aircraft in PAF inventory?

Wouldn't post a reply on this even if I knew.