Capabilities of PAF Dassault MIRAGE-III/V.

[mshan44]

Quite rare: a #Pakistan Air Force Mirage IIIEA ROSE I, wearing Indian Air Force roundels and markings during shooting of a film (Sherdil). #India’s Air Force operates the Mirage 2000, a similar looking aircraft. Via
@TheNomadLad

 

[Windjammer]

 

[khail007]

View attachment 814658

Beautiful picture, the only issue is that the aircraft PS into the picture, the real picture is:

 

[Gripen9]

Beautiful picture, the only issue is that the aircraft PS into the picture, the real picture is:

View attachment 830961

Derawar Fort?

 

[khail007]

Derawar Fort?

Bullseye

 

[denel]

The mirage sounds like the PAF's equivalent of the A10. Unliked by the AF till it found a niche and then all of a sudden taken over for the niche role. I think it is ideal for the A2G role and will be used for it. As to Cheetah modification my own feeling is PAF assessed rightly that even developing it would not give it any meaningful role other than the one it is slotted into. Putting BVRs on it still means it will be very vulnerable in a modern war arena. If you look back in early 2000s with PAF still practicing for a WVR engagement, it just did not sit well with PAF strategy.
A

Actually i would disagree in a few points. Firstly not going the cheetah route exposed PAF for 2 decades of insecurity which could have been cut short. Additionally, there would have been a huge level of local knowledge, skill, alloyes, engineering not limited to just airframe capabilities developed to take it forward while enabling many further airforces who would have had this option to upgrade or older m3 could have been sold as a 'new' aircraft. Secondly, Cheetah represented a 4G aircraft; this would have given you HMS which has been a standard rapport for us for decades. Cheetah gave a significant improvement on range as well as payload capacity vs the M3/5. Further to your point this would have ensured Cheetah remained critical for the nuclear option as a payload carrier vs a lowest tier carrier with all the standard capabilities which a 4G has. Personally, i believe not following Cheetah route, it was a huge negative overall and the only rational i can understand is the unavailibility of 9K50C. If this option was not pursued, the 2nd best option of bringing in the F1 was also squandered.

My 2cents input.

 

[Deltadart]

Actually i would disagree in a few points. Firstly not going the cheetah route exposed PAF for 2 decades of insecurity which could have been cut short. Additionally, there would have been a huge level of local knowledge, skill, alloyes, engineering not limited to just airframe capabilities developed to take it forward while enabling many further airforces who would have had this option to upgrade or older m3 could have been sold as a 'new' aircraft. Secondly, Cheetah represented a 4G aircraft; this would have given you HMS which has been a standard rapport for us for decades. Cheetah gave a significant improvement on range as well as payload capacity vs the M3/5. Further to your point this would have ensured Cheetah remained critical for the nuclear option as a payload carrier vs a lowest tier carrier with all the standard capabilities which a 4G has. Personally, i believe not following Cheetah route, it was a huge negative overall and the only rational i can understand is the unavailibility of 9K50C. If this option was not pursued, the 2nd best option of bringing in the F1 was also squandered.

My 2cents input.

Great analysis. I wish we had a think tank of the caliber of RAND corporation in Pakistan to analyze such vital national security issues, and make recommendations to the government and the PAF, similar to the way USAF gets scrutinized by the think tanks and the elected officials in the US.
Currently there is no such mechanism in Pakistan to make recommendations, or question the decisions made by the PAF. Whatever, paf decides is taken as the final word without any outside input, which is deemed as inferior by the men in uniform anyway.
The way things are, the corrupt politicians, and their accomplices in the paf, showed criminal negligence in not seriously pursuing cheetah, F1, M2K etc. to the determent of the nation. Unfortunately, nothing has changed even now. It was always about kickbacks, and not about getting industrial know how to make our own planes, and become independent. Anybody questioning this set up is either a traitor, or a nobody to be questioning the professional know it alls.

 

[araz]

Actually i would disagree in a few points. Firstly not going the cheetah route exposed PAF for 2 decades of insecurity which could have been cut short. Additionally, there would have been a huge level of local knowledge, skill, alloyes, engineering not limited to just airframe capabilities developed to take it forward while enabling many further airforces who would have had this option to upgrade or older m3 could have been sold as a 'new' aircraft. Secondly, Cheetah represented a 4G aircraft; this would have given you HMS which has been a standard rapport for us for decades. Cheetah gave a significant improvement on range as well as payload capacity vs the M3/5. Further to your point this would have ensured Cheetah remained critical for the nuclear option as a payload carrier vs a lowest tier carrier with all the standard capabilities which a 4G has. Personally, i believe not following Cheetah route, it was a huge negative overall and the only rational i can understand is the unavailibility of 9K50C. If this option was not pursued, the 2nd best option of bringing in the F1 was also squandered.

My 2cents input.

Hi Denel.
As to the Cheetah upgrades, while I am merely an enthusiast, I do have a few observations.
My contention has always remained that the cheetah upgrade would not have sorted out the aerodynamic inefficiencies of the delta. In the subcontinent theatre without a BVR and effective HOBS, it would always have remained vulnerable as at the first turn it would have lost energy and succumbed to the enemy. There was no effective and available SA BVR or HOBS which would have utilized the full capabilities of the HMCS. However for other projects like the JFT, it would have come in handy.
I take your point on board about the other skills as well as alloys, but Pakistan did not have the basic infrastructure to avail from these metallic alloys technology (at least to the best of my knowledge). So as a cost vs benefit exercise it fails in my view. PAF does have a mafia (or gently putting it a thought process) and only now have they embraced the delta canard concept with the J10C ( I suspect the lack of availability of block 72s may have something to do with it) having previously stuck to the non delta setup. Setting up the Delta canard setup on older airframes would have been risky and cost prohibitive, and PAF out of sheer necessity remains frugal in spending money in risky projects. I do feel PAF should have gone the F1 route or M2K5 way in the mid 90s but it did not happen for various reasons. It is safe to say PAF wanted to replace the M3/5s with M2K5s. While this would have been amazing it did not happen.
Happy to listen to a counter post from you as I always learn from your posts.
Regards
A

 

[denel]

Hi Denel.
As to the Cheetah upgrades, while I am merely an enthusiast, I do have a few observations.
My contention has always remained that the cheetah upgrade would not have sorted out the aerodynamic inefficiencies of the delta. In the subcontinent theatre without a BVR and effective HOBS, it would always have remained vulnerable as at the first turn it would have lost energy and succumbed to the enemy. There was no effective and available SA BVR or HOBS which would have utilized the full capabilities of the HMCS. However for other projects like the JFT, it would have come in handy.
I take your point on board about the other skills as well as alloys, but Pakistan did not have the basic infrastructure to avail from these metallic alloys technology (at least to the best of my knowledge). So as a cost vs benefit exercise it fails in my view. PAF does have a mafia (or gently putting it a thought process) and only now have they embraced the delta canard concept with the J10C ( I suspect the lack of availability of block 72s may have something to do with it) having previously stuck to the non delta setup. Setting up the Delta canard setup on older airframes would have been risky and cost prohibitive, and PAF out of sheer necessity remains frugal in spending money in risky projects. I do feel PAF should have gone the F1 route or M2K5 way in the mid 90s but it did not happen for various reasons. It is safe to say PAF wanted to replace the M3/5s with M2K5s. While this would have been amazing it did not happen.
Happy to listen to a counter post from you as I always learn from your posts.
Regards
A

No friend; that is not true at all. Cheetah was designed for BVR engagement and HOBS (this was to have available with A-darter) with already a limited HOBS via U-Darter. BVR was already available as part of Cheetah as R-darter.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.,

.,.,

 

[air marshal]

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[Windjammer]

Once upon Mirage-3 and 5 were as popular as the F-16s.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,