Exclusive interview with new Pakistan Air Force Chief: PAF’s Cutting Edge Grows

[Zhukov]

Well I'm disappointed, AESA is nodoubt a giant leap, but it wont safe JF-17 from more maneuverable aircraft like MKI, Rafale, Mirage-2000. HMDS/HOBS missile would save it. But PAF is in no mood to integrate it even in 3rd block.

Manuverable?
What do you mean. Can any fighter jet flown by a human pilot out manuver an incoming missile? No

Its BVR age and even WVR battles are not that close and manuverability dependent now.

Even in a WVR if you are fired upon by a side winder or a PL5 you cannot outmaunuver man. Flares or Other ECM measures like jamming might save you. Manuvarability is getting less relevant in modern air combant

 

[Reverse Thinker]

My Question is JF17 Is better than from F16? If yes then we spend more on it. If its less than in comparison then why not we should go for J31 instead and new more advance fighter project with China + Turkey & Pakistan sharing experiences of all three airfoces and pros & cones of availabile fighters and bringing new more agreesive fighter than any other available fighter is it possible?

 

[araz]

then where the hell is ws-13?

There have been set backs in the engine manufacturing sector for the Chinese. They may have been able to produce engines in labs but when it comes to reliability they have had major issues. Recent reports suggest they maybe on the verge of resolution of the problems but large scale productions are still not there. As a consequence I thi k the chinese are concentrati g on WS10 and will transmit their successdown to WS13. This means more time I reckon 2018-20 bracket. The issue for PAF may be that the ruskiez would not want to lose their market and would offer RD 93MA around that time possibly with overhauling facility and perhaps ( a big perhaps) minor parts manufacturing facilities to allay any fear of supply chain issues . So the Chinese will be competing against a more established engine provider. We will then have to decide which way we go. The interesting times are yet to come.
Araz

My Question is JF17 Is better than from F16? If yes then we spend more on it. If its less than in comparison then why not we should go for J31 instead and new more advance fighter project with China + Turkey & Pakistan sharing experiences of all three airfoces and pros & cones of availabile fighters and bringing new more agreesive fighter than any other available fighter is it possible?

They are different fighters for different roles and the need is for both the platforms.
F31 is not available.

 

[Storm Force]

F31 does not exist AND will not exist for another decade.

F16 is bigger more powerful plane. better weapons, radars jammers and TWR etc. It is the cutting edge of PAF.

Simple answer yes its the best in PAF and better than JF17.

The role of the Thunder in PAF you guys know better than me but an outsider looking in

It lacks the load and range to be a multi role strike platform. eg F16/ J10/ Rafale .

And will be too lightweight to be a Air supremacy fighter like F15 F18 J11 OR SU30MKI

That leaves CAS and local intercept roles over pak airspace ie I think it will replace and perform some of the roles of your F7 but with BVR and strike ability thrown in. .

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Hi,

So---the first of the good news is released---thank you---ie the confirmation of AESA in blk 3. Now that is a giant leap----. More to come.

indeed these were my take away

twin seater JF-17 by 2016
AESA block 3
and flying in Paris airshow

 

[Eagle Claw]

F31 does not exist AND will not exist for another decade.

F16 is bigger more powerful plane. better weapons, radars jammers and TWR etc. It is the cutting edge of PAF.

Simple answer yes its the best in PAF and better than JF17.

The role of the Thunder in PAF you guys know better than me but an outsider looking in

It lacks the load and range to be a multi role strike platform. eg F16/ J10/ Rafale .

And will be too lightweight to be a Air supremacy fighter like F15 F18 J11 OR SU30MKI

That leaves CAS and local intercept roles over pak airspace ie I think it will replace and perform some of the roles of your F7 but with BVR and strike ability thrown in. .

pfffff !!
Don't talk about range !!
by this way Tejus is not even a Fighter but a trainer if we talk about range !!
And Thunder caries 4000+ Kg Payload !
Its not the best but its pretty much decent !
According to your Multi-roll thingy !
Just have a look at Weaponry Package of Thunder !
I hope you will get something in your mind

 

[rockstar08]

cant we Change the Air frame of JF-17 now ?? i mean for probably better payload , and reduced RCS ?

 

[Stephen Cohen]

That leaves CAS and local intercept roles over pak airspace ie I think it will replace and perform some of the roles of your F7 but with BVR and strike ability thrown in. .

In large force and mixed force engagements A BVR capable plane can
disrupt the aggressor's plans and if the agressor's mission is aborted
then it is a victory for the smaller plane

We in India cannot take JF 17 lightly at all

The Best thing in IAF's favour is and will remain the " numbers "
assuming that current equipment continues for FIVE more years ie till J 31 come along

More MKIs along with upgraded Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 will keep the balance in our favour

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

F31 does not exist AND will not exist for another decade.
F16 is bigger more powerful plane. better weapons, radars jammers and TWR etc. It is the cutting edge of PAF

The Stealth F-35 is having problems and has been delayed. J-31 may also have issues and may not be available before 2025 we have a decade we cannot rely on JF-17. So we need 36 F-16 Block 52 and/or 36 J-10B.

 

[syedali73]

Sarkar marey.
The reason it is not needed now is because the proported avionics upgradation is not due till block 3. If you look at the market there is not a single ECONOMICALengine in the bracket that you want which will be sanction prone. The RD93MA is not ready till 2018-19. WE 13 is no where in sight. You might get an EU/ US engine but then you have negated the reason de etre for the JFT. The other reason is you want to replace the fast obsolescent fleet of yours. Any new engine will set you back at least 12-18 months if not more in modifications/trials. This would in its own rights make JFT somewhat irrelevant as it is not fulfilling the needs for which it was created. I rest my case your honour! It is not needed till the block 3 which is where it is planned to be inducted if all goes well. We can afford to delay the programme if we would have replaced another 50_100 fighters but not now.

Araz Bhai, in my opinion, going for Block III without a new engine wont be good. Look how F-16, F-18, and Gripen evolved. The JAS 39C/D for instance is powered by Volvo RM12 (basically a General Electric F404) and the fighter is what it is with that powerplant. There was not much that could be done to the fighter with that powerplant. To take Gripen to the whole new level, the aircraft manufacturers went for a signifincatly better powerplant i.e. F414G. The Gripen designed around F414G is a different animal than the legacy Gripen. The new engine enabled the engineers to design a fighter with powerful AESA radar, increased fuel capacity, increased payload, additional hardpoints etc. Similarly, if JF has to evolve, it will need a newer and better power plant to support all the goodies that basically enhance the survivability of a fighter jet.

 

[araz]

Araz Bhai, in my opinion, going for Block III without a new engine wont be good. Look how F-16, F-18, and Gripen evolved. The JAS 39C/D for instance is powered by Volvo RM12 (basically a General Electric F404) and the fighter is what it is with that powerplant. There was not much that could be done to the fighter with that powerplant. To take Gripen to the whole new level, the aircraft manufacturers went for a signifincatly better powerplant i.e. F414G. The Gripen designed around F414G is a different animal than the legacy Gripen. The new engine enabled the engineers to design a fighter with powerful AESA radar, increased fuel capacity, increased payload, additional hardpoints etc. Similarly, if JF has to evolve, it will need a newer and better power plant to support all the goodies that basically enhance the survivability of a fighter jet.

Syed Ali Saheb.
I fully agree with you on the engine change in Block 3. It will be required to power the AESA and other avionics which will no doubt be added. The question is one of availability. As indicated before we dont want a western engine and RD93MA is not available till 2018-9. We don't know what is going on with WS series so it is difficult to say how things will progress. However it is reasonable to think that if WS10 is ready by 2018 the trickle down effect will hit WS13 by 2020/21. So the logical choice will be RD93MA in 2019. At that time PAF will almost certainly go down this route. Till then we have to sit back and enjoy. What I don't like is people giving the impression they want engine change now which clearly was not the gist of your post. I hope i have clarified my post.
Araz

 

[shah1398]

cant we Change the Air frame of JF-17 now ?? i mean for probably better payload , and reduced RCS ?

Sir by changing airframe of Thunder it means U are changing the whole design of it.Yes we can strengthen it (ribs, spars, lug joints etc) more in order to accommodate more REKs and may b some more pylons at the belly.But it all depends upon the role and task of Thunder in which PAF wants to employ it.May be Dual seaters would be used to carry more load and used for special ops rather other than training.

 

[FuturePAF]

Sir by changing airframe of Thunder it means U are changing the whole design of it.Yes we can strengthen it (ribs, spars, lug joints etc) more in order to accommodate more REKs and may b some more pylons at the belly.But it all depends upon the role and task of Thunder in which PAF wants to employ it.May be Dual seaters would be used to carry more load and used for special ops rather other than training.

good points
the PAF embarked on the JF-17 project over a decade ago, but now the future IAF line up is taking shape, and a re-evaluation of the design should be done, in the face of the addition of the Rafale and PAK-FA.

if the JF-17 is to form the backbone of the PAF, at least the requirement should be laided out for a design the size of the JF-17, and try to plan a development strategy to build future blocks closer and closer to fulfilling those goals

just like the Gripen E/F (NG) is a pragmatic evolution of the Gripen A/B design, so to must the JF-17 evolve for the sake of at least maintaining a credible balance on the sub-continent

 

[shah1398]

good points
the PAF embarked on the JF-17 project over a decade ago, but now the future IAF line up is taking shape, and a re-evaluation of the design should be done, in the face of the addition of the Rafale and PAK-FA.

if the JF-17 is to form the backbone of the PAF, at least the requirement should be laided out for a design the size of the JF-17, and try to plan a development strategy to build future blocks closer and closer to fulfilling those goals

just like the Gripen E/F (NG) is a pragmatic evolution of the Gripen A/B design, so to must the JF-17 evolve for the sake of at least maintaining a credible balance on the sub-continent

Sir i do agree with U but if we see at statistics and facts on ground then we find that LCA has not yet come up eith the expectations of IAF, the land mark MMRCA deal is virtually dead and reduced to only 36 aircraft and PAK-FA projects has hit multiple snags like Indian share in project could not exceed 18%, Russia has slowed down the project due to economics constraints and also it is/has decreased the number of ordered aircraft.so it simply means we have ample time to react now.what i have understood till now is that PAF is not rushing directly for hi tech stuff like SA/AESA radars etc before it prepares ground for its induction in shape of training of its personnel so that they can effectively absorb the technology.Also PAF first wants to replace the aging aircraft like Mirages and F-7Ps by JF-17s block I and II which are though advanced than these aircraft but the tech leap in that much where it can not be absorbed by PAF.After that block III with AESA would IN SHA ALLAH easily be absorbed in mainstream PAF quite easily as by then the requisite training of personnel would have done. plz correct me if my analysis is some what exaggerated or so.

 

[Basel]

Manuverable?
What do you mean. Can any fighter jet flown by a human pilot out manuver an incoming missile? No

Its BVR age and even WVR battles are not that close and manuverability dependent now.

Even in a WVR if you are fired upon by a side winder or a PL5 you cannot outmaunuver man. Flares or Other ECM measures like jamming might save you. Manuvarability is getting less relevant in modern air combant

There are next gen stuff which can fry the seeker of the missile and render it useless, don't under estimate 21st century counter measures for fighter jets, the thing is can we get those for our birds?