If we had $$, which fighter jets would PAF buy?

[thunderkaka]

Plus which country would have refused to sell their jets to Pakistan despite of having the money?

 

[Quwa]

If we had the money, invest it in gas turbines, steel, composites, electronics (including semiconductors, fabtech, etc) so we get Pr. Azm.

No reason why we should send $10-15 bn in precious hard currency to countries that will slap us in FATF and throw us under the bus at every opportunity.

We're alone physically. It's time to think like that in our heads.

 

[war&peace]

If we had the money, invest it in gas turbines, steel, composites, electronics (including semiconductors, fabtech, etc) so we get Pr. Azm.

No reason why we should send $10-15 bn in precious hard currency to countries that will slap us in FATF and throw us under the bus at every opportunity.

We're alone physically. It's time to think like that in our heads.

Exactly my thoughts as I stated a few days ago
JF-17 Thunder Block III is no match against Rafale

 

[PDF]

Plus which country would have refused to sell their jets to Pakistan despite of having the money?

Jab paisa nahi hai tou ye sab sochne ka kya faida? Better think the best we can do with what we have.

 

[Yaseen1]

I think cheaper approach to counter this threat is to invest more in electronic warfare and cyber attack/jamming techniques as well as ground based airdefense

 

[FuturePAF]

If we had the money, Fund Project Azm (TF-X most likely) and advance the program ASAP, thereby leap frogging our adversaries acquisitions and going directly to a 5th generation fighter.

 

[Azadkashmir]

we need good air defence like s400.

 

[Syed1.]

Baatien carooron ki, dukaan pakoron ki

 

[blain2]

Exactly my thoughts as I stated a few days ago
JF-17 Thunder Block III is no match against Rafale

What is this expert analysis based on? I see it being thrown around with abandon left and right. The blk III has not come off the assembly line, most here don't know much about Rafale yet such conclusive claims, how so?

 

[loanranger]

Technically we dont need top of the line 4 th gen aircraft. We can keep IAF inventory including Rafale at bay with JF-17 THUNDER Block 3 equipped with a decent Aesa radar and Pl_15. The F16s are always there to complement. However, this strategy will only work in defensive scenarios with a good modern Air defense net. We need new jets if we are to employ a more agressive strategy.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Gripen NG along with Globaleye would be best choice for PAF next gen fighter. that is if pak had money and yes from uncle sam which is not gonna happen so its just a dream.

 

[mudas777]

Exactly my thoughts as I stated a few days ago
JF-17 Thunder Block III is no match against Rafale

JF 17 in many ways is no match to Rafale but in good numbers still will be able to confront Rafale and it will not be totally one way street. Odds are stacked against the JF and no one can deny it but still ants can bring down an elephant. Am sure Rafale is not going to enter in our air space unchallenged. During world war 2 how Russians over whelmed Germans superior tanks with cheap mass produced of their own.
Secondly its ours and no one is stopping us to have them in good numbers and some members on this forum are still hoping of getting more F 16's forgetting its a sanctions prone aircraft and no one can be 100% sure its not carrying kill switches. We can speculate as much as we like LHM or US won't do that but what if they did as India is deeply entrenched in US establishment like octopus.
Please don't try to undermine JF its PAF choice to go the for the light weight aircraft for their own reasons while JF project have been successful beyond expectations. Successive Governments have failed to grasp the fact that we needed the medium category planes as well and Rafale was on the cards for the IAF for a long time we just didn't do any thing about it.
How about accepting the Chinese offer of J-10C fuselage production and importing the bells and whistles from different sources. I very much doubt that F16V will come to Pakistan and Russian planes are a very long way off if they ever materialise, as for Russia Indian market is much more lucrative. Swedes are not entertaining the idea of selling to us their fighter and European fighter is like remortgaging our economy. So our good old friend seems to be the our only best bet or we go for JF 4 on a fast track somehow.

 

[blain2]

Technically we dont need top of the line 4 th gen aircraft. We can keep IAF inventory including Rafale at bay with JF-17 THUNDER Block 3 equipped with a decent Aesa radar and Pl_15. The F16s are always there to complement. However, this strategy will only work in defensive scenarios with a good modern Air defense net. We need new jets if we are to employ a more agressive strategy.

Aggressive strategy for what? Why do we want to expose our airmen to risk when strike missions can be performed with a very capable set of stand-off attack weapons in PAF's inventory?

The name of the game is "stand-off attack". No need for ToT with added risk of losses to aircraft and aircrews.

PAF is striving for and inshallah will achieve a very good balance of air assets in the coming decade. We are replacing our older aircraft at a very good rate with a very decent and affordable MR platform.

I'd rather have the PAF invest heavily in increasing the range of ALCMs in service and also the stand-off precision munitions. These will allow PAF to hit targets deep inside the adversary as the need for the next "retort" comes up. As for the interdiction roles, BlkIII will inshallah be a good investment and in parallel, PAF should talk to the Americans about procuring AIM-120C7/Ds possibly alongside the BVR weapons being considered for BlkIII.

Everything on the horizon tells us the best thing Pakistan can do is to invest in its own indigenous platforms in collaboration with China and Turkey.

 

[war&peace]

What is this expert analysis based on? I see it being thrown around with abandon left and right. The blk III has not come off the assembly line, most here don't know much about Rafale yet such conclusive claims, how so?

Sir, just click the link in my post to read my thoughts on that thread. I have nothing to do with Blk-III vs Rafale measuring contest because no one is doing objective analysis. There is one group of Gangadeshis who is just doing chest thumping while the opposing group of Pakistanis is also resorting to rhetoric and jokes so the whole discussion is silly. But please click the link to read my post there.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Aggressive strategy for what? Why do we want to expose our airmen to risk when strike missions can be performed with a very capable set of stand-off attack weapons in PAF's inventory?

The name of the game is "stand-off attack". No need for ToT with added risk of losses to aircraft and aircrews.

PAF is striving for and inshallah will achieve a very good balance of air assets in the coming decade. We are replacing our older aircraft at a very good rate with a very decent and affordable MR platform.

I'd rather have the PAF invest heavily in increasing the range of ALCMs in service and also the stand-off precision munitions. These will allow PAF to hit targets deep inside the adversary as the need for the next "retort" comes up. As for the interdiction roles, BlkIII will inshallah be a good investment and in parallel, PAF should talk to the Americans about procuring AIM-120C7/Ds possibly alongside the BVR weapons being considered for BlkIII.

Everything on the horizon tells us the best thing Pakistan can do is to invest in its own indigenous platforms in collaboration with China and Turkey.

Agreed. In the near-term, focus should be laid on acquiring longer-ranged SOWs and, in turn, equipping the JF-17 with them (including the Ra'ad/Ra'ad II and H2/H4). In the long-run, I suspect the PAF will look at using drones to carry deep strike roles, especially in high-risk environments.

What's interesting is that both the Russian Su-57 and Chinese J-20 were followed by stealthy attack drone programs. If the PAF is investing so much in a high-end FGFA, it can re-use a lot of the same technology (engine, composites, flight control system, electronics, etc) on an attack drone.

I think a reason why the PAF set the bar high with Project Azm is that it wants to create as much room as possible to do more with what it has. So, that's where the idea of an attack drone comes in, but also other possibilities. The current ASR for Project Azm is a twin engine fighter with supercruising. In theory, the PN can factor itself into the equation now and make a strong case for its own maritime fighter (heck, fund a carrierborne study if it wants).

Enduring through a drought is tough, but we do have asymmetrical options we can invest in lieu of new off-the-shelf fighters, e.g., an Iskander-like ballistic missile, longer ranged cruise missiles, upping the ASR specifications of future JF-17 blocks, and/or even add a HiMADS air defence element.