Is the Chinese JH-7 an Answer to the Pakistan Air Force’s Deep Strike Needs?

[FuturePAF]

Having discussed this throughly on other threads, this is only be worth it as literally a stop gap measure. If we have the funds it’s better to just buy 1 squadron of J-10CE. The J-10CE is multi role and will send a political signal (to the world and to other Pakistanis) that the PAF can move on from the F-16 if need be.

As a strike platform, we must remember these are just that a platform, where the right doctrine dictates the range our strike capability needs to have. The JH-7A is a decent platform for the current threats and is available now, probably at a decent price. We also can no longer keep risking our pilots lives in ancient mirages.

If the JH-7A can go out further, on the deck ( just above the sea), and launch a stealthy cruise missiles from an unexpected angle, it will complicate enemy defenses.

 

[Zarvan]

People I didn't started this thread because I want J-7 to come and even if J 7 comes it should be a brand new version of it. What I am happy about it is finally debate is starting. Although in my opinion Pakistan should really consider J-10 C or the upcoming version of J-10 as being claimed by Chinese media to replace our MIRAGES as deep strike Jet not answer to Rafael. With 11 hardpoints J 10 C could be used to unleash hell on our beloved neighbor.

J-16 issue it being dual engine plus will Russia allow China to sell it to us.

@Deino @LKJ86 @Foxtrot Alpha @Path-Finder @MastanKhan @waz @Tipu7

 

[Path-Finder]

People I didn't started this thread because I want J-7 to come and even if J 7 comes it should be a brand new version of it. What I am happy about it is finally debate is starting. Although in my opinion Pakistan should really consider J-10 C or the upcoming version of J-10 as being claimed by Chinese media to replace our MIRAGES as deep strike Jet not answer to Rafael. With 11 hardpoints J 10 C could be used to unleash hell on our beloved neighbor.

J-16 issue it being dual engine plus will Russia allow China to sell it to us.

@Deino @LKJ86 @Foxtrot Alpha @Path-Finder @MastanKhan @waz @Tipu7

J10 as F10 in PAF/PNAF. In an ideal world J10 with GE F110 engine would be a dream machine but that is never going to happen.

 

[LKJ86]

People I didn't started this thread because I want J-7 to come and even if J 7 comes it should be a brand new version of it. What I am happy about it is finally debate is starting. Although in my opinion Pakistan should really consider J-10 C or the upcoming version of J-10 as being claimed by Chinese media to replace our MIRAGES as deep strike Jet not answer to Rafael. With 11 hardpoints J 10 C could be used to unleash hell on our beloved neighbor.

J-16 issue it being dual engine plus will Russia allow China to sell it to us.

@Deino @LKJ86 @Foxtrot Alpha @Path-Finder @MastanKhan @waz @Tipu7

IMHO, what PAF needs are mainly based on the challenges from IAF.
If PAF's MIRAGES can successfully overcome the challenges ahead, that is enough.

 

[Armchair]

I think its quite a coincidence, if that is what it is - that the author caught up on the theory discussed by @MastanKhan then got to the Spey engine, which took us years to intellectually connect to its low level characteristics, which was actually first brought in by me, and then connect it to the Blackburn Buccaneer, again something I did, then discuss all of this in light of the Falklands war (I did), then discuss this in light of naval strike on India's coast, (like MK did), and never heard of PDF before.

Not saying this is not possible, but it does sound unlikely given that the slightest googling of these terms leads to PDF as the top search results.

I don't have a problem though, as I am happy to see ideas disseminated even if credit isn't given. Bottom line for me is to help create an eco-system of ideas. That will be the ultimate competitive advantage of Pakistan against any other military state.

Now, perhaps MK is seeing certain bits which sound similar or wording is very close if not outright copy pastes. If its an outright copy paste, its a problem. Otherwise its hard to call it out.

I've had an entire journal article stolen once, word for word, entire copy paste and he published it. By an officer of the BD military to boot. I could do nothing. But when ideas travel, it is a good thing generally. Even if Pakistan never gets the JH-7, the fact that we could come up with an idea is far more important and bodes well for Pakistan's future.

 

[nascar 42]

I think its quite a coincidence, if that is what it is - that the author caught up on the theory discussed by @MastanKhan then got to the Spey engine, which took us years to intellectually connect to its low level characteristics, which was actually first brought in by me, and then connect it to the Blackburn Buccaneer, again something I did, then discuss all of this in light of the Falklands war (I did), then discuss this in light of naval strike on India's coast, (like MK did), and never heard of PDF before.

Not saying this is not possible, but it does sound unlikely given that the slightest googling of these terms leads to PDF as the top search results.

I don't have a problem though, as I am happy to see ideas disseminated even if credit isn't given. Bottom line for me is to help create an eco-system of ideas. That will be the ultimate competitive advantage of Pakistan against any other military state.

Now, perhaps MK is seeing certain bits which sound similar or wording is very close if not outright copy pastes. If its an outright copy paste, its a problem. Otherwise its hard to call it out.

I've had an entire journal article stolen once, word for word, entire copy paste and he published it. By an officer of the BD military to boot. I could do nothing. But when ideas travel, it is a good thing generally. Even if Pakistan never gets the JH-7, the fact that we could come up with an idea is far more important and bodes well for Pakistan's future.

Again, I would say to look into the sources I mentioned. The Blackburn Buccaneer is even discussed in the wikipedia page titled 'Attack Aircraft.' The Falklands War has been a source of intense scholarly debate and much has been published on it besides on this forum.

I didnt connect anything. The engine characteristics of the Rolls Royce Spey are available on Wikipedia even. Accessing information is not a problem these days. One can find out which engines an aircraft uses pretty easily.

Also, I didnt say that I havent heard about this forum before. I have obviously. The thing is I dont browse it often and surely havent copy/pasted anything. I just joined it a couple days back

I understand you might think that this is unlikely, but I did give sources to my article. This means that these ideas arent exclusive to this forum.

And I agree, debate is a good thing. We are all part of the same team as all want whats best for Pakistan. I just wanted to give my side of the story. Have a good day

 

[MastanKhan]

I think its quite a coincidence, if that is what it is - that the author caught up on the theory discussed by @MastanKhan then got to the Spey engine, which took us years to intellectually connect to its low level characteristics, which was actually first brought in by me, and then connect it to the Blackburn Buccaneer, again something I did, then discuss all of this in light of the Falklands war (I did), then discuss this in light of naval strike on India's coast, (like MK did), and never heard of PDF before.

Not saying this is not possible, but it does sound unlikely given that the slightest googling of these terms leads to PDF as the top search results.

I don't have a problem though, as I am happy to see ideas disseminated even if credit isn't given. Bottom line for me is to help create an eco-system of ideas. That will be the ultimate competitive advantage of Pakistan against any other military state.

Now, perhaps MK is seeing certain bits which sound similar or wording is very close if not outright copy pastes. If its an outright copy paste, its a problem. Otherwise its hard to call it out.

I've had an entire journal article stolen once, word for word, entire copy paste and he published it. By an officer of the BD military to boot. I could do nothing. But when ideas travel, it is a good thing generally. Even if Pakistan never gets the JH-7, the fact that we could come up with an idea is far more important and bodes well for Pakistan's future.

Hi,

When he started with the Spey engine and then the utility and then the JH7A---I said it is no coincidence---.

You explained the part of the spey engine and utility in the thread that you started and on JF17---MastanKhan version and a despicable MOD changed the name of that thread after it has been son the forum for a few years---.

that was absolutely pathetic and shameless---.

What do we have here now---15-16 years old working as mods---.

But there is no doubt that "Amman Malick " stole the information from your thread---it is too big a coincidence---.

@nascar 42 --- there is a lots of stuff available on the internet---.

Maybe C-span recordings of the US cogressmen showing cocern over israel giving its Lavi tech to china or china stealing F-35 tech---are available as well.

 

[nascar 42]

Hi,

When he started with the Spey engine and then the utility and then the JH7A---I said it is no coincidence---.

You explained the part of the spey engine and utility in the thread that you started and on JF17---MastanKhan version and a despicable MOD changed the name of that thread after it has been son the forum for a few years---.

that was absolutely pathetic and shameless---.

What do we have here now---15-16 years old working as mods---.

But there is no doubt that "Amman Malick " stole the information from your thread---it is too big a coincidence---.

@nascar 42 --- there is a lots of stuff available on the internet---.

Maybe C-span recordings of the US cogressmen showing cocern over israel giving its Lavi tech to china or china stealing F-35 tech---are available as well.

Respected Sir,

I have high regard for you. I have read a lot on the JH-7 after joining the forum on wednesday and you have been the most vocal proponent of the idea. Your knowledge in this aspect exceeds mine. I never said that I have not browsed this forum in the past but I have never done it regularly. Had I known that you had written this much on the topic, I would gladly have requested you to let me write an article and publish it in your name. On page 4 of this thread, I have detailed all my sources Sir. I have discussed this idea with many associates of mine and they gave me input too. But its clear you have been talking about it for far too long. If I had found an article published in your name when I was gathering sources, I would have surely cited it. Kindly give me the benefit of doubt here. The article I published has flaws, as some forum members like Bilal Sahab pointed out. Maybe you can write a feature length follow up to make a better argument.

 

[MastanKhan]

Kindly see this post quoted above. I have outlined all sources used. I made an account here after someone pointed out that forum members here think I have stolen their posts. I posted this on Wednesday.

Again, I would say that it is possible that some forum members here would have discussed the JH-7 before I wrote the article. However, what is not being talked about is the possibility that I could have reached the same conclusion about the aircraft's utility for the PAF without having read posts on this forum. I have detailed each and every source I have used. Please read the above quoted post.

I wrote an article from Pakistan's perspective as there wasn't one available anywhere. There are flaws in the article's analysis as many learned members have pointed out. I appreciate the comments and hope to learn more from the criticism also.

For those not familiar with how editorial process at leading publications works; submissions are checked thoroughly before publication and it is not possible to copy paste posts and shape them in an article.

I do not claim that I was in anyway the first person to have the idea that the JH-7 could be a good fit for the PAF. It is possible that many people have had similar thoughts much before me. It is also possible that not all these people use defense forums. I, for one, starting using this forum only from Wednesday.

Finally, I would say that I am new to this forum and have realized in 48 hours that other contributors here are more knowledgeable than me in aviation matters. I hope to learn more from all of you. But please, I respectfully request members not to say that I have stolen their posts.

Hi,

There is too much 'coincidental ' information that you put in that article that has been posted here in the last one decade---specially the introduction by @Armchair

I don't believe what you are saying---.

 

[nascar 42]

Hi,

There is too much 'coincidental ' information that you put in that article that has been posted here in the last one decade---specially the introduction by @Armchair

I don't believe what you are saying---.

Sir,

When I started with the article. The logical starting point was to discuss deep strike models in the Cold War. That is where the Buccaneer came up. Again Sir, I have read many of your posts now and respect you for your knowledge. Kindly give me the benefit of doubt

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Isnt J16 more suitable? Isnt JH7 an out dated design? comments of experts please.

We absolutely need two squadrons of j16s

People I didn't started this thread because I want J-7 to come and even if J 7 comes it should be a brand new version of it. What I am happy about it is finally debate is starting. Although in my opinion Pakistan should really consider J-10 C or the upcoming version of J-10 as being claimed by Chinese media to replace our MIRAGES as deep strike Jet not answer to Rafael. With 11 hardpoints J 10 C could be used to unleash hell on our beloved neighbor.

J-16 issue it being dual engine plus will Russia allow China to sell it to us.

@Deino @LKJ86 @Foxtrot Alpha @Path-Finder @MastanKhan @waz @Tipu7

We can pay Russia airframe design licence
Fee

 

[Armchair]

Hi,

There is too much 'coincidental ' information that you put in that article that has been posted here in the last one decade---specially the introduction by @Armchair

I don't believe what you are saying---.

More than a decade MK I remember your discussions from the decade before this. Those were some good days.

You pioneered the whole concept of attacking India's coast with the JH-7. Pity the PAF / PN never listened.

@MastanKhan the "Mastan Khan JF-17" thread was renamed recently with your name removed. I was surprised to see that. Such a shame.

The aircraft itself would have been an interesting JF-17 version although of much less utility than the JH-7. Jh-7 basically is a strategic weapon in the Indo-Pak context. Something our tacticians never understood despite you banging your head on them for at least 15 odd years if not more.

 

[Amaa'n]

Hi,

There is too much 'coincidental ' information that you put in that article that has been posted here in the last one decade---specially the introduction by @Armchair

I don't believe what you are saying---.

If you want i can open a Private Chat for both of you and you can discuss it offline, no need to spoil the thread.
@MastanKhan - the thing is that PDF is an open / public forum. Once you post something here, it becomes public and can be used in whatever capacity. So author or anyone else in that matter can't be blamed if your theory coincidentally falls in line with his newly found idea.

@nascar 42 - Welcome aboard and enjoy your stay, nice to see you here.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

We absolutely need two squadrons of j16s

JH7s have 60 years old copied Rolls Royce Engines, they are slow ,sluggish and very uneconomical to run. I will go for J16s any time any day, my most favourite Chinese jet.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Having discussed this throughly on other threads, this is only be worth it as literally a stop gap measure. If we have the funds it’s better to just buy 1 squadron of J-10CE. The J-10CE is multi role and will send a political signal (to the world and to other Pakistanis) that the PAF can move on from the F-16 if need be.

As a strike platform, we must remember these are just that a platform, where the right doctrine dictates the range our strike capability needs to have. The JH-7A is a decent platform for the current threats and is available now, probably at a decent price. We also can no longer keep risking our pilots lives in ancient mirages.

If the JH-7A can go out further, on the deck ( just above the sea), and launch a stealthy cruise missiles from an unexpected angle, it will complicate enemy defenses.

IMO ... I think we all need to come to terms with the reality that there is no new fighter coming.

The fiscal capacity doesn't support it.

Sure, the PAF can buy Erieye AEW&C, but it's $90 m a system, not $150-200 m per jet across a couple dozen units. And in the case of the JH-7A or J-10CE, though comparatively lower cost, is still a huge expense, and it may be too much for a bridge or stopgap solution. For it to pay-off, it needs to be a permanent solution, not a temporary one.

That aside, the PAF should take the responsible step of hard-coding the most cost-effective path to a NGFA.

I think the ideal would be entering a partnership with China on the J-35, though we'll need to convince them to let us into that program (with the desired offset and co-production benefits).

However, the benefit of joining the J-35 is that you leverage the PLAN's economies-of-scale to lower the cost as well as get a naval-ready fighter. I would get the PAF to totally double-down on the J-35 and seek a huge fleet of its own (180+) and, in turn, pivot AZM towards the development of advanced drones.

As for the PN, unless we're talking about an aircraft carrier, I don't think it's worth it for it to maintain its own fighters. The PAF would likely have to maintain and operate those jets, so ultimately, it doesn't change much from simply allowing the PN to call-on the PAF.

But I do support the idea of an aircraft carrier, but 15-20 years down the line. It's a luxury for power-projection, and I do think we need to start showing that (esp. in the GCC and the Persian Gulf) so as to assert ourselves as a bigger power. However, we need an economy to sustain and earn that respect too.