@
MastanKhan,
1. @
Munir is not lying, he is telling the truth. You may wish to find fault with him, but what you high-lighted is not it. Your explanation of how and where you consider him wrong is flawed. He never said anything about Russian aircraft and their radars. He merely observed that PAF had gained experience with F-16 and AIM-9 over the years. Your reply assumes that he said something about how difficult it was to fight Russian aircraft. That is where your emotions dictated your analysis.
2. You are making a point about environmental factors affecting a weapon and raising doubts about SD-10 as opposed to AIM-120. You forget that SD-10 has gone through updates and has been in use for quite some years now. The scenario you depicted is routine, airliners go through that all the time. One would think that when it comes to an operational missile, the impact of environmental factors would be accounted for during design phase and that impact of such factors would be thoroughly evaluated during testing. After all, declaring a weapon to be operational is not child's play.
One would also think that perhaps a person with your knowledge and experience would realize that components used in military system follow military specification in terms of range & spectrum of environmental factors encountered during usage. One would also think that you would appreciate the importance of simple and effective measures, such as use of high quality rubber seals to create barriers to isolate effects of temperature and humidity upon components. But alas, you are no better than those who consider nationality and origin to be most important determinants of quality. You may denigrate / censure a fanboy for assuming that JF-17 is the best aircraft in the skies. But do you realize that you are doing exactly the same, but in opposite direction; ie. assuming that Chinese do not know what they are doing when they entrust the defense of their nation to weapons like SD-10, even though SD-10 has gone through multiple design iterations? Do you think that they would use non-military spec components to save money? Do you think that they would compromise quality of materials used in manufacturing missiles to deliberately make defective weapons? Do you think that Aluminum, rubber, and silicone act differently when used for making AIM-120 than when used in SD-10? Do materials & materials science have nationality issues? Do you consider SD-10 series missiles to be of comparable quality to the children's toys? Do you think that quoting figures like 105 degrees (F), 50,000 ft, etc... impresses an engineer like Oscar, or Munir, or even me to accept your flawed analysis?
Sir, Oscar, Munir, and many others here are engineers and perhaps they understand the technical issues far better than you. Your logic, style of exposition, may impress a mere fanboy, but not us.
3. Sir, every other post of yours is about incompetence of PAF. You must have some logic and I understand some of it. But despite all that, PAF works for us. I do not see IAF jets frolicking in our airspace, like Israeli jets do in Lebanese airspace. I do not see that our armed forces have been beaten into submission by our enemies by their superior missiles and planes. I see that foreign armies and air forces send their cadets to be trained in Pakistan. Do they not know how horrible PA, PAF, etc are? I see that our personnel are deployed in friendly countries. Should they not be sent back because of supposed (by you) low standards of PAF, etc...?
Your constant complaining about PAF gets on nerves sometimes. Yeah, PDF members well know about your theories of how PAF messed up when they did not buy M2K, we also know how much of a failure is JF-17 with its non-European avionics & other systems, but can we please not repeat this ad-nauseum and actually move on?