K8 Karakoram

[Muradk]

How is the flight safety record of the K-8 with the PLAAF? I know its very good with the PAF but do the chinese also have good safety record?

First K-8 can't be a front line fighter but can be used in a battle specially with its speed it will be an added advantage for our troops to have cover on there heads.

We should have a total of 60, Rest depends on the big boss. Army Aviation has shown a great interest in it as a fighter covering there choppers. Lets see looks like a vice decision if they can maintain atleast 30 K-8 that would be enough to back our ground forces.

Second Like us China doesn't have problems with cash or spare parts they have really changed there way of thinking and have gone American instead of taking the part and reparing it they just toss it and put a new one.
One the other hand our PAF and ARMY Aviation have survived so many sanctions that they have become experts in modifying parts or coming up with new ideas till the part arrives.

 

[PAFAce]

Army Aviation has shown great interest in it [K-8s] as a fighter covering there choppers... if they can maintain atleast 30 K-8 that would be enough to back our ground forces.

That would give our Army a serious advantage over the Indian Army because, as far as I know, they do not have a dedicated close-air-support jet aircraft. They have helicopters, but so do we.

Ofcourse, with their money and numerical superiority, they can answer the K-8s with much superior jets by diverting some from the IAF. However, we can counter this by targeting their wide open helicopters and armored divisions with guerilla-style hit-and-run tactics employed by the K-8s (similar to the ones employed unsuccessfully by the IAF against PAF bases in 1965).

Ofcourse, my knowledge in these matters is limited, and therefore I am wide open to any criticism.

 

[Contrarian]

That would give our Army a serious advantage over the Indian Army because, as far as I know, they do not have a dedicated close-air-support jet aircraft. They have helicopters, but so do we.

K-8 is not and will not be a dedicated close air support aircraft. Its primarily a trainer, and can be used as a light CAS aircraft as well. Its not designed to be one.

Secondly, India is making Hawks now. Same thing, its primarily a trainer and can be used as a light CAS.

Ofcourse, with their money and numerical superiority, they can answer the K-8s with much superior jets by diverting some from the IAF. However, we can counter this by targeting their wide open helicopters and armored divisions with guerilla-style hit-and-run tactics employed by the K-8s (similar to the ones employed unsuccessfully by the IAF against PAF bases in 1965).

Ofcourse, my knowledge in these matters is limited, and therefore I am wide open to any criticism.

All armoured regiments now will have SRSAM and MRSAM, for the IA atleast. That is how it is planned, and the process is on track(thankfully) and on schedule.Maitri LLQRM along with Akash for the Army. I dont know whether they would get the SPYDER as well.

Most likely it will be so for PA as well. They would certainly have plans to acquire new mobile SAM's for their armoured regiments.

 

[Quwa]

First K-8 can't be a front line fighter but can be used in a battle specially with its speed it will be an added advantage for our troops to have cover on there heads.

We should have a total of 60, Rest depends on the big boss. Army Aviation has shown a great interest in it as a fighter covering there choppers. Lets see looks like a vice decision if they can maintain atleast 30 K-8 that would be enough to back our ground forces.

Second Like us China doesn't have problems with cash or spare parts they have really changed there way of thinking and have gone American instead of taking the part and reparing it they just toss it and put a new one.
One the other hand our PAF and ARMY Aviation have survived so many sanctions that they have become experts in modifying parts or coming up with new ideas till the part arrives.

The Chinese are developing a ground attack variant of the JF-17. Given how expansive PAC's production line is shaping, do you think it's possible for PA to acquire a number of such JF-17?

 

[fatman17]

Thanks for your responses guys; My question was based on the following things. Anyway, I got the answer from another source (link quoted below). Its a nice (thought outdated) history of PAF during the 90s and early 2000s due to various sanctions.

here's the link: How China keeps the PAF flying



Well, according to various sources on the internet Pakistan is to procure from 40-100 of these which is a sizeable number. Also if we count export prospects, it would be much larger.



So with around a 100 aircraft, the assembly line wouldn't have been that costly. Also, just as china is producing it and we are buying it, it could have been the other way round too. How comes its economically feasible for china to produce it and not for us, considering that we had a major portion of the design, and its not that advanced a plane for us to not be able to manufacture.

Secondly, I don't think an assembly line has to be built from scratch to be able to manufacture it. Modern day assembly lines are quite flexible and with some upgrades can built different components. I mean NAMC must have a dedicated assembly line to build these, that could have been used for other things too.



that was also my point.



True that but doesnt replacement of all the T-37s enhance the feasibility of having the assembly lines?

Anyway, thanks for your answers again. My initial question was based on seeing the K8 being listed on the PAC kamra website and reading the (seemingly) conflicting news of its import. But that article and your replies answers my questions.

all the quotes u have posted are out-dated thus the confusion on the status of the K-8s.
the only a/c to be manufactured/assembled at kamra will be the JF-17 in the immediate future.(besides the mushak and super mushak)

 

[PAFAce]

K-8 is not and will not be a dedicated close air support aircraft. Its primarily a trainer, and can be used as a light CAS aircraft as well. Its not designed to be one.

I understand everything you said. However, in the initial stages of a war between Pakistan and India, there will be an intense struggle by the respective Air Forces to achieve/prevent air supremacy in either territory. Under these circumstances, close-air-support to the Army becomes secondary. It happened in 1965 and it happened again in 1971. Since 1971, the Pakistani Armed Forces have intensified inter-service co-operation to prevent such situations (i.e., unsupported Army operations). Even so, CAS may or may not be available 100% of the time.

The aerial countermeasures you mentioned definitely need to be considered. They will, no doubt, be useful against jets, however, they themselves can be countered through tactics. Also, when your big boys step in, namely the IAF jets, then the K-8s will exist the field and make way for our big boys.

The K-8 may be light CAS, but it is CAS nonetheless. Also, it has its advantages over regular helicopters. I have supreme confidence in my Army, and if they think the K-8 can be useful in battle, I do not (and can not) doubt them.

 

[PAFAce]

Will the F-7s in the Operational Conversion Unit be replaced with with K-8s?

Assuming my source is correct, the question is: The F-7 is a proper fighter jet, the K-8 isn't. Why, then, are they planning to switch?

 

[hj786]

Will the F-7s in the Operational Conversion Unit be replaced with with K-8s?

Assuming my source is correct, the question is: The F-7 is a proper fighter jet, the K-8 isn't. Why, then, are they planning to switch?

Can't the K-8 can do most of what the F-7 can? You can mount sidewinders on it, bombs, rockets, a gun and so on. It is small so quite maneuverable and agile - with a good engine and a gun it would be a decent dogfighter.
K-8 uses a turbofan engine right? It's more fuel efficient than F-7, that itself would help pay for the K-8 over time. Also it is small so easy to store and move around, newer design so easier to maintain than F-7. Must be cheaper to buy/build K-8s than rebuild/maintain F-7s.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hj786,

F7PG---is an extremely deadly close combat fighter---there have been times that the F7pg's have taken out their compatriot's F 16's in real enough simulated dog fights of the PAF.

In close combat---this plane can go toe to toe with any present aircraft in indian arsenal except the SU 30.

There is no comparison with K8 to F7PG.

 

[PAFAce]

There is no comparison with K8 to F7PG.

I agree 100%, which is why I want to know whether what I have heard is true or not.

If we want our pilots to get the best possible training, we must train them in the best possible jets, i.e., F-7s, with the best possible trainers in the most realistic possible situations.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Chinese will use JH-7 for ground attack rather then JF-17 alleged ground attack variant.
Have a look at it i love this baby.
http://www.shaps.hawaii.edu/images/2002/fig-009.jpg
If Pakistan had finances we could have purchased 36 of them replacing A-5s.

 

[hj786]

Hj786,

F7PG---is an extremely deadly close combat fighter---there have been times that the F7pg's have taken out their compatriot's F 16's in real enough simulated dog fights of the PAF.

In close combat---this plane can go toe to toe with any present aircraft in indian arsenal except the SU 30.

There is no comparison with K8 to F7PG.

I was talking about F-7P! F-7PG should not be removed from front-line units. It is an excellent dogfighter to complement the F-16 and JF-17 BVRAAM platforms.

Chinese will use JH-7 for ground attack rather then JF-17 alleged ground attack variant.
Have a look at it i love this baby.
http://www.shaps.hawaii.edu/images/2002/fig-009.jpg
If Pakistan had finances we could have purchased 36 of them replacing A-5s.

JH-7 is not like A-5. It is not really a close air support specialist like A-5, it is a long range strike specialist from what I have read.
Does A-5 have lots of extra armour compared to F-6?

 

[Luftwaffe]

hj786 ur rite but coming back to Pakistan shouldn't we have limited number of deep strike fighter bombers like JH-7 limit to 36-40...???
OR another case that so far I've not received any replies..a larger version of JF-17 with future Chinese powerful engine of Mach 2 something in size equally to that of F-16C exactly to say..cuz we use our f-16 for all purpose since A-5 will be retired in next 5-6 years realistically. I've always stressed that JF-17 if not in design replica to F-16 should be in size replica to that of F-16C/D and best of all will cost less with infrastructure in place i would love to see after 50 JF-17 rest of 200-250 of them be larger in size equally to that of F-16C/D we are getting from US..comments plz..

 

[ejaz007]

Venezuela to Receive 6 Chinese Planes in January
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 11 Feb 17:10 EST (22:10 GMT)

CARACAS - Venezuela will take delivery in 2010 of the first six of eight K-8 Karakorum trainer or light attack planes it bought from China, to be used in the antidrugs fight, a military official said Feb. 11.

"In January 2010, we will have the first six in Venezuela, and before the middle of 2010 there will be 18 flying in Venezuelan airspace," said Gen. Jesus Gonzalez, who leads the Operational Strategic Command.

The two-seater will be test flown by Venezuelan pilots in China before they are taken apart and shipped to Venezuela, he added.

Russia, China and Belarus are Venezuela's main military suppliers.

Venezuela to Receive 6 Chinese Planes in January - Defense News

 

[hj786]

hj786 ur rite but coming back to Pakistan shouldn't we have limited number of deep strike fighter bombers like JH-7 limit to 36-40...???

JH-7A (FBC-1) would be useful, but would need extra infrastructure to support it. It is much cheaper than more advanced multi-role jets like J-11B and its long range makes it very good at maritime strike as well. But I am not sure it is a good idea for PAF to buy another new fighter after F-16C, J-10 and JF. If it used the same engines as JF or J-10 and is fitted with a radar that can fire BVRAAMs, it might be a good idea.

Just found a post by A.Rahman that PAF were interested in it in 2001. I suppose they decided against it.

OR another case that so far I've not received any replies..a larger version of JF-17 with future Chinese powerful engine of Mach 2 something in size equally to that of F-16C exactly to say..cuz we use our f-16 for all purpose since A-5 will be retired in next 5-6 years realistically. I've always stressed that JF-17 if not in design replica to F-16 should be in size replica to that of F-16C/D and best of all will cost less with infrastructure in place i would love to see after 50 JF-17 rest of 200-250 of them be larger in size equally to that of F-16C/D we are getting from US..comments plz..

Bro PAF don't need JF to be a size replica of F-16, they are buying J-10 for that!