Kashmir front - High Wing loading JF17, F-16 and Mi35

[BlackOpsIndia]

This thread is not about glory or weakness of JF17 but about a certain design aspect please stay on that if you can else dont post and derail.

While reading about Pakistan defence procurement and equipment I come across this thought many times, PDF seems to be a good place where experienced professionals can help me understand it better.

Right from '47 attack on Kashmir, Pakistan had tried various strategies to conquer Kashmir irrespective of means and so far all our conflicts/wars are more concentrated in that particular area. Whenever there will be next war it will again concentrated more in Kashmir as opening another front in Punjab, Rajasthan or Gujarat wont be possible for Pakistan and its more like an advantage of India to open these front. Having said that our future conflict/war is generally limited to high altitude warfare in Kashmir.

Now when the objective is clear the preparedness or doctrine will be accordingly but while examining some important assets of Pakistan I am little surprised that is just opposite to it, I will take just two examples here.

JF17 :

Keeping aside all the who wha of trolls, I would like to talk about it more objectively and its role. As I have said Indo-Pak war is more limited to Kashmir domain and its India that is more likely to open another front on low altitude International border rather than Pakistan, I would like to know how will JF 17 fare in Kashmir.

Two basic aspect I would like to discuss about is:
1) Wing area of JF-17 is just 24.4 sq.mtr. which makes it ridiculously high wing loading which in turn favors it at supersonic speeds but induce a big penalty during take off.

2) Engine of JF17, PAF have so far miraculously managed low crash rate even with single engine jet of Russian engine (kudos to them) but the thrust of RD 93 coupled with low wing area makes it even more grim to take off with high loads and at high altitudes I wonder will it ever take off with all 7 hardpoints occupied with full load even with KM's long airstrip.

I would like to know why PAF preferred a low wing area and low powered jet as its backbone of airforce when they are most likely to fight in high altitude only and these two factors combined induces penalty on performance in those altitudes.

Beside the low number of Airbase in Kashmir, I am yet to see JF17 in Kashmir area (if anyone else have link of performance please share.). The JF17 bases are in Karachi, Peshawar and none in Kashmir or any mountainous area (info based upon wikipedia).

Mi35 :

This is again a heavy beast, though only 4 are on order, Pak will buy more in future for sure. Now they are kept for western border of Pakistan, mostly for anti terror ops but a machine of this caliber limited just to no air threat Jihadis is not wasting the capability of it? Wouldn't it be good with limited resources to buy more versatile or multirole machines that can help Pakistan in Kashmir, the only place they need serious power.

We have to use Mi17 last time in Kargil even after having Mi 35.

They again cant be used in Kashmir against India.


Now comparing this to India, which is most probably preparing exclusively for high altitude warfare with low wing loading Tejas or double engine long range Su30MKI and high altitude gunship LCH it seems India is on right track for mountainous warfare. While PAF doctrine/preparedness looks like mystery that how will they fight in Kashmir with old F-16 against Flankers and other IAF assets.


I would like to keep this discussion more of academic than troll fest, tagging a few username I know please add more and if there is mod please keep it clean. @MilSpec @hellfire @PARIKRAMA @MastanKhan

 

[R!CK]

JF17 :

2) Engine of JF17, PAF have so far miraculously managed low crash rate even with single engine jet of Russian engine (kudos to them) but the thrust of RD 93 coupled with low wing area makes it even more grim to take off with high loads and at high altitudes I wonder will it ever take off with all 7 hardpoints occupied with full load even with KM's long airstrip.

Mi35 :

This is again a heavy beast, though only 4 are on order, Pak will buy more in future for sure. Now they are kept for western border of Pakistan, mostly for anti terror ops but a machine of this caliber limited just to no air threat Jihadis is not wasting the capability of it? Wouldn't it be good with limited resources to buy more versatile or multirole machines that can help Pakistan in Kashmir, the only place they need serious power.

They again cant be used in Kashmir against India.
]

Very valid points and it is actually true. We just need to look at the past for a decent comparison.

There is a reason why the Mirage proved to be a great asset compared to the rest of IAF fleet. This same reason will constrain the effectiveness of JF-17 on higher terrain. While I'm not sure how effective Tejas can be in similar conditions, IAF Su-30 and Mirages will be up for the job.

As for Mi-35, we are not phasing them out without any reason. They are such amazing beasts, but their performance takes a steep dive as the altitude increases. It is within the policy of Indian armed forces to maintain equipment that are operable on all terrains, a factor that Mi-35 loses out on. The absence of our attack helicopters in Kargil war, actually served as a motivation for LCH development. However I'm convinced PA will have another type of attack helicopter to be utilized for high altitude operations, like T-129 or Z-10. PA doctrine started involving aerial assets much before IA took the initiative. Therefore I'm convinced they will not be lacking on attack helicopter support. PAF on the other hand might be on the wrong boat.

P.S: Personal observation, happy to be proven wrong but no interest in troll fest.

Good Day all!

 

[AUz]

In case of war, heavy concentration of air power will be in regions with plains and deserts. Nobody uses heavy, concentrated air power in extremely high battle ground regions---especially in presence of SAMs, enemy ground forces with shoulder anti-aircraft weapons, and so on.

Having said that, I do not see any reason as to why JF-17 Thunder can not operate in Kashmir/Gilgit region. PAF can deploy JF-17s in point defense roles with BVRs and WVRs missiles. You don't have to have bombs on every hardpoint. Furthermore, air-to-air refueling can be used to fuel JF-17s in air after they take off with minimum fuel in the tanks etc.

PAF has deployed JF-17s in mountainous regions of Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan--and seems quite happy with the performance of the jet.

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

As for Mi-35, we are not phasing them out without any reason. They are such amazing beasts, but their performance takes a steep dive as the altitude increases. It is within the policy of Indian armed forces to maintain equipment that are operable on all terrains, a factor that Mi-35 loses out on. The absence of our attack helicopters in Kargil war, actually served as a motivation for LCH development.

Yeah, we have to modify a Mi17 to use it as attack helicopter ill equipped and very dangerous even after having Mig 35 in our arsenal shows how useless they were at that altitude. We even lost a Mi17 due to this compulsion of no attack Helicopter. I think LCH will be a game changer and much much more dangerous in reality than it looks on paper.

In case of war, heavy concentration of air power will be in regions with plains and deserts. Nobody uses heavy, concentrated air power in extremely high battle ground regions---especially in presence of SAMs, enemy ground forces with shoulder anti-aircraft weapons, and so on.

Tell me onething, which got higher probability to hit the airborne target by SAM, a target in plain/desert or a target in mountainous region?

I am very much certain the chances are exponentially high of hitting target in plain/desert than that in mountainous region and shoulder mounted anti aircraft weapons are pretty useless in mountains compared to SAM.

PAF can deploy JF-17s in point defense roles with BVRs and WVRs missiles.

Ofcourse they can but if you check the weight of BVR missiles you will understand how many missiles you can carry from airbase deep inside Pakistan to Kashmir or if you plan to assemble them in Kashmir or Gilgit that wing loading factor will come into play.

air-to-air refueling can be used to fuel JF-17s in air after they take off with minimum fuel in the tanks etc.

So you will be operating your tankers near LOC or international border? Within SAM and BVR range of IAF? but interesting strategy indeed.

Moreover you are presenting a solution to a problem, not presenting solution to the cause. Why did they opted for low wing area jet in the first place with low thrust engine?

PAF has deployed JF-17s in mountainous regions of Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan--and seems quite happy with the performance of the jet.

I was asking for exactly same, so far no squadron is mountain based neither can I find link on google about JF 17 trial in GB or Kashmir however Tejas got multiple videos and exhaustive testing in that region. If you got links please share.

@Abingdonboy @PARIKRAMA your thoughts please or I am presenting something wrong? Would like to know more about it.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

I will try to cover strategy part

The air bases in high altitude normally operates with simple strategies which is universal for all AFs across the world.

1. The first is a trade off factor of ability to carry the payload capacity and in general its lower fuel load during takeoff implying lower time of flight+reach based on internal fuel capacity.
2. The second is a presence of AAR which can help the bird refuel at considerable safe distance and then proceed for area of engagement/mission
3. Elongated runways enabling the aircraft to reach sufficient speed for lift off inspite of higher altitude led constraints.

Now if there is a full fledged conflict

1. In general, whichever side will construct a longer runway will be crippled due to first opening salvo of CM/BMs taking out the long runway and laying them to waste especially the primary ones.
2. The secondary runways wont have length implying the constraints as discussed above.
3. The AAR are prime target in opening of air campaign to ensure that multiplier effect is full negated.

Way out

• Possibly in case the AAR operating closer to western border of Gilgit side might help JF17 but again such a approach means longer time taken to approach mission area but its a possibility.
• Also this strategy success rates can be high with the fact that most of the IAF jets have to cross a lot longer distance in a hostile territory laced with High altitude SAMs.
• The Point Air defence aspect may work in some limited aspects and zone.
• Anything closer to LOC will see a bigger fatal rate for multipliers as well as birds which is already operating under constraints.
• If Pakistan gets analogous to Buk type SAMs perhaps that could be a solid deterrent in this zone.

An interesting aspect is inspite of whatever we talk, in reality the number of HV target in that area seems limited atm. Unless there are too many underground silos and bunkers which are of strategic nature and needs to be taken out (which again will come under opening salvo definition) the majority will be localised point defence aspect.

Here the fleet based out of Northern Airbases especially the twin engined ones may help provide considerable advantage inspite of such constraints faced by say LCA Tejas also in J&K theater but again AD sites is the unknown factor.

Interestingly, the campaign and support ops for IAF is pretty well defined. So a ops in J&K theater will also see bottling up the other portion of PAF under Psychological ops and opening up western theater for air & surface campaign. this will cause some definite bottle neck issues in terms of providing adequate support for fighters based out of Gligit/Kashmnir region. I am sure planners would be working from both sides to change disadvantage into advantageous position.

Here is a sneak peak about AD operations from IAF

I am sure a similar ops basic would be applicable to PAF as well. In general their focus is not so much in J&K and this gets reflected by number of airbases in the region. Perhaps its limited fleet but reliance more on SAMs and AAAs.

As and when JF17 moves closer to intended 250 numbers or 10+ squadrons we might see some deployment in such mountain or high altitude regions. It is very much possible as well that F16s may be used instead of JF17 in case they believe operationally it gives them better benefits and advantages due to ability to carry better loads aspect.


Coming to Mi35 ops, its basic operations is defined under Battlefield Air Interdiction (BAI) and Battlefield Air Strikes (BAS)
The objectives of BAI operations are to shape the battlefield by:

• Isolating the battle zone from critical supplies and reinforcements.
• Denying the enemy freedom of space to manoeuvre by attacking crucial lines of communication
• Degrading the enemy’s off ensive potential, and rendering him incapable of taking meaningful offensive action.
• Preventing the enemy from reaching decisive locations and launch pads to further their offensive.

BAS otoh should be employed primarily in critical operations only. BAS are meant to be employed quickly and decisively, and concentrated in space and time. However, BAS have their own limitations. These include problems in target acquisition and identification, difficulty in identifying the bomb line, lethal AD environment, jamming of communication etc

Helicopters could be used effectively in BAI / BAS missions. Major tasks of armed/attack helicopters are:

• To provide suppressive fire options to the ground troops. This would be useful in conditions where artillery or the ground attack effort is either not available or is likely to be less eff ective. On account of the helicopters’ variable speed and hover capabilities, engagement of surface targets in various situations would be highly effective.
• To provide flank protection to mechanised formations.
• To provide route cover and suppression fire to heliborne assaults to create a favourable ground situation.
• To provide air defence cover against enemy armed or attack helicopters.
• To engage enemy helicopters involved in troop carriage, reconnaissance and communication duties.
• To interdict targets in the close vicinity of the Tactical Battle Area (TBA)
• To neutralize radar sites located close to the border.
• To neutralize bridges used by the enemy for breaking out.

About JF17 Engine, IMHO i see a great chance they will upgrade to another Russian engine soon and perhaps also look at a chinese engine later. I remember @Quwa @Bilal Khan (Quwa) talking about Klimov RD-33MK or Guizhou WS-13 options. Dont know how much it progressed. But sooner or later they will look for something better than RD93 surely in terms of reliability as well as perhaps some performance upgrade parameters.

@MilSpec @SpArK @Abingdonboy @anant_s @Vergennes @Picdelamirand-oil @Taygibay @nair @scorpionx @Joe Shearer @waz @WAJsal @Icarus

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

I will try to cover strategy part

The air bases in high altitude normally operates with simple strategies which is universal for all AFs across the world.

1. The first is a trade off factor of ability to carry the payload capacity and in general its lower fuel load during takeoff implying lower time of flight+reach based on internal fuel capacity.
2. The second is a presence of AAR which can help the bird refuel at considerable safe distance and then proceed for area of engagement/mission
3. Elongated runways enabling the aircraft to reach sufficient speed for lift off inspite of higher altitude led constraints.

Now if there is a full fledged conflict

1. In general, whichever side will construct a longer runway will be crippled due to first opening salvo of CM/BMs taking out the long runway and laying them to waste especially the primary ones.
2. The secondary runways wont have length implying the constraints as discussed above.
3. The AAR are prime target in opening of air campaign to ensure that multiplier effect is full negated.

Way out

• Possibly in case the AAR operating closer to western border of Gilgit side might help JF17 but again such a approach means longer time taken to approach mission area but its a possibility.
• Also this strategy success rates can be high with the fact that most of the IAF jets have to cross a lot longer distance in a hostile territory laced with High altitude SAMs.
• The Point Air defence aspect may work in some limited aspects and zone.
• Anything closer to LOC will see a bigger fatal rate for multipliers as well as birds which is already operating under constraints.
• If Pakistan gets analogous to Buk type SAMs perhaps that could be a solid deterrent in this zone.

An interesting aspect is inspite of whatever we talk, in reality the number of HV target in that area seems limited atm. Unless there are too many underground silos and bunkers which are of strategic nature and needs to be taken out (which again will come under opening salvo definition) the majority will be localised point defence aspect.

Here the fleet based out of Northern Airbases especially the twin engined ones may help provide considerable advantage inspite of such constraints faced by say LCA Tejas also in J&K theater but again AD sites is the unknown factor.

Interestingly, the campaign and support ops for IAF is pretty well defined. So a ops in J&K theater will also see bottling up the other portion of PAF under Psychological ops and opening up western theater for air & surface campaign. this will cause some definite bottle neck issues in terms of providing adequate support for fighters based out of Gligit/Kashmnir region. I am sure planners would be working from both sides to change disadvantage into advantageous position.

View attachment 334278


Here is a sneak peak about AD operations from IAF

View attachment 334291
I am sure a similar ops basic would be applicable to PAF as well. In general their focus is not so much in J&K and this gets reflected by number of airbases in the region. Perhaps its limited fleet but reliance more on SAMs and AAAs.

As and when JF17 moves closer to intended 250 numbers or 10+ squadrons we might see some deployment in such mountain or high altitude regions. It is very much possible as well that F16s may be used instead of JF17 in case they believe operationally it gives them better benefits and advantages due to ability to carry better loads aspect.


Coming to Mi35 ops, its basic operations is defined under Battlefield Air Interdiction (BAI) and Battlefield Air Strikes (BAS)
The objectives of BAI operations are to shape the battlefield by:

• Isolating the battle zone from critical supplies and reinforcements.
• Denying the enemy freedom of space to manoeuvre by attacking crucial lines of communication
• Degrading the enemy’s off ensive potential, and rendering him incapable of taking meaningful offensive action.
• Preventing the enemy from reaching decisive locations and launch pads to further their offensive.

BAS otoh should be employed primarily in critical operations only. BAS are meant to be employed quickly and decisively, and concentrated in space and time. However, BAS have their own limitations. These include problems in target acquisition and identification, difficulty in identifying the bomb line, lethal AD environment, jamming of communication etc

Helicopters could be used effectively in BAI / BAS missions. Major tasks of armed/attack helicopters are:

• To provide suppressive fire options to the ground troops. This would be useful in conditions where artillery or the ground attack effort is either not available or is likely to be less eff ective. On account of the helicopters’ variable speed and hover capabilities, engagement of surface targets in various situations would be highly effective.
• To provide flank protection to mechanised formations.
• To provide route cover and suppression fire to heliborne assaults to create a favourable ground situation.
• To provide air defence cover against enemy armed or attack helicopters.
• To engage enemy helicopters involved in troop carriage, reconnaissance and communication duties.
• To interdict targets in the close vicinity of the Tactical Battle Area (TBA)
• To neutralize radar sites located close to the border.
• To neutralize bridges used by the enemy for breaking out.

About JF17 Engine, IMHO i see a great chance they will upgrade to another Russian engine soon and perhaps also look at a chinese engine later. I remember @Quwa @Bilal Khan (Quwa) talking about Klimov RD-33MK or Guizhou WS-13 options. Dont know how much it progressed. But sooner or later they will look for something better than RD93 surely in terms of reliability as well as perhaps some performance upgrade parameters.

Thank you for such a detailed post however my question still remains why did PAF opted for low wing area JF17 when its not so effective tool of war in high altitude which is the primary battlefield.

Why at designing phase they did not consider or ignored this and what for? What advantage does low wing area provided PAF? Is it a exceptionally well air superiority fighter? even the best of trolls will hesitate to claim it. What exactly does they achieved by that design when they intended to make it backbone of PAF. Its definitely something which we are not getting.

If you want to go offroad get a Fortuner or big SUV, if you want to go in woods get a bike or better a cycle but getting Maruti 800 for offroading and into woods seems not a logical solution.

Tagging one more PAF enthusiast but most of the time its more trolling than logic from him, hope he shed some light on this @Windjammer and not disappoint.

Also @waz @Horus @Oscar if you can tag or provide some info on it.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

While reading about Pakistan defence procurement and equipment I come across this thought many times, PDF seems to be a good place where experienced professionals can help me understand it better.

Right from '47 attack on Kashmir, Pakistan had tried various strategies to conquer Kashmir irrespective of means and so far all our conflicts/wars are more concentrated in that particular area. Whenever there will be next war it will again concentrated more in Kashmir as opening another front in Punjab, Rajasthan or Gujarat wont be possible for Pakistan and its more like an advantage of India to open these front. Having said that our future conflict/war is generally limited to high altitude warfare in Kashmir.

Now when the objective is clear the preparedness or doctrine will be accordingly but while examining some important assets of Pakistan I am little surprised that is just opposite to it, I will take just two examples here.

JF17 :

Keeping aside all the who wha of trolls, I would like to talk about it more objectively and its role. As I have said Indo-Pak war is more limited to Kashmir domain and its India that is more likely to open another front on low altitude International border rather than Pakistan, I would like to know how will JF 17 fare in Kashmir.

Two basic aspect I would like to discuss about is:
1) Wing area of JF-17 is just 24.4 sq.mtr. which makes it ridiculously high wing loading which in turn favors it at supersonic speeds but induce a big penalty during take off.

2) Engine of JF17, PAF have so far miraculously managed low crash rate even with single engine jet of Russian engine (kudos to them) but the thrust of RD 93 coupled with low wing area makes it even more grim to take off with high loads and at high altitudes I wonder will it ever take off with all 7 hardpoints occupied with full load even with KM's long airstrip.

I would like to know why PAF preferred a low wing area and low powered jet as its backbone of airforce when they are most likely to fight in high altitude only and these two factors combined induces penalty on performance in those altitudes.

Beside the low number of Airbase in Kashmir, I am yet to see JF17 in Kashmir area (if anyone else have link of performance please share.). The JF17 bases are in Karachi, Peshawar and none in Kashmir or any mountainous area (info based upon wikipedia).

Mi35 :

This is again a heavy beast, though only 4 are on order, Pak will buy more in future for sure. Now they are kept for western border of Pakistan, mostly for anti terror ops but a machine of this caliber limited just to no air threat Jihadis is not wasting the capability of it? Wouldn't it be good with limited resources to buy more versatile or multirole machines that can help Pakistan in Kashmir, the only place they need serious power.

We have to use Mi17 last time in Kargil even after having Mi 35.

They again cant be used in Kashmir against India.


Now comparing this to India, which is most probably preparing exclusively for high altitude warfare with low wing loading Tejas or double engine long range Su30MKI and high altitude gunship LCH it seems India is on right track for mountainous warfare. While PAF doctrine/preparedness looks like mystery that how will they fight in Kashmir with old F-16 against Flankers and other IAF assets.


I would like to keep this discussion more of academic than troll fest, tagging a few username I know please add more and if there is mod please keep it clean. @MilSpec @hellfire @PARIKRAMA @MastanKhan

JF taking off from Skardu;

Promo -- flying across all Pak terrain;

Also enlighten us how JF is low powered ? What is the TWR of JF?


As for MI-35 we are buying the latest variant whose production started in 2005-6. Which will raho equip our SF.

Army has already bought Vipers .. While KD testing T-129 & Z-10s..

We have almost 60 Cobras to replace.

 

[Spectre]

Thank you for such a detailed post however my question still remains why did PAF opted for low wing area JF17 when its not so effective tool of war in high altitude which is the primary battlefield.

Why at designing phase they did not consider or ignored this and what for? What advantage does low wing area provided PAF? Is it a exceptionally well air superiority fighter? even the best of trolls will hesitate to claim it. What exactly does they achieved by that design when they intended to make it backbone of PAF. Its definitely something which we are not getting.

Tagging one more PAF enthusiast but most of the time its more trolling than logic from him, hope he shed some light on this @Windjammer and not disappoint.

Also @waz @Horus @Oscar if you can tag or provide some info on it.

The answer is quite simple: PAF didn't "opt" for anything, it got JF-17. The spear of PAF in any scenario where it undertakes a strike mission is likely to be F-16s. JF-17 will primarily be utilized in interceptor profile.

For resource constrained Airforce like PAF which is looking to build up the numbers with a defensive focus JF-17 offers great value.

All said and done even IAF with all it's 250+ SU-30 Mkis, Mirages, Mig -29s and Jaguars would be loath to enter Pakistani territory with the air defence systems and fighter concentration PAF has. So reverse would be equally true.

Only thing which can change the status quo are the Stealth Fighters which to this date USA alone possess.

 

[Tipu7]

Beside the low number of Airbase in Kashmir, I am yet to see JF17 in Kashmir area (if anyone else have link of performance please share.). The JF17 bases are in Karachi, Peshawar and none in Kashmir or any mountainous area (info based upon wikipedia).

Forget Kashmir, How about little Higher?
In Skardu

or
Himalaya Mountains?
You can see it is fully loaded.

This is again a heavy beast, though only 4 are on order, Pak will buy more in future for sure. Now they are kept for western border of Pakistan, mostly for anti terror ops but a machine of this caliber limited just to no air threat Jihadis is not wasting the capability of it? Wouldn't it be good with limited resources to buy more versatile or multirole machines that can help Pakistan in Kashmir, the only place they need serious power.

Its not for Kashmir.
Most probably Pakistan will use either AH1Z or T129B as gunship in Kashmir sector.

JF-17 will primarily be utilized in interceptor profile.

Wrong.
Jf17 will be utilized as Multi role air craft and various tasks which even F16 cannot perform will be performed by Jf17.

For resource constrained Airforce like PAF which is looking to build up the numbers with a defensive focus JF-17 offers great value.

Jf17 is not a ''defensive platform'' buddy. You don't develop series of stand off weapons for a defensive platform.
You can call F7PG as ''defensive air craft'' as it will serve as point range interceptor.

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

JF taking off from Skardu;

View attachment 334319


View attachment 334320

Promo -- flying across all Pak terrain;

Thank you for those images, I sincerely hope you read the post before you took the road to "enlightenment". Its more about penalty induced while take off at high altitude and not service ceiling if you know the difference.

 

[Spectre]

Jf17 will be utilized as Multi role air craft and various tasks which even F16 cannot perform will be performed by Jf17.

I highly doubt that as I recall an interview by your ACM or AM stating that F-16s are essential in anti terror roles which no other aircraft in your inventory can perform or something to that effect.

Anyway as already stated, JF-17 is a short legged aircraft and in Indo-Pak scenario you wouldn't dare to bring your refueling aircraft within range of Indian borders. There will be always be a trade off b/w fuel and ammo. F-16s and heavier crafts like SU-30s don't suffer from this limitation.

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

Forget Kashmir, How about little Higher?
In Skardu

or
Himalaya Mountains?
You can see it is fully loaded.
View attachment 334321

Again the same problem in comprehension.

Its not for Kashmir.
Most probably Pakistan will use either AH1Z or T129B as gunship in Kashmir sector.

Thats what I was saying when you got your best machine why dont you use it against your worst enemy? Why not chose it like that.

Jf17 is not a ''defensive platform'' buddy. You don't develop series of stand off weapons for a defensive platform.
You can call F7PG as ''defensive air craft'' as it will serve as point range interceptor.

First time I am hearing this terminology of "defensive fighter jet"! Its amazing how creative people can become.

Jf17 will be utilized as Multi role air craft and various tasks which even F16 cannot perform will be performed by Jf17.

Never knew JF-17 was so potent that it can do what F-16 cant, mind to list some of those "actions"?

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

The answer is quite simple: PAF didn't "opt" for anything, it got JF-17. The spear of PAF in any scenario where it undertakes a strike mission is likely to be F-16s. JF-17 will primarily be utilized in interceptor profile.

For resource constrained Airforce like PAF which is looking to build up the numbers with a defensive focus JF-17 offers great value.

All said and done even IAF with all it's 250+ SU-30 Mkis, Mirages, Mig -29s and Jaguars would be loath to enter Pakistani territory with the air defence systems and fighter concentration PAF has. So reverse would be equally true.

Only thing which can change the status quo are the Stealth Fighters which to this date USA alone possess.

Hope you know that the plan to to develop the JF on superior or on par with the block 52+...
Minus maybe the range.

With each block coming online with improvements while the older block gets the upgrade..

Block III shall come with AESA,IRST,new engine ... Among other goodies.

I highly doubt that as I recall an interview by your ACM or AM stating that F-16s are essential in anti terror roles which no other aircraft in your inventory can perform or something to that effect.

Anyway as already stated, JF-17 is a short legged aircraft and in Indo-Pak scenario you wouldn't dare to bring your refueling aircraft within range of Indian borders. There will be always be a trade off b/w fuel and ammo. F-16s and heavier crafts like SU-30s don't suffer from this limitation.

Hope you also read that JF-17 took part in COIN operations in Ops ZarbeAzb?

Or the fact that they have ordered ASELPOD for the very reason..

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

@DESERT FIGHTER and others, I know talking about JF 17 touches some nerves but its not a just another thread about how glorious or inferior JF-17 is, I am talking about specifics, about a certain aspect of design.

If you can contribute about that, I will be more than thankful else please dont derail this thread in d!ck measuring contenst. Also mods please remove offtopic posts.

Thanks to all for understanding. Hope to make this a discussion worth reading and not some 100 pages troll fest.

 

[Spectre]

Hope you know that the plan to to develop the JF on superior or on par with the block 52+...
Minus maybe the range.

With each block coming online with improvements while the older block gets the upgrade..

Block III shall come with AESA,IRST,new engine ... Among other goodies.

I have no doubt regarding that. We have similar plans for our Tejas.

What both these aircrafts suffer from is the range limitations by the virtue of them being smaller and lighter aircrafts. This is something which cannot be easily modified if ever.

For Pakistan the range issue is ever more acute with India being much larger in size thus necessitating deeper strikes. Central India onwards to the south if Pakistan wishes to strike Indian installations - pilots would have to be prepared for a one way trip specially for your JF-17s where as most of Indian aircrafts like Mirages, Su-30 etc can strike quite deep within Pakistan and still hope to make it back.

I hope you understand this critical limitation because this allows India to position it's jets further back and still be in range while denying Pakistan that luxury.