Notify PAF Aircraft Crashes

[Saif-ud-Din Qutuz]

But I see that you are getting your allowance regularly from your charlatan leader.

I don't need to get paid from any political party. I'm not a loser like you. I'm an entrepreneur who provides job and doesn't look at others to get one. Loser

@DarX & @Saif-ud-Din Qutuz

Please keep politics off these threads. Your personal spats shall get negative ratings from hereon. Do not complain then.

Now that's good. I'm not in to any political talk. That other guy is a psycho. He doesn't understand it.

 

[his5850]

Sire, no doubt jf17 is not at al a bad aircraft. Cheap healthy and customisable but it just doesn go down the throat that just because jf17 is tailor made for paf(remember cac doing all designing prototyping and testing) that plaaf is not even buying 1 squadrn because they have j 10, they also have pretty old j 7 too which can be replaced very cheaply wd jf 17 as j 10 is almost costing double. Plaaf can for stop gap measure use jf 17 for many reasons. Dun gv xample of f2 or any other aircraft they are based on original aircraft design of f 16 and us already deploys f 16 which are similarly capable. Which aircraft is jf 17 based on ???
I belive even if after block 3 if plaaf doesn buy jf 17 it wl seriously dent the image of jf 17 as well as doubts will remain is it really as capable as it is marketed.

I don't think so like USA which have F-15 and F-16 in their air force for long time in the in the same way if you see F-7 why not replace it all of them with J-10 isn't adding more j-10 will be cheaper if u add JF-17 there would be too many planes for single job which is multi role fighter it will add more cost and add more classes which meaning u have to build number of different spare parts and war tactics

all em saying if u have 2 different type of multi role fight it will be cheaper for u rather then running 3 different type of plans for the same job

 

[DarX]

Sire, no doubt jf17 is not at al a bad aircraft. Cheap healthy and customisable but it just doesn go down the throat that just because jf17 is tailor made for paf(remember cac doing all designing prototyping and testing) that plaaf is not even buying 1 squadrn because they have j 10, they also have pretty old j 7 too which can be replaced very cheaply wd jf 17 as j 10 is almost costing double. Plaaf can for stop gap measure use jf 17 for many reasons. Dun gv xample of f2 or any other aircraft they are based on original aircraft design of f 16 and us already deploys f 16 which are similarly capable. Which aircraft is jf 17 based on ???
I belive even if after block 3 if plaaf doesn buy jf 17 it wl seriously dent the image of jf 17 as well as doubts will remain is it really as capable as it is marketed.

There is some substance in this contention about why the PLAAF is not ordering the JF-17. My guess is that the Chinese are waiting for a more developed version such as the Block-3, which has upgrades to the airframe besides its control systems and avionics.

 

[DarX]

I don't need to get paid from any political party. I'm not a loser like you. I'm an entrepreneur who provides job and doesn't look at others to get one. Loser


Now that's good. I'm not in to any political talk. That other guy is a psycho. He doesn't understand it.

@DarX & @Saif-ud-Din Qutuz

Please keep politics off these threads. Your personal spats shall get negative ratings from hereon. Do not complain then.

@Chak Bamu

 

[hacker J]

There is some substance in this contention about why the PLAAF is not ordering the JF-17. My guess is that the Chinese are waiting for a more developed version such as the Block-3, which has upgrades to the airframe besides its control systems and avionics.

My guess is also the same, block 3 they are waiting. If block 3 is a quantum leap ahead that explains things. But if they want block 3 why not block 2 ? it is better than f7 and cheap and upgadable to block 3. Such questions can be answered but in case they did not order at all,
Then they might be selling cheap shit to pakistan for money thats it. Chinese are already bloody money minded nothing is for free from them. No one knows it better than pakistan specially with CPEC.
But till then its a question only PLAAF official can answer .

I don't think so like USA which have F-15 and F-16 in their air force for long time in the in the same way if you see F-7 why not replace it all of them with J-10 isn't adding more j-10 will be cheaper if u add JF-17 there would be too many planes for single job which is multi role fighter it will add more cost and add more classes which meaning u have to build number of different spare parts and war tactics

all em saying if u have 2 different type of multi role fight it will be cheaper for u rather then running 3 different type of plans for the same job

Let me try and correct you
1) F 15 is air superiority fighter and f 16 was a light multi role platform from the start (now they have been customised according to user needs but they were designed for different roles) n the concept of one plane is obviously better but it is not in place with coming of f 35 not before that, and many argue against it too thats why a 10 is still in service
2) F 7 is a interceptor with limited ground attack roles, j 10 is medium weight multirole aircraft and jf 17 is a light multirole aircraft. j 10 was created in requirement of cheap multirole platform (j11 j15 j16 and j 20) all have better range and payload and it is replacing f 7s in service which gives them additional operational effectiveness as a multirole aircraft.
Now my question in we are moving ahead which 5th gen aircraft and j 10 almost costs double than jf 17 so for a stop gap measure where 5th gen planes replace all gen? why are they not going for jf 17 ? (remember they have jf 17 assemble lines, they still deliver some parts to pakistan, they designed it so no prob of maintanince, they are also building indigenous engines for it while j 10 uses russion one.
Not sayig jf 17 is a bad aircraft but it can easily be produced in numbers to replace 3rd gen aircrafts with roles like coin, advance trainer, and light attack and light multirole plactform. You don't always need bombing trucks to do job and jf 17 (as per discription can do everything).
Unless the growth potential in jf 17 is very limited(thats the reason i am assuming).

 

[DarX]

My guess is also the same, block 3 they are waiting. If block 3 is a quantum leap ahead that explains things. But if they want block 3 why not block 2 ? it is better than f7 and cheap and upgadable to block 3. Such questions can be answered but in case they did not order at all,
Then they might be selling cheap shit to pakistan for money thats it. Chinese are already bloody money minded nothing is for free from them. No one knows it better than pakistan specially with CPEC.
But till then its a question only PLAAF official can answer .



Let me try and correct you
1) F 15 is air superiority fighter and f 16 was a light multi role platform from the start (now they have been customised according to user needs but they were designed for different roles) n the concept of one plane is obviously better but it is not in place with coming of f 35 not before that, and many argue against it too thats why a 10 is still in service
2) F 7 is a interceptor with limited ground attack roles, j 10 is medium weight multirole aircraft and jf 17 is a light multirole aircraft. j 10 was created in requirement of cheap multirole platform (j11 j15 j16 and j 20) all have better range and payload and it is replacing f 7s in service which gives them additional operational effectiveness as a multirole aircraft.
Now my question in we are moving ahead which 5th gen aircraft and j 10 almost costs double than jf 17 so for a stop gap measure where 5th gen planes replace all gen? why are they not going for jf 17 ? (remember they have jf 17 assemble lines, they still deliver some parts to pakistan, they designed it so no prob of maintanince, they are also building indigenous engines for it while j 10 uses russion one.
Not sayig jf 17 is a bad aircraft but it can easily be produced in numbers to replace 3rd gen aircrafts with roles like coin, advance trainer, and light attack and light multirole plactform. You don't always need bombing trucks to do job and jf 17 (as per discription can do everything).
Unless the growth potential in jf 17 is very limited(thats the reason i am assuming).

I think there are a number of factors which might explain this. The PLAAF operates huge fleets of older jets and so converting the infrastructure once to Block-2 planes, and then again to Block-3 planes, would require massive amounts of resources and effort. The PLAAF must've significant resources tied up in the supply lines of the older jets. The PAF on the other hand had retired the F-6 fleet and closed its rebuild factory. The Q-5 was being maintained from the left over spare parts. Thus it needed the Block-1 urgently to replace these planes.

Other than this, I think the PLAAF doesn't face the same urgency that the PAF faces, as it has very capable plane in the form of the J-10 available to it. The J-10 also uses the same engine as the J-11 which minimizes supply lines and so satisfies China's needs very effectively. In the end, China might never order the JF-17 for this reason, as it has a much more powerful jet in its place.

 

[hacker J]

I think there are a number of factors which might explain this. The PLAAF operates huge fleets of older jets and so converting the infrastructure once to Block-2 planes, and then again to Block-3 planes, would require massive amounts of resources and effort. The PLAAF must've significant resources tied up in the supply lines of the older jets. The PAF on the other hand had retired the F-6 fleet and closed its rebuild factory. The Q-5 was being maintained from the left over spare parts. Thus it needed the Block-1 urgently to replace these planes.

Other than this, I think the PLAAF doesn't face the same urgency that the PAF faces, as it has very capable plane in the form of the J-10 available to it. The J-10 also uses the same engine as the J-11 which minimizes supply lines and so satisfies China's needs very effectively. In the end, China might never order the JF-17 for this reason, as it has a much more powerful jet in its place.

As i told earlier powerful is not d explaination. If powerful jets were only needed then why to go fr j 10, j11 are alone very capable. Now again one of the qualities of jf 17 as stressed upon by senior members here ws that it could be easily upgaded to block 3. If that has massive investments means ur buying block one and then re buying it to convert to block 2 and 3 ??
I am not just stressing that jf 17 is for the role of j 10 but there are other roles as well which jft can suppliment as a cost effective solution. Some of them are coin, advance trainer, light attack, point defence, normal patroll services, light cost effective plane near d sea servilliance specially wd drop tanks.
And the urgency is there in plaaf as they want to mve ahead of 3rd gen as fast as poasible to match us airforce which is having already 4plus aircrafts to d least.

 

[SQ8]

I for once and i think only once posed a similar Q to a serving AVM. The Q was, our state is practically & effectively a security state and so everything incld. R&D revolves around security concerns first and foremost & people/welfare comes somewhere down the list. So why & how is it that security projects like turbine R/D, electricity generation etc are nowhere on the list of security concerns in a security state surrounded by enemies. This logically should have been on the top of the list. There were at-least three serving AVM and at-least half a dozen retd. officers and one retd. ACM sitting on that table and NO one could answer this question. All i got was a raw smile.

It is NOT on the list of national priorities. No government military/civilian alike intentionally and I have said this time & again intent-fully neglected these national security concerns. The resultant fallout was fully predictable and well-known.

Understood you withdrew post, but Same reasons I walked away much earlier from the field. Even in security concerns the projects are dictacted by the idiotic- Ill restate - IDIOTIC concept of "Unless India has it, we don't need to bulld it"
This is enforced from the earliest days of R&D at all institutions incl the one next to Fauji Foundation. Newer kids part of that organization have expressed massive frustration, those that were not desperate or not capable of sticking to the "box" left.

 

[DarX]

As i told earlier powerful is not d explaination. If powerful jets were only needed then why to go fr j 10, j11 are alone very capable. Now again one of the qualities of jf 17 as stressed upon by senior members here ws that it could be easily upgaded to block 3. If that has massive investments means ur buying block one and then re buying it to convert to block 2 and 3 ??
I am not just stressing that jf 17 is for the role of j 10 but there are other roles as well which jft can suppliment as a cost effective solution. Some of them are coin, advance trainer, light attack, point defence, normal patroll services, light cost effective plane near d sea servilliance specially wd drop tanks.
And the urgency is there in plaaf as they want to mve ahead of 3rd gen as fast as poasible to match us airforce which is having already 4plus aircrafts to d least.

Your points are absolutely valid. It actually looks very reasonable for the PLAAF to induct a JF-17 type jet as a second line economical fighter. In the end, I think the only logical explanation might be that the PLAAF is either waiting for the Block-3, which has air frame and avionics upgrades, or it is skipping the plane altogether.

Then they might be selling cheap shit to pakistan for money thats it. Chinese are already bloody money minded nothing is for free from them. No one knows it better than pakistan specially with CPEC.

With reference to your point regarding the CPEC, I don't think it is unreasonable of the Chinese to package their investment as loans. In this way, it is ensured that the financing is not taken for granted and discipline is maintained. I can assure you that this project is the flagship of their OBOR scheme, which is designed to build China's global stature on the lines of America's Marshal plan, and they cannot be seen to have run their flagship project, and their only ally, into the ground on account of a few dollars. The CPEC also has many other benefits, which is why many countries around the world are panicking, and powerful countries do not panic just because of a few roads.

 

[his5850]

My guess is also the same, block 3 they are waiting. If block 3 is a quantum leap ahead that explains things. But if they want block 3 why not block 2 ? it is better than f7 and cheap and upgadable to block 3. Such questions can be answered but in case they did not order at all,
Then they might be selling cheap shit to pakistan for money thats it. Chinese are already bloody money minded nothing is for free from them. No one knows it better than pakistan specially with CPEC.
But till then its a question only PLAAF official can answer .



Let me try and correct you
1) F 15 is air superiority fighter and f 16 was a light multi role platform from the start (now they have been customised according to user needs but they were designed for different roles) n the concept of one plane is obviously better but it is not in place with coming of f 35 not before that, and many argue against it too thats why a 10 is still in service
2) F 7 is a interceptor with limited ground attack roles, j 10 is medium weight multirole aircraft and jf 17 is a light multirole aircraft. j 10 was created in requirement of cheap multirole platform (j11 j15 j16 and j 20) all have better range and payload and it is replacing f 7s in service which gives them additional operational effectiveness as a multirole aircraft.
Now my question in we are moving ahead which 5th gen aircraft and j 10 almost costs double than jf 17 so for a stop gap measure where 5th gen planes replace all gen? why are they not going for jf 17 ? (remember they have jf 17 assemble lines, they still deliver some parts to pakistan, they designed it so no prob of maintanince, they are also building indigenous engines for it while j 10 uses russion one.
Not sayig jf 17 is a bad aircraft but it can easily be produced in numbers to replace 3rd gen aircrafts with roles like coin, advance trainer, and light attack and light multirole plactform. You don't always need bombing trucks to do job and jf 17 (as per discription can do everything).
Unless the growth potential in jf 17 is very limited(thats the reason i am assuming).

JF-17 parts production going from 60% to 80% in Pakistan next year. PLAAF i think is skipping Jf-17 like PAF did. J10 is medium weight fighter so heavy and medium weight fighter will be better and cheaper option because J-10 and J-11 share many parts which will be cheaper to run in long run engine is same so running cost will be low. that's why i think there is not point for JF-17 in PLAAF there is one more point to make they are fallowing the US model for there air force

 

[hacker J]

JF-17 parts production going from 60% to 80% in Pakistan next year. PLAAF i think is skipping Jf-17 like PAF did. J10 is medium weight fighter so heavy and medium weight fighter will be better and cheaper option because J-10 and J-11 share many parts which will be cheaper to run in long run engine is same so running cost will be low. that's why i think there is not point for JF-17 in PLAAF there is one more point to make they are fallowing the US model for there air force

sir, firstly when u talk about 60% to 80%(assuming ur numbers to be correct) its all about the parts of airframe and that too doesn includes parts like landing gear and hydraulics. Even rafael is upto 30% of total plane is imported, because there are many parts in the airplane. As mentioned ubove get out of the illusion of numbers and stop confusing others too. Now if china wants to follow usa then they should be more than desperate to remve all 3rd gen fighters with 4th gen aircrafts ryt, so y not do it with jf 17 ? j 10 and j 11 share no part in common except engine and some avionics and armaments. besides engine every thing else can be shared by jf 17 as well, plus i dn't want to replace j 10 with jf 17 i am just trying to understand why they are skipping this plane which can cheaply remove all their fleet(in some other roles like coin, light multirole, patrole duties, trainer etc) with cost effective solution and in long turn they can eventually replace all by 5 gen airplanes(because us is planning so). And no matter what parts pak produces in house with TOT all original parts were designed, tested in china first.

 

[MastanKhan]

I for once and i think only once posed a similar Q to a serving AVM. The Q was, our state is practically & effectively a security state and so everything incld. R&D revolves around security concerns first and foremost & people/welfare comes somewhere down the list. So why & how is it that security projects like turbine R/D, electricity generation etc are nowhere on the list of security concerns in a security state surrounded by enemies. This logically should have been on the top of the list. There were at-least three serving AVM and at-least half a dozen retd. officers and one retd. ACM sitting on that table and NO one could answer this question. All i got was a raw smile.

It is NOT on the list of national priorities. No government military/civilian alike intentionally and I have said this time & again intent-fully neglected these national security concerns. The resultant fallout was fully predictable and well-known.

Hi,

Thank you for your post---.

 

[Sameer25]

this is so sad, we should get rid of then right now because f7s are really unreliable

 

[araz]

sir, firstly when u talk about 60% to 80%(assuming ur numbers to be correct) its all about the parts of airframe and that too doesn includes parts like landing gear and hydraulics. Even rafael is upto 30% of total plane is imported, because there are many parts in the airplane. As mentioned ubove get out of the illusion of numbers and stop confusing others too. Now if china wants to follow usa then they should be more than desperate to remve all 3rd gen fighters with 4th gen aircrafts ryt, so y not do it with jf 17 ? j 10 and j 11 share no part in common except engine and some avionics and armaments. besides engine every thing else can be shared by jf 17 as well, plus i dn't want to replace j 10 with jf 17 i am just trying to understand why they are skipping this plane which can cheaply remove all their fleet(in some other roles like coin, light multirole, patrole duties, trainer etc) with cost effective solution and in long turn they can eventually replace all by 5 gen airplanes(because us is planning so). And no matter what parts pak produces in house with TOT all original parts were designed, tested in china first.

Inappropriately posted in this section. Go to the relevant section on JFT and read from first page. Your querry has been answered many times. Please read all the posts before asking again.
Regards
A

 

[messiach]

These days i have to travel almost twice weekly between bristol--regensburg. Lot of management issues.
You are on spot. I have been away for 13 yrs now. I hear things are changing. You know better, you are on ground.

Understood you withdrew post, but Same reasons I walked away much earlier from the field. Even in security concerns the projects are dictacted by the idiotic- Ill restate - IDIOTIC concept of "Unless India has it, we don't need to bulld it"
This is enforced from the earliest days of R&D at all institutions incl the one next to Fauji Foundation. Newer kids part of that organization have expressed massive frustration, those that were not desperate or not capable of sticking to the "box" left.

I have been away for thirteen yrs but things have changed. The 13f is a turbojet with erratic performance characteristics at extreme altitudes both ways. My understanding is that could be a reason for recent F7 problems.
Turbofans have for more reliable characteristics.

Hi,

Thank you for your post---.