OPPORTUNITY - Pentagon suspends weapon deliveries to Iraq, leaving Iraqi F-16 fleet in the air

[Nasr]

So what kept PAF F-16s flying during a decade of sanctions?

Information on that has been scant. However, from the information available, Kargil War clearly showed that Pakistan Air Force was in no position to fight an Air War against Indians who were pounding Pakistani positions in the sector. If the F-16s were fully serviceable, as you have stated and were flying unimpeded despite Zionist-American Sanctions. Then why wasn't Pakistan Air Force eager to engage the Indians in the Kargil War?

Pakistan Air Force was flying F-16s from it's initial order of 40 aircraft. However that number had reduced down to 32 or so aircraft. As Pakistan engaged the Soviets in Afghanistan. Attrition, despite Pakistan Air Force's excellence in flight safety and impeccable aircraft serviceability record, had claimed half a squadron's worth of Fighting Falcons. There were even rumors of F-16s canabalized in order ensure overall fleet service. In fact, I believe the Book, Pakistan Air Force from the late 1980s, claimed that the Vipers were earmarked for decisive air battles, at the time. Between 1998 till 2002, was the worse period for Pakistan Air Force's F-16s. So much so, that Pakistan Air Force went on a buying spree of Mirages in order to maintain a credible "Order of Battle."

Let's not kid ourselves about the devastating effects of Zionist-American Sanctions. Iran, Venezuela and Iraq can attest to this, be it past, present or future. But it would be foolish to ignore the grit, determination and tenacity of Pakistan Military, which has shown victorious resilience in the face of unmatched adversity, with enemies both external and internal, out to destroy or disable Pakistan.

I am not an idealist, nor a pessimist. But what I am is someone who seeks to identify our weaknesses, spot the cause of our weaknesses and find solutions to effectively neutralize them. The enemy (and yes, Zionist-America is an enemy) uses a plethora of effective tools to subjugate or decapitate nations. Hence it would be utterly foolish to play into the hands of the enemy. Make no mistake, the enemy is real, it's beguile, seduction is designed to lure you into complacency. America, Britain, France, Israel and India's interests converge on Pakistan. None of them want to see a strong, powerful, united, independent Pakistan, free from Zionist-Western influence and domination. This doesn't mean that they are invincible, as they have weaknesses that Pakistan has effectively and decisively exploited.

In terms of F-16 Fighting Falcons and Pakistan Air Force, there is no doubt that the fighter-jet in the hands of Pakistan Air Force's fighter pilots, is deadly/lethal and one that can determine the outcome of Air War in Pakistan's favor. So the way I see it, the solution for Pakistan to build up a healthy and sustainable cache of spare-parts such as avionics, engines, radar and of course weapons. To find and access viable and definitive access to such supplies. And it isn't impossible, as Pakistan has done it before with the French Mirages. The latter however, are no Vipers and France isn't like America. So before the doors to this route are shut in it's totality. Like Iran experienced with it's F-14 Tomcats. It would be important for Pakistan to plan and act on this in a comprehensive manner.

When Pakistan Air Force has attainted a certain degree of independence in servicing it's Viper fleet. It can continue, unhindered, operating and getting supplies from the OEM. This by no means is an easy task to accomplish, but as I said, is not impossible.

The other problem that is identified as an impediment in Viper fleet sustainability, is technology. Which is continually being improved on the Viper. It would be a gargantuan task to keep updated and have supplies which enable Pakistan Air Force to update/upgrade the Vipers independently. In this scenario, Turkey looks an attractive route, however I wouldn't be Pakistani enough if I didn't warn Pakistan Military Establishment of Turkey being a dangerous and deceptive player to deal with. The best way to deal with Turkey, is not ever become overly dependent on it, because trust me when I say this, Turkey will press the nerve points, to exact what it wants. So it is important to outsmart, outthink and snip out Turkey, by remaining it's friend, yet with no liability.

 

[aliyusuf]

- Most important of all, Link 17 and its association with our ground assets, radars, SAMs, and AWACS. Link 16 falls short here unlike TuAF which has made Link-16 central to all its equipments in air and ground.

It is my understanding that using the both Link-17 and Link-16 we are connected with the main GCI nodes and key assets in the PAF, PA and PN .... in an integrated network, based on which we are now in position to conduct netcentric warfare. Although, you are right that majority of the assets are linked via the Link-17, but, once an asset is linked into the main network, no matter which TDL is being used, information flow is seamless and all information to and from an asset is available.

I also think that Block 3 unless reaches around 50, and 4 years operational status, won’t be formally used for AD roles .... Since we are not seeing block 3s formally in AD roles for some time ....

My query was about the above part of your post. According to the way I see it, it is only in the AD role and the naval support support role that the Block-3 + PL-15 combo and Anti-Ship Missiles would be better than the Block-52+'s and Block-15 MLU Tape-5's.

 

[araz]

That will be ice on the cake.

The icing is very much there in my view. And the cake is going to cause a lot of envy to the neighbours.
A

 

[StormBreaker]

It is my understanding that using the both Link-17 and Link-16 we are connected with the main GCI nodes and key assets in the PAF, PA and PN .... in an integrated network, based on which we are now in position to conduct netcentric warfare. Although, you are right that majority of the assets are linked via the Link-17, but, once an asset is linked into the main network, no matter which TDL is being used, information flow is seamless and all information to and from an asset is available.


My query was about the above part of your post. According to the way I see it, it is only in the AD role and the naval support support role that the Block-3 + PL-15 combo and Anti-Ship Missiles would be better than the Block-52+'s and Block-15 MLU Tape-5's.

Oh, that is because, the reason is quite simple, and 27 feb further solidifies my reason.

PAF is still in the phase of integrating Thunders into fleet (integration here in this post is referencing mastering and gaining confidence and developing/practicing tactics). 27 Feb, both kills were officially declared as by F-16s. One might start believing that PAF is hesitating to send thunders AT THE MOMENT to most critical points where there is a high chance of interception and that’s why sends Falcons. This i am saying on the basis of the information we generally know, I don’t knw what actually was the scenario as they have been many conflicting views from different so called insiders so lets take official stance as the quotation.

So the timeline on the above post was referring to this and also the fact that Block 3 is actually a whole new bird (for end user ie pilot), the avionics, sensors even weapons are new and that AESA all together is new to PAF so we might not see it in action for some time.

I would want PAF to conduct frequent exercises, both domestic and participate in international exercises with Thunders B2 or more preferred brave but not Block 3.

Practice Block 3 in UAE, Qatar and China. Get CCS some upgraded Block 2 or Bravos with avionics from Block 3 but also keep PESA equipped training fighters in CCS so as to keep alive the spirit and familiarity with PESA radar because that is what our fleet is actually. I think, we should replace K-8 with some PESA equipped trainers like L-15 or M-346 so that an intermediate trainer teaches you on PESA while Advanced trainers of CCS are equipped with AESA radars. This way, our pilots will have experience on both PESA as well as AESA so that when they are posted in different squadrons, they won’t have a problem since they are familiar with both systems. A person who drives a manual car hesitates to drive automatic and vice versa.

Our simulators should also be upgraded for Block 3

@Signalian @HRK @Hodor @MastanKhan

 

[aliyusuf]

Oh, that is because, the reason is quite simple, and 27 feb further solidifies my reason.

PAF is still in the phase of integrating Thunders into fleet (integration here in this post is referencing mastering and gaining confidence and developing/practicing tactics). 27 Feb, both kills were officially declared as by F-16s. One might start believing that PAF is hesitating to send thunders AT THE MOMENT to most critical points where there is a high chance of interception and that’s why sends Falcons. This i am saying on the basis of the information we generally know, I don’t knw what actually was the scenario as they have been many conflicting views from different so called insiders so lets take official stance as the quotation.

So the timeline on the above post was referring to this and also the fact that Block 3 is actually a whole new bird (for end user ie pilot), the avionics, sensors even weapons are new and that AESA all together is new to PAF so we might not see it in action for some time.

In my opinion the aerodynamic differences between the block-II and Block-III may not be significantly more than the differences between the Block-52 and the Block-15 Vipers. The Block-III won't be that much of big difference. As far as an AESA radar is concerned, capability enhancement would be there for sure but will it's usage be very different from the existing radars?

 

[Raider 21]

USN is operating 14 x F-16 A/B as aggressor that PAF had asked for.

PAF didn't ask for it. US Navy bought them.

 

[StormBreaker]

In my opinion the aerodynamic differences between the block-II and Block-III may not be significantly more than the differences between the Block-52 and the Block-15 Vipers. The Block-III won't be that much of big difference. As far as an AESA radar is concerned, capability enhancement would be there for sure but will it's usage be very different from the existing radars?

Like i said, it all depends upon PAF’s selection of radar. If the selection is wide angled radar with single rotating steered plate, there won’t be much a difference, but a radar with small plates on 3 sides, that would be something new or different.

Like i gave the car transmission example !!!

These airframe changes matter not, that doesn’t even feel like a change. And any pilot can fly the plane regardless of type. What matters is the pilot’s experience or training of combat situation, environment and how he uses the data of new systems of Block 3 and plans accordingly.

In my opinion the aerodynamic differences between the block-II and Block-III may not be significantly more than the differences between the Block-52 and the Block-15 Vipers. The Block-III won't be that much of big difference. As far as an AESA radar is concerned, capability enhancement would be there for sure but will it's usage be very different from the existing radars?

Oh, just understood what you are trying to say, AESAR is a capability enhancement.

It bring small but very useful changes to basic combat of locking and firing. This is something, we can get hang off soon. But then again, what matters is the development of complex tactics and strategies given the increased range of detection and locking, increased ranged BVR, HMDS and Advanced WVR Missiles, MAWS and Enhanced EW, all these upgrades opens doors to thousands of practical strategies and tactics so figuring out this will take time. And this is what matters in the end.

 

[BATMAN]

Then use the USA tactic of selling less technology advanced variant of JF-17 (like F-16/79), which could be upgradable from Block I to Block III if certain conditions are met after certain years, for an extra cost.

USA has better aircrafts than F-16 even if Iraqi AF goes rogue. F-16, F-18, F-15, F-35 and F-22 Vs F-16. Not a comfortable scenario for F-16.

You'r right BUT just to put the things in proper perspective. Just like US we shall than as well have full inventory control of the birds, with built in kill switch.

F-16 blk-70 has developed into multirole over the time, and now the Bahrain blk-70 is in same league as F-35 etc., minus stealth body, but that does not limit F16-blk 70 to disappear from the radar screen.

 

[Signalian]

If the F-16s were fully serviceable, as you have stated and were flying unimpeded despite Zionist-American Sanctions. Then why wasn't Pakistan Air Force eager to engage the Indians in the Kargil War?

PAF was eager to engage IAF, had IAF crossed inside Azak Kashmir however issue of downing an IAF aircraft inside its own territory and starting a full scale war was there. Point being : F-16s were not absent during Kargil war, they were on CAPs.

My query was about the above part of your post. According to the way I see it, it is only in the AD role and the naval support support role that the Block-3 + PL-15 combo and Anti-Ship Missiles would be better than the Block-52+'s and Block-15 MLU Tape-5's.

You mentioned Anti-ship missiles, so AShW ? Range matters. F-16 has more range, more payload. Even if fuel tanks come into play, JF-17 still carries less payload and has lesser range.

 

[aliyusuf]

PAF was eager to engage IAF, had IAF crossed inside Azak Kashmir however issue of downing an IAF aircraft inside its own territory and starting a full scale war was there. Point being : F-16s were not absent during Kargil war, they were on CAPs.


You mentioned Anti-ship missiles, so AShW ? Range matters. F-16 has more range, more payload. Even if fuel tanks come into play, JF-17 still carries less payload and has lesser range.

The only anti ship missile that the F-16 can carry that I know of is the AGM-84 Harpoon. But, AFAIK, we have not been provided the Harpoon. Also if any other anti ship missile had been mated with the Viper, then at least a small squadron's strength would have been placed at Masroor. AFAIK our F-16's do not have any dedicated anti ship weapon.

JF-17 have the option to use CM-400AKG and C-802 anti ship that come straight to the mind.

 

[Signalian]

The only anti ship missile that the F-16 can carry that I know of is the AGM-84 Harpoon. But, AFAIK, we have not been provided the Harpoon. Also if any other anti ship missile had been mated with the Viper, then at least a small squadron's strength would have been placed at Masroor. AFAIK our F-16's do not have any dedicated anti ship weapon.

JF-17 have the option to use CM-400AKG and C-802 anti ship that come straight to the mind.

PAF F-16s are harpoon capable. F-16 formations keep moving in flights/detachments all around Pakistan- Masroor to Skardu. F-16 will be spread all over Pakistan in case of war. Bholari AFB housing F-16 is the closest to the coastline ? That would put F-16 in AD role closer to the coastline.

Since officially Pakistan has AGM-84 equipped on P-3C, but Exocet on Mirage-V and C-802 on JF-17 are there. There are around 12 Mirage-VPA and probably 16-18 JF-17 which is MultiRole, so not dedicated to Naval support role only. The previous aircraft of 2nd Squadron was F-7P used in same role as ROSE-I, air superiority role, but now the replacement of F-7P is JF-17, which has enhanced capabilities thus its scope of role has increased.

A few highlights about Masroor AFB.

1. Interestingly, Mirage-III ROSE-I is stationed at Masroor which shows that air cover/escort/AD of Karachi as well as for escort for Naval support Mirage-VPA was envisioned through this ROSE-I squadron.

2. Ra'ad ALCM was fired through Mirage-III DP deployed at Masroor AFB.

3. Other Mirage-III at Masroor are mixture of radar equipped fighter-bomber and few radar less ones. Rest are two seater Mirage-III used for training and conversion.

So even before JF-17 was introduced at Masroor and F-16 was stationed close at Bholari, PAF had its Air Wing covering all scopes of aerial combat (Air Defence-Mirage-III ROSE I + F7P, tactical attack- Mirage-III, interdiction- Mirage-III, long range attack as ALCM -Mirage-III) including naval - Mirage-V.

However, not only a long range fighter bomber is missing but still F-16 stands out in terms of range and payload. Mirage-V can match bombing payload sometimes, probably la behind in range. JF-17 pitches in with modern weaponry and pods. If Air refueler comes into play, that could increase range, but escorting refueler 50-100 km from coastline can be an issue.

 

[mingle]

PAF F-16s are harpoon capable. F-16 formations keep moving in flights/detachments all around Pakistan- Masroor to Skardu. F-16 will be spread all over Pakistan in case of war. Bholari AFB housing F-16 is the closest to the coastline ? That would put F-16 in AD role closer to the coastline.

Since officially Pakistan has AGM-84 equipped on P-3C, but Exocet on Mirage-V and C-802 on JF-17 are there. There are around 12 Mirage-VPA and probably 16-18 JF-17 which is MultiRole, so not dedicated to Naval support role only. The previous aircraft of 2nd Squadron was F-7P used in same role as ROSE-I, air superiority role, but now the replacement of F-7P is JF-17, which has enhanced capabilities thus its scope of role has increased.

A few highlights about Masroor AFB.

1. Interestingly, Mirage-III ROSE-I is stationed at Masroor which shows that air cover/escort/AD of Karachi as well as for escort for Naval support Mirage-VPA was envisioned through this ROSE-I squadron.

2. Ra'ad ALCM was fired through Mirage-III DP deployed at Masroor AFB.

3. Other Mirage-III at Masroor are mixture of radar equipped fighter-bomber and few radar less ones. Rest are two seater Mirage-III used for training and conversion.

So even before JF-17 was introduced at Masroor and F-16 was stationed close at Bholari, PAF had its Air Wing covering all scopes of aerial combat (Air Defence-Mirage-III ROSE I + F7P, tactical attack- Mirage-III, interdiction- Mirage-III, long range attack as ALCM -Mirage-III) including naval - Mirage-V.

However, not only a long range fighter bomber is missing but still F-16 stands out in terms of range and payload. Mirage-V can match bombing payload sometimes, probably la behind in range. JF-17 pitches in with modern weaponry and pods. If Air refueler comes into play, that could increase range, but escorting refueler 50-100 km from coastline can be an issue.

PAF and PN needs something twin engine jetlike Su or J16 or F18 or F15 E.

 

[aliyusuf]

PAF F-16s are harpoon capable. F-16 formations keep moving in flights/detachments all around Pakistan- Masroor to Skardu. F-16 will be spread all over Pakistan in case of war. Bholari AFB housing F-16 is the closest to the coastline ? That would put F-16 in AD role closer to the coastline.

Since officially Pakistan has AGM-84 equipped on P-3C, but Exocet on Mirage-V and C-802 on JF-17 are there. There are around 12 Mirage-VPA and probably 16-18 JF-17 which is MultiRole, so not dedicated to Naval support role only. The previous aircraft of 2nd Squadron was F-7P used in same role as ROSE-I, air superiority role, but now the replacement of F-7P is JF-17, which has enhanced capabilities thus its scope of role has increased.

A few highlights about Masroor AFB.

1. Interestingly, Mirage-III ROSE-I is stationed at Masroor which shows that air cover/escort/AD of Karachi as well as for escort for Naval support Mirage-VPA was envisioned through this ROSE-I squadron.

2. Ra'ad ALCM was fired through Mirage-III DP deployed at Masroor AFB.

3. Other Mirage-III at Masroor are mixture of radar equipped fighter-bomber and few radar less ones. Rest are two seater Mirage-III used for training and conversion.

So even before JF-17 was introduced at Masroor and F-16 was stationed close at Bholari, PAF had its Air Wing covering all scopes of aerial combat (Air Defence-Mirage-III ROSE I + F7P, tactical attack- Mirage-III, interdiction- Mirage-III, long range attack as ALCM -Mirage-III) including naval - Mirage-V.

However, not only a long range fighter bomber is missing but still F-16 stands out in terms of range and payload. Mirage-V can match bombing payload sometimes, probably la behind in range. JF-17 pitches in with modern weaponry and pods. If Air refueler comes into play, that could increase range, but escorting refueler 50-100 km from coastline can be an issue.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Signalian]

PAF and PN needs something twin engine jetlike Su or J16 or F18 or F15 E.

See the internal fuel which decides combat radius or even range.
This is to show that range is not always dependent on twin engine fighter.

All your choices are twin engine fighters. What about F-16 Block 70 or realistically will there be CFT on JF-17 Block III to increase its internal fuel capacity?

 

[StormBreaker]

PAF and PN needs something twin engine jetlike Su or J16 or F18 or F15 E.

Let’s collect the money earned by these pro kashmiri stalls on roads who are sitting and earning with giant speakers to buy the fighters since 3 days

Pak India war is because of Kashmir so funds for Kashmir should go for procurement

View attachment 603578

See the internal fuel which decides combat radius or even range.
This is to show that range is not always dependent on twin engine fighter.

All your choices are twin engine fighters. What about F-16 Block 70 or realistically will there be CFT on JF-17 Block III to increase its internal fuel capacity?

Sir do you see any room for CFTs on Thunders now that spine is significantly humped up ?