Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

[Trango Towers]

Sir, as per my understanding, PAF did not plan JF17 to be main stay or the leading A/C rather they were hopeful to combine with it F-16s or some other A/C. It was only meant to replace the Mirages. I think that was short-sightedness which still continues as now we know PAF is unable to get F-16s.. so it should have designed a platform of the F-16 i.e. medium weight. They didn't even work on its successor with larger size, they are not willing to get J10 or J11 and any other A/C is out of their hand..Project Azm is just on paper or in very very preliminary stage. So what are they doing...is beyond me...
PAF is just sitting on yesteryears laurels...in recent years, its performance has nothing to be proud of...most of the successes are by PA and air defences instead of our airforce. Where were they in Kargil conflict? they could defend their own airbases...As citizens of Pakistan we have the right to ask these questions and they have the responsibility to answer.

oh dear...glass is not just half full but almost empty.
around the time of Kargil indeed Pakistan airforce was in poor shape but Musharraf send an open air message that if the Indians aircraft come attack Indian bases and keep doing it. Many aircraft are not available to Pakistan. those that are available may not be available re funding. limited funds being utilized for AZM and Air university etc.
I and many people have total confidence in the air force. JF17 may not be a sexy plane but its effective. Indians are at bay. thats what matters. also if its that bad why have we got export sales.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I am also surprised that bilal is sating design was freezed in 2015. We just had a speech recently saying design was just recently finalized..if block 3 is non structural upgrade than it seems pretty long time (2014-15 to 2020)
Engine rd93ma gives a 15% boast on rd93 base model
Honestly we just have to wait..nobody thought jf17 b model will come up untill it showed up pretty quickly

What they intended for the Block-III was decided in 2015 (e.g. AESA radar, HMD/S, etc). What they selected to fill those requirements with (e.g. KLJ-7A, etc) was done recently, so the prototype is under production. It doesn't mean there are major airframe changes (comparable to the Gripen E/F). Besides a shorter timeframe, we're also throwing less money at the JF-17 (vs. Saab on the Gripen).

 

[Trango Towers]

What they intended for the Block-III was decided in 2015 (e.g. AESA radar, HMD/S, etc). What they selected to fill those requirements with (e.g. KLJ-7A, etc) was done recently, so the prototype is under production. It doesn't mean there are major airframe changes (comparable to the Gripen E/F). Besides a shorter timeframe, we're also throwing less money at the JF-17 (vs. Saab on the Gripen).

i Think what Bilal means is the design envelope was finalized and selection process is continuing.

 

[ziaulislam]

Regardless unless there is quantum chmage in USA direction in Afghanistan USA will continue to pressure Pakistan and thus no used or subsidized f16 ..while new f16 are simply not cost effective given the political baggage they come with ...
So i doubt the f16 will change in number ..

But come next elections when somwone new comes things might change for good or bad

I doubt trump will be reelected

 

[khanasifm]

What they intended for the Block-III was decided in 2015 (e.g. AESA radar, HMD/S, etc). What they selected to fill those requirements with (e.g. KLJ-7A, etc) was done recently, so the prototype is under production. It doesn't mean there are major airframe changes (comparable to the Gripen E/F). Besides a shorter timeframe, we're also throwing less money at the JF-17 (vs. Saab on the Gripen).

Production w/o prototype assuming new sub systems there is already a block 3 somewhere being flown and tested, production will start once testing is completed that is the reason for 2019-20 production date at pac and interim additional block 2 being built

Per Acm this is the first major upgrade of jf-17 previous one, block 2 was not considered as major but minor upgrade

So assuming would need testing

 

[Trailer23]

ehhh...
This is still a General Dynamics/Lockheed Martin F-16 Topic, right?

But come next elections when somwone new comes things might change for good or bad

I doubt trump will be reelected

I more concerned about the elections that we have to deal with in a couple of days.

Foreign Policies, under a new leader might bring change and we actually might have a better access to (some) Western Equipment.

 

[messiach]

Rubbish, we applied the principles of associative and disassociative segregation onboard FC1 in 2005 eg. HIDEC.

The Saab Gripen E. Not a bad a/c to have in ones fleet. Too bad we can't get our hands on it. Saab can sell us Eyrie, but not the Gripens'. What bull...

 

[MastanKhan]

Rubbish, we applied the principles of associative and disassociative segregation onboard FC1 in 2005 eg. HIDEC.

Hi,

That is what I thought of the Modular design of the JF17---.

Grippen is a big " dramay baaz "---it has a great media team---Paf's media team sucks when it comes to marketing---.

 

[messiach]

You are walking in the right direction now. Some of the features they implemented in E (in the video i saw) we have already successfully implemented in FC1. @MastanKhan

Saab itself is saying the Gripen E/F is basically a different fighter to the Gripen C/D, and we can see it both in terms of the specifications and the time it took to develop, test and certify this aircraft (almost 10 years, end-to-end).

The Block-III's design was frozen in 2015 and is to enter production in 2019-2020, so there's no way we're talking about a significant re-design or re-engine. Such changes require a lot more time (just see the Gripen E/F).

That said, the Gripen E/F does provide a good template of what can be done for Project Azm. In this case, you have an engine which is an upgraded derivative of the GE F404, but is capable of lifting 1.5x more payload and providing more range than the current C/D. It also provides supercruise.

In other words (@MastanKhan @CriticalThought) the PAF can approach Project Azm in a similar way, i.e. achieve it a 1.5x range and payload increase over the Block-III, but with a low radar RCS airframe, all the while still benefiting from a relatively low-cost turbofan platform. This also fits with @messiach's statements about Project Azm 'not being a significant departure from the JF-17' while still respecting the idea of a next-generation fighter.

The only question is the engine. Naturally, the RD-93MA would have made sense initially as it's a relative of the RD-93 (much like the Gripen E/F's F414 is a relative of the C/D's F404), but a rumoured ~90kN afterburn thrust wouldn't cut it for a next-gen fighter with clear range and payload improvements. Rather, you'd need to reach the 98~100 kN thrust of the F414, which also respects @messiach's point that the engine for Azm will be new.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

You are walking in the right direction now. Some of the features they implemented in E (in the video i saw) we have already successfully implemented in FC1. @MastanKhan

To be honest, I'm liking the idea of an agile, cost-sensitive next-gen fighter.

 

[MastanKhan]

You are walking in the right direction now. Some of the features they implemented in E (in the video i saw) we have already successfully implemented in FC1. @MastanKhan

Hi,

When the JF17 came out---the Paf was touting about its modular capabilities---thus putting it way ahead of everything else in its category---. Modular design was the mantra---.

And for over the years---this term disappeared as well---. A senior officer mentioned about the modular design for the engine space as well---that the aircraft was designed to accept couple of different engines in mind---.

And that comment was well apreciated and acknowledged by a respectable defense professional on defencetalkdotcom over a decade ago---.

So---what happened---over the years did someone in the Paf sabotaged their own product---?

 

[CriticalThought]

You are walking in the right direction now. Some of the features they implemented in E (in the video i saw) we have already successfully implemented in FC1. @MastanKhan

Well, logically it does make sense. I have always wondered how come PAC is jumping straight into 5th gen design when they don't have any independent (I.e. without a partnership) experience of taking a project from conception to design, prototype, and production. But what kept throwing me off was the ACM's statement that future of PAC is making AESA radars and 5th gen jets in house. Also, I expected Block 3 to already feature low RCS given it will roll off the production line just after India receives first deliveries of Rafale. Pushing this to Azm means quite a number of years where the Rafale will reign supreme in South Asian skies. They better fix this with a 4.5+ gen purchase.

@Oscar @Bilal Khan 777 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Mahmood uz Zaman

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Well, logically it does make sense. I have always wondered how come PAC is jumping straight into 5th gen design when they don't have any independent (I.e. without a partnership) experience of taking a project from conception to design, prototype, and production. But what kept throwing me off was the ACM's statement that future of PAC is making AESA radars and 5th gen jets in house. Also, I expected Block 3 to already feature low RCS given it will roll off the production line just after India receives first deliveries of Rafale. Pushing this to Azm means quite a number of years where the Rafale will reign supreme in South Asian skies. They better fix this with a 4.5+ gen purchase.

@Oscar @Bilal Khan 777 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Mahmood uz Zaman

IMO ... unless the plan is for that 4.5+ gen fighter to ultimately replace the F-16, I don't think the PAF will buy it to plug the gap between the JF-17 and 5th-gen. There's a sunk cost to inducting a new platform, so while the PAF may start with 30~40 jets, it'll want to add more to scale the upfront expense.

 

[CriticalThought]

IMO ... unless the plan is for that 4.5+ gen fighter to ultimately replace the F-16, I don't think the PAF will buy it to plug the gap between the JF-17 and 5th-gen. There's a sunk cost to inducting a new platform, so while the PAF may start with 30~40 jets, it'll want to add more to scale the upfront expense.

Unfortunately, the result of Azm that you have described feels neither here nor there. Yes, we need numbers. But at the same time, we need an air superiority fighter, not in the sense that it only performs air to air duties, but in the sense that it rules the skies. Such fighters are by design meant to be inducted in small numbers - they are prohibitive otherwise. IMO, 2 to 3 squadrons of the latest incarnation of Su-35 with latest AESA radar and weapons package, along with 2 to 3 A-100 AEWACS is a must for air superiority. Then we also need S-400+ for air defence. At this point we can feel relatively certain about defending our homeland.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Unfortunately, the result of Azm that you have described feels neither here nor there. Yes, we need numbers. But at the same time, we need an air superiority fighter, not in the sense that it only performs air to air duties, but in the sense that it rules the skies. Such fighters are by design meant to be inducted in small numbers - they are prohibitive otherwise. IMO, 2 to 3 squadrons of the latest incarnation of Su-35 with latest AESA radar and weapons package, along with 2 to 3 A-100 AEWACS is a must for air superiority. Then we also need S-400+ for air defence. At this point we can feel relatively certain about defending our homeland.

My point is that if the PAF opts for the Su-35, then the long-term outcome will be Su-35 + Project Azm. Basically, whatever off-the-shelf fighter the PAF commits to moving forward will replace the F-16. So if the Russians proceed with a new Su-35 variant with an AESA radar, and in turn, the PAF would opt for it then they won't be stop at 2~3 squadrons, but take it to 4~5 (72~90) and replace the F-16s by the mid-2030s.

It might sound weird to maintain that many Su-35s, but it makes sense for the PAF as it'll scale infrastructure spending and ensure that a strong number of jets are operating when others are undergoing routine maintenance (a relatively frequent issue with the Flanker-series).

IMO ... it'll be one of Su-35, J-10C, FC-31 or TF-X.