Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

[Donatello]

I Agree with Araz 100% one must think and live in reality not fantasy simply ... one must balance out goods with what it can handle and get not many options are open and even they become where are the funds? so sticking with additional vipers is the way to go , getting the 14 vipers back which we paid for and then mlu them or get 18 more blk 52's or both options.

We should definitely go for 14 F-16s and MLU them, But i am not so sure about purchasing new F-16s. If PAF does get 14 older ones, then we can have 4 full squadrons of F-16s.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

When you are looking to develop your force to counteract your adversary, you go through a decision loop based on the width of your pocket or your influence. The key example of the latter is Israel . we may have had some clout in the 80s but not any more. So we are left in the former group. Now what you want to have is a good mix of quality and quantity within yur budget. If you read my original response to imrans post from which we have digressed a long way you will realize that the post opns afew points of discussion. No one deniesthat the JFT is a little gem which has had input from PAF to cater to their needs. Being a small fighter its running costs might be lower but planes are not just about running costs. There is also the cost of setting up infra structure depot level maintenance m anpower training and time evolved in doing that .Then there are costs associated with learning about the strengths and weaknesses of the new machine and devising strategies to fight with it so that you try your best to utilize it in the sphere of its strength. If yoy now look at my post again you will see the logic behind it. You will need a newer platform to replace the 16s and if you add the costs together it will not only cost you more but set you back at least 2-3 yrs from the time you get the plane to the time you can rock n roll in it. Look at the equation again and you will see why the 16s still make sense for the PAF.I would love to mpve on to bigger and better but does your pocket allow you to do so? Therein lies the dilemma which PAF faces. FC20 Ais still not inducted in PLAAF. DO YOU REALLY WANT TO TAKE ON A BABY WITH TEETHING PROBLEMS OR TAKE ON A BIGGER BOY WHO IS ESTBLISHED AND PASSED THE POTTY TRAINING STAGE.
ARAZ

Very good points. The F-16's performance I do understand, but perhaps we need to discuss the implications of what you just said above in the JF-17 thread. Is that program overhyped in what it can realistically deliver?

 

[Nishan_101]

So any news about 14 F-16s coming to Pakistan.

 

[fatman17]

Pakistani Air Force F-16 Pilots

38 Pakistani Air Force pilots have reached 1,000 flying hours or more in the F-16 Fighting Falcon so far.

Gr.Capt. Aamir Masood
(Updated: 3 Sep 2011)
9 sqn

Wg.Cmd. Ghazanfar Latif
(Updated: 29 Dec 2012)
9 sqn

Wg.Cmd. Zulfiqar "Sidewinder" Ayub
(Updated: 29 May 2010)
9 sqn

Air.Cmd. Ashfaq Arain (Ret.)
(Updated: 14 Sep 2011)

Wg.Cmd. Umer "Archer" Rasheed
(Updated: 17 Jul 2013)
11 sqn

Wg.Cmd. Tariq Zia
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)
9 sqn

Wg.Cmd. Ali Naeem "Baaz" Zahoor
(Updated: 13 Nov 2011)
11 sqn

Wg.Cmd. Irfan Ahmed
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Gp.Capt. Fauad Masud Hatmi
(Updated: 22 Dec 2012)
11 sqn | 9 sqn

Wg.Cmd. M. Haseeb Paracha
(Updated: 30 Aug 2010)
9 sqn | 11 sqn

Air.Vice.Marsh. Muhammad Iqbal
(Updated: 22 Dec 2012)
9 sqn

Air.Vice.Marsh. Farhat Hussain Khan
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Air.Vice.Marsh. Athar Bokhari (Ret.)
(Updated: 22 Dec 2012)

Air.Cmd. Khaleel Ahmed
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)
11 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Haider "Tipu" Zaidi
(Updated: 20 Feb 2011)
11 sqn

Wg.Cmd. Javad Saeed
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Sqn.Ldr. Khalid Mahmood (Ret.)
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Wg.Cmd. Bilal Hassan
(Updated: 23 Sep 2012)
9 sqn | J-7

Wg.Cmd. Waqas Ahmed Sulehri
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Wg.Cmd. Hamza Jamil
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Sqn.Ldr. Omair Ahmed Najmi
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)
11 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Moin "Tornado" Rana
(Updated: 29 May 2010)

Sqn.Ldr. Khalid Mehmood
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)
9 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Azman Khalil
(Updated: 1 Feb 2010)

Sqn.Ldr. Asim "Mav-Slammer" Raja
(Updated: 29 May 2010)
9 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Nauman "Hornet" Ali
(Updated: 29 Jan 2011)
11 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Mustafa "Lightening" Orakzai
(Updated: 17 Feb 2010)
11 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Aftab "Viper-Phantom" Zia
(Updated: 29 May 2010)
11 sqn

Sqn.Ldr. Shazib "Falcon" Mehmood
(Updated: 21 Nov 2010)
11 sqn

Cdr. Sayed Muzaffar Ali (Ret.)
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)


Sqn.Ldr. Ali Asad Khan (Ret.)
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Sqn.Ldr. Muhammad Azam
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Wg.Cmd. Azher Hassan
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Air.Cmd. Razi Nawab (Ret.)
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Air.Cmd. Tariq Mahmud Ashraf
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Air.Vice.Marsh. Waseem-ud-din (Ret.)
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Air.Vice.Marsh. Mohammad Yousaf
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)

Sqn.Ldr. Syed Omer Shah
(Updated: 17 Feb 2009)
11 sqn


F-16.net

 

[SQ8]

Is that program overhyped in what it can realistically deliver?

The hype is entirely based on unofficial sources and bad interpretation of statements. The Program's goal was/is to deliver a fighter that is as manoeuvrable as the F-16, has BVR capability, has certain survivability, is capable of multi-role operations and can carry and deliver both air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons in a single sortie, is easy to fly and maintain, and costs 1/3-1/2 of the newest F-16. It does all that. It was NEVER advertised to be low observable, never advertised to do airshow pirouettes, and never advertised to replace the role of the F-16 for the PAF. All that is based on what fanboys, overzealous press writers and other ill-informed sources put up.

 

[Bilal.]

Agreed for the first block, but saying that the design should not or would not evolve would into something else would also be wrong. As the threat perception change one would not develop completely new platform every time, instead, the same base platform can be utilised and evolved into a more capable weapon system. For instance, F-16 started out as a pure WVR light weight dog fighter and now a block 60 is anything but that...

 

[MastanKhan]

W

You will need a newer platform to replace the 16s and if you add the costs together it will not only cost you more but set you back at least 2-3 yrs from the time you get the plane to the time you can rock n roll in it. Look at the equation again and you will see why the 16s still make sense for the PAF.

Sir,

It would actually take 8---10 years to a start rocking and rolling in a new aircraft. When the first F16's came out---it took the u s pilots 4---8 years to really know the plane----with advanced electronics in the newer aircraft----even 8 to 10 years is not too long of a period----and this is case of an aircraft that is already developed----.

Not like the JF17----which would take 10---15 years to mature-----I remember when I stated a few years ago about the 5 to 10 years time for JF17 to mature----some "ST-UDS" on this board made fun of me----hey 'JACKS'---look who is laughing now.

PAF has missed the 'boat ride' in the earlier part of 2000----when I was a kid---my grandfather used to tell me----son---'grab the horse by its neck hair and you will ride on the back----but if it runs by you and you grab onto the tail----you will be dragged all your life----.

And I will say to myself---what is this 'stupid' old man saying---I am young and I am strong----I can get on top anytime----guess what----.

That is the story of the PAF---it has fallen behind---and it was not for lack of funds----it was a lack of judgmental call----. There is no catching up now----untill and unless they come up with a better air to air BVR missile than their counter parts and have 350---400 4th gen + aircraft.

If you don't have money---then find ways to make peace----. One who fights and runs away---will live to fight another day---.

 

[raazh]

PAF has missed the 'boat ride' in the earlier part of 2000

What boat ride are you referring to??

 

[MastanKhan]

What boat ride are you referring to??

Sir,

Being on this board---since 2009---if you don't know it by now---then you too missed the boat. No pun intended.

 

[Viper0011.]

It would actually take 8---10 years to a start rocking and rolling in a new aircraft. When the first F16's came out---it took the u s pilots 4---8 years to really know the plane-

Not like the JF17----which would take 10---15 years to mature.

PAF has missed the 'boat ride' in the earlier part of 2000

And have 350---400 4th gen + aircraft.

I am going to answer the above bullets in order:

1) 8-10 years was the case when the technology wasn't so advanced and you'd have to fly the aircraft physically to learn its characteristics. Plus if you had a few hundred pilots in the line for training on a new platform, the pilot to the twin seater trainer would be a lot as the trainer would be much less in numbers. So it took that long. Now, you have simulators that give you about 80-85% real flying experience. So you are trained MUCH faster. So take about 3 years average for a batch of pilots to train on all flight envelop, both through the simulator and the physical jet flying. In PAF's case, I'd go to 4-5 years max. Changes being made to the plane are a whole different issue though.

2) JFT will only have two advanced blocks AFAIK. So, its maturity will end by 2018 I think as it's supposed to be forming a lower tier (which is currently being called Mid Tier due to the lack of another jet that would be higher end like FC-20).

3) What Boat Ride are you referring to? Please explain. PAF definitely has some catching up to do due to sanctions during the 90's. But it is doing good to catch up and I think if the funds were available, it would've caught up for the most part. I'd give it 3-5 more years if the new gov't does what its supposed to do to kick start the economy. But do explain what Boat Ride please. I'm curious to know.

4) I agree with the number. The PAF as a defensive arm, needs about 400 3.5 - 4th gen jets with BVR's at the least.

 

[araz]

Aurangzeb Saheb.
The above post has wrongly been attributed to me. It belongs to mastan khan.I would therefore leave it to him to answer it.On a diferent note I feelthat PAF s problem has caused it to always think out of the box.It is in a hurry to modernize its fleet which is obsolete barring the16s.The ineptnese of the previousgovernment and the consequent dip in the economy , and the lack of trust in the continuing support of the US has forcd it to look at options which are perhaps not as matured as it would have wanted it to be. The JFT has also suffered as it does not gain the support Of PL.AF. I suspect that and its desire to have weaponry from multiple sources has resulted in the weapons integration being done in Pakistan. I suspect in the long run it will stand us in good stead with further developments. Present thawing of Indo Pak relations has given us the time to do so. However future acquisitions would place us in a very difficult position. I dont think that FC20 NOW is the answer and therefore we will get more Bl.52s and oldee planes for MLU if uncle sam plays ball. If he does not--I think then we will do what we have done with the JFTand induct FC20 as it becomes available or some other platform as the chinese make it acailable to us. I think the situation heee is fluid and keeps changing in light of what our neighbour does with theifMMRCA and its final specs. It is not ideal to react but wedont have the resources to have the luxury of going proactive.
Araz

 

[Najam Khan]

Its too early to say but AmeriKees are finally agreeing to loose the 'alleged strings' on F-16s. With passage of time, rebuild of US trust on PAF (and arrival of similar/advance technology in the region Air Forces) the leniency shall increase. I can-not comment on details; but the F-16s image created by our fellow Pakistani and neighbour media-men about future of these machines shall prove wrong...provided that Pakistan continues to keep good relations with US.

US Govt. was strict about use of these 18 new machines at the time of their arrival in 2010; now in 3 years everything has gone by the book and hopefully clean transition and use of these machines will continue to open logistic support of US weapons systems to Pakistan. PAF should take back those 14 old F-16 A/B airframes (at least for spares).

In the mean time good relations with US and maturity of JF-17 program remains the only solution for PAF.

 

[nangyale]

Its too early to say but AmeriKees are finally agreeing to loose the 'alleged strings' on F-16s. With passage of time, rebuild of US trust on PAF (and arrival of similar/advance technology in the region Air Forces) the leniency shall increase. I can-not comment on details; but the F-16s image created by our fellow Pakistani and neighbour media-men about future of these machines shall prove wrong...provided that Pakistan continues to keep good relations with US.

US Govt. was strict about use of these 18 new machines at the time of their arrival in 2010; now in 3 years everything has gone by the book and hopefully clean transition and use of these machines will continue to open logistic support of US weapons systems to Pakistan. PAF should take back those 14 old F-16 A/B airframes (at least for spares).

In the mean time good relations with US and maturity of JF-17 program remains the only solution for PAF.

I wouldn't emphaise the good relations so much. It's not like the F-16 is our only option, JF-17 may be slightly underpowered but it more than makes up for that by being strings free so we can put any weapon that we need. Going further more and more Chinese platforms are maturing and we will be inducting more of them.
What good would be any aircrafts if we have to compromise on our sovereignty so that we stay in the good books of uncle Sam. F-16 is not an end in itself it's a tool towards an end i-e Pakistani pride and freedom.

 

[Najam Khan]

I wouldn't emphaise the good relations so much. It's not like the F-16 is our only option, JF-17 may be slightly underpowered but it more than makes up for that by being strings free so we can put any weapon that we need. Going further more and more Chinese platforms are maturing and we will be inducting more of them.
What good would be any aircrafts if we have to compromise on our sovereignty so that we stay in the good books of uncle Sam. F-16 is not an end in itself it's a tool towards an end i-e Pakistani pride and freedom.

I like the speech about 'sovereignty and pride'...but 23 years have been since last sanctions on Pakistan; nothing has changed so far. You military is in-love with US weapon systems. Chinese systems are good but your adversaries and pacing up really fast. To get close you need BIG procurement of new systems (doesn't matter Chinese or non-Chinese) and for that you need time (read years) to master them and MONEY. Go through Araz's posts in previous 2 pages for detail.

Sadly Pakistan neither has time nor money; so all we can do put all ambitions on JF-17 program. While doing so we should understand our weaknesses, limitations and plan our economic future...Self reliance in economy is the way out. Self reliance in weapons is nothing when you don't have money to drive production lines.

Today we cannot simply pull our chest out in front of west, Why? Because of weak economy and poor Foreign policy. If these changes are not made then this good speech about 'sovereignty and pride' is of no use.

 

[nangyale]

I like the speech about 'sovereignty and pride'...but 23 years have been since last sanctions on Pakistan; nothing has changed so far. You military is in-love with US weapon systems. Chinese systems are good but your adversaries and pacing up really fast. To get close you need BIG procurement of new systems (doesn't matter Chinese or non-Chinese) and for that you need time (read years) to master them and MONEY. Go through Araz's posts in previous 2 pages for detail.

Sadly Pakistan neither has time nor money; so all we can do put all ambitions on JF-17 program. While doing so we should understand our weaknesses, limitations and plan our economic future...Self reliance in economy is the way out. Self reliance in weapons is nothing when you don't have money to drive production lines.

Today we cannot simply pull our chest out in front of west, Why? Because of weak economy and poor Foreign policy. If these changes are not made then this good speech about 'sovereignty and pride' is of no use.

I agree with you a hundred percent that first thing that needs to improve is the economy, then we can afford more, be that Chinese Western or Russian equipment. But I still don't understand the love affair with all things American even if that means that you have to compromise on your core interests.
The sanctions were lifted not 23 years ago, but only after the US needed us for their war in Afghanistan circa 2001/02. and where is the guarantee that it won't be back once they get all their troops out. I am not into conspiracy theories about bugs but what happens when there is an actual war and uncle Sam imposes sanctions again. I know a lot of people here think that India Pakistan wars will always be short and we will have enough spares for a short war after that "Allah malik hai". But what if the next war is not a short war but rather a sea blockade and it turns into an Air-Sea battle which run for months. How are you gona operate all those lovely 16s when the stores are depleted. We can still operate the indigenous systems.
My emphasis is that you may think that F-16 is really good and I do believe that our pilots are really well trained with this system, but if we can't use it when things turn ugly, what good is having it.
If it's only purpose is to drop bombs inside our territory, then that job can be by an F-6 as well, if it's job is to just scare an adversary I would rather do that with paper models of F-22.

Regards