Pakistan has been offered the Chinese 4th generation J-11 (SU27)

[khanz]

it can be used against baluchis, pushtoons or In khi.
you guys should stop this deal otherwise your defence strategist will make you cry.

u don't need to worry about them only one it'll be used against is indians if u try anything funny.

 

[Secret Service]

it can be used against baluchis, pushtoons or In khi.
you guys should stop this deal otherwise your defence strategist will make you cry.

hahaha...first take care of your Naxalites ,Tamils and Maoists ..

 

[satishkumarcsc]

hahaha...first take care of your Naxalites ,Tamils and Maoists ..

Whats wrong with Tamils?

 

[james1122]

A feather in a cap for PAF

 

[RazorMC]

The single engine in the JFT produces probably more thrust than the two engines combined of FCK-1. So what's your point?

Sonny single engine jets risk falling out of the sky because their one and only engine failed and they can't run long duration strike sorties either.

I don't understand your point?
I was answering another post. As for twin-engines, I've always preferred them over single. Just like I prefer air-superiority over multi-role fighters for air-air combat roles (unless dogfighting).

 

[Tajdar adil]

If PAF get 100 of J11b then we dont need F16 F15 eurofighter and rafale....
This plane is very good option for PAF.But my question that why PAF PAF dont have heavy bomber and twin engine Fighter.
Can any one tell me the real resone...

 

[SR 71 Blackbird]

If PAF get 100 of J11b then we dont need F16 F15 eurofighter and rafale....
This plane is very good option for PAF.But my question that why PAF PAF dont have heavy bomber and twin engine Fighter.
Can any one tell me the real resone...

PAF possessing heavy bomber!
Even China ha just medium bombers based on old Tu-16.
engined
The reason PAF doesn't want twin engined fighters is that they except the Mig-29 & Su-27 are very costly to operate.

 

[SBD-3]

If PAF get 100 of J11b then we dont need F16 F15 eurofighter and rafale....

When it is satisfied with a single engine fighter, why does PAF need to go for a twin engine. I dont understand the logic behind this argument. F-16 is a decent bomb truck, JFT will make up for its munition load by using multi launch racks. Why do we need a fuel and maintainence thirsty monster when we can have a single engine aircraft doing a similar role. Twin engines are used to balance the TWR of heavy fighters, but ease of maintainence means that a single engine fighter will be able to make more stories when required and thus will be more efficient than a twin engine fighter in general

This plane is very good option for PAF.But my question that why PAF PAF dont have heavy bomber and twin engine Fighter.
Can any one tell me the real resone...

because PAF is not USAF, USAF does not pit its heavy bombers in active theater, they firstly wipe out all the potential threats in the area to give a clean go for their heavy bombers. PAF cant do this, thats why we dont need these lame elephants

 

[Tajdar adil]

When it is satisfied with a single engine fighter, why does PAF need to go for a twin engine. I dont understand the logic behind this argument. F-16 is a decent bomb truck, JFT will make up for its munition load by using multi launch racks. Why do we need a fuel and maintainence thirsty monster when we can have a single engine aircraft doing a similar role. Twin engines are used to balance the TWR of heavy fighters, but ease of maintainence means that a single engine fighter will be able to make more stories when required and thus will be more efficient than a twin engine fighter in general

because PAF is not USAF, USAF does not pit its heavy bombers in active theater, they firstly wipe out all the potential threats in the area to give a clean go for their heavy bombers. PAF cant do this, thats why we dont need these lame elephants

Then we need to go for joint production of J 10 because it is also very good fighter aircraft.

 

[SBD-3]

Then we need to go for joint production of J 10 because it is also very good fighter aircraft.

Probably yes, however, till something concrete comes out on the issue, its better to wait and watch

 

[yousaf goebbels]

my two pence would be that Pakistan should invest in ICBM's...they are the great equalizer and will ensure and safeguard Pakistan's sovereignity against the rest of the world in the age to come

 

[SBD-3]

my two pence would be that Pakistan should invest in ICBM's...they are the great equalizer and will ensure and safeguard Pakistan's sovereignity against the rest of the world in the age to come

Why would we be needing ICBM???? we dont have our history with US or USSR

 

[T-Rex]

Why would we be needing ICBM???? we dont have our history with US or USSR

If you have ICBMs you don't need long range heavy bombers. It has nothing to do with the history of USSR or the US. Besides, the ICBMs are much less vulnerable to counter-measures.

 

[TOPGUN]

I just don't seem to understand is why most of you always go off topic look at what the damn titile of the thread is and now we here talking about other stuff waste of thread space never the less a useless thread which will never happen.

 

[SBD-3]

If you have ICBMs you don't need long range heavy bombers. It has nothing to do with the history of USSR or the US. Besides, the ICBMs are much less vulnerable to counter-measures.

But when you have ur adversary covered with conventional BMs, then why to go for ICBM....