Pakistan has Integrated its Own Standoff Weapons with Turkish Baykar Bayraktar Akıncı: Turkiye Urdu

[PaklovesTurkiye]

The JF-17 project provided an opportunity to develop some of the parts in-house and was a good learning experience on the whole. The fundamental objective was to create a jet fighter that was better than F-7PG and replace it and other older jets. This purpose is served.

Now WE are trying to put too much in JF-17 and expect it to challenge the likes of Rafale F3R and other big jets. This is not going to work. F-16s made it possible for PAF to defeat IAF in Operation Swift Retort.

There is no need to phase out JF-17 but a light-weight airframe has its limitations. If WE try to install new items in JF-17, these additions will stress JF-17 airframe. There are reports of cracks in JF-17 airframe, these might be fixed but the problem exists.

Medium-weight class is the way to go. PAF should shift its focus to Medium-weight class projects. Lessons learned from JF-17 can be put to use in these projects and probably do a better job.

@MastanKhan Any opinion on this comment?

 

[Sineva]

Are those AAMs loaded on the pylons?

No,these look like Mam-L air to ground glide bombs

 

[MastanKhan]

@MastanKhan Any opinion on this comment?

Hi,

My opinion is the oldest on this topic. on this forum.

The JF-17 is a little too small of an aircraft---it should have been at least 25% larger---.

But the utility & function it was designed for---that has worked out very well.

As more power plant options are available---JF-17 can have an increase in size---.

Even the americans have changed gears---here is an example

" The Super Hornet is largely a new aircraft at about 20% larger, 7,000 lb (3,200 kg) heavier empty weight, and 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) heavier maximum weight than the Legacy Hornet. The interesting video in this post highlights the main difference between the Boeing F/A-18 “Legacy” Hornet and the F/A-18 Super Hornet ".

 

[arslank03]

are these for both the jammer or radar??

yes for both

OK could be a logical a step but can you make a guess or imagine an engine which could be used for that possible local LIFT program ... ???

could continue to use the TFE731 from the K8 or the new variant of it the F124

OK could be a logical a step but can you make a guess or imagine an engine which could be used for that possible local LIFT program ... ??

or AI322 for commonality with potential PAF kizilelma?

 

[TheSolution]

Hi,

My opinion is the oldest on this topic. on this forum.

The JF-17 is a little too small of an aircraft---it should have been at least 25% larger---.

But the utility & function it was designed for---that has worked our very well.

As more power plant options are available---JF-17 can have an increase in size---.

Even the americans have changed gears---here is an example

" The Super Hornet is largely a new aircraft at about 20% larger, 7,000 lb (3,200 kg) heavier empty weight, and 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) heavier maximum weight than the Legacy Hornet. The interesting video in this post highlights the main difference between the Boeing F/A-18 “Legacy” Hornet and the F/A-18 Super Hornet ".

I thought this too tbh, seemed very small

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

yes for both


could continue to use the TFE731 from the K8 or the new variant of it the F124


or AI322 for commonality with potential PAF kizilelma?

Besides,It will also be interesting to see what is next for AWC after Shahpar 3 project completes.

 

[Mrc]

Akinci is a game changing weapons system , most probably don't realise how crucial this system will be with stand off weapons and long endurance

Night mare for enemy air defences

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

Night mare for enemy air defences

Can you expand on this?
Akinci is not a stealth UCAV after all

 

[surmabhopali]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1687374475673600001

Pakistan has potential to grow if not get diversions of involving in other's wars .

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

yes for both


could continue to use the TFE731 from the K8 or the new variant of it the F124


or AI322 for commonality with potential PAF kizilelma?

IMO...developing a LIFT around the AI-332F would be an excellent idea. First, a LIFT of that size would fit the PAF's desired niche more so than the near-fighter-class LIFTs on the market today (e.g., ACM Sohail Aman said that operating costs of those were comparable to JF-17). Second, it would be a much more modest indigenous fighter program from which we can build aircraft design and development capacity.

Personally, I liked the GROT-2 concept. Basically, a Polish company proposed it to Ukraine as a joint-project. Their idea was to use a single AI-322F turbofan engine. If it had materialized, it'd be similar in size to the BAE Hawk series, which is what I think the PAF is probably gunning for when seeking an appropriate LIFT platform. It could make for a neat UCAV too.

 

[TheSolution]

IMO...developing a LIFT around the AI-332F would be an excellent idea. First, a LIFT of that size would fit the PAF's desired niche more so than the near-fighter-class LIFTs on the market today (e.g., ACM Sohail Aman said that operating costs of those were comparable to JF-17). Second, it would be a much more modest indigenous fighter program from which we can build aircraft design and development capacity.

Personally, I liked the GROT-2 concept. Basically, a Polish company proposed it to Ukraine as a joint-project. Their idea was to use a single AI-322F turbofan engine. If it had materialized, it'd be similar in size to the BAE Hawk series, which is what I think the PAF is probably gunning for when seeking an appropriate LIFT platform. It could make for a neat UCAV too.

View attachment 947535

I hope they attempt this to prevent the AMF from idling and also to gain experience in pursuing the development of a manned aircraft project independently.

Would be a good foundation before moving onto more complex projects like FGFA.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

IMO, the only net-new development projects Pakistan can and maybe should pursue are UCAVs of various sizes and capabilities. These can be simpler to develop than a manned jet while also playing critical roles in the future, e.g. loyal wingman, deep strike, etc.

UCAVs could hold out in initial phases of war but as the Ukraine-Russian war shows they'll be limited/nonexistent mid to late stages.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

UCAVs could hold out in initial phases of war but as the Ukraine-Russian war shows they'll be limited/nonexistent mid to late stages.

As for the Indo-Pak air warfare scenario, first few moments are the most crucial. If the IAF and AD assets can be hit hard, as shown on 02-27, the Indian side would melt down like cow urine...

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

UCAVs could hold out in initial phases of war but as the Ukraine-Russian war shows they'll be limited/nonexistent mid to late stages.

The UCAVs used up to this point are piston (or, at best, turboprop)-powered designs that lack the speed and maneuverability of a fast jet. In fact, they weren't even designed for conventional warfare in the first place, but showed some value. However, I'm talking about developing fast jet (transonic and, later, supersonic) UCAVs like the Bayraktar Kızılelma or TAI Anka-3.

Speaking of the initial stages of a war, I'd much rather send out dozens of stealthy high-speed UCAVs (e.g. TAI Anka-3) with precision-guided bombs, glide bombs, and cruise missiles to eliminate as many key targets as rapidly as possible. Yes, an aggressive strike campaign will result in lots of losses, but UCAVs (i.e., unmanned and cheaper than manned jets) are exactly the type of assets you'd send into those situations. Destroy as many of the adversary's air defence sites, critical military infrastructure (e.g., bridges, fuel depots, etc), situational awareness capabilities (e.g., radars), and -- if fortunate -- aircraft on the ground as possible within the first 1-2 days.

 

[TheSolution]

The UCAVs used up to this point are piston (or, at best, turboprop)-powered designs that lack the speed and maneuverability of a fast jet. In fact, they weren't even designed for conventional warfare in the first place, but showed some value. However, I'm talking about developing fast jet (transonic and, later, supersonic) UCAVs like the Bayraktar Kızılelma or TAI Anka-3.

Speaking of the initial stages of a war, I'd much rather send out dozens of stealthy high-speed UCAVs (e.g. TAI Anka-3) with precision-guided bombs, glide bombs, and cruise missiles to eliminate as many key targets as rapidly as possible. Yes, an aggressive strike campaign will result in lots of losses, but UCAVs (i.e., unmanned and cheaper than manned jets) are exactly the type of assets you'd send into those situations. Destroy as many of the adversary's air defence sites, critical military infrastructure (e.g., bridges, fuel depots, etc), situational awareness capabilities (e.g., radars), and -- if fortunate -- aircraft on the ground as possible within the first 1-2 days.

Russia is supposedly pursuing a UCAV version of the Su-75.