PAKISTAN’S MIRAGES: SPECIALISTS ENDURING OUT OF NECESSITY

[PurpleStone]

What options we have assuming PAF can only spare 4 billion dollars very generous ..i doubt we can)

1. J 10 = 30% More range and payload but same weapons and package as jf-17

2. Su 35... Very costly in maintaince ...would be very diffiuclt to maintain 50 % serviceability and would require frequent overhauls in russia (from Indian experience )

3. Chinese Flankers not available, typhoon, Rafals all cost above 8 billion dollars for 2 sq(36 acs)

4. Old non multirole aircarfts like mastan sahab favourite jh-7
issue would be an aircaft that has only one role in situation where you would like to have multi role ac given the large IAF

now if block 3 can get AESA, HMD, CFTs and new rd 93 ma. It would neutralize any advantage j10 has to offer, if not than PAF should opt for it...

And no used F16 is not available and will not be available

Why can't we get F-16 using the $700 million CSF funds approved for 2018.

 

[ziaulislam]

Why can't we get F-16 using the $700 million CSF funds approved for 2018.

we can buy with our own money, the issue is cost effectiveness..
new f-16s block 52 simply doesnt cut against more advance rafale, block 70 i am not sure is going to be released or not, and than there is the issue of aim9x and aim 120D

 

[MastanKhan]

Why can't we get F-16 using the $700 million CSF funds approved for 2018.

Hi,

What does " we " mean---false flag---??????

 

[PurpleStone]

Hi,

What does " we " mean---false flag---??????

No. I am from India. I just use "we" to refer to defense enthusiasts irrespective of the country.

 

[GriffinsRule]

This is slightly off-topic but its something I thought about and I don't see why it is such a bad idea, but maybe some of you can interject as well with the pros and cons of such an approach.

Yes, PAF Mirage aircraft are in need of replacement. And if JF-17 is not the ideal way to go, then why not build brand new Mirage X variant, albeit with insights gained Thunder's manufacturing. I am envisioning something along the lines of a Mirage 3/5/F1 powered by the RD-93. I doesn't needing to be a carbon copy, but even if it is, buying the rights to an old design shouldnt be expensive. And the bonus would be local facilities have experience in both overhaul and maintenance. The airframe as we already know is very robust. With a turbofan instead of a turbojet you would get a newer generation engine that is already in the fleet in a huge way not to mention you are free to design the architecture from scratch and install any component you want. FBW wouldnt even be a necessity as we are not trying to create a new Mirage 2000 and would reduce the costs as well. We could even recycle components from JF-17 into the homemade Mirage variant, thus gaining significant economies of scale.

 

[ziaulislam]

This is slightly off-topic but its something I thought about and I don't see why it is such a bad idea, but maybe some of you can interject as well with the pros and cons of such an approach.

Yes, PAF Mirage aircraft are in need of replacement. And if JF-17 is not the ideal way to go, then why not build brand new Mirage X variant, albeit with insights gained Thunder's manufacturing. I am envisioning something along the lines of a Mirage 3/5/F1 powered by the RD-93. I doesn't needing to be a carbon copy, but even if it is, buying the rights to an old design shouldnt be expensive. And the bonus would be local facilities have experience in both overhaul and maintenance. The airframe as we already know is very robust. With a turbofan instead of a turbojet you would get a newer generation engine that is already in the fleet in a huge way not to mention you are free to design the architecture from scratch and install any component you want. FBW wouldnt even be a necessity as we are not trying to create a new Mirage 2000 and would reduce the costs as well. We could even recycle components from JF-17 into the homemade Mirage variant, thus gaining significant economies of scale.

buying j-10 off the shelf, getting CFTs for thunder block 3, or getting jh-7 will be more productive than this approach

 

[syed_yusuf]

Well o well, we could buy mirage 3ng or mirage 50 everything then mate it to rd93. Do provide air refuler probe. Updated radar and avionice is needed

 

[Armchair]

This is slightly off-topic but its something I thought about and I don't see why it is such a bad idea, but maybe some of you can interject as well with the pros and cons of such an approach.

Yes, PAF Mirage aircraft are in need of replacement. And if JF-17 is not the ideal way to go, then why not build brand new Mirage X variant, albeit with insights gained Thunder's manufacturing. I am envisioning something along the lines of a Mirage 3/5/F1 powered by the RD-93. I doesn't needing to be a carbon copy, but even if it is, buying the rights to an old design shouldnt be expensive. And the bonus would be local facilities have experience in both overhaul and maintenance. The airframe as we already know is very robust. With a turbofan instead of a turbojet you would get a newer generation engine that is already in the fleet in a huge way not to mention you are free to design the architecture from scratch and install any component you want. FBW wouldnt even be a necessity as we are not trying to create a new Mirage 2000 and would reduce the costs as well. We could even recycle components from JF-17 into the homemade Mirage variant, thus gaining significant economies of scale.

I think the technologies have evolved to the point where this would not be meaningful. But you have a brilliant idea that Syed Yusuf also shares. And I particularly like - the Azm as a tailless delta with twin RD-93s. Would make a great multi-role platform.

Hi,

" The aircraft can fly at a maximum speed of 1,808km/h. Its cruise speed is 903km/h. The normal and ferry ranges of the JH-7 are 1,759km and 3,700km respectively. The service ceiling of the aircraft is 16,000m. The aircraft weighs around 14,500kg while its maximum take-off weight is 28,475kg ".

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/xianjh7fighterbomber/

http://errymath.blogspot.com/2014/12/jh-7b-flying-leopard-fighter-bomber.html#.WvdyJYgvzcc

That would work with buddy refueling---.

The SU34 would have the legs---.

See---you are not looking for the combat radius at this time---if you get in combat---drop your weapons---drop your tanks--you are done---run---hide and come back some other time---.

So---the normal strike range is 1750 KM---build larger fuel tanks like the israelis did---and you can increase the range---.

See---you are not jettisoning your fuel tanks before launching the weapons load---.

It is not a conventional bombing run at the target---it is from 250-500 miles away---you pop up to launch height---release the load---make a sharp turn and be gone---.



Hi,

When you are flying that far---you need to have the ability of a " DOUBLE TAP "---.

What if one missile and the only one you are carrying fails to ignite---and after all the good luck that you had of getting into enemy territory---you got nothing to give---.

My children---I really want you kids to think---.

I want you to think this way---why is this old man saying just the opposite of what everyone else was telling us---.

Over the centuries---men have stood up and have said things different than anyone else---things different than the norm---some had their heads chopped off---some were burnt on the stake---some became prophets---some became statesmen---some became gurus---some became Wali---some became saints---but there remained one thing common amongst them---the majority did not believe in them---I claim to be none of them.

I wanted to say it to PSHAMIM---he was one of those who got a lucrative job because of the F16's---but I did not---but he understood me loud and clear.

Also the figures may be for the JH-7 and the JH-7B may have greater range. A customized version for PAF ala Mirage 5 could have even more range, as would your suggesion of larger fuel tanks.

Kochi may still be too far to attack though. What other significant targets are there other than Mumbai that could be attacked by a JH-7PG? An interesting bit of homework for me.

The latest JH-7A is carrying the same radar as the J-10A. Which doesn't bode well for naval strike. Could an appropriate naval strike radar be found? What options are there? Some more homework for me...

I've had the opportunity to speak with Parvez Shamim. I respect him and miss his posts on Pakdef.

 

[Ultima Thule]

And I particularly like - the Azm as a tailless delta with twin RD-93s. Would make a great multi-role platform.

then it has no/minimum maneuverability/agility at all @Armchair its like Mirage VI or USAF delta series like F-106 of wings interceptors/nuke strike jets @Armchair

 

[araz]

we can buy with our own money, the issue is cost effectiveness..
new f-16s block 52 simply doesnt cut against more advance rafale, block 70 i am not sure is going to be released or not, and than there is the issue of aim9x and aim 120D

This is not true. Your current problem is a very hostile US government. All the projects are on hold including the AH1Z so do you want a repeat of the same? Heck we cant even seem to procure old 16s as this too reqjires US approval. They have already said NO once how do you expect them to give you the nod now?
A

This is slightly off-topic but its something I thought about and I don't see why it is such a bad idea, but maybe some of you can interject as well with the pros and cons of such an approach.

Yes, PAF Mirage aircraft are in need of replacement. And if JF-17 is not the ideal way to go, then why not build brand new Mirage X variant, albeit with insights gained Thunder's manufacturing. I am envisioning something along the lines of a Mirage 3/5/F1 powered by the RD-93. I doesn't needing to be a carbon copy, but even if it is, buying the rights to an old design shouldnt be expensive. And the bonus would be local facilities have experience in both overhaul and maintenance. The airframe as we already know is very robust. With a turbofan instead of a turbojet you would get a newer generation engine that is already in the fleet in a huge way not to mention you are free to design the architecture from scratch and install any component you want. FBW wouldnt even be a necessity as we are not trying to create a new Mirage 2000 and would reduce the costs as well. We could even recycle components from JF-17 into the homemade Mirage variant, thus gaining significant economies of scale.

I have often thought of the same. Essentially it would give us M2k like capabilities as even that design should be available to buy/ copy. The main impediments as I see them is the cost and the benefit.
In a cash crunch situation with an enemy 7 times larger than you, do you go sideways or forward? M3/5 development along those lines with a Chinese FBW would give us a M2K/ like capability/load out(at least I hope so). The question is to what end and at what cost and time frames. I certainly think it was worth doing/thinking about in the early 2ks but now?
I think the cost could well be 200-500million(rough guess but could be totally wrong). One could develop the plane in our existing facility. However how many deltas would one need? At a guess 80 and at a stretch 100. It would stretch our fabrication plant to the Max as they are struggling to meet the JFT requirement. So do we increase capacity. I doubt othe4 than the cantral fuselage anything else would be salvagable from the old platform. Specialized steel would have to be procured from elsewhere at specs as we cannot make it ourselves. Commonality of parts /engine would drive down the running costs but there are other problems to contend with. The other factor is time frame. If we start the project now just the feasability study could take 12/18 months. Add 3 yrs for the platform to materialize as a test bed and add another 2 yrs for manufacturing to start. So what other factors does one consider?
A. Are we capable of running 2 projects side by side? I suspect not but could be wrong.
B. Do we design the platform and run it ourselves or get help? Probably the latter.
C. Why would the Chinese/French help us as they have comparative products to sell?
D. If the Chinese do help us it would be at a cost and how much is that going to be? What would they want in return?. Would the French be happy for us to share the design with the Chinese even if it is an old one?.
E. Even if the platform gets produced what advantage does it bring us against the enemy fleet. Remember they have the M2K with similar characteristics.
F. If we do manufacture the plane would our corrupt govtt and even the procurement wallas want to buy it as foreign ka maal comes with kick backs and some of us love haraam to fill our bellys with.
G. With resource costraints when does the project come on line and what advantage does it gives us? Probably not much. It might end up being cheaper buying the J10 if a Delta is needed.
I think these points make me feel that PAF has taken the wiser decision of embarking on a 5th generation programme to keep technological parity with the adversary at a relatively modest price while retaining intellectual independence. I wont even entertain the thought of going to the French even for the designs of their older planes as they will charge us an arm and a leg.
A

 

[Basel]

Hi,

SU35 is not good for strike missions---it is more of an air superiority aircraft.




Hi,

Thank you---and that again brings us back to the JH7's---.

You are wrong about Su-35, its a multirole aircraft, Su-37 is air dominance fighter which have not seen sales.

http://tass.com/defense/990745

 

[Armchair-General]

@GriffinsRule
Buying J-10 would be cheaper and J-10 can be linked to our chinese AEWACs (Karakorum Eagles).
JF-17 block 2s are already datalinked to these.

 

[Signalian]

Umm how about using it for buddy refueling as the illusions have to take a beating in any case and we got only 4 of em - - - - - - .

Or with a lil modifications - - - make a Pakistani version of EA-18 growler - - - - -.

The deal is promising , from which ever angle you look at it.

I am an ardent proponent of such a type of EW aircraft with secondary capability of SEAD ops.

Conversion of JF-17:

1. The two wingtips missile launcher rail replaced with detection pods
2. 2 x out-board pylons carrying High Band Jamming Pods
3. Center line fuselage carrying Low Band Jamming Pod
4. The last two mid-board pylons carrying fuel tanks or ARM's.

 

[Armchair]

@MastanKhan I just saw that Tornados are being retired... another junk saga could be started for maritime strike and Mirage replacement...

 

[salman-1]

PAF would never buy any outdated designs, as it's maintenance and overhaul facilities would also be outdated and scrap. Mirages had a long history starting from brand new and buying used one were no big difference. JH-7As have British engines who's availability is extremely doubtfull, Tornados are already white elephants for RAF. PAF is just lingering on with what it has, that's a bit dangerous too as the gap is increasing fast for technology and replacements.
JF17 cannot be answer to every mission, a dedicated fighter like J10, 11 should be inducted. Already late for it just 4-5 years