Pakistan's New Fighter Jets Can Change the Balance: The Impact of Pakistan's First...

[brahmastra]

how many of JF-17 will china induct?

 

[Keysersoze]

how many of JF-17 will china induct?

Remains to be seen...Russia doesn't use the MKI so does that mean the MKI is inferior?

 

[SQ8]

in the 1965 war...you had the f-86 sabre and we had gnats...
in the 1971 war...you had the f-104 starfighter the best of that time...you've always had the quantitative edge over us in both the wars...and yes numerical superiority does come handy....but it's a trade-off....

If you are referring to qualitative edge in these wars then i expected better from you considering your previous record(unless you were referring to something else and made a faux pas).
The Gnat is a far superior machine than the Sabre. for christ sake the jets were designed ten years apart. Not only is the Gnat just as or more maneuverable or more in certain aspects. it had superior acceleration & climb.
Now coming to the starfighter..the less said the better, It was called the missile with a man in it and that is exactly how it performed. its turning circle is more comparable to a gulfstream business jet. The only advantage it had was speed which by 71 was nullified by the mig-21 a far far superior fighter.

 

[Fennecus]

how many of JF-17 will china induct?

Still under evaluation. Different nations have different sorts of roles that need to be fulfilled.

 

[brahmastra]

Still under evaluation. Different nations have different sorts of roles that need to be fulfilled.

Then why china made JF-17 if they do not want to use it?

 

[muse]

brahamastah


This JF17 is a fraud, it has zero capablity and Indian should not waste any time on it - how many China will buy, how many the Martians will buy, it's all meaningless - the equipment does not merit these questions.

 

[brahmastra]

Remains to be seen...Russia doesn't use the MKI so does that mean the MKI is inferior?

I never said JF-17 is inferior.

btw, why more than 250 of jf-17?
are they also planning to retire some of their mirages?

 

[Keysersoze]

I never said JF-17 is inferior.

btw, why more than 250 of jf-17?
are they also planning to retire some of their mirages?

Dude the Mirages have very old airframes and will need retiring just like the Mig 21 for the IAF

 

[brahmastra]

Dude the Mirages have very old airframes and will need retiring just like the Mig 21 for the IAF

Sir, can u throw some light regarding PAF's plan or future plan regarding retiring their old aircrafts? Which one will replace which one?

 

[Keysersoze]

Sir, can u throw some light regarding PAF's plan or future plan regarding retiring their old aircrafts? Which one will replace which one?

Please refer to this thread for the information that you require.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/27497-question-about-aircrafts-coming-paf.html

Bear in mind there are other plans in the pipework that are not represented here. So the list is not complete.

 

[Zob]

Then why china made JF-17 if they do not want to use it?

well why would the CHINESE want to have 3 diffrent kind of front line multirole paltforms??

they got their MKK,J-10s so they don't need the JF-17 but that doesn't make it a crappy plane!!!

 

[pakpower]

well why would the CHINESE want to have 3 diffrent kind of front line multirole paltforms??

they got their MKK,J-10s so they don't need the JF-17 but that doesn't make it a crappy plane!!!

I guess they are going for Stealth 5th Generation JXX , J-14 or what ever they name it to counter the US F-22 and Pak-FA joint production of India and Soviets.

That's why they are not inducting Jf-17 in their front line fleet they might use it in limited no's though.

But the fact always remains that JF-17 will take on any jet in it's class and do a great job in both fulfiling the numerical no's of PAF and also in latest technology jet.

 

[Fennecus]

Then why china made JF-17 if they do not want to use it?

Because the JF-17's roles can already be satisfied by other planes in current PLAAF inventory. There's little reason for China to open another assembly line and incur further maintenance costs by inducting the Thunder.

And besides, this was a joint-development venture.

 

[paritosh]

If you are referring to qualitative edge in these wars then i expected better from you considering your previous record(unless you were referring to something else and made a faux pas).
The Gnat is a far superior machine than the Sabre. for christ sake the jets were designed ten years apart. Not only is the Gnat just as or more maneuverable or more in certain aspects. it had superior acceleration & climb.
Now coming to the starfighter..the less said the better, It was called the missile with a man in it and that is exactly how it performed. its turning circle is more comparable to a gulfstream business jet. The only advantage it had was speed which by 71 was nullified by the mig-21 a far far superior fighter.

mate...atleast in 1965 you cant deny the paf having a qualitative edge over the IAF.
the f-104 wasn't all that bad...i agree on it's vulnerability in a turning fight....but it had good speed and the dreaded vulcans...!
gnats were not meant for being tipped against the superior f-104s...they were maneuverable...and that helped their case.
the f-104s wrecked havoc on the indian canberra bombers...
in 1965....there were confirmed reports of sidewinder kills by f-104...and the iaf mostly operated planes with just cannons...i am not sure about this fact though...so correct me if i am wrong..
in 1971 it was a different story...with the mig-21s...
the sabres were not that bad...remember MM Alam?

 

[Munir]

To tell ya something... F104A had no canon. Pakistan was the first customer askinf specificly to add it. After that it was part of it till the end. F104 was a good interceptor but a worst plane to sit in when things started turning. Smokey and it had no range without fueltanks...

Gnats were a nightmare. Small and agile. As said by a Pakistani pilots... You knew the gnats were there when you hear their bullets...