Potential Weaknesses of PAF and Possible Solutions

[AstanoshKhan]

Another potential weakness of PAF.

 

[Bratva]

Another Potential weakness of PAF is their Aerial refuling tankers. They would be sitting ducks in full fledge war as they got no Defensive suite

 

[Windjammer]

Another Potential weakness of PAF is their Aerial refuling tankers. They would be sitting ducks in full fledge war as they got no Defensive suite

My dear, the idea for air refuellers is to operate out of harms way, or their purpose to fuel the jet fighters is also to be under their protection.

 

[Bratva]

My dear, the idea for air refuellers is to operate out of harms way, or their purpose to fuel the jet fighters is also to be under their protection.

Wind jammer, I totally agree with you, but Looking Pakistan geography and Adversary capability (Long legs and Long missiles) Air refuler will be hard to deploy and if deployed will be hard to defend.

 

[nomi007]

we must to reform our economy 1st
that is the key point

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I cant state them all.. but they include American radars like the TPS-77, a few Chinese systems.. Siemens giraffe radar.. and other European systems.

I am also aware of one more system which I think you chose not to discuss and I wont either. as we both know this is not Pak Air Defence information desk

to summarize, our early warring alerts us the moment there is a flight from Indian airforce bases.
in the height of tensions, the moment Indian aircraft is airborne our air defence batteries of both PAF and Army align themselves towards the potential thread while the air assets are either scrambled or put on standby to take off on minutes notice.

re missile attacks like we have multilayer approach destroy aircrafts or helicopters before they launch their missiles and then Oerlikon / Vulcan systems + differnt countermeasures for the already launched missiles including Brahmos.

countries with limitations (political+ financial) tend to keep their defence and countermeasure capabilities vague and secret against a foe who has means to nullify them.

so rest I will leave to the imagination of anyone who wants to learn what exactly PAF can do in case of an aircraft+ missile attacks

Wind jammer, I totally agree with you, but Looking Pakistan geography and Adversary capability (Long legs and Long missiles) Air refuler will be hard to deploy and if deployed will be hard to defend.

then same principle goes for AWACs wait same problem goes with the airfield because its a sitting duck that doesnt even move.
look at things more than one dimension I say, then the situation wont look that bleak,

aircraftcarriers are the most vulnerable due to their large size and slow speed right? right? NO.... the stings they carry on themselves and around them means no adversary will ever dare to come close to them from below or above the sea.

you cant give up hope just because whatever you have, maybe the enemy will come with something better. you counter that threat that is meant to counter what you got and the cat and mouse game carries on

 

[Windjammer]

Wind jammer, I totally agree with you, but Looking Pakistan geography and Adversary capability (Long legs and Long missiles) Air refuler will be hard to deploy and if deployed will be hard to defend.

One can say, Israel is much smaller than Pakistan, yet it had acquired tankers long before us. PAF planners would have looked into all the eventualities before investing millions. It's a double edge sword, the other side also has them.

 

[umair86]

Real weakness we are having is lack of SAMS we can get them at bargain price from China still we don't. Look at the 1973 Arab Israel war the SAM umbrella virtually wiped out IAF until Americans came to help with loads of warplanes and ammunition to resupply its Jewish Ally. Secondly quality of planners which has always hampered the performance of our forces they tend to think that they are the most geniuses on the face of earth but in reality they aren't and they have made loads of blunders look at 1965 Operation Gibraltar a failure,1971 preemptive strikes not much of a success, Kargil another misadventure by Army, War on terror again nothing much despite the loss of 40,000 Pakistani civilian and military lives, Mehran Base attack and the whole Abbottabad Fiasco on which Armed forces have not yet cleared how that bastard OBL ended up there.

 

[sancho]

Gentlemen:

Let us have an honest, respectful and educated discussion about potential Weaknesses of PAF especially in the light of India's potential purchase of 126 Rafaels, the threat of SU 30 MKI, Govt of Pakistan's policy which has been thrust-ed upon PAF of single engine less powerful fighter air crafts, the role of JF-17 and its capabilities, future possible acquisition of FC-20 (J10-B)and should we acquire J11-B for navy or Air Superiority Role etc.

Let us Discuss.

I read your posts on the JF 17 thread in this regard and have to say, that the biggest difference in your point of view and the possible point of view of PAF is, that you think countering MKI or Rafale is only possible with similar fighters. However, that's not correct and most likely not practical for PAF anyway, because PAF has not the funds to be like IAF and to procure and operate expensive twin engine fighters!

A single Flanker might be as costly to operate like 2 x JF 17, so instead of 150 x JF17, PAF might only be able to operate 75 x J11s but would that change anything? MKIs and Rafales would still be more capable and available in higher numbers, while the reduction fighters would hit PAF at the base which will increase the cost problems again, because you would only have more expensive fighters (in operational terms) for any role. Operating a fleet of J11, F16 and J10 in normal interception, CAP, or CAS roles is obviously more expensive than using JF 17s in the same and that's what many people forget! I can by a 2nd had Porsche too, but can I pay the costs of maintenance, fuel, insurance...?
This sounds like a minor issue for us non professionals on defence forums, but in reality it is of importance for air forces as we can see with topline fighters like F22 or EF, that hardly will be used in wars, since they are too costly to operate.

So there are other reasons why PAF might have gone for a bigger fleet of cost-effective multi role fighters than capability, that you have to keep in mind as well too!

Also, you don't need similar fighters to counter MKI for example, you just need tactics and capabilities to counter it's advantages!
One of the main advantage of IAF compared to PAF was BVR, not only with BVR missiles, but also with long range radars for the first sight advantage. PAF has countered this now not only with adding AIM120 and SD 10, but more importantly with good AWACS support. The radar advantage of MKI is gone, when a JF 17 is supported by AWACS, just like even a Mig 21 Bison has an advantage over a single F16 B52, when it's guided by MKI. In this case, it simply doesn't matter how capable the launch platfrom is, because it benefits from radar guidance of another aircraft and just has to fire the missile and with more launch platforms available, to launch missiles, you increase your defence capability!

Similarly, PAF has inducted F16 Block 52 now with JDAMs, Paveway LGBs and CFT for range extention, but the best deepstrike choice is still Mirage with Raad, because it gives PAF the chance to hit targets deep inside of India, without sending fighters into Indian airspace. It's a much safer option, which is also harder to counter, although nobody will really say that the Mirage is more capable than these latest F16s of course,but it's just one capability that changes the game and JF 17 will offer certain capabilities to increase PAFs strenght:

JF 17 Block 2 (because it will offer more range and better techs for certain roles) with:

- MAR 1
- C802
- Raad

will be more capable than F16 B52 in SEAD, maritime attack and deepstrikes.

JF 17 as a fighter is not as capable as an MKI or Rafale, but as a multi role fighter, in good numbers, with these weapons, techs and the support of AWACS and tankers it gives PAF way more punch than F16B52s or J11, because the complete base will be way more capable and not only a smaller hi end part of the fleet!


Add some geographical advantages, like only one borderline to defend (no split of forces), smaller airspace to patrol (fighters with less range are enough) and you will have another reason, why higher numbers of a single engine fighters are enough for PAF.
If a twin engine medium class fighter would be available for reasonable costs, it might have been the better choice instead of J10 at the higher end, but except of Mig 35 I don't see anything that fits this bill currently, while J-21 might in future!

 

[logic]

The biggest weakness of PAF is corrupt leadership both of the institution and the country period.
And its only possible solution is more honest integrity and justice.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Anyone who wants to know about some of the Radars Pakistan is operating.

Also there are Radar Systems with Pakistan that are classified.

If moderators think the link is not required than let me know i shall post the complete textual information.

Pakistan Military Consortium :: www.PakDef.info

 

[Farooqi1]

Another potential weakness of

HA HA like it

 

[farhan_9909]

why is no company in pak developing radar and sam..

start from.a short range sam

 

[Farooqi1]

Okay Since this is a kind of general thread too so I have some questions about 4th generation and 4.5 generation fighters and where could one put JF-17. Before I ask my question I want to humbly declare that I don't have science or engineering back ground like most of participants of PDF. I never took physics or math as my subjects either in Pakistan or in US while I was attending the schools. Now I remember that I did try once and failed miserably. Though I do have a craze about model trains and RC model planes and do fly (model Planes) over here in Houston. Therefore when I started reading JF-17 information pool most rather all the material bounced right over my head. Having said that I hope most of you would not mind me asking basic questions.

Anyway as per my limited reading and knowledge the US govt recognize the 4th generation fighters the one with having "fly by wire" system and places the fighters equipped with both "fly by wire" system and "AESA" radars as 4.5 generation fighters. I remember reading about JF-17 is equipped with "fly by wire" system but only in the pitch axis (have no idea what it means but was happy to read that it has FBW system).

Now my first question is it a complete FBW system?

My second question is I also read that JF-17 block II will be equipped with AESA radar. Is it correct? It means JF-17 block II with both systems FBW and AESA will correctly be called a 4.5 generation aircraft. Please tell me that I am right. I would appreciate an un-biased answer. If JF-17 Block II will indeed be a 4.5 generation fighter air craft then surely we have made a great progress and it would take care of some of the potential weaknesses of PAF.

 

[Najam Khan]

Now my first question is it a complete FBW system?

My second question is I also read that JF-17 block II will be equipped with AESA radar. Is it correct? It means JF-17 block II with both systems FBW and AESA will correctly be called a 4.5 generation aircraft. Please tell me that I am right. I would appreciate an un-biased answer. If JF-17 Block II will indeed be a 4.5 generation fighter air craft then surely we have made a great progress and it would take care of some of the potential weaknesses of PAF.

I hope my this post will help answer your questions.

Its too early to say anything about AESA in Block-II, most probably it will be the same KLJ-7 with some upgrade. Block-III will be the real "state-of-the-art" machine with goodies like IRST, AESA, powerful engine etc.