Acquire J-31/J-20 in 2030s with native configuration to safe cost and for keeping PAF razor sharp. Keep investing on R&D of own FGFA with a realistic induction date (2040+). Anyone thinking PAC is going to roll out our own 5G fighter in 2030s must be delusional. It will be a miracle if PAC build a simple full scale mock up by 2024-2025 with clear vision. Tech demonstrator and prototyping will take a decade further. So, it is only logical to de-link AZM and PAF's first 5G aircraft. We must focus on MALE drone with strong ECM/ECCM sub-systems, navigational and target acquisition pods and radars etc. These smaller achievements will eventually lead to something as big as own 5G fighter one day IA. No need to over commit. PAF will have to adopt strategy of Younas Khan. He was not classy as Inzimam or Saeed Anwar but he knew his limited capability of playing certain strokes. He applied himself accordingly and never try to be over smart and eventually became bigger test match batsman than both Inzi and Anwar.
I agree 100%.
In fact, the ASR the CAS gave in May 2019 is a clear sign now towards a consortium or off-the-shelf solution for the FGFA. By stating 'twin-engine' and 'laser weapons' the CAS clearly set a very high bar, and no one should expect us to develop a production-ready solution in 7-10 years. The PAF would only give an ambitious ASR
because it is now looking at working with an existing project, and the FC-31/J-35 is looking like it.
Not only should we de-link AZM from the FGFA, but we ought to tailor the AZM on advancing technology and our local R&D base. In other words, the demonstrator doesn't need to replicate what the FC-31/J-35 brings, but rather, deal with a different set of requirements. So, one need that will arise in the late 2030s is replacing our JF-17s from that point on (i.e., in the 2040s and 2050s).
This is when AZM will matter most.
I think it's fitting that to replace the JF-17 -- i.e., an in-house project (albeit in the loose sense of the term since it was China that led the design and development) -- with a more local/domestic design. The timelines are much more realistic, lower input costs, and economies-of-scale more feasible (more numbers, longer production run, etc).
To me, the
dream AZM would be a lightweight, single-engine fighter with an unstable design and respectable range and payload, but with the ability to work as a UCAV if configured. So we basically have a swing-function fighter that can either serve as a manned, defensive A2A jet, or an unmanned, offensive A2G drone. Basically, aim to have a production ready fighter by 2040.