UAE Mirage to PAF and SH to IAF Extract

[MZUBAIR]

Salman can u plz provide a Credible Source on when PAF was offered a Flanker and Most Importantly when did they have a CHANCE to Test it ?

Thanks.

I know PAF piolts flew F-16 Block 60 (UAE), Mirage 2k (UAE), SU27 (China), MiG-21 (Syria in Arab Israel War), Mig 29 (Dont knw abt country, may be Syria or Sudan).

Pakistan flew test flights of MiG-29 and Su-27 offered by Poland, early 90's.

Pakistan piolts flew more then that kind of birds, but every thing is nt necessarely available on Internet.

 

[mean_bird]

Salman can u plz provide a Credible Source on when PAF was offered a Flanker and Most Importantly when did they have a CHANCE to Test it ?

Thanks.

Its a well known thing that Pakistan had a chance to secure Sukhois and/or Migs form former Soviet and Soviet influenced republics. The offer wasn't a direct one from Sukhoi of Russia but second hand planes.

I don't think these were advertised tendered offers so you probably won't find news item about it, but you'll have to go by PAF sources or some later review articles. Google around and you'll find them.

I think the main reason they weren't inducted was no support from Sukhoi in maintenance and/or up-gradation. You will completely have to rely on black market for it.

 

[Super Falcon]

yes i agree with you but i dont think so russian fighter jet are lethal than usa and european made but their sam system is best in the world it was better choice paf made at that time but know new geration of sukhoi 35 and sukhoi 37 equally better than F 15 with out a doubt any way i think PN should be contender to upgrade its old naval aviation fleet and remember in war time navy has to take on huge IN ships and IN AC fighter jets so i think PN should have atleast 30 of these and right now pn only have old mirage III around 10 of them will not do any better for PN

 

[Gin ka Pakistan]

I know PAF piolts flew F-16 Block 60 (UAE), Mirage 2k (UAE), SU27 (China), MiG-21 (Syria in Arab Israel War), Mig 29 (Dont knw abt country, may be Syria or Sudan).

Pakistan flew test flights of MiG-29 and Su-27 offered by Poland, early 90's.

Pakistan piolts flew more then that kind of birds, but every thing is nt necessarely available on Internet.

One thing good about JF-17 engine is that Pakistan can get its spares from Poland , Czech and other eastern European nations if not directly from Russia .

 

[Luftwaffe]

than again we'll be at mercy of others gin bhai

 

[Gin ka Pakistan]

than again we'll be at mercy of others gin bhai

Let's hope Chinese engine be ready and tested within few years for future JF-17s. Its 80% complete.

 

[araz]

Sir Mastan, is it correct that french offered Mirage Assembly plant in Kamra in 70s to be operated by them first and later they will hand it over it to PAF which was refused by GOP.
Second, during 71 war just before the start, submarine Ghazi requested Islamabad to allow it to fire at the Indian Aircraft carrier as it was just under it and was not allowed.

If i may clear one question . The french plant was an idea of the Shah of Iran with rights of manufacture in Iran and pakistan and Egypt buying from him. It was 1966,or there abouts. I think , Egypt pulled out and it became financially non feasible for Iran and pakistan to do it.
I dont know if there was a second move by the french in the 70s. We were certainly offered the Mirage F1 in the mid to late 70s, which we did not take up for reasons which are unknown to me.
The Ghazi episode appears to be incorrect as yu do not ask for permission when under a carrier. Yo u maintain absolute silence and hit the bugger wherre it hurts the most and ask later But i am not aware of anything to the contrary.
Araz

 

[Sinnerman108]

Salman can u plz provide a Credible Source on when PAF was offered a Flanker and Most Importantly when did they have a CHANCE to Test it ?

Thanks.

As the some other members have pointed out that you will have
to accept the personal know how on this one.

I can tell u that 2 Sukhoi 27 or Mig 29 came to Pak, and were tested
at Peshawar and Kamra air bases.

UNFORTUNATELY the reason for discarding was nothing but silly arrogance on PAF's part who were high on F-16

Although Poland has had a strong relationship with PAF, but I doubt Poland offered the planes, it was one of the republics if my memory serves me right.

BTW

I know PAF piolts flew F-16 Block 60 (UAE), Mirage 2k (UAE), SU27 (China), MiG-21 (Syria in Arab Israel War), Mig 29 (Dont knw abt country, may be Syria or Sudan)

Pakistan flew Egyptian and jordanian planes to my knowledge.
BTW, why would we fly those ? F-7 the same thing ?

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

i dont wana go through the all posts of this mighty thread but sombody can plz tell me what u guys r discussing over here related to mirage of UAE,what it has to do with PAF

 

[MaXimMaRz]

Very interesting debate and both sides have put forward some valid facts to get across their point of view.

However, I do have some questions as follows for the experts:

1. As we all know, technology has created improved weapon systems, but at the same time has dramatically increased the costs for those systems. It is very possible that technological advances are not always the answer to every situation. The nature of the air war has changed, and close-range visual combat (dog fights) might never happen again. The proliferation of new enhanced capabilities of radars, with incredibly agile short-range missiles now makes visual-range combat extremely dangerous, and long-range air-to-air missiles have improved significantly, allowing slower fighters to more easily shoot down opponents. If this argument is valid, then in my opinion, the platform becomes irrelevant to some extent. Do you agree?

1. just like we cant place a Core 2 Duo processor on a P-3 motherboard, in the same way every platform can not be upgraded to become a BVR shooter or Have hight class avionics.therefor Platform matters alot. Apart from this Every BVR missile that is fired has 38% chance of missing the target. the main reason is the pilot fires from the maximum range to avoid close combat and max range shooting has minimum probability of kill. In every battle that takes place in the air, there are 40% chance of close combat.

2. For close air support, why not to acquire an aircraft which is relatively inexpensive and can be used purely for close air support. Is it the time to accept less expensive, less capable aircraft with our limited budget in order to have the number of airplanes we need to adequately provide close air support to the army on the ground?

Close air support is a very very complex mission, you can burn down your own troops just by mis calculating a mile, or because of lack of coordination between army and air force. A pilot has a maximum of 2 passes in which he has to deliver his best, these days every Tom, dick and harry of the enemy army has a SAM on his shoulder. You need a Good plane for close air support. Have you seen A-10 its a tank eater, that is the best example of specialized plan for a mission.

3. How about acquiring more Surface-to-Air Missiles for a fraction of the cost as compared to fighter jets. New Surface-to-Air Missiles are faster, fly higher and farther, and are less susceptible to jamming and countermeasures. These new missiles can engage an airborne target at altitudes as low as 75 feet or as high as 50,000 feet or more and the ability to simultaneously engage many targets. For fighters, they pose a challenge as tough as-if not tougher than-the best competitor aircraft. For $75 million to $100 million or more (just guessing), one can probably buy at least half dozen launchers of modern design and can cover a large area.

It is always good to have SAMs , just the word SAM sends a fear of unknown down a pilots mind. Cuz you are more relaxed when you are fighting a man rather then a Missile....The major problem is Missile will do a fraction of the work that is done by a Aircraft. It can not protect the distance which a aircraft can.....A missile will never return back if it fails to destroy....An aircraft has more chances of re-usage. Aircraft is a multi role platform, missile is not. Missile may or may not defend you in your very own backyard....an aircraft will take the war to enemy's door step. Tracking radars can be bugged, jammed or spoofed......even if you jam the AI of an aircraft , you still have to worry about it cuz it is reusable again and again.

 

[Storm Force]

If The PAF ever had the forsight to BUY these 60 mirages from UAE it wud be easily the 2nd best if not the best platform in Pakistani hands.

60 MIRAGE 2000-9 would make mince meat of 160 mirage Rose upgraded PAF PLANES.

They are probably going to be available from 2014 onwards wen UAE start to receive the RAFAEL.

If India buys them for $1 billion dollars you lot will be kicking yourself...

The look brand new hardly used and very well maintained.

 

[sonicboom]

Why PAF did not opt for Mirage-2000 in 1990's - some explanation that I found

After the re-evaluation of Mirage-2000 in the early 90s, it was deduced that Mirage-2000 is a state of the art, deep strike fighter with BVR technology, but in turning dogfights at medium and low altitudes it was out-manoeuvred by an F-16A.

Thus PAF decided to upgrade its existing Mirage fleets to the standards of a third generation strike fighter. PAF Mirages have an equivalent close combat capability which was of the early model Mirage-2000s i.e. the Griffo-M Radar and AIM-9L/Magic-2 combination.

PAF Mirages are the only Mirages to carry BVR missiles [since all Mirage-3/5 users have replaced them with aircraft having same basic airframe but improved features, avionics and weapon system e.g. South African 'Cheetah', Israeli 'Kfir' and French 'Mirage-2000'], since instead of purchasing a replacement for Mirages PAF decided to upgrade its existing fleet to the third generation standards.

PAF Mirage ROSE are better than IAF’s Floggers and Jaguars in air to air combat role since it has the edge in BVR technology, equivalent close combat capability and state of the art avionics [early Mirage-2000 standards] whereas it is equivalent in terms of strike.

Even if pitted against MiG-21s, MiG-29s, Mirage-2000s and Su-30 MKIs, our Mirages have the capability to defend themselves while exiting the arena using their BVR and close combat techniques. In the case of MiG-21 Bison our Mirages can even give them a tough time in dogfights but it would not come near a MiG-29, Mirage-2000 and Su-30 in dogfights.

PAF Mirages does not possess FBW and HMS technologies as well as thrust vectoring whereas the MiG-29, Mirage-2000 and Su-30s have these advantages.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

^^ MiG 29 doesn't have FBW. I quote a Soviet pilot loosely,

"FBW makes an average pilot great. But it makes a great pilot average."

 

[jha]

saudi and UAE planes are anytime good deal.... how often these are used there...???plus their hangers are said to be comparable to america's.

 

[MastanKhan]

Why PAF did not opt for Mirage-2000 in 1990's - some explanation that I found

After the re-evaluation of Mirage-2000 in the early 90s, it was deduced that Mirage-2000 is a state of the art, deep strike fighter with BVR technology, but in turning dogfights at medium and low altitudes it was out-manoeuvred by an F-16A.

Hi,

Sonic---thankyou good buddy---you proved my point---paf had no threat from the F 16---iaf couldnot have acquired it at all---so if paf had become m2k buyer from the gitgo---iaf would have only been stuck with russian aircraft.

Secondly---there are some videos on u tube showing grrek m2k's and F 16's---and check out the speed of he encounter---around 200 knots to 350 knots---the F 16 couldn't get away.