US blocked transfer of Jordanian F-16s to Pakistan

[volatile]

Nope..... Leasing is the worse option financially. THis is not a car you lease.

Modern economics suggests other wise leasing with out ownership is preferred
https://www.defensenews.com/home/20...nistry-eyes-gripen-lease-deal-after-election/
Saab Outlines A Gripen Lease Proposal For Malaysia
https://saab.com/es/air/gripen-figh...o-extend-gripen-lease-in-the-czech-republic1/
Its economics as if you dont need a platform for long period
https://asianmilitaryreview.com/2017/06/india-to-lease-second-russian-nuclear-attack-submarine/

A look at PAF fleet may give us idea of what PAF is looking for:

No 2 JF-17 Prev: F-7P
No 5 F-16C/D Prev: Mirage III
No 7 Mirage III ROSE-I
No 8 Mirage V
No 9 F-16AM/BM
No 11 F-16 AM/BM
No 14 JF-17 Prev: F-7P
No 15 Mirage V
No 16 JF-17, Prev: A-5C
No 17 F-7PG
No 18 F-7P [Probably will be equipped with remaining JF-17s Block 2]
No 19 F-16 A/B ADF. Better than non-MLUed Block 15s and might gain strike capability with Altis Pod which was previously integrated on Block 15s.
No 20 F-7PG
No 22 Mirage V
No 23 F-7PG
No 25 Mirage V ROSE-II
No 26 JF-17 Prev: A-5C
No 27 Mirage V ROSE-III
CSS Dashing:JF-17
CSS Skybolt: Mirage ROSE-I

No. 18 last F-7P squadron will probably be equipped with remaining JF-17s from block II.

3 F-7PG squardons will probably remain as is till 2023/2025 time frame when 5th gen starts coming in. Remember these were acquired around 2002. So they are not as old as some of the other aircrafts in PAF inventory. They can fulfill role of Daytime CAS, Point Defence Fighters.

So PAF needs to replace total 3 + 4 Non-ROSE & ROSE squadrons in short-term. Block III will replace 3 of these. So what remains is 4 more squadrons. So any new platform will be around 60 filling remaining 4 squadrons.

Possibilities:

1. If Block III matches or exceeds F-16 as an interceptor/Air Defence Fighter, release F-16 from such duties and keep them dedicated for strike roles & occasional Air Defence when things seem to getting out of hand(kind of like F-104 in 65). Even 45 MLU and 13 ADF fighters can be mixed up in squardons. This gives 4 squardons of Medium Range fighter for strike missions. Block IV of 50 JF-17s to fill numbers and to act as lower end strike aircraft(may be attempt to have CFT to increase range/free up stations for weapons, also a newer engine and lighter airframe can be attempted. Kind of JF-17 on steroids. But for this to happen in time, PAF has to finalize its revised acquisition plan ASAP). [Likely]
   
2. Cap JF-17 at 150, and add 50-60 J-11(around 3-4 squardons). This will give Pakistan new capabilities. Deep Strike / Long Duration Combat Air Patrol(over sea). [Ideal but unlikely due to cost]
3. Cap JF-17 at 150, and add 50-60 J-10(around 3-4 squardons). This is unlikely because PAF probably will not consider it worth the investment to induct a new platform which hardly gives any new capability. J-10s will only be filling in for F-16s PAF was not able to acquire. Another thing to consider is that by the time J-10s arrive it will be time for 5th Gen already. Had J-10s arrived in 2015/17 it would have made sense.[Unlikely]

Also we need to remember JF-17s are replacing Mirages/F-7s, so thats a capability increase anyway.

Also while we all wish for PAF to have best equipment available, we need to remember PAF is primarily a defensive force. Yes they may carry out some strikes but those will be against shallow targets aimed at allowing PAF some freedom over battlefield to support PA. So bulk of PAF war effort will be Air Defense Sorties.

No matter how you do this we will be needing additional 60-100 fighters remmember till 2020 we need 190-200 fighters to replace so even today we can safely say that 50-60 will be added from JF17 (Personally i dont want more than 150 JF17) all block 3 ,after that lets move some other design since JF17 design is limited with capacity

 

[CHI RULES]

I do concur with you in terms of the penalties being done by Isreal; i never do and never did support it; it is same as aparthied and far worse especially under the newer govt who has given way too much support to settlements. Two state solution with pre-67 borders is the right way.

However, I would then counter why does Pak not terminate any relationship with Burma right now; the plight of the refugees breaks my heart and no sane muslim govt will be standing idle or even with KSA and its goons who are virtually annihalting Yemen daily or if I may add what your govt is doing visa vi proxies in neighbouring states for decades. Put everything in prespective is what i say... Palestinian cause is long fait accompli and if the arabs themselves were having any balls, they would have addressed this long ago; nothing you or I can do about it.

Anyway, let us not derail the topic and stick to the orignal matter.


Nope..... Leasing is the worse option financially. THis is not a car you lease.

Sir, Funny thing is I have read that even Pak F16 block52 have many Israeli techs/spares. Even a Pak Mirage Pic was there on this forum using old Israel spares, even clearly have Israel wording. The sane option is to stop blood shed and get mutual benefits.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I do concur with you in terms of the penalties being done by Isreal; i never do and never did support it; it is same as aparthied and far worse especially under the newer govt who has given way too much support to settlements. Two state solution with pre-67 borders is the right way.

However, I would then counter why does Pak not terminate any relationship with Burma right now; the plight of the refugees breaks my heart and no sane muslim govt will be standing idle or even with KSA and its goons who are virtually annihalting Yemen daily or if I may add what your govt is doing visa vi proxies in neighbouring states for decades. Put everything in prespective is what i say... Palestinian cause is long fait accompli and if the arabs themselves were having any balls, they would have addressed this long ago; nothing you or I can do about it.

Anyway, let us not derail the topic and stick to the orignal matter.


Nope..... Leasing is the worse option financially. THis is not a car you lease.

To be honest, even if Pakistan maintained ties with Israel, I don't think Israel would be much different than France or Germany when it comes to supplying Pakistan. In other words, bigger commercial opportunities in India would likely sway the Israelis to be pragmatic and skip Pakistan as a market. If not India, then U.S. pressure could be a factor as well. Pakistan has unique geo-political challenges at this time relating to China's growth and, in turn, the U.S.' desire to contain China, which necessitates India and - conversely - punishes Pakistan.

 

[Signalian]

A look at PAF fleet may give us idea of what PAF is looking for:

No 2 JF-17 Prev: F-7P
No 5 F-16C/D Prev: Mirage III
No 7 Mirage III ROSE-I
No 8 Mirage V
No 9 F-16AM/BM
No 11 F-16 AM/BM
No 14 JF-17 Prev: F-7P
No 15 Mirage V
No 16 JF-17, Prev: A-5C
No 17 F-7PG
No 18 F-7P [Probably will be equipped with remaining JF-17s Block 2]
No 19 F-16 A/B ADF. Better than non-MLUed Block 15s and might gain strike capability with Altis Pod which was previously integrated on Block 15s.
No 20 F-7PG
No 22 Mirage V
No 23 F-7PG
No 25 Mirage V ROSE-II
No 26 JF-17 Prev: A-5C
No 27 Mirage V ROSE-III
CSS Dashing:JF-17
CSS Skybolt: Mirage ROSE-I

No. 18 last F-7P squadron will probably be equipped with remaining JF-17s from block II.

3 F-7PG squardons will probably remain as is till 2023/2025 time frame when 5th gen starts coming in. Remember these were acquired around 2002. So they are not as old as some of the other aircrafts in PAF inventory. They can fulfill role of Daytime CAS, Point Defence Fighters.

So PAF needs to replace total 3 + 4 Non-ROSE & ROSE squadrons in short-term. Block III will replace 3 of these. So what remains is 4 more squadrons. So any new platform will be around 60 filling remaining 4 squadrons.

Possibilities:

1. If Block III matches or exceeds F-16 as an interceptor/Air Defence Fighter, release F-16 from such duties and keep them dedicated for strike roles & occasional Air Defence when things seem to getting out of hand(kind of like F-104 in 65). Even 45 MLU and 13 ADF fighters can be mixed up in squardons. This gives 4 squardons of Medium Range fighter for strike missions. Block IV of 50 JF-17s to fill numbers and to act as lower end strike aircraft(may be attempt to have CFT to increase range/free up stations for weapons, also a newer engine and lighter airframe can be attempted. Kind of JF-17 on steroids. But for this to happen in time, PAF has to finalize its revised acquisition plan ASAP). [Likely]
   
2. Cap JF-17 at 150, and add 50-60 J-11(around 3-4 squardons). This will give Pakistan new capabilities. Deep Strike / Long Duration Combat Air Patrol(over sea). [Ideal but unlikely due to cost]
3. Cap JF-17 at 150, and add 50-60 J-10(around 3-4 squardons). This is unlikely because PAF probably will not consider it worth the investment to induct a new platform which hardly gives any new capability. J-10s will only be filling in for F-16s PAF was not able to acquire. Another thing to consider is that by the time J-10s arrive it will be time for 5th Gen already. Had J-10s arrived in 2015/17 it would have made sense.[Unlikely]

Also we need to remember JF-17s are replacing Mirages/F-7s, so thats a capability increase anyway.

Also while we all wish for PAF to have best equipment available, we need to remember PAF is primarily a defensive force. Yes they may carry out some strikes but those will be against shallow targets aimed at allowing PAF some freedom over battlefield to support PA. So bulk of PAF war effort will be Air Defense Sorties.

J-10 is impossible now and J-11 is unlikely due to license issue. An aircraft that can give PAF a lead from IAF can be a 5th gen aircraft like J-31. Still, at some stage F-16 has to be retired or replaced so an aircraft which has formidable capabilities in future is either EF or SU-35 with significant technology leap.

Even if EF is pricey, PAF can start inducting it in small numbers like 12 per squadron, starting from 24 making 2 squadrons and increase a squadron every 5 years. No one knows about budgetary situation of future but a first step has to be taken. SU-30 is flown by IAF so getting a similar aircraft like SU-35 might not be the best decision.

Sir if Pak gets some squadrons of J10b it shall be more then enough to counter Rafael as I personally think that no one outside Chinese military knows much about their fighters true capabilities especially modernized versions. The J10b shall certainly have more powerful AESA with more range than JF17 due to size and more power, similarly more capable ECM suit of Western origin may also be included.

On the other hand perhaps Pak may get few squadrons of J16 for Naval and Surface attack roles ( fighter bomber). One may assume that J15-16 are more or less indigenous products of China already having some 5th gen tech, though not having true stealth features.



The ties should be there first to end atrocities in Palestine if done then Pak or any other nation need not to contact Israelis behind close curtains. Many religious sites of Muslims and Christians are there in the area which are out of access to many due to hostile attitude of Israel. Israel should adopt the policy to live and let live

Against the likes of Rafale and SU30, PAF needs a suitable adversary aircraft. Even after inducting J-10B ,PAF would need another aircraft which can give a hard time to the enemy. J-10B may have modern gadgets but it will not be able to give IAF a hard time that an EF can certainly give followed by a 5th gen.

Suppose PAF can spend $5 Bn, its better to spend it on the best available aircraft out there, rather than losing it on J-10B and still needing another aircraft.

 

[ziaulislam]

To be honest, even if Pakistan maintained ties with Israel, I don't think Israel would be much different than France or Germany when it comes to supplying Pakistan. In other words, bigger commercial opportunities in India would likely sway the Israelis to be pragmatic and skip Pakistan as a market. If not India, then U.S. pressure could be a factor as well. Pakistan has unique geo-political challenges at this time relating to China's growth and, in turn, the U.S.' desire to contain China, which necessitates India and - conversely - punishes Pakistan.

i disagree, the main reason for our failure is simply poor politics and foreign relations...an example..you didnt had a foreign minister...

another example is how Musharraf handled the situation in early 2000s despite being at disadvantage of not being a democratic elected leader and post nuclear situation

even Zardari was better in foreign relationships part as compared to current govt(got a lot of corrupt money through keri loger bill)

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

i disagree, the main reason for our failure is simply poor politics and foreign relations...an example..you didnt had a foreign minister...

another example is how Musharraf handled the situation in early 2000s despite being at disadvantage of not being a democratic elected leader and post nuclear situation

even Zardari was better in foreign relationships part as compared to current govt(got a lot of corrupt money through keri loger bill)

While an FM would have helped with presenting Pakistan's narrative, when US technocrats are intent on something, they'll see it through to the end. The Pivot to Asia policy put the spotlight on India in that India became essential to containing China. From the US' standpoint, India's success in this respect meant reducing Pakistan's weight as a threat - perceived and real - to India. The drop in arms aid to Pakistan dropped in relation to Pivot to Asia's rise. I think effective foreign policy would have made Pakistan look better in perception, but it wouldn't have changed things on the ground by much.

 

[ziaulislam]

While an FM would have helped with presenting Pakistan's narrative, when US technocrats are intent on something, they'll see it through to the end. The Pivot to Asia policy put the spotlight on India in that India became essential to containing China. From the US' standpoint, India's success in this respect meant reducing Pakistan's weight as a threat - perceived and real - to India. The drop in arms aid to Pakistan dropped in relation to Pivot to Asia's rise. I think effective foreign policy would have made Pakistan look better in perception, but it wouldn't have changed things on the ground by much.

a better perception would have been enough, this would have allowed third party transfers easier..right now india push to isolate Pakistan is seemingly working due to poor politics from Pakistan side

we also have effectively unable to use gulf countries to our advantage

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

a better perception would have been enough, this would have allowed third party transfers easier..right now india push to isolate Pakistan is seemingly working due to poor politics from Pakistan side

we also have effectively unable to use gulf countries to our advantage

Yes it would have been key for some third-parties, e.g. Europe (very similar to the Pressler days). But with Israel specifically, we're talking about a country that relies on U.S. aid and U.S. patronage in more ways than Pakistan. So if the U.S. puts a block there, that's probably it.

 

[Falcon26]

i disagree, the main reason for our failure is simply poor politics and foreign relations...an example..you didnt had a foreign minister...

another example is how Musharraf handled the situation in early 2000s despite being at disadvantage of not being a democratic elected leader and post nuclear situation

even Zardari was better in foreign relationships part as compared to current govt(got a lot of corrupt money through keri loger bill)

Zardari and the PPP did an irreparable damage to your foreign relations. I don’t see how someone can claim they were better than the PML-N

AS @Quwa stated above, US diplomacy is driven by desire to contain China, consequently India is seen as a major tool to achieve that objective. Regardless of what Pakistan does or doesn’t, it can’t change this fact because Indian objectives will have to be placated with regards to Pakistan. The best you can do under the prevailing situation is to dig in, increase ties with friendly countries and don’t blink first. Any show of weakness will come to haunt you royally in the future.

 

[ziaulislam]

Zardari and the PPP did an irreparable damage to your foreign relations. I don’t see how someone can claim they were better than the PML-N

AS @Quwa stated above, US diplomacy is driven by desire to contain China, consequently India is seen as a major tool to achieve that objective. Regardless of what Pakistan does or doesn’t, it can’t change this fact because Indian objectives will have to be placated with regards to Pakistan. The best you can do under the prevailing situation is to dig in, increase ties with friendly countries and don’t blink first. Any show of weakness will come to haunt you royally in the future.

there is difference between perception and facts..
i always believe in simple straight forward facts..
and its a facts dictate that our relationship havent been this bad ever..
thus by simple logic the fault lies in PML N...

arguing about who started it and who did this and that is a useless excercise...
facts are simple, we had best relationship in mushi era and worst today, dictators have far less power and perception strength as elected govts have, yet why our last 2 govt especially current govt failed so miserably...
at least to credit of PPPP era things were not this bad....

 

[Falcon26]

there is difference between perception and facts..
i always believe in simple straight forward facts..
and its a facts dictate that our relationship havent been this bad ever..
thus by simple logic the fault lies in PML N...

arguing about who started it and who did this and that is a useless excercise...
facts are simple, we had best relationship in mushi era and worst today, dictators have far less power and perception strength as elected govts have, yet why our last 2 govt especially current govt failed so miserably...
at least to credit of PPPP era things were not this bad....

That’s generally true. But again, you have to look at it from Pakistan’s utility to the US compared today than what it was during Musharraf’s. Pakistan was considered a frontline state and defeating Al Qaida was the main objective of US diplomacy. Today it’s containing China and the whole pivot to Asia thing. India has replaced Pakistan. Yes, it was pretty idiotic not to have a FM for the last couple years, but overall Pakistan has made substantial improvements domestically in terms of infrastructure development, economic performance and in terms of security. Everyone agrees the 2020s will be an exciting time for Pakistan with regards to economy, military power and its overall position in the global packing order. I think these are fundamental achievements that the PML-N deserves credit.

PPP gave you Husain Haqqani and Zardari and the whole memogate scandal which furthered a very dangerous picture of state institutions which were blatantly treasonous. And left PML-N to clean 5-years of utter failure. Credits should be given where due.

 

[Sinnerman108]

[video]

Analyze that.

 

[araz]

J-10 is impossible now and J-11 is unlikely due to license issue. An aircraft that can give PAF a lead from IAF can be a 5th gen aircraft like J-31. Still, at some stage F-16 has to be retired or replaced so an aircraft which has formidable capabilities in future is either EF or SU-35 with significant technology leap.

Even if EF is pricey, PAF can start inducting it in small numbers like 12 per squadron, starting from 24 making 2 squadrons and increase a squadron every 5 years. No one knows about budgetary situation of future but a first step has to be taken. SU-30 is flown by IAF so getting a similar aircraft like SU-35 might not be the best decision.



Against the likes of Rafale and SU30, PAF needs a suitable adversary aircraft. Even after inducting J-10B ,PAF would need another aircraft which can give a hard time to the enemy. J-10B may have modern gadgets but it will not be able to give IAF a hard time that an EF can certainly give followed by a 5th gen.

Suppose PAF can spend $5 Bn, its better to spend it on the best available aircraft out there, rather than losing it on J-10B and still needing another aircraft.

I think with western platforms the threat of potential sanctions remains a bug bear. Our finances wont allow a significant buy which we need. We do need a 3rd fighter but which one remains a dilema. I suspect we will induct bl.3 JFT first and reappraise the situation later. This is the only situation apart from getting more F16s which seems possible
A

 

[Fawad alam]

Can we buy used Mig-29s and upgrade to current level? what is the possibility.

 

[syed_yusuf]

Can we buy used Mig-29s and upgrade to current level? what is the possibility.

Except engine we do not know anything about the plane. could be a good idea to buy used and upgrade them to the latest level as been offered by Russia to Malaysia and Burma