What twin engine Jet Fighter Suits PAF Doctrine?

[Irfan Baloch]

Twin Engine Jet anyone?


Over the decades PAF has become essentially a single engine Multi role fighter Air force. either through necessity, doctrine or limitation of funds ... PAF has written off the twin engine jets.

there are compelling arguments and counter arguments both for and against the twin vs. single engine jets. while the enthusiasts try to come to terms with or try to understand the PAF doctrine both during war and peace...



a certain news about the potential interest in buying or joining the Chinese J-31 program suggested that PAF was finally going to break its self imposed ban on twin engine jets. on the side lines PAF officials were also known to have evaluated the European twin engine jets like Typhoon and Rafales but such events never went beyond evaluations.
and then there were news about the Su-35 when kept coming up repeatedly.


so lets see if PAFreally has decided to break a fast on twin engine jets then what kind or type of twin engine jet it is likely to go for? it will be most likely a multirole fighter , maybe a missile / bomb truck or a spear head net to the latest PAF F-16s

for the sake of starting a discussion I have listed few jets above.

• J-11 ? why not, specially when we are allowing ourselves to talk about Su-35s. it will be a good missile truck and if Russia approves then it might make its way into PAF.
• SU-35? well there is no harm in dreaming. if the unthinkable happens it will increase PAF potency many folds. and will form the top tier of the PAF fighter jets.
• J-31? maybe likely for the future but most is unknown about it and it might remain on PAF likely shortlist for future.
• F-A 18? again why not? if F-16 block 52 are cleared by USA and PAF, time and again goes to US because it cant get enough of the F-16s then why not another American multirole twin engine jet? if not the latest Super hornet class then maybe the earlier blocks? maybe least likely but no harm in making a guest appearance.

I could have mentioned a likely twin engine J-10 (naval version) but I am not sure if it is even developed or ditched in favour of existing Chinese J-11s or J-16s.


ok guys get on with it and contribute your ideas.

@MastanKhan @batmannow @Khafee got you a thread now

Special Addition JH 7B

Although originally I dismissed it based on the capabilities of its original blocks and vintage avionics but all could be changed when the supplier is you joint partner of JF-17 program.

I should have added this in the original post due to its relevance. it is a good candidate with 4-4.5 generation avionics and upgrades for 2020+ usage. the supplier is reliable and there is room and freedom for customization and improvement and best of all it might provide best value for money.

 

[Beast]

J-11 is out of question as its not allow to export. J-31 is not really a heavy load, long legged aircraft.

That left Su-35 as the best candidate for PAF. F/A-18 is not really long legged and since its sanction prone. That will put it out of question.

 

[Signalian]

and why are long legs required?

 

[Irfan Baloch]

and why are long legs required?

for deep strikes and longer loitering of course both just increase the reach and flight time of your jet both of which give you advantage in the time of need. hope you know how

 

[dadeechi]

and why are long legs required?

If you want to take the international waters and then bomb Bengaluru.

 

[Signalian]

for deep strikes and longer loitering of course both just increase the reach and flight time of your jet both of which give you advantage in the time of need. hope you know how

Surface to surface : BM's, CM's.
Air to surface: ALCM, H2/4
AIr to Sea: CM-400, C-802/3.

CAP Loiter, A2A: refuellers.

where do you want to strike?

If you want to take the international waters and then bomb Bengaluru.

aircraft carrier most probably for taking international waters

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Surface to surface : BM's, CM's.
Air to surface: ALCM, H2/4
AIr to Sea: CM-400, C-802/3.

CAP Loiter, A2A: refuellers.

where do you want to strike?

a fighter jet with bigger tanks replaces all of them and offer much more flexibility and ease. some of the items above come with the baggage of their own protection issues and suitability (suitability is general term like cost, numbers available, accuracy, threat to themselves and their own launching platforms).
a twin engine jet is mobile, is smaller is able to cover for all these roles and more.

carry on

 

[Signalian]

a fighter jet with bigger tanks replaces all of them and offer much more flexibility and ease. some of the items above come with the baggage of their own protection issues and suitability (suitability is general term like cost, numbers available, accuracy, threat to themselves and their own launching platforms).
a twin engine jet is mobile, is smaller is able to cover for all these roles and more.

carry on

Putting life of a pilot in danger by sending him through SAM and enemy aircraft deep into enemy territory when other options are available is dangerous. Lost aircraft and captured pilot is a critical matter.

secondly, the long range strike aircraft will carry any of the above mention air to surface / sea weapons. Load can be increased from probably 1 to 2 per aircraft (like JF17 carries one CM400, SU35 maybe can carry 2) not more than that. still both(Jf-17 and SU35) will fire from stand off range.

Yes one advantage is that SU35 can carry more A2A for self defence.

 

[Blue Marlin]

nothing.....yet
lets look at all of the possibilities here.
1. typhoon- too expensive and very remote
2. rafale- not gonna happen as indina is going to sign for them around jan 25
3. f15-congress will block the deal to advanced, even qatar was refused. boeing may support it ot keep the production line open.
4.f18- no as they ae being pitched to india
5. f22 banned from export
6.su27 family- india has one of the latest varient of the jet and its not worth it , besides russia will refuse as india is a larger customer
7. mig-28 family- same as 6
8. j11- cant happen as china agreed not to export the j11 so that it wont undermine/compete with the su27/mig29

that means that there nothing in the4th gen twin engined market for pakistan.
pakistan is suplemetning it's 4th gen fleet with more f16's and jf-17's
more info in the thread below
Will Pakistan Land a Deal With US for New F-16s?

but the 5th gen market brings two jets the tfx and the j31
the tfx would bring a huge amount of tech to pakistan if under a joint development plan,but they will be concerns as the british government may hold a veto as bae is assisting tai in the tfx project or with the ej200 engines. same problem if buying them of the shelf as an end user agreement may halt the deal as with the t129

so that leaves the j31. word out is that motor sich is developing a engine with 10 tonnes of thrust. which can/may replace the chinese ws-13 if need be.

General Designer SE "Ivchenko-Progress" Igor Kravchenko said that AI-222-25F is the first Ukrainian engine with afterburner. "With his designs," Ivchenko-Progress "has mastered the technology that we currently seek to use to create a" fighter "of the engine with afterburner thrust to 44,000 pounds (20 tons)," he told the news agency AIN. In its basic version, with a thrust of 10 tons, this engine may replace Russian RD-93, mounted on the Sino-Pakistani fighter FC-1/JF-17 Thunder.

@Irfan Baloch im suprised you brought up this thread. surely you should know that.

 

[untitled]

Buying a twin engined aircraft just for the sake of buying one is not the solution. BTW the only single engined options for the PAF I can think of right now are the J10, F16 and the Gripen. Everything else I believe is twin engined.

And the f18 is not a better option over the f16 just because it is twin engined.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Putting life of a pilot in danger by sending him through SAM and enemy aircraft deep into enemy territory when other options are available is dangerous. Lost aircraft and captured pilot is a critical matter.

secondly, the long range strike aircraft will carry any of the above mention air to surface / sea weapons. Load can be increased from probably 1 to 2 per aircraft (like JF17 carries one CM400, SU35 maybe can carry 2) not more than that. still both(Jf-17 and SU35) will fire from stand off range.

Yes one advantage is that SU35 can carry more A2A for self defence.

like I said and hinted is that surface based attacks have their limitation. there is simply no match with the airborne attack.
putting life in risk comes with the job description, if thats too much of a concern then send saris and mangoes like nawaz .. job done

 

[Signalian]

like I said and hinted is that surface based attacks have their limitation. there is simply no match with the airborne attack.
putting life in risk comes with the job description, if thats too much of a concern then send saris and mangoes like nawaz .. job done

why dont you generate scenarios. mission strike at 300km. mission strike at 1000km. mission strike at 2000km. land and sea.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

@Irfan Baloch im suprised you brought up this thread. surely you should know that.

it is the response to and on demand from an existing thread where people were telling each other to start a thread.

hence started the debate. what you say maybe right but this can pretty much kill every discussion if we rule out everything.
but for the sake of argument you have to start with something existing. tome J-11 in the 4th generation seems most likely as the eport control from Russia can be amended for Pakistan just like other military procurements and improvement in ties with Kremlin.. J-11 has nothing special to cause concerns like a Mig35 or Su 35 would cause. its essentially an SU27 skeleton with primitive avionics. if for whatever reason F18 can be blocked then F-16s can be blocked too. I never mentioned Typhoons and rafales for their price tags. and also concluded that J-31 in the end remains a potential future buy if china manages to build it entirely of Chinese based components.

why dont you generate scenarios. mission strike at 300km. mission strike at 1000km. mission strike at 2000km. land and sea.

I already cerated this thread on request from @Khafee

I will let you spend time write down the scenarios and list down the parameters
create a thread with pictures, specifics and data and all possible outcomes pros and cons


then I will read it and criticise it like a real Pakistani

 

[C130]

J-11 is out of question as its not allow to export. J-31 is not really a heavy load, long legged aircraft.

That left Su-35 as the best candidate for PAF. F/A-18 is not really long legged and since its sanction prone. That will put it out of question.

for deep strikes and longer loitering of course both just increase the reach and flight time of your jet both of which give you advantage in the time of need. hope you know how

the F-18 Advance Super Hornet can use buddy refueling to extent the range of other aircraft.

so one F-18 ASH used as a re-fueler can extend the range of 4 F-18 by 25% or 3 F-18 by 33%

this on top of the conformal fuel tanks the Advance Super Hornet has means it's got long legs.

 

[untitled]

Everyone forgot JH-7B ?

@MastanKhan