What twin engine Jet Fighter Suits PAF Doctrine?

[MastanKhan]

No offence taken. This thread does not seem to have gone the way of most threads on PDF nowadays.

My reasoning was as follows:

1. It is inevitable that PAF will get the 5th Generation planes from China, once ready. You, therefore, do not want to invest too much of your resources on the current set.

2. You also want it quickly. Which means, a plane which is ready and proven. The plane can fire the Brimstone, Taurus and the Stormshadow. If you have money, you could even procure the ecm package offered by BaE. There is also an upgrade package for the avionics, which was not applied to all the European planes because of the imminent induction of the Typhoon. The RSAF, if I am not mistaken is going in for this.

3. You need a fighter which will act as a bomber. Not an interceptor. Range-check. Proven low level attack-check. Next gen ammo-check. Spare availability-check.

I am not saying, it is the best in the world. But, practically, it can do the job for the PAF at the lowest cost at the earliest.



It would have been, till the advent of the MFSTAR in an Indian CBG. Also, ballistic missile for all its capabilities of maneuverability would need to have guidance which updates real time against a moving target. And you do not want to go nuclear. Not to mention, a strike group of aircraft coming in low over the horizon with multiple cruise launches are more unpredictable compared to a ballistic missiles.

Of course, am not an expert on anti ship ballistic missiles.

That was a sarcastic comment.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

View attachment 284049

Above are the specs from the public access data.

J31 seems to be a good choice as the platform is a 5 th gen fighter.

On the j31 there are some questions that I am slightly confused on.

Engine: The J31's use the same Klimov RD 93 engines as of now on the test bed which may or may not be replaced by a chinese variant. Compare the J31 ranges with the Mig 35/ Mig29 OVT and Mig 29 K which uses the most recent variant of the RD33 series - RD33 MK, similar 17.5 Ton loaded/Gross weight, the ferry range of the Mig 35 is 3100Km with 3 Ext Drop tanks, whereas the J31 is being advertised as a 4000 Km Ferry range.Given that both aircrafts are of similar empty weight around 11-11.5 tons and have a 17.5 ton loaded weight, there is a good chance that both carry similar internal fuel, thus the combat range of the J31 in stealth configuration might not be1200 Km as advertised, rather around 500-600 Kms similar to that of a F16. That would put the idea of deep strike into a pickle.

Airframe: AVIC says that a lot of additive mfg was used in the test bed, and hence could not be dis-assembled during the transportation for testing. As the production models are out to 2019, if any of the RP techniques make it into the production model it will be a nightmare of maintenance and fitment. In addition the airframe was reported to bleed a lot of energy in it's first appearance, hopefully by the production variant those issues might be resolved.

I wonder why was the j20 kept out of the equation that wold pretty much fit the wishlist of most pakistani enthusiasts, Twin Engine, bigger frame, more ordinance, better range ability to hit every corner of India.

lastly, Cost of the project:

With the proposed platforms, the plan I am assuming is to add another platform to existing platform, so where the JF17 was brought in to be used as a consolidated platform for replacing Mirage III/V, A5, F7 and F7PG, this will be adding another platform to existing inventory and fundamentally changing the defense of Pakistani airspace as prime requirement to a offensive doctrine where it mandates the platforms to perform air interdiction in enemy territory, in that case the other platforms like the Jf17 and F16 (except the BLK 50+ with CFT's) are seriously short legged to support such functions. In other words you might need a multi role fighter that will have have both A/s as well as Strike configuration in a strike package. So you are looking at about 100 units of a Multi Role long range strike fighter, preferably stealth, So in my opinion the only platforms that fit the requirements are either the j20 or the T50.

Irrespective of which unit you pick, you are looking at a min of 60 mil Cap + another 25 mil PLM costs excluding the munitions package. so with 10 units inducted over next 10 years to give you a 100 units you are still looking at about 650 million cap price every year,

lets assume that the Defence budget of pakistan is around 10 Billion dollar at the time of buying these platforms
10 billion / fiscal year
Op ex allocation : 62% - 6.2 Billion
Capex Total: 3.8 Billion
Air Force Capex: 30% : 1.14 Billion Dollars

As of now, your Defence budget is 7.6 billion, Capex is 2.8 and PAF allocation is 30% 866 Million Dollars. I.E, PAF needs around 866 million for it;s current acquisitions, or atleast that is what they planned in their AOP for 2015-16.

Given your acquisitions will remain similar as of now, with a 10 billion defence budget, you will need 1.14 billion capex, with JF17 production, F16 MLU, other weapons systems, and new platform, might not suffice in that 1.14 billion mark. In other words maintaining similar allocations, to put another 650 mil in PAF capex you would need Airforce capex at 1.79 Billion, that in result puts your total cap budget at 5.97, and you Pakistan defence allocation at 15.7 Billion dollars.

As you currently stand about at 7.6 billion, you will most likely need to double your Defence budget to get where you want, at an induction rate of 10 aircrafts/year

very detailed analysis. your cost analysis are impressive and I wonder if people have the comprehension to absorb what you wrote maybe there is not much chance when a usual reaction from some members is get the ToT of this and ToT of that 100 units of this or that as if they are in a glossary store and Mamu is paying for the fruit and veg.


just answering a question re J-20 .. I think that plane is beyond our scope and requirement. its reviews show that its more included towards deep strikes due to its much bigger payload capacity in a very complex air defence network and secondly it might not be on export offer by China. J-31 if and when it comes out might be enough for us.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

Pakistan should go for J20 and Raptor... *********** ya baby!

Troll of the new year!!!

 

[MastanKhan]

Its not just the Indian CBG. Forget that for one minute.
Assume, a Torndao takes off from Karachi. Moves 700 kms south of Karachi over the Arabian Sea. Then moves towards Mumbai. It will be able to make the distance without any refueling. Without getting into whether it will be able to penetrate the defences, you will have an aircraft which can provide the threat parameter.

What it will also do is provide you with an aircraft which can potentially reach Delhi and return without refuelling. You also threaten the Gujarat cities of Ahmedabad with the ability to get back to base.

Hi,

Well---that is what I have been talking about---the dog leg scenario---.

The J31 is a complimentary aircraft---it can guide the strike force thru---but it cannot do the job of a heavy aircraft---.

The ballistic missile scenario does not work very well---.

 

[MilSpec]

very detailed analysis. your cost analysis are impressive and I wonder if people have the comprehension to absorb what you wrote maybe there is not much chance when a usual reaction from some members is get the ToT of this and ToT of that 100 units of this or that as if they are in a glossary store and Mamu is paying for the fruit and veg.


just answering a question re J-20 .. I think that plane is beyond our scope and requirement. its reviews show that its more included towards deep strikes due to its much bigger payload capacity in a very complex air defence network and secondly it might not be on export offer by China. J-31 if and when it comes out might be enough for us.

Even before the discussion of what twin engine fits the doctrine, the more relevant question is, Should PAF change it's denying it's enemy air superiority doctrine to gaining air superiority over it's enemy. Unlike USAF, no other nations Air force inventory cannot gain air superiority in any theater of combat, and that too applies to nations which barely have a strong military.

The intended application of the proposed twin engine aircraft is for deep strike into Indian territory. There are two methods of doing so:
1>Stealth - radar evading platforms going in undetected and carrying out strikes
2>Or a Strike Package over powering the defences of India and bludgeoning it's way into Indian Heartland.

Irrespective of which route you chose the platform will need long legs, and right now the only platform you have to do so is F16 Blk 50+ with CFT, the CFT adds about 450 Gallons of fuel to the BLK 30 configuration, that will give you an additional 250 kms of combat range (500 kms ferry), to the existing 540 - bringing it to 790 kms of combat range. We Which still is not enough to fight over central eastern and southern parts.

looking at the Stealth option, J31 will not have combat range to do so, and it seems china won't export the J20. Maybe a good option would be for PAF to work with the CAC and develop the j31 with stealth config CFT's to get the combat range it needs for strike mission.

Having discussed the 4.5th gen a/c's, Su35 and J11 are good platforms, if PAF chooses a platform whose variant has been in service for almost 16 years with IAF, i m not sure how much of a advantage it brings to the table, F/A 18 comes with barely any advantages over the F16b50+, and in addition comes with the political implications of US leverage.
JH7 is just a bad platform in my opinion so I won't comment on it.

then there are the more expensive platforms like the f15SE and silent Eagle versions, EFT, Rafales, which are quite expensive and have high PLM costs.

So in my opinion,

PAF should maintain it's current defensive doctrine, make it's defensive systems even more stronger with additional iterations of JF17, and more F16's completely phase out Mirage III/V and F7, F7PG platforms. This in turn will drop down operating costs of PAF, freeing up much needed capital, and then pull a stunner by getting a high dollar platfrom - either a modified J31, or a J20 or even a F35.

For the next 10 -12 years leave deep strike options to BM's and CM's.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

F-16s are more than anything the Afghan's can throw at Pakistan, now or well into the future.

Technologically yes...But how about prolonged CAP missions?

With possible exception of Afghanistan rest of them will never be left to Pakistan. Never. Near East will for long time come under the shadow of the West. Why do you think they call it "Near East"?

Are you sure?

Do you think once the dependence on OIL is reduced what use would "Near East" be? Secondly there is enough Oil available in the USA as well as Latin America and Africa which would be easily available along with the other benefits. There are many advertisements running on international electronic media emphasizing the importance of Africa in the near future...

Let me be very clear if it is not Pakistan then it is Israel that will be ruling these areas. This is because it gives Israel the strategic dept and also puts all the Muslim Holy places under its control.

Arab League is ARAB league and nothing to do with Pakistan unless Pakistan adopts Arabic and that is remote since besides other factor's Pakistan Bollywood addicts could never surrender Urdu.

No it is not the language barrier that is stopping Arab League to accept Pakistan.

If the Arab League is willing to accept Malaysia and Indonesia in this then Pakistan is far closer and a strategic partner.

Turkey's Agreement with the WEST regarding the territories it lost after the Ottoman Empire is about to end. It is not being allowed to join the European Union. Russia threatening expansion in the region and financial problems of EU all are a contributing factor. The EU is itself in limbo because there is a strong lobby that is against the expansion of migrants and strict anti-competition laws i.e subsidies given the member states.

Over this the US is considering to pack-up and leave the middle east because they are facing opposition at home.

UN? Since when does UN require twin jets. Plain old guy with AK-47 and can of blue or white spray can will do the trick.

You misinterpreted my actual post which stated

Arab League's peace keeping missions along with UN would also increase.

Pakistan would have to send more troops to the Arab League and UN Missions in the future.

F-16s can handle that easy.

OHH yes this is the most advance aircraft in PAF. Still the numbers are an issue....Still the point stands how many places would these aircraft fly to at one time...

From whom? USA? Somali pirates? Or India. For the first threat few twin jets are as good as my right fist. The second threat- Give me a break.

India? Yes, very true but that would be part of over all war with India. If India was chocking Pakistan by using it's superior navy few twins would struggle and at any rate if tthe threat was serious enough our nuclear option would be triggered.

Come-on you know very well who the main enemy is ... OHH may be you are thinking of This:-

"This raid, even if it makes it through, it'll only be a pinprick... but it'll be straight ...Jimmy Doolittle"

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Even before the discussion of what twin engine fits the doctrine, the more relevant question is, Should PAF change it's denying it's enemy air superiority doctrine to gaining air superiority over it's enemy. Unlike USAF, no other nations Air force inventory cannot gain air superiority in any theater of combat, and that too applies to nations which barely have a strong military.

The intended application of the proposed twin engine aircraft is for deep strike into Indian territory. There are two methods of doing so:
1>Stealth - radar evading platforms going in undetected and carrying out strikes
2>Or a Strike Package over powering the defences of India and bludgeoning it's way into Indian Heartland.

Irrespective of which route you chose the platform will need long legs, and right now the only platform you have to do so is F16 Blk 50+ with CFT, the CFT adds about 450 Gallons of fuel to the BLK 30 configuration, that will give you an additional 250 kms of combat range (500 kms ferry), to the existing 540 - bringing it to 790 kms of combat range. We Which still is not enough to fight over central eastern and southern parts.

looking at the Stealth option, J31 will not have combat range to do so, and it seems china won't export the J20. Maybe a good option would be for PAF to work with the CAC and develop the j31 with stealth config CFT's to get the combat range it needs for strike mission.

Having discussed the 4.5th gen a/c's, Su35 and J11 are good platforms, if PAF chooses a platform whose variant has been in service for almost 16 years with IAF, i m not sure how much of a advantage it brings to the table, F/A 18 comes with barely any advantages over the F16b50+, and in addition comes with the political implications of US leverage.
JH7 is just a bad platform in my opinion so I won't comment on it.

then there are the more expensive platforms like the f15SE and silent Eagle versions, EFT, Rafales, which are quite expensive and have high PLM costs.

So in my opinion,

PAF should maintain it's current defensive doctrine, make it's defensive systems even more stronger with additional iterations of JF17, and more F16's completely phase out Mirage III/V and F7, F7PG platforms. This in turn will drop down operating costs of PAF, freeing up much needed capital, and then pull a stunner by getting a high dollar platfrom - either a modified J31, or a J20 or even a F35.

For the next 10 -12 years leave deep strike options to BM's and CM's.

I agree with your analysis of our current capabilities and what our airforce can do. western twinjet platforms are potent but expensive yes. Su family jets if acquired might have the desired detremental impact even if IAF knows where they stand. I mean if your opponent also has something similar to your top line weapon then you will be more philosophical than erratic. @MastanKhan says that from time to time and I wonder if its only me who reads rest of his message.

by the way do correct me if I am wrong but most of the IAF bases are very much close towards Pakistani borders. I cant find a program or a map that showed Indian airforce bases all along the western side from the north to the south.

I think disabling enemy's aircrafts the ability to fly is any airforce's one of the primary objectives. our Dhaka air base was pretty much non-operational from mid to later days of war in 71 as it was bombed round the clock. so some options maybe enough.

deep strike capability is relevant in terms of navy targets or some other strategic targets I agree but I think its also a deterrent as well. (again philosophical vs erratic)




. I really dont have much faith in CM's and BM's .. their numbers are limited, their platforms themselves are very vulnerable and they are simply a too risky option as they carry a MAD risk.

lets lighten up the scene here
Indian DGMO receives a call from his Pakistani counterpart)

Hello? yea what you want... why you calling me .. we are at war.
just letting you know.. that we are firing Nasr Missle and by the way its not nuclear or chemical

you sure? why should I believe you?

Promise. I swear it.. its conventional.
ok then.. hmm oh wait

what?

I just learnt we launched Pirthuvi.. .. hmm it should be just crossing into your country now. and dont worry its not Nuclear or Chemical either.

God dam it. why did you? I mean how can I believe you?

...pause.. you still there?

yea.. but tell me how can you assure me you didnt fire a nuclear missile?

well you still there arn't you? LOLz

I dont like your joke. well this should stop. ok to hell with you

go to hell too. speak to you soon

 

[MilSpec]

I agree with your analysis of our current capabilities and what our airforce can do. western twinjet platforms are potent but expensive yes. Su family jets if acquired might have the desired detremental impact even if IAF knows where they stand. I mean if your opponent also has something similar to your top line weapon then you will be more philosophical than erratic. @MastanKhan says that from time to time and I wonder if its only me who reads rest of his message.

by the way do correct me if I am wrong but most of the IAF bases are very much close towards Pakistani borders. I cant find a program or a map that showed Indian airforce bases all along the western side from the north to the south.

I think disabling enemy's aircrafts the ability to fly is any airforce's one of the primary objectives. our Dhaka air base was pretty much non-operational from mid to later days of war in 71 as it was bombed round the clock. so some options maybe enough.

deep strike capability is relevant in terms of navy targets or some other strategic targets I agree but I think its also a deterrent as well. (again philosophical vs erratic)




. I really dont have much faith in CM's and BM's .. their numbers are limited, their platforms themselves are very vulnerable and they are simply a too risky option as they carry a MAD risk.

lets lighten up the scene here
Indian DGMO receives a call from his Pakistani counterpart)

Hello? yea what you want... why you calling me .. we are at war.
just letting you know.. that we are firing Nasr Missle and by the way its not nuclear or chemical

you sure? why should I believe you?

Promise. I swear it.. its conventional.
ok then.. hmm oh wait

what?

I just learnt we launched Pirthuvi.. .. hmm it should be just crossing into your country now. and dont worry its not Nuclear or Chemical either.

God dam it. why did you? I mean how can I believe you?

...pause.. you still there?

yea.. but tell me how can you assure me you didnt fire a nuclear missile?

well you still there arn't you? LOLz

I dont like your joke. well this should stop. ok to hell with you

go to hell too. speak to you soon

Irfan saab,

Indian air force bases that are close to Pakistani border are from the hawker hunter and gnat days. These were short ranged units and thus had to operate from close to the border and forward operating bases. Indian air force commands are divided by areas.
List of Indian Air Force bases - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have read @MastanKhan ;s narrative and we have had disagreements, I can understand where his narrative comes from, I can also understand the issues that he has with PAF brass about platform selection. But what most people forget is that there is no free reign over choice. It's never about the best but always about the optimal, and PAF has done a hell of job of maintaining an optimal credible deterrence, especially against the an enemy which is much bigger in size.

I read your comment about army units asking help from PAF, and PAF replying fend for yourself as the base is under attack. And that is a horrifying situation. The lesson to learn from that is to make your defence water tight, "offence is the best kind of defence" is a dialogue for party's who have already secured there defence. It's a catch phrase, a sales pitch to justify offense, You yourself know what happens when a post comes under fire, what you do is duck and return fire, you don't go out screaming out with a MMG right upto the enemy post and successfully defend your post, you have to be patient and do your best to defend the position. The objective is to defend your post, not capture the enemy post instead and end up dying in the attempt.

One of the things that I have always been in awe of the maintenance and resourcefulness of PAF, even the images that come out of PAC Kamra, shows a water tight 5S program. These little things shows the discipline the cadre has, If the actual PAF brass decides that F16BLK 50+ fits the bill, I will tend to agree to them. Others can disagree, but they neither have the credentials, expertise nor the experience to present a counter opinion that holds any weight.

Yes members here every other day come up with nishan like post - that PAF should get JH7, SU35, J11, EFT, F15, J10, and what not. None of them realise how capital acquisitions work within the available budget. It's like my wife saying ohh you should sell your 08 Xterra and buy a new X5, you can easily afford it, but what she forgets is spending 50G's on the third car which we barely use, means the 50 G needs to come from some other allocation, that was for investment, or a house or something else.

Spending a few billion for PAF is sure possible, but when the Finance ministry gives PAF an extra Dollar, it has to take it from someone, either the civilian sector or the other branches of Military, thus the word optimal. I am sure there is a planning team that evaluates : introduction of new capabilities (electronic warfare, Ucavs, new ordinance), combating obsolescence of existing platforms, maintaining existing programs, and operating costa and project the funding requirements for the next year based on there long term vision.

These teams do not need to share there vision with public due to strategic implications, just because members here in PDF do not have access to that information doesn't mean that they have the right to question there process. Yes counter ideas are great, but berrating a professional organisation whose record has been nothing short of stellar just sounds idiotic to some of us, and I know you are smiling when you reading this last paragraph.

Wishing you a very happy new year, GTG now . tc.

 

[S.U.R.B.]

I'm up for the wait and see policy.
Cruel statement yup, but it'll prove to be advantageous for us in my view.
1-The fifth generation capability of most of the available fighter jets is evolving at a rapid speed.

2-We are a developing economy .The money matters.Your buying power is your backbone in all this buying and maintaining adventure.With time (and i'm very hopeful about it) it'll get back on track.So, a wait and watch policy is a justifiable approach.

3-Our foreign policy has seen some freedom as the US have left the Afghan theater.Russians are knocking on your door.And the news is good this time around.

4-The future blocks of JF-17 most probably will be operating an advanced variant of the RD-93.Settling in for a fifth generation that still operated the old RD-93, doesn't make one more happy or does it?

5-Any fourth generation ++ fighter might have reduced the gap between the 4th and the 5th generation , but the truth remains that the 5th generation is the one that can provide you with the air dominance against the rest of the lot.So, i want my next purchase to cater for all my needs.That is to strike deep inside enemy territory, have a decent enough endurance , loiter time and availability of spares.And a weapon package that is versatile.As you do not want your 5th generation AC to only be victorious at the skies.The land and sea warfare in our case does demand an equal amount of importance.

There are different 5th generation development programs available to us right now, if we play it right we can be a part of their development.It'll be like getting the most out of it.Which of course also requires a solid economy.

For the time being, we can collect 4th generation platforms that we are operating right now, from the countries which consider those ACs as a burden.The Fifth generation will require a work horse buddy.The 16s and the 17s will be there to pitch in.This variant of 16s or that variant of the 16s ,doesn't matter.I say get them all that are available and in a good condition.An extra squadron of the advanced variant of the same aircraft that you operate, is always a welcome addition.

 

[MastanKhan]

I agree with your analysis of our current capabilities and what our airforce can do. western twinjet platforms are potent but expensive yes. Su family jets if acquired might have the desired detremental impact even if IAF knows where they stand. I mean if your opponent also has something similar to your top line weapon then you will be more philosophical than erratic. @MastanKhan says that from time to time and I wonder if its only me who reads rest of his message.

by the way do correct me if I am wrong but most of the IAF bases are very much close towards Pakistani borders. I cant find a program or a map that showed Indian airforce bases all along the western side from the north to the south.

I think disabling enemy's aircrafts the ability to fly is any airforce's one of the primary objectives. our Dhaka air base was pretty much non-operational from mid to later days of war in 71 as it was bombed round the clock. so some options maybe enough.

deep strike capability is relevant in terms of navy targets or some other strategic targets I agree but I think its also a deterrent as well. (again philosophical vs erratic). I really dont have much faith in CM's and BM's .. their numbers are limited, their platforms themselves are very vulnerable and they are simply a too risky option as they carry a MAD risk.

Hi,

If the pak air force does not have assets to divert the attention of the enemy air force over a larger area---it has already lost the battle. The enemy can strike at the place and time of its choice and with numbers that choses to----.

And yes---you are one of the few who reads and comprehends my post---and as it does not confirm with the standard propaganda of paf---most posters either cannot understand.

Supposedly---when Ghengis Khan was confronting Khwarazm Shah---the Khan's flank was able to strike the Shah's main force---after a fierce battle it retreated---enticing the Shah's cavalry to follow it---which it did---the chase went on for a very long time till a moment came when the Khan's flank turned back and smashed the Shah's cavalry right to the last man.

The Shah never found out what happened to his cavalry----. Once the cavalry was taken out---the Khan was able to confront the Shah's INFANTRY at a place of Khan's choice and thus decimated it.

There were many scenarios taking place at that time----Shah's arrogance was being fanned by the mullahs---he was not listening to his generals----all the kiss ar-se were telling him that he was the chosen one----he had no value of his cavalry----he did not understand the URGENCY to move at a faster pace---he cared less where he confronted the Khan's army.

Oh---by the way--the muslim army was stopping 5 times a day for prayers----and very slow moving out.

In the end---they got caught in a tight space---and it was just a matter of hours----if they had another half day more available to them or maybe a couple of three hours at a fast pace---they would have faced Khan's army in the open---where the Khan could not face them and did not want to face them.

The purpose of these comments is----that you need to have resources to spread the enemy thin---pakistan has a smaller area to cover---the enemy has larger area to cover----pakistan has a smaller area to protect----and if pakistan has long range strike aircraft---it can simply run circles around the enemy----.

Because----the enemy has delegated certain values to certain geographical areas----

east punjab----areas of rajasthan---gujrat----0---4 value------partial to total destruction acceptable

maharshtra---karnatka and other states-----4----10 value partial strike very damaging

mahrashtra------mumbai valued at 10------the jewel in the crown---and all the surrounding area----.

The assets protecting east punjab etc will be depleted when many aircraft are sent to protect the Jewel in the Crown----MUMBAI-----and the region around it.

And that would mean comparatively open skies for pakistan air force----.

Paf cannot battle the enemy concentrated in a narrow area-----it needs to find ways to THIN OUT the enemy resources-----.

If my game plan is followed----the enemy air force will have serious issues---

The paf---instead of spending 2 billion dollars on this supposed purchase of 8 F16---would have been better served with 50 plus JH7B's at 30 mil a pop---.

 

[Signalian]

1) Can Ballistic missiles track, maneuver and hit moving ships? How accurate is it? More importantly, will China give PK that technology?
2) When an IN Air Craft Carrier is sent towards Pakistan, it won't be alone, it will part of a Battle group, with dedicated destroyers having ABM capabilities like Barak etc. How many Ballistic Missiles are you going to fire, to over whelm an ABM?
3) Which has a higher probability of getting through: 40 aircrafts launching 80 Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles, or 80
Ballistic missiles?
4) The problem with a single engine aircraft over water is, IF you loose that single engine, you not only loose a multi-million dollar aircraft, but possibly the pilot as well, whose loss cannot be counted in monetary terms.

To answer your question, lets go back to the start.
So PAF spends a few billion of $$$ and acquires two long range strike aircraft squadrons for deep strikes inside Indian territory.

Now if the target lies a few hundred km in the east on land, flying through IAF AWACs, SU30, Mig29, SAM's and firing at that target by these long range strike aircraft will incur huge losses, which makes the acquisition of these aircrafts useless.

Suppose at some stage in the war, these aircraft need a to strike a target behind or in vicinity of IN aircraft carrier.
If these aircraft fly eastwards over land and then southwards towards the target, they will be detected by IAF AWAC's and engaged by everything IAF has in the form of SU30, Mig29, SAM etc.
They fly southwards and then turn east, IN carrier and other naval vessels will engage them.

so how do you strike targets hundreds of km inside Indian land territory? ALCM,CM or last resort BM.

JH-7 is a long range strike aircraft. It might have a great combat radius but sending it on a long range mission inside enemy territory is losing the aircraft and pilot. Leave that to CM and BM.

SU35, J-11 have good A2A capabilities, but defending own airspace can also be done by JF-17 and F-16. For long range strike mission, SU35, J-11 suffer the same consequences as JH-7.

The fact is that these long strike aircraft dont stand much chance when in any scenario of strike inside Indian territory.

Now coming to tackling an aircraft carrier.

I have told that sending long range aircrafts in the vicinity of IN carrier to strike inside India isnt a good idea.

your querry is : 40 aircrafts launching 80 Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles, or 80 Ballistic missiles?

Firstly, Losing 60-70% or more of that aircraft strike package is more acceptable or deterring, damaging IN carrier group from coming close to pakistani seas by firing BM is more acceptable?
Some of these 40 aircrafts can be engaged by Mig-29's and destroyed before they even fire the anti-ship missile. so the number of anti-ship missiles fired at the IN carrier will be greatly reduced.

Secondly, so PAF got two squadrons of long range aircrafts, say 40.Engaged all of them in striking IN carrier. Returned with 14-18 aircraft. Not a good scenario. so PAF got these 40 aircrafts only for engaging, damaging or sinking an IN carrier?doesnt make sense. Now reduced to one squadron size only, their usage will be limited.

Thirdly, the loss of pilots trained on these aircrafts after IN carrier strike will badly hit PAF. The biggest lot of trained pilots in PAF are mirage iii/v and F-16 pilots, next will be JF-17 pilots. Usually pilots trained on F-16's are already trained on mirage or or F-7 or both.
So the pilots trained on say JH-7, SU35 etc will already be a small compliment. It will be further shortened after loss of aircraft in IN carrier strike.

The fact is that these long strike aircraft dont stand much chance when in any scenario involving IN carrier.

Your Querry: When an IN Air Craft Carrier is sent towards Pakistan, it won't be alone, it will part of a Battle group, with dedicated destroyers having ABM capabilities like Barak etc. How many Ballistic Missiles are you going to fire, to over whelm an ABM?

Raining BM's on IN carrier will not incur loss of life or material for Pakistan. Infact after the first salvo is fired, detected and tracked, IN carrier maybe forced to change course or return. Pakistan is increasing its arsenal of missiles faster than its acquiring aircrafts.

Your Querry: Can Ballistic missiles track, maneuver and hit moving ships? How accurate is it? More importantly, will China give PK that technology?

DF-21 series has not hit any moving target although its emergence is to strike a naval ship at a long range so the tech is getting there. Chinese have spent millions of $$$ in this tech and if China's answer to engaging a US aircraft carrier is with Df-21 series, i would go with that where time and money has been practically spent, rather than any out of thin air idea by members here.
Chinese usually give tech requested by Pakistan.


In any scenario, if IN aircraft carrier starts coming threatening close to or inside Pakistani seas, the long range factor starts to diminish. Every second it inches closer towards Pakistan, gives any PAF aircraft advantage in range to engage it. If PAF has to engage it, it has hundreds of aircrafts to do so.

In any case, my vote is for J-31

 

[chengdusudise]

what PAF need is this one

e

 

[illuminatidinesh]

Sir,

This not a versus thread---it is about the need of Pakistan---. Check out the earlier posts please

No no Mastan Bhai, I genuinely raised the question hear taking only IAF into considering and forgetting the MIG 29 k which would be both carrier based and land based. So any intrusion from Arabian sea is going to be little difficult .....
So again the question is for what role exactly does PAF need twin jet ?
To check IN in Arabian sea?
To strike deep in side

 

[batmannow]

Hi,

Off course it is not----.

So---here is what I have---.

I know the enemy is going to kill me---if I do not have the right aircraft---it is going to kill me in my backyard---in front of my loved and dear ones----and it is going to pummel me and humiliate me like never before----if I maintain the status quo.

But---if I change the equation---where I can now reach into his SECURE & SACRED GROUNDS and smash his ego in front of the home crowd---the chinks in the armor---can sometimes play havoc with the psyche of the enemy.

This was the emotional and strategic part---if I have to die---then why not on the side of the enemy border---.

That is a very tough question---how does russia protect its bombers---or how does the U S or the UK does that----. Does that stop them from acquiring bombers to reach out into the enemy heartland---knwoing very well that they will be taken out.

What about the F111--or the Tornado---or the Jaguar----they are worst thanthe JH7B's----.

The bottomline here is---that if Pakistan air force cannot target mumbai and surrounding areas----then it is better to sign up and make peace with india.

The primary goal needs to be to spread out the enemy's fire power---by staying inside and being in a defensive posture means that Paf has decided that they are going to bend over and let Iaf do what ever it pleases to.

As for the aircraft---Bad decisions and Time has been the worst enemy of pakistan air force---and they keep on making them over and over---again and again---.

They need to be confronted on the TV----the paf managers need to be smacked around---the real face of the paf needs to be shown to pakistan----and it is not a very pretty face---.

I will tell you---if I go on a 2 hour TV talk show in pakistan---pakistan air force will not find a place to hide their faces---.

As I stated---bad decisions----and poor timing----Paf has cut its own feet over the period of the last 30 years----put deafet on a platter and handed it over to the enemy.

Basically---the position that it finds it self in----IT DOES NOT HAVE A POTENT AIRCRAFT TO PROCURE and field against the enemy----. There is nothing out there of substance available to it----.

In an ever changing environment---you have to make decisions when PEOPLE LIKE YOU-----when there is a positive image about you----. The doors start closing when people start to dislike you.

The ARROGANT PAKISTANI has just learnt---that even if you have the money---when they don't want to---they will not sell to you---but this has not registered yet.

problem is PAF managers only think their role as about dog fights in bode ring areas with enemy , or bombing the advancing troops ?
they never planned for a unified 3 way air attack on them ?
like NATO+IAF joining hands for taking out our military installations , & jamming our machinized divisions coming out against advancing enemy troops from eastern & western sides constantly ?
Then NATO coming up against our nuclear & long range missile , our so called super F16s stationed sites ?

All what they have is our missile capability to strike back with our tactical nuclear devices mounted on the heads ?
it shows , who is behind this strategy our army or airforce ?


We need to bring the decesion making power to PAF , with its own choices &it's own plans ?
I don't think , it will be just IAF we will be facing in the future ?
I think still our military , is not accepting the reality , that they can be attacked jointly by NATO+INDIA ?
they are still sleeping even after OBL happened to them , which was off couse a joint action .

No no Mastan Bhai, I genuinely raised the question hear taking only IAF into considering and forgetting the MIG 29 k which would be both carrier based and land based. So any intrusion from Arabian sea is going to be little difficult .....
So again the question is for what role exactly does PAF need twin jet ?
To check IN in Arabian sea?
To strike deep in side

SU-35 is superior to most of the Indian airforce inventory & it can be upgraded , further so , we need to check in , from each side of Indian military strategy, be it land or sea based , with air craft carriers India has a lot longer range & reach against us ?
& to check that in minutes you need a twin.engine fighter , bomber , striker aircraft fighter ?

Hi,

If the pak air force does not have assets to divert the attention of the enemy air force over a larger area---it has already lost the battle. The enemy can strike at the place and time of its choice and with numbers that choses to----.

And yes---you are one of the few who reads and comprehends my post---and as it does not confirm with the standard propaganda of paf---most posters either cannot understand.

Supposedly---when Ghengis Khan was confronting Khwarazm Shah---the Khan's flank was able to strike the Shah's main force---after a fierce battle it retreated---enticing the Shah's cavalry to follow it---which it did---the chase went on for a very long time till a moment came when the Khan's flank turned back and smashed the Shah's cavalry right to the last man.

The Shah never found out what happened to his cavalry----. Once the cavalry was taken out---the Khan was able to confront the Shah's INFANTRY at a place of Khan's choice and thus decimated it.

There were many scenarios taking place at that time----Shah's arrogance was being fanned by the mullahs---he was not listening to his generals----all the kiss ar-se were telling him that he was the chosen one----he had no value of his cavalry----he did not understand the URGENCY to move at a faster pace---he cared less where he confronted the Khan's army.

Oh---by the way--the muslim army was stopping 5 times a day for prayers----and very slow moving out.

In the end---they got caught in a tight space---and it was just a matter of hours----if they had another half day more available to them or maybe a couple of three hours at a fast pace---they would have faced Khan's army in the open---where the Khan could not face them and did not want to face them.

The purpose of these comments is----that you need to have resources to spread the enemy thin---pakistan has a smaller area to cover---the enemy has larger area to cover----pakistan has a smaller area to protect----and if pakistan has long range strike aircraft---it can simply run circles around the enemy----.

Because----the enemy has delegated certain values to certain geographical areas----

east punjab----areas of rajasthan---gujrat----0---4 value------partial to total destruction acceptable

maharshtra---karnatka and other states-----4----10 value partial strike very damaging

mahrashtra------mumbai valued at 10------the jewel in the crown---and all the surrounding area----.

The assets protecting east punjab etc will be depleted when many aircraft are sent to protect the Jewel in the Crown----MUMBAI-----and the region around it.

And that would mean comparatively open skies for pakistan air force----.

Paf cannot battle the enemy concentrated in a narrow area-----it needs to find ways to THIN OUT the enemy resources-----.

If my game plan is followed----the enemy air force will have serious issues---

The paf---instead of spending 2 billion dollars on this supposed purchase of 8 F16---would have been better served with 50 plus JH7B's at 30 mil a pop---.

nice war gaming sir ,
but what if are up against joint NATO+INDIA equation ?
how would you will draw your attack &.defence map ?

To answer your question, lets go back to the start.
So PAF spends a few billion of $$$ and acquires two long range strike aircraft squadrons for deep strikes inside Indian territory.

Now if the target lies a few hundred km in the east on land, flying through IAF AWACs, SU30, Mig29, SAM's and firing at that target by these long range strike aircraft will incur huge losses, which makes the acquisition of these aircrafts useless.

Suppose at some stage in the war, these aircraft need a to strike a target behind or in vicinity of IN aircraft carrier.
If these aircraft fly eastwards over land and then southwards towards the target, they will be detected by IAF AWAC's and engaged by everything IAF has in the form of SU30, Mig29, SAM etc.
They fly southwards and then turn east, IN carrier and other naval vessels will engage them.

so how do you strike targets hundreds of km inside Indian land territory? ALCM,CM or last resort BM.

JH-7 is a long range strike aircraft. It might have a great combat radius but sending it on a long range mission inside enemy territory is losing the aircraft and pilot. Leave that to CM and BM.

SU35, J-11 have good A2A capabilities, but defending own airspace can also be done by JF-17 and F-16. For long range strike mission, SU35, J-11 suffer the same consequences as JH-7.

The fact is that these long strike aircraft dont stand much chance when in any scenario of strike inside Indian territory.

Now coming to tackling an aircraft carrier.

I have told that sending long range aircrafts in the vicinity of IN carrier to strike inside India isnt a good idea.

your querry is : 40 aircrafts launching 80 Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles, or 80 Ballistic missiles?

Firstly, Losing 60-70% or more of that aircraft strike package is more acceptable or deterring, damaging IN carrier group from coming close to pakistani seas by firing BM is more acceptable?
Some of these 40 aircrafts can be engaged by Mig-29's and destroyed before they even fire the anti-ship missile. so the number of anti-ship missiles fired at the IN carrier will be greatly reduced.

Secondly, so PAF got two squadrons of long range aircrafts, say 40.Engaged all of them in striking IN carrier. Returned with 14-18 aircraft. Not a good scenario. so PAF got these 40 aircrafts only for engaging, damaging or sinking an IN carrier?doesnt make sense. Now reduced to one squadron size only, their usage will be limited.

Thirdly, the loss of pilots trained on these aircrafts after IN carrier strike will badly hit PAF. The biggest lot of trained pilots in PAF are mirage iii/v and F-16 pilots, next will be JF-17 pilots. Usually pilots trained on F-16's are already trained on mirage or or F-7 or both.
So the pilots trained on say JH-7, SU35 etc will already be a small compliment. It will be further shortened after loss of aircraft in IN carrier strike.

The fact is that these long strike aircraft dont stand much chance when in any scenario involving IN carrier.

Your Querry: When an IN Air Craft Carrier is sent towards Pakistan, it won't be alone, it will part of a Battle group, with dedicated destroyers having ABM capabilities like Barak etc. How many Ballistic Missiles are you going to fire, to over whelm an ABM?

Raining BM's on IN carrier will not incur loss of life or material for Pakistan. Infact after the first salvo is fired, detected and tracked, IN carrier maybe forced to change course or return. Pakistan is increasing its arsenal of missiles faster than its acquiring aircrafts.

Your Querry: Can Ballistic missiles track, maneuver and hit moving ships? How accurate is it? More importantly, will China give PK that technology?

DF-21 series has not hit any moving target although its emergence is to strike a naval ship at a long range so the tech is getting there. Chinese have spent millions of $$$ in this tech and if China's answer to engaging a US aircraft carrier is with Df-21 series, i would go with that where time and money has been practically spent, rather than any out of thin air idea by members here.
Chinese usually give tech requested by Pakistan.


In any scenario, if IN aircraft carrier starts coming threatening close to or inside Pakistani seas, the long range factor starts to diminish. Every second it inches closer towards Pakistan, gives any PAF aircraft advantage in range to engage it. If PAF has to engage it, it has hundreds of aircrafts to do so.

In any case, my vote is for J-31

sir,
I think ,
you don't have idea about , the capabilities of SU-35S M, Leading a strike mission any where in Indian lands.
just remember that , SU-35M is a 4.5+++ jet .

 

[illuminatidinesh]

SU-35 is superior to most of the Indian airforce inventory & it can be upgraded , further so , we need to check in , from each side of Indian military strategy, be it land or sea based , with air craft carriers India has a lot longer range & reach against us ?
& to check that in minutes you need a twin.engine fighter , bomber , striker aircraft fighter ?

SU 35 is superior? So what? It doesnt give u unlimited liotering time?
IN carrier does give India lot of options.
Again For exactly do u need twin jets for?