Pakistan AirForce : Updates & Discussions

Sancho said:
Highly doubtful, since it depends on internal space to integrate swash plate or side arrays, not to mention that weight balance is a key problem that was visible for many new fighters that tested AESA.
Click to expand...

Of the three radars, the one with swash plate and the other with 3 arrays seem to be the same size. The one with three arrays has the main array fixed.

Interesting, so as I expected not that great performance as claimed.
Click to expand...

I think NRIET's radar is different from the other three radars shown. It's also possible NRIET's radar is older and may not be used.

There's basically three companies here: NRIET, CTEC and LETRI.

Those three radars you are talking about are from CTEC. LETRI has its own offer for JF-17, which gives 170Km for 3m2. And NRIET's radar is the one I posted the poster for.[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
If you ask me, India should fund Iran this weapon purchase ..

Take a peek inside.
Crash a few ..


For few 100 million $ , you can waste that program..
 
Milspec said:
I was looking at his feed, PAF cannot get a better cheerleader.
Click to expand...

Actually I think he is the best option to get a non biased outside view on JF17 / PAF. Most other reports are from Pak or Chinese media, so I welcome his reporting. In fact, I wished we would see something similar of a western journalist and IAF.
 
Sancho said:
Actually I think he is the best option to get a non biased outside view on JF17 / PAF. Most other reports are from Pak or Chinese media, so I welcome his reporting. In fact, I wished we would see something similar of a western journalist and IAF.
Click to expand...
read his feed for say the last 3 - 4 yrs.
 
Milspec said:
read his feed for say the last 3 - 4 yrs.
Click to expand...

I'm following him for a year or so, but other than that he has good relations and access to PAF (which is a benefit for reporting of course), I don't see an issue. Especially since western journalists have a more rational view, than Pakistani or Indian counterparts. Livefist got a series of interviews with foreign defence journalists and bloggers, was very interesting to see the difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neo
Sancho said:
**** + dogfighting is not modern air combat anymore.
Click to expand...

Of course it is ,

When your enemy has evaded your BVR missiles , will you run away or allow him to come close and then engage him with WVR
Missiles

As it is , JF 17 is a point defence fighter
And if One Su 30 can take out TWO of them
It is as good as Junk :LOL:
 
Sancho said:
**** + dogfighting is not modern air combat anymore.
Click to expand...

This thing was discussed in PDF

But then they quietly buried the story
As it was an inconvenient truth

Secondly have you heard of Tejas ALSR capability which is meant for Turning it at very slow speeds for getting into the Best Position for Firing the WVR missile
 
Chinese AF humiliating PAF, sounds little exaggerated. But yes, PAF was flying JF-17s, so it is believable. After all it was Chinese copy 1.0 vs Chinese mini-copy 1.0, so nothing much informative for defense enthusiasts.

It should have been F-16 vs J11. That would be interesting. PLAAF should consider that, as PAF is one of the experienced AF in the world in terms of dog-fight.
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
Of course it is ,

When your enemy has evaded your BVR missiles , will you run away or allow him to come close and then engage him with WVR
Missiles

As it is , JF 17 is a point defence fighter
And if One Su 30 can take out TWO of them
It is as good as Junk :LOL:
Click to expand...
Respectfully Disagree.

There is nothing junk about JF17, exercise means an exercise. It is to test out different engagement methods to fine tune ACM strategies. If a Flanker scored 1:2 kill ratio on a FC20 in air combat drills, it means that PAF will train it's pilots to stay away from those trajectories at all time from a flanker. Losses in exercises makes you avoid them in real combat.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: R!cK and Neo
Milspec said:
Respectfully Disagree.

There is nothing junk about JF17, exercise means an exercise. It is to test out different engagement methods to fine tune ACM strategies. If a Flanker scored 1:2 kill ratio on a FC20 in air combat drills, it means that PAF will train it's pilots to stay away from those trajectories at all time from a flanker. Losses in exercises makes you avoid them in real combat.
Click to expand...

So after 45 minutes of burning fuel in the sky
And Wasting Two BVRAAMs the JF 17 will
Head back to its base

And you know that a fighter is most vulnerable when it is taking off OR when it is Going back

The Sukhois can chase them and Fire a missile in its Behind :LOL:
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
Of course it is
Click to expand...

Wrong, because in modern air combat, the performance of the fighter is less important, because of BVR missiles, or HMS + Hobs missiles. Same goes for A2G, where you don't need a special design for accurate weapon delivery anymore, since the weapons itself are guided and offer even stand off ranges. So you don't counter the performance of the fighter anymore, but of it's weapons and systems. One reason why we added HMS + hobs missiles, to counter the shortfall in performance of LCA.

Besides, nobody should be really suprised, that a light class low end Mig 21 replacement, don't offer the flight performance of an air superiority fighter or? The problem however is, that combined with superior radar guidance via AWACS, the individual advantages of J11 doesn't play a role anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom