PDA

View Full Version : PAF's evolution through sanctions, leading to JF-17



Asim Aquil
01 Jul 04,, 15:48
http://61.132.72.44/dswc/upload/images/04061349744.jpg

http://61.132.72.44/dswc/upload/images/04061349743.jpg

http://61.132.72.44/dswc/upload/images/04061349742.jpg

http://61.132.72.44/dswc/upload/images/04061349741.jpg

http://61.132.72.44/dswc/upload/images/04061349740.jpg

Courtesy - Usman Ali of PDF - Senior Members group.

scimitar
04 Aug 04,, 22:38
What the PAF has accomplished since 1990 is really amazing. It is a credit to the various CAS's and the planners.

scimitar
04 Aug 04,, 22:46
The list reads thus:

ROSE or retrofit of strike element: miragres upgraded
induction of F7's
K8 trainer's
JF17

PAF was on a tight budget, there was virtually no help from the west; they have indeed risen to the challange.

Asim Aquil
05 Aug 04,, 07:48
Since 1990, the US administrations had thought they could abandon Pakistan and that'd mean we'd give up our nuclear program. Their own analysts predicted Pakistanis to come down to eating raw onions. If it has done anything it has helped us push towards more self-reliance and less dependency on most of all the Americans. I'm glad they're now realising that Pakistan is someone they have to deal with, not just run away from.

scimitar
05 Aug 04,, 17:27
I would like to talk about the JF-17's evolution.

In the mid to late 1980's, Pakistan and China came up with a plan to use the F7 airframe with drastic retorfit, they could come up wth a fairly potent aircraft; which would fill in the huge gap of newer front line aircraft in both airforces.

This new aircraft would be called the Sabre 2 by the PAF and the Super 7 by the Chinise. The aircraft would have the following improvements:

1) Side air intakes

2) F16 engine

3) APG-66 radar

4) the F16 canopy/cockpit (as the F7 canopy/cockpit was less roomer compaired to the F16, remember we had no F7's then)

Grumman was chosen as the contractor, this was a very potent aircraft and was much talked about in JDW. But with the sanctions on China in 1989 and subcequently on Pakistan this project was all but 86 'ed.

The rest as they say is history!!!!

Bueller
05 Aug 04,, 19:01
I would like to talk about the JF-17's evolution.

This new aircraft would be called the Sabre 2 by the PAF and the Super 7 by the Chinise. The aircraft would have the following improvements:...

2) F16 engine

IIRC, it was the F-404.


4) the F16 canopy/cockpit (as the F7 canopy/cockpit was less roomer compaired to the F16, remember we had no F7's then)

It was the F-20's glass and a new cockpit.

Bueller
05 Aug 04,, 19:11
What's with this stealth stuff anyway? Stealth isn't just a buzzword you can use to market a fighter. Seems like every fighter that's coming out claims some sort of stealth. That JF-17 possesses nil to very very little stealthy design, yet the article talks about it being stealth. Also, take the S-37/Su-47 for instance, with those prominent canards, they probably generate more return than a Su-27, which is pretty big for a fighter. The Chinese J-10 is also a poor design for stealth due to its surface configuration, yet they claim stealth characteristics for it when its radar return is bigger than the J-7. RAM can only take you so far.

scimitar
06 Aug 04,, 02:57
well I was trying to recall my memory, but thanx bueller

scimitar
06 Aug 04,, 03:26
what ever happened to the belgian F16's PAF was supposed to buy. US allowed them to do so I heard.....any one???

Asim Aquil
06 Aug 04,, 10:37
what ever happened to the belgian F16's PAF was supposed to buy. US allowed them to do so I heard.....any one???

No they didn't. They just said they don't have any objection, that too not in words, just gave us MNNA status. The issue has not even been raised in congress, recently.

Anyway, the only good F-16s out there are the ones that UAE is using. If they sell those to us, then it's worth talking about them, otherwise they're ancient tech.

Bueller
06 Aug 04,, 18:07
Anyway, the only good F-16s out there are the ones that UAE is using. If they sell those to us, then it's worth talking about them, otherwise they're ancient tech.

That depends on if you are getting the MLU Vipers, which I doubt due to Belgium's NATO committment. And also, it depends on if you are getting the Slammers. One way this can be done is to get those Block 5/10/15 Vipers Belgium and have LM do the MLU, but then this would fall under direct FMS and requires congressional approval, right?

ajaybhutani
02 Oct 04,, 03:07
What's with this stealth stuff anyway? Stealth isn't just a buzzword you can use to market a fighter. Seems like every fighter that's coming out claims some sort of stealth. That JF-17 possesses nil to very very little stealthy design, yet the article talks about it being stealth. Also, take the S-37/Su-47 for instance, with those prominent canards, they probably generate more return than a Su-27, which is pretty big for a fighter. The Chinese J-10 is also a poor design for stealth due to its surface configuration, yet they claim stealth characteristics for it when its radar return is bigger than the J-7. RAM can only take you so far.


S-37 has internal bays to store some of internal weaponsweapons.Though never tested with weapons . but in case S-37 has seen teh production day. then teh intenral weapon bays would have made a lot of difference in stealth. This is an imp part of stealth as having external wepons make even ahighly stealthy plane lke F22 loose all the stealth advantage..

ajaybhutani
02 Oct 04,, 03:12
I think they must have meant somethin like radar absorbing paints to be used on JF17 when they said that it will be stealthy. Furthermore stealth is a relative term . and tehres noe comparison saying that this should be the max RCS to call it stealthy u can even call a 747 stealthy LOL..