Future of russia defense industry?

Originally posted by chinawhite
Reliable, cost effective and "battle proven"

Umm, since when?
World War II or the Korean War?
Certainly, your not referring to Afghanistan or Chechnya?

Hell, lets be frank, would that be like saying that the Chinese have a "battle proven" military and equipment?






seekerof

[edit on 6-2-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by prelude

1 If US is so well developed then why all their NASA projets fail and at last the yanks have to depend on age old Russian rockets to send their men to ISS........but at last the question remains why Russian rockets...i remember that some americans even admitted that russian rockets are more reliable than US ones ... I would like to know your honest views

This is just utter bunk all Nasa projects dont fail. They have a success rates on really hard missions like Mars probes that make Russian attempts look like a joke. Search for successful russian mars probes compared to attempts to the red planet LOL . 14 of Russia's 19 missions failed, and only one—Zond 3—can be considered a complete success; the remaining four are, at best, partial successes.

The only reason Russian rockets are being used to keep the ISS operating is because of the Shuttle saftey concerns that are not that major 2 accidents out of over 100 flights is really not a bad record. The Russians couldn't even complete the building of the ISS if they wanted too. They dont have a single launch vehicle in their inventory that can get the ISS larger componets up to the ISS only the Shuttle has the cargo room to do it.

NASA's just recently returned a sample of a comet to earth the first time in human history that has ever been done. They still have two succesful mars probes still cruising around mars far longer then anyone thought they would last. That alone is better then the whole of Russia's mars missions.

But ask yourself what was the last major space mission Russia has done?? Horing out the ISS as a space motel to billionaires does not count.

The PAK-FA Is a joke. In no way can they possibly plan to match the JSF technologically or in exports.

So 3D thrust vectoring (perhaps not a really significant development), improved manuaverability, increased fuel capacity (over F-22), longer range missiles and larger carrying capability of missiles and faster speeds is not enough to match the puny little F-35? the F-35 only looks advanced but it's actually a 2.5 gen aircraft the STOVL version is interesting and quite advanced but still isn't a VTOL F-22.

The T-50 PAK-FA is directly competing with the F-22, so comparing it with the F-35 is laughable, the Iranian Shafaq is perhaps a closer match to the F-35, it's based on the russian MiG-I-2000 which was mean to compete with the F-35.

IMO it will be a more challenging fight for the US to fight Iran, they more well armed and more well trained compared to Iraq and Afghanistan, and ofcourse they have F-14's and other American aircraft.

Russia's tank industry is expanding it self with the T-80UM2 (even though production of the T-80U has seized).

And I think Russia is not letting the world know how much money they are really spending, I think they have their own version of the Black Budget, I think Russia will suprise the world, this is just the calm before the storm.

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo

The PAK-FA Is a joke. In no way can they possibly plan to match the JSF technologically or in exports.

So 3D thrust vectoring (perhaps not a really significant development), improved manuaverability, increased fuel capacity (over F-22), longer range missiles and larger carrying capability of missiles and faster speeds is not enough to match the puny little F-35? the F-35 only looks advanced but it's actually a 2.5 gen aircraft

the STOVL version is interesting and quite advanced but still isn't a VTOL F-22.

The T-50 PAK-FA is directly competing with the F-22, so comparing it with the F-35 is laughable, the Iranian Shafaq is perhaps a closer match to the F-35, it's based on the russian MiG-I-2000 which was mean to compete with the F-35.

IMO it will be a more challenging fight for the US to fight Iran, they more well armed and more well trained compared to Iraq and Afghanistan, and ofcourse they have F-14's and other American aircraft.

Russia's tank industry is expanding it self with the T-80UM2 (even though production of the T-80U has seized).

And I think Russia is not letting the world know how much money they are really spending, I think they have their own version of the Black Budget, I think Russia will suprise the world, this is just the calm before the storm.

First off, nobody could put into operation anything like the US Saturn V. That was 40 years ago. The US had some bad luck with the Shuttle, but I wouldn't underestimate the US technological expertise.
Iraq was EASY. When faced with a clear cut army as an adversary the US cut them down like a weed. It was soo lobsided it isn't even interesting, but against a coward who hides and sets booby traps, nobody can have an easy time of that.
Likewise, Iran would be taken down in short order. A couple thousand cruise missiles will take down their air defenses, like it could any on the plannet. Then the precision air strikes will dissect any organized armed forces the Iranians could muster. The harder the Iranians fight, the harder they will fall. The Iranian army would fail, their government would collapse, and we would win the major hostilities against Iran armed forces.
What happens after that though would likely resemble Iraq, and maybe more so. Gurrilla warfare is among the hardest to counter.

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo

And I think Russia is not letting the world know how much money they are really spending, I think they have their own version of the Black Budget, I think Russia will suprise the world, this is just the calm before the storm.

Ive been thinking this for awhile. Russia has been building massive super expensive underground structures like those under Yamantau Mountain. All the while complaining about putting up the cash for their part in the ISS.

Its been estimated Russia has pumped $6 billion into Yamantau alone and this is the only one of these super bunkers. God knows what they are doing in a underground complex some people say is as bigs as 400 square miles.

Perhaps the Russians read up on Sun Tzu ie.. "Make them think your weak when your strong"

Originally posted by Seekerof
Umm, since when?

I ment it sarcasticly as in been used in battle. thats why i put these " " on.

Originally posted by prelude
you call russia a poor economy ...while you call India and China to be rising economies

Chinas PPP is now $6,200
Russias is now $10,700. Not to far off now

Per capita is only useful when telling the living standards in certain countries while absolute GDP figures tell us the size of the economy and in effect the amount each country has to spend on defence and defence related spending. See the figures below in nominal prices. Brazil has more capital than russia and is way back in number 16 which is a lot below western countries and other rising economies like south korea

1 United States 11,734,300
2 Japan 4,671,198
6 People's Republic of China 1,830,000
12 India 665,071
15 Brazil 603,783
16 Russia 581,783

These are figures of of ecnomies according to the IMF on the aboslute size in nominal figures. While the PPP figures accounts for the difference in pricing between the different countries. Major difference. in the figures. still rose up but still way below

1 United States 11,605,185
2 People's Republic of China 7,334,254[1]
4 India 3,290,800
9 Brazil 1,461,564
10 Russia 1,449,170

While russia does jump up spots by a large margin it is over shadowed by india and china by more than twice or quadtripled in size for PPP which gives china and india a major lead over russia in budget and spending allocated for spending. Everybody knows the Soviet union was a command economy and the russian economy is a "market" economy but how much competition is really there since most of the larger buiness are controlled by the oligarks which bought up ex-government industries and is practically running a monopoly on steel chemicals and other heavy industries. While compared to china and india no one competitor holds such large market shares nor are prices dictated by one company

Chinas economy has been steaming ahead at 9%+ for over 26 years India at 6%+ for over 15 years. Both economies are bigger than russias and both have bigger potenial than russias which are exporting raw materials while china is exporting manufracutred goods and inida is exporting services. Big difference when one country sells raw materials to another country and one month later exports the finished goods back for a higher profit margin.

as far as defense is concerned Russia is still regarded as the second largest defense spender of the world by most of the defense analysts after USA

By who? stratgery page?

If russia was actually spending the 50billion or so stratgerypage claims(from memory). It would be a failing economy. Because trying to recover from economic decline and keeping that 7% growth needs capital and western compaines are not to eager to invest in russia since they have a small FDI investment. 50billion would nearly equal 10% of the russian economy and in no way could russia still sustain a 10% military budget.

The US reports like to hype things up. Chinas defence budget according to them is 90billion and that is a lot of money. In reailty to have a growing economy with a military it should be around the 20billion mark

ShadowXIX wrote



This is just utter bunk all Nasa projects dont fail. They have a success rates on really hard missions like Mars probes that make Russian attempts look like a joke. Search for successful russian mars probes compared to attempts to the red planet LOL . 14 of Russia's 19 missions failed, and only one—Zond 3—can be considered a complete success; the remaining four are, at best, partial successes.

The only reason Russian rockets are being used to keep the ISS operating is because of the Shuttle saftey concerns that are not that major 2 accidents out of over 100 flights is really not a bad record. The Russians couldn't even complete the building of the ISS if they wanted too. They dont have a single launch vehicle in their inventory that can get the ISS larger componets up to the ISS only the Shuttle has the cargo room to do it.

NASA's just recently returned a sample of a comet to earth the first time in human history that has ever been done. They still have two succesful mars probes still cruising around mars far longer then anyone thought they would last. That alone is better then the whole of Russia's mars missions.

But ask yourself what was the last major space mission Russia has done?? Horing out the ISS as a space motel to billionaires does not count.

At first I ll like to appolozise of being unable to edit my previous post ....I edited the sentences concerning "all NASA projects fail" but due to some reason the changes didnot take place .I wanted to say "inspite of all those so called "successful " NASA projects why do the US need to depend on socalled "back dated" Russian rockets to deliver their men to the ISS ?-isnt it shame for the self proclaimed leaders in technology ? "


Its beyond doubt that NASA has some unique successful projects but at the same time considering the amount of money they spend and considering the amount of mordern technology they have dont you think that the failure of discovery and colombia is a matter of great shame for NASA ?

About your claim of not having a launch vehicle for big cargo can you please give me a link ? also please enlighten me about the launch vehicle being used presently by Russia and let me know if there is any US/european launch vehicle suitable for the job
....

about succesful russian space projects the making of the "cepler" to replace the sputnik for the ISS are one of the many small yet remarkable achievements ...the model was displayed in Zukorovsky 2005


[edit on 9-2-2006 by prelude]

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
They dont have a single launch vehicle in their inventory that can get the ISS larger componets up to the ISS only the Shuttle has the cargo room to do it.

No really?

Since the local russian is back again this thread might be a good thread.

More needs to be added to this and i had psoted this in other forums and will present this in a question and answer format

# Russian industy is currently working the economy and in the future be able to invest money into development

Do you know the amount of investment that has gone into russian industry after the fall of the soviet union?. its about 50-70billion maximum. In effect using the same methods and industries the soviets were using. The industrial steel mills are still using soviet practises and the energy sector is not recieving large western investment. This equals a industry which is still using soviet tecniques and still using soviet technology and qute likey soviet era materials and equpment.

What were the soviets know for?. Steel production and heavy industries. Most of these after the soviet collapse were closed down or turned to limited production because they were inefficent or were obsolete. even some factories from the 30s were still operational during this time right after the fall of the soviet union. Russia is nothing closing on par with the western world economic wise nor money wise. I not sure about this but i am sure russias old commerical system is still in place where once governmetn factories are still dominat and have a monoploy on russias production while chinas development rest on competition which is driving new discoveries because compaines and organisations realise that in order to compete the have to spend to compete

# Russia has been exporting a lot of high tech weaponary

It has nothing to do with russias future defence policy. stricly speaking its about exported weapons not weapons russia will design for herself. Numbers are that that matters in the subject at hand not what russia wants to design for her own needs. They design what the market wants not the other way around. Just like the Mig-35 for india. india set out some sets and russia modifled it for them. Atually thinking about it most of the exported russian equipment has been modifled to suit the user. The bottom line is russia is still using inventions of soviet times to develop her defense industry. The AL-41F from reports is still using the fan blde technology from the AL-31 but was enlarged to allow a larger air flow. It is ingenious to it because it saves developing something more revolutionary or even evolutionary but it is still the same basic technology. And to lower weight the russians jsut some components to compsotie structure to increase the thrust to weight ratio

# And what does the Soviet/US division of ienfluence have anything to do whit future Russian export policy??

Because you were talking about their established customers. Not actually about the hating the US part. Even those people which hate america have other very good sources in other countries. There is no division between russia and US when it comes to arms sales anymore. In the near future (20 years) you will see chian being more in the market place. Chinese equipment appeals to third world countries because of their simplicity and their cheapnest like former soviet equipment but this comes with a flexible payment plan like barter deals which are more attractive to third world nations while russia will want hard currency so she can spend it on RnD

# Why does economic growth and performace matter

Ok likes do the maths here. Lets just say the very unlikey 6% growth for the whole time unitl it cathces up with say germany which is growing at 1%. how fast do you think russia will catch up?. By that time china is going to be a very established power and russia in the defense industry will have fallen behind because of the lack of investment or RnD. Thats simple logic to me because the USSR surely did not develop because it was spending less but spending more. What i see is most countries do not actually buy new equipment but buy second hand euipment. If you think about the numbers you will find that the actual equipment produced will not meet nearly as much as the required numbers. The largest spenders on defence are western countries and asian countries while the rest of the world has not found the need to spend large on defense. And in the near future i do not see that as a posibilty of africa doing a enourmas arms race or south america in a massive arms race

# Only aviable way to China to aquire this is to go on 'shopping'. China needs russia and will keep on importing from russia

And in the 80s and 90s chinas equipment was at least 20-30 years behind the west and a little under russia. When you play catch up you dont redesign the wheel you buy the wheel. Theres only a limited distance russia can carry china there because of its own inferioty compared to the west china will have to develop new equipment to evole. Inovation is not the ey but money is.

China had very advanced designs in aircraft bombers ships and submarines for the age they were designed in but were forced to take the cheaper and easier path to build weapons. in the 60s her defence budget was about 6billion and couldn't fund large projects like new aircraft designs or tank designs or ship designs but was forced to copy soviet designs because the situation didn't allow china to have time to develop her weapons. the50s- 60s were the threat of american invasion while the 70s-80s were the threat of soviet invasoin and the first priority was not to get a advantgae in weaponary with the soviets but jsut have enough weapons around. The soviet threat was large with her moblie divisions which is why the group armies were created. One field army was designed to fight a soviet moblie divions and like i said arming these group armies were prioties not allowing them to have a advantage. Just like Mig-21s are still being built just to fill the numbers even thoe there are more capable fighters or even why the Ming calss were still being built a few years ago

While you see in the 90s to now china has developed her own equipemnt using some russian technology just to even the gap created by the lack of spending on new equipment during the 80s. China only began is moderisation in 1979 in limited numbers just to imporve some equipment and the way china is now is getting to the russias techniogical level and then getting her own level.


The soviet union was only a paper tiger at the technogical level, the developments they funded were all done though more money and opputunism rather than a sound economical base. Whatever discovery was made that could be funded without much regard for money which made the USSR very powerful since they had the will to spend most of their capital on RnD. One of the biggest things lacking in modern russia today. That is of course the most important thing to keep when your developing a weapon system or the scope of your development is limited to a few basic systems.

The soviet economy was growing faster ad was alot larger than the current russian economy. Right now it sells cheap oil and gas for influence in central asia and the recent crsis between unkranie and russia were over gas prices. In the soviet era development would come with cost. without money(like the current situation) there is no innovation. I believe in what JFK said. not exact quote "It will work if theres enough money". thats not it but the general idea is clear. the Soviet spent likes say 100billion on military RnD and it led to breakthoughs because every idea that could be made into a weapon was amde into a weapon. now the russians dont have that luxury to experiemnet and thats why there are lack of innovation

No exports no development. As of now exports in russia number maybe 10-20billion. Think about what was actually needed in soviet times to build her ships making RnD prioties. At the height of the cold war Soviet expeniture was 170billion for arms and RnD and a good part of this for researching new equipment. The current russian defence budget is 20billion thats just enough to keep some of the navy some of the airforce and some money left over for other things.The russians make a good deal and always have a good price. This cuts profit margins somewhat which leaves less for RnD spending. Its simple logic to figure out that if russia is getting RnD money from exports and exports fail it will not get money

Most systems being exported or being developed now can be traced back to a ex-soviet project or one that is using soviet weapons. The modern aircraft in service export and development is a off-shot of these projects while the land based systems like tanks and APCs are nothing re-volutionary but more like tweaks to imporve their performace. Todays military wants more flexibilty and communication rather than big armour and big planes like what the soviets are currently making.

[edit on 13-7-2006 by chinawhite]

Potentional markets for russian weapons

#.South America, all the states following Venezuelas path.

The difference is Venezuela is a oil rich country and the rest of the region are poor countries. Now in these last 30 years which country has brought new equipment which was modern?. argentina lost the flasklands and would have been expected to up-build for another round. They want to but theres no money. The whole south america has no sercuirty threats nor do they pocess natiosn which will threaten them. Venezuela might not be a stable country at the mommet but south america do not fear them but treat them as heros. This place is where europens sell their weapons and if you go check out a equipment list there is a lot of french influence there

States in south america have rarly been known to buy massive amounts of equipment and the most likey equipment would be aircraft since the F-5 aircraft are getting old even with thoughs upgrades. But the amount fo F-16 which ahve limited airframe use mainly dents the russian hopes of using this as a area where it can sell a lot of fighters. For small arms and other land based equipment they would opt for cheaper chinese weapons(which they have) or for american made weapons depending on their polictical influence but considering the amount of left wing governemtns coming to power in south america this would be a real doubt

The whole area is not cash rich and it would be such a bargin even if they made that contract

# Indonesia, Burma, Vietnam, Bangladesh, all asian smaller economyes whit out deep commitmences to other supplyers.

Burma and bangladesh as chinese buyers and so is thailand. Indonesia also recently bought some chinese equipment something about missiles anti ship or ballsitic im not to sure but off my head they did buy some. Vietnam has brought a grand total of 4 planes in the last few years and i think they were in a contract to recieve some second hand tanks

Almost the same conditions as South america. Not much need for the equipment and not much money for that equipment. Most of those countries while either buy from a third source like vietnams polish tanks or buy from chinese like burma and bangladesh which dont really need high tech equipments and much of a airforce

#Iran&middle east.

Iran has here own fighters in development with russian technical help. This includes russian avonics and russian R-77 misile supposly featured on her Shafaq and Azarakhsh planes. The suadis wouldn't be left to fall since america needs that oil and other countries in the middile east are well off with their cizitens not paying any tax. Wasted money?. yes but when the oil is gone they wont have enough money to buy russian planes. In the missile east theres a large Anti-american sentiment but also a very large anti-russian sentiment as well just depending on your country

The middile east is mainly a western affair, all the large contracts are for american and western compaines and most of them have either rejected russian equipment or have brought in very small trial quanties. It has fierce competition from many of the worlds arms compaines and is doubtful and large sales go though

#Old customers, India and China, thougth not so strongly dependaple but not all areas they can be selfinsuficient.Shanghai co-operation pact and its evolpment into full scale military alligment.

But like i said they wont come in just buy from a russian factory but joint-ventures or production lines with-in ther country like indias Su-30MKI which is costing india 23million a piece and the BrahMos and other equipment. India has some very ambious plans like a indegenious BVR missile her own stealthy aircraft. indigenioius submarines and her own MBT tank which will be the future rumoured arjun II

China has not made a major order for russian weapons in a while excluding the Il-76 which cannot be made in china. The purchases china have made are spare parts and equipment that was ordered before hand. J-1s Yuan HQ-9 missiles. The real russian weapons that china brought were brought when chian didn't have capability to make things herself. Sovernys were brought just to fill the gap in blue ocean capbility and were ordered when china did not have the Type-52B/C. the kilos were ordered way back when china did not yet ahve the yuan The S-300 was brought when china did not have the HQ-9. THe last one is debateble because some sources say its just a licensed produced on while some say its a different version

China does not need russia anymore. The western embargo is not a embargo from the west but only for american products. During the whole time china had access to western technology. Israel france, germany all supplied china technology

In actual reality the chinese and russian relationship are almost about staurated on the high tech field since the russians have offered all they can offer. In a sense china and russia are on par on many levels in RnD. And on the level china is investing RnD and the amount of uni grads china is producing is inevtible that russia will be over taken. I wrote on this before. The russians only are really using Cold war developed technologies.

What china really needs now is managment systems communications data links. etc. Things the russians cant offer and things joint ventures are producing. Engines from germany. France for command systems.

Russia, if you look at the systems russia gave are basically technologies from the cold war. Kilos, Su-27s, Sovs. etc are all there to inhance chinas combat capablity instead of to upgrades chinas RnD research. Other systems china has are all fom western technology during the US-china honey-moon period when china was begining to change from a peoples force to a aerican force. RRUs if you look at their force structure is similar to american ones and their equipment is also very similar. Russian equipment was only used as a stop-gap until a chinese system could be found.

Chinas having a new medium transport program with ukrainian after they dropped russia(which in turn formed a partnerhip with india). Another souce of informaion

None the less, russian help was very valuble then but now china is almost self sufficent. But none the less with the russians experience in design is more benifical and quicker to work with russian help

# Domestic need. Russia has supraisingly well recovered from its fall

While in reailty russia could only let her military budget grow at 6% but if they wanted to it could grow more but that puts pressure on a economy which has not had stable growth so for now and the future ahead i dont see russia explanding in any direction

All of the money which would be spent would be at a discounted rate and though upgrading older aircraft with newer technologies which is not much of a increase to fund RnD. The russian defence industry is geared towards exports and is not geared to a future american threat

About the FC-1 going to pakistani service but also serves as a reminder to what it could become in the aircraft market once it enters service. The Mig-29 and F-16 are better planes but the FC-1 is a modern, cheap plane with no strings attrached deals

While capability wise the Mig-29 enjoys a marginal lead and the Mirage enjoys a bigger lead just comparing the payload and range of these two fighters. the FC-1 is not being designed as a multi-role aircraft as such and a fair comparison cannot be done like that.

What i meant as a counter was it was evoling to deal with more advanced threats. Its not being deisgned as such to counter any fighter but designed as to be more capable to counter fighters but no fighters in particular. Your thinking on the lines like pakistanis MRCA equivalent while im thinking more on the lines like it is being beefed up to pose a bigger challenge to the MRCA deal for whatever aircraft is being brought

The FC-1 in the begining was basically a upgraded Super-7 with russian engines and two piece MFD. This has later changed since the pakistani requiments have changed and now wants a more capable plane to counter future threats. The FC-1 being revised offers better performance all round. It has improved LEXs which almost mirrors the F-18 which might possiblity allow it great manuverbility and higher AOA. While its wing surface has increased by a largerish margin simliar to the F-16. I just going to assume this will allow it to hold more fuel and more weapons since the LERXs seem thick enough to hold fuel in and the great wing space leaves great room for fuel. But what im interested is the revised avonics suite with three large MFDs good for ground strikes.

Performace wise i would have to say the FC-1 revised would offer a lot more performace and possibile range and payload bigger than the twin engined Mig-29A/B

Your not going to see a air battle where it is restricted to particular class or type of aircraft. Its basically going to be a free for all with the aircraft called into the airspace

As of now you cant say the Mirage or Mig-35 hold a advantage in air superioty if we were comparing the relivant technologies involed. Because comparing BVR missiles no missile holds a large advantage over the other. The FC-1 has the SD-10, Mig-35 has the R-77 (whatever type) and the Mirage has the Mica metor combo or just the meteor now.

ECM wise i wouldn't say any has a advantage or disadvantage. The pakistanis have their ways and get western equipment or even chinese ECM gear into their aircraft. First off im not going to go outright and speculate on things i will leave it until later on when we know the stats of each aircraft.

Im not to sure the word counter should be used since i think the PAF with the FC-1 and other fighters they have would be used in a air denial stragery invloing Sams and point interception combined with F-16 strikes with other aircraft providing support. I like the idea or moblie radar coverage with the Erieye proving coverage instead of ground based radar and could be a mix of air denial and air superioty in different areas or at different times. I think pakistans army now is more geared towards a defensive war instead of a offensive war so its not about winning air space as such but to defend your airspace and thats where the FC-1 comes in because it acts as a cheap force multiplyer which provides advanced avonics with a low price thus can be expendeble and be used as a delaying action until its taken into the UN

What the indians have now is called cold start whereby crack division shearhead lighting strikes into pakistani terrioty aimed at pakistani leadership and nuclear weapons. This in comparision to their "hot" start which was low heavy moblisation where it would moblize many divisions and would lose a lot of time and the surprise advantage. What cold start does is bring fewer divisions to battle but better armed and can be called on into action in a matter of days. What the pakistanis will be aiming to be is protect againest lighting strikes and possibilty counter with their own


What is being sought to counter the MRCA was the F-16 block 52s which have alreadys been made out to be the tip of the spear and pride of the pakistani airforce. But the plans to aquire their airforce with-in a airforce was postponed and now they ahve devised different stragterys.

I think the good ratio would be
200 FC-1s to act as cheap BVR interceptors or air superioty fighters
80 F-16s to act as strike and air superioty
8 AWACS aircraft. preferably erieye or even the Y-8 balance bean AWACS

Combined with older none BVR craft and some limited BVR craft. Mirage III Rose upgrades and the J-7s

And the rumour of J-10s coming into pakistani service would also mean maybe 100 J-10s to that list to achieve the desired goals of air superioty in pakitani airspace. But only J-10s if the F-16s were only 50 in number and would use them as a good air superioty strike platform because it has longer range and higher payload

The amount of planes you quote, probably by rounding up to the nearest 100 cannot be supported by the current infrastructure of the PAF. I gurantee you that. Not for the next 10 to 15 years at least. There just isn't that much of a skilled workforce and training facilities to even reach those kinds of a/c numbers, let alone sustain them.
Even today, w/o considering the attrition rates in the PAF(as high 40-50%)the PAF has around 300 operational a/c. It can barely keep these many in service with many a/c that HAVE to be cannibalised in order to keep other flying.
Sanctions have hit the country's ability to acquire weaponry and this is under continuous
threat from events around. Note that if a link between the Mumbai blasts and Pakistan is confirmed before the G-8 summit this weekend, you can bet the west won't sit idle.
That leaves only China as a source.
It doesn't look to bright for the PAF as of now, but things could look up in the next few years if they start improving infrastructure. But you can bet India won't be sitting idle till then.

Originally posted by Daedalus3There just isn't that much of a skilled workforce and training facilities to even reach those kinds of a/c numbers

Can you provide something to collaborate this?

I know for a fact there are a substanical amount of pakistani technicians, airforce personal in most airforces across the middle east, mostly in saudi arabia. But not considering this migratn workforce, i do not see the PAF lacking in any areas of training and infrasture with the exception of spare parts for aircraft.

The pakistani airforce is also buying new trainers from china and will use older fighters as a transition to newer fighters

Even today, w/o considering the attrition rates in the PAF(as high 40-50%)the PAF has around 300 operational a/c.

I rather not consider attrition rates because we will definatly have different numbers

The PAF operates about 153 mirage planes of a lot of different makes, and 105 older J-7 planes and 55 newer J-7 planes, that equates to about 313 planes in service. The pakistani airforce also has 34 F-16 planes left which would increase that to 347. The number i suggested was 350 planes which is a three plane difference from todays number. Considering the things happening all over pakistani now i think 3 planes is not a big deal

The FC-1 planes will presumely replace the Mirage planes in the active service role in the next 10 years or so and the J-7 planes(all of them) will be replaced by a combination of F-16 and J-10 fighters in the next few deacde or so depending on the speed of induction.

So 150 FC-1 to replace the Mirage planes
100 J-10 to replace the 105 older J-7 planes
50 F-16 planes to replace 55 of the newer J-7PG
And the older 34 F-16s will be upgraded

Also i did not mention the Q-5 fighters that are currently in service or being decommisioned.

With these figures we can say the pakistani infrastructure is under utilized

It can barely keep these many in service with many a/c that HAVE to be cannibalised in order to keep other flying.

That was the old pakistani airforce and the one which tested nuclear bombs. Right now i do not forsee any sanctions that will be imposed on pakistan on the near future.

Originally posted by chinawhite


The FC-1 planes will presumely replace the Mirage planes in the active service role in the next 10 years or so and the J-7 planes(all of them) will be replaced by a combination of F-16 and J-10 fighters in the next few deacde or so depending on the speed of induction.

So 150 FC-1 to replace the Mirage planes
100 J-10 to replace the 105 older J-7 planes
50 F-16 planes to replace 55 of the newer J-7PG
And the older 34 F-16s will be upgraded

J-10s in the next few decades??
100 J-10s??!! Next few DECADES?
Man you must see the future real well! Thats really looking ahead!
I'd wait a few years before quoting such figures..
I don't know about the upgradation of the blk 15 F-16 because strangely enough the new F-16s will have 35-40% of the units as blk 15!


What's up with the FC-1 engines for the PAF.. And the Grifo radar? 100km tracking I hear? 4 concurrent targets max?

Originally posted by Russian Boy

Dont be so sure about the "Great" country of yours cause when the time comes you want believe your eyes of what my country can do

I've seen a couple of your posts now talking about how great living in Russia is. So, why does your avatar say your location is the UK? Is the UK an even better place to live than Russia?

Reminds me of the immigrants (legal or not?) here that risk everything to sneak across our southern border and then put an "I love nicaragua" bumper sticker on the car they drive.

Regarding the Russian defense industry, their reputation has taken a few hits after the recent failures of their weapons and tactics in the middle east wars. And the Kursk disaster coupled with those pictures we've seen of the Russian navy rusting in port don't help the rep either. Maybe it will come back. Or maybe the Russians will decide to put their money into other areas of their economy more beneficial to their people instead - for a change.

[edit on 7/15/2006 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by Daedalus3
J-10s in the next few decades?

I said the best ratio of fighters that pakistan could supply. Read my first post because i mentioned my opinion and not offical figures for planes. Within the next 20 years that is a possible mix

I don't know about the upgradation of the blk 15 F-16 because strangely enough the new F-16s will have 35-40% of the units as blk 15!

?????

The deal is
18 new F-16s(blk 52?)
- Plus the option for 18 new or old F-16s
- Plus a upgradtion program for the rest of pakistan's F-16s
- 500 Aim-120C5
- 200 sidewinders
- JDAM and bombs

"The proposed sale includes 18 new F-16 aircraft with an option to purchase another 18 new planes, a support package for up to 26 used F-16s, a munitions package, an upgrade package for Pakistan's current fleet of 34 F-16s, and logistical support," Snow said.

US Unveils F-16 Package For Pakistan

What's up with the FC-1 engines for the PAF.. And the Grifo radar? 100km tracking I hear? 4 concurrent targets max?

For the engines wait until next year when the pakistanis are going to get their first 8 pre-production aircraft

And the Grifo has never been chosen because it never met the requirments for the pakistani airforce. But considering planes do not come with a standard confriguration and will come into different block versions, a PESA or AESA is very possible with the british even throwing some weight behind the vixen or so reports say.

Read this thread, i wrote most of the things before we saw the new FC-1 with all the improvments. Most of the things i said were true and most of your questions ahve been answered

Older thread

I think we'll wait for all of the above until the PAF gets its first a/c.
I've heard about those VIXEN/PESA/AESA rumors too, but I'm not sure how that's going to work with CAC being involved. The US will not allow even a hint of tech leak about AESA to China, esp not from allies like Britain.

EDIT: Double post

[edit on 15-7-2006 by chinawhite]

Originally posted by Daedalus3
The US will not allow even a hint of tech leak about AESA to China, esp not from allies like Britain.

Even if china gets a radar, what will happen?

Apart from some technology the PLA has almost caught up with most forces in technology. Either in example form or already in service