1821 replies to this topic

[Mig29Lover]

with the ASEA radar we are looking at now, the f-16s will be just right to match the su-30mki

and the indians are most likely not getting the f-16 or f-18's
so pakistan is not even thinking about that

But ISI, if India gets F-18, what should be the next strategy cuz I know that J-10 or even Gripen is not capable enough to handle MKI and Super Hornet, keep in mind the recent budget in which only F-16 money was mentioned if I heard it right

[ISI2003]

indians are probably not going for f-16 or f-18

f-18 = 80 million
su-30mki = 40 million

f-18 = 2 su-30mki

indian gov doesn't want to waste money
so no f-18

[Adloph Hitler]

indians are probably not going for f-16 or f-18

f-18 = 80 million
su-30mki = 40 million

f-18 = 2 su-30mki

indian gov doesn't want to waste money
so no f-18

plz tell me web from where i can check aircrafts prices

[Mig29Lover]

indians are probably not going for f-16 or f-18

f-18 = 80 million
su-30mki = 40 million

f-18 = 2 su-30mki

indian gov doesn't want to waste money
so no f-18

righto...... F-18 is not as capable as MKI either so I think that will be a wrong move for India to anger its decades old friend Russia. Rest is on indians what they do is there business.

[KrUeLiNtEnSiOnZ]

indians are probably not going for f-16 or f-18

f-18 = 80 million
su-30mki = 40 million

f-18 = 2 su-30mki

indian gov doesn't want to waste money
so no f-18

if su 30 is 40 million why doesnt pak buy it? its cheaper than f 16

[BRIGADIER]

if su 30 is 40 million why doesnt pak buy it? its cheaper than f 16

Pakistan does not have access to advanced russian technology. They are not willing to sell to pakistan at the moment due to their commitments with india. if india decides to go for a u.s or other western fighter then i believe russia may then consider selling pakistan these jets.

peace

[Mig29Lover]

if su 30 is 40 million why doesnt pak buy it? its cheaper than f 16

Cuz Russians don't give us S**t. its just India cuz of which they don't sell us their tech, Anyway, it won't be too long for them to turn towards us.

[BRIGADIER]

I just had a question to ask. A while back, i think it was on this forum, it said tht the ukranians also build the flankers etc and that they also offered these to pakistan. is this story true and if so why doesnt pakistan go for these as they are cheaper then the F16 but just as capable.

peace

[ISI2003]

the russian sold the first su-30mk's for 45 million each (40 planes for 1.8 billion)
the f-18E/F is quoted to be in the area of 80 million

on confirming these sources you have to search around for old news about sales, and work out the per unit conversion

[Mig29Lover]

I just had a question to ask. A while back, i think it was on this forum, it said tht the ukranians also build the flankers etc and that they also offered these to pakistan. is this story true and if so why doesnt pakistan go for these as they are cheaper then the F16 but just as capable.

peace

It was back in 1995 i believe, when Bhutto was PM. The only reason why PAF didn't go for it was spares. U know ukraine makes parts with a license so russia would never allow it to sell it to Pakistan.

[BRIGADIER]

Yes but if ukrain makes the jets with their own parts then why cant they also produce the spares. And if the russians would not agree why did the ukranians offer them in the first place?

[Mig29Lover]

Yes but if ukrain makes the jets with their own parts then why cant they also produce the spares. And if the russians would not agree why did the ukranians offer them in the first place?

I don't know, ask them

[Saqr]

Lockheed F-16 Sale to Pakistan Passes First Test (Update3)

June 8 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. House committee today refused a lawmaker's call to block the sale of military aid to Pakistan, including Lockheed Martin Corp. F-16 fighters, unless it grants access to the alleged leader of the world's largest black-market nuclear supply network, now under house arrest.

Representative Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat and a co- chairman of the Congressional India Caucus, introduced a measure aimed at the sale during the House International Relations Committee's debate on legislation that would fund the State Department in fiscal 2006.

Two senior members of the committee -- Iowa Republican James Leach and Thomas Lantos, the panel's senior Democrat -- led opposition to the amendment, and it was defeated, 28-14. Lantos, in an interview later, predicted the panel will approve the sale of fighters to Pakistan when it's formally proposed.

``There is a recognition that Pakistan is an important ally on the global war on terrorism,'' he said.

Lantos, during panel debate, argued that blocking the sale would undermine the tenuous political position of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf as he supports the U.S. in the face of domestic opposition.

The Bush administration in late March signaled its intent to sell Pakistan an unspecified number of Lockheed F-16 fighters and upgrade its existing inventory. The sale was approved in the 1990s, then canceled as part of U.S. sanctions over Pakistan's nuclear program. India at the same time was offered the opportunity to replace its fleet of older MiG-21 aircraft with U.S. fighters.

Access to A.Q. Khan

The Bush administration renewed the offer of F-16s to reward Pakistan for its cooperation in the war on terrorism, including stationing thousands of its troops on its northwest Afghanistan border to stop Taliban and al-Qaeda infiltration and arrest terrorist suspects.

The Pentagon and State Department haven't said when they'll formally propose the sale to Congress. Details regarding the number of planes, their armaments and technology are still being discussed with Pakistan, spokesmen said.

At issue for Ackerman is the extent to which U.S. intelligence can directly interview the man seen as most responsible for developing Pakistan's nuclear program: Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the scientist who admitted transferring nuclear technology to other countries.

Seven Democrats

Ackerman's amendment -- the ``Pakistan Proliferation Accountability Act'' -- would stop all military aid to Pakistan until President George W. Bush certified the U.S. was interviewing Khan.

Joining Republicans in opposing the measure were seven Democrats. In addition to Lantos, they included Ileana Ros- Lehtinen, the Florida Republican who co-chairs the India Caucus along with Ackerman.

Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan. Lantos said many there view him as a national hero for his role in developing Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Khan in February 2004 confessed to leading a black-market ring of at least seven associates who investigators believe sold nuclear weapons technology and uranium-enrichment materials to North Korea, Iran and Libya, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.

Musharraf, citing Khan's contributions to the nation, granted him a conditional pardon and has not allowed the U.S. access for interviews, instead providing second-hand information -- a situation Lantos said was ``acceptable'' if not ``ideal.''

Ackerman today pressed his case that the U.S. knows little about the Khan ring because it hasn't been granted access to the scientist.

Instead of endorsing Ackerman's amendment, the committee's bill contained a section on the A.Q. Khan network that the U.S. and Pakistan should continue to dismantle Khan's network and that the U.S. ``should request and Pakistan should grant'' access to interview Khan. However, the approved provision didn't direct any punitive measures against Pakistan if it didn't grant access.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=100...id=aYSiNVyQI2AY

[thunderinaction]

What ever the case 75 F-16 Blk 52 is the best option.We will be able to effectively destroy key ground targets and defend the airspace.

[KrUeLiNtEnSiOnZ]

Lockheed F-16 Sale to Pakistan Passes First Test (Update3)

June 8 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. House committee today refused a lawmaker's call to block the sale of military aid to Pakistan, including Lockheed Martin Corp. F-16 fighters, unless it grants access to the alleged leader of the world's largest black-market nuclear supply network, now under house arrest.

Representative Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat and a co- chairman of the Congressional India Caucus, introduced a measure aimed at the sale during the House International Relations Committee's debate on legislation that would fund the State Department in fiscal 2006.

Two senior members of the committee -- Iowa Republican James Leach and Thomas Lantos, the panel's senior Democrat -- led opposition to the amendment, and it was defeated, 28-14. Lantos, in an interview later, predicted the panel will approve the sale of fighters to Pakistan when it's formally proposed.

``There is a recognition that Pakistan is an important ally on the global war on terrorism,'' he said.

Lantos, during panel debate, argued that blocking the sale would undermine the tenuous political position of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf as he supports the U.S. in the face of domestic opposition.

The Bush administration in late March signaled its intent to sell Pakistan an unspecified number of Lockheed F-16 fighters and upgrade its existing inventory. The sale was approved in the 1990s, then canceled as part of U.S. sanctions over Pakistan's nuclear program. India at the same time was offered the opportunity to replace its fleet of older MiG-21 aircraft with U.S. fighters.

Access to A.Q. Khan

The Bush administration renewed the offer of F-16s to reward Pakistan for its cooperation in the war on terrorism, including stationing thousands of its troops on its northwest Afghanistan border to stop Taliban and al-Qaeda infiltration and arrest terrorist suspects.

The Pentagon and State Department haven't said when they'll formally propose the sale to Congress. Details regarding the number of planes, their armaments and technology are still being discussed with Pakistan, spokesmen said.

At issue for Ackerman is the extent to which U.S. intelligence can directly interview the man seen as most responsible for developing Pakistan's nuclear program: Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the scientist who admitted transferring nuclear technology to other countries.

Seven Democrats

Ackerman's amendment -- the ``Pakistan Proliferation Accountability Act'' -- would stop all military aid to Pakistan until President George W. Bush certified the U.S. was interviewing Khan.

Joining Republicans in opposing the measure were seven Democrats. In addition to Lantos, they included Ileana Ros- Lehtinen, the Florida Republican who co-chairs the India Caucus along with Ackerman.

Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan. Lantos said many there view him as a national hero for his role in developing Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Khan in February 2004 confessed to leading a black-market ring of at least seven associates who investigators believe sold nuclear weapons technology and uranium-enrichment materials to North Korea, Iran and Libya, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.

Musharraf, citing Khan's contributions to the nation, granted him a conditional pardon and has not allowed the U.S. access for interviews, instead providing second-hand information -- a situation Lantos said was ``acceptable'' if not ``ideal.''

Ackerman today pressed his case that the U.S. knows little about the Khan ring because it hasn't been granted access to the scientist.

Instead of endorsing Ackerman's amendment, the committee's bill contained a section on the A.Q. Khan network that the U.S. and Pakistan should continue to dismantle Khan's network and that the U.S. ``should request and Pakistan should grant'' access to interview Khan. However, the approved provision didn't direct any punitive measures against Pakistan if it didn't grant access.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=100...id=aYSiNVyQI2AY

MY FRIEND FALCON

uve typed such a long post which i dont seem to understand all of it
can u give a short summary

[Adloph Hitler]

Lockheed F-16 Sale to Pakistan Passes First Test (Update3)

June 8 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. House committee today refused a lawmaker's call to block the sale of military aid to Pakistan, including Lockheed Martin Corp. F-16 fighters, unless it grants access to the alleged leader of the world's largest black-market nuclear supply network, now under house arrest.

Representative Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat and a co- chairman of the Congressional India Caucus, introduced a measure aimed at the sale during the House International Relations Committee's debate on legislation that would fund the State Department in fiscal 2006.

Two senior members of the committee -- Iowa Republican James Leach and Thomas Lantos, the panel's senior Democrat -- led opposition to the amendment, and it was defeated, 28-14. Lantos, in an interview later, predicted the panel will approve the sale of fighters to Pakistan when it's formally proposed.

``There is a recognition that Pakistan is an important ally on the global war on terrorism,'' he said.

Lantos, during panel debate, argued that blocking the sale would undermine the tenuous political position of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf as he supports the U.S. in the face of domestic opposition.

The Bush administration in late March signaled its intent to sell Pakistan an unspecified number of Lockheed F-16 fighters and upgrade its existing inventory. The sale was approved in the 1990s, then canceled as part of U.S. sanctions over Pakistan's nuclear program. India at the same time was offered the opportunity to replace its fleet of older MiG-21 aircraft with U.S. fighters.

Access to A.Q. Khan

The Bush administration renewed the offer of F-16s to reward Pakistan for its cooperation in the war on terrorism, including stationing thousands of its troops on its northwest Afghanistan border to stop Taliban and al-Qaeda infiltration and arrest terrorist suspects.

The Pentagon and State Department haven't said when they'll formally propose the sale to Congress. Details regarding the number of planes, their armaments and technology are still being discussed with Pakistan, spokesmen said.

At issue for Ackerman is the extent to which U.S. intelligence can directly interview the man seen as most responsible for developing Pakistan's nuclear program: Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the scientist who admitted transferring nuclear technology to other countries.

Seven Democrats

Ackerman's amendment -- the ``Pakistan Proliferation Accountability Act'' -- would stop all military aid to Pakistan until President George W. Bush certified the U.S. was interviewing Khan.

Joining Republicans in opposing the measure were seven Democrats. In addition to Lantos, they included Ileana Ros- Lehtinen, the Florida Republican who co-chairs the India Caucus along with Ackerman.

Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan. Lantos said many there view him as a national hero for his role in developing Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Khan in February 2004 confessed to leading a black-market ring of at least seven associates who investigators believe sold nuclear weapons technology and uranium-enrichment materials to North Korea, Iran and Libya, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.

Musharraf, citing Khan's contributions to the nation, granted him a conditional pardon and has not allowed the U.S. access for interviews, instead providing second-hand information -- a situation Lantos said was ``acceptable'' if not ``ideal.''

Ackerman today pressed his case that the U.S. knows little about the Khan ring because it hasn't been granted access to the scientist.

Instead of endorsing Ackerman's amendment, the committee's bill contained a section on the A.Q. Khan network that the U.S. and Pakistan should continue to dismantle Khan's network and that the U.S. ``should request and Pakistan should grant'' access to interview Khan. However, the approved provision didn't direct any punitive measures against Pakistan if it didn't grant access.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=100...id=aYSiNVyQI2AY

plz make short it. ihave no time to read such a big reply

[Saqr]

plz make short it. ihave no time to read such a big reply

Read the bold.

[KrUeLiNtEnSiOnZ]

when will the final decision of sale of f16 will be made by Us?

[Sharif Smuggler]

when will the final decision of sale of f16 will be made by Us?

Once pakistan has decided how many and of what specification F-16s it wants. Hopefully by the end of this year.

[Mig29Lover]

huh???.....
how long more will it take yara? Can't wait 2 c Falcons and Thunders in PAF  camo

[Doctor Death]

We may not get them as there seems to be a new development - US has warned Pakistan of sanctions if they go ahead with the Iran/India Gas pipeline project. The nature of these sanctions aren't specific but they may affect the proposed F-16 sale. If this happens (although it is a big if) then what do we do ?

[Mig29Lover]

We may not get them as there seems to be a new development - US has warned Pakistan of sanctions if they go ahead with the Iran/India Gas pipeline project. The nature of these sanctions aren't specific but they may affect the proposed F-16 sale. If this happens (although it is a big if) then what do we do ?

sit ducks!! what else!

[Ted Cyr]

huh???.....
how long more will it take yara? Can't wait 2 c Falcons and Thunders in PAF  camo

3 years after the deal is signed ( if it gets signed ).


i.e. hopefully by the start of 2009.

[KrUeLiNtEnSiOnZ]

what the f***ing bulls**t is this. if f 16 comes under sanctions then our only advanced fighter will be jf 17, because the f16s we currently have are too less. and jf 17 is not a very capable or superior plane.   

[Ted Cyr]

what the f***ing bulls**t is this. if f 16 comes under sanctions then our only advanced fighter will be jf 17, because the f16s we currently have are too less. and jf 17 is not a very capable or superior plane.  

Then, there are always Rafales and Su-30MKP.

[Mig29Lover]

Then, there are always Rafales and Su-30MKP.

I like that approach............ MKPs.

[Saqr]

People, will you all fukking relax and cool down!?!?!?!  IF an embargo is placed, tell me what Pakistan will be losing, we haven't put in a dime for the F-16s yet, nor have we even ordered F-16s yet.  These embargoes will just make us less reliant on the U.S, can't you all get a brain?

[Mig29Lover]

People, will you all fukking relax and cool down!?!?!?!  IF an embargo is placed, tell me what Pakistan will be losing, we haven't put in a dime for the F-16s yet, nor have we even ordered F-16s yet.  These embargoes will just make us less reliant on the U.S, can't you all get a brain?

I think its u who needs to calm down yaar.  

[KrUeLiNtEnSiOnZ]

People, will you all fukking relax and cool down!?!?!?!  IF an embargo is placed, tell me what Pakistan will be losing, we haven't put in a dime for the F-16s yet, nor have we even ordered F-16s yet.  These embargoes will just make us less reliant on the U.S, can't you all get a brain?

we are not talking about losing a dime we are talking about the stoppage of sale of f 16. if that is stopped will u still relax???   

[Caesar]

Cuz Russians don't give us S**t. its just India cuz of which they don't sell us their tech, Anyway, it won't be too long for them to turn towards us.

OR there is another possibility. Maybe Pakistan knows that this Russian technology is actually 'inferior', and they are letting the indians do all the screaming about how advance their MKIs and other stuff is, and when a war breaks out, PAF will go in there and fire their chicken asses!!...     Just a thought!

[Saqr]

I think its u who needs to calm down yaar. 

This is from your post;
huh???.....  
how long more will it take yara? Can't wait 2 c Falcons and Thunders in PAF camo
Next time, you take a chill pill.

Kruelly

we are not talking about losing a dime we are talking about the stoppage of sale of f 16. if that is stopped will u still relax???

Well if we didn't pay or order yet, we have nothing to lose, basically means were finally divert our money to something else, perhaps something better.  Note the PAF said it didn't give up on options other than F-16, despite the lifting of the embargo.  The professionals know a lot more bro, don't worry.

[Mig29Lover]

This is from your post;
huh???..... 
how long more will it take yara? Can't wait 2 c Falcons and Thunders in PAF camo
Next time, you take a chill pill.

ANd where did I use foul language?? Tell me . Batao na!!!!

[Mig29Lover]

People, will you all fukking relax and cool down!?!?!?!  IF an embargo is placed, tell me what Pakistan will be losing, we haven't put in a dime for the F-16s yet, nor have we even ordered F-16s yet.  These embargoes will just make us less reliant on the U.S, can't you all get a brain?

This is from your post;
huh???..... 
how long more will it take yara? Can't wait 2 c Falcons and Thunders in PAF camo
Next time, you take a chill pill.

[

Compare urs and mine post and tell me who needs to relax! atleast I never used foul language when askin the question

Edited by Mig29Lover, 16 June 2005 - 10:11 AM.

[KrUeLiNtEnSiOnZ]

Q.can anyone tell me the whole inventory of IAF?

[Saqr]

Compare urs and mine post and tell me who needs to relax! atleast I never used foul language when askin the question

Your implication was enough, compare my posts to yours.  For the past week I've seen all of your posts, and you all need to get off the computer.

[vikasrehman]

According to Ms Christina Rocca (U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs)-at hearing of the Congressional International Relations Committee (on tuesday)- US and Pak are still in negotiations as to how many F-16 Pak wants and what the cost will be.

[Saqr]

I've been hearing a ton of conflicting reports lately on PakDef and ######, the avionics for these planes haven't even been settled yet, even after Congress approval (if) is achieved, it may take some time before they finalize the number and type.

[Mig29Lover]

Your implication was enough, compare my posts to yours.  For the past week I've seen all of your posts, and you all need to get off the computer.

My posts are never against any paki member whatsoever. You consider yourself the smartest, that is what the problem is. I can say a lot but don'want any arguement.

[Ted Cyr]

My posts are never against any paki member whatsoever. You consider yourself the smartest, that is what the problem is. I can say a lot but don'want any arguement.

First Dizasta, then Cheenamalai, now Diving Falcon is attacking Mig29Lover!  

Please don't come after me!

[Frigate Commander]

it will still take 2 yrs for jf-17 to be operational coz the first batch of 4 fighter planes will be coming out INSHALLAH AT THE  end of 2007 and with the production range of 20 planes/yr

         secondly even if we did get f-16 it will be delivered to us in 2009 and if we dont give thr order f-16 assembling plant will be closed by 2008 ....... so this is our last chance to get them or not ...

       and eventually if we ddint get the f-16s then we have to go for J- 1O which is a similar chinese version of f-16s coz we cant rely on sweden or france to sell us their grippen or raffael as both these countries get enough defence orders from india so they cant make india angry for our onr order