Even with all the goodies that JF-17 has its role is that of a multi role fighter. It will be the backbone of PAF just like F-16s are the backbone of USAF. In their case, F-16 is the multi role and F-22 is the air superiority fighter. In our case, our F-16 Block 52 is the air superiority fighter and JF-17 the multi role fighter.

Ask yourself the question; why does the US need F-35 when they had F-22? Isn't that superior? Why is it that even after the development of F-35, majority of their air force will still be using F-16s?

Answer: Money, tactics & strategy. Read this, its very important: F-22, F-35 & the Hi-Lo Mix

Why we looked into Su-35? Because:

1. We need a plane which can not only counter but dominate rafale when it arrives in India. A true air superiority fighter, better than F-16 block 52 because rafale is. Its very very good, 2nd only to F-22 even, as some would argue.

2. To protect CPEC sea lines a plane with longer endurance than JF-17 & F-16 is required. It doesn't have to be twin engined but needs longer endurance and heavy payload capability which the current JF-17 engine cannot handle.

JF-17 was never meant to be a stealth fighter and it will never be converted to be one. The design changings that it would require would be too much and it would be easier to create a new design altogether.

However, that doesn't meant that we wouldn't try to reduce its RCS as much as we can through the use of RAM coating and things like DSI intake etc. The lower your RCS is, the better.


It is not. As I said, its a multi role fighter. We use F-16 Block 52 as our air superiority fighter.

China's requirements are different. They have J-10 for their needs which has a longer range and payload. They have a big country and a even bigger coast line to defend which requires more endurance.

We might be able to do it if we wanted to but we don't have an air craft carrier and we don't need it for now so the question doesn't arise. That would be like wasting our resources, billions and billions of dollars. Instead what we need are nuclear powered submarines for 2nd strike capability. That's where the money needs to go on the naval side.

I don't understand what you're trying to say but we cannot make it a twin engine aircraft because that would require too much design changing. An easier thing would be to create a new twin engine fighter design. Ask yourself the question; why doesnt US change F-16 into a twin engine fighter? Because there's no need for it. Same is the case with us.

There's a huge market for cheaper modern planes in African, Asian and South American countries which can earn us a lot of money. That's why we need to export it. Even the US is exporting F-35. Reason is money. But don't worry, no sensitive technology will be exported. An export version of a fighter jet is always a bit watered down than the original.

Su30MKI is not Indian technology. They are just assembling it in India with parts provided by Russia. They cannot export it because its not their product to sell, its Russia's. And Russia has sold Su30s to multiple countries like Indonesia and China for example.


We're not going to buy J-10. JF-17 has turned out to be more capable than we had hoped for and has eliminated the need for J-10 for now. There is however a need for a longer endurance aircraft for the protection of CPEC sea lines. That's why we may look into J-11 or Su-35 but probably politics and our money situation won't allow us to buy them. We'll just wait for TFX or F31 to mature.