Argentina in possible deal to buy JF-17 Thunders from Pakistan?

[Max Headroom]

Several sources have come up with this story today

 

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/argentina-to-purchase-jf-17-thunder-jets-from-pakistan/

 

Politics aside, Argentina has been looking for a replacement for its Mirages and derivatives for several years.

 

Trevor

[exdraken]

They allegedly also were to buy Spanish Mirages and Israeli Kfir C10.... 

But then why not? Probably little political strings attached but Chinese ones... and cash will be needed!

[Whitewolf]

Pakistan is sympathetic to Argentina's position on the Falklands. An initial buy of 12 won't pose any threat.

[Max Headroom]

Just how much MiG21 DNA is in a JF-17?

 

Trevor

[John B (Sc)]

Interesting thought. Looking at it , I'd say very little, if anything.  There are several other obvious influences there, but I doubt that  the JF-17 has any link to the Mig-21 other than that Mikoyan was involved in the design phase.   The F-7, which originally was to be have been further developed by Pakistan and China was a slightly improved Mig-21.  The plan to further develop that was apparently abandoned in favour of this F-17 design.

 

The LERX style wing roots and the tail are somewhat more in the style of the F-16, F-18, Mig-29 etc. 

Bonny looking aircraft.

 

John B

[GiampieroSilvestri]

The Chengdu JF-17 has a Klimov RD 93 engine.It is a version of the Klimov RD 33 of the Mig-29.

At the moment argentina has the A-4AR as interceptor.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

Edited September 20, 2021 by GiampieroSilvestri

[exdraken]

12 hours ago, Whitewolf said:

 An initial buy of 12 won't pose any threat.

Threat? for whom?

I do not think the Argentina prepares for a Malvinas invasion II currenlty... (not that they would have prepared the first one well....)

 

definitely a game changer if Argentina has a fighter with a beyond visual range capability. I do not know about range of the JF-17 though!, but it is air to air refueling capable.

Also the JF-17 could be armed with a standoff air to ground missile.

 

I guess the RAF is not entirely happy...

[Whitewolf]

12 is a small number, and there is no mention of a weapons fit out. The RAF don't have anything to worry about other than the Argies creating a few QRA scrambles just to annoy us. If bought in substantial numbers, things might be different and we might need to bolster Mount Pleasant with additional Typhoons.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Whitewolf

[ivan-o]

IF they were able to acquire them out of a squadron of 12 how many would be operational at any one time!

Pilot and ground crew training to be done from scratch.

Unlike in ‘82’ where we had no threat to their airfields, any potential threat can be negated by the fact we can now lob in TLAM’s from an Astute to rearrange the A/C in the control towers etc on their airfields,so that should really focus the minds of anyone seriously thinking about having a go.

Not to mention all the rest of their armed forces which are in disarray.

[GiampieroSilvestri]

I think the reason that the JF-17 was bought was to have a modern interceptor and not to prepare an attack at Chile or the Falklands.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

Edited September 21, 2021 by GiampieroSilvestri

[stalal]

I think Feb 27th 2019 skirmish over Kashmir has been a great advertisement for this jet. It shot down an Indian MiG-21 with its BVR missile. 

 

Nigeria recently bought a small number and now Argentina going for the block III version which has a AESA radar. Also, Zambia has been reported to be interested in buying them. Myanmar already has them. Malaysia also reported to be interested. 

Edited September 21, 2021 by stalal

[John B (Sc)]

7 hours ago, Whitewolf said:

12 is a small number, and there is no mention of a weapons fit out. The RAF don't have anything to worry about other than the Argies creating a few QRA scrambles just to annoy us. If bought in substantial numbers, things might be different and we might need to bolster Mount Pleasant with additional Typhoons.

Do we have spare Typhoons available for such a purpose?  I rather doubt it, given the way numbers have been run done already. 

 

Perhaps this is  a use for those Phase 1 Typhoons the RAF senior mob want to scrap ! 

 

If those 12 aircraft come with any BVR weapons - and why would you buy them without that? - they could pose a significant threat.  A quick feint by something less capable to lure the QRA birds up towards the East, then a possible BVR threat from several machines to either flank.  They could simply wait till they have enough serviceability, then cause some embarrassment at least. How many machines do we have down South?

 

That said, there is no reason to presume the Argentinians want to cause trouble just now.   

[Whitewolf]

14 minutes ago, John B (Sc) said:

Do we have spare Typhoons available for such a purpose?  I rather doubt it, given the way numbers have been run done already. 

 

Perhaps this is  a use for those Phase 1 Typhoons the RAF senior mob want to scrap ! 

 

If those 12 aircraft come with any BVR weapons - and why would you buy them without that? - they could pose a significant threat.  A quick feint by something less capable to lure the QRA birds up towards the East, then a possible BVR threat from several machines to either flank.  They could simply wait till they have enough serviceability, then cause some embarrassment at least. How many machines do we have down South?

 

That said, there is no reason to presume the Argentinians want to cause trouble just now.   

We have 4 Typhoons at Mount Pleasant, that could, and would, be reinforced very quickly if ever the need arose, there are well rehearsed plans in place for that. The Argentinians might no doubt have a bit of fun getting the QRAs up, if only to make a point as it were. 

The Tranche 1 Tuphoons are perfectly suited to the QRA/Air defence role and withdrawing them years ahead of time is complete stupidity. Not only will it reduce overall numbers, but it'll just add extra hours on to the later Tranche aircraft increasing maintenance costs......

[John B (Sc)]

I quite agree that withdrawing/scrapping these early airframes now is not clever. They may not be as capable as the later machines but will still be effective fighters surely.  

Even is held in reserve they would be available relatively quickly if required, for a small outlay in preventive maintenance.

 

I fear the senior officers involved in these decisions are perhaps thinking rather more about the political push to cut costs and their own short term career aspirations than about the tasks likely to be asked of the Air Force.  Of course the loss of confidence in the Air Force's ability to maintain airworthiness in its fleets may also be a factor.  The deep engineering understandings, background and traditions of the past have been allowed to wither away sadly, as several fairly recent efforts have shown.

 

John B

[junglierating]

1 hour ago, John B (Sc) said:

Do we have spare Typhoons available for such a purpose?  I rather doubt it, given the way numbers have been run done already. 

 

Perhaps this is  a use for those Phase 1 Typhoons the RAF senior mob want to scrap ! 

 

If those 12 aircraft come with any BVR weapons - and why would you buy them without that? - they could pose a significant threat.  A quick feint by something less capable to lure the QRA birds up towards the East, then a possible BVR threat from several machines to either flank.  They could simply wait till they have enough serviceability, then cause some embarrassment at least. How many machines do we have down South?

 

That said, there is no reason to presume the Argentinians want to cause trouble just now.   

I'm pretty sure the crabs (couldn't eat a whole one😄) have got this covered off....in some shape or form 

[junglierating]

1 minute ago, John B (Sc) said:

Even is held in reserve they would be available relatively quickly if required, for a small outlay in preventive maintenance.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣no chance John....its enough to keep a tri service front line going these days....Reserve ...I doubt it but....who knows you cant second guess this lot in charge 

[Moggy]

1. The Argentine Air Force has been shopping for interceptors for about 20 years. The government refused to budget anything above a clapped-out 3rd gen fighter with an average operational life left of 5 years. the Air Force does not want that.

 

2. The reason for the lack of budget is mainly that Argentina has resolved all outstanding territorial issues with her neighbours in the early '90s. The islands' dispute with the UK is definitely not going to be resolved by war (from the Argentine point of view). Argentina has one of the lowest per-capita defence budgets in the world.

 

3. The Mercosur has developed into a lot more than a tax & tariffs' union. Argentina has now a strategic defence treaty with Brazil regarding the defence and policing of (among other places) the South Atlantic. Said treaty requires Argentina to attend to her own air defence., thus interceptors. Brazil has now two carriers so they are the force projection muscle.

 

4. The interceptor is a defensive weapon - it keeps bad people from mucking about in your airspace. Nobody has won any wars by buzzing somebody else's airspace.

 

5. The "rocks for brains" admirals and generals that started Argentina's only war in 129 years died in prison for - among other crimes - illegally starting a war and losing it through sheer incompetence. Rhetoric is cheap - it is the same when bad politicians in the UK try to distract the voters from their latest stupid decision by talking about the Argentine "threat" in the South Atlantic.

 

6. In case you are wondering - the AAF does not want a dinky third rate interceptor from Pakistan. The Thunder has figured in (bad) press speculation for the last ten years - together with anything with wings that carries anything remotely looking like a missile that goes "boom".

 

I'll believe the Thunder purchase when they land in some base in Argentina. The budget draft is exactly the same as the earlier proposals for the last 20 years. Some of then were formally accepted - only for the money to be never expended.

 

Cheers, Moggy (tired of warmongery)

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by Moggy
corrections regarding factual info

[John B (Sc)]

Thanks junglierating. So if not in active use forget it. Your post suggests to me that our forces must be in way worse shape than I thought. Depressing.

 

Interesting stuff Moggy, thanks also. Wasn't aware of the links with Brazil - though that is not exactly a well run country itself right now ! 

Also interesting are your very negative views on the JF-17.  Is that based solely on the  press speculation ?  That also sounds as if Argentina is being rather careful with presumably limited cash.

 

Cheers,

John B

 

[Moggy]

To clarify: What I reported was the AAF's opinion... which is the point of this discussion. My opinion of the pakistani fighter is wholly unimportant. 😎

 

...And on cue - the personal attack 🤮 Keyboard "expert"?! Cyber warrior!? Really?!?

 

I am fluent in five languages - one of them being spanish. This allows me to read the material coming from Argentina - both the daily media and the specialised press. 😁

French and Italian allows me to read the specialty press in those languages; this gives me a wider perspective and access to articles never published in english. 🤔

Keep doing this for twenty years and you get a fairly good handle on what's going on in your particular subject of interest 😇

 

Of course you can still get it wrong 😜

 

Cheers, Moggy (reporting on the Fighter Waltz - one step forward, two steps back)

[stalal]

12 hours ago, Moggy said:

To clarify: What I reported was the AAF's opinion... which is the point of this discussion. My opinion of the pakistani fighter is wholly unimportant. 😎

 

...And on cue - the personal attack 🤮 Keyboard "expert"?! Cyber warrior!? Really?!?

 

I am fluent in five languages - one of them being spanish. This allows me to read the material coming from Argentina - both the daily media and the specialised press. 😁

French and Italian allows me to read the specialty press in those languages; this gives me a wider perspective and access to articles never published in english. 🤔

Keep doing this for twenty years and you get a fairly good handle on what's going on in your particular subject of interest 😇

 

Of course you can still get it wrong 😜

 

Cheers, Moggy (reporting on the Fighter Waltz - one step forward, two steps back)

 

Translation please for people like me who dont know Spanish  

 

https://www.zona-militar.com/2021/04/29/jf-17-vs-mig-35/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

[exdraken]

6 hours ago, stalal said:

 

Translation please for people like me who dont know Spanish  

 

https://www.zona-militar.com/2021/04/29/jf-17-vs-mig-35/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Basically they are comparing the MiG-35 and the JF-17 specifications, and that MiG offers their product as well. Not really relevant content in my opinion!

[Moggy]

The one question I have been waiting for somebody to ask is "who is to provide the weapons?"

It has the potential to turn into the same problem as the fighter procurement has. 🙄

 

********************************************************************************************************************************************

Summary:

Since their last Mirage was retired in 2015 (they have become fairly desperate - making the AAF look at almost anything) the only choices left after the Korean deal fell through seems to be either the MiG-35 or the JF-17.

Comparison - the MiG-35 is more technologically advanced and supported by an organization that has provided world-class fighters for a very long time. The Pakistani fighter is produced by an organization with no such experience.

Both use the same engine (Klimov RD-93) JF-17 single & the MiG-35 twins. The MiG-35 has significantly wider radius of action, heavier payload, superior speed, more pylons for payload.
Avionics; JF-17 has latest Chinese tech used on the J-10 (Flanker fighter). The MiG has comparable Russian tech again with a better support organization. (Whether the Russian tech is superior is a matter for discussion).
Armament: the MiG-35 uses Russian hardware R-73 & long range (BVR) R-77.
JF-17 uses a mixture of western (AIM-9L/M Sidewinder - not the latest) and Chinese BVR PL-12 & PL-15 same as used on the J-10.
Both aircraft have cannon (similar) and can carry a variety of modern guided ordnance.
Both have IFR capability.

The financing is as important as the fighter itself: Russia has not presented any such plan.

*********************************************************************************************************************************************

This could mean that the JF-17 wins by default - if the Argentine government and the AAF really make it happen this time

 

The political dimension is  complicated too. Buying from Putin would be a fraught decision, since Russia is  aggressively persuing an increasingly nasty cold war with the West. While Argentina has good relations with the Russian Federation, she has clearly no intention to align herself with Russia. Argentina has always been aligned with the West.

 

Buying from Pakistan is practically buying from China via an intermediary - and leaves the question of providing the boom-boom open to more problems (Sidewinder anybody?). Russia makes its own world-class ordnance - thus bypassing further restrictions.

 

Both options fly in the face of existing technology in AAF use - it would mean converting to different technology (as opposite to western)

 

"Is this actually going to happen this time around?" your guess is as good as mine 😇

 

Cheers, Moggy

[tempestfan]

The JF-17 looks like a Gripen went to bed with a Tigershark... 

As every modern fighter is full of electronics, I would expect any export models to have some sort of switch at some neuralgic point with which the seller simply makes the aircraft unflyable by remote action if the buyer does something nasty - this was rumoured I think re the Iraqi F.1s during the second Gulf War. In case such mechanisms exist, the easiest way for Argentina probably would be to go for F-16Cs, in case they can get some aid package to make them affordable. Those F-16s would pose no threat to the UK, as Argentina would be well aware that they would be out of action at the speed someone at the State Department needs to flick a switch.

[exdraken]

6 hours ago, Moggy said:

J-10 (Flanker fighter).

Be careful please  the J-10 is not a Flanker! It share the ~same Al-31 engine though.

 

The rest of the analysis seem OK and interesting!

At least the current A-4 Fightinghawks would also carry Sidewinders, the Texan II in of US origine as well.... 

 

I fear all in all it is about availability of cash AND political influence. The Brits will try to veto any Argentine arms procurement as long as Argentina openly declares the Falklands as Argentinean Malvinas.... understandably from the British perspective no,?

 

 

Personally I would have liked to see Spanish Mirage F1s in Argentine colours, or probably the ex Brazilian Mirage 2000s. .but renouncing the Malvinas obviously would have been necessary first... Hard to imagine though to happen....

[Moggy]

@tempestfan I think you're underestimating the Argentines. In the early 90's the US sold the AAF (modified) A-4AR that - among other things - had a variation of the F-16A radar. The Argentine Air Force promptly went through the software code and improved it to the later standard, improving it to F-16C standard (in some aspects slightly better).

Argentina exports technology; radars, satellites, software, etc. Argentina's nuclear program built its own nuclear power stations (based on the CANDU) including the entire fuel cycle. The only reason it doesn't have nukes is that the govt. in the early '90:s decided it was a bad idea - guaranteed  to fuel a nuclear arms race in South America. A treaty with Brazil on nuclear weapons capped the development of nukes to 0 nukes.

As I wrote in an earlier post once she had resolved the territorial issues with neighbouring countries the Argentine govt wanted to diminish defense expenditure to a minumum (BTW this had the side effect of demolishing the armed force's power in politics; the 1976-1983 military junta was the last) It had developed the missiles to use them - the US paid Argentina to stop the program. Both Syria and Iraq were extremely interested naturally and that was the US's interest in stopping the missile development program

However Argentine nuclear expertise is one half of the Brazilian development of nuclear submarines.

 

 

Cheers, Moggy