China to upgrade radar of Pakistan’s JF-17 fighter aircraft

[sparten]

The MKi is quite killable with the Block-I’s A2A fit.

The advantage that the Thunder has over the MKI is in MAWS and LOAL. Does Block I have them? I know Block II does.

 

[SQ8]

The advantage that the Thunder has over the MKI is in MAWS and LOAL. Does Block I have them? I know Block II does.

No
There are many other advantages, the Thunder is harder to see- both in radar detection, on the RWR and finally close in due to its size.

In a common energy fight which most aerial engagements are the MKI will be hard pressed at close range as well.

 

[sparten]

No
There are many other advantages, the Thunder is harder to see- both in radar detection, on the RWR and finally close in due to its size.

In a common energy fight which most aerial engagements are the MKI will be hard pressed at close range as well.

MAWS and LOAL were integrated only on Block II? Thats a certainty?

 

[SQ8]

MAWS and LOAL were integrated only on Block II? Thats a certainty?

LOAL is just a software change. Blocks arent standard either- certain Block-Is carry Block-II features too although I cannot state which airframes will have what capabilities.

What I can state now(since its old info) is that the ALR-56M which is a fairly advanced RWR on the block-52/AM is unable to pickup the KJL on the Thunder even when the non-AESA system is tracking it; some wizardry is on the NRIET product.

 

[GriffinsRule]

LOAL is just a software change. Blocks arent standard either- certain Block-Is carry Block-II features too although I cannot state which airframes will have what capabilities.

What I can state now(since its old info) is that the ALR-56M which is a fairly advanced RWR on the block-52/AM is unable to pickup the KJL on the Thunder even when the non-AESA system is tracking it; some wizardry is on the NRIET product.

Could just be due to the threat libraries not updated on the RWR for the F-16s, which are dependent upon the US, as we never got DRFM which is required to update signatures etc as they evolve vs having them patched in at some later point (if the OEM feels like it.)

 

[Tank131]

From my understanding of this, the block 3 will be the first to go into production witg the radar, following which Block 1 and 2 will get upgraded with it.

Regarding nose cones, i think people here forget that many fighters in the past have had redesigned nose cones including mirage V (which spawned multiple noses including other variants of M5, Nammer, Nesher, Kfir and Cheetah), F-4 phantom, and the SEPECAT Jaguar. Some lile the Mirage 5 variants and the more bulbous noses of later F-4 variants may be needed for room or extra cooling but it can be done and tested for less cost than replacing everything with block 3s.

Regarding the radar itself, there is still speculation about its specs and there is still speculation that it may be a Chinese clone of the Elta ELM-2052 which is said to be a hell of a radar. China itself has beenaking AESA radars for J-10, J-11 and J-16 for a few years and as such should have a strong handle on making a good product at this point. Additionally, PAF had the option of going with Selex Vixen 1000E which is the progenitor of the Raven ES-05 of the gripen. The major difference between the two being at the Raven has an extra 10 degrees of scanning capability due to the rotator plate and the fact that Saab owns the control hardware of the radar. The fact they had access to this radar yet were comfortable sticking with the Chinese solution speaks to the capabilities of the radar. Now some can say that the chinese and Italians wouldnt provide the source codes of the radars or weapons to allow the other to integrate the two, but Selex likely already has the ability to integrate AMRAAM, Sidewinder, Maa-1a Piranah, harpoon jdams, MAR-1, Etc. and PAF could provide codes to locally made weapons like RAAD, Reks, H2/H4. Now its not as robust a profile as the chinese weapons but PAF could probably get others weapons on the market if the difference in the two radars was drastic. The fact that they didn't makes me feel like the two radars are close to on par with each other.

 

[sparten]

LOAL is just a software change. Blocks arent standard either- certain Block-Is carry Block-II features too although I cannot state which airframes will have what capabilities.

What I can state now(since its old info) is that the ALR-56M which is a fairly advanced RWR on the block-52/AM is unable to pickup the KJL on the Thunder even when the non-AESA system is tracking it; some wizardry is on the NRIET product.

Open source states that Americans are quite shocked at just how advanced latest Chinese ECM gear is. Rumour has it that during the F7PG exercises with the F22, the PG's systems picked up the AN/APG-77 just fine.[/QUOTE]

 

[SQ8]

Could just be due to the threat libraries not updated on the RWR for the F-16s, which are dependent upon the US, as we never got DRFM which is required to update signatures etc as they evolve vs having them patched in at some later point (if the OEM feels like it.)

Doesn’t matter, the RWR will still classify an emitter as an emitter.

 

[MastanKhan]

for block 3 only. P.s we dont need every JF17 equipped with AESA anyway. 3-4 squads are more than enough

Hi,

Actually every aircraft of that model should have to have AESA radar---to keep the pilots training on the same level---and service crew training as well---.

2 different radar systems are not good---because the pilots would not be able to perform at their best and won't be able to switch from one aircraft to the other.

The function and utility of aesa and non aesa radars is different---. You have to learn to enter the combat zone in a different manner.

 

[Thorough Pro]

As long as all jets in a particular squadron have the same systems, there should be no problem.

Hi,

Actually every aircraft of that model will have to have AESA radar---to keep the pilots training on the same level---and service crew training as well---.

2 different radar systems are not good---because the pilots would not be able to perform at their best and won't be able to switch from one aircraft to the other.

The function and utility of aesa and non aesa radars is different---. You have to learn to enter the combat zone in a different manner.

 

[MastanKhan]

As long as all jets in a particular squadron have the same systems, there should be no problem.

Hi,

No---it does not work like that----. Once the upgrade starts---all older aircraft in service need to be brought upto the same standards if they were to remain in service---or need to be phased out of service---.

Flying with an aesa radar---is a different ball game---you have to fly combat with different rules of engagement and disengagement---the utility and fucntion of the aesa and non aesa system is different---.

Let us say---in war time---one air force base with non aesa radar JF17's gets destroyed---all the aircraft are gone---the pilots survive and need to be transfered to active JF17 bases.

The problem now is---that all those active JF17 bases have JF17's flying with aesa radar---what are you gonna do---?

 

[Trango Towers]

Is this news for sure about Block I and II getting KLJ7A?
...on PDF I've heard things ranging from not enough power, not enough room, nose cone not big enough etc. Don't know how true these things are

If this is the case however, I assume that KLJ7A has been finalized for Block III...there was someone saying that it's between this and some other Chinese AESA radar for Block III.

Not everyone commenting on PDF has any engineering know how or even jf17 knowledge

 

[BRAVO_]

for me interesting thing is ... KLJ 7A is not only a smaller but an economical radar compare to adversaries and it is specifically designed keeping in mind the requirements of JF-17 and its frame limitations and personally i consider it a feat one more interesting thing KLJ-7A AESA radar has 1,000 transmit/receive modules (TRM). which makes it equivalent to APG-80 fitted in F-16 Block 60 which also has 1,000 TRM...... and APG-79 fitted on F/A-18 E/F has 1,100 ...... while APG-81 fitted on JSF has 1,200 TRM

 

[MastanKhan]

for me interesting thing is ... KLJ 7A is not only a smaller but an economical radar compare to adversaries and it is specifically designed keeping in mind the requirements of JF-17 and its frame limitations and personally i consider it a feat one more interesting thing KLJ-7A AESA radar has 1,000 transmit/receive modules (TRM). which makes it equivalent to APG-80 fitted in F-16 Block 60 which also has 1,000 TRM...... and APG-79 fitted on F-18 E/F has 1,100 ...... while APG-81 fitted on JSF has 1,200 TRM

Hi,

Not all TR modules are created equal---.

In modern warfare---'economy' is not a winner's preposition---. One would spend 50-100% more to get a 10-20% edge on performance---if option is available---.

 

[BRAVO_]

Hi,

Not all TR modules are created equal---.

In modern warfare---'economy' is not a winner's preposition---. One would spend 50-100% more to get a 10-20% edge on performance---if option is available---.

yes .. but every country has its own unique environment, budgetary limitations and adversary capability to counter. Based on that, Thunder is rightly being pursued by Pakistan Air Force to provide it with the necessary capability for all eventualities.