JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[panyimao]

j-20 is JF17 and the J-10 combination

 

[Argus Panoptes]

...........

Within the scope of what the jf-17 is supposed to provide, the aircraft delivers an effective punch. Trying to expand on the initial role it was developed for is, at best, unrealistic and, at worst, a dangerous idea. This isn’t an aircraft designed to dominate the subcontinent skies, so it is unfair to expect it to measure up those expectations.

Yes Sir, @Oscar and I already agreed that it is our F-20 Tigershark for the 21st century. It is good for what it is designed to do, but it is important to always keep in mind what it was designed to do - and no more.

 

[Viper0011.]

In fact the F-22 was designed so it can remain undetected until it can been seen on IRSTs on Russian and Chinese jets,which would be too late as it would destroy any target at BVR range. However it can be detected at a long range when it opens its bays.

Slightly inaccurate. When the F-22 was being designed, the IRST and FLIR's on jet's were almost second generation, able to see just a few miles or WVR if you will. The hardware and the processing power doubles every few years (Moore's Law), and thus the quick advancements into FLIR and IRIST where now it can see an F-22 from about 20 miles I think. The EFT did that. But you are right, its too late even at that distance. The F-22 is not designed to come to 'be seen' distances. Even with bays open, majority of the current radars can't detect it from closer distances. They will however detect the afterburner and missile radiation post launch and thus, they'd know there was launching mechanism around. If someone sitting in North Korea or Iran witnesses it, I think they can immediately conclude that there are F-22's in the neighborhood.

The F-35 has DAS (similar to IRIST in concept but much more different and powerful). It can scan, take images for even small airborn objects from some 800 miles away I think.

there is no such thing as "undetectability" or pure stealth, rather RCS reduction through various means.

Actually......there is something called Stealth. That's why the word exists . The real question is, how much are you willing to pay for it? Or does having a .0001 RCS still takes you 2 decades ahead of your opponents yet millions cheaper than entirely stealth.....?

 

[sancho]

In clean config, when loaded, it's RCS will be 3-4 m^2

Clean, so without any loads that RCS is quiet possible based on it's size, design and if it don't have such basic RCS reduction features. That's why I said it might be somewhere between the older F16s and the newer Block 52s.
Apart from PAFs operations, that should effect the export chances for JF 17 too, since such a RCS is not up to date for new fighters anymore. In a competition with Russian Mig 29SMTs, F16 Block 52, or Gripen C/Ds, it would have a clear disadvantage, which makes it not that interesting anymore.

P.S. One more question with wrt exports. Since Pakistan and China would share the benefits of exporting JF 17, does only Pakistan pay for upgrades, or would China also fund certain upgrades to make it more interesting for export customers?

 

[Armstrong]

Clean, so without any loads that RCS is quiet possible based on it's size, design and if it don't have such basic RCS reduction features. That's why I said it might be somewhere between the older F16s and the newer Block 52s.
Apart from PAFs operations, that should effect the export chances for JF 17 too, since such a RCS is not up to date for new fighters anymore. In a competition with Russian Mig 29SMTs, F16 Block 52, or Gripen C/Ds, it would have a clear disadvantage, which makes it not that interesting anymore.

P.S. One more question with wrt exports. Since Pakistan and China would share the benefits of exporting JF 17, does only Pakistan pay for upgrades, or would China also fund certain upgrades to make it more interesting for export customers?

I'm not sure its intended to compete, pound for pound, with the likes of them !

I would imagine its intended to be acquired by Airforces that would either (a) look towards replacing their older F-7s & Mirages with a value-for-money multi-role platform that fits well for their Airforce as per their threat assessment & has the additional ability to be upgraded into a borderline 4.5th Generation Platform, if they're willing to cough up the currency ! Or (b) that they'd want a platform that provides the above, in a High-Low Configuration with some other better 4.5th Generation Platform like the latest Sukhois, the Rafaels or the Eurofighters etc.

I would think it somewhat likely that quite a few African, Latin American, Far Eastern & even Eastern-European Airforces may consider it as a valuable addition to their Air Arsenal !

 

[sancho]

I'm not sure its intended to compete, pound for pound, with the likes of them !

I would imagine its intended to be acquired by Airforces that would either (a) look towards replacing their older F-7s & Mirages

Exactly and the 4th gen counterparts that would be offered today, are the mentioned once, apart from J10A. Since they all are light to medium class interceptors with multi role capabilities and are technically at a comparable level.
JF 17 might have a cost-advantage, but possibly the highest RCS of the lot, which should be an issue, especially when you have to face the Israeli Air Force don't you think?

Or (b) that they'd want a platform that provides the above, in a High-Low Configuration with some other better 4.5th Generation Platform like the latest Sukhois, the Rafaels or the Eurofighters etc.

Possible if you think about some Asian or African countries, that operates Su 27s or 30s, but any country that can afford modern European or US fighters, are unlikely to take the JF 17 as a lower end.

 

[Armstrong]

Exactly and the 4th gen counterparts that would be offered today, are the mentioned once, apart from J10A. Since they all are light to medium class interceptors with multi role capabilities and are technically at a comparable level.
JF 17 might have a cost-advantage, but possibly the highest RCS of the lot, which should be an issue, especially when you have to face the Israeli Air Force don't you think?

I'm sure the intended customers don't plan on sparring with the Israeli Air Force; I had Ethiopia, Uganda, Nigeria, Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay etc. in mind !

But even if one assumes that a country like Egypt may be interested in it, as it does appear to be, are you saying that a High-Low Combination of Jf-17s along with their F-16s (possibly better blocks from the US owing to their better relations than us) would be ineffectual against the IAF ? Surely no matter how cost-effective a fighter the PAF had in mind when it choose to develop & later induct the Jf-17....they had the Indian Air Force in mind & you guys aren't exactly a walk over ! So I would assume that the Jf-17, whereas it may not be a game changer or anything like, would surely have enough bang-for-buck to give Israeli Air Force more than a pause to consider the nuisance it could be for them in case of war !

Possible if you think about some Asian or African countries, that operates Su 27s or 30s, but any country that can afford modern European or US fighters, are unlikely to take the JF 17 as a lower end.

Indeed but we do that ! I'm far from being an expert on what other Air Forces, around the world, are up to, but I would imagine that there are other Air Forces out there who, were they to require 10 Squadrons of Air Platforms, may choose to go for 3 Squadrons of F-16 Block 52s & perhaps fill the remaining with F-7s, Mirages or a better platform like the Jf-17 !

 

[Donatello]

I'm sure the intended customers don't plan on sparring with the Israeli Air Force; I had Ethiopia, Uganda, Nigeria, Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay etc. in mind !

But even if one assumes that a country like Egypt may be interested in it, as it does appear to be, are you saying that a High-Low Combination of Jf-17s along with their F-16s (possibly better blocks from the US owing to their better relations than us) would be ineffectual against the IAF ? Surely no matter how cost-effective a fighter the PAF had in mind when it choose to develop & later induct the Jf-17....they had the Indian Air Force in mind & you guys aren't exactly a walk over ! So I would assume that the Jf-17, whereas it may not be a game changer or anything like, would surely have enough bang-for-buck to give Israeli Air Force more than a pause to consider the nuisance it could be for them in case of war !



Indeed but we do that ! I'm far from being an expert on what other Air Forces, around the world, are up to, but I would imagine that there are other Air Forces out there who, were they to require 10 Squadrons of Air Platforms, may choose to go for 3 Squadrons of F-16 Block 52s & perhaps fill the remaining with F-7s, Mirages or a better platform like the Jf-17 !

I wouldn't say Egypt's relations with USA are any better than us, but rather worse. They were given F-16s but no AIM 120 AMRAAMs. A modern F-16 is useless tool without a BVR missile.

 

[sancho]

P.S. One more question with wrt exports. Since Pakistan and China would share the benefits of exporting JF 17, does only Pakistan pay for upgrades, or would China also fund certain upgrades to make it more interesting for export customers?

@ANTIBODY @Oscar @fatman17

Once more the question, doesn't China have an interest in upgrading JF17 wrt to exportability too and therefor would share certain upgrade costs?

 

[Argus Panoptes]

@ANTIBODY @Oscar @fatman17

Once more the question, doesn't China have an interest in upgrading JF17 wrt to exportability too and therefor would share certain upgrade costs?

China has pulled out from financing the JF-17 program any further. Any development over what has already been achieved will be on our nickel.

 

[dexter]

 

[Kompromat]

China has pulled out from financing the JF-17 program any further. Any development over what has already been achieved will be on our nickel.

I didn't know Chinese financed the program except the initial R&D costs.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

I didn't know Chinese financed the program except the initial R&D costs.

China not only financed their portion of the project, but also granted soft loans to us to finance our part of it.

 

[SQ8]

@ANTIBODY @Oscar @fatman17

Once more the question, doesn't China have an interest in upgrading JF17 wrt to exportability too and therefor would share certain upgrade costs?

The JF-17 program(Not the concurrent FC-1 as it is still not clear that these are still two different classifications for the fighter. The JF-17 has different specifications from the FC-1 in certain electronics like the difference between the MKI and the MKM) is in its entirety funded by China through loans given to the PAF. These Loans are taken over batches.. so the first 50 has been financed on a soft grant now. and the loans for the next 50 are then signed and negotiated etc.
The upgrades that the PAF puts into its aircraft make it a different electronic breed than the one that go into the FC-1 program. However, they both can still fly test programs for each other as they are common airframes with common computers(although I believe the PAF insisted on a non-reverse engineered ARM processor for the JF-17 while the FC-1 will have a Chinese copy). The closest analogy to the JF-17 and FC-1 program is the F-18.. Northrop had the F-18L while McDonnel Douglas had the F/A-18. Although those aircraft differed on a physical scale .. here the difference is electronic customization. So those countries that wish for a major Chinese Purchase or total Chinese electronics.. go for the FC-1.. while those that want the more westernized specification go for the JF-17. Now while PAC has design input on the JF-17, due to the project being financed by China essentially .. it forgoes sales profit if the aircraft is to be manufactured at Chengdu which will be the FC-1. The JF-17 specification is only manufactured at Kamra.. hence the profits for the JF-17 will go majorly to the PAF. At the present, the PAC assembly line is overloaded with orders for the JF-17 from the PAF at its current capacity.. hence, they cannot accommodate exports(although in light of the recent economic downturn and general low probability of war with India anytime in the next ten years.. the PAF may have decided that it can delays its orders and accommodate foreign orders so that it can generate funds for debt servicing or other equipment purchase). So, any orders for the aircraft will most likely end up in China. Moreover, China also seems a more stable supplier to most interested parties.. hence the FC-1 is more likely to be ordered and Profits to remain for the aircraft in China.
However, it is in the interest of China(and no offence to our Chinese friends).. that the PAF has much more experience and is far better placed due its greater exposure to aircombat tactics and strategy and latest technology.. to direct the upgrades to be carried out on the aircraft(FC-1/JF-17)..since even if the JF-17 is ordered... the Chinese do still end up with a share of the profits. So the Chinese finance the upgrades for the JF-17 and in turn they get an idea of what to put on the FC-1.

 

[Dazzler]

China has pulled out from financing the JF-17 program any further. Any development over what has already been achieved will be on our nickel.

you are absolutely wrong here, read Yang Wei's latest interview where he clearly gave a read map for future batches.