JF-17 Thunder's Armament

[Beethoven]

Guys I have come across a lot of posts in this forum about JF-17 being underpowered....just to add my two cents here i personally think if you keep the engine the same and use more carbon composites in the airframe or the fuselage that is going to make a difference and it will automatically increase its thrust to weight ratio as well....but this sadly can only apply on block 3 model which is under development...

 

[ziaulislam]

JF-17 is still behind older airplanes like F-16, Mirage 2000s. t.

no its not, f-16D/jf-17 is vastly supeior from f-16a/b and mirage2000

it lack behind the upgraded f-16 b52

 

[MastanKhan]

Guys I have come across a lot of posts in this forum about JF-17 being underpowered....just to add my two cents here i personally think if you keep the engine the same and use more carbon composites in the airframe or the fuselage that is going to make a difference and it will automatically increase its thrust to weight ratio as well....but this sadly can only apply on block 3 model which is under development...

Hi,

Those who are talking about it being under powered are totally illiterate about the concept.

JF17 is a perfectly balanced aircraft for the engine output it has---for the hard points and for the modular structure that provide the ease of use for upgrades.

If there is any investment that needs to be made----should be on the structure---to add wheels with longer struts that give it more clearance from the ground---for Hatf 8 kind of cruise missile.

 

[Arsalan]

JF-17 is still behind older airplanes like F-16, Mirage 2000s. Though I think it is a positive thing but still JF-17 fails to address the needs of PAF and we would be not so keen on getting whatever the number of F-16. I am sure JF-17 will become better and I hope for that but there is a limit....with essentially the same airframe there is a limit to what you can achieve....you can new avionics, radars, EW/ECM, BVRs etc but you can't increase for example ferry range or payload capacity, number of hardpoints etc...The moment you change the airframe in size, it is essentially a new aircraft and not a block update. We still need a genuinely Pakistan designed airborne platform with stealth features (a pretty much airframe design characteristic (shapes and materials) along with paints and electronics). JF-17 blocks are aimed at making reducing the gaps with existing airplanes like F-16.....so block 4 would be either similar or somewhat better than F-16....but what about all those Rafales, Su 30 MKIs, Eurofighters and Grippen Es etc. I do not downplay JF-17 and I know it is a great achievement and has an export potential and can do a lot of tasks with excellence but just within its flight envelope. If we need to expand the flight envelope, we need a different airframe, a different engine....a totally new airplane....I hope I answered your comment.

It all depends on what you perceive as the "needs of PAF" and what PAF actually feel them to be.
There have been small modifications with the air frame already, we will see MORE in coming blocks but the upgrades under the current project will remain the same. JF17 was NEVER meant to be a stealth fighter no matter how much our public will love it to be. @araz have had quite a few things to say in this matter and i will request him to share his views again if possible and if he is not too fed up already.

As for addressing the 4.5 gen needs, we have discussed various options for that already. Some are of the shelve planes, some may have little bit local manufacturing input while another can be a further evolution, a new PLANE if we plan to induct in numbers that retains the basics for JF17, get some goodies from the future J31 (that we are likely to procure at some stage). HOWEVER this will be separate from the current JF17 project that is being produced with different needs in mind and seem to be addressing them pretty well.

 

[war&peace]

HOWEVER this will be separate from the current JF17 project that is being produced with different needs in mind and seem to be addressing them pretty well.

Yes that's what I have been saying that a different airframe with larger area, lighter material (composites) and more stealthier design needs to initiated. We need to cater for those needs too. JF-17 certainly has a role to play but it will be a better wholesome approach to include larger and heavy fighters in the inventory/fleet for a formiddable defence and offence.

 

[Arsalan]

Yes that's what I have been saying that a different airframe with larger area, lighter material (composites) and more stealthier design needs to initiated. We need to cater for those needs too. JF-17 certainly has a role to play but it will be a better wholesome approach to include larger and heavy fighters in the inventory/fleet for a formiddable defence and offence.

True
and that in no way should be mixed with the current project of a 4th gen plane that is going on and nearing Blk III already. We need 150+of these to form a strong back bone of PAF. The 4.5 can only be in addition to these and in lesser number, both keeping in view the financial limitations.

 

[araz]

It all depends on what you perceive as the "needs of PAF" and what PAF actually feel them to be.
There have been small modifications with the air frame already, we will see MORE in coming blocks but the upgrades under the current project will remain the same. JF17 was NEVER meant to be a stealth fighter no matter how much our public will love it to be. @araz have had quite a few things to say in this matter and i will request him to share his views again if possible and if he is not too fed up already.

As for addressing the 4.5 gen needs, we have discussed various options for that already. Some are of the shelve planes, some may have little bit local manufacturing input while another can be a further evolution, a new PLANE if we plan to induct in numbers that retains the basics for JF17, get some goodies from the future J31 (that we are likely to procure at some stage). HOWEVER this will be separate from the current JF17 project that is being produced with different needs in mind and seem to be addressing them pretty well.

If one looks at the aims and objectives of having an indigenous fighter programme, These would be:
A. Technology which can be easily absorbed, and developed.
B. Cost effective replacement of a large fleet of obsolescent fighters
C. Sanction Prone.
D. Has development prospects.
The product which initially came out in 2007--8 was just that. We have progressively increased our share of production to 58%. The capabilities of the plane have improved leaps and bound in less than a decade. We have concentrated on avoiding main stream suppliers to prevent Sanctions. This unfortunately has included France as well due to their proposed sale of RAFALE to IAF. The products we have acquired are cost effective and have comparable effectiveness. As time is going on we will indulge in more and more of joint ventures for armaments/PODs to develop the plane further.
To me this looks like the beginnings of a very successful programme. Due to reason number A the plane had to be kept simple. Reason C demanded reliance on China and other providers. This unfortunatley has led to delays as the products put forward may not have been upto the mark or too expensive or may have had problems with transfer of technology. This is the reason why we have not had a plane with all frills and whistles from the word go.
People have to understand that a plane is designed keeping in mind its use and development potential for its working life ( approximately30-40 years).PAF must have done this work prior to sending out a proposal for platform development.The problem remains regarding the funding (as seen in Zardari era) and availability of relevant technology at a decent price. These things along with testing takes time. We as internet warriors want things done yesterday but aviation experts will tell you the development cycle for JFT has been remarkably quick.
the second point nay sayers are raising is about hardpoints .7 v/s 9 v/s 10. My thoughts are that the potential is there even in this frame to achieve the ends sowhy fiddle with something that works well.
The next point pertains to stealth performance. Al stealth fighters are designed with this feature in mind. The changes required to the air frame and the testing for it is such that you are better off redesigning a whole new air frame for which we neither have the technology, the know how or the money. So we will buy an off the shelf platform for this purpose
The last point pertains to increasing the loitering time for this platform. I think beofre we look towardds enlarging the plane and playing around with it we need to look at other solutions. Can we increase the efficiency of the engine to increase efficiency of fuel.Can we look at CFTs as a possible solution? Till we do that you cannpot justify fiddling around with a plane with unknown consequences in power and performance. This is downright dangerous. Comparing us or even the chinese with the USand their experience are comparing chalk with cheese. However ideas can be borrowed and implemented if the overall outcome is economical and beneficial.
Regards
A

 

[Manticore]

JF-17 + CM-400AKG ASM

 

[aliyusuf]

If one looks at the aims and objectives of having an indigenous fighter programme, These would be:
A. Technology which can be easily absorbed, and developed.
B. Cost effective replacement of a large fleet of obsolescent fighters
C. Sanction Prone.
D. Has development prospects.
The product which initially came out in 2007--8 was just that. We have progressively increased our share of production to 58%. The capabilities of the plane have improved leaps and bound in less than a decade. We have concentrated on avoiding main stream suppliers to prevent Sanctions. This unfortunately has included France as well due to their proposed sale of RAFALE to IAF. The products we have acquired are cost effective and have comparable effectiveness. As time is going on we will indulge in more and more of joint ventures for armaments/PODs to develop the plane further.
To me this looks like the beginnings of a very successful programme. Due to reason number A the plane had to be kept simple. Reason C demanded reliance on China and other providers. This unfortunatley has led to delays as the products put forward may not have been upto the mark or too expensive or may have had problems with transfer of technology. This is the reason why we have not had a plane with all frills and whistles from the word go.
People have to understand that a plane is designed keeping in mind its use and development potential for its working life ( approximately30-40 years).PAF must have done this work prior to sending out a proposal for platform development.The problem remains regarding the funding (as seen in Zardari era) and availability of relevant technology at a decent price. These things along with testing takes time. We as internet warriors want things done yesterday but aviation experts will tell you the development cycle for JFT has been remarkably quick.
the second point nay sayers are raising is about hardpoints .7 v/s 9 v/s 10. My thoughts are that the potential is there even in this frame to achieve the ends sowhy fiddle with something that works well.
The next point pertains to stealth performance. Al stealth fighters are designed with this feature in mind. The changes required to the air frame and the testing for it is such that you are better off redesigning a whole new air frame for which we neither have the technology, the know how or the money. So we will buy an off the shelf platform for this purpose
The last point pertains to increasing the loitering time for this platform. I think beofre we look towardds enlarging the plane and playing around with it we need to look at other solutions. Can we increase the efficiency of the engine to increase efficiency of fuel.Can we look at CFTs as a possible solution? Till we do that you cannpot justify fiddling around with a plane with unknown consequences in power and performance. This is downright dangerous. Comparing us or even the chinese with the USand their experience are comparing chalk with cheese. However ideas can be borrowed and implemented if the overall outcome is economical and beneficial.
Regards
A

So after the realization of the objectives of the JFT program and most importantly the time frame required to achieve them, how is it supposed/perceived to perform against the frontline platforms that the IAF likely to throw at us after that time frame? I am asking in the context of the upgraded MKI (w/AESA), upgraded M2K to Dash-5MK.II, MiG-29K, MiG-29UPG and possibly Rafale?

 

[Manticore]

 

[araz]

So after the realization of the objectives of the JFT program and most importantly the time frame required to achieve them, how is it supposed/perceived to perform against the frontline platforms that the IAF likely to throw at us after that time frame? I am asking in the context of the upgraded MKI (w/AESA), upgraded M2K to Dash-5MK.II, MiG-29K, MiG-29UPG and possibly Rafale?

The JFT utilizes what PAF considers all the best attributes in a fighter. It is constantly being upgraded and will maintain its deterrent value for PAF. It is important in the Indo Pak Arena to understand that Pakistan will never have an upper hand in any long lasting conflict. What we are relying on is to make it so expensive for the enemy that they wont venture into our border.
A

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

The JFT utilizes what PAF considers all the best attributes in a fighter. It is constantly being upgraded and will maintain its deterrent value for PAF. It is important in the Indo Pak Arena to understand that Pakistan will never have an upper hand in any long lasting conflict. What we are relying on is to make it so expensive for the enemy that they wont venture into our border.
A

Kind sir, you have pinned the entire philosophy of defence in its very essence!

Accross the entire spectrum Pak defence is geared towars making war of agression a very prohibtive proposition for the belligerent nemesis. Just look at all your assets what do they show.

It is a great and wise strategy to make war impossible or at least so painful that the eastern hegemon will have to think million times before any action. Political firebranding not withstanding...

JF has in it all the necessary elements to help develop next medium multirole semi stealth platform based on many existing subsystems and infrastructure. Give it five years....You will need to replace your F16s down the road.

All the best with your nation's development. Keep developing capabilities to make war impossible in your part of the world.

 

[aliyusuf]

... It is important in the Indo Pak Arena to understand that Pakistan will never have an upper hand in any long lasting conflict. What we are relying on is to make it so expensive for the enemy that they wont venture into our border.
A

Precisely the point I was inquiring to get your opinion on ... i.e. how will the JF-17 (once fully realized as per objectives and by the time those objectives are realized) stack up against the (also) upgraded MKIs, MiG-29s, M2Ks and possibly newer Rafales ... in the pursuit of making it unacceptably expensive for the IAF to resort to any domineering adventurism towards Pakistan?

 

[Tempest II]

The Link-17/netcentric approach will be important. Under such conditions, with PAF being defensive (on home turf), then if JF-17 will not be far away from its rivals in terms of effectiveness.

The ZDK-03 and I am sure a lot more critical assets are in place to magnify the effectiveness of the JF-17.

 

[Arsalan]

The Link-17/netcentric approach will be important. Under such conditions, with PAF being defensive (on home turf), then if JF-17 will not be far away from its rivals in terms of effectiveness.

The ZDK-03 and I am sure a lot more critical assets are in place to magnify the effectiveness of the JF-17.

EXACTLY!!!
What more should we expect from a plane with such price tag and developed and made operational in such time frame. Not to mention all those lessons that we will find useful going forward. JF17 is here to stay and from what i can tell, it wont be last of such projects for PAF. It is unfortunate that our economic situation is not allowing us to exploit the full potential and future avenues but we are doing so still and once situation improves we will see us gain pace.