Pakistan is expected to order its JF-17 Block-III in 2017.

[mingle]

Block 3 should be all 2 Seaters

Time to move into the 2 Seater class

The New PODS and rear pilot adds some more gains for , block 3

AESA / 2nd Officeer / Enhanced ground operations and Lethal new Engine just loaded with Power , this new Block 3

I have been in love since I have seen this 2 seater model

It looks like Rafale with single engine if u see front with canopy its looks more cool than single Seat JF 17

 

[MilSpec]

Hi,

I would say that another 5---8 years for the minimum---maybe 10 years---.

With the new EW suite aesa---you will see the new source of power---.

Can you elucidate a bit more on the underlined part

 

[imadul]

I wouldn't bet on the PAF enlarging the JF-17 airframe or adding a second engine, ever.

There will be no significant changes in the first 150 (i.e. Block 1-3). In subsequent blocks, the PAF might opt for a new engine (e.g. RD-93MA or WS-13E) and perhaps even increase the proportion of composite materials used in the airframe, making it even lighter and thus capable of a heavier payload. If anything, the evolutionary path might end up somewhere between the JF-17 today and the Gripen NG, but certainly not a full-fledged medium-weight jet.

In my opinion, there is little need to worry about the size, range or payload. Instead, the PAF should work on evolving the JF-17 into a high-technology fighter - i.e. composite airframe, efficient engine, fully digital flight control system, fusion between AESA radar and AESA-based EW/ECM. These do not necessitate size, but they will carry a qualitative edge that will help with defending against high-technology foes.

For the offensive element, invest in the FC-31.

Any info on number of hard points and which SOW it could carry. Read in this forum that Thunder is short legged to carry Raad.
Thank you

 

[BRITISH]

I wouldn't bet on the PAF enlarging the JF-17 airframe or adding a second engine, ever.

There will be no significant changes in the first 150 (i.e. Block 1-3). In subsequent blocks, the PAF might opt for a new engine (e.g. RD-93MA or WS-13E) and perhaps even increase the proportion of composite materials used in the airframe, making it even lighter and thus capable of a heavier payload. If anything, the evolutionary path might end up somewhere between the JF-17 today and the Gripen NG, but certainly not a full-fledged medium-weight jet.

In my opinion, there is little need to worry about the size, range or payload. Instead, the PAF should work on evolving the JF-17 into a high-technology fighter - i.e. composite airframe, efficient engine, fully digital flight control system, fusion between AESA radar and AESA-based EW/ECM. These do not necessitate size, but they will carry a qualitative edge that will help with defending against high-technology foes.

For the offensive element, invest in the FC-31.

you mean RD -93MK ?

 

[Thorough Pro]

When the Block III is inducted, Presumably it will be first flown by the senior Block II pilots. For them it will not be like learning from scratch as you do with the new platform, rather a few new gadgets/capabilities with new weapons. To learning the operations of the new RADAR, one does not need to actually fly the plane with the RADAR in it, they can use simulators on the ground for the basic training, same for HMDS/HMCS and other EW stuff.

Once the new capabilities are known (which would be once the design is finalized/frozen) strategies and game plans can be done on the ground with paper and pen and then tried and tested when the Block III is available. Doing un-related things in parallel can save a lot of time.

Hi,

I would say that another 5---8 years for the minimum---maybe 10 years---.

With the new EW suite aesa---you will see the new source of power---you will have to learn and know what it is---then you will have to learn how to operate and then manipulate it---train on it---change the game plans---.

The thing is---with aesa---JHMCS---off bore sight missiles---you will have to learn to use new parameters of combat and dis-engagement.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Any info on number of hard points and which SOW it could carry. Read in this forum that Thunder is short legged to carry Raad.
Thank you

From what @Bilal Khan 777 told us earlier: For now, the PAF has slotted the JF-17 to ferry conventional SOWs. While technically capable of carrying conventional warheads, the PAF considers the Ra'ad a strategic weapon, and a strategic role for the JF-17 is not a priority at the moment. Rather, the JF-17 will carry conventional SOWs such as anti-ship missiles (C-802), range-extended glide bombs, and the like.

I would say, whatever AVIC showed off in its export portfolio during Air Show China 2016, a few of those could make their way to the JF-17. The YJ-6, which is a Chinese analogue to the AGM-154 Joint Stand-off Weapon (JSOW), might be a decent bet (to see with PAF JF-17s).

 

[ziaulislam]

Hi,

I would say that another 5---8 years for the minimum---maybe 10 years---.

With the new EW suite aesa---you will see the new source of power---you will have to learn and know what it is---then you will have to learn how to operate and then manipulate it---train on it---change the game plans---.

The thing is---with aesa---JHMCS---off bore sight missiles---you will have to learn to use new parameters of combat and dis-engagement.

did it took 10 years to master Rafael/ will it take 10 years for euro fighter new trench that hasnt came up?
did it took 10 years for each block of mirage 2000? or you are saying that USA mastered each block of f-16 over 10 years(60 years in total)
man the whole life of an aircraft is 25-30 years, if one block takes 5-10 years to master , technically you will be retiring an aircraft before you even get close to master it

shouldn't take more than 5 years to get most of the work settled for any particular aircraft

 

[war&peace]

What would be your comment for combat radius and super-cruise capability?

The details are not available yet or at least IDK as of now. However F-35 can supercruise for only 150 km at a stretch and that too at M = 1.2 which doesn't meet the definition of LM's supercruise at M =1.6 or above

 

[CriticalThought]

I wouldn't bet on the PAF enlarging the JF-17 airframe or adding a second engine, ever.

There will be no significant changes in the first 150 (i.e. Block 1-3). In subsequent blocks, the PAF might opt for a new engine (e.g. RD-93MA or WS-13E) and perhaps even increase the proportion of composite materials used in the airframe, making it even lighter and thus capable of a heavier payload. If anything, the evolutionary path might end up somewhere between the JF-17 today and the Gripen NG, but certainly not a full-fledged medium-weight jet.

In my opinion, there is little need to worry about the size, range or payload. Instead, the PAF should work on evolving the JF-17 into a high-technology fighter - i.e. composite airframe, efficient engine, fully digital flight control system, fusion between AESA radar and AESA-based EW/ECM. These do not necessitate size, but they will carry a qualitative edge that will help with defending against high-technology foes.

For the offensive element, invest in the FC-31.

Sir, are there any plans for indigenizing engine manufacture?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Sir, are there any plans for indigenizing engine manufacture?

I'm not aware of any concrete plans, but it's worth noting that PAC did float the idea of collaborating on gas turbines with the private sector. That would be a good first step towards indigenous engine production.

 

[CriticalThought]

In terms of which AESA will be fielded by Block 3, it seems sensible the PAF will prioritize:

1. Wide ranging integration with existing systems.
2. The complete package: AESA+HMD+HOBS.
3. Ease of availability in the future.

The Chinese systems excel at 1 and 3, Italians excel at 2. And Turkey is a wild card.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

In terms of which AESA will be fielded by Block 3, it seems sensible the PAF will prioritize:

1. Wide ranging integration with existing systems.
2. The complete package: AESA+HMD+HOBS.
3. Ease of availability in the future.

The Chinese systems excel at 1 and 3, Italians excel at 2. And Turkey is a wild card.

Depends.

There is no inherent need to source the AESA and HMD/S from the same supplier. Actually, it is the AESA radar and EW/ECM that should come from the same source, which will allow for sensor fusion between the AESA radar and the AESA TRMs (hopefully) on the EW/ECM.

The only HMD/S and HOBS pairings available are the Python 5/Targo, AIM-9X/JHMCS, and Striker II/ASRAAM. There's the Chinese PL-10 and South African A-Darter, but neither have a default HMD/S available on the market. Even the HMD/S shown by AVIC during Air Show China was not an actual product, but a conceptual demo. In all likelihood, the PAF will source the HMD/S and HOBS separately, unless of course China has a solution in the wings ready for release.

 

[imadul]

From what @Bilal Khan 777 told us earlier: For now, the PAF has slotted the JF-17 to ferry conventional SOWs. While technically capable of carrying conventional warheads, the PAF considers the Ra'ad a strategic weapon, and a strategic role for the JF-17 is not a priority at the moment. Rather, the JF-17 will carry conventional SOWs such as anti-ship missiles (C-802), range-extended glide bombs, and the like.

I would say, whatever AVIC showed off in its export portfolio during Air Show China 2016, a few of those could make their way to the JF-17. The YJ-6, which is a Chinese analogue to the AGM-154 Joint Stand-off Weapon (JSOW), might be a decent bet (to see with PAF JF-17s).

Any info on hardpoints? Is it to remain at 7? More than 7 will require structural changes!!!

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Any info on hardpoints? Is it to remain at 7? More than 7 will require structural changes!!!

Can't say, we'll have to wait and see, but Alan Warnes did say (in the Rolling Thunder article) this:

Meanwhile a contract for 50 JF-17 Block-3s is expected to be signed in the first half of this year, which will ensure production does not halt when all the JF-17 Block-2 aircraft are completed. The most advanced version of the Thunder will include new avionics, better electronic warfare systems, increased payload and more sophisticated weapons.

http://asianmilitaryreview.com/2017/02/rolling-thunder-jf-17/​

 

[imadul]

Can't say, we'll have to wait and see, but Alan Warnes did say (in the Rolling Thunder article) this:

Meanwhile a contract for 50 JF-17 Block-3s is expected to be signed in the first half of this year, which will ensure production does not halt when all the JF-17 Block-2 aircraft are completed. The most advanced version of the Thunder will include new avionics, better electronic warfare systems, increased payload and more sophisticated weapons.

http://asianmilitaryreview.com/2017/02/rolling-thunder-jf-17/​

Thank you, so much, Sir.
All this looks too good to be believing.
AESA, which will need more power so more powerful engine and cooling.
HMDS, more coding and sensor fusion.
It is second to a miracle PAC and CAC achieving this in that short time.
Thank you, again.