What's new

From pk-15 , JF-17 Thunder and Al Khalid to fifth generation stealth fighter jet project Azm

DJ_Viper

FULL MEMBER
Mar 17, 2008
1,666
2
2,009
Country
United States
Location
United States
According to international defense observers, Pakistan’s defense production from PK-15 assault rifles to Al-Khalid tanks and JF-17 Thunder is rapidly moving towards its self - sufficiency. In a short span of 12 years, the successful journey of JF-17 Thunder Block 3 from the launch of China’s joint warplane manufacturing program to its completion in Pakistan is a surprise to the world and awe to the enemies.

The JF-17 Thunder is talking parrots in combat aerial demonstrations around the world. Demand for Pakistan Thunder aircraft is increasing in developing countries like Malaysia, Burma and Nigeria. While the failed result of India’s 30 years of failed planning, the Tejas aircraft has become a rejected and flop product in the world market.
These things sound great. But equally important focus and one of the highest priority needs to be given to counter defense systems, such as long range SAMs, BVR missiles and more than anything, to protect military assets, C-RAM systems.
 

mudas777

FULL MEMBER
Oct 24, 2016
1,803
0
3,126
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Even Tejas MK1A will feature an AESA radar and other equipment, Tejas MK1A will be better than JF-17 Block-3.

PL-15 is not given to PAF yet, but our own SFDR BVR missile will have a 400km range thanks to its Solid Fuel Ducted Ramjet technology (SFDR).

Plus we have meteor

Our Tejas has critical tech like OBOGS made in India which currently all chinese aircrafts lack except the original Russian ones.
F-16 have OBOGS but rest of PAF fleet doesn’t have OBOGS whereas only MiG-21 in IAF doesn’t have OBOGS and MiG-29 got one after UPG upgrade.

Rafale’s Spectra EW suite is unmatchable brother.
Mate what ever Chinese junk we are buying may not be able to cross the LOC so you should be glad and feel safe just remember to wear mask in case some one finds you floating in the Ganges. OBOGS and AESA equipped Tejas is a force to reckoned with no wonder PAF pilots were so scared they were offering Indian pilot tea after tea to get into his good books.
You have managed to find the room for the SFDR BVR missile but still i don't see any toilet seats installed when they see JF 17, does brave Indians pilots have to put plane on the auto pilot and get out of the plane and sit on the wings to do the business? No wonder poor Abi just fell off the wing and got captured, poor soul didn't even knew which side of the border he was, please do something for the Indian pilots dignity too.
 

DJ_Viper

FULL MEMBER
Mar 17, 2008
1,666
2
2,009
Country
United States
Location
United States
I wish you a good luck !
The two planes are not oxing in the same league. One is a light and mainly a point defense fighter and the other a medium with long range fighter.
Rafale will evolve also. F4 is in the pipe and F5 already in R&D phase. Rafale may have a tile, 270° coverage GaN radar when JF17 will only have a first gen AESA 120° radar.

No, the Pak answer request another beast.

Engine will always be a problem. And so probably radar.
You will have to be dependant on China for this.
Turkey has the same problem : no engine for its TFX (F110 for prototyp, but what alse for serial product?)

Some of your arguments are valid and some are very off. For example, yes, it's obvious that Rafale is a medium class aircraft while the JFT is light weight. However, the JFT isn't a "point defense" fighter. With it's payload limitations, it's still a very potent multi-role platform. If it had 9-11 hardpoints (medium class), it would do wonders with more thrust.

It's airframe and avionics aren't much distant from the Viper's and I believe the Viper was the design model in mind for the JFT. Additionally, the avionics were improved for anti-ship capability and two long range anti-ship missiles is great payload.

The use case it was built for, was India in mind. For that use case, it offers tremendous amounts of capability similar to the Rafale in terms of AESA, advance BVR missiles, etc. It is however inferior in EW compared to Rafale and in a merge, the Rafale like the Mirage 2000, will have a clear edge, especially if the fight turns out to be a one turn fight. However, with HOBS and advance F&F BVR missiles, the kill will be decided in 80%+ cases a few miles away.

Lastly, the Chinese AESA in the next 3 years will be on par or ahead of Europe's tech. The Chinese military industrial complex have become the second after the US in terms of innovation. I'd put them ahead of Europe at this time. The pace and speed at which the latest tech is rolling out of China, is faster than Russia + Europe + UK combined, second to the USA at this point and thus the QUAD was put into existence.
 
Last edited:

KaiserX

FULL MEMBER
Apr 6, 2019
1,660
-1
2,844
Country
United States
Location
United States
Some of your arguments are valid and some are very off. For example, yes, it's obvious that Rafale is a medium class aircraft while the JFT is light weight. However, the JFT isn't a "point defense" fighter. With it's payload limitations, it's still a very potent multi-role platform. If it had 9-11 hardpoints (medium class), it would do wonders with more thrust.

It's airframe and avionics aren't much distant from the Viper's and I believe the Viper was the design model in mind for the JFT. Additionally, the avionics were improved for anti-ship capability and two long range anti-ship missiles is great payload.

The use case it was built for, was India in mind. For that use case, it offers tremendous amounts of capability similar to the Rafale in terms of AESA, advance BVR missiles, etc. It is however inferior in EW compared to Rafale and in a merge, the Rafale like the Mirage 2000, will have a clear edge, especially if the fight turns out to be a one turn fight. However, with HOBS and advance F&F BVR missiles, the kill will be decided in 80%+ cases a few miles away.

Lastly, the Chinese AESA in the next 3 years will be on par or ahead of Europe's tech. The Chinese military industrial complex have become the second after the US in terms of innovation. I'd put them ahead of Europe at this time. The pace and speed at which the latest tech is rolling out of China, is faster than Russia + Europe + UK combined, second to the USA at this point and thus the QUAD was put into existence.
How much payload does a fighter realistically need at the end of the day?

It is extremely rare to see fighter jets with more than 3000+ KG of payloads. Only the USAF/ RUAF/PLAAF are capable of equipping bombers with payloads upto 8000kg and beyond but even those are very rare and are just showcases in modern warfare.

60 years ago you may need 100,000 kg to get the job done due to inaccuraccy
20 years ago you may need 1000 kg to get the job done
Todays guidance systems are so refined you could get the job done with 100kg weapon :D
 

DJ_Viper

FULL MEMBER
Mar 17, 2008
1,666
2
2,009
Country
United States
Location
United States
How much payload does a fighter realistically need at the end of the day?

It is extremely rare to see fighter jets with more than 3000+ KG of payloads. Only the USAF/ RUAF/PLAAF are capable of equipping bombers with payloads upto 8000kg and beyond but even those are very rare and are just showcases in modern warfare.

60 years ago you may need 100,000 kg to get the job done due to inaccuraccy
20 years ago you may need 1000 kg to get the job done
Todays guidance systems are so refined you could get the job done with 100kg weapon :D
5+ ton is normal with 9-11 hardpoints. JFT is lighter with a reduced performance engine compared to the fighters it's trying to compete against like the Gripen, etc. If, like originally thought it to be a replacement for Mig-21 and Mirage 3-5's in the world (thousands retiring), then that's a different story. But with the JFT block III, it has certainly risen above that mark to directly competing against 4th gen single engine jets. For that, it does need more thrust to weight ratio, more hardpoints and about a ton more weapons carrying capacity at the least. I'd think with the Chinese engines coming available, the issue of higher thrust might get resolved along and more hardpoints might be added to the later blocks (or MERS, as clearly seen in one of the recent images on twitter, not sure if it was real).
 

khansaheeb

ELITE MEMBER
Dec 14, 2008
11,452
-4
13,381
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Keep the good work going.
But still we need to come up with some equivalent fighter to tackle Rafael fighter.
All our expectations are from JF-Block-3 which still due to roll out.
We need air supremacy whatever the cost. Block 3 is the right step in the right direction. We need to focus on skills development and world class education and training.
 

BON PLAN

FULL MEMBER
Mar 3, 2016
1,213
-7
1,116
Country
France
Location
France
Some of your arguments are valid and some are very off. For example, yes, it's obvious that Rafale is a medium class aircraft while the JFT is light weight. However, the JFT isn't a "point defense" fighter. With it's payload limitations, it's still a very potent multi-role platform. If it had 9-11 hardpoints (medium class), it would do wonders with more thrust.

It's airframe and avionics aren't much distant from the Viper's and I believe the Viper was the design model in mind for the JFT. Additionally, the avionics were improved for anti-ship capability and two long range anti-ship missiles is great payload.

The use case it was built for, was India in mind. For that use case, it offers tremendous amounts of capability similar to the Rafale in terms of AESA, advance BVR missiles, etc. It is however inferior in EW compared to Rafale and in a merge, the Rafale like the Mirage 2000, will have a clear edge, especially if the fight turns out to be a one turn fight. However, with HOBS and advance F&F BVR missiles, the kill will be decided in 80%+ cases a few miles away.

Lastly, the Chinese AESA in the next 3 years will be on par or ahead of Europe's tech. The Chinese military industrial complex have become the second after the US in terms of innovation. I'd put them ahead of Europe at this time. The pace and speed at which the latest tech is rolling out of China, is faster than Russia + Europe + UK combined, second to the USA at this point and thus the QUAD was put into existence.
JF17 is more an answer to Mirage 2000.
9 or 11 hardpoints is useless if your bird is not powered enough.
It is interessant to see that JF17 is not used by China ! Strange if it was studied as an answer to IAF, no?
And to end, there is no proof of the efficiency of the chinese weapons. Are they good or are they suck? that is the big question.
How much payload does a fighter realistically need at the end of the day?

It is extremely rare to see fighter jets with more than 3000+ KG of payloads. Only the USAF/ RUAF/PLAAF are capable of equipping bombers with payloads upto 8000kg and beyond but even those are very rare and are just showcases in modern warfare.

60 years ago you may need 100,000 kg to get the job done due to inaccuraccy
20 years ago you may need 1000 kg to get the job done
Todays guidance systems are so refined you could get the job done with 100kg weapon :D
It's true, but the load can be changed in fuel, to deliver these 100 or 1000 kg far longer, or with a greater persistence on the theater..
 

Huffal

FULL MEMBER
Dec 27, 2020
1,879
0
2,115
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
JF17 is more an answer to Mirage 2000.
9 or 11 hardpoints is useless if your bird is not powered enough.
It is interessant to see that JF17 is not used by China ! Strange if it was studied as an answer to IAF, no?
Oh my goodness another 'china doesnt use the jf17' crap. Jf17 was jointly built FOR Pakistan. Not china.

Plus its an export vehicle. Like the MBT 3000 and VT4. They wont be used because they are for export
 

The Eagle

SENIOR MODERATOR
Oct 15, 2015
22,763
174
43,414
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
It is interessant to see that JF17 is not used by China ! Strange if it was studied as an answer to IAF, no?
It will be more interesting if you pay some attention and go back to FC-1 history along with not required for PLAAF. The subject has been discussed to death not once but more times. PLAAF has solutions answer for IAF or any other enemy.
 

Beast

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2011
26,566
-39
61,205
Country
China
Location
China
JF17 is more an answer to Mirage 2000.
9 or 11 hardpoints is useless if your bird is not powered enough.
It is interessant to see that JF17 is not used by China ! Strange if it was studied as an answer to IAF, no?
And to end, there is no proof of the efficiency of the chinese weapons. Are they good or are they suck? that is the big question.

It's true, but the load can be changed in fuel, to deliver these 100 or 1000 kg far longer, or with a greater persistence on the theater..
Chinese weapon from missile to drone has work exactly according what is stated from lraq anti ISIS ops to Libya civil war. If China can land a working rover on Mars which even the EU and Russian struggle. I don't think there is anything u can doubt about the progress of Chinese technology.
 

BON PLAN

FULL MEMBER
Mar 3, 2016
1,213
-7
1,116
Country
France
Location
France
Oh same crap again, PLAAF has different doctrine than PAF, PLAAF needs Bigger jets with more payloads/electronics to cover vast swath of China, that's why PLAAF not inducted JFT
OK. But read some posts before, when some tried to explain JF17 can be on par with Rafale. It is definitively not.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom