What's new

Indian LCA Tejas Or Pakistani JF-17: Who Is Winning The Malaysian Fighter Jet Contract?

drunken-monke

FULL MEMBER
Jan 19, 2011
1,248
-12
1,159
Country
India
Location
India
Both are BS aircrafts produced by two third world countries like Pakistan and India.

Malaysia has the money to buy European jets. If Bangladesh can buy Eurofighter Typhoon why can't Malaysia with such a good economy?
ANd where does Nepal Stands?? 4th or 5th world??
 

VkdIndian

BANNED
Jan 6, 2021
791
-6
614
Country
India
Location
India
That is why its more fuel guzzler.
But 3 times increase doesn’t seem feasible to me.

Moreover, JF’s Combat range is indicated to be better than even JAS-39 and F-16. Both with more internal fuel and non-delta designs.

JF’s ferry range with 3 tanks is touted to be 3500 Kms. With 2 tanks it’s combat radius is 1350 kms. This translates to a combat range of 2700 kms. It means reduction of 800 kms range with loss of one tank. It appears there is hardly any range reduction in combat mode from ferry mode. In combat mode aircraft would have some combat load plus it will fly also at faster speeds? There was one post in which it was brought out that there has to be some fuel for combat also. A fighter can’t go to its extreme combat radius without any combat reserve.

Am I right or have I missed something here?
 

arjunk

FULL MEMBER
Apr 16, 2020
1,686
0
3,483
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Let's be real here. Tejas Mk1A won't fly for another 1-2 years and production will start a year after that. JF-17 III production has already started, and its first flight was over a year ago. So it's more likely that JF-17 III will be competing with baseline Tejas than Tejas Mk-1A.
 
Oct 6, 2020
2,224
-53
1,522
Country
India
Location
India
Let's be real here. Tejas Mk1A won't fly for another 1-2 years and production will start a year after that. JF-17 III production has already started, and its first flight was over a year ago. So it's more likely that JF-17 III will be competing with baseline Tejas than Tejas Mk-1A.
Which HMDS does JFT-BIII has?
 

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
496
1
1,017
Country
United States
Location
India
It is not the only AESA fielded by the Chinese they have been flying with AESA radars for some time now. Even the KLJ7A has been tested on different testbeds but still, it's not fielded in numbers, and haven't seen any combat exercise. At least it's ready and customers can be given trials or they can test themselves if they are interested. This would be the last time you got a response from me if I see you running in circles again with silly whataboutism.
So prey tell me if Uttam is not ready for your Airforce is it ready for the customer? Does it stand a chance against Klj7A if tomorrow they decide to make a comparison or it will take some time for the trials?
The RMAF will be free to evaluate the Uttam AESA that has been FLYING on 2 LCA testbed fighters and 1 business jet. Just because it hasn't yet been productionised doesn't mean it cannot be tested in it's primary air to air, air to ground and air to sea modes, all of which have completed development.

Again, if I were an RMAF evaluator, I would look at the technology offered. Is it GaAs or GaN for the TRMs? Both Uttam and KLJ-7A are GaAs radars, so no advantage to either of them.

Second- what detection, tracking specs would I be looking at for a given RCS target of say 5 sq m? How good would the resolution of ground mapping be? What about SAR/ ISAR? I would ask to be shown that in flight tests or with data from flight tests. Given the fact that the KLJ-7A is an Air cooled AESA radar, I can safely say that it's performance will not match that of liquid cooled AESA radars, unless I have discovered new laws of physics and thermodynamics in particular.

Third- By when is this slated to be in service? The answer would be possibly 2023-24 for the Tejas Mk1A and probably 2022-23 for the JF-17 Block III.

Fourth- Has it been ordered by any other Air Force or will the RMAF be the guinea pig? Answer would be yes for both so no advantage to either. Since the Uttam is already flying on Tejas testbeds, has been validated by DRDO labs AND the IAF, and has been confirmed to be productionised by the time the 21st Tejas Mk1A rolls out of the assembly line, I would ask for the contract to include clauses in case of any delays.

Keep in mind, the IAF ordered Su-30MKIs with the Bars radar that was STILL IN DEVELOPMENT. In fact, the Bars was being upgraded to meet the original specs even after the 60-70 Su-30MKIs were already inducted. So it's not new to see services order on the back of promised performance specs.
Let's be real here. Tejas Mk1A won't fly for another 1-2 years and production will start a year after that. JF-17 III production has already started, and its first flight was over a year ago. So it's more likely that JF-17 III will be competing with baseline Tejas than Tejas Mk-1A.
No it won't.

Because HAL has offered the Tejas Mk1A not the Tejas Mk1, since that is the Tejas spec that will be in production at the time that the RMAF will be expecting deliveries of it's light fighter. Keep in mind that the RMAF cannot expect deliveries any earlier than 36 months from contract signature. And contract signature is God knows how far away. Could be months (very very optimistic) or years (more probable).

And HAL is working towards getting the Mk1A in production by 2023. Primary elements on the Tejas Mk1A are already being flight tested on Tejas Mk1 Limited Series Prototypes.
Neverminds, At least it proves;

JF17- More fuel efficient
Tejaz- More fuel guzzler
Lol..Just HOW?! Please do explain..

F-404 is more fuel efficient than RD-93. So how is the Tejas more of a fuel guzzler? Lol..kuch bhi bolne ka.
Which HMDS does JFT-BIII has?
Nobody knows. They're still speculating on that..will obviously be a Chinese system only since there are few other options realistically speaking.
 
Last edited:

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
496
1
1,017
Country
United States
Location
India
But 3 times increase doesn’t seem feasible to me.

Moreover, JF’s Combat range is indicated to be better than even JAS-39 and F-16. Both with more internal fuel and non-delta designs.

JF’s ferry range with 3 tanks is touted to be 3500 Kms. With 2 tanks it’s combat radius is 1350 kms. This translates to a combat range of 2700 kms. It means reduction of 800 kms range with loss of one tank. It appears there is hardly any range reduction in combat mode from ferry mode. In combat mode aircraft would have some combat load plus it will fly also at faster speeds? There was one post in which it was brought out that there has to be some fuel for combat also. A fighter can’t go to its extreme combat radius without any combat reserve.

Am I right or have I missed something here?
Ignore these idiotic claims..

The fact is this- in an older article on Air Forces Monthly by Alan Warnes, the PAF's ACM at that time had clearly stated that the JF-17 is a small light fighter and does not carry enough fuel internally, hence is almost always going to need 2 drop tanks. This was in response to a query on possibly using the 2 internal pylons for carrying BVRAAMs.

He was honest enough to admit what every clear thinking person will know. That if it carries ~2300 kgs of fuel and no drop tanks, it'll run into Bingo fuel within an hour of flying or even lesser. All these bogus figures of 3500 kms and all make no sense for anything but ferry range, with 3 drop tanks and no payload carried, plus a simple mission with no Afterburner being used to conserve fuel.
Topsight is who's original product do tell me???
Thales. But Thales and Samtel have a JV which allowed Samtel to build and maintain the TopSight inventory in India.
Block-3 will using liquid cooled AESA not air cooled version, and as for your information no version of KLJ-7A uses air cooled tech, all version of KLJ-7A uses liquid cooled tech, your mixing thing up with LFK-600 air cooled AESA which is the product of another Chinese company
Do some research first. Or go ask other more well informed Pakistani posters. Or better still, go ask the Pakistanis beloved Alan Warnes, since it was he who first confirmed this..the version of the KLJ-7A selected for the JF-17 Blk 3 is the Air cooled version. Poor choice, I know, but that's what's been chosen.

Pakistan selects KLJ-7A AESA radar for JF-17 Block 3

Though the KLJ-7A was available in multiple versions, one with a fixed-array, another with a mechanically steered panel, and a form with side-mounted panels.[2] However, Warnes’ noted that the PAF opted for an air-cooled version of the KLJ-7A, potentially indicating the existence of a fourth variant.[3]

In 2016, NRIET reportedly said that the KLJ-7A offers a maximum range of 170 km against a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of 5m2.[4] NRIET added that the KLJ-7A uses over 1,000 transmit/receive modules (TRM), and is capable of tracking 15 targets and simultaneously engaging four.[5] It also has over 11 modes for operation, including synthetic aperture radar (SAR).[6]

It is unclear how the air-cooled configuration would impact the KLJ-7A’s performance, but the competing LKF601E (also air-cooled) offered near-identical results. So, like the KLJ-7A, the LKF601E offers a range of 170 km for ‘fighter-sized’ targets, with the ability to track 15 of them simultaneously, and engage four at once.[7] However, LETRI did not disclose how many TRMs it is using in the LKF601E.[8]
Probably due to the desire to upgrade Block 2 with the AESA as well. Block 2 will find it very hard to be upgraded with the liquid cooled AESA as compared to Air cooled AESA.
 
Last edited:

arjunk

FULL MEMBER
Apr 16, 2020
1,686
0
3,483
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Which HMDS does JFT-BIII has?
Either it has not been chosen, is up to the buyer, or is privately disclosed. Since JF-17 I and II already have the ability to add an HMD to the aircraft, it would be unsurprising that HMD(S) will be offered with JF-17 III.
No it won't.

Because HAL has offered the Tejas Mk1A not the Tejas Mk1, since that is the Tejas spec that will be in production at the time that the RMAF will be expecting deliveries of it's light fighter. Keep in mind that the RMAF cannot expect deliveries any earlier than 36 months from contract signature. And contract signature is God knows how far away. Could be months (very very optimistic) or years (more probable).

And HAL is working towards getting the Mk1A in production by 2023. Primary elements on the Tejas Mk1A are already being flight tested on Tejas Mk1 Limited Series Prototypes.
Either way, JF-17 III is further ahead on schedule than Tejas 1A, and will be fully operational by the time Tejas 1A has its first flight. That gives the JF-17 an advantage in terms of testing etc, and by then the HMDS and other specs may be fully revealed.
 
Oct 6, 2020
2,224
-53
1,522
Country
India
Location
India
Either it has not been chosen, is up to the buyer, or is privately disclosed. Since JF-17 I and II already have the ability to add an HMD to the aircraft, it would be unsurprising that HMD(S) will be offered with JF-17 III.
Never seen JF-T pilots with HMDS.
 
Oct 29, 2020
2,795
0
1,500
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Currently there is no HMDS for JF-T so it will be a disadvantage. There is no picture or evidence of JF-T having HMDS that’s why I’m assuming this.
I think we tested but not satisficed it performance, and remember dude HMDs is basically for guiding HOBs short range air to air missiles but JFT currently not carrying HOBs (high off bore sight) short range air to air missiles we are only carrying PL-5E which not HOBs missiles hence no need for HMD, but your Tejas able to carry R-73 or may be ASRAAM which is HOBs missiles , so thats why your tejas has HMDs for those air to air missiles
 

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


Top Bottom