What's new

JF-17 Block-3 -- Updates, News & Discussion

Shabi1

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2006
1,751
5
2,617
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Yar ye to pehle bolna chahiye tha na. Musharaf should have asked the Americans for duties if they wanted to use our land for Nato supply transit. Uss waqt Musharaf ne jhuk kar kaha "Jahan pana tussi great ho toffu qabul karo". Now we don't have the window of oppurtunity. Never will. Meanwhile, their heavy truck traffic has completely devastated G.T Road. Especially the North Punjab(Potohar) sections that go from the Salt Ranges/Jhelum to Talagang/Chakwal and onward to Mianwali and then Torkham entrance border. On this Punjab route for some reason Nato trucks take a detour through the back roads of Chakwal, Talagang, Mianwali and Dera Ismail Khan for some reason. I thought it strange.
Paisa Phenk Thamasha dekh. Works both ways if, If there is money to be made US will sell at the end of the day these are commercial interests. Part of the purpose of US funded programs is to funnel that money back to US contractors and companies. If Pak gov willing to pay out of own pocket US will never refuse.
 

Ahmet Pasha

BANNED
May 23, 2017
7,998
-5
7,873
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Paisa Phenk Thamasha dekh. Works both ways if, If there is money to be made US will sell at the end of the day these are commercial interests. Part of the purpose of US funded programs is to funnel that money back to US contractors and companies. If Pak gov willing to pay out of own pocket US will never refuse.
Mujhe nahi lagta. Let's agree to disagree. I don't think U.s will give us anything. It'd be amazing if we get our AH1Zs.
 

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
14,442
10
13,551
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
well there is not a straight answer to this question so I will only state my understanding which is based on the information available in open source till now but it may in future prove totally false, therefore before to indulge myself into this I think we must try to answer first what new capabilities Rafale is bringing int his region

So we know that Rafale is introducing following capabilities in South Asia

- Operational AESA RADAR in fighter jet [GaAS Based AESA Radar]

- Integrated AESA based EW suit

- Long range BVR [Meteor missile] as compare to AIM-120C

- A very Decent Air to ground Strike Package.

Now for JF-17 Blk-III we know

- It will also have AESA radar [GaN based AESA radra]

- It will also have Integrated AESA based EW suit.

- It will have PL-15 missile which even IF do not have longer range then Meteor then it must be equal to Meteor in range, this would level the field in BVR domain, [Note: though it is widely believe PL-15 have longer range than Meteor Missile]

- Whole of JF-17 series have a very decent strike package in terms of variety of air to ground and air to sea weapons but lacks in terms of limited pay load capacity.

AESA RADAR

Now as we know no two AESA radar from 2 different vendors are same but even then IF we consider every thing other then known things b/w RBE2-AESA and unknown AESA radar of JF-17 are on par than we know

- GaN based modules are consider better than GaAS based AESA Radar Modules and as mention above JF-17 have GaN based AESA Radar

- GaN based AESA radar not necessarily but generally offer better ranges than GaAS based radars but this feature is related to availability of power to AESA radar and its management.

- Another feature which most people ignore is the processing power as this capability effects the capability of simultaneously Detection, Tracking and Engagement capability of RADAR here declared number of simultaneous detection of multiple targets of RBE2-AESA is
- Detection of 40 targets
- Tracking of 8 priority targets
- Simultaneous engagement of 4 targets

As of now these capabilities for the AESA radar of JF-17 are not are not known publicly so we could not comment on this

EW suit
:

Again here both JF-17 and Rafle will have integrated AESA based EW suit but again we do not have much information about these system in public domain and whatever information is available about SPECTRA is related to its performance against PD RADAR, so we can only say that whichever Jet will have
- Better processing power
- Better Threat Library
- Better Power Management

is likely to dominate the other jet on one on one grounds but we know in future war no jet will duel with each other on one on one grounds but as a part of a package which will represent EW systems of both Air forces, so again it will be difficult to comment.

As I have already commented about BVR missiles therefore would skip it and would only comment about Strike package

Considering over all scenario currently IAF have limited air to ground capability in terms of Range of their SOW weapons, but it have long range platforms such as Su-30 and Rafale jets, with Rafale jets IAF have option of hammer series from France and could integrate Spice series from Israel as well but the more important thing is with Rafale deal the IAF has acquired storm shadow missile which give IAF capability to strike 250-290 km from the point of release previously IAF was lacking this capability their program of integrating of Brahamous missile with Su-30 was there but due to limited number of jets it was not truly operational as it requir modification of Su-30 Air frame, so with Storm shadow India for the first time acquired the true SOW capability.

Now with heavy load carrying capability Rafale could carry 2 Storm Shadow missiles while Mirage-5 jets of IAF even now could carry multiple 60 km and 120 Km SOW weapons, same is the case with Rafale jets.

Here JF-17 with limited pay load capacity as compare to Rafale could carry limited SOW weapons here we need to keep in mind due to difference of geographical size of India and Pakistan and Larger size of Indian forces PAF not only need Range but Numbers of Weapons with strike package to effectively engage targets in India, while due to limited depth of Pakistan India does not have a need to have SOW missiles longer then 300-400 Km.

Now these requirements expose the limitations of NOT ONLY JF-17 in terms Payload and Range limitation of PAF as well.

Now here look at the strike platform of PAF the Mirage jets which could carry only ONE RA'AD missile while could carry two H-2 or H-4 weapon but require another dual seat Mirage to guide the H-2 or H-4 weapon.

As far as JF-17 in strike role is concern currently only know capabilities are limited upto 280-290 KM from the point of release but in terms of capability to carry the number of SOW weapon it has only shown capability to carry

- 2 REK with 120 km range
- 2 C-802 with 180-250 Km range
- 2 CM-400 AKG upto 250 Km range

and status of integration of RA'AD with JF-17 is still not known, this thing will compensate the issue related to striking range.

Now as you suggested in your post to increase the number of JF-17 as compare to Rafale jets in that case IF

increase the production of jet with the ratio of 1.5 to 36 Rafale jet then

36 Rafale Jet x 1.5 (JF-17 blk-III) = 54 JF-17 Blk-III jets are required while 48 Mirage-5 jets with strike capability are still unanswered so to match these numbers we need at least same number of JF-17 which mean we would require at least
54 JF-17 (blk-III to match Rafale jets)
48 JF-17 (to match the numbers of mirage-5 jets)
102 JF-17

Now note this 102 number in mind which would be required to match the strike capability in terms of number of platforms, 102 JF-17 would be 55% of JF-17 total plan fleet of 184 JF-17 (all blocks included).

IF we calculate on the suggested ration of 2 JF-17 against 1 Rafale, keeping other factors same then the number would increase up to 120 JF-17 out of 184 JF-17 this will be roughly equivalent to 65% of the JF-17 fleet

Now what IF IAF buy another batch of 36 Rafale Jets .... ??? you could calculate it by your own.

But even after doing all these would we attain the parity in striking capability with India ..... ???? for this you should look how many hammer bombs Rafale could carry and how many Mirage-5 could carry


Personally I think even J-10 does not satisfactorily answer our need in the domain of Air strike, but would be helpful the reduce the gape to some extent
GaN is simply 33% more efficient in power consumption
a lot of AESA has to do with software, we arent sure where china is at now with respect to that

assuming flankers are not available j35 or advance j31 seems to be logical solution

it stealth design will help in strike
its era of small diameter bombs it should be able to carry 6 of these internally and will perfectly neutralize rafale

especially since PLAAF/PLAAN is going to induct it, even if we get a squadron in 2025 it will do

the twin engine j35(with twin ws19) in theory will have almost 80% more dry thrust then single engine j10
 
Last edited:

peagle

FULL MEMBER
Dec 29, 2019
1,097
3
2,682
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
well there is not a straight answer to this question so I will only state my understanding which is based on the information available in open source till now but it may in future prove totally false, therefore before to indulge myself into this I think we must try to answer first what new capabilities Rafale is bringing int his region

So we know that Rafale is introducing following capabilities in South Asia

- Operational AESA RADAR in fighter jet [GaAS Based AESA Radar]

- Integrated AESA based EW suit

- Long range BVR [Meteor missile] as compare to AIM-120C

- A very Decent Air to ground Strike Package.

Now for JF-17 Blk-III we know

- It will also have AESA radar [GaN based AESA radra]

- It will also have Integrated AESA based EW suit.

- It will have PL-15 missile which even IF do not have longer range then Meteor then it must be equal to Meteor in range, this would level the field in BVR domain, [Note: though it is widely believe PL-15 have longer range than Meteor Missile]

- Whole of JF-17 series have a very decent strike package in terms of variety of air to ground and air to sea weapons but lacks in terms of limited pay load capacity.

AESA RADAR

Now as we know no two AESA radar from 2 different vendors are same but even then IF we consider every thing other then known things b/w RBE2-AESA and unknown AESA radar of JF-17 are on par than we know

- GaN based modules are consider better than GaAS based AESA Radar Modules and as mention above JF-17 have GaN based AESA Radar

- GaN based AESA radar not necessarily but generally offer better ranges than GaAS based radars but this feature is related to availability of power to AESA radar and its management.

- Another feature which most people ignore is the processing power as this capability effects the capability of simultaneously Detection, Tracking and Engagement capability of RADAR here declared number of simultaneous detection of multiple targets of RBE2-AESA is
- Detection of 40 targets
- Tracking of 8 priority targets
- Simultaneous engagement of 4 targets

As of now these capabilities for the AESA radar of JF-17 are not are not known publicly so we could not comment on this

EW suit
:

Again here both JF-17 and Rafle will have integrated AESA based EW suit but again we do not have much information about these system in public domain and whatever information is available about SPECTRA is related to its performance against PD RADAR, so we can only say that whichever Jet will have
- Better processing power
- Better Threat Library
- Better Power Management

is likely to dominate the other jet on one on one grounds but we know in future war no jet will duel with each other on one on one grounds but as a part of a package which will represent EW systems of both Air forces, so again it will be difficult to comment.

As I have already commented about BVR missiles therefore would skip it and would only comment about Strike package

Considering over all scenario currently IAF have limited air to ground capability in terms of Range of their SOW weapons, but it have long range platforms such as Su-30 and Rafale jets, with Rafale jets IAF have option of hammer series from France and could integrate Spice series from Israel as well but the more important thing is with Rafale deal the IAF has acquired storm shadow missile which give IAF capability to strike 250-290 km from the point of release previously IAF was lacking this capability their program of integrating of Brahamous missile with Su-30 was there but due to limited number of jets it was not truly operational as it requir modification of Su-30 Air frame, so with Storm shadow India for the first time acquired the true SOW capability.

Now with heavy load carrying capability Rafale could carry 2 Storm Shadow missiles while Mirage-5 jets of IAF even now could carry multiple 60 km and 120 Km SOW weapons, same is the case with Rafale jets.

Here JF-17 with limited pay load capacity as compare to Rafale could carry limited SOW weapons here we need to keep in mind due to difference of geographical size of India and Pakistan and Larger size of Indian forces PAF not only need Range but Numbers of Weapons with strike package to effectively engage targets in India, while due to limited depth of Pakistan India does not have a need to have SOW missiles longer then 300-400 Km.

Now these requirements expose the limitations of NOT ONLY JF-17 in terms Payload and Range limitation of PAF as well.

Now here look at the strike platform of PAF the Mirage jets which could carry only ONE RA'AD missile while could carry two H-2 or H-4 weapon but require another dual seat Mirage to guide the H-2 or H-4 weapon.

As far as JF-17 in strike role is concern currently only know capabilities are limited upto 280-290 KM from the point of release but in terms of capability to carry the number of SOW weapon it has only shown capability to carry

- 2 REK with 120 km range
- 2 C-802 with 180-250 Km range
- 2 CM-400 AKG upto 250 Km range

and status of integration of RA'AD with JF-17 is still not known, this thing will compensate the issue related to striking range.

Now as you suggested in your post to increase the number of JF-17 as compare to Rafale jets in that case IF

increase the production of jet with the ratio of 1.5 to 36 Rafale jet then

36 Rafale Jet x 1.5 (JF-17 blk-III) = 54 JF-17 Blk-III jets are required while 48 Mirage-5 jets with strike capability are still unanswered so to match these numbers we need at least same number of JF-17 which mean we would require at least
54 JF-17 (blk-III to match Rafale jets)
48 JF-17 (to match the numbers of mirage-5 jets)
102 JF-17

Now note this 102 number in mind which would be required to match the strike capability in terms of number of platforms, 102 JF-17 would be 55% of JF-17 total plan fleet of 184 JF-17 (all blocks included).

IF we calculate on the suggested ration of 2 JF-17 against 1 Rafale, keeping other factors same then the number would increase up to 120 JF-17 out of 184 JF-17 this will be roughly equivalent to 65% of the JF-17 fleet

Now what IF IAF buy another batch of 36 Rafale Jets .... ??? you could calculate it by your own.

But even after doing all these would we attain the parity in striking capability with India ..... ???? for this you should look how many hammer bombs Rafale could carry and how many Mirage-5 could carry


Personally I think even J-10 does not satisfactorily answer our need in the domain of Air strike, but would be helpful the reduce the gape to some extent
Nicely explained, thanks.

Personally, I'm in the confused camp for the time being. By reaching out for a J10CE, I do not want us to get into a trap of matching unit for unit competition, and stick to our matching capability mindset. But, at the same time, I do think we will need another platform before Project AZM produces any results, what that platform is an open question for now.

I read somewhere that the wings on Block 3 are being reinforced, hopefully that will introduce an improved capability in terms of payload.
 

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
8,016
66
12,729
well there is not a straight answer to this question so I will only state my understanding which is based on the information available in open source till now but it may in future prove totally false, therefore before to indulge myself into this I think we must try to answer first what new capabilities Rafale is bringing int his region

So we know that Rafale is introducing following capabilities in South Asia

- Operational AESA RADAR in fighter jet [GaAS Based AESA Radar]

- Integrated AESA based EW suit

- Long range BVR [Meteor missile] as compare to AIM-120C

- A very Decent Air to ground Strike Package.

Now for JF-17 Blk-III we know

- It will also have AESA radar [GaN based AESA radra]

- It will also have Integrated AESA based EW suit.

- It will have PL-15 missile which even IF do not have longer range then Meteor then it must be equal to Meteor in range, this would level the field in BVR domain, [Note: though it is widely believe PL-15 have longer range than Meteor Missile]

- Whole of JF-17 series have a very decent strike package in terms of variety of air to ground and air to sea weapons but lacks in terms of limited pay load capacity.

AESA RADAR

Now as we know no two AESA radar from 2 different vendors are same but even then IF we consider every thing other then known things b/w RBE2-AESA and unknown AESA radar of JF-17 are on par than we know

- GaN based modules are consider better than GaAS based AESA Radar Modules and as mention above JF-17 have GaN based AESA Radar

- GaN based AESA radar not necessarily but generally offer better ranges than GaAS based radars but this feature is related to availability of power to AESA radar and its management.

- Another feature which most people ignore is the processing power as this capability effects the capability of simultaneously Detection, Tracking and Engagement capability of RADAR here declared number of simultaneous detection of multiple targets of RBE2-AESA is
- Detection of 40 targets
- Tracking of 8 priority targets
- Simultaneous engagement of 4 targets

As of now these capabilities for the AESA radar of JF-17 are not are not known publicly so we could not comment on this

EW suit
:

Again here both JF-17 and Rafle will have integrated AESA based EW suit but again we do not have much information about these system in public domain and whatever information is available about SPECTRA is related to its performance against PD RADAR, so we can only say that whichever Jet will have
- Better processing power
- Better Threat Library
- Better Power Management

is likely to dominate the other jet on one on one grounds but we know in future war no jet will duel with each other on one on one grounds but as a part of a package which will represent EW systems of both Air forces, so again it will be difficult to comment.

As I have already commented about BVR missiles therefore would skip it and would only comment about Strike package

Considering over all scenario currently IAF have limited air to ground capability in terms of Range of their SOW weapons, but it have long range platforms such as Su-30 and Rafale jets, with Rafale jets IAF have option of hammer series from France and could integrate Spice series from Israel as well but the more important thing is with Rafale deal the IAF has acquired storm shadow missile which give IAF capability to strike 250-290 km from the point of release previously IAF was lacking this capability their program of integrating of Brahamous missile with Su-30 was there but due to limited number of jets it was not truly operational as it requir modification of Su-30 Air frame, so with Storm shadow India for the first time acquired the true SOW capability.

Now with heavy load carrying capability Rafale could carry 2 Storm Shadow missiles while Mirage-5 jets of IAF even now could carry multiple 60 km and 120 Km SOW weapons, same is the case with Rafale jets.

Here JF-17 with limited pay load capacity as compare to Rafale could carry limited SOW weapons here we need to keep in mind due to difference of geographical size of India and Pakistan and Larger size of Indian forces PAF not only need Range but Numbers of Weapons with strike package to effectively engage targets in India, while due to limited depth of Pakistan India does not have a need to have SOW missiles longer then 300-400 Km.

Now these requirements expose the limitations of NOT ONLY JF-17 in terms Payload and Range limitation of PAF as well.

Now here look at the strike platform of PAF the Mirage jets which could carry only ONE RA'AD missile while could carry two H-2 or H-4 weapon but require another dual seat Mirage to guide the H-2 or H-4 weapon.

As far as JF-17 in strike role is concern currently only know capabilities are limited upto 280-290 KM from the point of release but in terms of capability to carry the number of SOW weapon it has only shown capability to carry

- 2 REK with 120 km range
- 2 C-802 with 180-250 Km range
- 2 CM-400 AKG upto 250 Km range

and status of integration of RA'AD with JF-17 is still not known, this thing will compensate the issue related to striking range.

Now as you suggested in your post to increase the number of JF-17 as compare to Rafale jets in that case IF

increase the production of jet with the ratio of 1.5 to 36 Rafale jet then

36 Rafale Jet x 1.5 (JF-17 blk-III) = 54 JF-17 Blk-III jets are required while 48 Mirage-5 jets with strike capability are still unanswered so to match these numbers we need at least same number of JF-17 which mean we would require at least
54 JF-17 (blk-III to match Rafale jets)
48 JF-17 (to match the numbers of mirage-5 jets)
102 JF-17

Now note this 102 number in mind which would be required to match the strike capability in terms of number of platforms, 102 JF-17 would be 55% of JF-17 total plan fleet of 184 JF-17 (all blocks included).

IF we calculate on the suggested ration of 2 JF-17 against 1 Rafale, keeping other factors same then the number would increase up to 120 JF-17 out of 184 JF-17 this will be roughly equivalent to 65% of the JF-17 fleet

Now what IF IAF buy another batch of 36 Rafale Jets .... ??? you could calculate it by your own.

But even after doing all these would we attain the parity in striking capability with India ..... ???? for this you should look how many hammer bombs Rafale could carry and how many Mirage-5 could carry


Personally I think even J-10 does not satisfactorily answer our need in the domain of Air strike, but would be helpful the reduce the gape to some extent
Thank you for a really nice well thought out post. The only IAF limitation may be the lack of integration of ALL platforms in their C41 system. This might create problems for them. PAF will have an integrated force allowing network centric capability which could be an advantage. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
A
 

Bratva

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Jun 8, 2010
13,564
58
21,622
Country
Pakistan
Location
Qatar
Thank you for a really nice well thought out post. The only IAF limitation may be the lack of integration of ALL platforms in their C41 system. This might create problems for them. PAF will have an integrated force allowing network centric capability which could be an advantage. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
A
There is a reason India is moving away from Russian jets, or atleast if they have to buy the Russian jets they are going to put Israeli Software defined Radios.

The netcentric capability is what? Some of the things like

- Datalinks! Aircrafts, jets are sending and receiving real time radar and sensor data to each other. Jets can turn their radar off and will receive Radar information directly from AWAC

- Encryption. Datalinks are encrypted so no one can intercept and read the info flowing the in the air

- Resilience. If the datalinks are being jammed, they quickly switchover to another frequency and transmit data seamlessly

In order to reach the netcentric, All the air assets must be talking in one language. If in any case, there are multiple languages exist in the airforce, A translator is needed who will translate 1 language into another language in Mili-Seconds

Take an example of Link 17 Tactical datalink PAF developed for Chinese assets. We know Chinese assets cant talk directly with American assets So Pakistan had to purchase a Hardware which not only compatible with Link-16 but also on which we can implement our own Datalink that can talk with Link-16. Hence Pakistan purchased German SDR, developed a Datalink that can talk with LINK-16 and installed the Link-17 in Chinese ZDK-03, JF_17's, Mirage's as well.

On the other hand Pakistan made Erieye as a translator and I'm guesstimating based on the info, Erieye has both Link-16 and Link 17 installed in it and Erieye acts as translator b/w Various assets of PAF. Thanks to R&S hardware installed in the JF-17 and mirages that communicate with Erieye which forwards the data to F-16

https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/dk/pr...-radios/pg_software-defined-radios_64225.html


Based on 27/2 Indian reports, The Phalcon awacs was only capable enough to guide SU-30 and mirages and Mig-21 through Voice, much like the Ground controlled interceptions through radio. Phalcon was not able to send Radar or sensor data via datalinks as it is an israeli hardware while SU-30 and mig-21 had russian Hardware installed in it. Both are incompatible and can-not talk with each other and India doesnt have homegrown datalink or translator so various elements can talk with each other

India is still not developing their own Datalink like LINK-17. They are going for Israeli Talos SDR so that All the indian jets speak one language and they can integrate their Phalcon, The JETS, and their Ground Control each other so every one knows where the others are.

IAF to buy SDRs from Israel to ensure secure communication between fighter jets

During the Balakot strike and the skirmish that followed afterwards, the IAF found itself deficient when it came to safe communication.

KEY HIGHLIGHTS
  • SDRs from Israel will be for the Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Sukhoi-30 fighters
  • If there is an attempt to jam, communication can shift to another frequency



New Delhi: The Indian Air Force (IAF) bombed Balakot on February 26 this year. The next day, it fought off a determined effort by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) to attack Indian army installations. During both battles, the IAF, when it came to safe communication, found itself deficient. And in future, it could lead to costly failures.

Immediately after Balakot, the IAF has decided to quickly buy Software Defined Radios (SDR), and integrate them with the aircraft fleets. This emergency purchase of SDRs from Israel will be for the Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Sukhoi-30 fighters of the IAF.

The SDRs will ensure secure communication not just between fighters in the air, but also between fighters in the air and the ground installations and importantly between the fighters in the air and the AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) - the eye in the sky. If there is an attempt to jam, communication can shift to another frequency and continue.

Besides conversations, it will provide secure data linking. This means everyone will know who - whether it is the fighter pilot, the AWACS controllers, the ground plotters - is where. This will help in better "combat control."

"Whatever we were talking could have been heard," a senior official said about the Balakot operations and after. The radios will ensure no one can pick up our communication. And importantly, the data linking will ensure we know who is where."

A small number - about 400 - are being purchased, as is possible during emergency acquisitions. Once the SDRs arrive, it will ensure that for the IAF, silence will truly be golden.


 

CHI RULES

FULL MEMBER
Mar 23, 2015
1,842
5
1,527
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
According to PAF leadership, JF-17 Block 3 is being loaded with various avionics, EW and ECM technologies and weapon packages to counter IAF threat including Rafale, Su 30MKI, Mirage 2000 and Mig-29.

Neither Rafale nor JF-17 Block 3 were pitched in actual battlefield ditching PL-15 or Meteor.

However, PAF pilots have the experience of flying and pitching against Rafale during various International exercises.

These pilots are the first and foremost important customers and users of JF-17 Block 3.

The integration and trial phase of JF-17 Block 3 is very crucial. It is being assisted and done by the experienced pilots.

JF-17 being smaller size has a low RCS value. According to manufacturers, more composite material was used on JF-17 Block 3, hence its RCS will be much lower than the older JF-17s. Furthermore, there are other ways available to PAF to reduce RCS and IR emission to minimal!!!!!!

Chinese KLJ-7A AESA radar has a range of 170 km whereas French Thales RBE2 AA AESA radar has range between 120 to 140 km for RCS value of 3 square meter target.
https://www.aviationtoday.com/2009/06/01/serious-squall/#:~:text=In air-to-air mode,air-to-air missiles.

Furthermore, PAF pilots are better tacticians than their counterparts.

And lastly do not forget PAF "force multipliers".
Thanks for detailed reply, I hope PAF must have developed strategies to counter Rafale as biggest surprise of JF17 b 3 shall be it's avionics about which so far even no estimates are available,

However as per RCS part the mentioned RCS Rafale is about 1.25M^2 which becomes much lesser when spectra EW suit is applies. However worthwhile case is the news about Anti stealth radars of Pak.
 

Jungibaaz

RETIRED MOD
Jul 4, 2010
7,588
93
15,472
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
However as per RCS part the mentioned RCS Rafale is about 1.25M^2 which becomes much lesser when spectra EW suit is applies. However worthwhile case is the news about Anti stealth radars of Pak.
I have serious doubts about the claims made about Spectra suite, it seems to me that it's some form of fairly sophisticated DFRM jamming that is being marketed as active cancellation and active stealth. It may well be effective against older PDs, but I don't see how it would sample, predict, and then jam any modern LPI AESA.

It would need to accurately sample incoming pulses within each pulse train, from any potential sub-array divisions, and then be able to accurately predict the next incoming set of pulses and the pulse width in between them. And I have to assume that our sophisticated AEW&C, airborne AESA, and ground based radars, all have some pulse frequency jittering and PRF staggering capabilities already to counter Spectra style pulse frequency sampling + jamming.

And that's all vs just one AESA radar. Subarray partitioning can create multiple radars from one AESA, and then what happens when you've got more than one aircraft with more than one AESA scanning? With PRF jitterring and staggering in each subarray of each AESA on each aircraft? I don't see at all how Spectra would be effective, especially against Block III.

Perhaps some more knowledgeable members can enlighten us.
 

The Raven

FULL MEMBER
Mar 31, 2020
379
3
816
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
No they dont.
For example
Thunder III doesnt has 360 MAWS(i think it only has 2 vs appox 6), or a decoy, or a strong self protection suit(rd93 simply wont have enough power). It also doesnt has an IRST.

There are several other parameters
Block III has 4 IR based MAWS (2 rear, 2 forward) as apposed to only 2 rear facing UV based MAWS on Block I/II
 

Mrc

ELITE MEMBER
Dec 19, 2013
9,795
0
11,228
Country
Pakistan
Location
Qatar
Thanks for detailed reply, I hope PAF must have developed strategies to counter Rafale as biggest surprise of JF17 b 3 shall be it's avionics about which so far even no estimates are available,

However as per RCS part the mentioned RCS Rafale is about 1.25M^2 which becomes much lesser when spectra EW suit is applies. However worthwhile case is the news about Anti stealth radars of Pak.

Do u know RCS calculated for block 2 by some experts? There is no official figure though
 

HRK

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Sep 24, 2010
11,814
93
29,647
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
it stealth design will help in strike
but in stealth configuration it will ONLY be able to carry A2A missiles that too in limited numbers
its era of small diameter bombs it should be able to carry 6 of these internally and will perfectly neutralize rafale
SDB if acquired would compensate the issue of JF-17 related to capability of carrying low number of striking munitions to a n extent then why should we go for a stealth jet which would not be able to take up strike role ..... ???
The only IAF limitation may be the lack of integration of ALL platforms in their C41 system.
with the help of Israel and France I expect IAF will address it asap.

Bratva in his post has explain it nicely .....
 

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
8,016
66
12,729
There is a reason India is moving away from Russian jets, or atleast if they have to buy the Russian jets they are going to put Israeli Software defined Radios.

The netcentric capability is what? Some of the things like

- Datalinks! Aircrafts, jets are sending and receiving real time radar and sensor data to each other. Jets can turn their radar off and will receive Radar information directly from AWAC

- Encryption. Datalinks are encrypted so no one can intercept and read the info flowing the in the air

- Resilience. If the datalinks are being jammed, they quickly switchover to another frequency and transmit data seamlessly

In order to reach the netcentric, All the air assets must be talking in one language. If in any case, there are multiple languages exist in the airforce, A translator is needed who will translate 1 language into another language in Mili-Seconds

Take an example of Link 17 Tactical datalink PAF developed for Chinese assets. We know Chinese assets cant talk directly with American assets So Pakistan had to purchase a Hardware which not only compatible with Link-16 but also on which we can implement our own Datalink that can talk with Link-16. Hence Pakistan purchased German SDR, developed a Datalink that can talk with LINK-16 and installed the Link-17 in Chinese ZDK-03, JF_17's, Mirage's as well.

On the other hand Pakistan made Erieye as a translator and I'm guesstimating based on the info, Erieye has both Link-16 and Link 17 installed in it and Erieye acts as translator b/w Various assets of PAF. Thanks to R&S hardware installed in the JF-17 and mirages that communicate with Erieye which forwards the data to F-16

https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/dk/pr...-radios/pg_software-defined-radios_64225.html


Based on 27/2 Indian reports, The Phalcon awacs was only capable enough to guide SU-30 and mirages and Mig-21 through Voice, much like the Ground controlled interceptions through radio. Phalcon was not able to send Radar or sensor data via datalinks as it is an israeli hardware while SU-30 and mig-21 had russian Hardware installed in it. Both are incompatible and can-not talk with each other and India doesnt have homegrown datalink or translator so various elements can talk with each other

India is still not developing their own Datalink like LINK-17. They are going for Israeli Talos SDR so that All the indian jets speak one language and they can integrate their Phalcon, The JETS, and their Ground Control each other so every one knows where the others are.

IAF to buy SDRs from Israel to ensure secure communication between fighter jets

During the Balakot strike and the skirmish that followed afterwards, the IAF found itself deficient when it came to safe communication.

KEY HIGHLIGHTS
  • SDRs from Israel will be for the Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Sukhoi-30 fighters
  • If there is an attempt to jam, communication can shift to another frequency



New Delhi: The Indian Air Force (IAF) bombed Balakot on February 26 this year. The next day, it fought off a determined effort by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) to attack Indian army installations. During both battles, the IAF, when it came to safe communication, found itself deficient. And in future, it could lead to costly failures.

Immediately after Balakot, the IAF has decided to quickly buy Software Defined Radios (SDR), and integrate them with the aircraft fleets. This emergency purchase of SDRs from Israel will be for the Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Sukhoi-30 fighters of the IAF.

The SDRs will ensure secure communication not just between fighters in the air, but also between fighters in the air and the ground installations and importantly between the fighters in the air and the AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) - the eye in the sky. If there is an attempt to jam, communication can shift to another frequency and continue.

Besides conversations, it will provide secure data linking. This means everyone will know who - whether it is the fighter pilot, the AWACS controllers, the ground plotters - is where. This will help in better "combat control."

"Whatever we were talking could have been heard," a senior official said about the Balakot operations and after. The radios will ensure no one can pick up our communication. And importantly, the data linking will ensure we know who is where."

A small number - about 400 - are being purchased, as is possible during emergency acquisitions. Once the SDRs arrive, it will ensure that for the IAF, silence will truly be golden.


Agreed but the legacy Mig21s, mig 29s and MKIs may continue to have these problems. So 70-80% of their fleet will need upgrading. I am not sure what they will do in this regards although I know they were after changing some communication equipment on their platforms urgently. One of the reasons qouted for the efficacy of the MKI was its multi vendor provision of hardware which then did not communicate with each other. There may still be issues of integration of ground radars into the C41. My knowledge remains limited in these spheres so please feel free to rectify that which I have written incorrectly.
Regards
A
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Top Bottom