What's new

JF-17 fighter jet gets J-20’s combat missile: reports (Global times)

alee92nawaz

FULL MEMBER
Sep 14, 2015
1,699
-3
959
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Brother JFT is also able to carry 4 SD-10 if we put them in place of fuel drop tanks

Duel racks is created drag hence it will reduce range/speed of the jet, that's why its not operational

Then why we not had J-10 offered by China in early 2000??? the reason was that PAF was not satisfied the performance of J-10 especially its EW package with other unrelated reasons
Fuel tanks are needed.
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
10,391
-2
13,749
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Are you sure? Do you have any expertise to support that? Or you just mean "lay-man" easy because it seems easy to a lay-man.

What reason do you think we havent seen dual-rack SD-10s in operation yet? I am skeptical abouth the radar reason (current radar can only simultaneously engage 2 targets), the underlying assumption there is that you will just take 1 set of shots in the first flow and not re-engage. That's not how BVR tactics work.
I don't have expertise but have spoken to us navy technicians that have mounted dual racks on f18s. it's not a difficult task to achieve. and mind you, the dual racks were shown for BLK3 Thunders that will have the AESA radar capable of engaging 4 targets, not 1 or 2. That explains why we haven't sent dual missile racks on the Thunders as of yet. And besides, the PAF doesn't show off its assets.
 

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
15,217
10
14,587
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I think you are referring to the peregrine missile. I have not seen any details about aim260 except that it would be longer ranged.
And that it would nt be RAM based
Are you sure? Do you have any expertise to support that? Or you just mean "lay-man" easy because it seems easy to a lay-man.

What reason do you think we havent seen dual-rack SD-10s in operation yet? I am skeptical abouth the radar reason (current radar can only simultaneously engage 2 targets), the underlying assumption there is that you will just take 1 set of shots in the first flow and not re-engage. That's not how BVR tactics work.
Endurance of b2 and during peacetime doesnt make sense to go fully loaded

But i agree minimum of 4 BVRs are needed for modern BVR tactics
Lets see if rumours of rd93ma/morefuel and dual racks will be confirmed or not
 

Shabi1

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2006
1,816
6
2,722
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Are you sure? Do you have any expertise to support that? Or you just mean "lay-man" easy because it seems easy to a lay-man.

What reason do you think we havent seen dual-rack SD-10s in operation yet? I am skeptical abouth the radar reason (current radar can only simultaneously engage 2 targets), the underlying assumption there is that you will just take 1 set of shots in the first flow and not re-engage. That's not how BVR tactics work.
I got this from a interview with a PAF official which I can't seem to find, so will have to take my word.

Even though CATIC has a full scale mock up of JF-17 on display with dual rack SD-10s PAF didn't choose this configuration for it's JF-17s because the KLJ-7 can guide only 2 SD-10s at a time. Although possible but PAF felt this loadout isn't practical enough in combat hence not employed.

Now that Blk-3 gets a better radar and more loadout capability this could be a possibility.
 

m52k85

FULL MEMBER
May 24, 2013
534
0
511
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
PAF didn't choose this configuration for it's JF-17s because the KLJ-7 can guide only 2 SD-10s at a time.
So the PAF wants us to believe the Jf-17 will always be used in a shoot and scoot tactic, and not go into an engage disengage cycle? Do you think thats practical?

Either they are hiding the capability or the pre-blk 3s the capability comes at too much of flight envelop cost to justify it.
 

Shabi1

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2006
1,816
6
2,722
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
So the PAF wants us to believe the Jf-17 will always be used in a shoot and scoot tactic, and not go into an engage disengage cycle? Do you think thats practical?

Either they are hiding the capability or the pre-blk 3s the capability comes at too much of flight envelop cost to justify it.
The argument of drag and degradation to flight envelop doesn't hold because it carries other munitions with worse impacts.
The DCS JF-17 which is a very accurate blk-1 can carry 4 sd-10s same time. The capability is there but its a preference that because of the radars limitation of only being able to guide 2 bvrs at a time they decided it's not a practical configuration. It was from a official interview so not my 2 cents.
 

CHI RULES

FULL MEMBER
Mar 23, 2015
1,881
5
1,568
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
This is really good news but how long will it take for PAF pilots to get accustomed to performing with heads up displays and off bore sight missiles. A change of tactics would likely be required. Its a major technological jump from anything in Pakistans inventory. Is PAF able to replicate these advances In simulator?
Neither Rafale in IAF nor block 3 with latest gadgets is coming in blink of an eye. It is much certain that pilots and crew gets main training and tactical modules/necessary training starts much longer before induction. Supposedly if PAF is going to induct the J10 and J11 variants then we have got pics and info of PAF fighter pilots getting accustomed with Chinese jets. I am quite sure that Pakistani pilots have already completed training regarding most of latest gadgets.
Fuel tanks are needed.
Refuel in air almost doubles the range of the jet.
 

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
34,643
393
71,676
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
two more hard points on jft will make it real 4+ fighter i am sick of current load now
7 additional inches and a wider chest and bone structure would make me into a heavyweight wrestler - but that is not what I was born with or am optimized for.
 

Imran Khan

PDF VETERAN
Oct 18, 2007
59,320
2
117,162
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
7 additional inches and a wider chest and bone structure would make me into a heavyweight wrestler - but that is not what I was born with or am optimized for.
i am not sick for you sir i was sick of that damn fighter
1620242856382.png
 

Scorpiooo

FULL MEMBER
Apr 22, 2020
786
0
793
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
7 additional inches and a wider chest and bone structure would make me into a heavyweight wrestler - but that is not what I was born with or am optimized for.
That means change in air frame, i dont think they will consider this as option even in future
 

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


Top Bottom