What's new

JF-17B - EW 'Growler'

Great Janjua

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 13, 2016
2,561
-3
2,720
Country
United Kingdom
Location
Pakistan
No, since the Flanker is a very different beast ... I cannot imagine the JF-17 to carry a similar amount of pods let alone provide enough energy/electricity for the systems and even more it is either a small single seater or a twin seater with similar limitations.
I second your thoughts no matter how many out of the box upgrades or packages we apply to jf-17 it will always be limited by it's size, engine, among others since it was only designed to be a lightweight interceptor.
 

AZADPAKISTAN2009

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 8, 2009
33,485
65
35,368
Country
Pakistan
Location
China
A modified JH-7 Would work as EW growler role
Since it has ability to outrun other planes due to it's Top Speed

The plane is also quite large that it can fit in many sensors
Would imagine this bird can stay up in air longer as well



The Thunder platform would be better to escort the unit , and be armed with weapons

Chinese have opted to convert one of their J-16D platform to EW role , so we may not even need to convert anything , Just get 1 squadron of J-16-D




The size of JF17 would be limiting factor as JF17-Thunder is in true sense is a Fighter Jet not designed to carry bulky EW gadget , it can do that role but loitering time in air would be less I would assume

May be if J16-D stays in air 3 hours (speculation), JF17 would perhaps would need to refuel in 2.3 hours (speculation)

But it is in theory possible to convert JF17 Block 2 , into JF17 Block 2 (EW) mode
Since we already have 50+ Block 2 , we will have flexibility to rotate the Growler mode if need be
 
Last edited:

akramishaqkhan

FULL MEMBER
Feb 28, 2017
646
0
1,394
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
A single engine plane to take on a "growler" role is not viable. Pakistan is unlikely to field deep strike packages, where a "growler" becomes essential.
Unless the PAF modifies is war fighting doctrine which is a possibility. PAF has been focused on SEAD for many years, whereas Indian has built a formidable AD network. For PAF to knockout IAF forward bases will require a level of penetration into near border hostile environs that will require significant suppression through ECM and other electronic means. In that case I can see a JF-17B "Growler" version. Outside of that it is unlikely. If we do see a JF-17B Growler version then we know exactly how they are likely to be applied.
 

AZADPAKISTAN2009

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 8, 2009
33,485
65
35,368
Country
Pakistan
Location
China
However , the pod like solution would certainly work , Having this flexibility would give a extra edge
Lucky for Pakistan our foe is next door so we don't need to fly very far

Still room for some gadgets on the wings

Credit to the original poster @Shabi1
1634581510250.png
 

DJ_Viper

FULL MEMBER
Mar 17, 2008
1,666
2
2,009
Country
United States
Location
United States
Major Issue: Less number of hard points.

2 x wingtips can use detection pods.
1 x mid pylon for High Band jamming pod
1 x mid pylon for Low band jamming pod
2 x inner pylons for MAR-1
1 x center-line for fuel

Where will A2A missiles go.
Less Range.
Nor sure if wet pylons can carry Mar-1
Let's see, 3 HP's taken by fuel tanks. One MER fitted with two Sd-10's and the remainder 4 with jamming PODs, two on wingtips and two on remainder hardpoints. You could in theory use one more pod in lieu of one fuel tank making it 5 jamming / EW pods. This is a good step in the right direction.

Now Pakistan needs some heavies, a local / ToT based BVR and a SAM system to start that industry to build knowledge base and flourish, and lastly a Hypersonic vehicle.
 

White and Green with M/S

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 29, 2020
3,810
-2
2,003
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
A modified JH-7 Would work as EW growler role
Since it has ability to outrun other planes due to it's Top Speed

The plane is also quite large that it can fit in many sensors
Would imagine this bird can stay up in air longer as well



The Thunder platform would be better to escort the unit , and be armed with weapons

Chinese have opted to convert one of their J-16D platform to EW role , so we may not even need to convert anything , Just get 1 squadron of J-16-D




The size of JF17 would be limiting factor as JF17-Thunder is in true sense is a Fighter Jet not designed to carry bulky EW gadget , it can do that role but loitering time in air would be less I would assume

May be if J16-D stays in air 3 hours (speculation), JF17 would perhaps would need to refuel in 2.3 hours (speculation)

But it is in theory possible to convert JF17 Block 2 , into JF17 Block 2 (EW) mode
Since we already have 50+ Block 2 , we will have flexibility to rotate the Growler mode if need be
J16 has no chance for Pakistan because it design based on Russia, Hence this design is RUSSISN ITTELECTUAL PROPERTY
 

DJ_Viper

FULL MEMBER
Mar 17, 2008
1,666
2
2,009
Country
United States
Location
United States
A single engine plane to take on a "growler" role is not viable. Pakistan is unlikely to field deep strike packages, where a "growler" becomes essential.
Unless the PAF modifies is war fighting doctrine which is a possibility. PAF has been focused on SEAD for many years, whereas Indian has built a formidable AD network. For PAF to knockout IAF forward bases will require a level of penetration into near border hostile environs that will require significant suppression through ECM and other electronic means. In that case I can see a JF-17B "Growler" version. Outside of that it is unlikely. If we do see a JF-17B Growler version then we know exactly how they are likely to be applied.
You are failing to understand the purpose behind this development. One, you MUST have it for your naval operations. Secondly, with S-400's and the likes being placed within a 100 miles of the Pakistani-Indian borders, thus covering 200 Miles deep inside Pakistan, you need these to fly your own jets safely and blind the S-400. Additionally, like it happened before, you also need to jam the inbound package so that there is limited to no data sharing and contact among the incomings, thus allowing you more time to react, with more safety for your aircrafts to operate within your own airspace.
 

AZADPAKISTAN2009

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 8, 2009
33,485
65
35,368
Country
Pakistan
Location
China
F-18 plane' , it's characteristics (Physical , raw machine capabilities ) are far superior to F-16, Thunder was designed to match F-16

JF-17 , can't match F-18 for "certain" characteristics but it can still get the Job done , if assigned to Jam enemy Units.

  • If F-18 Growler gets 10/10 , JF17- Growler mode would be 6.5-7.0 rating , F-18 is much bigger plane then Thunder more fuel , more flight no doubt this physical characteristic can only be matched if scaled up JF17 is done with more powerful engine which is not on card [Unless Block IV is created]

Still JF-17 would be able to get job done , no doubt since our enemy is next door

Should in future Longer range is desired perhaps a purchase of J-16D would be on cards in future.

Ability to convert any of the JF-17 Block II B (we have 50+ units or so for B Unit) to Growler mode is certainly a very strategic enhancement
 
Last edited:

Sage

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 19, 2014
2,303
1
2,324
Country
Pakistan
Location
France
A modified JH-7 Would work as EW growler role
Since it has ability to outrun other planes due to it's Top Speed

The plane is also quite large that it can fit in many sensors
Would imagine this bird can stay up in air longer as well



The Thunder platform would be better to escort the unit , and be armed with weapons

Chinese have opted to convert one of their J-16D platform to EW role , so we may not even need to convert anything , Just get 1 squadron of J-16-D




The size of JF17 would be limiting factor as JF17-Thunder is in true sense is a Fighter Jet not designed to carry bulky EW gadget , it can do that role but loitering time in air would be less I would assume

May be if J16-D stays in air 3 hours (speculation), JF17 would perhaps would need to refuel in 2.3 hours (speculation)

But it is in theory possible to convert JF17 Block 2 , into JF17 Block 2 (EW) mode
Since we already have 50+ Block 2 , we will have flexibility to rotate the Growler mode if need be
China cannot sell J-16 D to Pakistan...JH-7 is an excellent option if only it produced a better thrust to weight ratio...I have written about many times that JH-7 is a must for Pak Navy ...
 

akramishaqkhan

FULL MEMBER
Feb 28, 2017
646
0
1,394
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
You are failing to understand the purpose behind this development. One, you MUST have it for your naval operations. Secondly, with S-400's and the likes being placed within a 100 miles of the Pakistani-Indian borders, thus covering 200 Miles deep inside Pakistan, you need these to fly your own jets safely and blind the S-400. Additionally, like it happened before, you also need to jam the inbound package so that there is limited to no data sharing and contact among the incomings, thus allowing you more time to react, with more safety for your aircrafts to operate within your own airspace.
I am not failing to understand. I am saying in large measure what you are saying.
 
Last edited:

MIRauf

FULL MEMBER
Mar 23, 2018
654
0
869
Country
United States
Location
United States
You are failing to understand the purpose behind this development. One, you MUST have it for your naval operations. Secondly, with S-400's and the likes being placed within a 100 miles of the Pakistani-Indian borders, thus covering 200 Miles deep inside Pakistan, you need these to fly your own jets safely and blind the S-400. Additionally, like it happened before, you also need to jam the inbound package so that there is limited to no data sharing and contact among the incomings, thus allowing you more time to react, with more safety for your aircrafts to operate within your own airspace.
Witth-in 100 Miles of IB ? easy picking for MLRS, not going to happen. Expect them to be placed 200 odd miles away from IB, even then they be in reach of A-300 MLRS system along with other SoW, BMs, CMs.
 

FuturePAF

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 17, 2014
5,774
20
6,790
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Would a J-15 be considered Russian Intellectual property? Considering the Chinese bought a T-10K prototype from Ukraine, it’s technically not Russian.

But, Realistically, would a EW platform based off the J-10CE be more feasible, due to the PAF’s budget and desire to limit the number of types in the fleet

Perhaps the pods can be made with their own power supply, decreasing the dependence on the WS-10B engine of the J-10CE.

Whatever is acquired it would have to be able to serve for decades to come.
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
11,637
-1
15,951
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
No, since the Flanker is a very different beast ... I cannot imagine the JF-17 to carry a similar amount of pods let alone provide enough energy/electricity for the systems and even more it is either a small single seater or a twin seater with similar limitations.
Agreed but battery and wind driven tech is advanced enough today to provide just enough power at the time of the mission to blind the enemy, deliver the payload and disappear.
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
12,403
76
14,733
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Let's see, 3 HP's taken by fuel tanks. One MER fitted with two Sd-10's and the remainder 4 with jamming PODs, two on wingtips and two on remainder hardpoints. You could in theory use one more pod in lieu of one fuel tank making it 5 jamming / EW pods. This is a good step in the right direction.

Now Pakistan needs some heavies, a local / ToT based BVR and a SAM system to start that industry to build knowledge base and flourish, and lastly a Hypersonic vehicle.
5 × Jamming Pods not only require tremendous amount of power but will impose significant aerodymamic penality on the airframe as well. This level of payload stresses F/A-18 airframe as well.

JF-17 will not cut it in this case.
 

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


Top Bottom