What's new

JF-17B Updates, News & Discussion

Irfan Baloch

SENIOR MODERATOR
Apr 12, 2009
18,924
185
43,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I think it has been a combination of the restraint induced by lack of funding, the urgency of replacement, and a lack of clear need from the PAF's perspective. However, they did not think it out from a buyers perspective and this was an issue.
Now they have got the system in hand they are trying to expand its role. So I at least am ambivalent to attribute a cause to this alleged missed opportunity. We are all at a distinct advantage at the moment in knowing what the PAF and CATIC's perspective was so a sound analysis cannot be made. 10 years down the line when one knows the real reasons behind not inducting the B variant will we be able to reason out what actually happened.
Incidentally do F22 and35 have a dual seat version????? By no means am I comparing the two with JFT but it might help to see the emerging trends the world over.

A
the JF-17 development program has been a great success for a new comer in the exclusive club of Aviation industry together with the partnership of China whose own aviation achievements are modest (yes).

does a strike fighter specially electronic warfare and SAM / radar suppression role needs a 2 seater as a must have? the Hornets Grawler is 2 seater and I understand its not for training but for combat role.
 

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
7,819
64
12,198
the JF-17 development program has been a great success for a new comer in the exclusive club of Aviation industry together with the partnership of China whose own aviation achievements are modest (yes).

does a strike fighter specially electronic warfare and SAM / radar suppression role needs a 2 seater as a must have? the Hornets Grawler is 2 seater and I understand its not for training but for combat role.
Agreed with what you say but when faced with constraints where do you set your priorities and what would that have been? To waste time with a twin seater or get the single seater up and going. As they had limitations they probably put up a brave face and said we do not need a twin seater.
All of this is pure conjecture and we willnot know till someone writes about it .
A
 

Danish Moazzam

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Dec 26, 2015
47
0
67
Country
Pakistan
Location
Nigeria
Seeing the time it took them to churn out the 2 seater is amazing, they redesigned the tail, the spine and made all modification and certified it for flight in such a short time One can only assume that the 2 seater was always in the making it was only a matter of when PAF decided to put the hammer down.

As soon as they got confident and a 100 units in air and generating enough interest they flexed their muscle and delivered the 2 seater.

In contrast the Blk-03 has been in the making for so long and still no concrete info
 

GriffinsRule

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 18, 2015
2,188
4
3,028
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Seeing the time it took them to churn out the 2 seater is amazing, they redesigned the tail, the spine and made all modification and certified it for flight in such a short time One can only assume that the 2 seater was always in the making it was only a matter of when PAF decided to put the hammer down.

As soon as they got confident and a 100 units in air and generating enough interest they flexed their muscle and delivered the 2 seater.

In contrast the Blk-03 has been in the making for so long and still no concrete info
I think it actually took a couple of years for the modifications and testing. The first flight that happened in early 2017 probably had another year or two before on the design parameters set etc. Myanmar got their example two years after the first flight and PAF got theirs almost six months later. So it didnt happen overnight for sure. Lot of work goes into any changes, even for an existing aircraft.
 

MastanKhan

PDF VETERAN
Dec 26, 2005
19,302
160
52,997
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
The problem with trying to integrate Gripen EW into the JF-17 is integration in the wider scheme of things. We have seen this with the Indian MKI - trying to hack subsystems from the East and the West and ending up with EW that jams its own systems.

Modern EW makes it even more difficult to do this as the systems need to constantly talk to each other. Ultimately, the most powerful EW system in an aircraft has already become the radar itself.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thoughts on a Growler JF-17

A large base below the vertical tail of the JF-17, similar to the F-16 version offered to India could house major EW. So could the wing tips. MERs could even allow 4x BVR and 2x WVR if the need arises.

A large conformal fuel tank could sold the problem of taking out two fuel tanks. To compensate for the added weight at the back, the forward fuselage could be lengthened for even greater fuel and electronics, bit like what the French did with the Mirage V.

Alternatively to solve the CoG issues, you could mount a heavy pod on the forward hardpoint. You could also remove the gun and create a large conformal EW pod.

For solving radiation problems you could line the cockpit with lead. One thing that some modern aircraft do is imbue gold dust on the cockpit glass to keep radar waves from entering the cockpit. Perhaps it could be possible to imbue lead into the cockpit glass in the same way.

Lead is only a problem for pilot health if they inhale it or consume it in some way. Not otherwise.
Hi,

Engineering is a frame of mind---which mean---your product shows your mental thinking and capabilities.

If Paf decides to go the way of Gripen on the JF17---it will succeed---because the thinking process procedures have clear picture and end result in front of them.

Here a soldier decides what he wants or not---and this simplifies the perpetual change---the need for change---what is to be changed---and what the resultant outcome would be.

Whereas our neighbor---the military has to go thru the civilian side contractors and that has not been a big help.

Jf17 has chinese pkg as well as turkish and spansih equipment and each of them have been a success.
 

KaiserX

FULL MEMBER
Apr 6, 2019
685
0
1,170
Country
United States
Location
United States
I believe the future will be unmanned. PAF should focus on producing a next generation unmanned JF-17 variant. By unmanned I mean the jet would still be manned but from the ground similar to how drones are operated.

Imagine the benefits... you could reduce a lot of weight required for the air craft freeing up space for more weapons, increasing speed, more sensors, etc.. while at the same time not be limited by human abilities (within the cockpit) allowing the aircraft to perform insane G manuvers.
 

PakFactor

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 30, 2019
3,521
2
6,161
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I believe the future will be unmanned. PAF should focus on producing a next generation unmanned JF-17 variant. By unmanned I mean the jet would still be manned but from the ground similar to how drones are operated.

Imagine the benefits... you could reduce a lot of weight required for the air craft freeing up space for more weapons, increasing speed, more sensors, etc.. while at the same time not be limited by human abilities (within the cockpit) allowing the aircraft to perform insane G manuvers.
My vision of next gen fighters would be akin to a Tesla --

- Autonomous flight
- Sensor Fusion to distinguish between friend and foe, and linked to ground assets as well
- Self engagement and thinking with other assets in the field when engaging enemy
- Plane doing its maneuvers on its own using real time data

You'll still have human roles in Helis and Drones to provide cover for ground forces
 

Danish Moazzam

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Dec 26, 2015
47
0
67
Country
Pakistan
Location
Nigeria
I think it actually took a couple of years for the modifications and testing. The first flight that happened in early 2017 probably had another year or two before on the design parameters set etc. Myanmar got their example two years after the first flight and PAF got theirs almost six months later. So it didnt happen overnight for sure. Lot of work goes into any changes, even for an existing aircraft.
I agree, two years is very very insignificant time to put out a 2 seater from scratch. It only means that it was already in process but not publicly acknowledged. it was on side burner as there was immediate requirement for PAF. Even if they had export order in hand they would not have been able to deliver.
 

Marker

FULL MEMBER
Dec 31, 2019
701
5
878
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I agree, two years is very very insignificant time to put out a 2 seater from scratch. It only means that it was already in process but not publicly acknowledged. it was on side burner as there was immediate requirement for PAF. Even if they had export order in hand they would not have been able to deliver.
In my opinion, after comparing the difference in airframe designs of Jf-17 single seater and dual seater, there may be noticeable differences in flight characteristics of both versions, specially in speed, radius of turn, TO and landing distance, service ceiling, combat range, fuel consumption and RCS.
 

Armchair

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 4, 2014
3,322
8
5,368
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Turkey
Hi,

Engineering is a frame of mind---which mean---your product shows your mental thinking and capabilities.

If Paf decides to go the way of Gripen on the JF17---it will succeed---because the thinking process procedures have clear picture and end result in front of them.

Here a soldier decides what he wants or not---and this simplifies the perpetual change---the need for change---what is to be changed---and what the resultant outcome would be.

Whereas our neighbor---the military has to go thru the civilian side contractors and that has not been a big help.

Jf17 has chinese pkg as well as turkish and spansih equipment and each of them have been a success.
Agreed, if PAC wants, they can surely go a "Gripen Route". However, the devil is in the details here.

Using Spanish EW in a basic EW suite is fine but when you move to current high end EW tech, it requires very close integration. The Chinese won't allow that kind of integration with their systems, as it would allow Western companies to get details.

For instance, it is perfectly technically possible to integrate AMRAAMs on the JF-17. All you need is a handshake between the Chinese radar, JF-17 electronics and the AMRAAM. However, this cannot be done.

Now imagine your RWR, other sensors, EW on pods, radar, all seemlessly needing to talk to each other instantaneously. Yes, if a system from Spain allows itself to be given with full access to the source codes, it is possible to integrate it. However, when you go into higher end systems, like those on the Gripen, the Europeans would:
1. Not sell
2. Sell without full access to the software

This means that seamless integration is difficult at best. Meaning that instantaneous and unified working of the electronics is now not possible.

Again, the Indians made this mistake. Israeli equipment was not able to effectively integrate with Russian equipment. Not because the Indian engineers were incompetent, but because the Israelis and Russians didn't want to give each other access and insight into their systems. Had the Indians not been short sighted, they would have never gone through to begin with.

And that was for tech 2 decades ago. Last generation EW. The problem becomes 10x with the current generation of EW. Let me explain this further. In the very latest technology, your radar itself becomes almost a subsystem of the wider EW system. They need to seemlessly work with your EW pods, RWR, DRFM, processing, etc at the fastest, most instantaneous way possible. If it can't do it near instantaneously, the whole thing collapses in terms of its effectiveness.

Gone are the days of brute Russian jamming. Yes, that still works, but the art is far more refined to be as efficient as possible, so that small aircraft like the Gripen can have a meaningful EW capability.

The American F/A-18 Growler combines both brute power with ultra refinement. This is what makes it such a major asset. Meanwhile, the F-35 does ultra refinement. It is claimed that DEW is now in its capability - but this may be urban legend.

What does that mean? What is DEW? DEW is the ability of an EW suite to do permanent damage on an enemy system. A radar, for instance, is a powerful microwave. If you walk in front of a radar, you are basically getting an x ray and if you have chocolates with you, they will melt. A very powerful microwave directed, pinpointed at a point, could cause permanent damage even to the enemy system. "Fry the electronics".

Now imagine a generation even beyond that - something perhaps we may see in the near future. A laser and the radar pointing their energy at an enemy aircraft's radar, RWR, and perhaps frying those electronics. That is the future.

To complement this brute power, you have a very effective DRFM and processing that allows you to instantly jam and algorithms that allow you to anticipate what the enemy EW will do. So you can now put your whole jamming capability into the small band that the enemy radar is about to radiate.
 

AZADPAKISTAN2009

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 8, 2009
32,037
63
33,174
Country
Pakistan
Location
China
When can we see the JF17-B , Yearly Picture of the Models Produced per year
It was a good tradition to show case the 18-25 units , manufactured per year Induction Photoshoot

Ceremonial Induction of New Squadrons , seems like it is a great tradition
 
Last edited:

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


Top Bottom