Arguments of choosing JF-17 Thunder over JAS-39 Gripen

[Syed Hussain]

For God sake going to a 33rd page?

 

[C130]

The sources I have seen state the number of flight hours for the JF-17 to be 4,000.
(That might be wrong of course)
Gripen is designed for 8,000 flight hours.



Sweden estimate the cost to be ~72M$ Per plane.
I have not seen any data for cost per flight hour

if that's the fly-away cost that's not bad.

 

[Malik Alashter]

Yes, You were...
When Musharraf visited Sweden in 2004, Pakistan wanted to discuss buying 40 Gripen
"since they were better than the F-16".
They were told to forget it, but EriEye was OK.

http://www.sydsvenskan.se/2004-06-19/pakistan-vill-kopa-40-jas-plan

Why forget it Pakistan isn't neighbor to Israel your most concern state.

if that's the fly-away cost that's not bad.

Ok, 72 fly away that's not including the other thingys that should come up with it when all that attached it will hit the roof for sure.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

The Meteor missile and superior radar range would for starters establish a healthy kill ratio for Gripen.
In dogfights, the Gripen looks like it can outturn the JF-17 without problems.

And somehow SD-10B or R-Darter would be useless against gripen?

Radar range of KLJV2 is around 140-150+km.. Comparable to the APG-68 radar ..

Meanwhile the Block III will be equipped (aswell as all previous blocks) with AESA.. Contenders are Selex,Chinese etc.

As for outturning the JF-17... Well it outturns the F-16 .. I'm sure It can do the same to the gripen !

The Gripen C has nothing on the JF-17 block I. Much less the new Block II.

One of the key factors allowing Swedish Pilots to win in Top Gun is the Man Machine Interface,
which they claim is the best in the world, allowing them to concentrate on fighting,
instead of on flying, so JF-17 pilots are likely to run into information overload way before Gripen pilots.

This includes the superior datalink between Gripen aircrafts, allowing one aircraft to act like an AWACS
for other Gripen which runs without activated radar.

The same is the case with the JF-17 and that's the reason Pak has 8 AWACS and a net centric approach towards the modern battlefield.. Each PAF fighter can relay the info to another unit.

Some info;

Although an ancillary comment, AC Mahmood stated that “a national solution” was being used to connect the JF-17 to “on and off-board sensors.”

If you are not familiar with the concept, a data-link network basically enables various assets to communicate and exchange information from their sensors in near real-time. For example, an Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft could pick up incoming enemy aircraft and, nearly instantly, pass that exact information (with continuous updates) to friendly fighters. The network environment gives your side a live “picture” of the battlefield situation, enabling every friendly actor on the field to have an accurate and constantly up-to-date understanding of the situation.

The PAF uses the American Link-16 system with its F-16s, though it is not entirely clear if the Erieye AEW&C is equipped with Link-16. That said, it should be noted that Saab listed Link-16 (along with Link-11 and an “in-house data link”) as an option.

Besides mentioning that “the national solution” was working “okay”, the system in question was not elaborated upon. It is no secret that the JF-17 was slotted to be a network-centric platform, but it was not clear exactly how the PAF would achieve it. Would it import a data-link network that could be interoperable with Link-16? Or would it use two completely separated solutions (which could be relayed between one another by AEW&C)?

The use of a “national solution” can be a significant thing, assuming what is meant by “solution” is the actual network itself. I personally would consider this feat to be of paramount importance given how network-centric warfare is the norm in modern warfare


http://quwa.org/2015/10/17/jf-17-block-2-and-block-3-details-confirmed/


----

While the air force getting JF-17 will be able to get more aircraft, the fast turnaround time of the Gripen
will allow a higher percentage of the fleet to be up in the air,at any given time.
Over time, the limited number of flight hours of the JF-17 cause attrition, reducing the theoretical numerical superiority.

Without solid data your point regarding turnaround time etc holds no worth.


You aren't dealing with the Somali airforce but PAF a highly decorated airforce that has a kill ratio compared to the best in the world .. Be it the Israelis or the Americans themselves... And they have a solid kill ratio against indians,Israelis and even the Soviets to prove that...

Not to forget them fleecing the likes of Typhoons and other top of the line jets in multinational exercises.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

.

And somehow SD-10B or R-Darter would be useless against gripen?

Radar range of KLJV2 is around 140-150+km.. Comparable to the APG-68 radar ..

Meanwhile the Block III will be equipped (aswell as all previous blocks) with AESA.. Contenders are Selex,Chinese etc.

As for outturning the JF-17... Well it outturns the F-16 .. I'm sure It can do the same to the gripen !

The Gripen C has nothing on the JF-17 block I. Much less the new Block II.



The same is the case with the JF-17 and that's the reason Pak has 8 AWACS and a net centric approach towards the modern battlefield.. Each PAF fighter can relay the info to another unit.

Some info;

Although an ancillary comment, AC Mahmood stated that “a national solution” was being used to connect the JF-17 to “on and off-board sensors.”

If you are not familiar with the concept, a data-link network basically enables various assets to communicate and exchange information from their sensors in near real-time. For example, an Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft could pick up incoming enemy aircraft and, nearly instantly, pass that exact information (with continuous updates) to friendly fighters. The network environment gives your side a live “picture” of the battlefield situation, enabling every friendly actor on the field to have an accurate and constantly up-to-date understanding of the situation.

The PAF uses the American Link-16 system with its F-16s, though it is not entirely clear if the Erieye AEW&C is equipped with Link-16. That said, it should be noted that Saab listed Link-16 (along with Link-11 and an “in-house data link”) as an option.

Besides mentioning that “the national solution” was working “okay”, the system in question was not elaborated upon. It is no secret that the JF-17 was slotted to be a network-centric platform, but it was not clear exactly how the PAF would achieve it. Would it import a data-link network that could be interoperable with Link-16? Or would it use two completely separated solutions (which could be relayed between one another by AEW&C)?

The use of a “national solution” can be a significant thing, assuming what is meant by “solution” is the actual network itself. I personally would consider this feat to be of paramount importance given how network-centric warfare is the norm in modern warfare


http://quwa.org/2015/10/17/jf-17-block-2-and-block-3-details-confirmed/


----






Without solid data your point regarding turnaround time etc holds no worth.


You aren't dealing with the Somali airforce but PAF a highly decorated airforce that has a kill ratio compared to the best in the world .. Be it the Israelis or the Americans themselves... And they have a solid kill ratio against indians,Israelis and even the Soviets to prove that...

Not to forget them fleecing the likes of Typhoons and other top of the line jets in multinational exercises.

And the Link-16 is inferior to the proprietary data link.
so if the JF-17 is using it, it is inferior to Gripen in that respect.

Originally Posted by Bill Sweetman
The TIDLS can connect up to four aircraft in a full-time two-way link. It has a range of 500 km and is highly resistant to jamming; almost the only way to jam the system is to position a jammer aircraft directly between the two communicating Gripens. Its basic modes include the ability to display the position, bearing, and speed of all four aircraft in a formation, including basic status information such as fuel and weapons state. The TIDLS is fundamentally different from broadcast-style links like Link 16. It serves fewer users but links them more closely together, exchanging much more data, and operating much closer to real time.

TIDLS information, along with radar, EW, and mapping data, appears on the central MFD. The display reflects complete sensor fusion: a target that is being tracked by multiple sources is one target on the screen. Detailed symbols distinguish between friendlies, hostiles, and unidentified targets and show who has targeted whom.

Today, Sweden is the only country that is flying with a link of this kind, and will retain that status until the F-22 enters service. The Flygvapnet has already proven some of the tactical advantages of the link, including the ability to spread the formation over a much wider area. Visual contact between the fighters is no longer necessary, because the datalink shows the position of each aircraft. Leader and wingman roles are different: the pilot in the best position makes the attack, and the fact that he has targeted the enemy is immediately communicated to the three other aircraft.

A basic use of the datalink is "silent attack." An adversary may be aware that he is being tracked by a fighter radar that is outside missile range. He may not be aware that another, closer fighter is receiving that tracking data and is preparing for a missile launch without using its own radar. After launch, the shooter can break and escape, while the other fighter continues to pass tracking data to the missile. In tests, Gripen pilots have learned that this makes it possible to delay using the AMRAAM's active seeker until it is too late for the target to respond.

But the use of the link goes beyond this, towards what the Swedish Air Force calls "samverkan," or close-cooperation. One example is the use of the Ericsson PS-05/A radar with TIDLS. An Ericsson paper compares its application, with identical sensors and precise knowledge of the location of both platforms, to human twins: "Communication is possible without explaining everything."

"Radar-samverkan," the Ericsson paper suggests, equips the formation with a super-radar of extraordinary capabilities. The PS-05/A can operate in passive mode, as a sensitive receiver with high directional accuracy (due to its large antenna). Two PS-05/As can exchange information by datalink and locate the target by triangulation. The target's signals will often identify it as well.

The datalink results in better tracking. Usually, three plots (echoes) are needed to track a target in track-while-scan mode. The datalink allows the radars to share plots, not just tracks, so even if none of the aircraft in a formation gets enough plots on its own to track the target, they may do so collectively.

Each radar plot includes Doppler velocity, which provides the individual aircraft with range-rate data. However, this data on its own does not yield the velocity of the target. Using the TIDLS, two fighters can take simultaneous range-rate readings and thereby determine the target's track instantly, reducing the need for radar transmission.

In ECM applications, one fighter can search, while the wingman simultaneously focuses jamming on the same target, using the radar. This makes it very difficult for the target to intercept or jam the radar that is tracking him. Another anti-jamming technique is for all four radars to illuminate the same target simultaneously at different frequencies.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

.



And the Link-16 is inferior to the proprietary data link.
so if the JF-17 is using it, it is inferior to Gripen in that respect.

Time to read the article again..

 

[MastanKhan]

Over time, the limited number of flight hours of the JF-17 cause attrition, reducing the theoretical numerical superiority.

The sources I have seen state the number of flight hours for the JF-17 to be 4,000.
(That might be wrong of course)
Gripen is designed for 8,000 flight hours.

Hi,

First of all---you are not listening----. Pakistan had no intention of buying the aircraft---the number given was to entice sweden to allow test flight of the aircraft.

It is " incorrect " that sweden refused the sale---it did not happen---pakistan learnt enough from this aircraft for around 2 years time period of test flights and then decided to upgrade its own aircraft. If sweden states that it refused paf---then it is trying to cover up for giving open access on the gripen to paf.

The BLK 3 with aesa will have similar features as that of the Gripen E---and will also be equipped with PL15 BVr missile.

The gripen E is no doubt an excellent aircraft---.

The comments----' limited number of flying hours / attrition rate---what does that have to do with " theoratical numerical superiority "---to the superiority of one aircraft over the other----.

Sensor fusion is going to be a norm in all the coming aircraft---. The thing is who is on the future buyer's list of the Gripen E---.

For the JF 17---Paf is looking for around 200 more aircraft---or maybe more---not taking into account any foreign sales---which may or may not happen---.

Is Sweden betting on the U S to replace its F16's or compliment it with the Gripen E?

.



And the Link-16 is inferior to the proprietary data link.
so if the JF-17 is using it, it is inferior to Gripen in that respect.

Originally Posted by Bill Sweetman
The TIDLS can connect up to four aircraft in a full-time two-way link. It has a range of 500 km and is highly resistant to jamming; almost the only way to jam the system is to position a jammer aircraft directly between the two communicating Gripens. Its basic modes include the ability to display the position, bearing, and speed of all four aircraft in a formation, including basic status information such as fuel and weapons state. The TIDLS is fundamentally different from broadcast-style links like Link 16. It serves fewer users but links them more closely together, exchanging much more data, and operating much closer to real time.

TIDLS information, along with radar, EW, and mapping data, appears on the central MFD. The display reflects complete sensor fusion: a target that is being tracked by multiple sources is one target on the screen. Detailed symbols distinguish between friendlies, hostiles, and unidentified targets and show who has targeted whom.

Today, Sweden is the only country that is flying with a link of this kind, and will retain that status until the F-22 enters service. The Flygvapnet has already proven some of the tactical advantages of the link, including the ability to spread the formation over a much wider area. Visual contact between the fighters is no longer necessary, because the datalink shows the position of each aircraft. Leader and wingman roles are different: the pilot in the best position makes the attack, and the fact that he has targeted the enemy is immediately communicated to the three other aircraft.

A basic use of the datalink is "silent attack." An adversary may be aware that he is being tracked by a fighter radar that is outside missile range. He may not be aware that another, closer fighter is receiving that tracking data and is preparing for a missile launch without using its own radar. After launch, the shooter can break and escape, while the other fighter continues to pass tracking data to the missile. In tests, Gripen pilots have learned that this makes it possible to delay using the AMRAAM's active seeker until it is too late for the target to respond.

But the use of the link goes beyond this, towards what the Swedish Air Force calls "samverkan," or close-cooperation. One example is the use of the Ericsson PS-05/A radar with TIDLS. An Ericsson paper compares its application, with identical sensors and precise knowledge of the location of both platforms, to human twins: "Communication is possible without explaining everything."

"Radar-samverkan," the Ericsson paper suggests, equips the formation with a super-radar of extraordinary capabilities. The PS-05/A can operate in passive mode, as a sensitive receiver with high directional accuracy (due to its large antenna). Two PS-05/As can exchange information by datalink and locate the target by triangulation. The target's signals will often identify it as well.

The datalink results in better tracking. Usually, three plots (echoes) are needed to track a target in track-while-scan mode. The datalink allows the radars to share plots, not just tracks, so even if none of the aircraft in a formation gets enough plots on its own to track the target, they may do so collectively.

Each radar plot includes Doppler velocity, which provides the individual aircraft with range-rate data. However, this data on its own does not yield the velocity of the target. Using the TIDLS, two fighters can take simultaneous range-rate readings and thereby determine the target's track instantly, reducing the need for radar transmission.

In ECM applications, one fighter can search, while the wingman simultaneously focuses jamming on the same target, using the radar. This makes it very difficult for the target to intercept or jam the radar that is tracking him. Another anti-jamming technique is for all four radars to illuminate the same target simultaneously at different frequencies.

Hi,

It is like saying------AK47 is inferior to AR15.

See---you have already reahced a higher pleateau---now we can make changes to make our better---.

There is an old western saying---" the one who draws second---draws the quickest ".

It is the similar fight between the F16 and the Mirage 2K---F16 came out first---and when the M2k came out---it was no slouch by any accounts---

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

JF17 Thunder Block 1
JF17 Thunder Block 2
JF17 Thunder block 3

Gripen will we , shall well , will they , are they , may be, could it , should it

We could consider Gripen but Sweeden will have to develop a proper understanding to respect us as a client and we will take it from it, the client relation aspect will have to improve for Sweeden

I don't feel we got the appreciation what we were entitled to after doing business in Past for AWACs (At government level) Most Pakistanis would welcome close ties

There was great (infact tremendous amount of respect for Sweeden) after the AWAC contract
and people were looking forward to Saab cars, Saab products or even more planes however the odd reaction from the government officials was confusing and regretful

No respect for our nation , no discussion of any item

 

[war&peace]

JF-17 is a joint development which provides full control over the aircraft. It is PAF's own baby and you can't really beat the advantages it provides. PAF can integrate whatever systems and weapons it wishes, can develop further models/versions, make different variants and also export it.
Grippen a good option and PAF wanted to buy after USA blocked F-16a but the deal could not be signed as USA blocked it due to the fact Grippen uses US engine produced under license in Sweden.

 

[zebra7]

Pakistan stated an interest to buy, and were politely denied.
Whether they actually wanted to buy or not is unimportant
to answer the question, whether Gripen E is available for Pakistan or not.

If I go by my memory, it was the time, when Pakistan have paid for F-16 to U.S, but U.S stopped the supply of the F-16 even though money was with Pakistan. There were statements from the Pakistan, that if U.S won't send the approved F-16, then Pakistan will demands its money back, and will buy Swedish Gripen.

Big question Does Gripen E is available for Pakistan Today ????

But paf's interest was not in the Gripen---they wanted to build their own Gripen---and just wanted access to the aircraft---.

Mastan Bhai, how did you came into this conclusion, and does flight testing a plane gives an insight deep information about the Gripen. If the argument is the Cockpit of the Gripen, than lot of information is available in the public domain to arrange the Gripen cockpit arrangement may be that's why China allow Pakistan to lead in this domain for the Cockpt improvement for having better relationship and contacts than Chinese. But leaving Cockpit, what benifit does FC-1/JF-17 gets from Gripen C, can you explain it elaborately.

if that's the fly-away cost that's not bad.

It is a good plane, and if believe in the argument, then its 50% cheaper in operation cost fuel, spare parts, repairs and personnel that constituted each of the aircrafts, highly reliable, availability, and the ruggedness of the Russian plane, with western quality and reliability, and can carry enough load. For many nations this is an appealing combination. The Gripen is easy to use (both for pilots and ground crews) and capable of doing all jet fighter jobs (air defense, ground support, and reconnaissance) well enough.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

If I go by my memory, it was the time, when Pakistan have paid for F-16 to U.S, but U.S stopped the supply of the F-16 even though money was with Pakistan. There were statements from the Pakistan, that if U.S won't send the approved F-16, then Pakistan will demands its money back, and will buy Swedish Gripen.

Big question Does Gripen E is available for Pakistan Today ????

No, it was not available then, and is not available now.

 

[Djinn]

No, it was not available then, and is not available now.

Pakistan wasn't going to buy then Pakistan isn't going to buy now.

 

[Kakaspai]

No, it was not available then, and is not available now.

Ok.When we become a stable country we will buy then

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

No, it was not available then, and is not available now.

The question is why would Pak even consider gripen or gripen E.. Which bring nothing to the table JF doesn't?

Block III will not just be armed with AESA but also IRST and other goodies..

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Pakistan wasn't going to buy then Pakistan isn't going to buy now.

Driven by hunger, a fox tried to reach some gripen hanging high on the vine but was unable to, although he leaped with all his strength. As he went away, the fox remarked 'Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour gripen.