JF-17 and PLAAF

[Storm Force]

Some people have got a DEEP complex about JF17 thunder not being state of the art.

IT WAS NEVER going to be State of The Art.

ITS effective and low cost.

FITS PAF perfect for fighting IAF

plaaf IS BEEN equipped to Fight both IAF or worse stil the USA Navy carrier group plus Taiwan and Japan combined. That means F18SH F16/52 F15C/E and in future F35.

FOR THAT JF17 is clearly not right for PLAAF.

but 1000+ J10/SU27/30/J11 will be a great challenge.

 

[jagjitnatt]

JF17 is better , plane then F16

a) We can fit any possible weapons on that plane
b) It comes with latest radars which can be upgraded any time
c) The avionics , and electronics on the system are superior
to the F16 A/B we have, and unless we get avionics that are
used on F15 (UAE) then we can argue, but we have advance
survailence technology already what we use on our UAV
d) The radars are always being enhanced, the JF17 will all be
synchronized with Advance chinese AWACS
e) Who know we might also get AESA Radars on the birds

F16 will always come with no , fun clause
J17 thuder gives us freedom in true sense when it come to defence in air

read my post. as for all the things you listed they are all 'will be' kinda things. atm jf-17 just doesn't cut it to beat the f-16 although a good point defence fighter.

 

[razgriz19]

When comparing a jet fighter the following things are what must be compared:

1. Engine - The engine JF-17 uses is the Klimov RD-93 turbofan which provides almost 50KN of thrust, which if you ask me is a little less. Also russian engines till date have been known to haven't been able to sustain afterburner for too long. So its 85KN of thrust cannot be sustained for long. Its top speed is also less.

The F-16 uses a much more powerful and reliable F110-GE-100 turbofan which provides 76 KN of dry thrust, which is more than enough for a plane of that size, and with its afterburner it provides 127 KN of thrust, which is a LOT. Also American engines are more reliable than Russian engines.

2. Weapon Load - JF-17's weapon load is 2/3 of that of the F16. The F16 carries more weapons, more fuel, has more range than the JF-17.

3. EW Suite - JF-17 has a chinese EW suite which are definitely not the best, its derived from russian EW suite which even the Indians refused to buy. Indians used their own EW along with Israeli. F-16 can be linked with awacs seemlessly. Their datalink technology is matured and proven.

4. Radar - The first 42 JF-17 are going to be fit with KLJ-7 radar which has a lookup range of 105km, 85km lookdown for a 5m2 rcs object. The new radar may be better but not by much, may be 15-25%.
The F-16 block 50/52+ uses AN/APG-68 V9 radar which has a range upto 300 kms but engages targets only upto 105 kms for 5m2 rcs. It also has a SAR capability. It uses less power and less cooling systems.

5. Weapons - No comparison here. AMRAAMs are one of the best BVR missiles. Better effective range, more maneuverability, less prone to missing the target. Also Sidewinders can be used, which are also one of the best in its class. Chinese missiles like sd-10 are nowhere near these missiles. Even russian missiles fall short.

6. Effectiveness - The rcs of F-16 is known to be around 1.2m2 which is very less when compared to jet fighters of its league. Also F-16 uses various composites and its build quality is very nice, whereas JF-17 uses all metal structure to reduce costs, which would increase its rcs. The F-16 is proven and its track record is superb. JF-17 is new, but it uses old russian derived components which would be easily available to India and India would definitely get a way to jam its radar, find weakness and exploit it.

I hope you understand my point of view and whoa that post was long. Good Night!

u do have a point, but if u compare jf-17 with our current f-16 (not blk 50/52) then jf-17 sure have an edge in certain areas...

 

[hazi]

I dont think we should compare how well the jf-17 and the f-16 compete against each other.
We should compare how well they work with each other, because in war time scenario the f-16 blk15/30/52 will be working with the jf-17, not against it.

I personally think that if you combine the effectiveness and the experience that the PAF have with the f-16 and the modern and numerically superior jf-17 and the awacs the PAF will acquire you will get a very effective and very capable war machine able to defend itself against a determined foe.

 

[echo 1]

Man its been a while since i posted I am interested in knowing more about meneuverability of the JF-17 compared to other 4th gen aircrafts. Can anyone enlighten me thanks

 

[Storm Force]

I agree with You Hazi.

Thunder will not be alone in a War Situation.. It will have the superior F16/52 ALONGSIDE the large nos of Thunders.

But if you suggest large nos you are talking about a SCENARIO 5-7 YEARS from today. Because TODAY JF17 nos are around 10 max. Now

It will take until 2013 TO deliver all 42 mk1 Thunders...

There after it depends on Wat PAF budget allows for MK2 upgrade and the time allowed to incorporate a western upgrade eg from France/ China etc.

In 2015-2017 NOTH PLAAF & IAF will have substantial heavey and meduim MULTI ROLE combat planes in large nos in comparison to PAF.

plaaf may have by 2017
300 J10 BLOCKA/B/C mmrca single engined multi role/ air superiority
400+ Flankers (su27/30/j11) twin engined multi role strike /strike
300 J8
200+ JH7


IAF
240 su30mki multi role twin engined
60 MIG29SMT + 40 MKIG29K navy
60 MMRCA (F18SH/ TYPHOON) (FIRST HALF OF 126)
60 LCA MK1/2
50 MIRAGE 2000
100 jAGUAR

 

[Luftwaffe]

jagjitnatt..believe PLAAF will never opt for JF-17. Rather they would sell it to poor nations and make some money to fund their future projects.
JF-17 simply isn't capable enough to compete with PLAAF's current inventory. It makes no sense to replace current aircraft with JF-17. They would rather replace them with J-10, J11 and in future J-XX.
JF-17 was Pakistan's requirement and not China's.
China can afford better planes, Pakistan cannot at the moment. So JF-17 is for Pakistan for next 20 years.

you expect PLAAF to induct 45-50 Million dollars J-10s as a replacement for 1100+ Q-5/F-7 variants? ...the price tag of FC-1 is around 15 Million add few million more China gets a far superior fc-1 than the current j-7/q-5; research is required my friend..are you sure J-7/Q-5 are more capable than JF-17? did you go through all J-17s threads and posts..

If China starts replacing 1100 J-7/Q-5s with J-10/J-11 it'll take PLAAF if not exact around 50 Billion dollars...

FC-1 as designated is the future requirement and replacement of a number of J-7/Q-5s variants..

 

[Dazzler]

China is a vast country having issues with Taiwan, japan, US and India. They need heavy, long ranged fighters to defend their territory. Not many know that China was initially offered the Fulcrums but they denied it because of limited range and payload in favor of Flankers. Does this make Fulcrum an inferior fighter?

Thunder is State of the art fighter in terms ofavionics, radar and ew, just lacks in range and payload when competed with the Western heavy fighters like Rafale, Typhoons. I said State of the Art in terms of avionics, EW and weapons capability. A good radar that is better than apg-68 v2 is fitted in it. For those who want to know the capabilities of thunder, please go through the JF-17 thread. It was designed on F-16's philosophy and has already become a heart throb in PAF. Many countries are willing to buy it in years to come as it offers flexibility, good performance at a very low cost. It is another example of a plug and play weapon system that can be fitted with Chinese, Russian and Western systems without any hassles what so ever. Some of its systems were later fitted in J-10b which were first tested on thunder. To sum it up, it will become one of the most demanded MAIN STAY fighters in the world in coming years providing excellent performance at a low cost.

 

[Storm Force]

LUFTWAFFE

Your comment about China Not being able to modernise with J10/FLANKERS due to cost .

YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG.

You cannot compare the modernisation plan of PLAAF and even IAF with PAF.

Pakistan total military budget $5 billion approx (GDP $170 BILLION)

China mlitary buget $120 billion (GDP $4.4 TRILLION)

India $32 billion ($1.2 trillion)

PLAAF is getting ready to Compete with the best..

USN carrier groups equipped with F18S/H F35
Japans 350 strong F15/F16FSX fleet and future F35 option
India SU30MKI/MMRCA combo and future PAK FA

China will have a incredibly powerful air force based on J10/FLANKERS and soon JXX BY 2020.

BY 2015 China military budget will exceed pakistans entire GDP

They can AFFORD THE BEST air force bar USA easily

 

[Luftwaffe]

nabil_05...to add more something that performs 75% equal that of F-16 even earlier blocks China won't reject it in favor of j-7/Q-5s with old airframes technology getting obsolete..

 

[Storm Force]

Seems to me Some people feel that UNLESS PLAAF inducts JF17 even in token nos IT WILL NOT HAVE ACHIEVED a " Stamp of approval"

You people really need to give the Thunder a chance its a nice little combat plane...

But no use in defeating the USN carrier battle groups... or 240 su30mki

 

[Dazzler]

luftwaffe

I don't know where this 75% or 80% figure came from and what were the origins of it. In terms of comparison, thunder is better than falcon's block no. 15, 20, 25, 30, 40 and should be comparable to 50. In terms of range, T/W ratio and payload, it is inferior but conquers them in avionics, radar, EW, weapons and agility. Keep in mind that the most agile variant of falcon was the block 15, the one we have and thunder made a mess of it in Combat trials last year !

 

[Luftwaffe]

nabil_05...in terms of maneuverability...

 

[Dazzler]

Bro, please read my post again just what i stated. Not just maneuverability, but weapons, radar and EW. Thats how it conquered the falcon blk, 15s.

 

[Luftwaffe]

off course Thunder is better than block 15..yet i would consider it close to block 40..but never the less its getting better and better..