JF-17 Block-3 -- Updates, News & Discussion

[The Raven]

We had an aerial battle in February 2019. Factories survived.

If anything, as a direct result of that conflict Block-2 Bravo production finished a year earlier.

Not sure if you're kidding or being serious here. An aerial skirmish is different to a full scale war, if they wanted to destroy those factories, they could, with the right tools and tactics.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

Not sure if you're kidding or being serious here. An aerial skirmish is different to a full scale war, if they wanted to destroy those factories, they could, with the right tools and tactics.

In a full scale war, I highly doubt both Pakistan and India would survive as nations never mind factories.

 

[Cool_Soldier]

Why they never found wreckage of those 6 amraams they supposedly dodged?
[/QUOTE]

Those were ground based 6 targets. Obviously, Smart guided weapons were used to hit land targets. AMRAAM are used for air to air strike role specially in BVR scenario.

 

[Shabi1]

At least one SPICE 2000 bomb was jettisoned, as it was found intact.

Remaining bombs exploded on the trees, may be because of wrong intel target coordinates or incompetency (lack of skills) of the IAF pilots.

However, IAF penetration inside Pakistani airspace revealed slackness of Pakistani air defense in that region, which was immediately addressed and necessary air defense systems were inducted and positioned to cover the gap.

They jettisoned payload and returned before hitting desired target because PAF interception was eminent, it was PAF effectiveness.

 

[Bratva]

Well fantastic to know that you are an engineer, otherwise, I would have been just wasting my time explaining. Now, let's go through what you have written.


1. EW and Radar has to be integrated to get the most optimal result. If they exist as 2 different components you are wasting and underutilizing your components and not getting the best out of your component. Just like the HMD and 5th Gen AIM-9x or PL-10. without HMD you gonna get a sub optimal result and wont get the full functionality out of it.

Yes one of the reasons. But this is not the PRIMARY reason why EW and Radar are INTEGRATED. The PRIMARY REASON relates to the processing power of the High Speed Integrated Circuit (VHSIC) aka the onboard computer. But Before I explain this further, just remember EW were not that sophisticated until now. As you would know, the jammers only use to jam radars, and did not jam any type of sensors. These systems are/were manual, isolated from other systems, and hard-wired. BUT most important of all, requiring a lot of onboard Power.

Now things have changed. The new generation EW is software programmable and VLSI. It interacts with the air defense systems of enemies and friends. Together with Radar and all other gadgets of the aircraft, THERE IS TONS AND TONS OF INFORMATION WHICH NEEDS TO BE PROCESSED VERY QUICKLY. The thinking behind an Integrated EW and Radar is that BEING ONE VLSI DEVICE IT WILL REQUIRE LESS POWER. MEANING A MUCH MORE POWERFUL VHSIC aka Onboard Computer can be installed. THE NAME OF THE GAME IS WHOEVER PROCESSES INFORMATION QUICKLY, GETS THE UPPER HAND. It does not matter how good your gadgets are if you do not have the computing power installed to process it quickly and gain the upper hand.

2. As I understand Spanish EW and KLJ-7 radar in block-1 and 2 are integrated to a Central Unit, through which they display their info on MFD and pilots decide how best to apply EW and in which direction to get the optimal result

EW decisions are NOW FAIRLY AUTOMATIC, and do not require too much input from the Pilot anymore. The days of pilot making decision on the direction of EW is over in the jets carrying these sophisticated systems including JF-17.

2.5. Do you know what are the protocols? It is language used by 2 systems to talk to each other. Does Pakistan has Language aka source code of Spanish EW to integrate it to Chinese Radar? No it isn't. Hence the reason Pakistan didnt go for western EW and Chinese Radar in Block-3. Both Radar and EW are of chinese origin so they can be integrated.

Why do you want to know/understand Protocols when you have components made to MIL-STD standards?? It does not matter if the manufacturers are South African, Spanish, UK, Sudan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Russia, US or whatever - when your products are made to these standards it simply becomes PLUG AND PLAY. Yes the manufactures will have "Access Codes" to gain access to utilize the features of their product once it is being tested or being integrated, just like password to your computer. I would strongly recommend to listen AVM Shahid Latif's interview where he clearly explains this.

You are once again misinformed what MIL-STANDARDS ARE. The Mil Standard 1553 and 1773 are Layer 1 and Layer2 protocols in terms of OSI Model which are physical and Data Link Layers.

What does it means in layman terms. You see the network cards installed in PC's and the NEtwork cables that you purchase and You connect the physical cable into network card. Have you ever wondered If you are purchasing Broadcom or Intel Or whichever Vendor network card they always connect ? Why is that? because the Cables, The network card interfaces all follow A Standard

But it doesnt mean the Network card Can WORK IN WINDOWS 10 UNLESS YOU INSTALL DRIVERS OF THAT NETWORK CARD FROM INTEL/DELL/HP etc Then network card begins to function properly

So what are the Drivers? A Software program developed by Network card developers in coordination with Microsoft. That whenever these drivers are installed in any machine. Be it Chinese, American, Vietnamese made, The network card will start to work.


So what does it all means? That there are different standards for Layer 1 and Layer 2 aka Physical and Data Link communication. Where you define your hardware, interfaces and cabling requirement that it should be standardized and whiever vendor use it in their products it, There must not be different set of cables should be produced for the hardware.

But thats not enough, Now on top of that layer 1 and Layer 2 Requirement, Now in terms of OSI Layer... And talking with Window Operating System, You need to create Drivers, That talk with the Operating system AKA SOFTWARE TO SOFTWARE Communication. Layer 7 Application analogs

Lets get back to your glaring mistake where you were saying MIL Standards are just enough to communicate. Now tell me In layman Terms, JF-17 Radar has its own Operating System, Or Drivers, Or Source code. EW systems has their own set of OS, or Drivers or Source. How will you make them communicate with each other? Unless you have a translator in b/w? or Sort of Drivers or A Middle Man who converts the language of 1 system into another system?

You may ask What are MIL Standards for? You know the physical communication that is happening over the cables b/w EW systems and Radar? That Physical Communication is dictated under MIL Standards. Cue to the physical interfaces i was talking on above paragraphs. As per MIL Standards, EW and RADAR will be using standardized Physical interfaces, Standardized Copper/Fiber cables, So connecting 2 elements inside JF-17 will be plug and play. You wont be Re designing your Hardware seral/parallel interfaces to match with other Hardware. Or producing new Copper/Fiber cables with new connectors just to connect with Non-Standardized hardware

Don't Confuse Access codes/Source code integration with MIl Standards. You can connect EW systems and Radar without any issue. Just like USB connection with LAPTOP. Plug and play but even when your USB conencts with Laptop It installs drivers on laptop to talk with LAPTOP

So where are the Source codes for EW system which will let it talk with Radar?

 

[Marker]

You are once again misinformed what MIL-STANDARDS ARE. The Mil Standard 1553 and 1773 are Layer 1 and Layer2 protocols in terms of OSI Model which are physical and Data Link Layers.

What does it means in layman terms. You see the network cards installed in PC's and the NEtwork cables that you purchase and You connect the physical cable into network card. Have you ever wondered If you are purchasing Broadcom or Intel Or whichever Vendor network card they always connect ? Why is that? because the Cables, The network card interfaces all follow A Standard

But it doesnt mean the Network card Can WORK IN WINDOWS 10 UNLESS YOU INSTALL DRIVERS OF THAT NETWORK CARD FROM INTEL/DELL/HP etc Then network card begins to function properly

So what are the Drivers? A Software program developed by Network card developers in coordination with Microsoft. That whenever these drivers are installed in any machine. Be it Chinese, American, Vietnamese made, The network card will start to work.


So what does it all means? That there are different standards for Layer 1 and Layer 2 aka Physical and Data Link communication. Where you define your hardware, interfaces and cabling requirement that it should be standardized and whiever vendor use it in their products it, There must not be different set of cables should be produced for the hardware.

But thats not enough, Now on top of that layer 1 and Layer 2 Requirement, Now in terms of OSI Layer... And talking with Window Operating System, You need to create Drivers, That talk with the Operating system AKA SOFTWARE TO SOFTWARE Communication. Layer 7 Application analogs

Lets get back to your glaring mistake where you were saying MIL Standards are just enough to communicate. Now tell me In layman Terms, JF-17 Radar has its own Operating System, Or Drivers, Or Source code. EW systems has their own set of OS, or Drivers or Source. How will you make them communicate with each other? Unless you have a translator in b/w? or Sort of Drivers or A Middle Man who converts the language of 1 system into another system?

You may ask What are MIL Standards for? You know the physical communication that is happening over the cables b/w EW systems and Radar? That Physical Communication is dictated under MIL Standards. Cue to the physical interfaces i was talking on above paragraphs. As per MIL Standards, EW and RADAR will be using standardized Physical interfaces, Standardized Copper/Fiber cables, So connecting 2 elements inside JF-17 will be plug and play. You wont be Re designing your Hardware seral/parallel interfaces to match with other Hardware. Or producing new Copper/Fiber cables with new connectors just to connect with Non-Standardized hardware

Don't Confuse Access codes/Source code integration with MIl Standards. You can connect EW systems and Radar without any issue. Just like USB connection with LAPTOP. Plug and play but even when your USB conencts with Laptop It installs drivers on laptop to talk with LAPTOP

So where are the Source codes for EW system which will let it talk with Radar?

And what are third party drivers?

 

[Bratva]

And what are third party drivers?

Third party drivers was an example. In terms of EW system, the source code is the drivers. Third Party is the Spanish.

Why Rafael is so potent? Because of the sensor fusion and all the data being projected onto single MFD as a single unified picture which lets the pilot quickly and efficiently decide. That sensor fusion occured because of the integration of all sensors.

Now take JF block 2 example, Pilot has to separately check chinese radar and Spanish EW data as there is no sensor fusion. Which may or may not introduce delay in pilot decision making, depending upon pilot proficiency

Hence Pakistan went for a complete chinese package in block 3 instead of hedge podge. To get that sensor fusion and utilize the sensors to its full extent and with a single touch of button, a centralized controller telling each sensor what to do based on the threat level that has been identified. Instead of pilot observing the feed of each sensor and then deciding what to do and telling each sensor to do specific task

 

[ziaulislam]

Yes, but there's only so much juice you can get out of the same ganna from the 1980s.

Has PAF not yet mastered the JF-17 Thunder as much as possible considering its been in the service for nearly a decade and a half? As well as, PAF can add a lot more flying hours to the JF-17 than it could to F-16s.

JF-17 pilots (serving and retired) will probably now outnumber the F-16 pilots.

The point i'm trying to make is that the downside of the F-16 in PAF is, it's old, outdated and Pakistan is unable to test or fly the latest models. There's little room to improvise. That's not the case with the JF-17 Thunders.

Personally, in my humble opinion, medium-weight F-16's days are numbered. It's existence in the PAF will be streched until medium-weight NGFA is inducted. This is the same position of light-weight Mirages and F-7s - they're just waiting to be scrapped pending further light-weight JF-17 Thunder inductions.

You are right
However f16 endurance is twice that jf17 and it weapon system may be better than PL-15 or atleast is different (aim 120d)

My guess is PAF will not buy f16 unless its available at subidized price with aim120c7/aim120d

This is what we saw, PAF walked away from 8f16 even though congress approved it

Pakistan finanaces are 4x better then 1980s so it was not an issue of affordibility but rather necesity

PAF will be looking at biden for f16c/d under FMF
Lets see if that happens..odds are low since PAF failed to get anything from trump in the end years but who knows..the obama offer was a surpise too

Unlike last time congress is under biden control..so if he does offer it will sail through plus f16 price has dropped too

 

[Shabi1]

You are right
However f16 endurance is twice that jf17 and it weapon system may be better than PL-15 or atleast is different (aim 120d)

My guess is PAF will not buy f16 unless its available at subidized price with aim120c7/aim120d

This is what we saw, PAF walked away from 8f16 even though congress approved it

Pakistan finanaces are 4x better then 1980s so it was not an issue of affordibility but rather necesity

PAF will be looking at biden for f16c/d under FMF
Lets see if that happens..odds are low since PAF failed to get anything from trump in the end years but who knows..the obama offer was a surpise too

Unlike last time congress is under biden control..so if he does offer it will sail through plus f16 price has dropped too

This is deviation from the topic but in my opinion PAFs interest in F-16 is still there because of Erieye and F-16 integration for co op engagement mode. Endurance and payload is not that much of a factor for PAF because of proximity of our opponent. The Erieyes can do the targeting and guiding for AMRAAMs while the F-16s only act as launch platforms without using own radars. Its a tested and matured capability which PAF would like to enhance and would seek to upgrade the F-16 fleet to keep them flying longer. According to Quwa analysis such a capability is being developed and probably already in place for Link-17 and JF-17s.

US isn't refusing to sell to Pakistan. Its a game of principle, Pakistan has unpaid reimbursements from US for its coalition support efforts which it can only receive in the form of US hardware. US wants Pakistan to forget those receivables and pay out if its own pocket, Pakistan refuses to do so, hence the deadlock, we are still getting spares and services but without much advertise on purpose.

AH-1Zs not having been transferred to USMC or another buyer is a example that they are hoping for a change in policy. Bahrain has confirmed a order for 12 AH-1Zs to be delivered in 2022 yet to be seen if they are getting new built units or the ones meant for Pakistan. T-129 engine blockade is related to Turkey-US relation complications and not owing to Pakistan.

If Afghanistan peace efforts proceed successfully I believe new jets are unlikely but PAF will at least pick the Viper upgrade for its fleet along with new munitions.

The best part is PAF plans are no longer tied to F-16 yes or no, they are just a welcome supplement in future plans. We have a JF-17 and Azm program that will proceed regardless. PAF emphasis and investment in AI development means we will likely increase reliance on UCAVs and smart munitions rather than endangering manned fighters. Perhaps even UCAVs acting as buddies/wingmen to manned fighters.

Watched a analysis by a Indian analyst last month and he was praise for PAF and its decision for creating a center of AI development. Said PAF jamming tech is more practical because they are integrated and dont jam own platforms where as Indian jamming capability might be stronger but is not linked/well planned and jams even own platforms. With AI it will get better as systems will adapt more effectively in real time. JF-17 B3 and subsequent programs extremely effective and practical.

Pakistani Military Launches Defense AI Program

Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has launched a Cognitive Electronic Warfare (CEW) program at its Center for Artificial Intelligence and Computing (...

www.southasiainvestor.com

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

You are once again misinformed what MIL-STANDARDS ARE. The Mil Standard 1553 and 1773 are Layer 1 and Layer2 protocols in terms of OSI Model which are physical and Data Link Layers.

What does it means in layman terms. You see the network cards installed in PC's and the NEtwork cables that you purchase and You connect the physical cable into network card. Have you ever wondered If you are purchasing Broadcom or Intel Or whichever Vendor network card they always connect ? Why is that? because the Cables, The network card interfaces all follow A Standard

But it doesnt mean the Network card Can WORK IN WINDOWS 10 UNLESS YOU INSTALL DRIVERS OF THAT NETWORK CARD FROM INTEL/DELL/HP etc Then network card begins to function properly

So what are the Drivers? A Software program developed by Network card developers in coordination with Microsoft. That whenever these drivers are installed in any machine. Be it Chinese, American, Vietnamese made, The network card will start to work.


So what does it all means? That there are different standards for Layer 1 and Layer 2 aka Physical and Data Link communication. Where you define your hardware, interfaces and cabling requirement that it should be standardized and whiever vendor use it in their products it, There must not be different set of cables should be produced for the hardware.

But thats not enough, Now on top of that layer 1 and Layer 2 Requirement, Now in terms of OSI Layer... And talking with Window Operating System, You need to create Drivers, That talk with the Operating system AKA SOFTWARE TO SOFTWARE Communication. Layer 7 Application analogs

Lets get back to your glaring mistake where you were saying MIL Standards are just enough to communicate. Now tell me In layman Terms, JF-17 Radar has its own Operating System, Or Drivers, Or Source code. EW systems has their own set of OS, or Drivers or Source. How will you make them communicate with each other? Unless you have a translator in b/w? or Sort of Drivers or A Middle Man who converts the language of 1 system into another system?

You may ask What are MIL Standards for? You know the physical communication that is happening over the cables b/w EW systems and Radar? That Physical Communication is dictated under MIL Standards. Cue to the physical interfaces i was talking on above paragraphs. As per MIL Standards, EW and RADAR will be using standardized Physical interfaces, Standardized Copper/Fiber cables, So connecting 2 elements inside JF-17 will be plug and play. You wont be Re designing your Hardware seral/parallel interfaces to match with other Hardware. Or producing new Copper/Fiber cables with new connectors just to connect with Non-Standardized hardware

Don't Confuse Access codes/Source code integration with MIl Standards. You can connect EW systems and Radar without any issue. Just like USB connection with LAPTOP. Plug and play but even when your USB conencts with Laptop It installs drivers on laptop to talk with LAPTOP

So where are the Source codes for EW system which will let it talk with Radar?

My dear friend, I have worked as a driver developer for the whole 5 years. If what you said is true, then I guess there is no issue of making the radar and EW talk because every device with a driver also provides an API for the client for further integration in his/her system. So the PAF can ask for API from both Radar (china) and EW (Spain) and hire some software developer to make them talk and develop a unified interface for the pilot. Note that I have developed Drivers for many devices like scanners/ printers etc and we are also further asked to develop an API that can be used by the end client as a black-box having all the functions call available to the end-user for integration.
Note that I don't know the technical details of EW or Radar. I have just answered your questions which seem related to my experience. Thanks

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

JF-17 can’t take on Rafale in one to one battle: Ex PAF Air vice-marshal – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

Rafale is of a different league and at best can be compared to F16 bk52... With a AESA and Meteor against classical antenna radar, aging couter measures and no brand new AMRAAM, even F16-52 is far away....

If you understood the video on which Shahzad Chaudhry briefed about Rafale and JF-17 block 3. he said the same thing which was twisted by Indian media.

 

[Bratva]

My dear friend, I have worked as a driver developer for the whole 5 years. If what you said is true, then I guess there is no issue of making the radar and EW talk because every device with a driver also provides an API for the client for further integration in his/her system. So the PAF can ask for API from both Radar (china) and EW (Spain) and hire some software developer to make them talk and develop a unified interface for the pilot. Note that I have developed Drivers for many devices like scanners/ printers etc and we are also further asked to develop an API that can be used by the end client as a black-box having all the functions call available to the end-user for integration.
Note that I don't know the technical details of EW or Radar. I have just answered your questions which seem related to my experience. Thanks

What you have said is not how the European or American Vendors work when it comes to Military Grade systems. Take a look at this recent example

"With India planning to arm its Sukhoi Su-30 MKI frontline fighter jets with Israeli Derby missiles, the Indian Air Force (IAF) may first have to take permission of the Russian government as per the license technical documentation of the aircraft, reports Sputnik News.

As the per documentation, if India wants to integrate any third-country armament in the aircraft, it would need permission of the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). HAL currently produces Sukhois under licence production from Russia."

Indian Air Force’s Integration Of Israeli Derby Missiles On Sukhoi Su-30 MKI Hits Russian Roadblock

With India planning to arm its Sukhoi Su-30 MKI frontline fighter jets with Israeli Derby missiles, the Indian Air Force (IAF) may first have to take permission of the Russian government as per the license technical documentation of the aircraft, reports Sputnik News

swarajyamag.com

I cant comment on If PAF was able to get their Hands on Spanish EW source codes. But it should be clear for all the members here that No European and American vendor will give source codes to integrate their Mil Grade systems with Chinese Systems. Hence the Reason pakistan went for a complete Chinese Package in Block 3 and That Pakistan will not put Western components on Block-3 or Block 4 until and unless chinese components are removed from it.

And this is the reason Block-1 and Block 2 if Upgraded with Chinese AESA will still not have that sensor fusion which Block-III will have.

 

[ARMalik]

My dear friend, I have worked as a driver developer for the whole 5 years. If what you said is true, then I guess there is no issue of making the radar and EW talk because every device with a driver also provides an API for the client for further integration in his/her system. So the PAF can ask for API from both Radar (china) and EW (Spain) and hire some software developer to make them talk and develop a unified interface for the pilot. Note that I have developed Drivers for many devices like scanners/ printers etc and we are also further asked to develop an API that can be used by the end client as a black-box having all the functions call available to the end-user for integration.
Note that I don't know the technical details of EW or Radar. I have just answered your questions which seem related to my experience. Thanks

Oh Thank God for clarifying this mate - beautifully done!! I was dreading writing another 10 pages of explanation on this.

@Bratva , let's just agree to disagree on your understanding of things, and leave it at that.

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

What you have said is not how the European or American Vendors work when it comes to Military Grade systems. Take a look at this recent example

"With India planning to arm its Sukhoi Su-30 MKI frontline fighter jets with Israeli Derby missiles, the Indian Air Force (IAF) may first have to take permission of the Russian government as per the license technical documentation of the aircraft, reports Sputnik News.

As the per documentation, if India wants to integrate any third-country armament in the aircraft, it would need permission of the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). HAL currently produces Sukhois under licence production from Russia."

Indian Air Force’s Integration Of Israeli Derby Missiles On Sukhoi Su-30 MKI Hits Russian Roadblock

With India planning to arm its Sukhoi Su-30 MKI frontline fighter jets with Israeli Derby missiles, the Indian Air Force (IAF) may first have to take permission of the Russian government as per the license technical documentation of the aircraft, reports Sputnik News

swarajyamag.com

I cant comment on If PAF was able to get their Hands on Spanish EW source codes. But it should be clear for all the members here that No European and American vendor will give source codes to integrate their Mil Grade systems with Chinese Systems. Hence the Reason pakistan went for a complete Chinese Package in Block 3 and That Pakistan will not put Western components on Block-3 or Block 4 until and unless chinese components are removed from it.

And this is the reason Block-1 and Block if Upgraded Chinese AESA will still not have that sensor fusion which Block-III will have.

My dear friend, As I told you I have no knowledge about such things that you may explain better than me. However, I will just clear one thing to you in this post where you mention that "If PAF was able to get their Hands on Spanish EW source codes". This is wrong instead of giving the source code Pakistan can ask for API of the same source code from Spanish. Remember, API is an abstraction of the source code and hides the overall communications between device and OS. Plus I don't think so that sharing API will be an issue for any vendor as if they refused how can one then integrate that to their system. Thanks

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

Oh Thank God for clarifying this mate - beautifully done!! I was dreading writing another 10 pages of explanation on this.

@Bratva , let's just agree to disagree on your understanding of things, and leave it at that.

Thank You, brother. I have just explained about the software integration part that I understand, Rest I don't know much about the Radar and EW suite and I won't argue on that without having to study it before with someone. That I will leave to you guys as you guys have more knowledge on that. Thanks