What's new

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

No-one really knows that for a fact; yes it is possible a further blk 4 variant may be having it or jf-1b2.

Can the JF-17’s RCS be reduced significantly without a major redesign. Could the Block III feature a lower RCS through RAM or EW at an economical cost and modest weight gain, so as to minimize the burden on the engine (TWR)?
 

can i ask a stupid questions?

1. RD93 or RD93MA is indistinguishable from out side..correct? then why hide the engine exhaust in picture?

2.is there any change is exhaust patels? between RD93 and RD93MA

3.Is there any credible source that RD93MA is operational?
 
Can the JF-17’s RCS be reduced significantly without a major redesign. Could the Block III feature a lower RCS through RAM or EW at an economical cost and modest weight gain, so as to minimize the burden on the engine (TWR)?
It can be done; already we are seeing more and more composites being used across all the airframe.

Remember, this baby is still in its baby steps and evolving. It will mature in its MLU time frame.
 
It can be done; already we are seeing more and more composites being used across all the airframe.

Remember, this baby is still in its baby steps and evolving. It will mature in its MLU time frame.

Especially Electronics.
So, Any indication of the use of RAM paint, or the use of means to cool the leading edges to reduce the IR signature?
 
Missile range is how far a missile can travel, which depends on a number of factors including the firing platforms speed, height, AOA, Air density, etc. It has nothing to do with the size of the target.

The size of the target matters only for radar detection, which is not dependent on the missile's radar, rather targeting platforms' radar. IF the targeting platform (AEWAC or Fighter) can locate and lock the target and the missile can reach that distance, it can theoretically kill the target at its max range regardless of the size of the target.
Small targets like fighter aircraft can manoeuvre and bleed energy of the missiles even if the radar has locked the enemy and a missile is fired doesn't mean a kill is confirmed....... a missile starts to slow down after some time and if the target is going evasive and bleeding energy of the missile then chances of hitting go down significantly...... a missile with 100km range will never guarantee a kill in 100km range because factors like ECM and EW capabilities of the enemy and altitude of the missile when it was fired also matter........
 
Last edited:
What is of interest right now is HMDS and HOBS capability; if LCA/Tejass encounter does happen; HMDS/HOBS is a necessity which has been sidelined for a bit too long in the tooth imo.
offtopic but is there a SA HMDS in the work for Denel HOBS?
 
Especially Electronics.
So, Any indication of the use of RAM paint, or the use of means to cool the leading edges to reduce the IR signature?
So far none that I am able to read between or see via the pictures. It probably wont be done; may be for JF17B2 (speculation - as a specialised bird). BVR protocol appears prevailing but still if we are to see repeat of Feb 2019; there is a high change of VVR engagement and HMDS is a must.
 
Can the JF-17’s RCS be reduced significantly without a major redesign. Could the Block III feature a lower RCS through RAM or EW at an economical cost and modest weight gain, so as to minimize the burden on the engine (TWR)?
Will really be only useful if internal fuel capacity is increased or if CFTs are added

A fuel tank will lit JF17 from far away making it useless excercise
can i ask a stupid questions?

1. RD93 or RD93MA is indistinguishable from out side..correct? then why hide the engine exhaust in picture?

2.is there any change is exhaust patels? between RD93 and RD93MA

3.Is there any credible source that RD93MA is operational?
No
We have a year old source stating it is in final testing
Meaning it should be available right about now for production
 
Will really be only useful if internal fuel capacity is increased or if CFTs are added

A fuel tank will lit JF17 from far away making it useless excercise

No
We have a year old source stating it is in final testing
Meaning it should be available right about now for production
Yes but zia - we need to let it run thru a 2 year test cycle in the field before allowing it on a serial production jet.
 
So PL-15 is confirmed for jf-17 but what the news of 5 gen sraam pl-10 or A darter ?
also aselpod is along with what else is coming for a2g attack role

cm-400 I know but not strategic but tactical ?

let’s see if small dia is. Ring introduced meaning jf can carry 8 100kg small dia. jadam types ? On two pylons leavingother two for bvr ?
 
1611115328948.png

i wonder whether PAF will consider using a BVR on center pylon since it is usually not used anyway during routine mission
gripen can hardwire 3 BVRs in enter pylon by moving the landing gear slightly towards the wing
 
View attachment 708527
i wonder whether PAF will consider using a BVR on center pylon since it is usually not used anyway during routine mission
gripen can hardwire 3 BVRs in enter pylon by moving the landing gear slightly towards the wing

You need at least one hardpoint for fuel tank, which is indispensable for a light fighter if you want any semblance of range.
 
View attachment 708527
i wonder whether PAF will consider using a BVR on center pylon since it is usually not used anyway during routine mission
gripen can hardwire 3 BVRs in enter pylon by moving the landing gear slightly towards the wing
frankly that is how it should be now that IFR is integrated in JF17 blk2 & 3.
 
Back
Top Bottom