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

[serenity]

May be a naive question: Can any block/version of J-10 overcome the limitations of JF-17 against Rafales?
If Yes, how and on what parameters J10 can cope with Rafales?
If No, do Chinese have an export variant of any aircraft which can take up the Rafales challenge?

Of course. J-10 has better range and performance. It can also fire more missiles and different weapons. J-10C has larger more powerful AESA but slightly older.

J-10C can shoot PL-15 and possibly PL-x. Will PAF buy J-10 and PL-x? Will China sell PL-x? I think the new missiles are all still kept as secret until the next, next generation is ready for service. Because these new missiles maybe just reach service, there is no chance China will sell and reveal them.

J-10C is better than block 3 but not by much. So why waste money instead of just invest into AZM. IAF will not have 100 Rafale just 36 and half will not be position so close to Pakistan because they need them on eastern side too. How many airbases can be destroyed by Pakistan and how many Rafale can shelter and reload? I think with block 3 in high number this is enough for Rafale even if block 3 is clearly inferior.

I'm pretty sure F-22s don't fly around in stealth configuration except in mainland USA for military purpouses. They purpousely increase their RCS with a little attatchment normally.

Apparently this was flying around Korea where it is detected. Rumor only but it's not hard to test this principle. This is just one way to defeat stealth and still really not very useful unless it can guide missiles over long range.

You can build a smaller flying F-22 model with lower radar signature even if correct manufacturing and materials is used with the right shape. To simulate real thing for air defence. They can be dropped to glide and test radar and missile or they can even be powered UAV. I think F-35 is actually more stealthy than F-22 because they use some different principles too in materials.

Similarly there have been multiple incidents of Chinese hackers getting hold of sensitive stealth documents.

Yes of course we want all the information we can get. Same with everyone else. They hack and steal too. America buy Kh-31 missiles not because they cannot make better but to test and to study for weakness. We hack F-35 to study for weakness or for example its real radar signature from different angles and see if there are things we can learn too. Whoever is leading some field will have his next follow behind him trying to see how he leads even if to just find weakness.

There are many purposes for these activities. Not all of them is just so to do a copy. If China finds information on missile top speed and real range, of course that is useful and not for reverse engineering.

you are right, just like everyone else we are using every methods to obtain information for every purpose. They do it too. But this stuff is just one side. China has had good aviation industry for military for 50 years at least. Many of our own projects and studies and experiments and many improvements made from Russian ones. It is not all just hacking and copying which is also very hard without those other things already mastered.

Look at AMCA drawings or KFX prototype or TFX drawings. They all look like F-22 and F-35. Does that mean they also hacked them as well? I think the design is easier. Hacking for more useful secrets is the purpose.

 

[shanlung]

completely wrong article Project Director of JF-17 Shaid Latif himself many time told that JF-17 have nothing to do with Super-7 or J-7 series in fact Super-7 was was a failure and was abended, but when he took charge of the project he shifted the baseline concept from J-7 to F-16 [PAF only had blk-15 F-16 at that time], Chinese counterpart severely objected on itit took him a good amount of time to make Chinese agreed to the new Project and name of the new project was not decided till then so initially they use the name of old project Super- 7 and it is from this point where all the confusion arise related to JF-17 relation to Super-7 arise

Name FC-1 or JF-17 was decided at much later stage.

Ok.
Not the first time national interest wrong. I needed to post that here to see what others here view that as.

completely wrong article Project Director of JF-17 Shaid Latif himself many time told that JF-17 have nothing to do with Super-7 or J-7 series in fact Super-7 was was a failure and was abended, but when he took charge of the project he shifted the baseline concept from J-7 to F-16 [PAF only had blk-15 F-16 at that time], Chinese counterpart severely objected on itit took him a good amount of time to make Chinese agreed to the new Project and name of the new project was not decided till then so initially they use the name of old project Super- 7 and it is from this point where all the confusion arise related to JF-17 relation to Super-7 arise

Name FC-1 or JF-17 was decided at much later stage.

Ok.
Not the first time national interest wrong. I needed to post that here to see what others here view that as.

 

[CriticalThought]

I'm pretty sure F-22s don't fly around in stealth configuration except in mainland USA for military purpouses. They purpousely increase their RCS with a little attatchment normally.

This is an F-22 with a Lunenberg lens:

View topic - I was wondering what is this? • F-16.net

Military aviation forum since 2003, with high quality discussion focusing on the F-16, F-35 and F-22 jet fighters and the C-130.

www.f-16.net

Look at the size of it. UHF/VHF ranges from 30 MHz to 300 MHz which translates to a wavelength of 1 dm to 10m. Now here is a simple rule regarding reflection of electromagnetic waves - an object cannot reflect a wave whose wavelength is bigger than its size. So that tiny lunenberg lens could not have introduced noise into the UHF/VHF signal and would have been useless.

 

[CriticalThought]

Yes. Our positron collider that is built in 2035 was later developed into a time warping machine which allow our engineers to copy from future. They then seed the information through 5G tower to past. This is already common information because secret is exposed


Spotting F-22 is actually not too difficult with certain types of high frequency radars. Not all of them but it is still useless to provide accurate target information for missile. Better way was to use many similar types of these radars and develop a way to improve the information they collect into a clear target for missile guidance. Chinese scientists say this was already done but it relies on many radar units all operating in this overlap method.

This is what I am saying. Chinese scientists have a long experience dealing with stealth in its various forms. When it comes to Rafale, that experience will be invaluable in devising counter-strategies.

 

[FuturePAF]

What about employing over the horizon radars in an overlapping pattern, networked with other radars closer to the theater while others are space based radar satellites along with IR/Optical/Lidar satellites and processing the signals through supercomputers.

datalinked to the JF-17; will at least allow the plane to get closer to the enemy without having to turn on its own radar, or at least use its radar and ew suite to minimize detection until the enemy is within PL-15 range

similar to what America is building to contain China

US commander seeks US$27 billion to hold back China in the Indo-Pacific

Admiral Philip Davidson outlines plan for new military hardware and to hold drills with allies as rivalry with Beijing continues under Biden administration.

www.google.com

Coupled with the right AI, it might be able to track aircraft deep in enemy territory.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1325520110271033346

 

[Dazzler]

Dazzler I would have loved to accept that KLJ-7A is better but that might not be the case. Comparing a system on mere T/R is an utter injustice. For morale boosting purpose-yes but these two systems cannot be compared. RBE2 being one of the worlds finest AESA Radars out there operational. It’s rated as the BEST Non American solution available on the market. It’s been heavily tested, used in all practical manifestations of the word practical, extremely focused on EW protection, is robust , agile and damn lethal in picking up tracking, engaging targets in all domains. Works very well in a dense EW Enviornment. It’s the tried tested and go to solution these days. The best of the best out there. Thales has done an amazing work on this piece of instrument. The only draw back I foresee it’s extremely expensive to maintain in comparison to other World Leading AESA radar sets and the French are known to squeeze their client in after sales support, Software/HardWare Updation, Even a small change in PCB can cost you a treasure. Initially first 2-3 years IAF Rafales will be a beast able to punch anyone coming it’s way . They will be deadly. However keeping in view the extremely long Sub Continental Bureaucratic procedures even for regular maintenance purposes declines the shelf life of the product and results in degraded performance much earlier than it’s anticipated. Therefore after 3-4 years IAF Rafales may have degraded performance.

-The radar was chosen by mid 2019, suggesting it went through rigorous testing since it was offered for the blk 3 in 2017.

-klj-7A emerged as the best solution out of three contenders, the other were Grifo-E and LKF601E.

-Despite air cooling, the overall performance degradation during off-boresight search is negligible.

-Up to 120° two dimensional scanning by machine phase scanning version
-Very compact

More later

 

[maverick1977]

-The radar was chosen by mid 2019, suggesting it went through rigorous testing since it was offered for the blk 3 in 2017.

-klj-7A emerged as the best solution out of three contenders, the other were Grifo-E and LKF601E.

-Despite air cooling, the overall performance degradation during off-boresight search is negligible.

-Up to 120° two dimensional scanning by machine phase scanning version
-Very compact

More later

120 degree off bore seems to be not that great as compared to human sight comparison., or do we mean 240 degree 120 on each side of the line of sight.. ??? need experts to chime in ?

or a reflex angle angle greater than 180 degree, which in this case is 240 degree off bore sight as compared ot obtuse angle as shown above

 

[arjunk]

If No, do Chinese have an export variant of any aircraft which can take up the Rafales challenge?

FC-31 exists but not only is its engine performance lacking, purchasing it would also encourage India to buy F-35s which are definitely better than FC-31.

 

[Abramar]

Closest thing we have to a block 3 cockpit photo.

 

[Dazzler]

Closest thing we have to a block 3 cockpit photo.View attachment 724294

Check the differences

Blk 2

Blk 3

Notice cables, a telltale sign of single integrated display.

 

[arjunk]

Looks like an F-35/J-20 style display due to the vast patch of black but this may just be the UFCP... Pic quality is too bad to tell. Old cockpit for comparison.

F-35 and J-20 cockpit from roughly the same angle

 

[nomi007]

I hope it has cockpit like J-20 with right-hand side stick and throttle hands-on throttle-and-stick system,

 

[Air Wolf]

I hope it has cockpit like J-20 with right-hand side stick and throttle hands-on throttle-and-stick system,

No side stick.

 

[Ali_Baba]

No side stick.

it does have a side stick. That has been said by the ACM and others at PAC for some time now.

 

[SQ8]

This is what I am saying. Chinese scientists have a long experience dealing with stealth in its various forms. When it comes to Rafale, that experience will be invaluable in devising counter-strategies.

Agreed - but in my personal experience they (much like the US) aren’t giving Pakistan tier 1 access(which should never be expected). That doesn’t mean what Pakistan is getting is “Monkey Model” material but the performance against a comparable western system then suffers.

The ideal solution is technology independence which India or even UAE is much more ahead than Pakistan if not for their own bureaucratic shackles; but its a given with their deep pockets.

The true product of AZM isn’t the 5th gen, but the technology base that will develop due to it. What stops PAC from selling anything it learns on communication or displays to an enterprising local Cellular BTS manufacturer - use that to finance additional R&D?