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

[Ultima Thule]

i think B version can be fitted with AESA radar

it can be if PAF wanted but with air cool AESA that we had seen on 2018 Zuhai airshow but not with liquid cool AESA (KLJ-7A) which need more power hence new engine @Code_Geass

why do u think not?

Air cool version with less power LFK @Code_Geass liquid cooled AESA (KLJ-7A) @Code_Geass

 

[The Eagle]

it can be if PAF wanted but with air cool AESA that we had seen on 2018 Zuhai airshow but not with liquid cool AESA (KLJ-7A) which need more power hence new engine @Code_Geass


Air cool version with less power LFK @Code_Geass liquid cooled AESA (KLJ-7A) @Code_Geass

When you are quoting a member or replying to, there is no need to tag his/her name as well. A friendly advise, though.

 

[Code_Geass]

it can be if PAF wanted but with air cool AESA that we had seen on 2018 Zuhai airshow but not with liquid cool AESA (KLJ-7A) which need more power hence new engine @Code_Geass


Air cool version with less power LFK @Code_Geass liquid cooled AESA (KLJ-7A) @Code_Geass

that is exactly what i meant if PAF wanted to there is an option.

 

[Ultima Thule]

that is exactly what i meant if PAF wanted to there is an option.

yes you're right sir

 

[Code_Geass]

yes you're right sir

i m no sir.

 

[araz]

it can be if PAF wanted but with air cool AESA that we had seen on 2018 Zuhai airshow but not with liquid cool AESA (KLJ-7A) which need more power hence new engine @Code_Geass
Air cool version with less power LFK @Code_Geass liquid cooled AESA (KLJ-7A) @Code_Geass

Most of CATIC work on provision of AESA and the consequent changes went on before the Bs came to light. So it is perfectly plausible that the necessary changes are in place for both liquid cooled and Air cooled AESA. Secondly PAF has not so far hinted that a new AESA needs a new more powerful engine. It seems to be carrying on with the same RD93 series. So where is the evidence that a new engine is needed before liquid cooled AESA Can be integrated? I am merely airing my thoughts.
A

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

AESA can always be retrofitted as there appear to be plans to retrofit the whole fleet of JFTs with an AESA. This would also point to local production at the avionics suite. However we do need a few Bs now to test and evaluate their Future role in PAF. Whether they remain as trainers or have an evolved role and to what extent we can exploit them and expand the role they play. If the role is satisfactory we may yet see more Bs joining PAF.
A

I heard the blk1s and blks2s have space issues and can't accomodate AESA radar with its required heat exchangers. Also, AESA requires a more powerful powerplant.

 

[Ultima Thule]

I heard the blk1s and blks2s have space issues and can't accomodate AESA radar with its required heat exchangers.

No radome (nose cone) is same as up coming Block-3 and we have the options air cooled radar presented by China on 2018 Zuhai airshow we can fit LFK AESA with our B1/B2 with ease, and where do you hear that JF-17 block-1/2 need a heat exchangers for AESA @Alpha BeeTee

 

[SOHEIL]

i m no sir.

Hi no sir !

 

[araz]

I heard the blk1s and blks2s have space issues and can't accomodate AESA radar with its required heat exchangers. Also, AESA requires a more powerful powerplant.

We are yet unsure about what is going to happen. Originally PAF had a plan to upgrade Block 1s to 2s and let block 3s be a separate entity. As air cooled AESAs came to light the plans have changed a d we are now told all fighters would be upgraded to AESA standards. I think it is fair to say it will probably be an air cooled AESA rather than an air and liquid cooled. So the space issues ar apparently now not that big an issue.
The engine power issue is also something that exists only amongst arm chair generals. PAF has never really hinted at any change in the engine. It seems some work has gone on behind the scene on low pressure turbines and the engines are uprated now. It is appreciable how the smoke issue has gone into the background with newer changes. So it seems we do not need to change the engine.
A

 

[MystryMan]

When it comes to midway changes, the jf-17 has seen more than many, even at the prototyping stage. Remember the drastic differences, hence the delay between third and fourth flying prototypes.

The block 3 is NOT just an incremental upgrade. In some areas, you will notice evident changes.

Patience will pay off.

If under the skin changes resemble the B version then what is taking so long for Blk3 to come out?

 

[AsifIjaz]

Aesa and FLIR and a hard point for pod is given in the 50 units or more of thunders we will get feom next yr.. What is worthwhile to know is that in block 3 which of the following is possible or is being worked out.
1).
Whats the deal with rd93MA. A even 5 to 10kN improvement in dry and wet thurst coupled with a few hundred more MTBO +/- fadec would be a huggee improvement.
2).
How much more composite can be added to the aircraft thus decreasing the weight of the airframe and possibly increasing the payload or mtof
3).
If any or both of the above 2 points is going to materialize then can the wing roots and joints be strengthened by using composites or alloys or better manufacturing techniques
4).
Lastly, has the landing gears been redesigned or repositioned a bit. This will complement the dorsal fuel tank expected due to the removal of 2nd seat from the B version. Thus a repositioned or redesigned landing gear can lead to more fuel in the soace freed up while some of the space of 2nd seat can be used for ECM/ELINT or OBOG unit. Laste last year we did hear from @messiach in this regard but there has been no news since then.

I believe that any / all changes above will improve the loiter time and / or the mtow thus pushing the flight envelop nearer to what is required by paf. I would be grateful if some one has any information regarding any of the 4 points mentioned above.

 

[messiach]

No re-design.

4).
Lastly, has the landing gears been redesigned or repositioned a bit. This will complement the dorsal fuel tank expected due to the removal of 2nd seat from the B version. Thus a repositioned or redesigned landing gear can lead to more fuel in the soace freed up while some of the space of 2nd seat can be used for ECM/ELINT or OBOG unit. Laste last year we did hear from @messiach in this regard but there has been no news since then.

 

[The Eagle]

We are yet unsure about what is going to happen. Originally PAF had a plan to upgrade Block 1s to 2s and let block 3s be a separate entity. As air cooled AESAs came to light the plans have changed a d we are now told all fighters would be upgraded to AESA standards. I think it is fair to say it will probably be an air cooled AESA rather than an air and liquid cooled. So the space issues ar apparently now not that big an issue.
The engine power issue is also something that exists only amongst arm chair generals. PAF has never really hinted at any change in the engine. It seems some work has gone on behind the scene on low pressure turbines and the engines are uprated now. It is appreciable how the smoke issue has gone into the background with newer changes. So it seems we do not need to change the engine.
A

We are looking at two different radars option for JF-17 fleet Block-II & Block-III.

These two Radars may possibly solve curiousity in regard to AESA Radar for Block-II & Block-III. Many had question on mind that KLJA or LKF601E may or may not fit into nose cone of Block-II, so the possible scenario as following may help to understand possible integration.


LKF601E AESA radar seems to be possible option for Block-II for its small size & air-cooling that deals with any low power. Clearly mentions FC-1 so one can assume that the same is purely offered for JF-17 (Block-II for its size & apparent fitment) AESA solution with 170 KM claimed range of 15 target tracking & 4 locks at the same time. Or, to go by the word FC-1 that seems an upgrade for the foreign customers of Block-II if they interest. That said "being fully air cooling, which significantly reduces system weight and the need for rewiring, and the secondly is to replace the existing KF-17 radar without major modification".

Furthermore, the chatter has it that the same AESA radar was too on offer for Block-III but not sure.

So far known details are:

• Frequency: X band

• Range:
  • Look-up: Fighter-sized targets at 170 km
    
    
  • Look-down: large targets from 200 km in the Sea (Ships)

• Total targets tracked: tracks up to 15 targets simultaneously and engages four with air/air missiles

• Weight: 69kg + 35kg (radar + (processor + power module))

With 864 TR modules.

And seems they did some tests after installing one on JF-17 Block-II

Apparently, the serial number also seems to be 06 which is also highlighted in one of the above pictures at 2018 China Airshow.

Now coming to Block-III possibility of Chinese AESA radar in view of more detection range, power & built in capabilities. I can guess that it would be KLJA with two different models being displayed. One with front Array only and the other with one front Array + two side Arrays as well. Both Radars the KLJ7A & KLJ7A with side looking arrays are pictured in single frame.

• Frequency: X band

• TR: 1000+

• Range:
  • Look-up: 170 km for targets of 3m² RCS (RCS of smaller or stealthier aircraft...none in possession of indian armed forces....also drones)
  • 200 km against aerial target with 5m² RCS (RCS of base model Rafael and Gripen...Su-30MKI has even higher RCS @ 20m²)

• Total targets tracked: 15 in TWS (Track-While-Scan) mode and engage 4 simultaneously

• Weight: ≤120 kg

KLJ7A with only front facing Array is claimed to be the ideal option for JF-17 Block-III.

Now the KLJ7A with side arrays is claimed to have 600 TR modules for side arrays that are more than SU-57 side array AESA radar, that provides JF-17 Block-III with front, sides & coverage from back as well due to side arrays placement. However, this upgrade seems to be expensive and may need more power that gives a possibility for some future projection like NxGF.

There is a possibility that we may wait for AVIC KLJ7A retrofit version for Block-II planes (Block-I upgraded scenario) to avoid having two different AESA radars from two different suppliers but that is unclear and my opinion only.

Then comes the possibility that in my view, seems to be latest update & carries more weight (thanks to @messiach for valuable input) that we are looking at in-house solution for AESA radar (indigenous to the extent) with the help of foreign friends including assistance from Russia as well. This solution comes into mind for the our freedom of integration of weapons from different sources either be it Chinese or Western. That seems possible to me because Chinese will not share source code with Western Radar and neither the Western Source will provide source codes for integration with Chinese Radars. So, to solve this issue we are moving towards an independent Radar built in house so that none of the sources will have any issue in regard to source codes for weapon integration on our fighter fleet.

What comes may next, is yet unclear though, few of above posts pushed me to share my observation and understanding as well.

I will however, request the members that please let's keep Block-II discussion out of this thread. I did on my part but that was in regard to LKF601E AESA Radar possibility for the Block-III as well.

Thanks to the all sources (OSINT) is done here.

Regards,

 

[Dazzler]

Did you know that in early 2000, a team from LCA project got in touch with a key figure in thunder project and requested him to have a look at how it was taking shape so fast?