What's new

JF-17/FC-1 Thunder Fighter

Status
Not open for further replies.
Explain this into more details.

Which wetdreams are you reffering to?

Thanks.

I think I have already explained that pretty well, Webby. Lets leave at that, I aint going to change unless I see something credible. Lets just agree to disagree at this point of time.
 
.
Does that mean JF-17 and blk 52 are not in the same class while a J-10 and blk 52 are?




Weaponary is still intalks, after the talks are over and weaponary decided on you ahve to integrate it . So all these will happen in another 9 months??? So it basically means PAC will have a test bed and thats it. No induction.



So does that mean that the testing for the other radar hasnt started? :rolleyes:

Bull those where not my comments. They were the comments of a magazine called Kanwa. And contains some opinions of said magazine. Bear in mind that no date is given for the article.
 
.
Well back to the wet dreams everyone!

According to what I have read there may be 2 standards of JF-17. One with Chinese systems and the other with western systems.

There will be a Chinese standard with Chinese weapons and avionics. And a Western standard with western weapons and avionics.

I doubt all of the planes will be of the same standard though.




Thales looks to update scanned array radar
by Reuben F. Johnson

In the last two years, France’s radar and airborne electronics firm Thales has enjoyed steady progress in the development and integration of new radar and avionic modes for the Dassault Rafale fighter, the latest being the F3 configuration. The French government signed a production order for this configuration in December and it should be fully deployed by 2008. Thales is now set to take another major step that will mean a significant enhancement for the Rafale’s combat capability.

When the company first introduced the RBE2 radar for the Rafale, it became one of the very first radar houses in the world to develop an electronically scanning array (ESA) for a fighter aircraft. While the original RBE2 was only a passive ESA, it still was one of the most capable multimode radars of its time.

RBE2 is officially rated as capable of tracking up to 40 targets and engaging as many as eight of them at once, and it can perform automatic identification friend or foe (IFF) interrogation when in dogfight mode. It employs air-to-surface attack modes for both ground and naval targets, as well as navigation and automatic terrain following modes, and can operate in jamming environments. “The number of targets that it can track simultaneously are limited only by how many the pilot can keep track of,” said a Thales official.

Since the late 1990s, Thales has been working on a updated version of the RBE2 that would use an active electronically scanning array (AESA) in place of the passive array originally developed for the aircraft. This RBE2-AA (active array) variant has been flown both on the Thales Mystère testbed aircraft and then on a Rafale for flight test.

Thales has now been allocated funding by the French ministry of defense to develop the AESA variant of the RBE2, which would enter service with the French air force Rafales in 2012 as part of the next-generation F4 configuration. “What causes some people to ask questions about this F4 AESA version,” explained the Thales representative, “is that we have now demonstrated that taking off the old passive array and replacing it with an active one is a simple plug-and-play exercise. So then they ask us, ‘why do you need funds for development and integration if this is a plug-and-play piece of hardware?’”

The answer is that the RBE2 AESA model that was developed and flown on these testbed aircraft was a technology demonstrator that was built using U.S.-made transmit/receive modules. The AESA model that is now in development will be a prototype of an all-Europe AESA design with no U.S. content. Once it is ready to fly, Thales engineers will maximize the performance of the modes on the radar that already exist on the passive variant, then develop additional modes that would only be feasible with an AESA. One improvement that will be made eventually is to enhance the RBE2’s noncooperative target recognition functionality. This enables a radar to identify an approaching fighter by literally counting the number of turbine blades in that aircraft’s engines or other characteristics when there is no possibility to interrogate the target with IFF.

http://www.ainonline.com/Publications/paris/2005/Paris_day_02/paris_2_thales_20.html
 
.
The RBE2 radar had been in development since 1989. It was decided that the radar would receive a
new phased-array antenna with full electronic scan, instead of the electro-mechanical scan employed by
the Eurofighter Typhoon's Captor radar. Initially, the radar received a passive phased-array
antenna, but ultimately an active electronically scanned array (AESA) will be fitted. According to
French Ministry of Defense (MoD) sources, the RBE2 radar has a modest range about 100 km
against fighter aircraft, but it operates in a low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) mode and is
resistant to deception jamming. The Typhoon's Captor has a range of 160 km against fighters
but is considered more prone to jamming and can track fewer targets. The French Air Force
accepted the penalty in range reduction for the benefits of LPI and other characteristics.
Moreover, in network-centric operations, a common air picture will be transmitted via the
Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) to the Rafale, enabling the aircraft to make
use of off-board sensors.
According to Thales, the radar operates in the X band and can use low, medium, and high pulserepetition
frequencies. It can track up to 40 air targets in track-while-scan mode and, according
to an unofficial source, can engage up to eight of them with missiles launched in short intervals.
Normally up to six (five on the naval Rafale M) MBDA (Paris, France) MICA EM missiles can be
carried. An unusual feature of the infrared-seeking MICA IR version is that the missile can receive
mid-course update commands from the radar to compare the target location with the location of its
seeker's track or for lock-after-launch engagements. The effective range of both the infrared- and radarhoming
missile versions, therefore, reaches 70 km. Electronic beam steering enables the RBE2
radar to search the airspace in various patterns, probably up to 60 degrees in any direction from
the fixed antenna axis. The radar enables not only track while scan but also so-called "track here while
scan there." For example, the RBE2 can readily track airborne targets while searching for another
airborne target in another sector. The radar performs automatic prioritization of threat targets and has
the ability to discriminate a single aircraft in a group in raid-assessment mode. The F1 standard radar
has no air-to-ground functions.
 
.
whats the difference between AESA & PESA? which one is better?
 
.
AESA IS MUCH BETTER but again it depends for what purpose are we using it.
 
.
Sir,

I believe for JF-17 we should just go for PESA radar. It will be cheaper than a AESA. RBE2 PESA radar have been offered to Pakistan for the JF-17, but it is said that the range of the radar may be insufficient, however with the combo of 6 Erieyes and E-2 Hawkeye, this shouldn't be a problem.
 
.
keys,
what is the detection range of RBE2-AA against fighter sized targets like LCA, Mig21?
on many forums, it is said that RBE2 has range of less than 100km against a typical air target of RC 3 m² :eek:
 
.
Well back to the wet dreams everyone!

According to what I have read there may be 2 standards of JF-17. One with Chinese systems and the other with western systems.

There will be a Chinese standard with Chinese weapons and avionics. And a Western standard with western weapons and avionics.

I doubt all of the planes will be of the same standard though.

There are indeed two different standards, PLAAF version with chinese avionics and PAF standard with western avionics.

Initial batch for PAF will be delivered with chinese systems as per agreement but PAC built thunders will come with western avionics.
 
.
Bull those where not my comments. They were the comments of a magazine called Kanwa. And contains some opinions of said magazine. Bear in mind that no date is given for the article.

So are you asking me to take that article with a pinch of salt?
 
.
keys,
what is the detection range of RBE2-AA against fighter sized targets like LCA, Mig21?
on many forums, it is said that RBE2 has range of less than 100km against a typical air target of RC 3 m² :eek:

Well the range listed is 100km on the article that I posted which unfortunately I have lost the link to!:wall: (Although I have read somewhere that the range is for look down /shoot down mode, not search mode)
The bigger question is that whilst it has the ability to track 40 targets and engage 8, the JF-17 only has 7 hardpoints :lol: The feeling I have is that it will be either a French or Italian radar for the western block fighters. (RBE2, RC400 or possibly one of the radars from Selex e.g.Vixen 750.)
Apparently the J-10 is stealing some of the JF-17's thunder (pun intended;) ) So
They're looking at upgrading the spec (raising the price from $15 to 30 million per unit)As well looking at RCS reduction etc to make it more Attractive.
 
.
So are you asking me to take that article with a pinch of salt?

Well if you check the link you will see that the reporter has been interviewing several Pak officers. But All information in the public domain should be taken with a pinch of salt.;)
 
.
Well the range listed is 100km on the article that I posted which unfortunately I have lost the link to!:wall: (Although I have read somewhere that the range is for look down /shoot down mode, not search mode)
The bigger question is that whilst it has the ability to track 40 targets and engage 8, the JF-17 only has 7 hardpoints :lol: The feeling I have is that it will be either a French or Italian radar for the western block fighters. (RBE2, RC400 or possibly one of the radars from Selex e.g.Vixen 750.)
Apparently the J-10 is stealing some of the JF-17's thunder (pun intended;) ) So
They're looking at upgrading the spec (raising the price from $15 to 30 million per unit)As well looking at RCS reduction etc to make it more Attractive.

You took what Phaism said from Sinodefence :) I agree with him also, but JF-17 should increase its hardpoints, but also wasn't their a picture which we had a rack which can hold 2 missiles I will try to find the link and picutre.
 
.
Shamim sahib posted this picture as a proposed changes for the future JF-17 aircrafts, however i believe hardpoints still need to be increased. Whatsoever, i am impressed by the changes.



On the other note it is possible that the hardpoints are not being increased in order to keep the fighter as a light weight and make sure thurst and RCs are not effected by it.
 
.
Not many changes in my opinion.



The major change i see is. Twin Vertical Stabilizers instead of one. I will post another picture later.



The proposed changes are of course unofficial and poorly drawn.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom