JF-17 Now Boasts True Multi Role Capabilities !

[JohnWick]

View attachment 598740 View attachment 598741 View attachment 598742

I am seeing these dual racks on toys dcs cgi
Decoys Any informtion or picture they are really used on jft?

 

[LKJ86]

they are really used on jft?

Only depend on the actual demand of PAF.

 

[aziqbal]

Block 1 and 2 cannot replace F16 as no data link correct ? Or block 2 can data link? If so what’s the proof ?

block 3 can and also has ASEA

F16 has situational awareness

 

[Haris Ali2140]

Block 1 and 2 cannot replace F16 as no data link correct ? Or block 2 can data link? If so what’s the proof ?

block 3 can and also has ASEA

F16 has situational awareness

JF-17s have datalinks called Link-17.

JF-17 were never supposed to replace F-16s.

 

[JohnWick]

JF-17s have datalinks called Link-17.

JF-17 were never supposed to replace F-16s.

F-15 was also never supposed to be a bomber but it is evolved into
F-15 strike eagle

 

[airomerix]

Block 1 and 2 cannot replace F16 as no data link correct ? Or block 2 can data link? If so what’s the proof ?

block 3 can and also has ASEA

F16 has situational awareness

Situational awareness comes with sensors and data links. Hence JF-17 has some sort of awareness awarenss. But F-16s have a better one due to the maturity of the Link 16 and other systems.

 

[jupiter2007]

Block 1 and 2 cannot replace F16 as no data link correct ? Or block 2 can data link? If so what’s the proof ?

block 3 can and also has ASEA

F16 has situational awareness

JF-17 replacing F-16? Where did you hear that? AZM will eventually replace F-16s.

 

[m52k85]

Situational awareness comes with sensors and data links. Hence JF-17 has some sort of awareness awarenss. But F-16s have a better one due to the maturity of the Link 16 and other systems.

If I remember correctly, it was only when the block-IIs came out that they got data-links and "enhanced load carrying capacity", which probably means the 1,000 pounders/ dual 500 pounders under each wing on no. 2 and 6 stations. Together with 3 tanks as well.

Btw, would you know is DCS accurate in suggesting that center line tank is not droppable? Quite a few pictures of Jf-17 in A2A config are without a centerline tank, infact I don't think I can see a picture of A2A config with one.

If the above is true that means, the 50 block-Is are:
1. Inferior in CAPs due to slightly shorter range of radar (v1 vs v2), and lack of data link which improves situational awareness, and a relatively inferior EW package (I would hazard a guess that Indra ones were introduced on Bk2)
2. Inferior in bombing punch due to lesser load i.e 2 smaller bombs vs 4 of blk 2.
3. Anti-shipping role seems the config where Blk 1 and 2 are near par.

Ofcourse, retrospect incorporation of Blk 2 features would solve each each point, here is my take on easiest to incorporate changes first, along with the reasons I think so:
1. Data link addition. Reason: Home grown, presumably least structural changes needed.
2. Wing strengthening. Reason: again PAC are responsible for making wings.
3. EW suite: foreign involvement required, so probably most cost prohibitive (for lack of a better word)
There was also news of "improved avionics" in blk2, don't know what that means, could be alluding to the EW suite.

Does anyone know if these changes have been applied to blk-1 also?

P.S. I know of internal pluming upgrade in blk-2, lets leave it out for now.

@messiach would appreciate your take on these points as well.

 

[khanasifm]

If I remember correctly, it was only when the block-IIs came out that they got data-links and "enhanced load carrying capacity", which probably means the 1,000 pounders/ dual 500 pounders under each wing on no. 2 and 6 stations. Together with 3 tanks as well.

Btw, would you know is DCS accurate in suggesting that center line tank is not droppable? Quite a few pictures of Jf-17 in A2A config are without a centerline tank, infact I don't think I can see a picture of A2A config with one.

If the above is true that means, the 50 block-Is are:
1. Inferior in CAPs due to slightly shorter range of radar (v1 vs v2), and lack of data link which improves situational awareness, and a relatively inferior EW package (I would hazard a guess that Indra ones were introduced on Bk2)
2. Inferior in bombing punch due to lesser load i.e 2 smaller bombs vs 4 of blk 2.
3. Anti-shipping role seems the config where Blk 1 and 2 are near par.

Ofcourse, retrospect incorporation of Blk 2 features would solve each each point, here is my take on easiest to incorporate changes first, along with the reasons I think so:
1. Data link addition. Reason: Home grown, presumably least structural changes needed.
2. Wing strengthening. Reason: again PAC are responsible for making wings.
3. EW suite: foreign involvement required, so probably most cost prohibitive (for lack of a better word)
There was also news of "improved avionics" in blk2, don't know what that means, could be alluding to the EW suite.

Does anyone know if these changes have been applied to blk-1 also?

P.S. I know of internal pluming upgrade in blk-2, lets leave it out for now.

@messiach would appreciate your take on these points as well.

Most of block 1 /2 except aar do not need much I fact lots stuff is swapable or software base and can be done in field and does not require depot level change only aar and some environmental stuff need it so block 1/2 is superfluous

Even prototype were flying with three drops and older style multiple bomb pylons and testing all go ejection at same time bombs and drop tanks

 

[Ultima Thule]

I would really love to see a B3 loaded with 6xPL-15 including 2 on racks.
Indians “raPhAeL radar meteor” statement will become useless

with lots of drag issue, mainly heavy jets like F-15/Su-27 can carry 6 to 8 AAMs for air defenses, they wont able to carry 10 or 12 AAMs because this bring lots of drag and destabilize the jet, medium can carry 4-6 AAMs depending on mission, JF-17 block-3 have a 4 BVR and 2 SRAAM is enough for the enemy

F-15 was also never supposed to be a bomber but it is evolved into
F-15 strike eagle

To replace F-111 and no alternative competitor on horizon, and last the right term for F-15E strike eagle is FIGHTER BOMBER not BOMBER

 

[MastanKhan]

If I remember correctly, it was only when the block-IIs came out that they got data-links and "enhanced load carrying capacity", which probably means the 1,000 pounders/ dual 500 pounders under each wing on no. 2 and 6 stations. Together with 3 tanks as well.

Btw, would you know is DCS accurate in suggesting that center line tank is not droppable? Quite a few pictures of Jf-17 in A2A config are without a centerline tank, infact I don't think I can see a picture of A2A config with one.

If the above is true that means, the 50 block-Is are:
1. Inferior in CAPs due to slightly shorter range of radar (v1 vs v2), and lack of data link which improves situational awareness, and a relatively inferior EW package (I would hazard a guess that Indra ones were introduced on Bk2)
2. Inferior in bombing punch due to lesser load i.e 2 smaller bombs vs 4 of blk 2.
3. Anti-shipping role seems the config where Blk 1 and 2 are near par.

Ofcourse, retrospect incorporation of Blk 2 features would solve each each point, here is my take on easiest to incorporate changes first, along with the reasons I think so:
1. Data link addition. Reason: Home grown, presumably least structural changes needed.
2. Wing strengthening. Reason: again PAC are responsible for making wings.
3. EW suite: foreign involvement required, so probably most cost prohibitive (for lack of a better word)
There was also news of "improved avionics" in blk2, don't know what that means, could be alluding to the EW suite.

Does anyone know if these changes have been applied to blk-1 also?

P.S. I know of internal pluming upgrade in blk-2, lets leave it out for now.

@messiach would appreciate your take on these points as well.

Hi

@messiach knows too many things about this aircraft.

She ain’t talking no more.

bye bye @messiach

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

If JF-17s can carry EW pods like the one being developed at ASELSAN, it'll give them an added benefit.

ASELSAN claims it can intercept and jam and/or deceive hostile enemy radar emitters by analyzing multi-target signals and automatically/manually generating an appropriate response. GaN based devices make it more efficient.

The system uses similar technology to that used in ASELSAN's Land based KORAL Electronic Warfare system being in active deployment.

 

[Genghis khan1]

It may sound pandoo but we need to rename our squadrons with desi names ..... gandasa is a good start.... each language should give its finest and toughest word

Mula jatt squadron

 

[Ali_Baba]

If JF-17s can carry EW pods like the one being developed at ASELSAN, it'll give them an added benefit.

ASELSAN claims it can intercept and jam and/or deceive hostile enemy radar emitters by analyzing multi-target signals and automatically/manually generating an appropriate response. GaN based devices make it more efficient.

The system uses similar technology to that used in ASELSAN's Land based KORAL Electronic Warfare system being in active deployment.

I agree, now that the JF17 Avionics integration lab is fully up and running, PAF has the ability to integrate these platforms onto the JF17 itself and deploy them to its fleet. PAF can try and get the best of breed and use it without restrictions of what it can, or cannot integrate on the JF17. This is the advantage it has over the F16, Mirages etc where they need approval from the supplier and also the goverment of the supplier to make changes to the platform.

Turkey is developing quite a lot of EW systems, platforms that Pakistan would very much be interested in for sure.

 

[m52k85]

Hi

@messiach

She ain’t talking no more.

bye bye @messiach

That is sad. We will miss her.

Since you understand the value of picking out the nuances from otherwise what is mostly noise on pdf, perhaps you can summarize the significance of her postings here.. It would then be interesting to debate such an analysis from a game theoretical point of view.

Perhaps I can get the ball rolling:
1. Posting since Sep '16
2. Most active in Q4 '17 (accounting for a fourth of her posts).

Significant revelations:
1. Engine improvements on JF-17,
2. FBW/O in various blocks of JF-17
3. Realistic timelines in Aerospace projects, especially turbine development.
4. How turbine development has been sabotaged in official circles of Pakistan.
5. ...