JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 2]

[Arsalan]

SNECMA would develop a version of M88 with higher thrust if PAF requested...anyone would upgrade their engines if they were promised a share in the export.

wont the chines or the russian do the same, so why go for a change if we still want to get it upgraded or modifed, we can do the same with the existing engine also.

the european's will also be a relatively costly option. what do you think

 

[Arsalan]

SNECMA would develop a version of M88 with higher thrust if PAF requested...anyone would upgrade their engines if they were promised a share in the export.

wont the chines and the russians do the same. why go for a new system whne we still want to update or modify it where we can do this to the existiong engine as well.

and the european option will be relatively costly compared to the existing one.
what do you think

 

[mean_bird]

wont the chines and the russians do the same. why go for a new system whne we still want to update or modify it where we can do this to the existiong engine as well.

and the european option will be relatively costly compared to the existing one.
what do you think

China does not have a mastery over jet engines as yet, they still need some time (they are improving quite rapidly but still a decade behind IMO to master the tech).

Russians can, but will they? and secondly even if they did....just like the US, do we trust them for what is going to be our airforce's backbone?

Any western engine will be costly but assuming we can get a license to produce it locally, that would be cool.

 

[Arsalan]

but this matter had already been disscussed that Pakistan at the moment have no infrastructure and even knowledge of building Engine, if it was so we would have opted for the chines option and may have modified it to our standards. at present we are not even able to make automobile engine, what about the jet!!

so i think the expensive M88 with similar specs as the RD93 is not a good option, rather its a bad one!

anyway its my personel opinun based upon the facts i have studied, you may disagree with me!

Thanks

 

[mean_bird]

but this matter had already been disscussed that Pakistan at the moment have no infrastructure and even knowledge of building Engine, if it was so we would have opted for the chines option and may have modified it to our standards. at present we are not even able to make automobile engine, what about the jet!!

so i think the expensive M88 with similar specs as the RD93 is not a good option, rather its a bad one!

anyway its my personel opinun based upon the facts i have studied, you may disagree with me!

Thanks

Yes but when you intend to acquire 250 of them (and possible exports too), it wont be a bad idea to invest in the infrastructure. And I am talking about ToT not building our own new engines.

Basically you build the bulk of the components here to reduce cost and import any sensitive/advanced components you're not allowed/capable of building here.

 

[chirag.s]

i think if you have a sufficiently large requirements i think u can approach those SNECMA guys because you have a large mirage fleet so they might help with a better engine europeans are the ones to approach....

am i right ??

thank you

 

[hj786]

i think if you have a sufficiently large requirements i think u can approach those SNECMA guys because you have a large mirage fleet so they might help with a better engine europeans are the ones to approach....
am i right ??

Yup! They might even help upgrade ROSE Mirages with M53 engine from M2k if PAF decides it is worth the cost - the ROSE Mirages are supposed to be very good strike platforms and I have read that 30-40 ROSE 2/3 Mirages will be modified for Aerial Refuelling.
Main reason they would not sell M88 is if India goes for Rafale - in that case, a version of Eurojet EJ200 may well be possible.

the M88:
Fuel consumption: dry 0.80 kg/(daN·h)
Thrust-to-weight ratio: approx. 8.5:1
the RD93
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 7.9:1
two M88z are used to power a Rafale jet and i have already given the comparision on Performance specs of JF17 and rafale.

Compare the red parts. M88 is a big improvement over RD. Also, it is MUCH more fuel efficient and will need much less maintenance. You cannot compare the fuel consumption figures listed in your data, they are in different units. M88 is a much newer engine and much better than RD. The reason Rafale has two is because it is twice as heavy and well over twice the cost of JF-17.

In reply to HJ786..
JF17 in it current format ie the first 50 or so models I don,t believe that this plane has the Radar,, combination of WVR/ BVR missles, or the RANGE OF electronic warefare/jammer suites to match the heavey SU30MKI.
IF THE JF17 was able to live with and survive regularly with SU30MKI i don,t think the PAF would be considering J10
A LOT of FORUM posters have agreed that large nos of FC20 will be needed to tackle SU30MKI.. & (MRCA if this happens.)
AS FOR future upgrades THIS IS TOO FAR AWAY and just speclation...
If JF17 was already at near SU30MKI level i doubt we would be talking french radar french engine french missles.

You don't believe current JF-17 has radar, weaponry and EW suites to fight MKI? Well the PAF and many members here do. JF with AWACS means MKI has no big radar advantage. JF with SD-10 means MKI has no big BVR advantage. JF with HMS means MKI has no WVR advantage. JF with Chinese EW suite means MKI has no big Israeli jammer advantage - if Israel can make good jammer systems, why can't China? Did you know even Turkey is making their own EW/jammer suite for their F-35?

You say many posters say FC-20 is needed to counter MKI (these posters are almost always newbies who are not knowledgeable) but you are forgetting the many posters who say JF can beat MKI if JF is on it's home territory. FC-20 is a better high-altitude defensive fighter with longer loitering time than JF as well as a more advanced offensive fighter with longer range than JF. That is why it is being bought. If FC-20 was needed to defend Pak airspace, why would PAF buy JF-17? It is pointless if it cannot defend against MKI, since MKI is InAF's main offensive fighter. Even Western forum posters say JF can defend against MKI on it's own territory, especially if backed by AWACS. JF was modified with DSI, FBW, better Chinese radar and EW suite (that thing on the tip of the tail is an EW fairing) and so on right when MKI was being inducted into InAF.

Upgrades to JF are NOT speculation, they are being confirmed by inside sources including ex-fighter pilots. Upgrades to sensors and airframe (new radars, RCS reduction, new weapons) happen on all modern fighters and JF is a modern fighter.
JF might not be at MKI's level, but it is certainly close enough to defend against it. The reason French radars and weapons are being evaluated is to make it better, full stop.

 

[fatman17]

it is still too early to predict what final "role" the JF-17 will perform for the PAF. early indications suggest that the "primary" role evolving for the JF-17 is CAS/Ground Attack and thus the current evaluation being conducted by the PAF for this role. this is further confirmed by the fact that the first batch of JF-17s will replace the Nanchang A-5s CAS aircraft currently operating with No 16 and No 26 Squadrons (~38 a/c) based at Peshawar.

In any future india-pakistan war scenario, the PA will seek immediate CAS/Ground Attack support from the PAF to thwart any indian thrusts / incursions threatening the karach-Lahore road.

This support would need to be provided much before the PAF is able to gain "air deniability" to the IAF in the forward battle areas. there are risks involved in this strategy (Manpads, SAMs etc) but like all previous wars where the PAF was "busy" denying the IAF air superiority during the early stages of the war and was constrained by not having enough FGA assets to provide support to the army, thus putting PA formations under intense pressure (Shakarganj, Thar desert, etc).

With the intent to have 250 JF-17s in eventual service (by 2014) this "weakness" will be removed and considering the profile of the JF-17, it could prove to be a decent CAS/Ground Attack platform. this will remove the traditional "lukewarm" relationship between the PAF and the Army high command. the JF-17 will have a secondary fighter role but it is not clear at this time.

PAF ADA responsibilities will then remain with the F-16s (blk-52s, MLUs) and the FC-20 along with the remaining surviving F-7PGs in service, providing a "potent" ADA force.that is why i believe that the PAF will pick up the option on the 18 F-16 blk 52s after the first 18 are delivered by 2010.

 

[Arsalan]

Compare the red parts. M88 is a big improvement over RD. Also, it is MUCH more fuel efficient and will need much less maintenance. You cannot compare the fuel consumption figures listed in your data, they are in different units. M88 is a much newer engine and much better than RD. The reason Rafale has two is because it is twice as heavy and well over twice the cost of JF-17.

ok right with the first part but the fuel consumption, yes it has not been available to me in same units but i have read that the RD93 is among the most fuel efficient engines and is also Maintenance friendly, the Maintenance part has been disscussed again by the PAF as there edge over indian best plane like Su30 and Su27 which need lots of time and resources for the regular between flight Maintenance thus limiting there flying time and decreasing the number of sorties the paln can fly as compared to the JF17!!

 

[Arsalan]

PAF ADA responsibilities will then remain with the F-16s (blk-52s, MLUs) and the FC-20 along with the remaining surviving F-7PGs in service, providing a "potent" ADA force.that is why i believe that the PAF will pick up the option on the 18 F-16 blk 52s after the first 18 are delivered by 2010.

what, are we still be flying the F7z, i mean even when the JF17z will be inducted??

they are really costly to fly and our F7 are not BVR so do not see any point in keeping them operational

and do you mean that the A5 squadrons will be the first ones to be replace by the JF17,
can any one put some light on the number of JF17z we will require to completely get rid of the A5!!!

 

[fatman17]

what, are we still be flying the F7z, i mean even when the JF17z will be inducted??

they are really costly to fly and our F7 are not BVR so do not see any point in keeping them operational

and do you mean that the A5 squadrons will be the first ones to be replace by the JF17,
can any one put some light on the number of JF17z we will require to completely get rid of the A5!!![/B]

pls read my post carefully
thanks!

 

[Arsalan]

currently we are operating

40 A5 planes
and a total of 192 F7 (including the F7PG, F7MP and trainers)

so considering first priority replacement of A5 as stated by sir Fatman17, i guess we will be requiring a batch of about 50 planes.

by the way any idea that how many plane a squadron of JF 17 will carry?, i guess it will be 19 planes and this meen about 3 squadrons will be inducted to phase out the A5z,

thats cool!!

 

[Arsalan]

and have a look at the mirages there are about 180 of them,

so if we are trying to replace these existing system by the JF17z and acquire the F16 and the Fc20 to add power to the muscle, we need big numbers of JF17, i guess about 300 to 350

well if we do not debate on cost issues wouldnt it be a great scenario, i would love to see PAF having

350 JF17
60 to 80 Fc 20 (three pure aggressor role suqadrons)
60 to 80 F16 ( 40 MLU planes + about 40 Block 52, as it have been stated that paf is going for 18 of them with an option of additional 18)
supported by 4 early warning airborne radar systems and refuelling tanker

now wouldnt that be Cool

i wish it happens, May Allah Help Us, Aameen!

 

[Myth_buster_1]

currently we are operating

40 A5 planes
and a total of 192 F7 (including the F7PG, F7MP and trainers)

so considering first priority replacement of A5 as stated by sir Fatman17, i guess we will be requiring a batch of about 50 planes.

by the way any idea that how many plane a squadron of JF 17 will carry?, i guess it will be 19 planes and this meen about 3 squadrons will be inducted to phase out the A5z,

thats cool!!

Like fatman said.

A-5 sqd 16 and 26 in Peshawar will be replaced with 36 JF-17s, that should be done before 2010 or we could eventually see all A-5 being pashed out first.

and have a look at the mirages there are about 180 of them,

so if we are trying to replace these existing system by the JF17z and acquire the F16 and the Fc20 to add power to the muscle, we need big numbers of JF17, i guess about 300 to 350

well if we do not debate on cost issues wouldnt it be a great scenario, i would love to see PAF having

350 JF17
60 to 80 Fc 20 (three pure aggressor role suqadrons)
60 to 80 F16 ( 40 MLU planes + about 40 Block 52, as it have been stated that paf is going for 18 of them with an option of additional 18)
supported by 4 early warning airborne radar systems and refuelling tanker

now wouldnt that be Cool

i wish it happens, May Allah Help Us, Aameen!

dear no need for such calulations, IAF will be replacing their 250+ Mig-21 Mig-23 jags with only 126 MRCAs.

 

[PAFAce]

4 early warning airborne radar systems
[

I thought we will be procuring 5 Saab Erieye 2000 AEW&C from Sweden and 5 Harbin ZDK-03 AEW& from the People's Republic of China in the coming few years. Did I miss something here?