JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 2]

[fatman17]

Fatman17

thanks for the post above. Its commendable that you provided this detail for forumers here to see. However, and please do not get me wrong, I think it would have been a better idea to either rephrase stuff in your own words or provide a link to the page. This is the material from the manufacturers website and copy pasting the whole page amounts to serious breach of copyright IMO.

Again, please do not get me wrong. It certainly would help forumers here learn a lot but IMO you should have just selected the key points and provided the link for the page. That way, we can have all the information and also respect the copyright from from a moral and legal viewpoint.

Please do consider this.

Below are the two pages for reference, for those who wish to see the details as well as diagrams
1. JF-17
2. JF-17 specification details

I take your point - just so you know, I hope you will remind everyone else about this issue - pls dont forget - keep up the good work!

 

[qsaark]

1. JF-17
2. JF-17 specification details

Really pissed off to see that PAC cant even update the contents of their websites. When was the first 04 prototype rolled out? and they are still having the old pictures and info. I hope they are more professional when it comes to overhaul or manufacture aircraft components.

 

[hj786]

I hope they are more professional when it comes to overhaul or manufacture aircraft components.

You know their maintenance procedures increased the time between overhaul for Shenyang F-6 from 100 to 130 hours and they currently maintain/overhaul/rebuild the largest fleet of 60s era Mirage 3/5 aircraft in the entire world? I would rather see them building new birds than building new websites.

 

[qsaark]

You know their maintenance procedures increased the time between overhaul for Shenyang F-6 from 100 to 130 hours and they currently maintain/overhaul/rebuild the largest fleet of 60s era Mirage 3/5 aircraft in the entire world? I would rather see them building new birds than building new websites.

Yes but when you are looking for business, you have to keep every thing up to date which also includes a website especially in this era to IT.

 

[mean_bird]

Really pissed off to see that PAC cant even update the contents of their websites. When was the first 04 prototype rolled out? and they are still having the old pictures and info. I hope they are more professional when it comes to overhaul or manufacture aircraft components.

Same here.

I think its irresponsible and unprofessional behavior of the concerned department .... and that too for a plane they intend to export.

But do remember that the dept. responsible for manufacturing isn't the same as that for publicity and marketing. The main focus is on the technical side and probably a half-hearted . I.T. dept. is in place. They probably outsourced the website development and the person in charge is too lazy to update.

 

[qsaark]

Same here.

I think its irresponsible and unprofessional behavior of the concerned department .... and that too for a plane they intend to export.

But do remember that the dept. responsible for manufacturing isn't the same as that for publicity and marketing. The main focus is on the technical side and probably a half-hearted . I.T. dept. is in place. They probably outsourced the website development and the person in charge is too lazy to update.

I fully agree with you. Actually it is typical of Government Institutions. People draw their salaries no matter what. If PAC was a private institution or had a considerable percentage of private shares, things would have been a little better. Appearance is very important. PAC may be at par with Lockheed Martin in making quality stuff, but an outdated website doesn't leave a very good taste in the mouths of many potential customers. In business, every thing is about impression.

 

[hj786]

We know that one of the upgrades being considered for JF is a FLIR/IRST sensor, removing the need to carry IRST/FLIR pods on the hardpoints. But an IRST/FLIR sensor would add a small amount of drag to the airframe if fitted in a similar spot as on J-11 or Typhoon, i.e. above the nose, offset to one side slightly. It may also cause some small reduction in pilot visibility.

Placing the sensor underneath the nose/fuselage would prevent any reduction in visibility, but the drag penalty would still be present. This position may also cause problems in aerodynamics for anything mounted on the centre hardpoint (and other fuselage hardpoints, if pshamim's report that two additional hardpoints will be added "on the fuselage near the air intakes" is true).

After looking at some pictures of the front of JF, I noticed that a possible solution may be to fit FLIR/IRST sensors inside the JF's divertless supersonic intake bumps. The tip of each bump appears to have a good field of view:
Front view:
http://www.defence.pk/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/4738
Front and to one side:
http://www.defence.pk/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/5368
Side view:
http://www.defence.pk/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/7088
One more view from below:
http://www.defence.pk/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/4740

The view above the aircraft is restricted because of the angle of the intakes, however:
http://www.defence.pk/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/5370

Installing two IR sensors (one in each bump) may cause a higher increase in weight than a single external FLIR/IRST pod, but I think this is a price worth paying to free up an extra hardpoint and reduce drag on the small airframe. Close proximity to the fuel tanks would also mean less coolant lines required to send coolant for the sensors to heat-sinks placed in the fuel tanks.

Thoughts?

 

[ALi Rizwan]

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan's Premier NEWS Agency ) - PAF to start serial production of JF17 fighter aircraft soon

PAF to start serial production of JF17 fighter aircraft soon
ISLAMABAD, Mar 7 (APP): With singing of an agreement between Pakistan Air Force and Chinese firm CATIC the serial production of JF‑17 (Thunder) aircraft would start soon. The agreement between PAF and CATIC on the basis of “seller’s credit” was reached at a ceremony held here Saturday, whereby 42 fighter jets would be joitly produced for the use of PAF.


The agreement was signed on behalf of PAF by Chairman Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Air Marshal Khalid Chaudary and President CATIC MA Zhiping which was witnessed by Chief of the Air Staff PAF Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed and Ambassador of China to Pakistan Luo Zhaohui besides other senior officials from both the parties.

Under the agreement the lot of 42 aircraft would be co‑manufactured by China and Pakistan and later these would be inducted in the PAF’s fleet.

Talking to media, Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mehmood Ahmed congratulated the peoples and governments of Pakistan and China on conduction of successful tests and trails of the most modern aircraft of its class and signing of agreement for start of their serial production.

He said “despite all odds we have been successful to reach the stage of starting serial production of the aircraft.”

“In the beginning we will produce 15 aircraft annually and their number will increase to 30 in a year ‑ this programme will be carried out in phases,” he said.

He said first squadron of these highest quality fighter jets would be inducted in the PAF’s fleet by mid of this year as PAF has already been using 8 jointly produced aircraft for the last couple of years.

This fleet would be raised in Peshawar, he added.

 

[ajpirzada]

Pak, China sign agreement for production of JF-17 fighter jets

Islamabad, Mar 7 (PTI) Pakistan and China today signed an agreement for the serial production of 42 JF-17 Thunder jet fighters, which are expected to form the backbone of the Pakistani aerial combat fleet in coming years.
Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood, the chief of the Pakistan Air Force, said the first squadron of JF-17s would be inducted into his force this year.

Though Pakistan is facing a financial crunch, the serial production of the aircraft is being started with the cooperation of the Chinese government, Mahmood said. Pakistan has invested USD 600 million in the JF-17 project.

The agreement for producing the jets was signed at the PAF headquarters by Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Chairman Air Marshal Khalid Chaudhry and M A Zhiping, President of state-run China Aviation Import-Export Corporation.

The ceremony was attended by Mahmood and Chinese Ambassador Luo Zhaohui.

Under the agreement, China will provide credit financing for manufacturing the jets. Payments will be made to China in seven years, Mahmood said.

The JF-17 is a lightweight, all-weather, multi-role combat jet developed jointly by Pakistan and China. The Pakistan Air Force has so far received eight JF-17 jets that are being used for testing and evaluation.

Mahmood also said that Pakistan would receive its first Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft from China by the end of 2010. PTI

Pak, China sign agreement for production of JF-17 fighter jets

 

[ajpirzada]

PAF to start serial production of JF17 fighter aircraft soon
ISLAMABAD, Mar 7 (APP): With singing of an agreement between Pakistan Air Force and Chinese firm CATIC the serial production of JF‑17 (Thunder) aircraft would start soon. The agreement between PAF and CATIC on the basis of “seller’s credit” was reached at a ceremony held here Saturday, whereby 42 fighter jets would be joitly produced for the use of PAF.



The agreement was signed on behalf of PAF by Chairman Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Air Marshal Khalid Chaudary and President CATIC MA Zhiping which was witnessed by Chief of the Air Staff PAF Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed and Ambassador of China to Pakistan Luo Zhaohui besides other senior officials from both the parties.
Under the agreement the lot of 42 aircraft would be co‑manufactured by China and Pakistan and later these would be inducted in the PAF’s fleet.

Talking to media, Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mehmood Ahmed congratulated the peoples and governments of Pakistan and China on conduction of successful tests and trails of the most modern aircraft of its class and signing of agreement for start of their serial production.

He said “despite all odds we have been successful to reach the stage of starting serial production of the aircraft.”

“In the beginning we will produce 15 aircraft annually and their number will increase to 30 in a year ‑ this programme will be carried out in phases,” he said.

He said first squadron of these highest quality fighter jets would be inducted in the PAF’s fleet by mid of this year as PAF has already been using 8 jointly produced aircraft for the last couple of years.

This fleet would be raised in Peshawar, he added.

About the delivery of AWACS system to Pakistan, he said that agreement had already been reached with a Chinese firm which would start its delivery by 2010.

On the delivery of first AWACS system Pakistan would pay 10 % cost of the aircraft while the rest would be paid on easy installments basis, he said.

Answering a question, he said the agreement between Pakistan and China for the delivery of High‑Tech aircraft J‑10 was intact and these aircraft after improving them further would be delivered to PAF in 2014‑15. He said these aircraft are being modernized in accordance with the PAF’s requirements and delivered under the title of FC‑20.

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan's Premier NEWS Agency ) - PAF to start serial production of JF17 fighter aircraft soon

 

[HAIDER]

Some technical specification...

Characteristics of Note on the FC-1
Navigation system

The FC-1 has a GPS based navigation system. It also has a backup navigation system in case GPS is not available. It remains to be seen if the US GPS system becomes an issue in a future conflict, however, the question of using the US GPS system is also becoming less relevant as the Chinese Beidou Satellites comes into service.

EW Suite

JF-17's EW combines radar warning receiver, ECM, RWR and missile proximity receiver to form an integrated surveillance network. The level of integration is of the ECM, RWR, MPR and others can be considered to be at the same level as those of the modern 4.5+ and 5th generation combat aircraft.

The RWR is of note in that it is not only part of an integrated system, but also gives 360 degree range for missile approaching warning system with infra-red and ultra-violet spectrum detecting with a detection range of > 20km. It can not only detect but also track and position approaching missiles. A computer controlled infrared interference system, calculates the right timing to release countermeasures. A “focused interference system”, that can directionally beam energy is included and creates the same impact as a large electronic warfare airplane in that particular direction. In comparison, only recent combat aircraft like the Rafale and the F-22 have anything similar. Going back half a generation to the F-18E/F and F-16 E/F, these planes do not come with anything similar.

With Link-16 type networking and DRFM or similar equipment on the FC-1s, networked with Eireyes and F-16s, the effectiveness of the EW system as a whole is likely to be a good notch higher than their counterparts. Also to note is China’s familiarity with Russian equipment, particularly radars and modern AAMs; these seem to suggest that Chinese EW is likely to be considerably effective against Russian (and for Pakistan, Indian) aircrafts and missiles. One commentator writes in his blog that Indian modifications are likely to nullify this. While to some extent this may be true, Indian modifications have been made around the fundamentally Russian architecture, making this argument less relevant. Further, the active BVRs are not modified and must contend with Chinese EW systems. Given that China has very likely reverse engineered Russian seekers, this can become a major source of concern for the Indians.
Cockpit

The control panel has 3 MFDs (20.3cm x 20.3 cm), and each screen can be redefined, adjusted, or swapped. The HUD looks modern, similar to what is fitted on the Grippen. The HUD seems to be better than the one on the latest Indian Flanker; It is said to display both raw and processed information. The FC-1 has full HOTAS Control and an all digital avionics system. Data buses exhibit a distributed structure with two independent but STD-MTL-1553B data buses each with an independent control computer. There are rumors of provision for 3D digital map.

Diverterless Inlets

To begin with diverter plates are used to separate the "boundary layer" of air that comes off the body of the aircraft in front of the inlet. This is slowed and chaotic air that can choke an engine.

In the earlier FC-1 version a gap between the body of the aircraft and the diverter plates maintained a separation of the boundary layer airflow. The newer FC-1 prototype uses a DSI bump, using the shape of the bump to deflect the slowed air. The openings of the inlets are now angled forward, rather than perpendicular. This is related to the DSI bump.

The DSI increases the efficiency airflow intake and engine performance across a range of altitudes and speeds. Commenting on the effect of using DSI intakes on the F-16, the test pilot described that it felt like the more powerful GE engine rather than the Pratt & Whitney on the test plane was powering it.

Plug and play

The FC-1 program has from the very beginning been designed as a “plug and play” platform, with modularization being taken as far as possible. The chief designer has already stated that the radar, avionics and engines can be changed with minimal redesigning. The plane can therefore be customized to a far greater extent than anything that Chengdu has produced before. Coupled with this is that the plane has minimal restrictions and red tape, as say compared to the J-10.
Some Less Noted Characteristics of the FC-1

Þ The seat is inclined more than the standard 13/14 degrees, but perhaps not as inclined as the F-16’s.

Þ The KLJ-7 radar has multiple modes and can handle greater than 40 targets, tracking 10 of them and guiding 4 BVR missiles to attack 4 of them at the same time. The detecting range for a typical air target of RCS 3 square meter is > 75 km; look-down-shoot-down range is > 45 km; range for sea target is > 135 km

Þ The FC-1’s computer has the capacity to store 300 existing radar signals for identification

Þ Maintenance friendly automatic detection equipment, simplifying diagnosis with displayed parameters.

Þ Every weapon point has the data bus interface, i.e. each point can carry guided weapons.

Þ Pitot head in the latest JF-17 has been replaced by a Rotary Multi-functional Probe.

Þ The FC-1 has been designed with a FBW optimized with two wingtip AAMs, similar to how the F-16 were designed.

Recent Improvements Analysis


LERXs would have certainly improved the high AoA handling of the plane, while the DSI would have improved the low end acceleration and power curve of the engine, while reducing weight by removing variable intake mechanisms. As the LERX would have increased the lift and move the center of lift forward, the DSI would have reduced frontal weight further. That may affect the relaxed stability margin of the plane The avionics are coming off surprisingly nicely. I think the PAF has been pushing the Chinese avionics industry harder than the PLAAF. The cockpit seems more cleaner and "glassier" than the J-10 or even the J-11B, though it would be nice if the FC-1 gets the J-11B's wide angle HUD, a request that can be fulfilled in a moment's notice if the PAF asks for it. I like the low visibility radome, and the small pitot (used to measure angle of attack) won't interfere on the radar returns as much as the pitot on the J-10.

The KLJ-7 radar has an amazingly compact and well packaged back end, neat and small, not like the jungle of wires and switches like the radars on the J-8F and JH-7A, or for that matter on the Indian LCA.

Pitot head in the latest JF-17 has been replaced by a Rotary Multifunctional Probe. This new probe was produced by Chinese Department of Comprehensive Planning Department, China Aero Products Division, and Department of airborne equipment and technology development and in consultation with French company Thales.

The basic reason for the large scale changes to the FC-1 has been that Pakistan found her requirements going up, given the new Indian military buildup, with Su-30MKI and Mirage-2000s being fielded in numbers. Secondly, The US decision to sell advanced F-16s to Pakistan. Both these factors forced the FC-1 project team to improve the FC-1 to stay relevant.

LGBs for the FC-1
The LS-6 appears likely to be the bread and butter precision bomb kit for the FC-1. The program was begun in 2003 and testing has now been completed, perfectly timed with induction of the JF-17s in Pakistan. Guidance is provided by a dual inertial package coupled with satellite navigation. The weapons family will be capable of using three GPS systems, including the U.S. GPS, the Russian GLONASS and China's own Beidou system. The 500-kg LS-6 has a maximum launch range of 60 km.


Chinese program management vis-à-vis US/Europe

A truly remarkable feature of the FC-1 has been the willingness of its development team to improvise. Significant changes have been made mid-program and even at the very end of the program timetable.

This is in contrast to Western design houses where original frameworks are strictly maintained – notice the F-22 and the Eurofighter, where certain design parameters where doggedly followed when they could have clearly done better by changing course midway.

This reminds me of my Organization Behavior and Organization Theory class; the western style of planning is culturally different from the eastern style – objectives are fixed at the beginning while in the east, we are willing to move the objective around a bit. Obviously, neither is “better” than the other, but each has its benefits and costs. However, I think the JF-17 benefited from this immeasurably. Otherwise Pakistan would be taking delivery of the original Super 7 airframe at perhaps $20 million per plane.


Aboulafia on JF-17

The FC-1 has come under a lot of fire from every quarter that one can think of. One prominent quarter was from Mr. Aboulafia of the Teal Group. He originally wrote:

"If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”

Thinking perhaps that he has not been aware of the later developments of the FC-1, I contacted him to find out more, and whether he was still sticking to his guns. This is the response I got from him:

I do [still stand by my statement], with twosmall caveats. One is that although we aviation fans love our planes, the side with the superior AWACS/AEW, satellite, and C3I links is going to have a huge advantage. But assuming we're looking at two planes with equal amounts of external sensor access (or no access), and assuming equal pilot training, the F-16 would win in seconds. For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe on the FC-1 (other radars proposed for the type are worse, particularly the Grifo). For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's. In either case the F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated. Also, the FC-1 and its systems have never been tested in combat, which makes a huge difference in effectiveness.

The second caveat, of course, is which F-16. An early A model would have a harder time than a recent C model. All of this ignores the much greater reliability of the avionics and engines on the F-16. We have no idea what mission capable rates are on an FC-1; I suspect they're relatively low, especially for the RD-93.

Lets take a deeper look at the arguments:

“For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe”

Firstly, the FC-1 and Elta pairing is old news and has been proved otherwise. The radar you’re comparing with is the KLJ-7. Leaving aside the fact that it is appalling for an aviation expert to not know this, it is not improbable that the KLJ-7 is of the same generation as the APG-68, given recent comparison statements by the PAF.

And even if at the end of the day you have marginally better radar, it in no way means you’re going to thump your opponent (and that too in mere 5 seconds). If that were the case then the F-15s would be swatting out the F-16s in air combat training, which goes against results from virtually every Red Flag event. Further, with AWACS on both sides, you might find that you don’t have a better situational awareness in any case because AWACS has evened the field (again, all this is merely considering a theoretical marginal advantage in detection range).

Comparing the AMRAAM to the SD-10 is another major question mark. The SD-10 has greater range while being more bulky. This means that AMRAAM may be slightly more agile. No clear advantage exists for either except that AMRAAMs are battle tested. Last but not the least, it may be of some interest to Mr. Aboulafia that even in the highly unlikely event that F-16s are knocking out FC-1s like flies, for an AMRAAM to launch and reach a target 50 Kms away, it would take more than 5 seconds for sure.

“For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's”

We all wish WVR combat were that simple. With modern high off-bore sight missiles maneuverability becomes less relevant. Even if we take the unrealistic view that such missiles will not be available, you still find that a TWR margin of 0.07 at best will only give you a marginal advantage. Clearly, nothing that would be a decider in combat.

Again, one can look to Red Flag results.

“The F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated.”

Perhaps the most solid part of Mr. Aboulafia’s rather flimsy argument is this. China has traditionally lagged behind in EW. However, the new generation that the JF-17 entails is a couple of generations ahead of anything seen before. This includes a fully integrated EW suite, the level of integration being in the same plain as the Rafale or the Super Hornet. A good deal of information has emerged on the surprising advancement in this regard. For instance, one such advancement is that the EW system can directionally beam energy, creating the same impact as a large electronic warfare airplane in that particular direction.

The whole point becomes moot in any case because Pakistan would never receive the full EW suite but only a monkeyfied version of it, given the sensitive technologies involved. The US is unlikely to package its F-16s with anything that would be something new for the Pakistanis / Chinese to discover, come next U-turn in the mercurial Pakistani-US relations.

Mr. Aboulafia, we expect better from a serious aviation analyst. But then the Teal Group has never been known for its balanced views when it comes to a product competing with LM or Boeing.

What's Cooking in Chengdu

There are indications that Chengdu is becoming a major cooperation hub for Pakistan and China. Hints are flying that more is brewing at Chengdu than the FC-1 and the J-10 sourced from the ever reliable pshamim of pakdef. Apparently a consulate and a halal restaurant is opening up to accommodate the soft side of all these project ventures. Personally I would like to see a single engined stealth fighter come out of Chengdu, as much as the reports are that its going to be a twin engined plane. Whatever is cooking in Chengdu, its likely to be halal for the PAF.

RD-93 / WS-13

One of the bigger issues with the RD-93 is its inability to be completely smoke free. While it has been significantly decreased, some smokiness still remains. No such problem is likely to exist with the WS-13. Reliability and MTBF as well as better fuel efficiency are key elements where the WS-13 also likely trumps the RD-93.

What is however truly impressive about the RD-93 and even considering all its misgivings, is the acceleration and quick response it can achieve. The engines' response is virtually instantaneous. Whether the WS-13 can match this would be interesting to note, although perhaps not as relevant or important. Below are the available specifications of the WS-13 and the RD-93.



.

Recent Improvements Analysis


LERXs would have certainly improved the high AoA handling of the plane, while the DSI would have improved the low end acceleration and power curve of the engine, while reducing weight by removing variable intake mechanisms. As the LERX would have increased the lift and move the center of lift forward, the DSI would have reduced frontal weight further. That may affect the relaxed stability margin of the plane.


The avionics are coming off surprisingly nicely. I think the PAF has been pushing the Chinese avionics industry harder than the PLAAF. The cockpit seems more cleaner and "glassier" than the J-10 or even the J-11B, though it would be nice if the FC-1 gets the J-11B's wide angle HUD, a request that can be fulfilled in a moment's notice if the PAF asks for it. I like the low visibility radome, and the small pitot (used to measure angle of attack) won't interfere on the radar returns as much as the pitot on the J-10.

The KLJ-7 radar has an amazingly compact and well packaged back end, neat and small, not like the jungle of wires and switches like the radars on the J-8F and JH-7A, or for that matter on the Indian LCA.

Pitot head in the latest JF-17 has been replaced by a Rotary Multifunctional Probe. This new probe was produced by Chinese Department of Comprehensive Planning Department, China Aero Products Division, and Department of airborne equipment and technology development and in consultation with French company Thales.

The basic reason for the large scale changes to the FC-1 has been that Pakistan found her requirements going up, given the new Indian military buildup, with Su-30MKI and Mirage-2000s being fielded in numbers. Secondly, The US decision to sell advanced F-16s to Pakistan. Both these factors forced the FC-1 project team to improve the FC-1 to stay relevant.


LGBs for the FC-1
The LS-6 appears likely to be the bread and butter precision bomb kit for the FC-1. The program was begun in 2003 and testing has now been completed, perfectly timed with induction of the JF-17s in Pakistan. Guidance is provided by a dual inertial package coupled with satellite navigation. The weapons family will be capable of using three GPS systems, including the U.S. GPS, the Russian GLONASS and China's own Beidou system. The 500-kg LS-6 has a maximum launch range of 60 km.


Chinese program management vis-à-vis US/Europe

A truly remarkable feature of the FC-1 has been the willingness of its development team to improvise. Significant changes have been made mid-program and even at the very end of the program timetable.

This is in contrast to Western design houses where original frameworks are strictly maintained – notice the F-22 and the Eurofighter, where certain design parameters where doggedly followed when they could have clearly done better by changing course midway.

This reminds me of my Organization Behavior and Organization Theory class; the western style of planning is culturally different from the eastern style – objectives are fixed at the beginning while in the east, we are willing to move the objective around a bit. Obviously, neither is “better” than the other, but each has its benefits and costs. However, I think the JF-17 benefited from this immeasurably. Otherwise Pakistan would be taking delivery of the original Super 7 airframe at perhaps $20 million per plane.


Aboulafia on JF-17

The FC-1 has come under a lot of fire from every quarter that one can think of. One prominent quarter was from Mr. Aboulafia of the Teal Group. He originally wrote:

"If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”

Thinking perhaps that he has not been aware of the later developments of the FC-1, I contacted him to find out more, and whether he was still sticking to his guns. This is the response I got from him:

I do [still stand by my statement], with twosmall caveats. One is that although we aviation fans love our planes, the side with the superior AWACS/AEW, satellite, and C3I links is going to have a huge advantage. But assuming we're looking at two planes with equal amounts of external sensor access (or no access), and assuming equal pilot training, the F-16 would win in seconds. For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe on the FC-1 (other radars proposed for the type are worse, particularly the Grifo). For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's. In either case the F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated. Also, the FC-1 and its systems have never been tested in combat, which makes a huge difference in effectiveness.

The second caveat, of course, is which F-16. An early A model would have a harder time than a recent C model. All of this ignores the much greater reliability of the avionics and engines on the F-16. We have no idea what mission capable rates are on an FC-1; I suspect they're relatively low, especially for the RD-93.

Lets take a deeper look at the arguments:

“For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe”

Firstly, the FC-1 and Elta pairing is old news and has been proved otherwise. The radar you’re comparing with is the KLJ-7. Leaving aside the fact that it is appalling for an aviation expert to not know this, it is not improbable that the KLJ-7 is of the same generation as the APG-68, given recent comparison statements by the PAF.

And even if at the end of the day you have marginally better radar, it in no way means you’re going to thump your opponent (and that too in mere 5 seconds). If that were the case then the F-15s would be swatting out the F-16s in air combat training, which goes against results from virtually every Red Flag event. Further, with AWACS on both sides, you might find that you don’t have a better situational awareness in any case because AWACS has evened the field (again, all this is merely considering a theoretical marginal advantage in detection range).

Comparing the AMRAAM to the SD-10 is another major question mark. The SD-10 has greater range while being more bulky. This means that AMRAAM may be slightly more agile. No clear advantage exists for either except that AMRAAMs are battle tested. Last but not the least, it may be of some interest to Mr. Aboulafia that even in the highly unlikely event that F-16s are knocking out FC-1s like flies, for an AMRAAM to launch and reach a target 50 Kms away, it would take more than 5 seconds for sure.

“For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's”

We all wish WVR combat were that simple. With modern high off-bore sight missiles maneuverability becomes less relevant. Even if we take the unrealistic view that such missiles will not be available, you still find that a TWR margin of 0.07 at best will only give you a marginal advantage. Clearly, nothing that would be a decider in combat.

Again, one can look to Red Flag results.

“The F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated.”

Perhaps the most solid part of Mr. Aboulafia’s rather flimsy argument is this. China has traditionally lagged behind in EW. However, the new generation that the JF-17 entails is a couple of generations ahead of anything seen before. This includes a fully integrated EW suite, the level of integration being in the same plain as the Rafale or the Super Hornet. A good deal of information has emerged on the surprising advancement in this regard. For instance, one such advancement is that the EW system can directionally beam energy, creating the same impact as a large electronic warfare airplane in that particular direction.

The whole point becomes moot in any case because Pakistan would never receive the full EW suite but only a monkeyfied version of it, given the sensitive technologies involved. The US is unlikely to package its F-16s with anything that would be something new for the Pakistanis / Chinese to discover, come next U-turn in the mercurial Pakistani-US relations.

Mr. Aboulafia, we expect better from a serious aviation analyst. But then the Teal Group has never been known for its balanced views when it comes to a product competing with LM or Boeing.

What's Cooking in Chengdu

There are indications that Chengdu is becoming a major cooperation hub for Pakistan and China. Hints are flying that more is brewing at Chengdu than the FC-1 and the J-10 sourced from the ever reliable pshamim of pakdef. Apparently a consulate and a halal restaurant is opening up to accommodate the soft side of all these project ventures. Personally I would like to see a single engined stealth fighter come out of Chengdu, as much as the reports are that its going to be a twin engined plane. Whatever is cooking in Chengdu, its likely to be halal for the PAF.


Future Modernization Roadmap

I think the future modernization of the JF-17 in PAF service will be along two more blocks – first 50, next 100 and final 100. It may be that the first 50 will be modernized after the last block.

The first 50 will include Chinese avionics and weapons, RD-93 engines and at best a foreign IR missile. The second block is likely to incorporate the WS-13 engine, Western radar and missiles and various augmenting sensors. These may include the Selex Vixen radar and the MBDA Meteor or perhaps the AMRAAM. The reason for this is that the SD-10 is untested, and AESA radar development is still not mature in China. Further, the SD-10 is a bit heavier than its Western counterparts and is less suited for the light fighter class than say, the Mica or the AMRAAM would be. AMRAAM of course would be ideal given that there would be commonality with the F-16s. Even if an AESA is not bought for the second batch, a western radar that allows the integration of the AMRAAM, even if it is not necessarily more advanced than the KLJ-7 would definitely be welcome. A HMD/S such as the Guardian or the Cobra with a HOBS missile would also be something the PAF is likely to be looking at. Some minor stealth features may also be incorporated in the second block.

The third block would possibly incorporate a Chinese AESA and perhaps a Chinese ramjet BVR missile (given that the speculated Meteor buy does not go through).

It is also likely to be more stealthier than any previous blocks. I would personally like to see provision for two BVRs to be kept semi-recessed, centerline and one behind the other, while the IR missiles stay on the wing tip. This could be a good trade-off between stealth and performance on a limited airframe.

A few readily available upgrades can also be borrowed from the J-11 program, including the new 3D holographic wide angel HUD and the optical missile approach-warning receiver. These should go into the JF-17s from the very first block.

RD-93 / WS-13

One of the bigger issues with the RD-93 is its inability to be completely smoke free. While it has been significantly decreased, some smokiness still remains. No such problem is likely to exist with the WS-13. Reliability and MTBF as well as better fuel efficiency are key elements where the WS-13 also likely trumps the RD-93.

What is however truly impressive about the RD-93 and even considering all its misgivings, is the acceleration and quick response it can achieve. The engines' response is virtually instantaneous. Whether the WS-13 can match this would be interesting to note, although perhaps not as relevant or important. The WS-13 is slightly smaller but heavier by about 7.6%. It proportionately achieves much higher dry thrust – 13.5% greater while proportionately lower thrust at full afterburner – only 6.24%. This is typical given the higher bypass ratio. The WS-13 is also more fuel efficient, both because of technological reasons and because of the higher bypass ratio. Lower bypass ratios tend to be more ideal for high flying air superiority types while higher bypass ratios seem better for light and small(er) types. Typically, during an engines development to maturity, engine weight tends to go down.

It is therefore likely that the potential for the WS-13 to improve in this quarter is reasonably good. Further, its higher dry thrust would be more useful to the FC-1 because of its limited fuel. The biggest factor however, would remain reliability. The reported 33% rejection rate with the RD-93s is mind blowing. At the end of the day, it is likely that the PAF will choose the more reliable engine.

 

[Skywalker]

What does that mean 2014-14, does it mean JXX, cause by that time JXX would be ready and I think now the Pindora box is opening up, it looks like they are involved in with chinese on this JXX project.

But same question arises, where this news comes from that the J10 will be here within this year.

 

[mean_bird]

Haider saheb, are you a member of grandstrategy.com?

 

[HAIDER]

No Sir, but every article and every piece of news has somthing to extract....what you think ?

 

[ajpirzada]

What does that mean 2014-14, does it mean JXX, cause by that time JXX would be ready and I think now the Pindora box is opening up, it looks like they are involved in with chinese on this JXX project.

But same question arises, where this news comes from that the J10 will be here within this year.

what we ll be gettin is FC-20 which is a major upgrade on J-10. i dont think if that will be JXX. the news of J-10 arriving this year was just a rumor