What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 2]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sir, Most members think in this way that JF-17 is coming in PAF to replace A-5, F-7P and Mirage III. It's correct. But when we see it has just one advantage at moment over F-7P, Mirage III & that is better radar-avonics packag with complete BVR ability. F-7P also have 7 hard points & like JF-17 can carry 4 a-2-a missels, with Grifo-7 and Grifo-M F-7P and Mirage III also have ability of limited BVR. Things are changing very fast in our neighbourhood. Last development was fourth prototype of JF-17 in 2006 with DSI inlets. Three years are over & JF-17 is still with 7 hard points, other hand china on J-10 has done remarkable changes.
 
.
Sir, Most members think in this way that JF-17 is coming in PAF to replace A-5, F-7P and Mirage III. It's correct. But when we see it has just one advantage at moment over F-7P, Mirage III & that is better radar-avonics packag with complete BVR ability. F-7P also have 7 hard points & like JF-17 can carry 4 a-2-a missels, with Grifo-7 and Grifo-M F-7P and Mirage III also have ability of limited BVR. Things are changing very fast in our neighbourhood. Last development was fourth prototype of JF-17 in 2006 with DSI inlets. Three years are over & JF-17 is still with 7 hard points, other hand china on J-10 has done remarkable changes.

Good Question?
May be some one give reasonable answer!!!!
 
.
59a77822f006aac0130154f11b511888.jpg
 
Last edited:
. . .
For those that keep talking about agility and speed...

A Fair Test For The MiG-29


April 8, 2009: India is testing its MiG-29 fleet for structural flaws, after Russia grounded all 300 of its own, and found 90 of them had serious corrosion problems. Last year, the Indian air force sent the first six of its 78 MiG29 fighters to Russia for a major upgrade. This will cost about ten million dollars per aircraft, and extend their service life from the current 25 years, to 40 years. Thus India is planning on keeping its MiG-29s around until the 2030s. But that plan may be aborted if major corrosion problems are discovered.
The MiG-29 entered Russian service in 1983, as the answer to the American F-16. Some 1,600 MiG-29s have been produced so far, with about 900 of them exported. India received its first MiG-29s in 1986, with deliveries continuing into the 1990s. The 22 ton aircraft is roughly comparable to the F-16, but it depends a lot on which version of either aircraft you are talking about. Russia is making a lot of money upgrading MiG-29s. Not just adding new electronics, but also making the airframe more robust. The MiG-29 was originally rated at 2,500 total flight hours. At that time (early 80s), Russia expected MiG-29s to fly about a hundred or so hours a year. India flew them at nearly twice that rate, and now Russia is offering to spiff up the airframe so that the aircraft can fly up to 4,000 hours, with more life extensions upgrades promised. This won't be easy, as the MiG-29 has a history of unreliability and premature breakdowns (both mechanical and electronic). Compared to Western aircraft, like the F-16, the MiG-29 is available for action about two thirds as much. While extending the life of the MiG-29 into the 2030s is theoretically possible, actually doing so will be real breakthrough in Russian aircraft capabilities.

The Indian upgrade program will equip their MiG-29s to handle long range missiles, like the AMRAAM the U.S. is selling to Pakistan. That means installing a phased array radar. The Mig-29s will also get a modern cockpit, inflight refueling capability and dozens of minor tweaks.

Because India's fighter fleet is aging rapidly, it only has 29 squadrons of fighters (about 24 aircraft each), instead of the 45 squadrons it would like to have. But with modernized fighters like the upgraded MiG-29, quality can, to a point, replace quantity. In fact, with the growing dominance of long range air-to-air missiles, and electronic warfare, the speed and agility of fighters is less important than are the electronics and missiles they carry.

The MiG-29 upgrade program will take three years to complete. This will not solve the MiG-29 engine problem (too much visible smoke), and the Russians have promised that past problems in getting spare parts, will not happen again. All things being equal, the MiG-29 should be the equal of a F-16 or F-15. But in all combat so far, the MiG-29s have had the inferior pilots, and have lost. Indian pilots are probably the best trained, and most experienced, that are flying the MiG-29. If India should go to war in the future, while the MiG-29s are still in service, air force commanders will watch with interest how the aircraft does in the hands of world class pilots. But first it will have to survive its construction defects.
 
.
In fact, with the growing dominance of long range air-to-air missiles, and electronic warfare, the speed and agility of fighters is less important than are the electronics and missiles they carry.
Speed and agility is required to out-maneuver a chasing missile.
 
.
The MIG29 should be scrapped BY IAF in my opinion.

The Airframe & engine are a major handicap.

70 planes at $10 million each = $700 million to upgrade. by 2011-2012.

Better IAF put this in MRCA pot of $10 billion or induction of TEJAS mk1
 
.
K lets stick to topic jf-17 not about mig -29's here
 
.
Sir, Most members think in this way that JF-17 is coming in PAF to replace A-5, F-7P and Mirage III. It's correct. But when we see it has just one advantage at moment over F-7P, Mirage III & that is better radar-avonics packag with complete BVR ability. F-7P also have 7 hard points & like JF-17 can carry 4 a-2-a missels, with Grifo-7 and Grifo-M F-7P and Mirage III also have ability of limited BVR. Things are changing very fast in our neighbourhood. Last development was fourth prototype of JF-17 in 2006 with DSI inlets. Three years are over & JF-17 is still with 7 hard points, other hand china on J-10 has done remarkable changes.



Hi,

First of all, that in itself is a pretty big advantage. A brand new plane---a brand new frame---while the other planes that you mentioned are about to face their demise---this plane is just taking birth. Even with the start up avioniocs package, this plane would be ahead of the other three that you mentioned.

Now coming down to hard points---why do you need so many hard points for a fighter this size and stature. I think that they are the perfect number of hardpoints that this plane can utilize. Any more and possibly the performance maybe negated----but then as most strike aircraft have moved on to smart bombing missions---you don't need to carry all that extra load. The only time you need it is for ground attack support.

The focus needs to stay with keeping the status quo and making a solid foundation of what we have. Sometimes too many changes create problems.


Now to another post----with the current day air to air missiles doing 3k plus an hour and possibly performing 15--20 g's plus---niether a plane can outrun or out maneaveour them----that is why we are looking at a cieling of somewhere around mach 2 + - on most of the planes of the world air forces. Cost of producing a mach 3--4 engine will be extremely high as compared to what we have now. More investments are being made on counter measures----and again for that same reason---the top air craft manufacturers would be going for a pilotless air craft----knowing very well that escaping a modern day air to air missiles is no easy task.

But then again the more thrust and power to weight ration comes handy in close combat.
 
.
Contd:--

Hi,

At this stage in its life---the JF 17 needs some kind of stability in its design parameters and avionics package---for any changes and experimentation to the structure and otherwise should be a thing of the past for the time being.

The focus needs to be on production---installing the selected avionics package and armaments and last but not the least---putting the pilots through the training process for the current upcoming batch of 50 planes. That is what I think that the PAF is doing right now. This plane needs to be out in its flying colors in a sqdrn strength ASAP.

Alterations, modifications, upgrades etc etc are a part and parcel of an air crafts life---but they should and must not hinder in the production of any war bird.
 
.
Speed and agility is required to out-maneuver a chasing missile.

Qsaark
Newer generation missiles can turn at 50Gs. the human body is limited to 9gs only before blacking out. So howsoever capable a plane , it will not out maneauvre a missile, because of limitations of the human pilot. You therefore only have electronic counter measures to keep safe. This is the reason AFs around the world have continued upgrading avionics of their old planes rather than replacing them.
WaSalam
Araz
 
.
A-O-A,
Fact is that SU-30 MKI have 12 to 13 hard points, on other hand JF-17 have 7. JF-17 has to carry 1 to 3 fuel tanks that mean's 2 VRM and 2 BVR missels. No matter what reason somebody put: SU-30MKI is bigger in size can be detected from long distance, Pilot would be indian, this & that & so on. SU-30 MKI and JF-17 are two different league fighters but SU-30MKI is opponent. JF-17 has to face. PAF can not bring JF-17 in SU-30MKI league but can make some changes to counter Su-30MKI by using in combination with J-10B and F-16 block 52. There are many fields such as Pay load, better engin, better radar & avonics, IRST, CFT & better long range BVR missels in which we can bring changes. Yes it costs money but when you are going towards selfreliance it will reduce the cost. If cost rises from US$15-20 million to US$ 25 million and we get a better fighter. So then why not then go ahead......!:smitten::pakistan:
Fact is that china developed "Guizhou JL-9" and they ran also JF-17 project simaltaneoulsy.
Guizhou JL-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
By making minor changes JL-9 also can do same as JF-17. Then why we invested on JF-17. We have invested on JF-17 Project for selfreliance for better fighter and to replace old dated Mirages, F-7 and A-5's. But sorry to say at moment "Guizhou JL-9" and JF-17 are in same league, yes if intention is there then JF-17 can be future for PAF. Lot of rumors were about JF-17 after last prototype, but nothing came out in last three years & if something is achieved then no reason to keep secret because any development blow F-22 raptor is not secret. "Financial problems of country" is no reason to delay the JF-17 project or devlopment and research on such type of project. People should know difference b/w Pakistan and Israel. In lebanon war in 2006 Israel got great loss of Merkava tanks. There was discussion, now Israel should choose any other tank. They decided yes Merkava has weaknesses, we will try to make it better but its our baby we will continue to use it. Why we kill our baby? JF-17 project is our babay, we should try to make it better. We should try to achieve maximaum in JF-17 project, later on downgraded versions can also be produced for different needs and for different missions.
Wasalam
 
.
Speed and agility is required to out-maneuver a chasing missile.

I disagree... The pilot can harldy have more then 9g (max 12 g). Missiles can go beyond 50g. If you want to use your speed and agility (it is either one of them...) then your lost. At this moment it is not abaout SAW anymore but deny opponent arena, track him first, shoot first and stay out of close combat or being shot at... If your ecm fails you are dead meat. The days of glorious close combat are history. Unless you go back to spitfire age...
 
.
This is the reason why Typhoon is famous for high speed (supersonic) agility and extremely high thrust to weight ratio. Typhoon's ability to get in range to fire its own missiles, then get out of range of enemy missiles is better than any other jet, except possibly the F-22.
JF needs a more powerful engine and weight reduction to perform well at high speed and high altitude like Typhoon. I hope it gets enough export orders to warrant lots of block-60 style modifications.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom