JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 2]

[Wingman]

PN naval air arm is a closed case as mentioned in a earlier post!

Yeap, then Navy would need full fledge base as well....

 

[SBD-3]

Yeap, then Navy would need full fledge base as well....

but navy needs its dedicated ACs to support on sea like the world over practice of having Twin Engines PN would need JH-7A or something like it but it contradicts the PAF doctrine of Single engine

 

[TaimiKhan]

but navy needs its dedicated ACs to support on sea like the world over practice of having Twin Engines PN would need JH-7A or something like it but it contradicts the PAF doctrine of Single engine

It contradicts the PAF doctrine, not PN or standard naval doctrines.
When we talk about PN requirements then definitely we have to see PN requirements and what standard is being followed internationally for other world navies.
Naval requirements are for twin engined aircrafts, becoz they can fly for longer period of type, so would be on the target area for more, plus they can carry more Anti Ship missiles then a single engine, we see our Mirage armed with only one Anti Ship missile under the belly, as two hard points are for fuel tanks and two i gues for WVR missiles. But a twin engine aircraft like chinese built J-11B can carry 9,000+KG of weapons and equipment. Meaning 2 or 3 anti ship missiles, firing more missiles at a single target will increase the chances of hitting the target or may even score one hit at least, reason being the CIWS of today are very good and one CIWS can easily take down 2 anti ship missiles, and nowadays modern ships are coming with 2 CIWS systems, meaning they can easily take out 3 or 4 incoming missiles.
So wht chance does our single Exocet or Harpoon missile will have against the ship ???? None i guess.

We need at least a squadron of 20 or so double engined aircraft just to protect our maritime routes, as IN is large and would definitely go for a blockage, and their latest naval ships have state of the art russian CIWS.

 

[wangrong]

09-110

 

[SBD-3]

09-110

ummmmmmmmmm there it is nice work wang

 

[SBD-3]

It contradicts the PAF doctrine, not PN or standard naval doctrines.
When we talk about PN requirements then definitely we have to see PN requirements and what standard is being followed internationally for other world navies.
Naval requirements are for twin engined aircrafts, becoz they can fly for longer period of type, so would be on the target area for more, plus they can carry more Anti Ship missiles then a single engine, we see our Mirage armed with only one Anti Ship missile under the belly, as two hard points are for fuel tanks and two i gues for WVR missiles. But a twin engine aircraft like chinese built J-11B can carry 9,000+KG of weapons and equipment. Meaning 2 or 3 anti ship missiles, firing more missiles at a single target will increase the chances of hitting the target or may even score one hit at least, reason being the CIWS of today are very good and one CIWS can easily take down 2 anti ship missiles, and nowadays modern ships are coming with 2 CIWS systems, meaning they can easily take out 3 or 4 incoming missiles.
So wht chance does our single Exocet or Harpoon missile will have against the ship ???? None i guess.

We need at least a squadron of 20 or so double engined aircraft just to protect our maritime routes, as IN is large and would definitely go for a blockage, and their latest naval ships have state of the art russian CIWS.

J-11s are air superiority fighters not PN supports JH-7A is the ideal platform

 

[a1b2c145]

09-110

110 comes ,wonderful

 

[TaimiKhan]

J-11s are air superiority fighters not PN supports JH-7A is the ideal platform

Sir, kindly check the latest articles about the chinese developed J-11B & Tandem seat variant J-11BS fighter aircraft, they have now surface strike capability, which also means Anti Ship capability, the chinese radar fitted in it has a sea target acquisition range of 350KM. J-11BS would be similar in performance to the Su-30, specially designed for surface strike capability, and SU-30MKK version is being used by PLA Naval Air Force.

Chinese have made J-11 from an air superiority aircraft to a Multi-Role aircraft.

I know very well about JH-7A, but J-11B or J-11BS is recommended due to its heavier pay load & becoz future version of J-11s are going to be fitted with WS-10A engines, which most probably will also be used in the PAF FC-20 aircraft, as JH-7A uses another kind of engine, WS-9 turbofan engine, a copy of Rolls Royce Spey Mk engines, so there would be commonality of engines, instead of using a totally different engine for just one or two SQs of J-11.

 

[SBD-3]

Sir, kindly check the latest articles about the chinese developed J-11B & Tandem seat variant J-11BS fighter aircraft, they have now surface strike capability, which also means Anti Ship capability, the chinese radar fitted in it has a sea target acquisition range of 350KM. J-11BS would be similar in performance to the Su-30, specially designed for surface strike capability, and SU-30MKK version is being used by PLA Naval Air Force.

Chinese have made J-11 from an air superiority aircraft to a Multi-Role aircraft.

I know very well about JH-7A, but J-11B or J-11BS is recommended due to its heavier pay load & becoz future version of J-11s are going to be fitted with WS-10A engines, which most probably will also be used in the PAF FC-20 aircraft, as JH-7A uses another kind of engine, WS-9 turbofan engine, a copy of Rolls Royce Spey Mk engines, so there would be commonality of engines, instead of using a totally different engine for just one or two SQs of J-11.

J-11C (or J-11BJ)

A yet-to-be-built aircraft carrier version, speculated on due to the success of the Russian Navy Su-33. The first mock-up of J-11C was displayed in public at airshows and defense exhibitions in China in late 2002, and the mock-up is shown to be able to be armed with all currently available Chinese anti-ship missiles, as well as air-to-air missile including PL-12.

 

[wangrong]

J-11C (or J-11BJ)

A yet-to-be-built aircraft carrier version, speculated on due to the success of the Russian Navy Su-33. The first mock-up of J-11C was displayed in public at airshows and defense exhibitions in China in late 2002, and the mock-up is shown to be able to be armed with all currently available Chinese anti-ship missiles, as well as air-to-air missile including PL-12.

sir,J11BJ≠J11C

Training aircraft carrier

 

[Manticore]

View attachment 4230

View attachment 4231

View attachment 4232

J-11BS
Tandem twin seater version of J-11B under development, reportedly as the Chinese version of Su-30MK2/3. It is rumored that the letter S stands for Shuangzuo, meaning twin seater in Chinese. The existence of J-11BS is officially acknowledged by the Chinese government in 2007, and a large model of J-11BS was revealed public on June 9, 2007 during the opening ceremony of the new aerospace museum of the Harbin Institute of Technology at the 20-year anniversary of the establishment of its school of astronautics, where it is displayed. Some sources outside China have claimed that the successful development of J-11BS is one of reasons that China lacks the enthusiasm on purchasing Su-30MK3, but the Chinese government appears to be rather cautious, with official reports only claiming that the project is very promising, instead of declaring it is successful already.

Su-27SK Upgrade
Both the SUV-VEP air-to-air subsystem and the SUV-P air-to-surface subsystems of the Sukhoi Su-30MKK fire control system were adopted to upgrade the single seat Su-27SK in Chinese inventory, and a joint team of Tikhomirov Scientific Research Institute of Instrument Design (NIIP) and State Instrumentation Plant at Ryazan was named as the primary contractor to provide the Chinese with the upgraded avionics package. The modified SUV-VEP subsystem adopted to upgrade Chinese Su-27SK was designated as SUV-VE, while the modified SUV-P subsystem adopted to upgrade Chinese Su-27SK was designated as SUV-PE. The original analog dial indicator on flight dashboard of Su-27SK were replaced by two 6 in x 6 in MFI-10-6M and a MFIP-6 LCD MFDs. According to Russian claim at the 6th Zhuhai Airshow, over 60 Chinese Su-27SK have been upgraded by the end of 2006.

The radar was also upgraded, but such upgrade is not part of the deal signed with Russian contractors. Instead, the radar upgrade was indigenously carried out by Chinese themselves in increments, but no official information on the exact type of radar has been released by the Chinese authorities yet (as of 2008), and thus the rumored passive phased array radar being utilized in such upgrades cannot be confirmed. With the radar improvement, the upgraded Su-27SK with the upgrade is claimed to have its overall combat efficiency significantly improved, approaching that of J-11B. It is not clear if China has continued such upgrade after 2006 since no more information was released.

J-11C (or J-11BJ)
A yet-to-be-built aircraft carrier version, speculated on due to the success of the Russian Navy Su-33. The first mock-up of J-11C was displayed in public at airshows and defense exhibitions in China in late 2002, and the mock-up is shown to be able to be armed with all currently available Chinese anti-ship missiles, as well as air-to-air missile including PL-12. Based on this public display and the Chinese order of Su-33, many predicted that J-11C might be used as a shipborne maritime strike role similar to that of land based Su-30MKK/MK2, while others argued the primary role would still be fleet air defense, but neither can be confirmed because no detailed official information has been released by neither the Chinese government nor the developer.



J-10C
Meanwhile, according to informed commentators, a J-10C with twin engines around the size of RD-33s and incorporating similar features to the J-10B has arrived. This is supposedly a direct competitor to the Eurofighter and has the same layout - twin engined canard delta with a single tail. The PLAAF will have to decide whether to go with the J-10B or the J-10C at some point. Pakistan will not go for the J-10C as the twin engines do not comply with their doctrine of single-engined fighters and with the AFDP-2019.



A carrier based J-10
A carrier based J-10 has also been reported but this is in direct competition with the J-13, a dedicated 4.5++ carrier fighter with a conventional layout similar to the F/A-18 Super Hornets.
http://www.grandestrategy.com/2009/04/559695923848203-dragons-new-claws-j-10b.html

 

[Tempest II]

09-110

Is that you in the photo wangrong?

 

[Tempest II]

As people debate how the JF-17 is compared to the F-16, we are slowly getting information and clues that it is better. One thing I was thinking last night was the fact that PAF is transferring pilots from F-16s to JF-17. … … Normally you don’t get pilots trained in your best fighter and send them to a less capable aircraft. I there deduce/reason from this that the JF-17 is superior.

 

[wangrong]

As people debate how the JF-17 is compared to the F-16, we are slowly getting information and clues that it is better. One thing I was thinking last night was the fact that PAF is transferring pilots from F-16s to JF-17. … … Normally you don’t get pilots trained in your best fighter and send them to a less capable aircraft. I there deduce/reason from this that the JF-17 is superior.

A block10?

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

sir,J11BJ≠J11C

Training aircraft carrier

wooowe
look at here.china's aircraft carrier.its gud c that china is making there own aircraft carrier.how much carrier does china hav,wangrong?
i would like to see chinese navel ships n carrier in indian ocean and on GAWADAR port,soon.is it going to happen WANGRONG.