JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 3]

[qsaark]

Sir the only reason why Mirage V was given the first priority is because PAF wanted to improve its range. Mirage V are excellent Strike Aircrafts, much better than our F16's but the only thing they lacked was range.

I understand that PAF wants to improve the range of the Mirages; however, I do not agree that the Mirage V are much better than the F-16s in the strike role. You can say the M2K is better (again much would be a little too much) than F-16 in A2G but certainly not the Mirage V even in its ROSE configuration. The Mirage III/V started their career in the PAF (as well as other Air Forces around the world) as multi-role fighter just like the F-16 did. However, in the PAF, these ancient birds are still lingering on because we just don’t have other platforms in number to replace them. It is obvious that PAF would never like to send its handful of the F-16s (even if they are superior to Mirage in every respect, including A2G) to perform the air interdiction role, PAF just can’t afford to loose its handful F-16s.

With IFR, we significantly enhance their range meaning they can carry Long Range Strike Missions. JF17's are more designed to perform air superiority roles, not strike missions and that is why Mirage V were given the first priority. They still have a lot of life left in their airframes, i dont think they will be retired before 2025.

With the onboard avionics, self defense systems, Mirage III/V are not suitable for the long range strike missions deep into enemy territory; they’ll prove sitting ducks for the IAF’s Mig-29s (naval Mig-29Ks), M2Ks even the Bisons, forget about MKIs. However, IFR-capable Mirage will have an advantage of carrying more weapon load. The PAF is inducting the JFs mainly to replace the ancient A5s and the Mirages, hence to me, the primary role of the JF would be what was designated to the aircrafts its is replacing, that is air-interdiction. JF-17 is not an air-superiority fighter rather a multi-role fighter. I also do not agree that lot of life is left in the Mirage’s airframes. We make fun of the IAF’s Mig-21, whereas fact of the matter is, our Mirage are also flying coffins, and this can be verified by checking the number of Mirages crashed in past five or so years. At any rate if PAF thinks that the 50s technology Mirage III/V are still viable, than who am I to say otherwise.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Just because it is a modular design, the JF 17 must be a plug and play kind of design---. That is what modular designs are---you have already anticipated the changes, upgrades and modifications ahead of time.

If it wasn't done, then that is an error on the part of the designing team---the failure to do so would have a multiplier effect on the cost factor and would have severe design change limitations ( I personally doubt it ).

At first we need to know what the loiter time for the current JF 17 is with its full weapons load---with a full load of air to air missiles, if it can fly around for two to three hours, do we really need IFR---maybe---now if it is used by the navy, then I would say absolutely.

I believe that IFR is more of a psychological weapon against the opponent to keep them guessing---which brings out the unpredictability in that flight mission which is just loitering around 100 miles away from the border and can make a dash anywhere at its discretion.

Maiximmarz posted something interesting about the IFR awhile back.

 

[razgriz19]

Can someone explain these Multiple Ejector racks ??????

View attachment 5795429dae9f336aa6c27e2d7a58c877.jpg

Can we get them on Thunders ?


Thanks

i think we already have racks for jf, they carry two bombs, but adding these ones might create a problem, 'cause as u kno jf-17 does not have a very high payload so i dont think it would be a good idea...

 

[MZUBAIR]

Sir the only reason why Mirage V was given the first priority is because PAF wanted to improve its range. Mirage V are excellent Strike Aircrafts, much better than our F16's but the only thing they lacked was range. With IFR, we significantly enhance their range meaning they can carry Long Range Strike Missions. JF17's are more designed to perform air superiority roles, not strike missions and that is why Mirage V were given the first priority. They still have a lot of life left in their airframes, i dont think they will be retired before 2025.

Nither PAF should....I hope Mirage ROSE V/III will server atleast till 2020

 

[TaimiKhan]

i think we already have racks for jf, they carry two bombs, but adding these ones might create a problem, 'cause as u kno jf-17 does not have a very high payload so i dont think it would be a good idea...

Payload can be increased as per the configuration. Reduce the drop tanks and you can add more fire power.

As the drop tanks take the maximum payload capacity in a fighter jet.

 

[MZUBAIR]

Please see white multi-racking in this very old picture.

Most of the members dont believe WEKI, But I do.
Check out "Weaponry" section from weki (Click here)

The wing-tip hardpoints will normally be occupied by short range infra-red homing air-to-air missiles, while many combinations of various ordnance and equipment (including avionics such as targeting pods) can be carried on the under-wing and under-fuselage hardpoints. Under-wing hardpoints can be fitted with multiple ejector racks, allowing each hardpoint to carry two 500 lb (241 kg) unguided or laser-guided bombs (Mk.82 or GBU-12). It is currently unknown if multiple ejector racks can be used for other ordnance such as beyond visual range air-to-air missiles.[7] The under-fuselage and inboard under-wing hardpoints are plumbed, enabling them to carry droptanks of various sizes for extra fuel (see propulsion and fuel system).

Another reference.......a research by usman ansari

Column of Usman Ansari (Click here) under "Armament" section

The JF-17 can carry a payload in the region of 3,800kg on seven hardpoints, three of which (centreline and inner pylons) are plumbed for fuel. However, in-flight refuelling capability will allow weapons to be carried in lieu of tanks if required. Furthermore, though prototype aircraft have been seen with multiple ejector racks fitted, it is not currently known if the JF-17/FC-1 can carry two BVRAAM missiles per under-wing station in a manner such as the F-18 can.

 

[Storm Force]

that picture of thunder looks really cool

best picture of fc1 yet i think

 

[ice_man]

does someone have a pic of a JF loaded with real weapons! not dummies! flying in Pakistani skies!!!

 

[Kompromat]

So wiki says that Vixen-500 AESA has been offered to PAF for Thunders but PAF is looking for something more Advanced !

IRST , IFR , Reduction in RCS , MBDA mica , PL-12 , new Avionics and AW suit .

Sounds good for now !

 

[sherdil76]

I am more worried about Pakistan not perusing Salex Galileo Vixen 1000E AESA Radar.

Remember this Radar would be on board EF-2000 Typhoon Tranche II & JAS-39 Grippen NG.

Pakistan has a great deal of understanding with Salex Galileo and i am convinced that if Pakistan pushes them hard they would be ready to sell this Technology To Pakistan .

Bear in Mind Vixen 1000E is a Smaller Radar which has an Automatic Movement capability to 100+ Angles with Faster Data Processing which Makes it a Best Choice for the Platforms ie: Thunder and Grippen.

I think if you take Grippen and Thunder in terms of Air frame size , Wingspan , Height they both end up to be the same but Thunder has wider wings.

2ndly i must say that Current Engine lacks power and speed current 49.4 ktn is just not enough.

I want to see Thunder generating at least 54Ktn and an Increased speed from Mach 1.8 to Mach 2 which can be achieved by Incorporating more powerful power plant.

3rdly : I would suggest changes in Landing gear , look at the pictures i am posting below & notice how similar both air crafts look and also notice that the Landing gear or the tyers are recovered on the parallel sides of the lower fuselage right next to wings which has made enough space for two extra hard points which are carrying Smart Bombs in the picture.

* Can someone explain the Multi Hardpoints in the 2nd picture below and if we are going to do the same with thunders .



What are these Multi hard points ??????



Lastly the cockpits:

Thunder Cockpit :

Grippen cockpit :




I think there are alot of lessons to be learnt from Grippen.

Regards: B.B

 

[sherdil76]

made this patch on JF17 induction in PAF fleet, hope you'll like it, not a great user of PS though

 

[blain2]

I understand that PAF wants to improve the range of the Mirages; however, I do not agree that the Mirage V are much better than the F-16s in the strike role. You can say the M2K is better (again much would be a little too much) than F-16 in A2G but certainly not the Mirage V even in its ROSE configuration. The Mirage III/V started their career in the PAF (as well as other Air Forces around the world) as multi-role fighter just like the F-16 did. However, in the PAF, these ancient birds are still lingering on because we just don’t have other platforms in number to replace them. It is obvious that PAF would never like to send its handful of the F-16s (even if they are superior to Mirage in every respect, including A2G) to perform the air interdiction role, PAF just can’t afford to loose its handful F-16s.

With the onboard avionics, self defense systems, Mirage III/V are not suitable for the long range strike missions deep into enemy territory; they’ll prove sitting ducks for the IAF’s Mig-29s (naval Mig-29Ks), M2Ks even the Bisons, forget about MKIs. However, IFR-capable Mirage will have an advantage of carrying more weapon load. The PAF is inducting the JFs mainly to replace the ancient A5s and the Mirages, hence to me, the primary role of the JF would be what was designated to the aircrafts its is replacing, that is air-interdiction. JF-17 is not an air-superiority fighter rather a multi-role fighter. I also do not agree that lot of life is left in the Mirage’s airframes. We make fun of the IAF’s Mig-21, whereas fact of the matter is, our Mirage are also flying coffins, and this can be verified by checking the number of Mirages crashed in past five or so years. At any rate if PAF thinks that the 50s technology Mirage III/V are still viable, than who am I to say otherwise.

Qsaark,

While you make quite a few valid points about the overall comparison which obviously places the F-16s higher than the Mirages, keep in mind that up until the very recent upgrades of the Pakistani F-16s with advanced targeting pods, the ROSE Mirages provided the best day/night strike capability to the PAF owing to their integrated FLIR systems. These were not available on the F-16 (they relied on their fair weather, day-only Laser Designation Pods courtesy Thomson-CSF).

Range is limited on the Mirages, however night interdiction and precision strike is a role that these Mirages can perform fairly well. As part of the ROSE II & III upgrades, the Mirages that underwent these upgrades got pretty decent Self Protection Systems in order to give them survivability for strike missions.

Its a good development that precision strike is available on so many different PAF platforms like the F-16s, Mirages and hopefully we will see it operational on the JF-17s (I suspect it is already there, however I am not sure which pod is being used).

 

[bc040400065]

I think PAF should persue the JF17 program on fast track. Because Mirages may be good enough or may have life left but when it comes to the technology they are no where even with ROSE and BVR they cannot match the threat pakistan faces. So push hard and go for advance versions of jf17. 2nd batch go for french RC400 or VENEX radar, ws13 engine with more thrust and better performance, increase internal fuel capacity or CFT, so that hardpoint are available for weapons, JF17 can use multi rack as can been seen on pic of jf17. after the 2nd batch go for more advance version, perhaps more advance and long range AESA radar and missile system, more powerful engine with 3D TVC, atleast 2 more hardpoint, try add some stealth features, grippen NG has supercruise so try that i don't think its impossible as we can see from pic and general info gripen and JF17 are of same size almost. a more powerful engine with TVC will really help. Also i would say stop looking for more F16 or even J10, develop JF17 to an extend that one should not have to buy any more "advance" fighters.

 

[M.Ali Nasir]

This could be an answer to the fast development of jf-17 thunder.

YEAH yu rite

 

[razgriz19]

Payload can be increased as per the configuration. Reduce the drop tanks and you can add more fire power.

As the drop tanks take the maximum payload capacity in a fighter jet.

but the combat radius will decrease!