What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 3]

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the real world no body is going to take off like that in combat because it bleeds of energy so unless your engine is providing very good tw you'd be fool to take off like that and bleed energy by the time you reach some altitude the bandit may already have you locked up on his radar.I have seen ADA take off which are the most quick take offs of our F16's.They are tasked to take off within few minutes if enemy is too close to border and they always take off through conventional method.
 
.
Ever wonder why kulbit and cobra are labeled as "airshow" maneuvers only? Because in real life combat, no sensible pilot will try them especially when their adversary is equipped with highly agile missiles.
 
.
Ever wonder why kulbit and cobra are labeled as "airshow" maneuvers only? Because in real life combat, no sensible pilot will try them especially when their adversary is equipped with highly agile missiles.

yeah agreed....coz cobra maneuvers cant beat 40g capable missiles :lol:
 
.
Even MAA-1 Piranha A that we just got from Brazil can achieve 60 degrees off bore sight angle with 40 Gs (50 G for Piranha 2). Same is the case with pl-9C and aim-9m and we do not even have A-darter as of yet. These maneuvers look good only in peace time, not in crunching battle time.
 
Last edited:
.
Wow, it's take off is so quick and how less a landing strip it needs. The more i see it the more it impress me ! Seems like 200 meters only ..

500-600m...
200 is very small and with external fuel tanks....impossible!
 
. .
Ever heard abt chinese engine Ws-13?
It will have 100kn of thrust :flame:

Even we can hope for more powerful engine, coz the first engine of F-16A/B has 100kn thrust, while F-16E/F has 144kn thrust.

internal fuel capacity is very limited so the operation radius will get shorter....
those engines r fuel suckerz!

and for f-16 e/f, UAE asked US to make a variant that can take off wiht full fuel and with full armament, thats why US made that engine...
dont forget the CFTs.....(extra weight!)
 
.
Even MAA-1 Piranha A that we just got from Brazil can achieve 60 degrees off bore sight angle with 40 Gs (50 G for Piranha). Same is the case with pl-9C and aim-9m and we do not even have A-darter as of yet. These maneuvers look good only in peace time, not in crunching battle time.

Here Nabil.

laad09_42.jpg
 
.
Piranha dodging a flare........

10h7ole.jpg


seeker.....

2qji1oz.jpg
 
.
Brazilian missiles for PAF. notice the range of MAR-1 which is 60 km and not the advertised 25 km.

117tsm8.jpg
 
.
The AIM-120 seeker does not select a random target in the terminal phase,...

Gambit

How does a Active Radar guided missile prioritizes its target in terminal phase . In layman terms how it sees and decides - "bang this is my target" .

When it's onboard radar goes active , there will be more than 10 RF emitter in a given area .
Two to three targets would be giving same radar return in dB .

A relatively low RCS design(Say Jet A) at 10Km range would be reflecting same energy as a slightly large figure (Say Jet B) at 20 Km distance + plus it might be possible that Jet A has just entered Theater field when missile is switching to Active terminal mode

Is it only based on
TWS/AACQ/STT/RWS information ; meaning Track while scan data which firing platform transmitted to missile - aka aspect angle, heading, airspeed and closure .

Or it has something to do with Pulse train / PRF sequence of reflecting surface which may be unique to hostile radar/jet .
Not necessarily. And yes...An actively guided missile does not perform any target selection.

Any body is essentially a radar reflector and the more complex the body, the greater the variability in producing an RCS value. The aircraft's radar will have a greater electronic view of the area than the missile because the missile does have a much smaller and less capable radar system, that mean if there are 10 reflectors in view, the missile may not see all 10. It is up to the pilot to 'deconflict' the available targets and prioritizes for the missile. Once a target has been assigned to the missile, it is supposed to maintain radar lock on that target. At this point it is the missile's design that will give the series its reputation. Target characteristics, aspect angle, heading, airspeed and closure rate, are independently calculated by the missile itself after acceptance from the parent aircraft. These information are incorporated into the type of guidance the missile is founded upon.

For example...

proportional_guid.jpg


Other forms are pure pursuit navigation (PPN), command line of sight (CLoS) or plenty of hybrids. All air-air missiles today are hybrid in their guidance algorithms. Probably only MANPAD-types are still using simple guidance algorithms like PPN.

If the target deploys chaff, then it becomes a matter of sensor-guidance fusion sophistication if the missile is able to maintain target lock. The issue here is the distance between the missile and target at the moment of chaff deployment. Remember the property of beam dispersion or widening over distance.

NWS JetStream - NWS Radar on the Web
The beam of energy transmitted from the Doppler radar is no different. A conical shaped beam is formed as the energy moves away from the radar. And it is near the center line of the beam where most of the energy is located with the energy decreasing away from the centerline.

If the missile is able to distinguish the chaff cloud from the target, then it is a matter of programming on whether or not the missile is programmed to head for the largest radar return and be misled. The odds of distinction increases with distance because of that beam widening property. At the moment of chaff discharge the pilot will execute violent maneuvers. Go back to the noaa.gov source above and mentally place the aircraft and the chaff cloud any point inside a radar beam cone. The closer to the missile they (aircraft and chaff cloud) are to the missile, the better the odds that those violent maneuvers will take the aircraft outside of that cone. The further away from the missile, the better the odds are that the missile can see both. There are no guarantees here. If the missile is programmed to head for the largest radar return, then this point is irrelevant. But if the missile is sophisticated enough to remember the target's radar signature, heading, airspeed, altitude and even flight mechanics as chaff will have different aerodynamic behaviors than an aircraft, then the missile should be able to ignore the chaff and remain focused on the aircraft. But once again, if aircraft and chaff cloud are close enough to the missile, meaning deep inside the radar cone, then this sophistication is not of any use simply because the violently maneuvered aircraft is no longer inside the missile's radar view.
 
.
JFT is a joint development and i see no reason to read it as Chinese influence...but no doubt it matters to be partner with China in a sense that enemy states cannot use our politicians to sabotage this project.. single handedly.
Neither, i see any reason or situation developing to part ways with China...... so no point in discussing a out of box senario.
I do see lot of attempts to provoke Pak-China or ISlam-China disagreements..... by various means.... which had failed miserably so far..

At the same time, I must mention PAF is quite respectable in most of Arab states and their trust in JFT.. speaks volumes of it....

BATMAN: Your points of partnership is excellent. This cooperation between partners successs only when each partners contributes and compensates weak points of other partners. Pakistan and China of JF-17 JV is good because:

Partner 1 - China contributions:
1. facility to develope, test, prototype production, weapon supply and test etc.
2. track record of selling fighter jets.
3. history of getting supplies from Russia such as engines
4. carries heavier weight in interanational negotiation

Partner 2 - Pakistan contributions:
1. experience and familiar with Western miliatry fighters, avionics and weapons.
2. experience in real fighting.
3. good relationship with targeted customer of the plane.

Please add something I have missed above.
 
.
If the missile is able to distinguish the chaff cloud from the target, then it is a matter of programming on whether or not the missile is programmed to head for the largest radar return and be misled. The odds of distinction increases with distance because of that beam widening property. At the moment of chaff discharge the pilot will execute violent maneuvers. Go back to the noaa.gov source above and mentally place the aircraft and the chaff cloud any point inside a radar beam cone. The closer to the missile they (aircraft and chaff cloud) are to the missile, the better the odds that those violent maneuvers will take the aircraft outside of that cone. The further away from the missile, the better the odds are that the missile can see both. There are no guarantees here. If the missile is programmed to head for the largest radar return, then this point is irrelevant. But if the missile is sophisticated enough to remember the target's radar signature, heading, airspeed, altitude and even flight mechanics as chaff will have different aerodynamic behaviors than an aircraft, then the missile should be able to ignore the chaff and remain focused on the aircraft.

Gambit , Thanks a Lot

Those were the lines precisely I was looking for
 
. . .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom