JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 3]

[MastanKhan]

if you are adjusting it in the league of MKI's
then definitely it will be little injustice with the bird

Hi,

No---I am not adjusting it nowhere at this stage---truthfully----with this news about KLJ 7 and no sd 10 BVR---the JF 17 has fizzled out of any race that it was in---some people are champions in their own mind----the JF 17 is a champion of itsown kind.

Come on---A ground attack piece----we didnot need---. Jf 17 is a great plane in its own version---a so called 3.5---4 gen plane with no BVR capability today---. How criminally inept an air force is that designed an fighter aircraft in the year 2010 and NO BVR.

Also pak has no scientists that can break the encryption code for the amraams---neither the funds nor the resource---they can't even touch the amraam when they get it only to put in the refregerated storage or on the dolly on the way to the plane---.

PAF cannot loosen one screw of the AMRAAMS once they get them.----it dare not hook up any other plug to the missile that is not used to loading it up to the plane.

Forget about loosening one screw---PAF dare not put a screw driver or mount a wrench on any of the screws or nuts of the AMRAAMS lest the paint chips off---if the americans find out that paf has been seeking to get into one---they will be in deep trouble---possibly losing their stock of AMRAAMS. So please people----don't bet on this stock. Thanks.

 

[MastanKhan]

A little % of metallic structure replaced by composites...

Hi Nabil,

These composites---other than the weight, won't they reduce the radar signature of the plane as well.

 

[wangrong]

JF-17's avionics

 

[wangrong]

 

[kursed]

OESP - Optical Emitter Self Protect. What is that?

 

[TaimiKhan]

OESP - Optical Emitter Self Protect. What is that?

A counter measure system, to deceive MANPADS or incoming IR seeking missiles.


Something like this:



Further Read for Information: http://www.ausairpower.net/optical-warfare.html

 

[nightrider_saulat]

Hi,

No---I am not adjusting it nowhere at this stage---truthfully----with this news about KLJ 7 and no sd 10 BVR---the JF 17 has fizzled out of any race that it was in---some people are champions in their own mind----the JF 17 is a champion of itsown kind.

Come on---A ground attack piece----we didnot need---. Jf 17 is a great plane in its own version---a so called 3.5---4 gen plane with no BVR capability today---. How criminally inept an air force is that designed an fighter aircraft in the year 2010 and NO BVR.

Sir you can't imagine that how much this shocking new development has upset me

 

[Dazzler]

@Mastan Khan

Theoretically it does reduce the RCS along with weight of the aircraft.


For those who are losing sleep on radar issue, KLJ-7 is still leaps and bounds better than any US or Italian radar currently in our inventory. Its not a heavy on ground functions type one but a true multirole radar because it offers more working modes than Grifos, APG 66 and even early 68s. KLJ-10 was still having issues to fit into thunder's nose and maintain complete functionality and this is being worked out. Thunder, at this moment, is completely capable to fire SD-10s.


The most detailed pics of Thunder's advanced avionics i have ever seen. Many thanks to Mr. Wangrong...

Regards

 

[Dazzler]

Here is what Mr. Gaf posted on Pakdef forum which confirms Thunder's quad channel fly by wire system operational from fourth prototype onwards.

"Just reading Vol. 11. No.6 Edition of "Combat Aircraft". There is an interesting small article about the JF17. In particular, the following caught my eye..

"the definitive prototype 04 was delayed until April 2006, although it did feature the full avionics suite. The heart of this suite is a digital quadruplex Type 634 FBW system and the KLJ-7 X Band multifunctional pulse doppler fire control radar in the initial batches, the KLJ-7 reportedly being replaced by the improved KLJ-10 on later aircraft"..

 

[mughaljee]

@Mastan Khan
The most detailed pics of Thunder's advanced avionics i have ever seen. Many thanks to Mr. Wangrong...
Regards

Share that pics with us too

 

[Tempest II]

KLJ-10 is long range radar and KLJ=7 is short range
long range means above 145Km range
'

FC-1/JF-17 Thunder Last Updated 4/27/10
Some points frm the link
'
'
then subsequently switched to KLJ-10 with a better performance (track 10 engage 2, look-up range 75km, look-down range 45km for RCS=3m2). An European high performance radar (e.g. Italian Vixen 1000ES AESA) has been planned in later batches.
====
he latest news indicated that the first taxi test of FC-1 powered by an indigenous WS-13 took place on March 18, 2010.
====
=
Chinese Military Aviation | China Air Force

I just had to post this again. The specifications for the KLJ-10 given above are inferior to the KLJ-7 given in this brochure, therefore the website did not update the specifications. The problems might be because Janes website does not seperate the KLJ-7 and the KLJ-10. They list they was version of the same radar and don't make an effort to define the differences in performance.



The info on Chinese Military Aviation | China Air Force is still the original KLJ-7 info. KLJ-10 will be much better. The original KLJ-7 specs are below:

 

[wangrong]

"the definitive prototype 04 was delayed until April 2006, although it did feature the full avionics suite. The heart of this suite is a digital quadruplex Type 634 FBW system and the KLJ-7 X Band multifunctional pulse doppler fire control radar in the initial batches, the KLJ-7 reportedly being replaced by the improved KLJ-10 on later aircraft"..

it is impossible...

they are different in size.

 

[TaimiKhan]

it is impossible...

they are different in size.

Yeah it is big in size, but many of the functions can be added to KLJ-7 and upgrade it, like number of targets it can scan, how many it can engage and range may not be same is the KLJ-10, but other features can be added to KLJ-7.

And as time passes by, technology advances and gets more miniaturized.

 

[hataf]

it is impossible...

they are different in size.

is it possible to incease the range of a radar with out inceasing the size???

 

[KEETARP]

is it possible to incease the range of a radar with out inceasing the size???

Yes its possible . Just increasing the Peak-power rating by 5-10 percent will translate into significant Range advantage , without increasing Antennae diameter .
Just have to place a higher rated TWT tubes or a central radio frequency source .
Better peak-power ratings and sustained Avg power ratings is what modern Phased Array-radar achieve esp the AESA radar.

Look at the radar detection range and power of smaller F18 and much bigger F14 . A smaller F18 with 20KW rated peak power of APG-79 detects much more farther than much larger F14 with 10KW Pw.