JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[DrSomnath999]

i'm not expert but i dont know why indians trying to convey that jf-17 is nowhere near to gripen.

can any one explain me on what basis it beat thunder comprehensively ?

radar
payload
range
speed
maneuverability
multirole function
weapons
all factors are even nothing major it offers for double price
but dont campare block I with NG, block III is meant to face NG

well mate ur post is confusing on one hand ur saying dont compare block 1 with NG & on the other hand ur saying to compare
block iii even if block 2 is not yet built .PLZ specify properly what do u want to compare

 

[Pinnacle]

Can someone tell me plz that will jft-2 have AESA and CFT?????????? I M very much confused.

 

[Pinnacle]

OK THANKS 4 REPLY.But i have read on some page that italian AESA radar is also conteder...WILL PAF GO FOR IT?

 

[Last Hope]

Can someone tell me plz that will jft-2 have AESA and CFT?????????? I M very much confused.

CFT? The combat radius of JF-17 is 1352 KM and it is good enough to patrol the borders, but yes the JF-17 will get a CFT in upcoming block.
About AESA in Block II, this news is classified as for now. The most likely chances are, yet more modified version of KLJ-07 radar.

OK THANKS 4 REPLY.But i have read on some page that italian AESA radar is also conteder...WILL PAF GO FOR IT?

Pakistan earlier wanted to go for European (Not US) AESA radar for the JF-17, but the price would take a huge jump and AESA.

 

[araz]

This cost effectiveness does not work with fighter aircraft persay----you can use this terminology---when comparing rifles---okay---G3 to and AK47.

But when it come to fighter aircraft---cost is a moot point----. There are major weapons systems and then there are your regular weapons system---. Major weapons systems are bought for a different purpose in mind----ie---force projection---to show off and strut around---like india does with its SU30's and u s does with its F15 what is it silent eagle---F22.

When you buy major weapons systems---keeping in mind the pak india scenario---india wants to pressurize pakistan to 'cow' down---whereas---pakistan does not even know the term what it means---.

JF17's cost scenario is good for those countries---who are going to face similiar kind of aircraft---in case of pakistan---it ties down pakistan's hands behind its back---.

The jf17 is made on the belief---it is ours----we made it---it is sanction proof---it is cheap---BUTwars are not won on this philosophy---untill and unless you have them in twice the number---ie twice as many in numbers as the enemy's and still have the production lines running----.

Pakistan will have to conjure up 35---45 sdrns of front line aircraft to make a dent in the IAF----which means---350--400 jf17's---150---200 F16's blk52 and MLU's and 150-200 J10B's.

With these many aircraft in opposition---iaf would be in no win situation----because even during war time---it will still have to keep almost 1/3rd to 1/2 of its air force closer towards the chinese border.

Untill and unless paf cannot match or exceed the iaf numbers it will have major issues----. Paf must have atleast 100---150 more aircraft to face the iaf---if it comes down tot hat---then india will seriously think of making peace with pakistan---. But if it can get about 100 eurofighters---that would also change the political scenario in the sub continent.

Pakistanis should never forget----you can only make india to come to the peace table if you can show off a better and bigger or more advanced aircraft than the SU30----india is not impressed what your little fighter' can do in actual combat---that comes later---and the results are up for grabs---. You have something to strut around in---that will get india's attention.

Remember---major weapons systems are for making peace and not for starting wars---.

Intersting post. While I cant deny the palusibility of your argument, may I point out that it is the numbers game which ruined USSR. It is a standard ploy of great nations to challange their adversaries into buying bigger and better than them, till your debtors run away from you or After you( dependiong on your size!!) . It is also worthy of knowing the role that you will be playing in a war, either a defensive role or an offensive role. Roughly, from what i have learnt from a few Ex PAF guys, you need a 3:1 ratio fof armaments to be able to attack effectively. with Big fighters like SUs this ratio might come down a bit to 1.5:1 to 2:1 but does not attain unity. therefore PAFs logic has always been to deter the enemy from attacking rather than taking the fight to the enemy, You just dont have the numbers to do so. Even if you usurp some territory and hold it, you will still fight defensively. As such the numbers that you project will probably never be required .
Second part of this argument is the nuclear arm, which will ensure that the war never lasts as long as it used to. All the friendship treaties and war pacts and no first use will go down the tube once sabres are drawn__ such is the lack of trust between the two nations. As such you will not have much of a country left to fight a war from, after the first 2-3 days. This is the one factor that must be inthe mind of the strategists as well. Unlike other optimists, i thinkthat IF there is a war in the subcontinent in the future, it would involve nuclear weapons from the very outset,which would make life very difficult for everybody. if you take that into consideration you satart to make sense of how Pakistan and PAF is doing things.
before you hammer me, I will gladly accept that the answer lies in more efficient and honest approach to wards a solution and the economics of Pakistan is the factor we need to emphasise on the mostto achieve our aims of a strong defence.
Araz

 

[aamerjamal]

well mate ur post is confusing on one hand ur saying dont compare block 1 with NG & on the other hand ur saying to compare
block iii even if block 2 is not yet built .PLZ specify properly what do u want to compare

earlier blocks of gripen.
obviously you can't campare a matured NG having 10+ years of earlier models of experience.
JF-17 will get mature in best 4-5 years and blockIII will b there where NG is rite now.
also NG is around 80+ million $

 

[abdulbarijan]

you are making circular arguments again and again. Cost factor is only important for PAF. And cost effectiveness comes with a penalty. Quality of services provided in aircraft will be not up to par. Tell me, if french avionics were selected for JF-17 then would JF-17 would have remain cost effective? Block 2 will not have drastic upgrades so it will not make any great imapct when it will come.

Interesting points however
-Cost factor is important not only for PAF but for every country that has an economy that cannot afford the likes of newer F-16's,Mig-29's and such....
-Well "not up to par" I dont think so...see at the time which was the top jet of PAF when JF-17 was inducted..F-16A (cost reportedly 13-15 million as per wiki and others not that i trust em..)
since im relatively new and my words are not the important ... therefore I'll be quoting a think tank on this

I am going to say something that maybe i shouldn't but to shut some members once and for all...

The actual RCS of JFT is Classified but what i know, it is MUCH less than even the Falcons and goes in mere fractions! To such an extent that during simulated engagements, Falcon pilots were having difficulty to trace it ! The biggest contribution to this is the DSI intake which reduces the RCS to a great extent. About the radar, KLJ-7 is based on RP-35 zhemchug series which itself was specifically made as a high performance, multirole radar for Mig-35. Though still mechanical pulse doppler, it is one hell of a radar that includes technologies from IAFs favorite ELAT 2032 and RP-35s joined by Chinese expertise in electronics and PCB, micro processors. Keep under estimating this fighter folks, it will benefit us. On the topic, MIG-29 versions before the SMT are inferior to JFT in terms of avionics, radar, weapon and sensor fusion. This is a reality that India at the moment DOES NOT have any SMTS and till they do, theirs are inferior to JFT. Bitter pill to swallow for them but i trust my source a lot.

-As for the last yes it would have...lets calculate it
it was about 1.6 Billion$ deal (including missiles,electronics and various subsystems) and it was for 50 jets ... which basically means 32 million per jet at that to the basic cost (if u take it as 15m) avionics you get 47 million...
However this also includes the cost of the subsystems and avionics of the blk-I (which features chinese equipment so to be fair it wouldve cost us around 40-45 Million per piece)

Now lets compare that to what the new blk-52's

qouting Hkhan from pakdef

36 F-16 C/D Block 52+ contract was for approximately $3 billion.

This is near 83 million per plane....

Now consider what would JF-17 wouldve looked like if it was to get all those upgrades
-Spectra EW suite
-MICA BVR missiles
-RC-400
-Different avionics on board French M2k and rafale

Pretty much up to the class (or even surpassing) the Blk-52 - the payload and still 35-40 million less (i.e cost effective)....

So basically after all this ranting
my basic point is still this
"JF-17 for its given cost is the best in its class"

 

[killerx]

when these 50 JF17 gona be deliverd yar to dam slow prodution

 

[MastanKhan]

Major weapon systems like Nuclear warhead.
Pakistan developed it's nuclear development program to defend itself from Israel and India not to start off a war with anyone else.

The bigger the weapons, like nukes, you have, the less chances for a war breakout.

But this principal doesn't apply everywhere like a ACC. They are used to pressurize the enemy, to obey and not wage a war, more like signing a deal just cause you have a gun pointed at your head.

Hi,

Nuclear war heads are end gamers---they are indeed major major weapons per say---but they are non conventional major weapon systems---they take things beyond the realm of reality---. Their manufacture and presence or a plan to manufacture can be politicized to the disadvantage of the nation that owns them---like pakistan---no korea---iran. To stay within the realm of reality you have air superiority aircraft, submarines, navy ships, missile systems, tanks, helicopters etc etc etc.

In actual warfare between two nation that have access to an ocean / sea---the submarines will be the game changers---. But as they are not visible in daily life----like a fighter aircraft taking off and landing or just flying by over the cities---their significant importance will only be known when it gets too late to act.

Fighter aircraft on the other hand strut around like peacocks---. And if you want to impress upon the adversary---you got to show up with something bigger, or technologically superior.

The pak nuc program had nothing to do with israel----I don't know from where and why you pulled that out---

 

[Bratva]

Interesting points however
-Cost factor is important not only for PAF but for every country that has an economy that cannot afford the likes of newer F-16's,Mig-29's and such....
-Well "not up to par" I dont think so...see at the time which was the top jet of PAF when JF-17 was inducted..F-16A (cost reportedly 13-15 million as per wiki and others not that i trust em..)
since im relatively new and my words are not the important ... therefore I'll be quoting a think tank on this



-As for the last yes it would have...lets calculate it
it was about 1.6 Billion$ deal (including missiles,electronics and various subsystems) and it was for 50 jets ... which basically means 32 million per jet at that to the basic cost (if u take it as 15m) avionics you get 47 million...
However this also includes the cost of the subsystems and avionics of the blk-I (which features chinese equipment so to be fair it wouldve cost us around 40-45 Million per piece)

Now lets compare that to what the new blk-52's

This is near 83 million per plane....

Now consider what would JF-17 wouldve looked like if it was to get all those upgrades
-Spectra EW suite
-MICA BVR missiles
-RC-400
-Different avionics on board French M2k and rafale

Pretty much up to the class (or even surpassing) the Blk-52 - the payload and still 35-40 million less (i.e cost effective)....

So basically after all this ranting
my basic point is still this
"JF-17 for its given cost is the best in its class"

The argument that JF-17 is good for those countries who cant afford to have BVR capable fighter is as good as the argument made when Gawader Port was building. " it will make pakistan a strategic country and blah blah" look what happen in the end. No exports of JF-17 will occur until 3 4 years we will then judge how cost effectiveness has made its impact on export market.





Second point is whats the benefit of comparing JF-17 with old F-16 or mig 29,? The comparisons would have been justified if jf-17 introduced 10 years ago when BVR,AESA, Advance electronic warfare capability were nascent concepts. Now the envirnment has changed, adversary capabilities have changed, they will have AESA and IRST capable fighters then how JF-17 small size and RCS would help it?

In my humble opinion, with the changing environment and capabilities of adversary. PAF should have dropped the cost effective approch and should have pushed the enevelop of JF-17 in block 2 but alas. . . . Economy and Money has restricted it to maintain the cost effective approch

 

[BATMAN]

Nuclear technology have two uses... energy and bomb.

Pakistan need energy,,, more than any country on the world and regardless to what media says Pakistan need to have independent energy policy and development in nuclear field.

Where as on war side.. India is quietly getting nuclear technology from Europe and US... and Pakistan's foreign office criminally quite on it.

 

[BATMAN]

Is your JF17 is capable of entering deep inside india with a nuclear bomb....if yes how...if not.. dont blast atom bomb on the waga border

Troll, we don't even need to fly, when your army is sitting deep inside their homes in Kerala!

BTW.. stop dreaming about wahgah and gymkhana!!

 

[karan.1970]

In my humble opinion, with the changing environment and capabilities of adversary. PAF should have dropped the cost effective approch and should have pushed the enevelop of JF-17 in block 2 but alas. . . . Economy and Money has restricted it to maintain the cost effective approch

Resolution of disputes between India and Pakistan would have been the 1st prize for both countries, but that seems to be a pipe dream for now

 

[abdulbarijan]

The argument that JF-17 is good for those countries who cant afford to have BVR capable fighter is as good as the argument made when Gawader Port was building. " it will make pakistan a strategic country and blah blah" look what happen in the end. No exports of JF-17 will occur until 3 4 years we will then judge how cost effectiveness has made its impact on export market.





Second point is whats the benefit of comparing JF-17 with old F-16 or mig 29,? The comparisons would have been justified if jf-17 introduced 10 years ago when BVR,AESA, Advance electronic warfare capability were nascent concepts. Now the envirnment has changed, adversary capabilities have changed, they will have AESA and IRST capable fighters then how JF-17 small size and RCS would help it?

In my humble opinion, with the changing environment and capabilities of adversary. PAF should have dropped the cost effective approch and should have pushed the enevelop of JF-17 in block 2 but alas. . . . Economy and Money has restricted it to maintain the cost effective approch

-How come a cost effective fighter is not good for countries that cant afford the latest 4th gen fighter ?
As the saying goes "something is better than nothing'.

-As for your second argument, does that even matter with us operating platforms like Mirage III/V or F-7 P/PG's ..

They "will" have....Will is the key word here...the closest our adversary can get to an AESA is by the time frame of 2015 with the MMRCA deliveries...By 2016(as per Dubai info releases) Block III would be ready and production will start...

-You are entitled to your opinion brother but lets just say it should have a shred of reality too...How can we raise the envelop of JF-17 more higher than its already defined when even our Block I's are there thanks to China's agreement of soft loans....

 

[Armstrong]

I think people forget that the JF-17 is part of a much bigger air defense umbrella that involves everything from Surface to Air systems, AWACs, Air Crafts and Battlefield Missiles and all of them would be acting in unison to deter any aggression. Plus, I believe, the deep strike capability is going to be delegated less to our air crafts and more to our missiles with the enemy's FOBs being targeted by our SRBMs and anything further delegated to the MRBMs !