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.
Gwader port couldn't return its desired results as we miserably failed to connect it to Northern parts of the country. Instead of building a road towards Quetta and Punjab, Musharraf connected it to Karachi port via road. Connecting two ports via road itself is very strange concept especially if both are located on the same sea shore. Now, coming towards Thunder, I think there is one hell of difference between project planning of JF-17 and Gawadar
designed particularly for PAF, it is quite dynamic project -at least it looks like that way till now -so far, we have have integrated weapons for almost all kind of operations on it (air combat, strike and Maritime ops) without losing the concept of "Low Price" and this is the export strategy for this fighter. In an global economic environment where even European military programs are suffering from Euro-Zone crisis, believe me sir, Cost-effectiveness matters and it matters even more for third world countries where Thunder is being targeted for exports.
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?
Only Two points.
1. JF-17 was never intended to become a hi-end weapon system. It was always to become Work-Horse of PAF. (Middle-Tier jet at best)
2. Modernization program is in place and to absorb the latest technologies while keeping price under a certain threshold. So, relax please... if we don't know everything it doesn't mean nothing is going on. Apart from small size and low RCS, there is a EW suite in it as well
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
That would be a horrible idea. As i have said that Thunder was never meant to be a Hi-End system and more importantly we must remember that the time when it was conceived even Chinese aviation industry was struggling with modern fighter jet technologies ( though they have done some catching in avionics, power plants will take few more years). You can't push a medium tech jet into league of modern 20 ton fighters. Ask yourself a simple question, Can you put more weapon load + range despite adding new avionics and EW in it? Answer is NO. That will demand a more powerful engine and larger wings and air frame... and this is where F-16 and J-10B will come in. (High-End) real issue which PAF is facing here is not the technological difference vis-a-vis IAF. During the last 10 years, we have match them in every technical aspect where previously IAF was having clear edge over us (BVR, IFR, AWACS etc.) But as mentioned above by Mastan Khan and myself, our real problem is the NUMBERS of our Hi-Tier aerial weapon systems.
Hope i did answer few of your questions here.
