What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you think the ECM capabilities of JF-17 will be known publicly ?? Don't think so.

All we know is JF-17 has flares and chaffs, plus SE-2 airborne missile approach system and an internal active electronic warfare system for radar controlled missiles.

You will never know what the internal jammer system is and how it works and how much effective it is.

But from sources with limited inside knowledge, the ECM suite of JF-17 is good and has good survivable chances against modern systems.

You don't wanna believe that, no issue, but sorry we have no official links to proof our claims. may be i real war scenario we will know what it had.
Of course I don't expect that to happen, but then people shouldn't atleast use it in debates out here. Because their can be countless such secret technologies which everyone hides and people should learn to not to be selective in approving these secret tech. For example SPECTRA on Rafale is rumoured to have active cancelling capabilities. If true it would put all those J-wateva into a spin and invalidate them.
 
Of course I don't expect that to happen, but then people shouldn't atleast use it in debates out here. Because their can be countless such secret technologies which everyone hides and people should learn to not to be selective in approving these secret tech. For example SPECTRA on Rafale is rumoured to have active cancelling capabilities. If true it would put all those J-wateva into a spin and invalidate them.

Well that is what active ECM are. Rafale has them, DRFM is one of that stuff, SPECTRA is a combination of different things, and the active cancellation you are talking about is more likely some form of DRFM technology, which the Americans have brought in use and hopefully Chinese are trying for the tech also.

JF-17 is also having an internal active suite, how effective that is against radar guided missiles is yet to be known or how it works is still to be found out.

But the ECM suite of JF-17 is integrated and it lets you know of incoming missiles and deploys defensive items as per the threat.
 
Can someone please answer this little query. I've often heard how JF-17 is capable of performing well under ECM environments, has state of art ew suites etc etc. without anything solid to back it up. I have been unable to find anything which suggests to the above mentioned in whatever little research I have done. Can someone please tell me what are these ECM capabilities of the JF or the posts or threads that show it.

the chinese translations in info pool however do tell how the prototype 4 was expanded internally for these systems and tell the detection ranges around the jet... the original long version of my jft thunder/asunder article has touched this data ... maybe it will be published some time aswell..

A PART FROM MY ORIGINAL ARTICLE
.....The JF-17 has a defensive aids system [DAS]which incoporates various subsystems.The radar warning reciever allows 360 degree coverage in a 60km range in both ultravoilet and infrared spectrums.Detection sensors are on the front and tail.100-500 different types of radar signatures can be saved.The inbuilt ECM can effectively counter radar locks.KG300G external jamming pod has multiple mode jamming capabilty.HMS is speculated to be of chinese origin.The missile approach warning system [MAWS] with an integrated optical distributed aperture imaging system , scans in UV,IR and visual spectrums , detecting missiles at 20km range......
 
some collected info....

ive SD10 [ 70km] was tested in 2007 on a Mirage. It was outright rejected not based on the range but due to its inferior seeker and the missile was easily jammed. PAF's engineers that are based in Chengdu had previously tested the AMRAAM and other European Options, they brought their experience and knowledge and worked along side with our Chinese partners and further improved the missile.Result: SD10A and than later S10B --via notorius eagle


SD-10= 70 km
SD-10A=90-100 km
SD-10B=130-150km

the PLA news article mentioning the >100km is quoted here: ??????-10??????????100??_??_??? . While I don't see where it actiually says PL-12 or SD-10, I am assuming that is the only MRAAM for the J-10s unlike their Flankers which use Russian missiles.

1zbrja1.jpg
--via tempest




via nabil
By the way, sd-10a does have a range of 90-100 km as per my source in PAF and this variant was tested on JFT not too long ago. B variant is to have a more powerful motor with new seeker and range to be reached as per PLAAF and PAF is at least 140 km.

The missile sd10a is widely credited with superior range performance to the AIM-120A-C variants.
Above, below: Luoyang PL-12/SD-10A on JF-17 pylon launchers, exported to Pakistan (image © 2010 Air Power Australia, via Zhenguan Studio).
http://www.ausairpower.net/Zhuhai-2010/SD-10A-PL-12A-AAM-APA-1S.jpg
http://www.ausairpower.net/Zhuhai-2010/SD-10A-PL-12A-AAM-APA-2S.jpg
PLA Air to Air Missiles


acig.org. This is from April 2004 and apparently it was an interview with the SD-10 designer. The original SD-10 was superior to the R-77 and the AIM-120 A/B and was very close to the AIM-120C. So the fact that the SD-10A is superior to AIM-120C should be no suprise

[qoute]
Some translations and points discovered by Hyperwarp in the AFM concerning an magazine published article of an interview with the designer of the SD-10.

"Efective combat altitude 0-25Km.
Ability to engage target 10kms higher or lower than launch altitude.
Range at 10Km altitude at M1.2 target at same altitude =70Km.
No escape zone for F-16 type target = 35-45km
Max overload=38G, Speed =4M
Plans to be also used as SAM system."

"Designer was asked at end to rate BVR AAMs. He rated Meteor as best BVR AAM, then AIM-120C, then his SD-10, then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Skyflash at equal fourth, then Derby, and last of all, MICA."

"What the designer said is that they used the same way AIM-120 calculated its range. target and launch aircraft flying at each other at 1.2 mach and at 10000 metres. The range is 70 km under such circumstance.
Also interesting is the designer basically said the russians "cheated" with R-77, as they calculated the max range with target and launcher flying at each other at 1.5 mach and at 12000 metres altitude."

A more detailed translation by Dongdong posted in the AFM forums:

"I just bought the BING GONG KE JI magazine with the SD-10 designer interview. The interview is pretty informative. Add my points for translation:

Ahout the max shot range:
The Deputy Chief Designer of SD-10 said: The parameter of “max range” is determined by the relative position of missile’s carrier and the target aircraft. The assumed conditions by various countries are different. So what the Russian said the max range 100Km may not be better than what we said the max range 70Km. The max range 70Km in SD-10 marketing promotion brochure is measured under the condition that both the missile’s carrier and the target aircraft are flying at 10Km’s altitude, both the missile carrier’s velocity and target’s velocity are 1.2Mach, their flying direction is reverse(head to head). AIM120’s test condition is similar to SD-10. However Russian’s propaganda is a little more exaggerated. For example, R-77’s test condition is: carrier and target are flying at 20Km’s altitude; each has 1.5M’s velocity, head to head flying. Under such a condition, the max range is 100Km. The problem is higher altitude means less aerodynamic resistance, plus the faster velocity for both the carrier and the target. The range is naturally longer. So you shouldn’t only consider parameters isolated with each other. In fact, our SD-10’s range is better than AIM-120A/B, a litter less than AIM-120C, almost same as R-77’s.

About ranking MRAAM:
Designer : It’s not easy to rank …..Various persons have various standards…
First of all, Euro’s Meteor should be No.1. This missile’s performance is very advanced, its range reaches 160Km.It belongs to next generation missiles. Next, I think the AIM-120C is more advanced. For original AIM-120 missile, whatever components, materials and craft are world first class. Now it is upgraded to Type C, it makes new progress on range, precision and anti-jamming capability. Following, It should be our SD-10. Then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Active Skyflash at equal fourth. Then Israel’s Derby, Derby has a comparable overall performance with the above missiles, but its range is relatively short. Last of all, MICA, its tech is not bad, however it’s a tradeoff between BVR and dogfight, so is naturally inferior to dedicated MRAAM.

Reporter asked : Our SD-10 has a good ranking. Why do you say our SD-10 is more advanced than R-77?
Designer: We adopted some technologies more advanced than R-77’s, so SD-10’s overall performance is better than R-77’s. For instance, our strap-down initial navigation system, signal processing system are more advanced than R-77’s. Our missile was developed relatively later than R-77.Some new technologies were not mature when R-77 was developed, so R-77 didn’t use the new technologies, but when SD-10 was developed, the new technologies became mature, so we adopted the new technologies in SD-10.

SD-10’s milestones:
Designer: We started the pre-research work for advanced radar guidance air to air missile in mid of 1980….
Phase1:mid of 1980 to beginning of 1990, key technologies study
Phase2;Started from mid of 1990, sub-systems development
Phase3:Started from end of 1990, missile overall performance verification test
Phase4:After entering 21st century, demo verification test
Now, the development of SD-10 has been completed."

[/qoute]

----------- Dopuna: 01 May 2012 19:49 ---------

i understand that the actual specs of bvrs are not published and range is only one factor in the effectiveness of the bvr -- i also understand that there is no published rcs of jft [and there wont be any published rcs for some time]

however my above post was basically for indians who used to say that the mki would detect jft first .. the second aspect e.g firing is purely a speculation as these stats are never openly published ... however paf is in the uniques place to test american missiles and the chinese are in the position to check russian tech... so sd10 which would ultimately be used by the jft wouldbe a very credible force in the near future... i forgot to mention the southafrican connection in the sd10 development aswell


''
e data revealed on January 4 indicated that development of the PL-10 started in 2004, which might track very well with the reported deepening of South African-PLA cooperation. The few clear images of the PL-ASR/PL-10 show a near 95 percent similarity with the Denel A-Darter AAM ''
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-strategic-forces/19447-air-air-missiles-command-air.html
SD-10B will have a reduced volume weight
SD-10B may be equipped with the Active / Passive Composite Seeker
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...r-air-missiles-command-air-3.html#post1339231
 
Well add, Irfan Baloch, Nabil-05 and ANTIBODY.. I'm FAN OF these THREE posters. :)
thankyou abdul quddoos
sir xman, muradk, pshamim are the professionals ... no amount of 'internal contacts' or bookish/internet knowledge that I accumulate could ever compare to these respected members ...... I read all of sir muradks posts/threads before posting my first post in this forum. and i would recomend you do the same ....or if you want to read more quality posts , go to the first 2 pages of info pool ,where ive posted some links of some of these quality members by name ... .. I would love to see these members post again
 
AntiBody,

Can i please have link to your archived info?


Thanks.
 
@ Farooqi Sahib : From one accountant to another - Yeh saraa paisaa ke maslaaa hai ! If and When the PAF has enough funds available they'd go for even better acquisitions (the J-11Bs) and upgrade the JF-17 all the way to the Gripen and F-16 Level (though judging by the words of many over here...its already pretty much comparable to earlier F-16s in many respects and comparable to latter blocks in others) ! However as of now, like the rest of Pakistan's institutions, the PAF is criminally short of funds and so the JF-17 with gradual upgrades over the years and other force multipliers (SAMs, Missiles and AWACs) are what we can go for at best and to be honest they, in my noobish opinion, they provide remarkable value-for-money !

Samajh gia yarr. But what they have done in the past when they had the funds drives me crazy and scare the hell out of me.

By the way what part of Lahore are you in.? I was born and raised in the old city near Islamia College Railway Road. I am not sure asking me this question is appropriate or not over here. Just wondering. Last time I went to Lahore was in 2005. Miss it badly specially the food.
 
Samajh gia yarr. But what they have done in the past when they had the funds drives me crazy and scare the hell out of me.

By the way what part of Lahore are you in.? I was born and raised in the old city near Islamia College Railway Road. I am not sure asking me this question is appropriate or not over here. Just wondering. Last time I went to Lahore was in 2005. Miss it badly specially the food.

I'm sure had the PAF had those funds available and the right conditions, they'd have gone for it ! If they didn't is because those funds weren't as available as we thought they were or the conditions weren't favourable enough !

Born and raised in Gulberg (right on the MM Alam Road) but later moved to and have been living for the last 14 years in Model Town !
 
I heard somewhere that it was PAF that wanted the DSI on the JF in the first place.

You are correct, PAF dearly wanted to integrate it on jf-17 after the initial intake problem that nearly led the first prototype crashed! Chinese agreed and we saw a delay of almost a year between 3rd and 4th prototypes. The latter turned out to be much agile due to excellent intake and bleeding edge (works as an integrated canard) on jf-17. However, China was already implementing DSI exclusively for J-20 before jf-17 and j-10b.
 
I'm sure had the PAF had those funds available and the right conditions, they'd have gone for it ! If they didn't is because those funds weren't as available as we thought they were or the conditions weren't favourable enough !

Born and raised in Gulberg (right on the MM Alam Road) but later moved to and have been living for the last 14 years in Model Town !

I don't know there are conflicting news and stories. Lets hope for the best for future.

I have couple of sisters living in Model Town. Are you a CA or CPA?
 
I don't know there are conflicting news and stories. Lets hope for the best for future.

I have couple of sisters living in Model Town. Are you a CA or CPA?

Nope, half-way through the ACCA right now with an intention for going for CFA later on and make a career out of Investment Finance as a buy-side analyst or if the people around me continue speaking about the abysmal prospects of a buy-side analyst in Pakistan...I might go for ICAEW instead and continue on with a career in accounting, though very reluctantly !
 
Great news cb4. Is it really proven? I mean is there any documented evidence of this quality of JF-17?

PAF pilots have said that JF-17 is better than F-16 on that note directly

If you check out Youtube videos regarding JF-17 turn rates vs LCA, F-16, and Mirage 2k you'll know.
 
If you note other fighter jets like F-16, Mirage 2k, LCA, they all loose speed in the air while turning.
JF-17 on the other hand is successful and beats them. How? well its all because of DSI and huge leading edges.... :woot:

Pure Delta's inherent property is that it bleeds energy in tight turns faster because of the larger surface area of the wings. But LCA and Mirage 2K climbs faster in the vertical because of the enhanced sweep in the wings. That is why LCA requires a more powerful engine than the existing one to make up for the loss of thrust and airspeed which is the life-line in any form of Knife-fight in air.
 
True. Somehow, JF-17 and PAF is the father of DSI technology in Chinese jets ;)

There many more senior members you are forgetting, as you are new and have not seen their posts. :)

If I am not wrong, DSI was made by PAF.

Hey, credit for PAF for building a credible/potent Air force with limited budget. But to claim DSI is made by PAF is a word too far..

Remember the first prototype of JF-17 has no DSI. If PAF did contribute, definitely it will be a 50/50 co-share technology between China and Pakistan and will feature in first prototype at PAF request.

DSI is never meant to feature for JF-17, PAF don't even know Chinese possess such feature. On PAF request, they wanted to inprove the airflow ,further improve the performance and rid more of the black exhaust trailing the tail all the time.

The Chinese then decide to do added this feature, first to test out this system in actual field and further improved what is lacking on JF-17.
 
Hey, credit for PAF for building a credible/potent Air force with limited budget. But to claim DSI is made by PAF is a word too far..

Remember the first prototype of JF-17 has no DSI. If PAF did contribute, definitely it will be a 50/50 co-share technology between China and Pakistan and will feature in first prototype at PAF request.

DSI is never meant to feature for JF-17, PAF don't even know Chinese possess such feature. On PAF request, they wanted to inprove the airflow ,further improve the performance and rid more of the balck exhaust trailing the tail all the time.

The Chinese then decide to do added this feature, first to test out this system in actual field and further improved what is lacking.


You are partly correct. Yes it is a 50/50 partnership but its not only based on money but also on each other's technology gains.

In the past, If i'm not mistaken, the Super 7 project was between China and the United States at first. After relations became difficult, China needed Pakistan's help for advance TOT, and Pakistan on the hand was showing interest too as it needed China's technical expertise to produce a western class fighter cheap with no sanctions.

All this is true. China's got hands on PAF F-16A to reverse engineer and Pakistan's got its plans and intentions to not push and waste time for another jet or to contend for more F-16s.

Mordern JF-17:

- Pakistan provides:

50% fuselage, Canopy, Communication antennas, Grifo S7 Radar, Radome, HUD, C++ Program language, Martin Baker Ejection Seat (from U.K), AIM-9 Air to Air (from U.S), MAR-1 missile (from Brazil), MK-82/84, Bombs Ra'ad Cruise Missile, H2/H4 optically guided bombs

- China provides:

50% fuselage, Canopy, Wings and Elevators (TOT Pakistani F-16 design), LERX, DSI intake, Radome, WS-13 Engine, RD-93 Engine(from Russia) GsH-23mm Gun (from Russia), KLJ-7 Radar, MFDs, SD-10 BVR, PL-5 Air to Air, LS6, C803 Anti-shipping, WMD-7 Pod HMS/D,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom