JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]
- Thread starter EagleEyes
- Start date
- Status
ziaulislam
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
- Messages
- 23,621
- Reaction score
- 9
- Country
- Location
i think mastan my friend you dont get from the start..if we buy 8000 fighters india will buy 16000 the race will never end and india will always be the winner because its 9 times larger economy and will always be such, biggest of its huge population.
we do attribute su30 and other fighters by their size but we forgot that thunder if tailored for air superiority mission on its home ground will always have a very decent chance against any 4/4.5 gen aircrft. wee should acknowledge the thunder BVR capablity and its ability to pick up any fighter at a range well beyond a bvr missile range.
we do attribute su30 and other fighters by their size but we forgot that thunder if tailored for air superiority mission on its home ground will always have a very decent chance against any 4/4.5 gen aircrft. wee should acknowledge the thunder BVR capablity and its ability to pick up any fighter at a range well beyond a bvr missile range.
Last Hope
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,275
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Although rude, I agree. The information could be found in the earlier pages. You (Farooqi) must have done that and left the thread for us to concentrate on our discussion, which was the development of JF-17.
Manticore
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 10,115
- Reaction score
- 114
- Country
- Location
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...more-j-10s-rather-than-jf-17s.html#post274285
Gents , lets take these discussions away from the jft thread and concentrate on jft developments here
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...24335-high-resolution-pictures-jf-17-a-9.html
Gents , lets take these discussions away from the jft thread and concentrate on jft developments here
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...24335-high-resolution-pictures-jf-17-a-9.html
I bet there are even more ill informed Pakistanis living in US who think JF-17 is just some Mig-21 upgrade which is nothing but crap. The US media will never say anything good things about Pakistan and China...
Highly respectable US aviator like Richard Aboulafia who may has immerse knowledge of aviation but when comes to nationality, will sprout rubbish without linking to their knowledge..
I agree sir but one should not give up either and settle for less
And just how did I destroyed this thread? By bringing all of you to realty? Learn to take the negative too. Be positive but realistically positive.
Please read through all of my posts, I joined this forum by praising JF-17 (which I love deeply weather anybody believes it or not don't give a damn) Then I started to find out via the past posts of this forum that we all expecting too much out of it, I find out the real threat and our defensive capabilities and made me realize that apparently we are as usual living in the dream world.
You know when Nabil posted about the stealth version of JF-17 coming out in 2012 I was jumping up and down. Go through my posts please. NOBODY IS AGAINST JFT.
Absolutely not.. The JF-17 was supposed to be the lower end of our arsenal.. its the aircraft designed to keep the home front secure..it was not required that it take the fight deep into the enemy's shores..
That was the job of more advanced fighters such as the F-16, Rafale, J-10 etc.. that were supposed to be bought but never materialized.
Zia
I agree with you to a extent. Yes we can not, will not and should not compete with India in terms of numbers of equipments. But don't you think we are putting too much emphasis and reliance on JFT? Shouldn't we have some matching equipment. When we learned India has nuclear sub we immediately decided to have ours too. But I don't see this trend in PAF.
Yes no doubt about JFT. But it is still in its infancy. I hope we will make it to the level of Grippen and stealth version Inshaallah. But what to do with the current threat?
Oscar
Any news, idea etc for future plans of PAF? besides JFT.
Nabil
Hopefully you will be doing well. So as per your past post about JFT stealth version coming out in 2012, any news about the speed. I think currently we are at 1.8 Mach. It would be great if we could get it to 2+ with possible change of power plant. What do you think?
As stated before..
The PAF's future combat aircraft plans hinged around three types.. and perhaps a fourth later on.
With the JF-17 taking up the role of "low-end" multi-role aircraft.. the F-16's adding deep strike interdiction ability to that..
and the Fc-20 taking up the high end 4.5++ gen of deep strike and air dominance.
and a few remaining F-7PG's taking up the point interceptor role.
These were the plans to meet till 2018-2020..
After which the F-7PG's were to be replaced by an unspecified 5th gen aircraft.
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
Let me quote myself her:
DSI at JF 17 has nothing to do with hiding the engine from radar waves, that's one of the common myth that are spread around. To hide the engine face, there must be a direct line of sight between air intake and engine, but that is not the case at a single engine twin intake design, especially not with ducted intakes as we can see in the follwing pics:
This is a cutaway of the early JF 17 prototype from PAC Kamra website. It shows that the air intake ducts are directed to the inside and not straight, because the gear bays are behind the intakes, so you have to direct the airflow around them to the engine that is located further behind. You can even see it pretty well in some JF 17 pics:
Be it the air flow or a radar wave, it has to make certain turns inside of JF 17 to reach the engine, which is located way behind and any radar reflection has to make even more turns to get out again. So these ducts are the reason why reflections will be reduced and not DSI!
DSI offer some RCS advantage, but only in comparison to the normal inlet design and not as a RCS reduction feature, which it isn't.
The red marked area of the inlet diverter at the early prototype, is the main part that normally would increase the frontal RCS, if not credibly treated with RAM, but the side effect of a DSI intake design is, that this diverter can be deleted. So DSI improves the airflow, reduces the weight because of the lack of parts, reduces the costs, because it's simpler and you need less effort to reduce RCS increasings than a normal inlet design.
More on DSI here as well:
Code One Magazine: JSF Diverterless Supersonic Inlet
These advantages compared to normal inlet designs should make clear, why DSI is a common feature on all Chinese fighter/trainer designs now, but only because F35 and J20 use it, people automatically confuse it as a RCS reduction feature and not what it really is!
When you look at JF 17 rationally, with the points that was stated here from several senior Pakistani members, JF 17 Block 1 has only very basic RCS reduction features.
Pro:
- small size fighter
- ducted air intakes
Con:
- no RAM coatings
- no less reflecting materials
- no saw tooth pattern
- the tailwing/vertical stabiliser design even increases the radar reflection area, compared to a tailless and angled stabiliser design like the J10 has
Logically, compared to PAFs older fighters, JF 17 might have a low RCS, compared to other modern 4th gen fighters, it has not. Block 2 might add some of these features, which is the normal upgrade step like older US, European or Russian fighters did as well, but fighters like the Eurocanards integrates these features from the start and that's what makes the Gripen for example more advanced so far.
- Status
Similar threads
