JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[razgriz19]

if block 1 is second to block 52 and there is no need of upgradation than why block 2 and 3 of JF 17 coming ?

In simple words. They would not be upgraded and that rumour has substance in it

they will be upgraded to blk 2 or 3 standard WHEN they will reach their half lives.
Just like our F-16s are going through mid-life upgrade package.

 

[Mani2020]

Click here to view the original image of 800x387px.

Mani
It is precisely for the reason that PAF is not riddled with 4/4.5 generation aircrafts that the JFTs do not need to be upgraded straight away. As it stands it gives us valuable platforms which can carry BVRs which most of our current inventory cannot. JFT BL1s may be upgraded later as the current inventory gets replaced. Having IRST on a probe or built in is of little consequence at this point in time

No one is exaggerating any facts and we are not in the habit of chest thumping. You may have noticed that news on bl2 has dried up.So we need to wait and see what difference the new block has compared to the old block. All that we know is that externally the differencez would be minimal.
ARAZ

araz i agree with what you said and i myself know that it is not the right time to upgrade them as our main purpose is to replace the vintage aircrafts , once the replacement is completed then it will be more feasible to upgrade them .

But my problem is why do we always have to say " jf-17 is second only to block 52" it is evident and understood by everyone on this forum , atleast we have guys here who have enough knowledge and are not that insane to consider mirages, f-7 or older f-16s to be superior than an aircraft produced way later .even a lay man can answer that. So if you keep repeating on such statements (by this i am not targeting any signal individual but generalizing to everyone who use such statement very often) which are widely known and understood then what will you call it? rationale?

Just surf back the thread and you will observe how many times this statement has been used .This statement would be more useful when you have cluster of modern aircrafts and you want to distinguish jf-17 among them to create awareness among willing people otherwise this statement looks lame to me.

 

[Mani2020]

Mani 2020, below are your answers,


Read the post again, you seem to have mistaken blk 15 with 52

No i have not intermingled b/w both . I know what you were referring to , Dear i am not insane . If you go through my statement again first i used the word block 52 then i went on to add that f-16 block 15 with ~30 years old cant be better than jf-17 produced after ~25 years later even in the eyes of lay man, my this statement was to clarify that the only sophisticated 4 generation fighters we got apart form block 52 and jf-17 was f-16 and there is no reason to consider those old aircrafts to be better than a decades later produced aircraft which creates an obvious fact that jf-17 will be second to block 52, nothing big in that

Which thing is exactly exaggerated in my post can you highlight it?

If you refer to my post and the part you quoted i clearly said the same thing has been repeated over 1000 times and by that i was generalizing it to everyone who used this statement in the past and not solely you . Don't you think braging about same thing time and time again which is so self-explaining is not exaggeration?

And i have also repeated more than a thousand times that jf-17 is NOT meant to be the top notch frontline fighter, as advanced as it may become in future batches, its primary purpose is to replace the obsolete fleet with sole purpose to provide protection to our skies with efficient EW, radar, avioncs and weapons and when required, can also be used for limited strike. As per my info, PAF is inducting j-10 for this very purpose which will fulfil the high end until something new is emerged from China.

Mate i never said that jf-17 was intended to be a top notch but my concern was the other thing ,the statement,refer to my above reply to araz,

Last part is just ridiculous and reflects that you were in a panic mode.

Considering your enemy strong is if panic than sadly i am in panic because i accept and admire the strengths they have and there is not doubt in that , if someone questions about their strength than be assure its out of blind patriotism.

To deal with your enemy you first need to realize its strengths and weakness only then you can exploit

 

[araz]

araz i agree with what you said and i myself know that it is not the right time to upgrade them as our main purpose is to replace the vintage aircrafts , once the replacement is completed then it will be more feasible to upgrade them .

But my problem is why do we always have to say " jf-17 is second only to block 52" it is evident and understood by everyone on this forum , atleast we have guys here who have enough knowledge and are not that insane to consider mirages, f-7 or older f-16s to be superior than an aircraft produced way later .even a lay man can answer that. So if you keep repeating on such statements (by this i am not targeting any signal individual but generalizing to everyone who use such statement very often) which are widely known and understood then what will you call it? rationale?

Just surf back the thread and you will observe how many times this statement has been used .This statement would be more useful when you have cluster of modern aircrafts and you want to distinguish jf-17 among them to create awareness among willing people otherwise this statement looks lame to me.

OK atleast we now know what you are talking about.Now lets take this further. You may also have heard that the PAF pilots prefer MLUED F 16s over Bl 52s mainly because of its handling. We also have heard that the same pilots prefer JFTs over both. Now this is not only because of the roles tha different blocks haveand the subsequent modifications to F16s as a consequence to thatbut also because of the comparative equality of the radars) and EW suite(again emphasize comparative). So to say thatis not wrong. We do have constraints and the plane is still evolving and developing. We have few orno options but to go in the direction tbat we are going and our current struggles even to get some EDA F16s are a testament to it.So yes the situation is not ideal but it cant be bettered at the moment. J10B will take time and JXX EVEN MORE.
araz

 

[Cool_Soldier]

Now a days, Pakistan Army does not want to disclose any progress regrding purchase and achievements.Silently accepting deliveries of AWACS from eurpe and China.Same case in naval regarding Qing Class Subs...and so on...

 

[graphican]

Wng Cdr Rashid.

@Actual Pilots and Informed Species

Is his left-hand on throttle? What do pilots have on their feet then? Both feet seem to have some sorts of paddles. What are those for?

 

[krash]

@Actual Pilots and Informed Species

Is his left-hand on throttle? What do pilots have on their feet then? Both feet seem to have some sorts of paddles. What are those for?

The rudder controls.

PT-04 was re-sent to China for some sort of testing / Integration back in 2011. The original 8 delivered by China were (JF-17 Sr # 101 to 108), dont confuse them with PTs. Prototypes never enter in service for combat purpose. PT-01 to 06 all were made for testing not for raising any combat Sqn.

here is the pic

That is the thing, this one did. It was part of the first squadron or so I'v read on this very forum.

 

[Imran Khan]

Today is !st of August 2012 : we were suppose to start getting our block 2 JF17 but don't have any sign of them. Looks like we won't get them until the end of this year or most probably the next year.........
I guess we dream too much and the outcomes are always the adverse about our efficiencies.........

some body promise with you this date mr.regular ?

 

[gambit]

Is his left-hand on throttle? What do pilots have on their feet then? Both feet seem to have some sorts of paddles. What are those for?

The rudder controls.

And nose wheel steering. The reality is that in flight, the flight control system computer (FLCC) performs all the necessary surface movements for coordinated maneuvers so the pilot really does not have much to do with the rudder controls at all.

 

[abdulbarijan]

And nose wheel steering. The reality is that in flight, the flight control system computer (FLCC) performs all the necessary surface movements for coordinated maneuvers so the pilot really does not have much to do with the rudder controls at all.

Its really nice to see you back sir, I have a simple question, as a pilot sir how do you see the lighter/smaller/ agile fighter jets (Gripen,JFT,LCA) go up against heavy class which is extremely maneuverable (likes of SU-35/30) in WVR fights, in the south asian prespective im talking about the likes of F-7 PG's (Mig-21's), JF-17's etc going up against heavy jets like the Mig-29 and SU-30...

What are the pros and cons of both... Thank you for your time sir....regards

 

[SBD-3]

As long as the recession reigns, the future remains with affordability.

 

[alimobin memon]

Jf17 block is second to block 52+, This is stated by PAF official.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

That is the thing, this one did. It was part of the first squadron or so I'v read on this very forum.

Yes, Our very own Bro TAIMI KHAN use to disagree with us on this matter and he was one of those who believed that PT-04 was serving as a operational bird but he was quite speech less when he saw these pix. you must have read his posts most probably.

 

[razgriz19]

@Actual Pilots and Informed Species

Is his left-hand on throttle? What do pilots have on their feet then? Both feet seem to have some sorts of paddles. What are those for?

rudder when in the air, and the nose wheel steering on the ground.

 

[gambit]

First...Lay of the 'sir' stuff. Am a pretty easy going guy. Very informal. Polite but blunt when necessary. Jeans and open collar over suits. That is why I never rose above stupor-visor rank. I thank you for your respect but no need to go that far.

Its really nice to see you back sir, I have a simple question, as a pilot sir how do you see the lighter/smaller/ agile fighter jets (Gripen,JFT,LCA) go up against heavy class which is extremely maneuverable (likes of SU-35/30) in WVR fights, in the south asian prespective im talking about the likes of F-7 PG's (Mig-21's), JF-17's etc going up against heavy jets like the Mig-29 and SU-30...

What are the pros and cons of both... Thank you for your time sir....regards

I learned from my days in the USAF a long time ago:

In a fight, you win by forcing your opponent to fight under your rules, not by you fighting under his.

Every man has weaknesses. So does every fighter. Whatever advantages that one fighter has over the opponent, each advantage is a rule. This has been proven over and over.

For example, the Zero was superior to most American fighters in maneuverability, thanks to light armor, so the agility advantage is a rule. Zero pilots forced many American pilots to fight under that rule and many American pilots lost.

On the other hand, American fighters have heavier armor and guns and those advantages are rules so if a Zero is shot, maneuverability may not mean much because so many vital flight components are quickly damaged/destroyed. American fighters are heavier so as long as there is sufficient altitude, a dive offers a good escape out of the agility advantage/rule the Zero pilot was trying to imposed upon the fight. But if there is insufficient altitude and a dive is not possible, then the Zero pilot effectively trapped the American fighter under the Zero's rule.

Each man must jockey to position himself where his rules are imposed upon his opponent in the shortest time possible.

4477th Test and Evaluation Squadron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The product of Project Constant Peg, the unit was created to train USAF pilots and weapon systems officers, and USN and USMC Naval Aviators and Naval Flight Officers to better fight the aircraft of the Soviet Union.[1] Some 69 pilots, nicknamed Bandits, served in the squadron between 1979 and 1988, flying MiG-17s, MiG-21s and MiG-23s.

During the Constant Peg program, the MIG-21s flown by American pilots familiar with its advantages/rules taught many American pilots painful lessons to their egos, including pilots who flew the powerful F-14s and F-15s. Many of them lost to the lighter and more agile -21. The Red Eagles instructors often put themselves into inferior positions at the beginning of the fight and turned the tables on their students. Or during the fight they would coach their students on how to maintain the superior positions to defeat the -21.

The point -- which often disappoint many -- is that it is not possible to put two aircrafts side by side with all of their features and say 'This one will win every time.' If we are talking about the Sopwith Camel versus the P-51? Then yes, we can do that. If we are talking about the A-4 versus the F-22? Then yes, we can do that.

The greater the generational gap between the technologies of the opponents, the greater the odds that the one with the superior technology will be able to impose its advantages/rules over its adversary, and do it over a greater range of capabilities. In the old days, it was pilots' eyes and ears as all passive sensors, today it is radar (active), EW antennas (passive) and infrared (passive) as sensors. In the old days, it was drop tanks, today it is drop tanks and air refuel. And the list goes on.

The technological gap between the fighters you listed are not as great as the examples I gave. That mean it falls back upon the war planners and the pilots to exercise their creativity based upon how well do they know theirs and their adversary's hardware. That is why the US invested so much into acquiring foreign fighters like the Constant Peg project. The less you know the less options you can create for yourself and the greater the risk of losses in war. The wise war planner listen to those who operate the hardware and put their lives on the line and who knows the limits of what they can do.