Imran Khan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2007
- Messages
- 68,815
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]
- Thread starter EagleEyes
- Start date
- Status
Agnostic_Indian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2010
- Messages
- 3,102
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I think probably 2 squadron.
VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,415
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
The shadow of the rudder on the fuselage does not match the position of the sun. Better quality photoshops would look better.
Imran Khan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2007
- Messages
- 68,815
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
38 aircraft operational as of November 2011
Last Hope
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,275
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
38 official. 50 unofficial as the third Squadron is raised some 2 weeks ago.
BlueDot_in_Space
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1,325
- Reaction score
- 0
Has JF17 ever performed slow speed high alfa demo in airshow?
Thunder_Rider
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2012
- Messages
- 105
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
In my Opinion PAF should give 18 JFTs to each Squadron, as in 54 in Total for First batch of Block (1) for 3 Squadrons.
Rajput_Pakistani
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- Messages
- 1,149
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
This post is for all Indians who come here and unnecessarily try to derail the thread. They look more like in a denial phase then to come here for the purpose of gaining knowledge.
Now few points which i have understand they always like to score are:
1. JF-17 is a Chinese product and Pakistan merely has painted it.
2. JF-17 is a 3rd generation plane comparable to MIG-21.
3. Compare JF-17 to LCA.
4. Try to degrade JF-17 weapons and avionics suite.
I have tried to answer it in detail. If you still deny the capabilities of JF-17 then its your choice. If you also consider Chinese avionics inferior to Russian or Western counterparts, its again your choice as well.
First of all the confusion about Aircraft's generation.
Generations are used to classify jet fighters in accordance with the time frames and period of their service. The best definition of fighter generations is in an article published in 2009 by Air Force Magazine, that proposes a generations break down based on capabilities:
Generation 1: Jet propulsion
Generation 2: Swept wings; range-only radar; infrared missiles
Generation 3: Supersonic speed; pulse radar; able to shoot at targets beyond visual range.
Generation 4: Pulse-doppler radar; high maneuverability; look-down, shoot-down missiles.
Generation 4+: High agility; sensor fusion; reduced signatures.
Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise.
Generation 5: All-aspect stealth with internal weapons, extreme agility, full-sensor fusion, integrated avionics, some or full supercruise.
Potential Generation 6: extreme stealth; efficient in all flight regimes (subsonic to multi-Mach); possible “morphing” capability; smart skins; highly networked; extremely sensitive sensors; optionally manned; directed energy weapons.
Now, according to above we can safely place JF-17 in Generation 4 or 4+ category. As the JF-17 is still evolving, it may get AESA Radar in block-3 and use of more composite materials will take it up on the ladder.
Other is about MRCA. Many people often use that word so much without having a clear defination in mind. Here is the defination of MRCA (Multi Role Combat Aircraft) from wikipedia.
"The term has been reserved for aircraft designed with the aim of using a common airframe for multiple tasks where the same basic airframe is adapted to a number of differing roles". Originally the term was used for a common airframe built in a number of different variants for different roles. Multirole has also been applied to one aircraft with both major roles, for example:
a) primary air-to-air combat role
a) secondary role like air-to-surface attack.
More roles can be added, such as air reconnaissance, forward air control, and electronic warfare. Attack missions include the subtypes air interdiction, suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD), and close air support (CAS)
So here again JF-17 is a true multirole fighter capable of taking on different roles.
PAF previously have 3 kind of aircrafts in its inventory each with separate designated role.
A-5: CAS
Mirage: Air Defense, Reconnaissance, Anti-Ship, CAS
F-7: Point Air defense, Interdiction
In PAF, the basic idea of JF-17 (in early 90's) was to replace fleet of older Mirage, A-5 and F-7. A single aircraft in comparison to multiple aircrafts offer low cost, easy maintenance and lots of other benefits too. It was a joint venture with China, where Pakistan is a 50:50 partner investment wise. During its design and development phase Pakistan's input was valuable. PAF also contributed in design of JF-17. From start JF-17 was conceived to be flexible design, which can incorporate different technologies as they develop in future. Recent history prove it, that JF-17 lives upto its promises. Ten years ago, Pakistan didn't have ALCM like RAAD nor have SOW H2 & H4. China did not have a AMRAAM like SD-10 nor KLJ-7 was developed. Pakistan did not have at that time an AWACS nor China has developed any AEW at that time. CM-400AKG was not even conceived. What JF-17 is today was a dream 10 years ago. It continues to amaze the critics with its excellent flexibility, a true MRCA no doubt.
JF-17 in current roles:
SEAD/DEAD:JF-17 with MAR-1 & YJ-91 anti-radiation missiles
Air combat: SD-10A BVR AMRAAM, PL-5E WVRAAM
Strategic Strike: RAAD ALCM
Precision Strike: LS-6 Satellite Guided Bombs, H2,H4 SOW, HAFR1, HAFR2 Runway Penetration Bomb
Maritime Strike Role: C-802A anti-ship missile, CM-400AKG Hypersonic missile for anti-ship & ground attack
Avionics Package:
JF-17 Avionics Architecture is supported by two mission computers based on Multi-Bus System (MIL-STD-1553B). The heart of the system is a 32-bit Weapon and Mission management Computer (WMMC) which performs mission computations, flight management, reconfiguration / redundancy management and in-flight system self-test.
The Block-1 is equipped with advanced KLJ-7 multi-track, 14 modes, pulse Doppler radar for air to air, air to surface attack capabilities. Accurate navigation and guidance is realized through hybrid technology using Ring Laser Gyros (RLG) based Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Global Positioning System (GPS). Independent Data link with 2 Independent Wide-Band Radios will take care of communication even during intense EW environment . EW suite comprises of Self Production Jammer (SPJ), Missile Approach Warning System (MAWS), Radar Warning Receiver (RWR), Chaff & Flare Dispenser (CFD). Laser Designator and Targeting Pod (LDTP) is for target illumination and detection with day/ night capabilities.
Glass cockpit uses Smart Multifunction Color Display (SMFCD) and Smart Heads-Up Display (SHUD) with built in symbol generation capability to optimize integrated architecture. ICP and HOTAS arrangement. Identification of Friend and foe (IFF) implements Secure mode for EW environment. Target verification is with onboard IFF interrogator for BVR missile firing.
Now gentlemen, what is there which remotely show that JF-17 is an inferior plane? I even goes on to say that even JF-17 was not conceived initially to take on planes like SU-30, but in current scenario it can take on SU-30. People here try to highlight KLJ-7 radar's detection range of 105KM for 5m^2 RCS. First of all SU-30's RCS is more then 15m^2. SD-10A will not discriminate either between SU-30 or MIG-21. Ok for a moment, forget about KLJ-7 radar. What about JF-17 data link to AWACS? Wouldn't Pakistan current AWACS (Swedish & Chinese) detect SU-30 350kms away?? Rest of the story everyone can guess.
Hopefully, Indians will not come up with cooked up theories against JF-17 again.
Now few points which i have understand they always like to score are:
1. JF-17 is a Chinese product and Pakistan merely has painted it.
2. JF-17 is a 3rd generation plane comparable to MIG-21.
3. Compare JF-17 to LCA.
4. Try to degrade JF-17 weapons and avionics suite.
I have tried to answer it in detail. If you still deny the capabilities of JF-17 then its your choice. If you also consider Chinese avionics inferior to Russian or Western counterparts, its again your choice as well.
First of all the confusion about Aircraft's generation.
Generations are used to classify jet fighters in accordance with the time frames and period of their service. The best definition of fighter generations is in an article published in 2009 by Air Force Magazine, that proposes a generations break down based on capabilities:
Generation 1: Jet propulsion
Generation 2: Swept wings; range-only radar; infrared missiles
Generation 3: Supersonic speed; pulse radar; able to shoot at targets beyond visual range.
Generation 4: Pulse-doppler radar; high maneuverability; look-down, shoot-down missiles.
Generation 4+: High agility; sensor fusion; reduced signatures.
Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise.
Generation 5: All-aspect stealth with internal weapons, extreme agility, full-sensor fusion, integrated avionics, some or full supercruise.
Potential Generation 6: extreme stealth; efficient in all flight regimes (subsonic to multi-Mach); possible “morphing” capability; smart skins; highly networked; extremely sensitive sensors; optionally manned; directed energy weapons.
Now, according to above we can safely place JF-17 in Generation 4 or 4+ category. As the JF-17 is still evolving, it may get AESA Radar in block-3 and use of more composite materials will take it up on the ladder.
Other is about MRCA. Many people often use that word so much without having a clear defination in mind. Here is the defination of MRCA (Multi Role Combat Aircraft) from wikipedia.
"The term has been reserved for aircraft designed with the aim of using a common airframe for multiple tasks where the same basic airframe is adapted to a number of differing roles". Originally the term was used for a common airframe built in a number of different variants for different roles. Multirole has also been applied to one aircraft with both major roles, for example:
a) primary air-to-air combat role
a) secondary role like air-to-surface attack.
More roles can be added, such as air reconnaissance, forward air control, and electronic warfare. Attack missions include the subtypes air interdiction, suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD), and close air support (CAS)
So here again JF-17 is a true multirole fighter capable of taking on different roles.
PAF previously have 3 kind of aircrafts in its inventory each with separate designated role.
A-5: CAS
Mirage: Air Defense, Reconnaissance, Anti-Ship, CAS
F-7: Point Air defense, Interdiction
In PAF, the basic idea of JF-17 (in early 90's) was to replace fleet of older Mirage, A-5 and F-7. A single aircraft in comparison to multiple aircrafts offer low cost, easy maintenance and lots of other benefits too. It was a joint venture with China, where Pakistan is a 50:50 partner investment wise. During its design and development phase Pakistan's input was valuable. PAF also contributed in design of JF-17. From start JF-17 was conceived to be flexible design, which can incorporate different technologies as they develop in future. Recent history prove it, that JF-17 lives upto its promises. Ten years ago, Pakistan didn't have ALCM like RAAD nor have SOW H2 & H4. China did not have a AMRAAM like SD-10 nor KLJ-7 was developed. Pakistan did not have at that time an AWACS nor China has developed any AEW at that time. CM-400AKG was not even conceived. What JF-17 is today was a dream 10 years ago. It continues to amaze the critics with its excellent flexibility, a true MRCA no doubt.
JF-17 in current roles:
SEAD/DEAD:JF-17 with MAR-1 & YJ-91 anti-radiation missiles
Air combat: SD-10A BVR AMRAAM, PL-5E WVRAAM
Strategic Strike: RAAD ALCM
Precision Strike: LS-6 Satellite Guided Bombs, H2,H4 SOW, HAFR1, HAFR2 Runway Penetration Bomb
Maritime Strike Role: C-802A anti-ship missile, CM-400AKG Hypersonic missile for anti-ship & ground attack
Avionics Package:
JF-17 Avionics Architecture is supported by two mission computers based on Multi-Bus System (MIL-STD-1553B). The heart of the system is a 32-bit Weapon and Mission management Computer (WMMC) which performs mission computations, flight management, reconfiguration / redundancy management and in-flight system self-test.
The Block-1 is equipped with advanced KLJ-7 multi-track, 14 modes, pulse Doppler radar for air to air, air to surface attack capabilities. Accurate navigation and guidance is realized through hybrid technology using Ring Laser Gyros (RLG) based Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Global Positioning System (GPS). Independent Data link with 2 Independent Wide-Band Radios will take care of communication even during intense EW environment . EW suite comprises of Self Production Jammer (SPJ), Missile Approach Warning System (MAWS), Radar Warning Receiver (RWR), Chaff & Flare Dispenser (CFD). Laser Designator and Targeting Pod (LDTP) is for target illumination and detection with day/ night capabilities.
Glass cockpit uses Smart Multifunction Color Display (SMFCD) and Smart Heads-Up Display (SHUD) with built in symbol generation capability to optimize integrated architecture. ICP and HOTAS arrangement. Identification of Friend and foe (IFF) implements Secure mode for EW environment. Target verification is with onboard IFF interrogator for BVR missile firing.
Now gentlemen, what is there which remotely show that JF-17 is an inferior plane? I even goes on to say that even JF-17 was not conceived initially to take on planes like SU-30, but in current scenario it can take on SU-30. People here try to highlight KLJ-7 radar's detection range of 105KM for 5m^2 RCS. First of all SU-30's RCS is more then 15m^2. SD-10A will not discriminate either between SU-30 or MIG-21. Ok for a moment, forget about KLJ-7 radar. What about JF-17 data link to AWACS? Wouldn't Pakistan current AWACS (Swedish & Chinese) detect SU-30 350kms away?? Rest of the story everyone can guess.
Hopefully, Indians will not come up with cooked up theories against JF-17 again.
Thunder_Rider
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2012
- Messages
- 105
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Salute Sir Rajput_Pakistani,
You have cracked all the Bugs created by Endians
You have cracked all the Bugs created by Endians
VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,415
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
To be honest, please also do mention those with an equal but opposite jingoistic agenda, quite often tainted with a "ramrod" arrogance, that ruins the impression other excellent Pakistani posters make.
To be honest, please also do mention those with an equal but opposite jingoistic agenda, quite often tainted with a "ramrod" arrogance, that ruins the impression other excellent Pakistani posters make.
cant forget those either.. but then again.. it takes a spark to light a fire..
Which brings us to an interesting what-if.. if the JF-17 had been equipped with the F-100..Just occurred to me...that would be one mean dogfight machine.. since the Thunder does best the Viper in the horizontal already.
VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,415
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
A better engine such as the F-100 would make the JF-17 airframe sparkle in performance, for sure. I have agreed many times before that what the plane needs is more power, as shown clearly by the flying displays. Without this improvement, the JF-17 will always fall short of its true potential.
araz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 9,291
- Reaction score
- 81
Fully agreed. The realities however forces one to take a more pragmatic approach. We have been stung badly in the past. Do we let go of our noodles and go for another embargo prone engine. Heck even the french held onto our Mirages in 2002, and need I say more after the lynx episode about the British. The chinese are struggling and will continue to do so for 3--5 yrs. Where do we go? We made the only choice that we could piggy backing on the chinese economic might. The game might change once the chinese work out the chinks in their engines. The russians would be forced to compete and might bring out an uprated engine in competition. What does PAF do then?I suspect we will be entering that phase in 3--5 yrs
Araz
- Status
Similar threads
