JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[Wet Shirt Contest]

Two SU-30's loaded with 10 bvr's each.....find two JF-17's on the other end. The locks are made and bvr's away. JFT's fire two BVR's per SU-30, getting a hit on both. SU-30's also fire bvr's (how many??? 10 for each JFT?) and take down the JFT's. Let's do the math who took a cost hit ten times more than the other????
In Indo-Pak's scenario, the 300-400 KM radar is ONLY sufficient if it used for AEW purposes. Outside of that, all 4th gen planes will see each other and can lock onto each other at relatively the same time. The missile - bomb truck concept of SU-30 isn't applicable here due to the short distance between airbases around the border in India and Pakistan's case.

The scenario above was on the offense. But defensively, the same two SU-30's can provide CAP and can probably target 10-20 incoming boggies. But that's defensive. Due to this, the other side is focusing more on precision, rocket powered and missile based munitions so they can launch them from 50-100 km away and not having to directly make contact with the defensive SU-30 team.

Element of surprise is not there. both sides can detect incoming but No sane pilot fire's BVR salvos at Max range (70-90km) for various reasons (Not simple as you mentioned Lock & shoot). Modern Air battle are complex in nature, Self protection jamming plays important role, Jf17 Small size comes with own set of limitations, it cannot carry powerful subsystems for self protection & survivability. i'll leave Su30mki out since it's not the appropriate thread!

I suggest you to do research on IAF/RaF BVR doctrine. you will get your answers.

 

[raazh]

I am not sure if being able to carry 10BVR missile is a plus or a minus in a real BVR engagement where one does not have complete air superiority. When we give examples of Western air forces and their experience we should also note that almost all of the recent campaigns they fought in, they had complete air superiority of the enemy skies. In such a scenario you can load as much as you can because you are not expected to come across enemy BVR/WVR fighter challenge. AN IDEAL SCENARIO!

Now in a hypothetical BVR engagement (JF17 + 2 BVR vs Su30 8~10 BVR) the real question will be that who will be able to evade an incoming BVR missile better. Will it be a small JF17 with 1BVR or will it be a big Su30 with 7~9BVR load left ???

With both sides having AWACs and 24 hr capability to see 100-200KM into enemy territory; any mass scale invasion type adventure is impossible without getting blown into a full scale war. That leaves room for small skirmishes where a quick lock, fire and disengage sortie is more than likely to happen. I reckon Jf17 is an ideal platform for Pakistan and rightly fulfills all our needs of a low cost multirole work horse duty.

Having said that, I believe Su30 satisfies India's requirements more appropriately as they have more area to defend. However in any BVR engagement I do not think a 10 BVR loaded Su30 is having more advantage. A more appropriate load will be 2~4 max BVR with 2~WVR. And if this is not enough to take out your enemy, then you need to disengage and return home asap.

If any body thinks that having more BVR will win you all engagements than the best Aircraft will be a commercial Jet .. 777 loaded with 20~30 BVR's, plenty of ELINT, AWEC, Counter measure equipment and enough fuel to do cross-continental sorties :p

 

[araz]

I am not sure if being able to carry 10BVR missile is a plus or a minus in a real BVR engagement where one does not have complete air superiority. When we give examples of Western air forces and their experience we should also note that almost all of the recent campaigns they fought in, they had complete air superiority of the enemy skies. In such a scenario you can load as much as you can because you are not expected to come across enemy BVR/WVR fighter challenge. AN IDEAL SCENARIO!

Now in a hypothetical BVR engagement (JF17 + 2 BVR vs Su30 8~10 BVR) the real question will be that who will be able to evade an incoming BVR missile better. Will it be a small JF17 with 1BVR or will it be a big Su30 with 7~9BVR load left ???

With both sides having AWACs and 24 hr capability to see 100-200KM into enemy territory; any mass scale invasion type adventure is impossible without getting blown into a full scale war. That leaves room for small skirmishes where a quick lock, fire and disengage sortie is more than likely to happen. I reckon Jf17 is an ideal platform for Pakistan and rightly fulfills all our needs of a low cost multirole work horse duty.

Having said that, I believe Su30 satisfies India's requirements more appropriately as they have more area to defend. However in any BVR engagement I do not think a 10 BVR loaded Su30 is having more advantage. A more appropriate load will be 2~4 max BVR with 2~WVR. And if this is not enough to take out your enemy, then you need to disengage and return home asap.
If any body thinks that having more BVR will win you all engagements than the best Aircraft will be a commercial Jet .. 777 loaded with 20~30 BVR's, plenty of ELINT, AWEC, Counter measure equipment and enough fuel to do cross-continental sorties :p

I would just like to add to this good post that during one of the shows last year the EF Typhoon flew with a full load to do a demonstration of its capabilities. What people realized was that from being a really maneouverable plane it virtually turned into a brick on account of the load it was carrying. The MKI is a beautiful plane but you cant take away the utility of the JFT especially in the Indo Pak theatre of war.
Araz

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

 

[araz]

Sir you are talking about Engine Technology here and No country in this world is going to give you that technology if needed you yourself will have to earn this technology by investing in your R&D their is no shortcut in this Tech....India and China both has realised that.....Damm you can't fly your own jets without Russian or American Engine....

Fully agreed. you dont ever want to sell the goose that lays golden eggs. However I was responding tk a post explaining precisely that. At the moment it is not in our interest to embark on research in this sphere. The better thing might be to acquire overhaul and repair/ rebuild facilities from russia for RD93 which was what I was hinthing at.
Araz

 

[Bossman]

The days of close dogfights are gone. It is the BVR era now. Longer reach wins.

I understand BVR but if days of dog fights are over then why the whole world is still producing and deploying WVR AAMs? Also what is the successful hit ratio of BVRs especially those of Russian origin?

 

[Storm Force]

Nothing WRONG WITH argument bossman

Silly argument, a big heavily loaded plane just makes for a bigger target for AMRAAMS or SD 10s fired from small and nimble F16s or JF17s.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-...ole-fighter-thread-4-a-681.html#ixzz2RVEQCw1M

IF ALL YOU WANT IS TO DENY YOUR ENEMY AIR SUPREMACY OVER YOUR AIR SPACE...

However IF YOUR MILITARY DOCTRINE calls for PRE EMPTIVE air strike, Air dominance over battlefield AND ability to STRIKE DEEP into opponents key military facilities OR to support your outnumbered NAVY out at SEA

THEN A TRUE MULTI ROLE meduim or heavy FIGHTER is the best solution.

 

[sancho]

In Indo-Pak's scenario, the 300-400 KM radar is ONLY sufficient if it used for AEW purposes. Outside of that, all 4th gen planes will see each other and can lock onto each other at relatively the same time.

Which doesn't make sense, since it's not like these fighters are always flying head on to each other to detect themselfs and the simple fact that youself show the importance of AEW, should make you understand how important long range detection is, even in this close proximity!

Having a better view over the battlefield, always gives you advantages, that's why long range fighter radars were important, why AWACS are today and why passive sensors are getting more importance now for the future.

I would just like to add to this good post that during one of the shows last year the EF Typhoon flew with a full load to do a demonstration of its capabilities. What people realized was that from being a really maneouverable plane it virtually turned into a brick on account of the load it was carrying. The MKI is a beautiful plane but you cant take away the utility of the JFT especially in the Indo Pak theatre of war.
Araz

That actually might had less to do with the full missile load, but with the 3 x 1000l fuel tanks that it usuall carries with such loads. However, the EF with such a load still belongs to the most maneuverable fighters in the world. The manouvers it did in Farnborough, fully loaded with 4 x 1000lb LGBs, fuel tanks and AAMs were impressing!

 

[Argus Panoptes]

I understand BVR but if days of dog fights are over then why the whole world is still producing and deploying WVR AAMs? Also what is the successful hit ratio of BVRs especially those of Russian origin?

There is a need for a mix of weapons, both WVR and BVR, but longer range BVRs will rule the future skies. That I know, but I do not know about hit ratios of Russian BVR missiles.

 

[Bossman]

There is a need for a mix of weapons, both WVR and BVR, but longer range BVRs will rule the future skies. That I know, but I do not know about hit ratios of Russian BVR missiles.

It will follow the same rule as Infantry, there will still be a need for close combat under certain circumstances. Low hit ratio for BVRs makes it inevitable.

 

[Viper0011.]

Which doesn't make sense, since it's not like these fighters are always flying head on to each other to detect themselfs and the simple fact that youself show the importance of AEW, should make you understand how important long range detection is, even in this close proximity!

As always, you guys butcher an argument!! Re-read my post and try to understand what I said. I wasn't talking about 'detection' or 'AEW'. Of course early detection or AEW is super important. I was talking about a conflict and combat. Not peace time where the SU-30's can fly at the end of the border, see a JFT, wave hands at each other and exchange birds and gestures!!

 

[Viper0011.]

Element of surprise is not there. both sides can detect incoming but No sane pilot fire's BVR salvos at Max range (70-90km) for various reasons (Not simple as you mentioned Lock & shoot). Modern Air battle are complex in nature, Self protection jamming plays important role, Jf17 Small size comes with own set of limitations, it cannot carry powerful subsystems for self protection & survivability. i'll leave Su30mki out since it's not the appropriate thread!

I suggest you to do research on IAF/RaF BVR doctrine. you will get your answers.

OK, so thank you for understanding the element of surprise isn't there. That's a topic that your fellow countrymen drag and try to act like it doesn't exist.
Next, yes, you are ALSO correct in that SU-30 can carry larger jamming systems, etc. But realize that for a modern fire-forget bvr.....dodging a missile also means it'll e-acquire a lock unless it explodes its warhead on a defensive target chaffs, flares, etc. Otherwise, if the missile has range and fuel, it'll come back. So in which case, what's easy to reacquire from an RCS's standpoint? A small Horse or an Elephant? Next, in dog fights, what's easy to maneuver.....a small plane or a larger twin turbine jet?
Why do you think Mig-21 and F-16's have always been considered two of the hardest to beat dog fighters in their basic configuration? Because both are small and agile.

I am not trying to project JFT or SU-30's superiority. I am taking both of them into account in combat, SU-30 in offense and JFT in a defensive role. Elsewhere, it will be an entirely different scenario and SU-30 will have an upper hand but in Indo-Pak's scenario, your best strength (in peace if that ever happens) is also your weakest link (such close proximity).

So in this case, SU-30's capabilities are marginalized by your distance. And, it doesn't matter what the bvr doctrine is. That's just focuses on pilot training and engagements. Proximity is just a reality and plays a role. A doctrine can't change the fact that both planes will see each other at the same time, irrespective of one have 200 km extra range.

Second, the doctrine also can't control the fact that the lock ons and missiles away will happen virtually at the same time. I'd be saying the SAME thing if Pakistan had SU-30's and India had JFT's. So my post shouldn't be considered 'anti India' or 'anti Pakistan'. I just speak the truth and if it hurts at times, too bad!

 

[Storm Force]

Indo pak war theatre is not small-scale or just on the border. That attitude exists in the jf17 mindset ie small low cost.agile dog fighter only. Almost t
identical to oaf mig21 doctrine. It's too limited in operat
ional flexbility whe n you have massive borders massive sea lanes and a mindset to hit hard and hit deep. Paf has a different doctrine to likes of India China saudi who operate much larger platforms.

 

[Gentelman]

There is a need for a mix of weapons, both WVR and BVR, but longer range BVRs will rule the future skies. That I know, but I do not know about hit ratios of Russian BVR missiles.

BVRs would remain decoration pieces in all air forces because of their hit ratio for atleast 2020+……
just a stupid pilot can take a hit from BVR or a UAV……
most hit ratios even after BVRs induction are of WVRs……
BVRs mainly used to disperse the enemy fighters and then engage in dogfight then……
most BVR kills are of US in Iraq and i don't need to explain Vietnam and Iraqi pilots training……
situation about Vietnam changed when their pilots learned BVR tactics in favour of Vietnam in 1967…
same goes for serbia……
well counter tactics of BVR are now too priority of PAF……

 

[Argus Panoptes]

BVRs would remain decoration pieces in all air forces because of their hit ratio for atleast 2020+……
just a stupid pilot can take a hit from BVR or a UAV……
most hit ratios even after BVRs induction are of WVRs……
BVRs mainly used to disperse the enemy fighters and then engage in dogfight then……
most BVR kills are of US in Iraq and i don't need to explain Vietnam and Iraqi pilots training……
situation about Vietnam changed when their pilots learned BVR tactics in favour of Vietnam in 1967…
same goes for serbia……
well counter tactics of BVR are now too priority of PAF……

It is obvious you know more about missiles than I do, so I will take your opinion as correct, Sir.