JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[ziaulislam]

i think noone here can compare f-16 and thunder more better than PAF as PAF is the only country who uses both.
Jf-17 is much smaller in size( and size does matter in RCS), DSi and limited use of composites and some ram coaitng at critical points makes the RCS less than block 52 as per PAF sources.

but RCS is not only thing, in ECM thunder lags much behind from the block 52. May be block 2 with better avionics and jammer will be closer but still chinse techn is yet to reach american level.
expect the block3 to be superior and ofcourse the j-10b, simply because its going on testing now and Chinese are fast catching up to the americans

but we have to see the thunder was built to counter indians and much of its fleet which at this moment it does good. In futture if required constant updates can be made

 

[Dazzler]

Without going deep in to my own reasoning about Blk 2 AESA issue. Just two things i would like to say...

1. Among most informative and deep rooted Chinese members having a bunch of insiders are Xinhui, Crobato (vanished?), Huitong and Tphuang. Two of this lot have repeatedly mentioned a customized version of J-10b AESA in blk-2 nose. What my source has told me is the radar is not the KLJ variant though it is an option. There are three different JFT avionic packages available from China as of now varying in some systems, sensors and radar. What we have in blk 1 is an awesome package, very powerful that even basic J-10 (NOT upgraded A that has a similar avionic package and neither the B) lacks. Blk 2 is mostly a mystery despite the Air chief statement. Let it be that way because i love surprises.

 

[Nirvana]

Hello ,

I Would like to Know if there are any updates on JF-17 Semi Stealth Fighter ?

 

[farhan_9909]

Hello ,

I Would like to Know if there are any updates on JF-17 Semi Stealth Fighter ?

there is no semi stealth JFT in making

all are rumours only

may be j2x bt j2x is all together a different program

 

[Luftwaffe]

Qasibr; JF-17's known to have defeated the F-16 in mock combats, hence, more manouverable.

Both are maneuverable platforms, wrong to assume JFT is more maneuverable then F-16, F-16 is the grand daddy.

It's got a smaller Radar Cross-Section. It's going to be integrated with more types of weaponry than the F-16s.

Would be integrated with more weaponry than F-16? F-16 is the front line Fighter with USAF it has been integrated with variety of munitions-weaponry that JFT would take a few more Years, you are wrong here again.

One would imagine that these Indians would have *some* shame, still berating the JF-17 programme while their Tejas continues to be pushed ahead. Every year it gets pushed ahead further and further. You should go and worry about that instead.

Agreed!

 

[TaimiKhan]

Keep the discussion as per the topic, kindly don't bring in comparisons, especially with Indian (Russian) aircraft as that attracts the troll bees and derail the thread.

 

[SQ8]

Your second statement may be result of your personal relations, otherwise what is announced is 250-300 JFT.

Yup.. you are NOT wrong when you say that those numbers were announced, but the staff req was revised based on economic conditions primarily to ensure that the minimum force levels are met.

 

[cw2005]

Without going deep in to my own reasoning about Blk 2 AESA issue. Just two things i would like to say...

1. Among most informative and deep rooted Chinese members having a bunch of insiders are Xinhui, Crobato (vanished?), Huitong and Tphuang. Two of this lot have repeatedly mentioned a customized version of J-10b AESA in blk-2 nose. What my source has told me is the radar is not the KLJ variant though it is an option. There are three different JFT avionic packages available from China as of now varying in some systems, sensors and radar. What we have in blk 1 is an awesome package, very powerful that even basic J-10 (NOT upgraded A that has a similar avionic package and neither the B) lacks. Blk 2 is mostly a mystery despite the Air chief statement. Let it be that way because i love surprises.

I believe PAF is doing the right thing of not to provoke IAF. What PAF need is a defensive air force with adequate deterrence. JFT with its weapon package plus ground and air early warning system serve this purpose well in affordable price. People must realize JFT was designed with PAF's need in mind. Otherwise It could be easily incorporate latest Chinese or other available western technologies into this plane, but that is not what PAF wants.

 

[fatman17]

does anyone have info on KLJ-5 radar?

 

[Qasibr]

Qasibr; Both are maneuverable platforms, wrong to assume JFT is more maneuverable then F-16, F-16 is the grand daddy.

I'll agree that the F-16, esp. earlier blocks, are pretty nimble. But the JFT is known to have defeated it in mock dogfights. Other factors like pilot skills also factor in, but this empirically shows that the JFT can hold it's own. Col. Terrance Fornhof(the same guy who famously disparaged SU-30MKI for, among other things, it's thrust-vectoring manouverability) also mentioned how the F-16's earlier variants made for "one hell of a dogfighter", and talked about this being reduced, in the latter blocks and the modified airframe. Given that the JF-17 can and has managed to beat Block-15, it would not be unreasonable to assume that it can hold it's on if pitted against a Block-52 as well(discussing manouverability here). So I think calling the F-16 the "grand daddy" is overstating it a bit - our JFTs have proven themselves to be no slouch either.

With the JF-17's comparatively smaller and less-weighty airframe, you aren't "throwing around" as many tons of weight in the air when you'returning in and manouvering, and it's understandable why a smaller airframe might be more manouverable than a bigger one. An F-18 is more manouverable than a 737. Thrust-to-weight is also very relevant here, F-16 excels in TWR but we don't know JF-17's TWR for sure. Earlier on, it was reported to be around 0.8, but then the JFT chief designer gave a presentation at Dubai 2011 reporting that JFT's TWR was much higher than previously reported, as well.

People used to question whether the JFT could do vertical climbs in earlier airshows when pilots flew more cautiously. But then at Dubai recently, we saw the aircraft's TWR power when it shot straight up and nearly touched the airshow's ceiling limit within a couple of seconds - something that also elicited praise from the Airshow's western commentators.

Would be integrated with more weaponry than F-16? F-16 is the front line Fighter with USAF it has been integrated with variety of munitions-weaponry that JFT would take a few more Years, you are wrong here again.

My point was about PAF's F-16s. We can integrate more types of weaponry on our JF-17s, than we can on our F-16s. In-fact, we can integrate more types of weaponry, than most countries(that aren't aircraft manufacturers) can. We don't have "source code" issues, electronic locks on every sub-system, or other headaches. What the USAF can or can't do with it's F-16s is not relevant to us.

One would imagine that these Indians would have *some* shame, still berating the JF-17 programme while their Tejas continues to be pushed ahead. Every year it gets pushed ahead further and further. You should go and worry about that instead.

Agreed!

Quiet shameless, aren't they. They've been whining and trolling about the JFT's imminent failure since the very beginning. One would think that the JFT's continued success, and their Tejas' repeated delays would finally shut 'em up.

 

[fjavaid]

It was confirmed by Tami Khan and Nabil bhai that JF-17 Thunder uses limited composites...

Also the difference between the empty weights shown in the zhuhai and Izmir releases is of 300 odd Kg's
In zhuhai it was shown to be 6700 Kg's and in Izmir It was 6411 Kg's.

Also the payload is now mentioned to be 4 tonnes while it was previously reported to be 3.6 and 3.8 tonnes.

As for RCS of JF-17 wasn't it mentioned a zillion times before its the lowest in PAF's fleet,even lower than the block 52 ...
(which BTW is 1.2 m2)....And the biggest reason has also been mentioned a zillion times (i.e DSI intakes that cover the fanblades of the engine)

Since most people are trolling ... well why not I give it a shot

Here is the poor man's viper,the 3rd generation JF-17's intakes

And here is the best jet in the planet that will grace the IAF..
PAK-FA the great..

Looks like the poor man's viper uses a better method to conceal the fanblades than the big bad boy PAK-FA...LOL!!

Very nicely replied....i actualyy enjoyed your answer .....

 

[Crypto]

does anyone have info on KLJ-5 radar?

Not much, just know that it is designated AESA for J-20 and has been undergoing test for a while now with Chinese. There was a rumor that a smaller version of the same type 1475 will be used with J10B

 

[abdulbarijan]

Any body has information on which HMS (helmet mounted sights) we are going to use on JF-17 since the discussion was going JF-17 II vs Block 52 ... with BLK-52 having JHMCS (one of the best HMS's in the world)

And I dont want to jump into conclusions right now ... but is it because we maybe interested in some non chinese HMS's?

 

[Bratva]

Any body has information on which HMS (helmet mounted sights) we are going to use on JF-17 since the discussion was going JF-17 II vs Block 52 ... with BLK-52 having JHMCS (one of the best HMS's in the world)

And I dont want to jump into conclusions right now ... but is it because we maybe interested in some non chinese HMS's?

None. No HMS will be used in Block 2

 

[PakShaheen79]

JFT does not have comparable avionics to F16/52

The APG RADAR on F16/52 has a scanning capacity and range twice that of KLJ7 on mk1 thunder ie 140km for APG & only 70km for KLJ7


The APG69 (3) IS THE BEST mechanical radar & processor in the non PESA NON AESA world

Hence the reason why i challenged you FARHAN.

Advanced F-16 Block 50/52/60

I think the BLOCK 52 is easily the best squdron in tech terms in PAF by a long way

No dear, KLJ-7 in JFT is improved one... check specs from PAC official website:

he KLJ-7 is an X-band airborne fire-control radar (FCR) uses a mechanically-steered slotted array antenna. The KLJ-7 has multiple modes, both beyond-visual-range (BVR) and close-in air-to-air modes, ground surveillance modes and a robust anti-jamming capability. The radar can reportedly manage up to 40 targets, monitor up to 10 of them in track-while-scan (TWS) mode and simultaneously fire on two BVR targets.
Frequency : X-band
A mechanically-steered slotted array antenna
14 Operational Modes
Range more than 100 km
Total targets tracked: 10 in TWS (Track-While-Scan) mode
Reliability:
MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure): 220 hours
MTTR (Mean Time To Recovery): 0.5 hours
Weight less than 120 kg
Composition
Antenna Unit
Receiver Unit
Transmitter Unit
Processor Unit
Power Supply Unit
Auxiliary Transmitter Unit

http://pac.org.pk/elec_KLJ7.html