JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[SQ8]

Chin pylon mostly will be used for pods but if needed assuming mk81/82 type can also be accommodated

Nope
Strictly for TGp

With dual racks the JF-17 can carry 9 missiles/weapons for particular missions..

Max missiles are 6 with dual racks

Max weapons are 9 or 13 free fall depending upon size

 

[MastanKhan]

With dual racks the JF-17 can carry 9 missiles/weapons for particular missions..

Hi,

That is not the point---the emphasis is that the 7 hard points are sufficient for this aircraft in majority of the roles---that this aircraft is designed for---.

 

[The SC]

Hi,

That is not the point---the emphasis is that the 7 hard points are sufficient for this aircraft in majority of the roles---that this aircraft is designed for---.

I agree, I just wanted to point out the other possibility too..which is a fact now that we have seen dual racks are ready..

 

[khanasifm]

Nope
Strictly for TGp


Max missiles are 6 with dual racks

Max weapons are 9 or 13 free fall depending upon size

Currently yes but with dual launcher and if needed on both under wing pylons making 10 max, wingtip plus 4 under each wing

Again needing drop tank sacrifice but If cft is an option as speculated then drops can be sacrificed

At least in theory or for show

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Why don't Pakistan sends 50 planes to Palestinian Authority and base these in Saudi Arabia since Israel is supplying some advance weaponry to India

 

[MastanKhan]

Why don't Pakistan sends 50 planes to Palestinian Authority and base these in Saudi Arabia since Israel is supplying some advance weaponry to India

Hi,

Why the heck do we need to send them to palestinian authority---what are they to us---?

And what will the palestinians do with them---throw them like rocks at the israelis---.

Pakistan cannot fulfill its own needs---it is begging for charity---.

 

[messiach]

FSDT last year on block B has resulted in lightened and strengthened wings. Should be carried forward in future blocks.

With dual racks the JF-17 can carry 9 missiles/weapons for particular missions..

 

[The SC]

FSDT last year on block B has resulted in lightened and strengthened wings. Should be carried forward in future blocks.

Make that 11 missiles if we take into account the wing tips

 

[MastanKhan]

FSDT last year on block B has resulted in lightened and strengthened wings. Should be carried forward in future blocks.

Hi,

Share something about a potent EW package---. Thanks.

 

[ziaulislam]

After this development can we say that now JF17 is at par with J10?
Was it the reason why PAF decling J10 for so long?
Is it still worth buying J10? What's the gap between the two left now?

J-10 will always have a stronger radar, more range, more payload
its all about cost of operation and cost of acquisition. i doubt PAF will go beyond f-16 and thunders. i wounder whether we would even get the full 250 numbers or just run out of money at 150

 

[Thorough Pro]

for the laymen like me what is FSDT?

FSDT last year on block B has resulted in lightened and strengthened wings. Should be carried forward in future blocks.

 

[CriticalThought]

for the laymen like me what is FSDT?

NOTE: I am a layman just like you. But Dr. Google tells me FSDT stands for First order Shear Deformation Theory. It predicts how an object will deform when impacted by shearing forces. They probably applied it to the wings and then selected materials/joining and welding techniques/structural design to reduce the deformation while allowing more load to be carried. Remember JF-17B is said to have a lower wing loading. This is the magic that enabled it. It comes under the general category of structural engineering.

 

[khanasifm]

What it is 9100 kg normal take off weight for single seater vs 9400 kg for dual seater which includes pilot ejecting seat cockpit avionics Etc plus fuel, an increase of just 300 kg means a lot of weight was Reduced via perhaps composites, flyby wire changes etc it would be nice to know empty weight of b model

Anyway great achievement

 

[araz]

Very valid question
If u remember my first post Senior member TaimiKhan highlighted the difference between J10 11HP and JF17
with chin mounted additional HP to make it 9 and I said y shouldn't we go J10C
So I asked for 11 HP simply to deny J10C on capabilities base if thunder also have same number HP, better avionics, better engine, HMD and possible CFT,AESA then it's really a gem and we can openly say no need for block52 or J10C
But in reality more HP means more BVR/WVR carriage to deal with Rafale and SU30MK and perhaps less sorties needed to deal with income intruders

You need to understand what a typical configuration for air to air confrontation is going to be like before you can critically comprehend what the JFT Provides. No one in their right minds is going into an A2A configuration with more missiles than are needed and at best a4BVR+2aWVR plus drop tank is all you are going to need. Once you have offloaded your missiles it will be back to base ASAP. No one is going to stick around in that environment for long. So I dont understand what the infatuation with 11 or 13 Hardpoints is. Please understand that the additional hardpoints are for Pods rather than weapons station. It will be down to pilot ratio, quality of missiles, and faster turn atounds that the next confrontation will be based. The reason IAF is supporting twin engines is to increase the distance from which it can operate rather than bomb trucks plus the larger land mass.
A

 

[CriticalThought]

You need to understand what a typicwl configuration for air to air confrontation is gojng to be like before you can critically comprehend what the JFT Provides. No one in their right minds is going into an A2A configuration with more missiles than are needed and at best a4BVR+2aWVR plus drop tank is all you are going to need. Once you have offloaded your missiles it will be back to base ASAP. No one is going to stick around in that environment for long. So I dont understand whatcthe infatuation with 11 or 13 Hardpoints is. Please understand that the additional hardpoints are for Pods rather than weapons station. It will be down to pilkt ratio, quality of missiles, and fwster turn atounds that the next confrontqtion will be based. The reason IAF is supporting twin engines is to increase the distance from which it can operate rather than bomb trucks.
A

Sir, if you notice, the Russians don't have any single engine fighter - at all. The IAF does have single engine fighters on the other hand. Loiter time and combat radius can be increased through refueling. The twin engines on Russian fighters represent their air warfare doctrine. Imagine SU-35 with integrated AESA and IRST. It wouldn't need a jamming pod. They actually will carry all those missiles. With those twin engines, they can remain nimble and agile with 12 A2A missiles. But Russian tactics involve firing a salvo of missiles at a single target with multiple warheads to maximize the probability of kill. At the same time, all that muscle gives them energy superiority which makes any missile that much more lethal because it will have higher kinetic energy. For WVR, they have a very lethal combination of HOBS+HMD/S and super-maneuverability.

For the Thunder Block 2, BVR with SU-30 can be won if we take advantage of its much bigger size, the radar signature of all those missiles hanging off it, and if we can overcome its radar jamming capabilities to shoot first and kill first. Wvr will be suicidal. HOBS+HMD/S can improve Thunder's chances but a lot would depend on pilot skills as well.

Given all this, J-10 would actually be a disadvantage because of its bigger size. The Thunder's smaller size is a strength and an asset in air 2 air combat. This is something which fanboys on the forum fail to appreciate. Even with all this explanation, a few days later, there will be someone else posing as an innocent cluebie, yet 'authentically' making statements about 11 hard points. It's a cult/gang/mafia out there.