JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[gambit]

hi, why did the spartans prefer lance like spears against the persians despite having swords ?

The Chinese call the spear: The King of Weapons.

In most of ancient combat, the sword is actually a sidearm, like a pistol. It is a weapon of last resort or when the situation made using the spear impractical.

 

[gambit]

The golden era of F-22 carrying only BVRs is already gone. The Americans capitalized on the cluelessness of the rest of the world during the 80s and 90s. The world has woken up since then and now even F-22 is armed with AIM-9X.

Cluelessness about what aspect of BVR scenarios ?

Just because a man has a knife, the odds of him being an experienced or even mildly trained knife fighter is very low. So if someone shows a knife and demand your wallet, what would you do ? Are you going to gamble your life on that very low odds ?

For every keyboard warrior I encountered on the Internet who criticizes the BVR missile and throws at the readers all sorts of math showing the dubious probability of kill ( Pk ) value, not one have dared to fight the knife wielding mugger with his bare hands.

When you present a new weapon or new weapons system that threatens the viability of a defense, people will take notice, and just because they dare not test your threat, that does not mean they are clueless. They are being sensible. And when that threat comes from a tier-one military like the US, common sense and restraints are the norm, even from peer tier-one militaries, allied or adversary.

As a side note about personal combat, there is an old saying: Charge the gun but flee the knife.

That means if the F-22 is equipped with the AIM-9, you better run.

 

[CriticalThought]

Cluelessness about what aspect of BVR scenarios ?

Just because a man has a knife, the odds of him being an experienced or even mildly trained knife fighter is very low. So if someone shows a knife and demand your wallet, what would you do ? Are you going to gamble your life on that very low odds ?

For every keyboard warrior I encountered on the Internet who criticizes the BVR missile and throws at the readers all sorts of math showing the dubious probability of kill ( Pk ) value, not one have dared to fight the knife wielding mugger with his bare hands.

When you present a new weapon or new weapons system that threatens the viability of a defense, people will take notice, and just because they dare not test your threat, that does not mean they are clueless. They are being sensible. And when that threat comes from a tier-one military like the US, common sense and restraints are the norm, even from peer tier-one militaries, allied or adversary.

As a side note about personal combat, there is an old saying: Charge the gun but flee the knife.

That means if the F-22 is equipped with the AIM-9, you better run.

Oh please, more hype-mongering to create a mystique in the minds of readers. This is plain and simple psyops. If an airforce finds itself pitted against F-22, it doesn't mean they should give up and ground their planes.

When I say 'clueless', I specifically mean the complete lack of stealth designs in the world at a time when USA was wielding B-2 Spirits, F-117s, and F-22 was moving ahead with all pomp and flair. The Iraq campaign created an awe in the world's eyes and American supremacy was unchallenged in the air.

The first chink in the armor appeared with the downing of F-117 by the Yugoslavs. I personally think the Russians took that opportunity to closely study American stealth and it's limitations From there they went into silence until all if a sudden they came forward with T-50 and the promise of work on sixth and seventh gen already being started.

By the way, those RAM coatings MUST heat up. And IRST comes standard on Russian fighters these days.

 

[gambit]

Oh please, more hype-mongering to create a mystique in the minds of readers. This is plain and simple psyops. If an airforce finds itself pitted against F-22, it doesn't mean they should give up and ground their planes.

Maybe they should.

When I say 'clueless', I specifically mean the complete lack of stealth designs in the world at a time when USA was wielding B-2 Spirits, F-117s, and F-22 was moving ahead with all pomp and flair. The Iraq campaign created an awe in the world's eyes and American supremacy was unchallenged in the air.

The first chink in the armor appeared with the downing of F-117 by the Yugoslavs. I personally think the Russians took that opportunity to closely study American stealth and it's limitations From there they went into silence until all if a sudden they came forward with T-50 and the promise of work on sixth and seventh gen already being started.

Oh please, not the Serbs again...

Once more, you are not living up to your forum handle.

Wiser heads than you recognized the real reason why that single F-117 was shot down, and it had little to do with radar. In Iraq, the F-117 flew under US rules. In Yugoslavia, the F-117 flew under NATO rules.

Over Yugoslavia, the F-117 was restricted to when and how it could fly its mission. The US never claimed 'stealth' mean invisibility to radar. I have said it many times in this forum over the yrs, that radar sees everything. The real phrase is 'low radar observability'. Nothing 'invisible' about it. So if you want to talk about hype, look at the media, not the Pentagon.

Over Yugoslavia, the F-117 had to use predictable ingress routes and in war, patterns means death. When people extolled Zoltan Dani, they talk as if Lockheed did not know basic radar detection principles and how radar signals behaves on a body. The reality is that Lockheed tested the F-117 under all know radar freqs, including the long wavelengths that would make the F-117 more radar observable. Not completely visible like normal aircraft, just less 'stealthy', to use that word.

So when Zoltan Dani modified his air defense radar to use those longer wavelengths, eventually he will detect something that was predictable. The word 'predictable' implies time, as in he must have detected a repeating echo over days. Then he was confident enough to fire.

Nevertheless, NATO flew over 30,000 sorties over Yugoslavia and lost only two aircrafts: one F-16 and one F-117.

Two kills out of 30,000 incursions of your airspace is not a defense record to boast about at the bar, mate. And did you know that those 30,000 sorties includes 60 of B-2's. If what Dani did to his radar worked so good, why not one B-2 kill ? The B-2 is a much larger aircraft than the F-117, right ?

As for the Russians and the T-50, how is that program coming ?

 

[CriticalThought]

Maybe they should.


Oh please, not the Serbs again...

Once more, you are not living up to your forum handle.

Wiser heads than you recognized the real reason why that single F-117 was shot down, and it had little to do with radar. In Iraq, the F-117 flew under US rules. In Yugoslavia, the F-117 flew under NATO rules.

Over Yugoslavia, the F-117 was restricted to when and how it could fly its mission. The US never claimed 'stealth' mean invisibility to radar. I have said it many times in this forum over the yrs, that radar sees everything. The real phrase is 'low radar observability'. Nothing 'invisible' about it. So if you want to talk about hype, look at the media, not the Pentagon.

Over Yugoslavia, the F-117 had to use predictable ingress routes and in war, patterns means death. When people extolled Zoltan Dani, they talk as if Lockheed did not know basic radar detection principles and how radar signals behaves on a body. The reality is that Lockheed tested the F-117 under all know radar freqs, including the long wavelengths that would make the F-117 more radar observable. Not completely visible like normal aircraft, just less 'stealthy', to use that word.

So when Zoltan Dani modified his air defense radar to use those longer wavelengths, eventually he will detect something that was predictable. The word 'predictable' implies time, as in he must have detected a repeating echo over days. Then he was confident enough to fire.

Nevertheless, NATO flew over 30,000 sorties over Yugoslavia and lost only two aircrafts: one F-16 and one F-117.

Two kills out of 30,000 incursions of your airspace is not a defense record to boast about at the bar, mate. And did you know that those 30,000 sorties includes 60 of B-2's. If what Dani did to his radar worked so good, why not one B-2 kill ? The B-2 is a much larger aircraft than the F-117, right ?

As for the Russians and the T-50, how is that program coming ?

Do you see how in the first sentence you inspire despair by saying 'Maybe the should'? The U.S. played with people's minds the same way in the 80s and 90s. I am not saying LM didn't know the limitations. But the U.S. certainly created that hype. Now you can try to hand wringing about limited flight paths etc., but it takes intellect to face the unknown and find sense out of it. And in the eyes of the rest of the world, that shatters the hype.

I once posted a link to a U.S. defence journal article about that air war. Although you are boasting about 30,000 sorties, the fact of the matter is that most of those sorties were useless. It was costing Western forces so much they were very close to the tipping point of giving up. Had Milosevic just held on to his guns for a bit more, he would have out smarted the Americans. I am too lazy to search for the link again.

And no, they should never. Death, or Glory!!!!

 

[gambit]

Do you see how in the first sentence you inspire despair by saying 'Maybe the should'? The U.S. played with people's minds the same way in the 80s and 90s.

Are morale and psychology not components of any war, or the potential thereof ? You expect anyone -- not just US -- to play fair in that realm ?

Now you can try to hand wringing about limited flight paths etc., but it takes intellect to face the unknown and find sense out of it. And in the eyes of the rest of the world, that shatters the hype.

And it also takes intellect to filter out the facts and truths behind the hype. The facts and truths are undeniable as they are backed up by figures.

By the time of Desert Storm, the F-117 was already well known, not just in appearance but also in operating principles. Plenty of experts, real and pseudo, had their inputs as to the efficacy of 'stealth' under real combat against a large adversary like Iraq and not a small country like Panama. In fact, the F-117 had more mockery and doubts than praise put upon it.

By the time of the air campaign over Yugoslavia, there were no more doubts as to how 'stealth' platforms could function in the context of being part of a larger air force, and in the technical realm, the concept worked. The fact that we lost one F-117 did not -- in the eyes of sober people -- revealed any 'chink' in any armor or exposed any hype. The concept worked once, it worked again, and there is no doubt that it will continue to work.

In wars, there will be losses, so until 'stealth' losses in the next war are noticeable, the concept will continue to be accepted as a credible deterrence. The problem for your criticism is that no one wants to be the next contestant against American 'stealth' platforms because everything they have also had their own hype and untested hype at that.

Although you are boasting about 30,000 sorties, the fact of the matter is that most of those sorties were useless.

This has nothing to do with the efficacy of 'stealth' platforms in actual combat.

Useless about what ? You mean like this...???

That B-2 flew from CONUS to Yugoslavia, dropped its bombs, and returned to CONUS. So what if even most of those 30,000 sorties were useless ? This one was not useless.

Let us take your criticism to the Army. It is estimated that the ratio of combat vs support troops, call 'tooth-to-tail' is...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth-to-tail_ratio

...About 5-6 support per one actual combat troop. It is a generalization but a widely accepted one.

Are you going to tell us that those support troops are useless to the war effort ?

 

[khanasifm]

Please take your off topic discussion to the appropriate thread

 

[CriticalThought]

Are morale and psychology not components of any war, or the potential thereof ? You expect anyone -- not just US -- to play fair in that realm ?


And it also takes intellect to filter out the facts and truths behind the hype. The facts and truths are undeniable as they are backed up by figures.

By the time of Desert Storm, the F-117 was already well known, not just in appearance but also in operating principles. Plenty of experts, real and pseudo, had their inputs as to the efficacy of 'stealth' under real combat against a large adversary like Iraq and not a small country like Panama. In fact, the F-117 had more mockery and doubts than praise put upon it.

By the time of the air campaign over Yugoslavia, there were no more doubts as to how 'stealth' platforms could function in the context of being part of a larger air force, and in the technical realm, the concept worked. The fact that we lost one F-117 did not -- in the eyes of sober people -- revealed any 'chink' in any armor or exposed any hype. The concept worked once, it worked again, and there is no doubt that it will continue to work.

In wars, there will be losses, so until 'stealth' losses in the next war are noticeable, the concept will continue to be accepted as a credible deterrence. The problem for your criticism is that no one wants to be the next contestant against American 'stealth' platforms because everything they have also had their own hype and untested hype at that.


This has nothing to do with the efficacy of 'stealth' platforms in actual combat.

Useless about what ? You mean like this...???

That B-2 flew from CONUS to Yugoslavia, dropped its bombs, and returned to CONUS. So what if even most of those 30,000 sorties were useless ? This one was not useless.

Let us take your criticism to the Army. It is estimated that the ratio of combat vs support troops, call 'tooth-to-tail' is...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth-to-tail_ratio

...About 5-6 support per one actual combat troop. It is a generalization but a widely accepted one.

Are you going to tell us that those support troops are useless to the war effort ?

Right, so people are starting to complain we are off topic. I'll just quickly wipe up the discussion.

When American official, writing in an American journal, accept that the campaign failed to take out enough of Milosevic's power structure quickly enough, they were facing increasing financial costs, and that it was a game of who bats the eye first, then yes, those sorties were pretty much ineffective.

And sober people are likewise seeing through the hubris around F-22/F-35 today. They are potent platforms no doubt, but if push comes to shove, you can go against them and shoot them down, if you know what you are doing. Once that starts happening, American planners actually start doing the cost vs. benefit analysis. Not to mention, if even 3-5 top of the line aircraft are downed, it makes the oil sheikhs jittery about their billions of dollars of investments. It's bad for the business and will quickly make America rethink its priorities.

From this point onward, let's make a thread about 'Beating America in air war 2017' and take the discussion there

 

[ziaulislam]

can we stick to the topic and stop glorifying F 22 and B2
neither are within the cope of this thread and each system cost 10X over or more than the total acquisition of PAF over last 70 years

reality of BVR/WVR is petty simple, each side is going to use BVRs first but probably the will enter WVR very soon given the proximity of the countries especially if one side is leading a strike and other side is doing airdefence

so 2+2 standarad airdefence setup makes sense, may be a 2+4 setup at highten tensions

 

[gambit]

Please take your off topic discussion to the appropriate thread

can we stick to the topic and stop glorifying F 22 and B2

You guys should understand that the American 'stealth' platforms are first and foremost emotional issues. It is extremely rare, not just in this forum, that someone will debate these jets in a truly objective manner. If there is a chance to put a negative spin on these jets, no matter how specious the criticisms, the critic will take that chance. If not objectivity, then it is about distortion of what the US says about these jets, what they have done, and what can they do. It is an emotional investment to the level of how does one feels about one's parents.

 

[ziaulislam]

You guys should understand that the American 'stealth' platforms are first and foremost emotional issues. It is extremely rare, not just in this forum, that someone will debate these jets in a truly objective manner. If there is a chance to put a negative spin on these jets, no matter how specious the criticisms, the critic will take that chance. If not objectivity, then it is about distortion of what the US says about these jets, what they have done, and what can they do. It is an emotional investment to the level of how does one feels about one's parents.

well, every one knows that about USA stealth aircraft capabilities, (not counting kid fans), you just need to learn to ignore the fools

but in perspective of Pakistan air force, the issue are both availability of USA platforms and restrictions, making even if offered f 35 a less than desirable option.

all USA programs had issues with being overly expensive, the f 35 was suppose to address that but probably in my opinion was an overkill, given that there is no longer a threat that cannot be dealt by an upgraded f16, i would have preferred USA just spending more on f22, f16 and f15s rather than f 35, that 400 billion dollars could have been spent elsewhere

i mean think about it, Russia and china are not going to field anything in that number, and Europe didnt need stealth aircraft, f16/f15 could have easily worked out till 2050 while still beating anything out their, arguably the so called not so stealth su 57. J 20 could have easily been dealt by f22, in today scenario USA simply cannot go to war with china and china simply cannot go to war on USA, both know the implications, and china being ruled by rich autocrats means it will never happen

i live in USA and have lived in UK, and i have seen the dismal state of poor health access in rural areas, US state is doing good but the people arent, and hence why Donald trump won the election..Their is a limit to what people can accept

health is simply not affordable to most people here

 

[CriticalThought]

well, every one knows that about USA stealth aircraft capabilities, (not counting kid fans), you just need to learn to ignore the fools

but in perspective of Pakistan air force, the issue are both availability of USA platforms and restrictions, making even if offered f 35 a less than desirable option.

all USA programs had issues with being overly expensive, the f 35 was suppose to address that but probably in my opinion was an overkill, given that there is no longer a threat that cannot be dealt by an upgraded f16, i would have preferred USA just spending more on f22, f16 and f15s rather than f 35, that 400 billion dollars could have been spent elsewhere

i mean think about it, Russia and china are not going to field anything in that number, and Europe didnt need stealth aircraft, f16/f15 could have easily worked out till 2050 while still beating anything out their, arguably the so called not so stealth su 57. J 20 could have easily been dealt by f22, in today scenario USA simply cannot go to war with china and china simply cannot go to war on USA, both know the implications, and china being ruled by rich autocrats means it will never happen

i live in USA and have lived in UK, and i have seen the dismal state of poor health access in rural areas, US state is doing good but the people arent, and hence why Donald trump won the election..Their is a limit to what people can accept

health is simply not affordable to most people here

With the F-35, they are redefining aerial warfare. What you are seeing is the first few pieces of the puzzle falling into place.

 

[Gryphon]

Myanmar signed for 16 JF-17 Block 2 versions worth approximately $560 million in July 2015. On Pakistani television last December, two were seen in the final stages of production at PAC’s Kamra factory. Deliveries are expected to start from second half this year and could replace the venerable Nanchang Q-5 and Chengdu J-7 fighters that China previously supplied to Myanmar.

Compared with standard-production JF-17s for the Pakistan air force, the JF-17M features a different UHF/VHF antenna beneath the nose and LED landing lights on the front undercarriage. Block 2 aircraft possess in-flight refueling capabilities as well as improved avionics and electronics systems.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-06-15/jf-17-myanmar-seen-flying-china

 

[Gryphon]

From 2 year old Jane's article:


ANALYSIS - by IHS Janes
The course charted for the JF-17 now demonstrates an increasing level of independence by the PAF from the aircraft's original Chinese design team at Chengdu, according to analysts of China's defence sector. The JF-17 programme not only has no plans to introduce a Chinese-made engine in place of the RD-93, but Pakistan is also in the process of replacing other Chinese components in favour of alternative options.

Representatives from the different PAC branches state that the China Electronics Technology Corporation (CETC) KJ8602BC radar warning receiver that has been installed in the aircraft up until now will be replaced by a new system produced by Indra in Spain. The Indra system will be retrofitted to existing aircraft, as well as into new-build models coming off the line in Kamra.

An additional conclusion is that Russian concerns expressed in the early stages of the JF-17 programme that providing an engine for the Pakistan fighter would hurt Russian industry's business interests in India seem to no longer be a factor.

 

[Taygibay]

An additional conclusion is that Russian concerns expressed in the early stages of the JF-17 programme that providing an engine for the Pakistan fighter would hurt Russian industry's business interests in India seem to no longer be a factor.

Hey, look at that, Russians can count!!!

Thunder is now being exported stop new engines needed stop sell ours first stop

... or check Pakistan sell something else without gains for Russia? full stop.
​

Good for them Tay.