JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[LKJ86]

i think what members are saying is that j10 is not a fighter bomber like what they perceive Pakistan needs

 

[Akh1112]

How much time frame you see for these predicted 90 to 150 numbers ?

These will totally CBU or some locally assembly in future to fod later numbers

AFAIK they should be assembled in China, we have no spare capacity. As per timeframes, i dont have a sold number on J-10 production per year. We could see anywhere up to 5 years i am guessing based off of the rough number i do have. However theres a few missing pieces which could mean they could be ready sooner than we think

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

I guess I have to write it everytime and I missed it---. The missile in question is the CM400 AKG.

See what most are missing are the primary flight qualities---that neither the J10 offers & nor the JF17---the sea skimming capabilities that the JH7A is capable of.

The J10 at + 50 mil a piece---the JF17 at 30 Mil + a piece---the JH7A at about 10-15 mil a piece.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

i think what members are saying is that j10 is not a fighter bomber like what they perceive Pakistan needs
i still believe PAF will wait for this admin to see if it gets f16s otherwise it will order j10s

personally i would have wish we focus on jf-17 & throw some money into j-31

multirole jets are most common in all over air forces all over the world, fighter bombers is becoming obsolete idea, how many air forces of the world uses fighter bombers in their arsenals, i think only , Russia and China have it

 

[LKJ86]

the sea skimming capabilities that the JH7A is capable of.

JH-7 was a PLAN-led project.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Hi,

I guess I have to write it everytime and I missed it---. The missile in question is the CM400 AKG.

See what most are missing are the primary flight qualities---that neither the J10 offers & nor the JF17---the sea skimming capabilities that the JH7A is capable of.

The J10 at + 50 mil a piece---the JF17 at 30 Mil + a piece---the JH7A at about 10-15 mil a piece.

JH is not coming to PAF, fighter bombers is an obsolete, idea, only price is cheap, nothing as comparable to modern strike jets like F-15E/Su-34/J-16

 

[Deino]

Hi,

I guess I have to write it everytime and I missed it---. The missile in question is the CM400 AKG.

See what most are missing are the primary flight qualities---that neither the J10 offers & nor the JF17---the sea skimming capabilities that the JH7A is capable of.

The J10 at + 50 mil a piece---the JF17 at 30 Mil + a piece---the JH7A at about 10-15 mil a piece.

Would be interesting, where this price for the JH-7A is from and even more if this is not the old one ... but again, it is long out of production so that that any such considerations are fruitless.

 

[baqai]

JH is not coming to PAF, fighter bombers is an obsolete, idea, only price is cheap, nothing as comparable to modern strike jets like F-15E/Su-34/J-16

you kind of contradict yourself? Strike Aircraft is just a modern term coined for Fighter Bomber, secondly dedicated strike aircraft is still not obsolete thus still being operated by all major airforces.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

you kind of contradict yourself? Strike Aircraft is just a modern term coined for Fighter Bomber, secondly dedicated strike aircraft is still not obsolete thus still being operated by all major airforces.

For Example???

 

[ziaulislam]

you kind of contradict yourself? Strike Aircraft is just a modern term coined for Fighter Bomber, secondly dedicated strike aircraft is still not obsolete thus still being operated by all major airforces.

Major..is PAF a major airforce
Does PAF needs more airdefence air superiority fighters which can defend against IAF supreme numbers but can do strike as well(multi role) or would it beneficial from fighter bomb/ strike alone jets.
Second when does it need it ? Now ? 2030?
If it opts for multirole ..is jf17 enough or will it go for larger j10

 

[Amaa'n]

Just to remind everyone here, thread is about JFT 17 not PAF doctrine and new aircraft...please stick to the topic

 

[MastanKhan]

JH is not coming to PAF, fighter bombers is an obsolete, idea, only price is cheap, nothing as comparable to modern strike jets like F-15E/Su-34/J-16

Hi,

When you say that---it shows that you do not know much about the subject matter. None of those three that you mentioned have the capability of what the JH7A can do.

It also showed me---you paid no attention to the content of the post---.

multirole jets are most common in all over air forces all over the world, fighter bombers is becoming obsolete idea, how many air forces of the world uses fighter bombers in their arsenals, i think only , Russia and China have it

Hi

All air forces use fighter bombers---F16 users, grippen user, su35 users, m2k users, jf17 users---.

All fighter aircraft are bomber aircrafts as well.

An F16 has more load carrying capacity than a B57 bomber

( Bombs:

• 4,500 lb (2,000 kg) in bomb bay, including nuclear bombs
• 2,800 lb (1,300 kg) on four external hardpoints, including unguided rockets ).

An air force inducts aircraft based on function and utility---. Paf is an over and fighting air force---. It has never seriously considered being an air force operating over water full time.

So the aircraft that the Paf has are all designed for land strikes and over land air to air combat---.

Over the water combat is not even a secondary consideration for the Paf.

Now the Mirages do the job---but they cannot fly far out---and their flight time is short.

What pakistan needs is an aircraft that can be modified for air to air refueling that can fly out and stay afloat for awhile to guard the frontier from about 300 miles away from the shore line so that its heavy anti ship missiles can keep the enemy farther away---.

 

[Deino]

Hi,

When you say that---it shows that you do not know much about the subject matter. None of those three that you mentioned have the capability of what the JH7A can do.

It also showed me---you paid no attention to the content of the post---.

Oh come on ... you must be obsessed to the JH-7A.

Yes, it is - NO, in fact it WAS - a great type of its days, but all these constantly bringing the JH-7 even off-topic back on the agenda shows me "you paid no attention to the content of the post" and also not to the facts, and fact is the JH-7A is regardless you want out of reach for the PAF and it is off topic here.

 

[PakFactor]

JH is not coming to PAF, fighter bombers is an obsolete, idea, only price is cheap, nothing as comparable to modern strike jets like F-15E/Su-34/J-16

Its not an obsolete idea it’s a force multiple a cheap and cost effective JH could pose a serious threat to surface vessels and land targets. It will be accompanied by fighter force and focus on that while the fighter bomber completes its role.

The Night Hawk and B-2 plays this role for the US but not all nations can develop or purchase this. In my opinion the F-18 plays an excellent fighter bomber role.

 

[FuturePAF]

Hi,

When you say that---it shows that you do not know much about the subject matter. None of those three that you mentioned have the capability of what the JH7A can do.

It also showed me---you paid no attention to the content of the post---.


Hi

All air forces use fighter bombers---F16 users, grippen user, su35 users, m2k users, jf17 users---.

All fighter aircraft are bomber aircrafts as well.

An F16 has more load carrying capacity than a B57 bomber

( Bombs:

• 4,500 lb (2,000 kg) in bomb bay, including nuclear bombs
• 2,800 lb (1,300 kg) on four external hardpoints, including unguided rockets ).

An air force inducts aircraft based on function and utility---. Paf is an over and fighting air force---. It has never seriously considered being an air force operating over water full time.

So the aircraft that the Paf has are all designed for land strikes and over land air to air combat---.

Over the water combat is not even a secondary consideration for the Paf.

Now the Mirages do the job---but they cannot fly far out---and their flight time is short.

What pakistan needs is an aircraft that can be modified for air to air refueling that can fly out and stay afloat for awhile to guard the frontier from about 300 miles away from the shore line so that its heavy anti ship missiles can keep the enemy farther away---.

Having agreed with you in the past on the expansion of the doctrine, wouldn’t the J-31 be a better platform to pursue for the Navy.

Common engine with the JF-17 being one reason, the emphasis on signature reduction means the aircraft can get in closer to the enemy so that a smaller missile (preferably carried internally) could do the same job required of a larger missile on a JH-7, reducing the need to carry as much in tonnage of ordnance.

Also by releasing closer to the target, the probability of an effective hit increases.; especially if a more modern smart munition like the Turkish SOM were employed. A platform like the J-31 could also have a self protection (A2A) capability, depending on the load out.

Yes the costs upfront would definitely be higher, but the experience gained could help refine our indigenous 5th Gen. fighter program. It would also be a psychological one upsmenship on the enemy, as the first country to introduce a 5th generation platform into the region. Coupled with its employment by the navy, and it could be a considerable threat to not only the Indian ships contemplating a blockade of the Pakistani coast in the event of a war, but also be able to deal with the fighters that would be carried on the Indian carriers of that task force, adding a layer of defense to the Pakistani navy from air attack.

Upon reflection, couldn’t the JH-7 end up costing nearly as much (due to maintenance costs of much older air frames) as the J-31 for a more limited set of capabilities.