JF-17 trumps the Viper in certain domains

[Chak Bamu]

please, please ask for permission to share. please

Sir, that paper is not that big a deal. Almost everything it quotes is already known here. There are only a few tidbits and frankly the more substantial one was that of a very quick turn-around time (due to design of the aircraft) and change of engine in less than an hour, with fastest time of 45 minutes.

I have always maintained that much of the criticism of JF-17 is unwarranted, because what is veiwed as limitation was actually deliberately designed from the beginning. The size & endurance of the aircraft is actually just right for a work-horse aircraft that can take off from roads, if need be - like Gripen.

One of the most important things to do in war would be for PAF to generate a higher sortie rate to overcome the numbers disadvantage. For that JF-17 is perfect. Had it been a much bigger bird, its turn-around time would also be higher. Loading an aircraft with ordnance consumes a lot of time & effort. Imagine a crew of 5 people arming a twin-engined behemoth by the roadside in midst of a war - I can not see it happening. But I can see JF-17 taking off within minutes after having been loaded up.

The high wing loading is also a good design feature. If JF-17 were an interceptor, it might have been a draggy delta design that might fly high to meet the adversary. But JF-17 is not an interceptor; it is made for operation at various altitudes while economizing on fuel. Smaller wing area => less drag => less fuel consumed => higher endurance for a given amount of fuel. This makes it possible for JF-17 to be effective at lower altitude for ground attack and actually have a bit of loiter time too. Another thing a higher wing loading does is, allow JF-17 to spend more time at lower altitude utilizing ground clutter to camouflage itself against enemy aircraft radar. For a radar lock to take place, the enemy radar needs some time with a radar return above a certain threshold. Ground clutter complicates matters, especially when the opposing aircraft is small, nimble, & has an erratic RCS. When Indians extol Tejas for having more wing area (and lower wing loading), I just smile at their simple-minded assumptions.

In any case, do not feel too bothered about the paper in question. You would be disappointed if you read it. Its value is only in being a semi-official account of JF-17 program from a strategic perspective. There are no surprises.

 

[Dazzler]

One of the edges it has over the viper. The dedicated EW variant is being tested for a while now with undisclosed jammers.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

This is not difficult to overcome. Problem Pakistan will have in terms of combustor design isn't the inlet airhole positioning to generate the vortex that extends the lean burn time but the materials for the combustor itself. Temp get as high as 1500 degrees in there. That requires material designers of the highest calibre. I hated material in my engineering degree along with thermodynamics lol. Both essential for combustor chamber design. Won't tell you what I ended up doing after graduation loooool
With regards to turn rate and dogfight that would have a significant impact in a close quarter battle. In modern combat PAF trains hard for this scenario and actively lures the enemy in for this type of engagement. The enemy on the other hand generally relies on BVR. So that still give us the advantage as to choosing when to deploy the extra trust. Those fractions of a second will be negligible due to you picking the time for that fight. Hope that makes sense

You usually do what you expect the least!!!!

One of the edges it has over the viper. The dedicated EW variant is being tested for a while now with undisclosed jammers.

View attachment 439827

I hope it's Turkish!!!!!

Sir, that paper is not that big a deal. Almost everything it quotes is already known here. There are only a few tidbits and frankly the more substantial one was that of a very quick turn-around time (due to design of the aircraft) and change of engine in less than an hour, with fastest time of 45 minutes.

I have always maintained that much of the criticism of JF-17 is unwarranted, because what is veiwed as limitation was actually deliberately designed from the beginning. The size & endurance of the aircraft is actually just right for a work-horse aircraft that can take off from roads, if need be - like Gripen.

One of the most important things to do in war would be for PAF to generate a higher sortie rate to overcome the numbers disadvantage. For that JF-17 is perfect. Had it been a much bigger bird, its turn-around time would also be higher. Loading an aircraft with ordnance consumes a lot of time & effort. Imagine a crew of 5 people arming a twin-engined behemoth by the roadside in midst of a war - I can not see it happening. But I can see JF-17 taking off within minutes after having been loaded up.

The high wing loading is also a good design feature. If JF-17 were an interceptor, it might have been a draggy delta design that might fly high to meet the adversary. But JF-17 is not an interceptor; it is made for operation at various altitudes while economizing on fuel. Smaller wing area => less drag => less fuel consumed => higher endurance for a given amount of fuel. This makes it possible for JF-17 to be effective at lower altitude for ground attack and actually have a bit of loiter time too. Another thing a higher wing loading does is, allow JF-17 to spend more time at lower altitude utilizing ground clutter to camouflage itself against enemy aircraft radar. For a radar lock to take place, the enemy radar needs some time with a radar return above a certain threshold. Ground clutter complicates matters, especially when the opposing aircraft is small, nimble, & has an erratic RCS. When Indians extol Tejas for having more wing area (and lower wing loading), I just smile at their simple-minded assumptions.

In any case, do not feel too bothered about the paper in question. You would be disappointed if you read it. Its value is only in being a semi-official account of JF-17 program from a strategic perspective. There are no surprises.

In plain Turkish - it's like milking the bull!!!!

Ever heard of the expression....'Power entails responsibility'.... He's the head of a professional organisation and what he says goes on record, it's not a case of an Air chief making claims of shooting down so many enemy fighters which can not be verified, there's a good reason why the JF-17 is gradually increasing it's role in the ADA duties and elsewhere the Americans were keen to see it's combat capabilities.

But, IAF Chief BS the jolly good fellow is the reference point!!!!

 

[war&peace]

with fastest time of 45 minutes.

That is a big advantage especially in war. PAF needs a mix of light, medium and heavy fighters and JF-17 is a very capable and cost effective light fighter. But Falcons have their own place and a heavy fighter will bring its own benefits to the mix and will unlock a plethora of possibilities that light fighters cannot offer. For example, a smart car is great for commuting in a crowded city due to its smaller size, better fuel economy, ease of parking but you cannot load it the way a station wagon like Volvo v70 or Passat can be loaded.

 

[Mrc]

Pat needs a low RCS bomber... preferably capable of firing cm ... to replace mirages

 

[Chak Bamu]

That is a big advantage especially in war. PAF needs a mix of light, medium and heavy fighters and JF-17 is a very capable and cost effective light fighter. But Falcons have their own place and a heavy fighter will bring its own benefits to the mix and will unlock a plethora of possibilities that light fighters cannot offer. For example, a smart car is great for commuting in a crowded city due to its smaller size, better fuel economy, ease of parking but you cannot load it they way a station wagon like Volvo v70 or Passat can be loaded.

In case of aggression, PAF has to face off a massive first wave. A squadron or two of heavies is not going to make a big difference to the result. One must assume that many of the airbases shall be knocked out for 24 - 48 hours at least. Heavies require elaborate facilities to be operative & effective. This is where dispersal of nimble & easily serviced jets like JF-17 become invaluable due to their advantages mentioned earlier.

Would PAF be able to afford enough of the heavy jets to realistically face off a massive strike becomes a key question.

 

[Mrc]

In case of aggression,

In case of war... pak shud knock out all airbases and nuclear sites using cms and tactical nukes... in one go... caz Americans might be looking for an opportunity to make entry... plus war will be inevitably nuclear ... so that's the best chance to finish it quickly

Any thing beyond that will lead to MAD

 

[war&peace]

In case of aggression, PAF has to face off a massive first wave. A squadron or two of heavies is not going to make a big difference to the result. One must assume that many of the airbases shall be knocked out for 24 - 48 hours at least. Heavies require elaborate facilities to be operative & effective. This is where dispersal of nimble & easily serviced jets like JF-17 become invaluable due to their advantages mentioned earlier.

Would PAF be able to afford enough of the heavy jets to realistically face off a massive strike becomes a key question.

Heavies are meant for particular role which is deep strike into enemy area i.e. Offensive role while JF-17 will be great for defence and limited offence. However PAF should have the capability to strike the enemy deep into its heart without relying on strategic weapons. Definitely we will need to locate them away from border and install some decent ADS.

 

[Maxpane]

hm

 

[HRK]

One of the edges it has over the viper. The dedicated EW variant is being tested for a while now with undisclosed jammers.

View attachment 439827

one could only speculate whatever EW package they are developing or testing with it is covering most of the needs (if not all of the needs) of PAF in regard of aggressive EW operations but the question is how they are dealing with power issue with current engine; this particular pic of 229 is almost two & half year old the same bird was seen in this year defence day program about PAC ....

 

[Chak Bamu]

In case of war... pak shud knock out all airbases and nuclear sites using cms and tactical nukes... in one go... caz Americans might be looking for an opportunity to make entry... plus war will be inevitably nuclear ... so that's the best chance to finish it quickly

Any thing beyond that will lead to MAD

Any use of nukes on Indian territory, tactical or otherwise, will lead to MAD.

Any discussion of MAD would be pointless. Come to think of it, any discussion of a massive war is pointless when all sides are armed with nukes.

Heavies are quite pointless, too then. Why send aggressive signals & spend money when it could be spent to improve HDI?

 

[Mrc]

Any use of nukes on Indian territory, tactical or otherwise, will lead to MAD.

Any discussion of MAD would be pointless. Come to think of it, any discussion of a massive war is pointless when all sides are armed with nukes.

Heavies are quite pointless, too then. Why send aggressive signals & spend money when it could be spent to improve HDI?

Not necessarily... u damage enough land based nukes... u make sure no air force exists... u leave major cities intact....
Enemy get a clear message that they can choose to live and go for total holiday....

That's not a good choice but is war... war is fought when u run out of choices

 

[Chak Bamu]

Hi,

Man---your stupidity has no ending---it increases by a multiplier effect---.

There is a reason why you are on most senior posters' ignore lists. I do not put you on there because I want to expose you to the newer / younger posters.

But in this case I have to do nothing at all. You are doing a good job all by yourself.

 

[MastanKhan]

There is a reason why you are on most senior posters' ignore lists. I do not put you on there because I want to expose you to the newer / younger posters.

But in this case I have to do nothing at all. You are doing a good job all by yourself.

Hi,

You had an extremely 'dumb' response to the oil leak issue of the JF17---and you had even dumber response to the heavies and how they maybe utilized---.

That comment of yours regarding the oil bearing leak---that was beyond stupid youngman---specially when an experienced poster in that area was defining it with an example---.

I mean to ask---is there a limit to your stupidity----when a poster who has worked on airplanes is explaining the science behind it---and you are excercizing your " personal ' explanations about the issue---?

 

[Chak Bamu]

Not necessarily... u damage enough land based nukes... u make sure no air force exists... u leave major cities intact....
Enemy get a clear message that they can choose to live and go for total holiday....

That's not a good choice but is war... war is fought when u run out of choices

You have raised a number of points here. Though I am no expert on nuclear war related issues, I think two points are relevant here:

1. India is a massive country. At this time I do not think PAF or PA can hope to cover it all the bases for the above scenario to be realistically possible.

2. While both Pakistan and India are growing their nuclear stockpile, there would come a point when it would be unthinkable to attempt a pre-emptive attack, since enough of the devices would escape destruction that a retaliatory attack would be devastating to own population.

Aside from the above two considerations, I think that war with India is unthinkable (and for India war with Pakistan is also unthinkable). The most we need to do is to have them understand that we would do immense and unacceptable damage if they attack Pakistan - deterrence in short. For that we do not necessarily need heavies. JF-17 & F-16 are quite enough when backed with force multipliers & missiles. We can work on a 5th generation acquisition as our resources allow. Lusting after heavies would break our back.

The way I see it, both the countries need to sit down and talk. Peace and development is the most important thing for whole of South Asia. Poverty, illiteracy, environmental degradation, & climatic challenges are far more important issues to discuss. Decision-makers on both sides know this, but can not find a way to break the impasse.

Hi,

You had an extremely 'dumb' response to the oil leak issue of the JF17---and you had even dumber response to the heavies and how they maybe utilized---.

That comment of yours regarding the oil bearing leak---that was beyond stupid youngman---specially when an experienced poster in that area was defining it with an example---.

I mean to ask---is there a limit to your stupidity----when a poster who has worked on airplanes is explaining the science behind it---and you are excercizing your " personal ' explanations about the issue---?

Much fire & fury without any substance.

1. @razgriz19 gave a good explanation, but I could not see how the oil slick would necessarily spread itself a particular way. If he thinks that my understanding is deficient then he can improve it & I shall be thankful to him. I do not pretend to be an expert, I am here to learn. If you still have a problem, please take it up on that thread, not here.

2. Constant hectoring by you points to your own personal problems. None of us can deal with your itch. You have to deal with it yourself. Please do not take it out over here.

3. I told you earlier not to 'young man' me. I am much older than I look and besides, you are a disgruntled nobody. I would gladly take a lesson or two from younger and more knowledgeable posters, but not from a failed old crank like you.