JH7B As Buddy Refueller:----

[MastanKhan]

@MastanKhan

what about making a JF-17 based Buddy Refueling System??That makes more sense,doesn't it??

Its not Rocket Science,in fact commonality in Platform makes more sense.why do you need JH-7 for that?

But I want to highlight one aspect.why are you thinking that refueler will be taken out within certain period??Air Force generally provides enough defense against assets like Refueler and AWACS..

Please read #29

 

[black-hawk_101]

HJ-5 planes are good too for such role.

 

[untitled]

A bigger question i believe is why we have not converted some of our c130s to kc130s. That would give PAF even more refuelling options

Hi,

I believe that the SU34 is a swing wing aircraft----
..

SU 34 is not variable geometry

 

[Sage]

Hello Mastan Khan,
What if for some reason the JH-7 is not available or just no feasible for the role ...what could be another option ...our Mirages ?

 

[Ultima Thule]

Hi,

Thank you for your comments---. Most people don't realize that a fully loaded aircraft uses almost 1/3rd to 1/2 its fuel at take off----.

For that very reason many an air craft taking off from carriers take off with full weapons load and minimal fuel and once in the air they get filled up. To top that off---you can increase your loiter time to hours. You don't need to land your JF17 every 1 hour or every 1 1/2 hr----. You can increase the cap missions to 4 - 5 hours---you increase the flight stamina and endurance of your pilots to fly for longer durations----and the cost of operating a buddy refueler is much less than that behemoth the Illyushin that we have.

So---by adding this weapon to our arsenal---we can suddenly increase the potency of the JF 17 and give it strike capabilities not imagined before---suddenly this little birdie can do strikes in the 800-1500 miles radius.

When we have an enemy across the border---we should always keep the 1973 Ramzan war scenario in focus---. The Egyptian mig21's had barely 30 to 40 minutes of LOITER time----the Israeli planes would wait for them to start to land and then they would pounce on them and the Egyptian pilots were helpless because on the other side were phanotms with around 3 1/2 hours of loiter time.




Hi,

The JH7B is more like the F111 of the U S air force----. It is a matter of range---the JH7B has a longer range and more load carrying capacity than the J11 D.

If I was to decide---then I want a strike air craft than can reach the state of Maharashtra and down below. I know that my enemy will smash Karachi---Lahore---multan---etc etc etc---for that reason---I want access to Mumbai and Poona and other cities down below----and with my standoff weapons capabilities----I want to reach farther out----because I want to keep this battle at a conventional level right to the end. The message I want to give to the enemy is that I know that you are going to destroy me----but in response---I will also bring you down to your knees---I don't believe in giving a bloody nose---or smash the jaw----I want to reach and slip the knife into their soft underbelly----their industrial base---the places from where they carry out their international businesses----I want to smash those businesses to smithereens just like they will do to my cities and infra structure---but I want to do it those areas----which they never expected us to reach---.

Destruction of Indian Punjab and adjoining states does not excite me---because I know the indian govt has written them off in this coming war----it is down below where the jewels are hidden.

I want to have this aircraft to carry 2 plus Babur air launched cruise missiles---the air launched version of cruise missile gives it a range from anywhere south of 1200 to 1500 KM from the launch point in the air.

With buddy type refueling---we can reach so far out and then come back---that will just be amazing feat in itself---our sorties can be up flying around for so many extra hours and it will pose lesser threat to the heavy refuellers----.

Plus we do not need to operate any forward bases----because our JF17 can now be up in the air for 3-5 hours at a time---.

i don't get you mastan bahi, today's aerial warfare is for stand-off ranges why we needs JH-7B to get closer to target, we have Ra'ad will do work for PAF, i understand you that JF17 has a limited weapon carrying capability, please explain, thank you

 

[Saifullah]

As per my personal point of view buddy refueling can't be added in JF-17 because JF-17 is quite small aircraft can't load enough fuel to use as buddy refuel-er rule. Only double engine heavy fighter can do this but their advantage is quite limited.

did you even read the last page or even the first post ?
Com on seriously bro at least read before posting stuff.

 

[untitled]

--I want to reach and slip the knife into their soft underbelly----their industrial base---the places from where they carry out their international businesses----I want to smash those businesses to smithereens just like they will do to my cities and infra structure---but I want to do it those areas----which they never expected us to reach

Are you suggesting pre-emptive air strikes on civilian infrastructure? I mean I get it when you say you want a long range bomber which can strike deep in enemy territory but you want those bombers to also take out civilian targets which may or may not have any military use. Is that what is it is all about? I think it will be a serious mistake on our part if that is (Allah forbid) part of our military strategy.

Do you really think we can claim the moral high ground by attacking civilian infrastructure without any provocation and that too before the nuclear threshold has been crossed?

India is not Afghanistan. There are plenty of legitimate military targets all over the country and by sticking to those targets only we can not only sap her morale but also take away her will to fight.

Even if the enemy does start bombing civilian targets we already do have missiles that can hit most of the their cities.

 

[Windjammer]

Tough call !!!

@Windjammer Any comments?

Just wondering using this method, how many say JF-17s would a single JH-7 would be able to refuel..... say a flight of five JF-17s is on a mission over enemy territory, would the mother ship will carry enough fuel to top up all of them and if JH-7 is engaged in buddy system, what about it's own mission profile and above all, in India/Pakistan scenario, if the air force can't protect it's dedicated refuellers in it's own territory, what are the chances of carrying out this exercise over enemy area.

 

[Indus Falcon]

Just wondering using this method, how many say JF-17s would a single JH-7 would be able to refuel..... say a flight of five JF-17s is on a mission over enemy territory, would the mother ship will carry enough fuel to top up all of them and if JH-7 is engaged in buddy system, what about it's own mission profile and above all, in India/Pakistan scenario, if the air force can't protect it's dedicated refuellers in it's own territory, what are the chances of carrying out this exercise over enemy area.

Very good questions, @MastanKhan .....................?

 

[Al-Taïr]

Tough call !!!

@Windjammer Any comments?



F-16 Blk52+ is 4th Gen,
JF17 is 3.5 Gen,
SU-35 is 4.5 Gen

Ideally, finances permitting, What we should get is 54 Su-35's and 72 JH-7Bs, not either or, but both.

Su-35 US$130m per unit
JH-7b US45m per unit

SU-35 - 54 units X $130m = $7.02Bn
JH-7b - 72 units X $45m = $3.240Bn

Total = US$10.26Bn
+Spares & Ammo US$2.5Bn +US$1.5Bn = US$14.26Bn / 10years = US$1.42Bn per annum.

brother can u put a link for these two? according to this http://planes.axlegeeks.com/l/214/Sukhoi-Su-35
and a few others su-35 is about $60-70m per piece according to wiki its $35mil

 

[araz]

Before everyone gets carried away a few points to ponder upon.
For a full refuel of a JFT, which I am assuming to be the case, You would need 2/3 of 2268Kgs= 1512KGs(assuming a fully loaded JFT with 2/3rd fuel tank consuming 1/3rd of its fuel in takeoff). Average JH7empty weight is 14000 Kg and fully loaded weight is 28000 Kgs with9000kgs in weapons leaving roughly 5000Kg in fuel.
Assume it uses 1/3rd of its fuel on take off and 1/3 rd fuel to return to base, it can barely fulfill the need of 1-JFT as it will only have 2400Kg fuel left after the said calculations. at best you can fulfill the needs of 2 being skimpy. To me it seems like a fairly expensive solution to induct a fighter bomber and then use it to buddy refuel.
Secondly, the poster has completely disregarded the concept of stand off weapons and our armoury of missiles which we have paid for with our flesh and blood. This is what will be used first in any battle as we have seen in the US Iraq encounter to disable and destroy the enemy defences. Whether with the trust deficit we have amongst us we would be able to still prevent a nuclear exchange is something I would hesitate to guess.
Thirdly even if we fuel a JFT mid air we can not extend its stay beyond 3 hours as the on board Oxygen system is only good for 3 hours. So for you to utilize that facility you need to have a plane which is better suited for longer loitering time and JFT is clearly not the candidate here. So you can use F16s with CFTs for the purpose and then would probably avoid the JH7 acquisition to begin with as loitering time with CFT s increases. I would want a fighter pilot to venture an opinion here but i think for longer loitering time a twin-seater might be a better option to prevent exhaustion of pilots and mistakes secondary to that.
A

 

[Al-Taïr]

Hi,

I believe that the SU34 is a swing wing aircraft----.
.

I think u r confusing su-24, with su-34.. this is su34

and an excellent machine too .. with everything u r looking for and more. u can park ur car in its nose. i wonder what would be the T/R count of AESA in that angry looking duck face

 

[Indus Falcon]

brother can u put a link for these two? according to this http://planes.axlegeeks.com/l/214/Sukhoi-Su-35
and a few others su-35 is about $60-70m per piece according to wiki its $35mil

Well I'm glad you didn't take wiki seriously. Considering it's a 4.5++ Gen, this price is an approx, based upon the latest SU-30 sold.

The $65m price tag doesn't make sense by any angle, considering the punch it carries.

 

[Humble Analyst]

@MastanKhan As good as an idea this is, it's an uphill task to convince PAF, and then PA for the funds.

Note: I agree with you 100%.

Agree very much, I often wondered about Air tankers, guess we think the Forward operating bases will be compromised due to stand off weapons used by India so we went for tanker.

yes but it is very unlikely for PAF to induct a new type of fighter bomber aircraft like JH-7B simply to refuel JF-17
there is no operational requirement for such an aircraft
now if the su-35 deal goes through then jf-17 can be buddy refueled by su-35

I love this mindset, there is no operational requirement for such an aircraft. We have become a fighter mafia from a first class AirForce. The damage this type of plane can cause to the enemy is 5 times more than other planes can do. Time to revist the strategy, thinking process and getting out of comfort zone of F16.

 

[pkd]

-it is your BVR truck---.

Can this fighter bomber fire a medium range BVR like SD-10? The armaments mentioned on the wiki page doesn't suggest so. Even if it can, does it has a good enough radar that can effectively exploit the full range of such a missile?
If you house an AESA in its nose along with other necessary advancement than essentially you are within the price tag of J-11B/J-15 class fighter, each of them have a more convincing case in their favor as they can not only perform deep strike mission but can also defend the maritime frontiers of the country by keeping the Indian Migs/Destroyers/Aircraft Carriers at bay.

I think u r confusing su-24, with su-34.. this is su34View attachment 269231
and an excellent machine too .. with everything u r looking for and more. u can park ur car in its nose. i wonder what would be the TWR of AESA in that angry looking duck face

This fighter aircraft has virtually a cockpit of a C-130.