Pakistan’s PL-15 Missile Equipped JF-17 Block 3 is a Serious Game Changer - How India Can Respond to

[BON PLAN]

Please show me these leaks. Thanks.

FOX-3, les missiles à longue portée — Dossier avionslegendaires.net

Pour palier aux défauts des missiles FOX-1, furent développés dans les années 70 les missiles à guidage radar actif qui devinrent les FOX-3 dans la

www.avionslegendaires.net

" MBDA déclare qu’il possède une « no-escape zone », une zone dans laquelle une cible n’a aucune chance de survivre, de 60 km. " = " MBDA declared that it has a NEZ of 60km"

 

[Marker]

Vijainder Thakur is not a reliable source when it comes to air to air missiles

UK top military think tank RUSI has clarified why Meteor is indeed better than PL-15

@Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Link to report:

Russian and Chinese Combat Air Trends: Current Capabilities and Future Threat Outlook

This Whitehall Report examines Russian and Chinese combat air trends, and looks specifically at fast jets and their weapons systems and capabilities.

www.rusi.org

Royal United Services Institute is the world's oldest Defence think tank (150-170 years) and is also one of the best.

Royal United Services Institute may be the world's oldest and best Defence think tank (150-170 years) but they are not manufacturers of Meteor.

According MBDA the manufacturer of Meteor, NEZ is 60 km not 100 km. However, NEZ of 60 km is not a lesser figure - a serious challenge for PAF fighter pilots.

 

[DJ_Viper]

FOX-3, les missiles à longue portée — Dossier avionslegendaires.net

Pour palier aux défauts des missiles FOX-1, furent développés dans les années 70 les missiles à guidage radar actif qui devinrent les FOX-3 dans la

www.avionslegendaires.net

" MBDA déclare qu’il possède une « no-escape zone », une zone dans laquelle une cible n’a aucune chance de survivre, de 60 km. " = " MBDA declared that it has a NEZ of 60km"

No offense. That NEZ of 60KM is total BS. There are anti-missile tech out there that can tamper with a locked missile from 300 meters away. 60KM is like going to a whole another town. This may be true if one's flying a Mig or a SU, may be, not an advanced Western fighter.

 

[BON PLAN]

No offense. That NEZ of 60KM is total BS. There are anti-missile tech out there that can tamper with a locked missile from 300 meters away. 60KM is like going to a whole another town. This may be true if one's flying a Mig or a SU, may be, not an advanced Western fighter.

The NEZ just give the range in which, IF THE SEEKER IS EFFECTIVE, a target can't evade even under it's max G load (so 9G).
The combo seeker effectivity and NEZ gave something like pk....

The seeker of Meteor, a derivative of those of the MICA EM and ASTER missiles, is said to be very precise and very potent to avoid counter measures.
As MICA NG will have ab AESA seeker, it is very likely to see a METEOR 2 with it in a near future.

 

[DJ_Viper]

The NEZ just give the range in which, IF THE SEEKER IS EFFECTIVE, a target can't evade even under it's max G load (so 9G).
The combo seeker effectivity and NEZ gave something like pk....

The seeker of Meteor, a derivative of those of the MICA EM and ASTER missiles, is said to be very precise and very potent to avoid counter measures.
As MICA NG will have ab AESA seeker, it is very likely to see a METEOR 2 with it in a near future.

Thank you. I know what you are trying to say. I was suggesting that the NEZ,etc, are just marketing purpose materials and are very subjective.

For example, your Rafale has towed decoy that emits a similar radar signature as the radar of the Rafale. It can fool a missile (non IR) into exploding a few hundred meters before hitting the jet, that's like 1/8th of a mile away, and the plane stays safe. The US jets can fool missiles with other tech and soon they can fry incoming missiles targeting system with LASER / MW. So again, the NEZZ is really subjective.

 

[POPEYE-Sailor]

Guys any idea when JF-17 block 3 will fly and specification will come out from official ?

 

[BON PLAN]

Thank you. I know what you are trying to say. I was suggesting that the NEZ,etc, are just marketing purpose materials and are very subjective.

For example, your Rafale has towed decoy that emits a similar radar signature as the radar of the Rafale. It can fool a missile (non IR) into exploding a few hundred meters before hitting the jet, that's like 1/8th of a mile away, and the plane stays safe. The US jets can fool missiles with other tech and soon they can fry incoming missiles targeting system with LASER / MW. So again, the NEZZ is really subjective.

The NEZ is the kinematic only approach. The PK is about the whole weapon.

The americans are strongest of the world on marketing. Never forget that they decided some decades ago to remove canon from their fighters because the missile was THE air to air weapon of choice. Until the Vietnam fiasco of the beginning.
They were keen to do the same by the removal of MBT from the land arsenal, thanks to light wheel vehicules. Fortunately they moved back.

They are not infalible and the truth is not always on their lips.

 

[DJ_Viper]

The NEZ is the kinematic only approach. The PK is about the whole weapon.

The americans are strongest of the world on marketing. Never forget that they decided some decades ago to remove canon from their fighters because the missile was THE air to air weapon of choice. Until the Vietnam fiasco of the beginning.
They were keen to do the same by the removal of MBT from the land arsenal, thanks to light wheel vehicules. Fortunately they moved back.

They are not infalible and the truth is not always on their lips.

Your post makes no sense!! Name to me a fighter jet that doesn't have cannons in the USAF, USN or USM? And I think the Americans are great at marketing of greater products! No two ways about it.
Secondly, I still stand by the notion that the future wars will be BVR wars. But to win those, you'd need missile trucks. That's why you'll have a pair of F-35 or F-22 followed by a few newer F-15 or -16 based missile trucks.

And precisely when did the "Americans" remove MBT's? If you remember seeing any footage of any wars fought in the past 3 decades precisely, you'll notice that every ground footage must show M1A1 Abrams. Let's debate with me on facts please.
Back to my post, NEZ or PK, are subjective and really marketing purposes only......

 

[Thorough Pro]

It's already flying, specs will not come out

Guys any idea when JF-17 block 3 will fly and specification will come out from official ?

 

[MastanKhan]

The NEZ is the kinematic only approach. The PK is about the whole weapon.

The americans are strongest of the world on marketing. Never forget that they decided some decades ago to remove canon from their fighters because the missile was THE air to air weapon of choice. Until the Vietnam fiasco of the beginning.
They were keen to do the same by the removal of MBT from the land arsenal, thanks to light wheel vehicules. Fortunately they moved back.

They are not infalible and the truth is not always on their lips.

Hi,

There was no "vietnam fiasco". The cannons mounted on the F4 showed extremely poor results.

 

[BON PLAN]

Your post makes no sense!! Name to me a fighter jet that doesn't have cannons in the USAF, USN or USM? And I think the Americans are great at marketing of greater products! No two ways about it.
Secondly, I still stand by the notion that the future wars will be BVR wars. But to win those, you'd need missile trucks. That's why you'll have a pair of F-35 or F-22 followed by a few newer F-15 or -16 based missile trucks.

And precisely when did the "Americans" remove MBT's? If you remember seeing any footage of any wars fought in the past 3 decades precisely, you'll notice that every ground footage must show M1A1 Abrams. Let's debate with me on facts please.
Back to my post, NEZ or PK, are subjective and really marketing purposes only......

The Phantom came in the Vietnam war without cannon (read carefully my previous answer). Only the E variant is fitted with a cannon inside from the factory.
F35B has no cannon, just a pod with cannon.
BVR only? hum hum.... Why F22 and F35 carry short range missiles?
Stop reading the post too fastly : I never write they remove MBT. I write they inteded to do so.

 

[BON PLAN]

Hi,

There was no "vietnam fiasco". The cannons mounted on the F4 showed extremely poor results.

Sorry no.
The F4 had an internal cannon since the E variant only, produced from 1965. Before it was cannon free, and the US studied a cannon pod, but it performed poorly.

 

[DJ_Viper]

The Phantom came in the Vietnam war without cannon (read carefully my previous answer). Only the E variant is fitted with a cannon inside from the factory.
F35B has no cannon, just a pod with cannon.
BVR only? hum hum.... Why F22 and F35 carry short range missiles?
Stop reading the post too fastly : I never write they remove MBT. I write they inteded to do so.

The reasons for Phantom to be without a cannon weren't due to the US back then thinking the life will only go with missiles, in fact, at that time, the Sidewinder version 1.0 had been out..... it was due to it being the "hi" of the tier and not intended to face off the Migs (USAF had F-86 and a few other options for dog fight). Just keeping an answer short.
F-35 and F-22 both have cannons, -35 has internal and mountable one's too. Depends on the configuration. Short range missiles will always be carried for "just in case" scenarios, if either the missile truck went down / ran out and "if" someone somehow broke the BVR tier and these jets needed to go into self-protect mode. This rare scenario doesn't change the methodology of the future air wars.

 

[Blacklight]

Short range missiles will always be carried for "just in case" scenarios, if either the missile truck went down / ran out and "if" someone somehow broke the BVR tier and these jets needed to go into self-protect mode. This rare scenario doesn't change the methodology of the future air wars.

Sidewinders can now be used for A2G as well.

 

[MastanKhan]

Sorry no.
The F4 had an internal cannon since the E variant only, produced from 1965. Before it was cannon free, and the US studied a cannon pod, but it performed poorly.

Hi,

What US studied the cannon pod.

The POD was placed to shut up some Congressmen. That was all the pod or the cannon was for.

It never proved useful.

When the day arrives that the F22 / F35 have to use cannons on an enemy---that enemy the enemy would be fighting with sticks and stones.