What's new

Selex ES radar & other technology on JF-17?

No worries @Tank131

Had it not been for splitting the South African series into two, I would have published an analysis about this issue last week. The following is just an enlarged version of my initial post with a few additional thoughts.

Could Italy’s Selex ES Equip the JF-17 Block-III?
COULD ITALY’S SELEX ES EQUIP THE JF-17 BLOCK-III?
An overview and analysis of various Selex ES electronics that might be of use for JF-17

08 February 2016

By Bilal Khan

The following is a look at a possibility more so than actual news. That said, there is some basis to this idea, and that is from a statement made by Air Vice Marshal (AVM) Arshad Malik, the Chief Project Director of the JF-17 program, on an article released during the 2015 Paris Airshow. In that article, AVM Malik stated that Selex ES (owned by the Italian defence giant Finmeccanica) was one of the competitors for the JF-17 Block-III’s active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar requirement (see “JF-17 Thunder: Pakistan’s Multi-Role Fighter” written by Alan Warnes).

The fact that Selex ES is (or at least was) a contender for providing the AESA radar solution for the JF-17 raises several interesting questions. First, could the radar also include a complete avionics suite? Second, would the PAF simply be looking at an existing off-the-shelf solution, such as the Vixen 1000E, or could it also be inquiring about a tailor-made solution?

The reason why the case for a ‘complete and tailor-made solution’ could be made is because Selex ES has the capacity to develop and offer a complete end-to-end suite. Take for example the Gripen-E/F (also known as the Gripen Next Generation or NG for short). Finmeccanica developed the Raven ES-05 AESA radar, Skyward-G infrared search and track (IRST), and BriteCloud digital radio frequency memory (DRFM)-based ECM system (for active radar-homing threats) for that fighter.

Selex ES markets the Raven ES-05as being “designed from the outset to meet worldwide fire control radar detection and target tracking needs combined into one efficient modular system.” One interesting thing about this radar is that it is a swashplate solution, which enables the system to boast very good ‘wide field of regard’ (WFoR) angles. In other words, compared to a fixed-plate AESA, the moving-plate Raven is capable of wider tracking angles, ±100º WFoR to be specific. Besides that, the Raven ES-05 is a good standard-fare AESA system, i.e. it includes the air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to-sea engagement modes one would expect from a modern-day fighter radar.

The Skyward-G is Selex ES’ latest in IRST technology. It is marketed as a lightweight system (<55 kg) capable of air-to-air, air-to-surface, and air-to-sea tracking of up to 200 targets. Selex ES states that the Skyward’s feed can also be pushed to the pilot’s helmet-mounted display and sight (HMD/S) system. An earlier article discussed the virtues of IRST. Generally speaking, a passive sensor would enable the JF-17 to engage (especially in close-quarters) without necessarily having to depend on its radar. Radar-silence would enable the Thunder to cut its electronic noise as well as better protect it against enemy EW and ECM techniques.

TheBriteCloudis a DRFM-based expendable decoy designed to be deployed from a fighter’s flare and chaff dispensers. The BriteCloud was designed to thwart active radar-guided missiles (i.e.beyond-visual range air-to-air missilesor BVRAAM for short) by using DRFM-based jamming techniques. Besides being a self-contained expendable system, Selex ES markets the BriteCloud as a solution with “zero-integration costs”, which is possible because the decoy would use the fighter’s existing dispenser system. Of all the Selex ES systems potentially available to the JF-17, this would be the most affordable and feasible to integrate, even onto existing Block-I and Block-II fighters.

This is not to suggest that Selex ES would be asked to develop an exact identical solution for the JF-17 Block-III (especially in terms of the Raven), but the company evidently has the competency to develop a tailor-made suite for the PAF if the PAF requests (and pays) for it. Embracing Selex ES’ competency and experience in this area could be of considerable benefit, at least from a basic technical standpoint. The fact that these systems have been embraced by Saab for use on the Gripen NG is indicative of their performance and quality (in terms of long-term maintenance).

The inclusion of the aforementioned systems could position the JF-17 Block-III as a very effective platform, (especially if one looks at it from the perspective of the Thunder using subsystems that are similar to those used on the latest Gripen variants). While cost is a serious issue, the PAF has earned itself considerable space in that regard by driving a significant proportion of the production and assembly of the JF-17’s airframe domestically. Compared to an off-the-shelf purchase of the Gripen-E/F, the JF-17 (even with similar subsystems) would still be much more affordable, though it would be pricier in absolute terms compared to the Block-III equipped with Chinese subsystems.

There are major caveats. Given Pakistan’s structural economic limitations and uncertainties, going the Selex ES x route could simply be too cost-prohibitive. It is unclear to what extent the Italian firm could connect the PAF to a workable payment plan. That said, the gradual nature of the JF-17 induction process could allow for incremental acquisitions, which could be feasible if contained to the core suite of on-board electronics. Moreover, the use of this variant in the PAF could also spur export orders of the Block-III, which in turn would mean more business for Finmeccanica. In a sense, there is overlapping incentive and interest to see such a sale (between Finmeccanica and PAF) come to fruition.

One might also raise the issue of potential leaks from Pakistan to China, particularly in terms of intellectual property and sensitive technology. To be fair, such an issue can be alleviated through engagement. In other words, close cooperation and tight consultation between Finmeccanica, Selex ES and Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) will alleviate such risks. The evidence for this is the fact that numerous Western firms already have strong technical ties with their Chinese counterparts, the joint Airbus-Harbin EC-175 helicopter is a good example.

The JF-17 Block-III seems to have more riding on it than being just an extension of the Block-II (which was a continuation of the Block-I). A cursory glance of some of the subsystems planned for this variant, such as AESA radar, suggest that it is a major update of the platform. According to Pakistani officials, the JF-17 Block-III will be “game changer”, which lends a meaningful sense of hope that perhaps the best available subsystems are under consideration. For that reason, we may very well see Finmeccanica return to the PAF’s orbit in the coming years.

@Horus
 
Last edited:
No worries @Tank131

Had it not been for splitting the South African series into two, I would have published an analysis about this issue last week. The following is just an enlarged version of my initial post with a few additional thoughts.

Could Italy’s Selex ES Equip the JF-17 Block-III?
COULD ITALY’S SELEX ES EQUIP THE JF-17 BLOCK-III?
An overview and analysis of various Selex ES electronics that might be of use for JF-17

08 February 2016

By Bilal Khan

The following is a look at a possibility more so than actual news. That said, there is some basis to this idea, and that is from a statement made by Air Vice Marshal (AVM) Arshad Malik, the Chief Project Director of the JF-17 program, on an article released during the 2015 Paris Airshow. In that article, AVM Malik stated that Selex ES (owned by the Italian defence giant Finmeccanica) was one of the competitors for the JF-17 Block-III’s active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar requirement (see “JF-17 Thunder: Pakistan’s Multi-Role Fighter” written by Alan Warnes).

The fact that Selex ES is (or at least was) a contender for providing the AESA radar solution for the JF-17 raises several interesting questions. First, could the radar also include a complete avionics suite? Second, would the PAF simply be looking at an existing off-the-shelf solution, such as the Vixen 1000E, or could it also be inquiring about a tailor-made solution?

The reason why the case for a ‘complete and tailor-made solution’ could be made is because Selex ES has the capacity to develop and offer a complete end-to-end suite. Take for example the Gripen-E/F (also known as the Gripen Next Generation or NG for short). Finmeccanica developed the Raven ES-05 AESA radar, Skyward-G infrared search and track (IRST), and BriteCloud digital radio frequency memory (DRFM)-based ECM system (for active radar-homing threats) for that fighter.

Selex ES markets the Raven ES-05as being “designed from the outset to meet worldwide fire control radar detection and target tracking needs combined into one efficient modular system.” One interesting thing about this radar is that it is a swashplate solution, which enables the system to boast very good ‘wide field of regard’ (WFoR) angles. In other words, compared to a fixed-plate AESA, the moving-plate Raven is capable of wider tracking angles, ±100º WFoR to be specific. Besides that, the Raven ES-05 is a good standard-fare AESA system, i.e. it includes the air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to-sea engagement modes one would expect from a modern-day fighter radar.

The Skyward-G is Selex ES’ latest in IRST technology. It is marketed as a lightweight system (<55 kg) capable of air-to-air, air-to-surface, and air-to-sea tracking of up to 200 targets. Selex ES states that the Skyward’s feed can also be pushed to the pilot’s helmet-mounted display and sight (HMD/S) system. An earlier article discussed the virtues of IRST. Generally speaking, a passive sensor would enable the JF-17 to engage (especially in close-quarters) without necessarily having to depend on its radar. Radar-silence would enable the Thunder to cut its electronic noise as well as better protect it against enemy EW and ECM techniques.

TheBriteCloudis a DRFM-based expendable decoy designed to be deployed from a fighter’s flare and chaff dispensers. The BriteCloud was designed to thwart active radar-guided missiles (i.e.beyond-visual range air-to-air missilesor BVRAAM for short) by using DRFM-based jamming techniques. Besides being a self-contained expendable system, Selex ES markets the BriteCloud as a solution with “zero-integration costs”, which is possible because the decoy would use the fighter’s existing dispenser system. Of all the Selex ES systems potentially available to the JF-17, this would be the most affordable and feasible to integrate, even onto existing Block-I and Block-II fighters.

This is not to suggest that Selex ES would be asked to develop an exact identical solution for the JF-17 Block-III (especially in terms of the Raven), but the company evidently has the competency to develop a tailor-made suite for the PAF if the PAF requests (and pays) for it. Embracing Selex ES’ competency and experience in this area could be of considerable benefit, at least from a basic technical standpoint. The fact that these systems have been embraced by Saab for use on the Gripen NG is indicative of their performance and quality (in terms of long-term maintenance).

The inclusion of the aforementioned systems could position the JF-17 Block-III as a very effective platform, (especially if one looks at it from the perspective of the Thunder using subsystems that are similar to those used on the latest Gripen variants). While cost is a serious issue, the PAF has earned itself considerable space in that regard by driving a significant proportion of the production and assembly of the JF-17’s airframe domestically. Compared to an off-the-shelf purchase of the Gripen-E/F, the JF-17 (even with similar subsystems) would still be much more affordable, though it would be pricier in absolute terms compared to the Block-III equipped with Chinese subsystems.

There are major caveats. Given Pakistan’s structural economic limitations and uncertainties, going the Selex ES x route could simply be too cost-prohibitive. It is unclear to what extent the Italian firm could connect the PAF to a workable payment plan. That said, the gradual nature of the JF-17 induction process could allow for incremental acquisitions, which could be feasible if contained to the core suite of on-board electronics. Moreover, the use of this variant in the PAF could also spur export orders of the Block-III, which in turn would mean more business for Finmeccanica. In a sense, there is overlapping incentive and interest to see such a sale (between Finmeccanica and PAF) come to fruition.

One might also raise the issue of potential leaks from Pakistan to China, particularly in terms of intellectual property and sensitive technology. To be fair, such an issue can be alleviated through engagement. In other words, close cooperation and tight consultation between Finmeccanica, Selex ES and Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) will alleviate such risks. The evidence for this is the fact that numerous Western firms already have strong technical ties with their Chinese counterparts, the joint Airbus-Harbin EC-175 helicopter is a good example.

The JF-17 Block-III seems to have more riding on it than being just an extension of the Block-II (which was a continuation of the Block-I). A cursory glance of some of the subsystems planned for this variant, such as AESA radar, suggest that it is a major update of the platform. According to Pakistani officials, the JF-17 Block-III will be “game changer”, which lends a meaningful sense of hope that perhaps the best available subsystems are under consideration. For that reason, we may very well see Finmeccanica return to the PAF’s orbit in the coming years.

@Horus
now this is quiet strange... dont you think theres no other option but only going Italian? the Spaniards and us (the British) can offer solutions too. also theres the Koreans, Russians, Swedish, Turkish, South Africans, and Brazilians. the worst mistake they can make is putting their eggs in one basket, (ignore china). yes the Italians are very good partners but i think your being too specific. here. but in terms of aesa radars, italy would be your best bet.
 
now this is quiet strange... dont you think theres no other option but only going Italian? the Spaniards and us (the British) can offer solutions too. also theres the Koreans, Russians, Swedish, Turkish, South Africans, and Brazilians. the worst mistake they can make is putting their eggs in one basket, (ignore china). yes the Italians are very good partners but i think your being too specific. here. but in terms of aesa radars, italy would be your best bet.

Italy allowed us to integrate chinese armament with their Grifo radar series. Brits,Swedes,Koreans and Russkies wount be very forthcoming with this idea.
 
Italy allowed us to integrate chinese armament with their Grifo radar series. Brits,Swedes,Koreans and Russkies wount be very forthcoming with this idea.
dont know i need to check that out. i know we offered to integrate Chinese kit too, but the italian radar was better.
 
I just wanted to say this is a very informative thread so good work every one.

2. Many posters keep mentionimg that the RD-93 does not have the power output to support an AESA Radar and an IRST. How much power output is required for these and what source has the info regarding insufficient power output been drawn from?

I want to ask regarding the above. Is there any work done on indigenous power plant or some sort of a ToT/JV etc? If not then how difficult is it to setup such a cooperation (sure it will be expensive but how expensive?).

How much work is done on radar tech in Pakistan?
 
Last edited:
Sorry to butt in in this very informative and educational exchange. Great posts by members and very well analyzed topic. Quoting you by making points, please bear with me:

Point 1: You are absolutely right regarding the flexibility available to IAF by the range of aircrafts. However, if you look at the open sourced current deployment pattern of IAF, you will see a relatively close proximity deployment of IAF rather contrary to deep deployment. The rationale for this is the deployment of Swordfish LRTRs with upgraded ranges (a figure of 1500+ kms is being circulated). This along with other assets and space based satellites enable a 24 x 7 surveillance of Pakistani airspace and assets. With passage of time, the capability to monitor will further strengthen. As of today, there is confidence in IAF of being able to track an aircraft the moment it lifts off a Pakistani airfield. Something, which the range of new LRTRs along with the constellation of satellites put by India may be indicative of.

Point 2: The aim of IAF in any future war will be to achieve air superiority in 24-48 hours (just for argument's sake accept it) and then go for air domination immediately in order to facilitate land operations and deny PN access to ocean. So your contention may just not hold

Point 3: There is a ratio of approximately 3 to 1 in terms of pilots to aircraft. The physical aspects do not hold merit in your contention here.

Thanks

Sorry for late reply. Was busy with some domestic affairs.
Very briefly replying to your points.
Point 1: India has an advantage of depth with its geography, while Pakistan is at a disadvantage with her's. If India chooses to deploy its assets within 350KM with Pakistan, it will be exposing them to Pakistan Land and Air-based radar coverage. Also it will be more in range of Pakistan SoW including cruise missiles.
Point 2: Debatable.. Its can be IAF plan, but obviously adversary is also prepared some what. Just 1 point, kindly read about US & Allies air campaigns of Desert Storm 1 and Serbian Campaigns. You will get your answers.
Point 3: As per my figures, IAF pilot to fighter ratio is 1:0.8 and not 1:3
Thats even below 1 pilot per plane. For reference, check out this link
The Indian Air Force’s Big Problem: Not Enough Pilots! | The Diplomat
 
now this is quiet strange... dont you think theres no other option but only going Italian? the Spaniards and us (the British) can offer solutions too. also theres the Koreans, Russians, Swedish, Turkish, South Africans, and Brazilians. the worst mistake they can make is putting their eggs in one basket, (ignore china). yes the Italians are very good partners but i think your being too specific. here. but in terms of aesa radars, italy would be your best bet.

PAF was open to defense solutions from all sources especially western. I believe some British systems were among contenders like Marconi, BAE, Martin Baker etc along with French systems. As it turned out, India floated MMRCA and everyone got trolled. To please India, France and UK withdrew from Pakistan. However Italians and South Africans remained reliable partners. You see it is difficult to build trust if it is shaken. If UK is prone to give in to the pressure from India, then it will be a mistake to get critical systems from UK. Hence our faith in Italians, South Africans and Spanish.
 
Sorry for late reply. Was busy with some domestic affairs.
Very briefly replying to your points.
Point 3: As per my figures, IAF pilot to fighter ratio is 1:0.8 and not 1:3

Hey thanks for the reply. I understand, a married man is a go getter (the wife says go get this item and off he goes .... LOL! In lighter vein please). Look at my number of posts - am away invariably. So I guess we both are go getters :super:

Anyways point three is incorrect. Ample number of pilots even in transport squadrons, and fighters are a priority. Especially with number of squadrons going down!!!!!:cheesy:

For point 2 just said the aim ... I agree a very debatable issue.

Thanks
 
Is there any work done on indigenous power plant or some sort of a ToT/JV etc? If not then how difficult is it to setup such a cooperation (sure it will be expensive but how expensive?).

Hi,

Even after spending 10 billion dollars---it would fail---. There will be no new fighter aircraft engine builders in this century.
 
Hi,

That should tell you how illeterate and self centered these officers are---.

Just because the name is JH7B or H6---does not mean that they will come with obsolete electronic packages----or air frames.

The state of the art chinese package is available and why not Selex as an alternative. Composite material on the JH7B with all upgraded frame and a new more powerful engine---.

A J16 size aesa radar---all the warfare packages---plus the ability to utilize all the weaponery---either the air superiority or the strike option.

I go back to the F22 video again---the JH7B would be a perfect complimentary aircraft to the J31---.

Because any stealth aircraft of paf without any support from heavies is extremely vulnerable.

The problem here is not the aircraft---but the mindset of the air force---.

You have to have a certain personality to love the bomber and the heavy strike aircraft----nobody willingly wants to get transferred to the bombers when they have a choice of sleek and fast fighters---.

And as the bomber crew has been wiped out of the airfoce many a years ago---it will take a lots of courage to get one back.

I thought PAF rejected Jh-7b based on it's old design, engine and payload.
If Chinese redesign it to be 4 or 4.5 generation fighter/bomber than there is a possibility that PAF might consider it.


may be this kind of design.........
images786513_JH_7B.Phunutoday.vn.jpg

images786553_images786515_JH_7B9.Phunutoday.vn.jpg
 
I thought PAF rejected Jh-7b based on it's old design, engine and payload.
If Chinese redesign it to be 4 or 4.5 generation fighter/bomber than there is a possibility that PAF might consider it.


may be this kind of design.........
images786513_JH_7B.Phunutoday.vn.jpg

images786553_images786515_JH_7B9.Phunutoday.vn.jpg


Hi,

And guess what the paf bought---the A5 Fantans---.

The aircraft rejected was the JH7---. Between that aircraft and toady---the technology has changed by leaps and bounds----. Electronic warfare packages and smart weapons can make a NOTHING aircraft into a deadly monster.
 
Hi,

Thank you for your post---. That is what my understanding was---that this was the image portrayed about the JF17---it would be our answer to the high end enemy aircraft---because that is what is " fearful ".

The issue is not about the potency of the F16 V or the BLK 60----they are absolutely top tier aircraft---the issue is of delivery---. The U S can yank the chain at the last moment because something happened somewhere.

Many of you were not even born when the sanctions hit----you cannot imagine the feeling of impotency that we had----you kids only heard about ti.

So---when that girl asked Nawaz Sharif in 1999 " why don't you avenge the death of my brother "----the brother was a jr officer on board the Atlantique that went down---and Nawaz stated " we don't have the power to do anything----. A hopeless and powerless man---a powerless nation---.




Hi,

When you say you are not sure about certain things---or likewise---then how come you are writing contradicting comments.

You need to understand something---this is a different time in a different world---a donkey can be equipped to act like a lion----go back to Aamir Hussein video on this board about the usage of the F22's and their asking a B2 bomber to intervene with BVR missiles----.

There is technology available that you can put an exoskeleton on a donkey to make it roar and deadly as a lion---or in other case you can put in an endoskeleton as well.

So---when you see a helpless awacs in your radar blip---don't so sure of its weakness---it maybe carrying a couple of missile that may take you out.

This is not the time for opening polytechnics---this is the time for equipping the right aircraft in a proper manner and getting the right aircraft as well---.

Even with all the polytechnics open---you won't have the ability to manufacture tier one weapons---because you don't have any knowledge and no fundamental base----. You are lucky that china is on a spree to counter the U S---and pakistan will benefit from whatever tech the chinese come up with.

For the navy you are looking at air to ship or air to surface capability---.

You post also shows ignorance of how air to air capability can be maintained thru JH7B's---you need to understand air to air combat---nowadays it is not all turns and twists---.

The purpose of a heavy is to keep the enemy frigates out of your waters---that is what I have been stating for eons---and you kids are so inherently ignorant of wars should be fought----well---my apologies---you are being led by idiotds who want to drop nuc bombs in your own land to kill the enemy----.

From day one---I have always stated one way or the other---fight the war closer to the enemy's house rather than yours----keep the enemy as far away from your assets as you possibly can---and you thoughtless kids want to let the enemy in your house---the enemy that is 3 time larger---with 5 times the strength---and you with inferior weaponery---what is wrong with you kids---.

I believe in glory and valor of our armed forces..........but...........I just couldn't find a single line of your comment with which i can disagree.

I am civilian, knows nothing about war and its toys but even if i was called to outline/set the objective of war with enemy. I will make sure that children and women of enemy nation won't be able to sleep at night peacefully. Bombs must be dropping everywhere here and there around their homes. There must be chaos and panic. Stock market should be collapse faster than our eye brinks. Tourists and investors should be in line to get out of enemy country and all beautiful land of enemy, blessed with greenery, should be destroyed in a way that no one can even recognize that once there was a greenery there...

This is called aggression. This is how you strike fear in enemy's heart. This is how all warrior nations fight. US & UK bombed the hell out of Dresden (German historical, cultural city and mostly civilian populated at that time, no significant troops were there). Germans still haven't forgotten the merciless bombing of Dresden

An internal UK RAF memo spreads some light on the reason for the bombing:

“Dresden, the seventh largest city in Germany and not much smaller than Manchester, is also far the largest unbombed built-up the enemy has got. In the midst of winter with refugees pouring westwards and troops to be rested, roofs are at a premium. The intentions of the attack are to hit the enemy where he will feel it most, behind an already partially collapsed front, to prevent the use of the city in the way of further advance, and incidentally to show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do.”

RAF January 1945

Now, here in Pakistan, everything is contrast of what it should be. From our diplomacy to military, everything is in defensive mode. Heck, and we are facing a very strong and highly motivated enemy just standing right next to us, which is trying her best to maintain superiority over Pakistan in everything at all cost. What do we guys think, why Indians always try to stop any western stuff going to Pakistan? Because they want to make us desperate and helpless, they are trying to corner us, they are trying to over match us in everything. In short, they are trying to lower down the cost of war and damage they'll have if war with Pakistan happens.

I am tired of this defensive approach, Indians went for Nukes, we went for Nukes. Indians bought Rafaels, we are looking to counter it. The only thing we have made which India doesn't have, are tactical nukes, even these we developed in response to Cold start Doctrine. India is driving us crazy and we are looking stupid. How about if we become trend setter instead trend follower, how about we set and make our own destiny instead of cursing and relying on it.

You said: There is technology available that you can put an exoskeleton on a donkey to make it roar and deadly as a lion---or in other case you can put in an endoskeleton as well.

It is nothing new. It is called ART OF WAR by Sun Tzu.

'Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.'

It is all about perception making and management. Don't know about us but Indians have well learnt it. Thats why they are keep repeating Pakistan and terrorism in same breath and sentence. We need to understand this.

Be innovative or die.


Heck, now, its a matter of time when militaries will be make their stuff and soldiers invisible. Read.

Phantom Bogey; Hyperstealth's Deceptive Decoy Technology - Soldier Systems Daily

Hyperstealth's Light Bending "Quantum Stealth" can bend laser beams

We need aggressive and innovative diplomacy and military not traditional one who is always in defensive mood and look stupid.
 
Pakistan need to increase JF-17 block 2 production rate from 16 to 30 per year and continue to upgrade block 1 to block 2.
 
Pakistan need to increase JF-17 block 2 production rate from 16 to 30 per year and continue to upgrade block 1 to block 2.
the max they can build can do is 25/pa but they are building 16 pa. but thats at pac. chengdu is the same. it can 30+ from both facilties combined
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom