So how good is Pakistan’s JF-17 fighter? Analysis from RUSI think-tank’s Justin Bronk

[ziaulislam]

and Putin coming to buy one more maneuverability than theirs ... it's jf-17 .. their are sitting ducks ... no missile can reach jf17 ..

Sir. Su30 is very maneuverable in dog fight when compared to other heavy fighters but will have stiff fight with lighter fighters

Example is that by time su 30 sliw down does it cobra maneuver and recover t9 good speed, a thunder would already fired its WVR, landed back and pilot would have even had his cup of tea

The true power of su30 is range
, ew suit, strong radar and payload

But why are we assuming 1 su 30 vs 1 thunder..it should be 1 vs 4 because thats the cost of buying and operations difference

 

[!eon]

Sir. Su30 is very maneuverable in dog fight when compared to other heavy fighters but will have stiff fight with lighter fighters

Example is that by time su 30 sliw down does it cobra maneuver and recover t9 good speed, a thunder would already fired its WVR, landed back and pilot would have even had his cup of tea

The true power of su30 is range
, ew suit, strong radar and payload

But why are we assuming 1 su 30 vs 1 thunder..it should be 1 vs 4 because thats the cost of buying and operations difference

Cobra maneuver is just for air shows

Jf is same size as JAS-39 Gripen, and no canards as well

Dogfight (close to medium range) Ratings

CATEGORY JAS-39 GRIPEN --- SUKHOI SU-30MKI
Cannon Mauser BK-27 ---- GSh-30-1
Caliber (mm) 27 mm ---- 30 mm
Rate of Fire (rpm) 1700 rpm --- 1800 rpm
Muzzle Velocity 1025 m/s --- 860 m/s
Size Point 10%-30% 30% --- 10%
Maneuverability 9.0 --- 9,7
Thrust/Weight Ratio 1.02 --- 1,05
AAM (first) MBDA MICA --- AA-11 Archer
Operational range 0.2 – 50 km --- 0.3 – 40 km
AAM (second) IRIS-T --- AA-8 Aphid
Operational range 0.5 – 30 km --- 0.1 – 8 km
Dogfight Rating 74% --- 94%


Read more http://aviatia.net/gripen-vs-su-30mki/

 

[araz]

Not a fan not kind but two things got my attention (posting from cellphone so limitations)

That you are challenging Indian air defence and second that you ASSUMED of a flight scenario without norm gets me tizzy.

Anyway I’m talking about an operational scenario as offered by you and I will not go into the technicalities of who offers what and who gets what.

On any given day you are bound to loose because I know the depth of your planning.

You neither have the human skills nor the technology to beat Indian Air Force.

Sorry to say, I expected more,

OK. I am sorry I disappointed you. I merely discussed the scenario of IAF intruding into Pak space. With the platform you showed with their current status you will lose out initially. Iam sure you know by now that Iam a pragmatist. No where have I said IAF will lose out but been generous in pointing out our losses as well.I have never said IAF will Lose to PAF. Iwill say that we will hold our own for the first week and after that fleet attrition will make life difficult for us. However international norms of confrontation dictate that in a fight between 2 equal forces the aggressive force will lose platforms in a ratio of 1:3. Your losses will ve similar. This is my last post on this subject to you.
Regards.

 

[ziaulislam]

You neither have the human skills nor the technology to beat Indian Air Force.
Sorry to say, I expected more,

you are right, IAF has a very "good" pilot to aircraft ratio and has one of the "lowest" crash rates due to human error with "world class training platforms"

 

[MiG-35-BD]

There has never been a peer-level BVR conflict, so we don't really know how BVR will perform, when not being used against hapless Iraqi forces with dumbed down yesterday's planes.

The JFT in a war setting will carry 2WVR and 2 BVR. A very limited loadout. In contrast, the MKI has 12 hardpoints, can can easily carry 8 BVR. This means a single MKI can fire 2 BVR each at a flight of 4 JFT.

Estimates I have seen from certain USAF / LM posters suggests at about 30 kms, the pk of a missile will be as little as 30% probability of hit. With a little maneuvering and position, this would be even less. Closer shots may have a pk of 50-60%.

In this scenario, MKI flying in high and fast, can shoot and scoot, come around and shoot again, multiple times, as it has the fuel to stay in the fight. The JFT will be lower and slower, and will very quickly bingo fuel and return to base, needing to be replaced by another batch.

This is why a better fighter is needed in the longer term, with not only FLANKERS but Mirage 2000s, Rafales and possibly F-16s / F-35s / PAKFAs...
Would be a very big disadvantage for Pak.

This is why J-31 is not a good solution for PAF, as it is not designed to fight the Hi-hi battle at 400 FL+ at high speeds. You need an aircraft optimized to fight at those altitudes, with corresponding wing loadings and EM performance.

The closest plane today for such a role (available to the PAF) is the J-10, aerodynamically. Unless PAF can go for the Eurofighter or the Su-35. But the J-10 is not stealth, so it would face difficulty against the next gen. Which is why project Azm is so important.

 

[ziaulislam]

There has never been a peer-level BVR conflict, so we don't really know how BVR will perform, when not being used against hapless Iraqi forces with dumbed down yesterday's planes.

The JFT in a war setting will carry 2WVR and 2 BVR. A very limited loadout. In contrast, the MKI has 12 hardpoints, can can easily carry 8 BVR. This means a single MKI can fire 2 BVR each at a flight of 4 JFT.

in regular peaceful times it will carry 2WVR, 2BVR with 2 drop tanks and single empty hard point(7 hard points)
its payload will be different in heighten times, it can easily carry 4+2, and with rumored 6+2 configuration

even the f-16 peaceful time configuration 2+2 but it can easily carry 6+2

as i mentioned again, cost of 1 su 30 is 3-4X more than jf-17, so an honest comparison will be 1:3 match

you have seen the photos and videos of it carrying 2 antiship, 2 WVR, 2 BVRs right?
what makes you think it cant carry additional sd10 instead of c802s

c802s weight around 800kg vs around 200kg of sd10

 

[araz]

in regular peaceful times it will carry 2WVR, 2BVR with 2 drop tanks and single empty hard point(7 hard points)
its payload will be different in heighten times, it can easily carry 4+2, and with rumored 6+2 configuration

even the f-16 peaceful time configuration 2+2 but it can easily carry 6+2

as i mentioned again, cost of 1 su 30 is 3-4X more than jf-17, so an honest comparison will be 1:3 match

you have seen the photos and videos of it carrying 2 antiship, 2 WVR, 2 BVRs right?
what makes you think it cant carry additional sd10 instead of c802s

c802s weight around 800kg vs around 200kg of sd10

With all due respect to posters SU Carrying 12 missiles for an aggressive air encounter in enemy terrain is really a God sent for PAF. It will fly like a brick and light up like a beacon from 200 miles away. Similarly the optimal JFT load out will be 4+2 , any more and it will become too cumbersome. We have Ex AF guys like @gambit and @bilal khan777. Let us see what they have to say about load out of the F 16, JFT and SU3OMKI.
A

 

[Ultima Thule]

With all due respect to posters SU Carrying 12 missiles for an aggressive air encounter in enemy terrain is really a God sent for PAF. It will fly like a brick and light up like a beacon from 200 miles away. Similarly the optimal JFT load out will be 4+2 , any more and it will become too cumbersome. We have Ex AF guys like @gambit and @bilal khan777. Let us see what they have to say about load out of the F 16, JFT and SU3OMKI.
A

and sir drag consideration also with 6+2 AAMs early F-15 were had a capability to carry 10 AAMs but with this weapon load out early F-15 had a drag penalty so the reasonable weapon load-out of 8 AAMs for compensate drag and same goes to early Su-27 series, its impossible for JF-17 to carry 8 AAMs without drag

in regular peaceful times it will carry 2WVR, 2BVR with 2 drop tanks and single empty hard point(7 hard points)
its payload will be different in heighten times, it can easily carry 4+2, and with rumored 6+2 configuration

even the f-16 peaceful time configuration 2+2 but it can easily carry 6+2

as i mentioned again, cost of 1 su 30 is 3-4X more than jf-17, so an honest comparison will be 1:3 match

you have seen the photos and videos of it carrying 2 antiship, 2 WVR, 2 BVRs right?
what makes you think it cant carry additional sd10 instead of c802s

c802s weight around 800kg vs around 200kg of sd10

and sir drag consideration also with 6+2 AAMs early F-15 were had a capability to carry 10 AAMs but with this weapon load out early F-15 had a drag penalty so the reasonable weapon load-out of 8 AAMs for compensate drag and same goes to early Su-27 series, its impossible for JF-17 to carry 8 AAMs without drag

 

[abrar khan]

With all due respect to posters SU Carrying 12 missiles for an aggressive air encounter in enemy terrain is really a God sent for PAF. It will fly like a brick and light up like a beacon from 200 miles away. Similarly the optimal JFT load out will be 4+2 , any more and it will become too cumbersome. We have Ex AF guys like @gambit and @bilal khan777. Let us see what they have to say about load out of the F 16, JFT and SU3OMKI.
A

will love to read their views,
regards

 

[MiG-35-BD]

my guess would be 2+2 for the JF-17 unless its as a pure short range interceptor ala F-7, when it could do 4+2.

6+2 for the MKI. Possibly 8+2 in certain situations. The engine power difference and size difference is gigantic between the two.

Assuming the following:
PAF:
120 JFT x 0.9 (90% servicibility)
85 F-16s x 0.80 (80% servicibility)
=108 + 68 = 176

IAF:
250 MKI x 0.55 (55% servicibility)
150 Other 4th gen x 0.7 (70% servicibility)
= 137.5 + 105 = 242.5

As a rough estimation of sortie generation and actual firepower available to both forces, discounting legacy platforms. This translates to a 27% superior force generation capacity, without taking into account quality of aircraft, etc.

This also doesn't account for legacy platforms, which is more of an advantage for PAF than IAF, as its defensive posture allows better utilization of J-7s and Mirages, as opposed to MiG-21Bis, which do not have the legs to impact an offensive air war against Pakistan.

Just a short and rough estimate.

 

[HariPrasad]

India would have done much better to have just bought a licence to manufacture Gripen C/D

excellent words..

Anyway , we are ordering 83 mk1+. It shall be an @ss kicker with just 6100 kg weight and 8% aerodynamic improvements with 60 kg dry thrust engine . Bloody no single engine shall be able to match its high T/W ratio. It will have 20% higher transgenic acceleration . It will have state of art Ew suite and best in class AESA . It's just couple of years away and not more . When it will take off from run way in less then 9 seconds with vertical upward movement with great speed, it will render people speechless. It's performance shall be at least 15% better in each parameter compared to mk1 says our scientists.

 

[ziaulislam]

my guess would be 2+2 for the JF-17 unless its as a pure short range interceptor ala F-7, when it could do 4+2..

so JF 17 can go for long range patrol with 2500kg of fuel internally and 800 Liter central drop tank with 2 anti ship missiles(900kg each) and 2 BVR and 2WVR (payload 1600+400+800+100=~3000kg)

but it become a short interceptor when it carries 4 BVRS of each 200kg and 2 50kg WVR with central drop tank(total payload 800+100+800kg=~1900kg)........
PS
all of your other assumptions are wrong
no body can generate a 90% servicibilty
neither do we have 120 thunders

 

[araz]

Anyway , we are ordering 83 mk1+. It shall be an @ss kicker with just 6100 kg weight and 8% aerodynamic improvements with 60 kg dry thrust engine . Bloody no single engine shall be able to match its high T/W ratio. It will have 20% higher transgenic acceleration . It will have state of art Ew suite and best in class AESA . It's just couple of years away and not more . When it will take off from run way in less then 9 seconds with vertical upward movement with great speed, it will render people speechless. It's performance shall be at least 15% better in each parameter compared to mk1 says our scientists.

Will have is the key word. Harp about it when it reaches your operating bases. Dont harp on about platforms you do not have.
A

 

[ziaulislam]

Anyway , we are ordering 83 mk1+. It shall be an @ss kicker with just 6100 kg weight and 8% aerodynamic improvements with 60 kg dry thrust engine . Bloody no single engine shall be able to match its high T/W ratio. It will have 20% higher transgenic acceleration . It will have state of art Ew suite and best in class AESA . It's just couple of years away and not more . When it will take off from run way in less then 9 seconds with vertical upward movement with great speed, it will render people speechless. It's performance shall be at least 15% better in each parameter compared to mk1 says our scientists.

lets wait for the first flight of MK1

IMO
idia should either stick to gripen or tejas

 

[araz]

in regular peaceful times it will carry 2WVR, 2BVR with 2 drop tanks and single empty hard point(7 hard points)
its payload will be different in heighten times, it can easily carry 4+2, and with rumored 6+2 configuration

even the f-16 peaceful time configuration 2+2 but it can easily carry 6+2

as i mentioned again, cost of 1 su 30 is 3-4X more than jf-17, so an honest comparison will be 1:3 match

you have seen the photos and videos of it carrying 2 antiship, 2 WVR, 2 BVRs right?
what makes you think it cant carry additional sd10 instead of c802s

c802s weight around 800kg vs around 200kg of sd10

Come on Zia! It is his analysis. You could have gently corrected him without the terse remarks. Barring that it is fairly logical and impartial.
If the truth be told no one has said that a DER is available to use on JFT for carrying BVR. So the likelihood is the Max it can carry according to publically available knowledge is 4 BVR plus 2 WVR. When a DER becomes available as it has for J10 then it can be 6 but I somehow doubt it will ever require to carry more than 4. The radar does not allow a simultaneous attack on more platforms for it to carry more. High wing loads in war times mean extreme stress due to aggressive maneouvres so logic demands optimal loads for better functionality. My 2 paisas worth.
A