Specifications of JF-17

[VCheng]

Adding external tanks adds only a few hundred km of ferrying range? That is not quite right, is it?

 

[CHI RULES]

what is true speed of JF17?

somewhere it is Mach 1.6, 1.8 and somewhere it is stated as Mach2.

 

[khanasifm]

what is true speed of JF17?

somewhere it is Mach 1.6, 1.8 and somewhere it is stated as Mach2.

One of the official CAC broucher had 1.67 Mach

 

[Manticore]

 

[Manticore]

thrust to wt ratio 1.09 in latest interview

 

[Akasa]

thrust to wt ratio 1.09 in latest interview

The Block I should have already been upgraded with the KLJ-7v2 radar, with a look up range of 140-150 km for a 5 m^2 target. The KLJ-7v1 has a look up range of 130 km, not 105 km for 5 m^2 target.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

@Manticore

Gripen can use MICA and KEPD 350 is a cruise missile.

Gripen C/D PS-05/A Mark 3 radar for its range involves RCS of 4 m2.

The Block I should have already been upgraded with the KLJ-7v2 radar, with a look up range of 140-150 km for a 5 m^2 target (or 110 km for a 3 m^2 target). The KLJ-7v1 has a look up range of 130 km for a 5 m^2 target, not 105 km.

Gripen C/D upgrade for PS-05/A Mark 3;

The new processor includes a high-capacity, solid-state data recorder and is based on commercial off-the-shelf components. It supports new processing algorithms derived from Saab’s family of Giraffe ground-based radars, including sub-meter-resolution synthetic aperture radar modes and non-cooperative target recognition features. The claimed performance improvement – up to 150 % range increase, or the ability to detect a target with an RCS of 0.1 square meters at the same range at which the Mk. 3 can see a 4-sq.-meter target – points to the use of multi-hypothesis or track-before-detect algorithms to pull targets out of clutter.

 

[Akasa]

@Manticore

Gripen can use MICA and KEPD 350 is a cruise missile.

Gripen C/D PS-05/A Mark 3 radar for its range involves RCS of 4 m2.



Gripen C/D upgrade for PS-05/A Mark 3;

The new processor includes a high-capacity, solid-state data recorder and is based on commercial off-the-shelf components. It supports new processing algorithms derived from Saab’s family of Giraffe ground-based radars, including sub-meter-resolution synthetic aperture radar modes and non-cooperative target recognition features. The claimed performance improvement – up to 150 % range increase, or the ability to detect a target with an RCS of 0.1 square meters at the same range at which the Mk. 3 can see a 4-sq.-meter target – points to the use of multi-hypothesis or track-before-detect algorithms to pull targets out of clutter.

Well, until we can get tracking ranges for such targets (such as those being 4 m^2), a viable comparison between the PS-05 and KLJ-7 cannot be made.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Well, until we can get tracking ranges for such targets (such as those being 4 m^2), a viable comparison between the PS-05 and KLJ-7 cannot be made.

Not my problem that you don't bother to read.

 

[Akasa]

Not my problem that you don't bother to read.

Yes, I did. And no, there were no figures with which the "150%" can be put into context.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Yes, I did. And no, there were no figures with which the "150%" can be put into context.

We know that PS-05/A Mark 3 range is 120 kilometers and with this graph shows Mk3 4 m2, Mark 4 has 150% longer tracking range thus 300 kilometers for 4 m2 and guess what, Meteor BVRAAM has range of 300 kilometers...

 

[Akasa]

We know that PS-05/A Mark 3 range is 120 kilometers and with this graph shows Mk3 4 m2, Mark 4 has 150% longer tracking range thus 300 kilometers for 4 m2 and guess what, Meteor BVRAAM has range of 300 kilometers...

There's a little bit of ambiguity here; does the 120 km figure refer to the "2014 Mk3" or the "2015 Mk3"? Another interesting observation is that the Mk3 has a 120 km fighter detection range and yet only a 70 km warship detection range. Anyways, this is quite a feat on behalf of Saab if this materializes, although questions remain as to how a radar designed to fit inside the Gripen's small radome (and powered by merely a F414) will manage to churn out better specifications than the Su-30MKI's Bars or J-11B's Type 1493 radar.

Impressive, indeed, if true.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

There's a little bit of ambiguity here; does the 120 km figure refer to the "2014 Mk3" or the "2015 Mk3"? Another interesting observation is that the Mk3 has a 120 km fighter detection range and yet only a 70 km warship detection range. Anyways, this is quite a feat on behalf of Saab if this materializes, although questions remain as to how a radar designed to fit inside the Gripen's small radome (and powered by merely a F414) will manage to churn out better specifications than the Su-30MKI's Bars or J-11B's Type 1493 radar.

Impressive, indeed, if true.

120 kilometer figure is for PS-05/A Mark 3 in 2005 when it was introduced to Gripen C/D and since we see in the graph that Mark 3 had improvement from Mark 3 2014 to Mark 3 2015 then I assume it was updated with minor variation and software improvements...

So range of Mark 3 2014 is very likely longer than that of Mark 3 2005.

 

[Manticore]

 

[aftab_s81]

The above specs in the pictures show that:
JF-17B is shorter than JF-17A (14.93 vs 14.5m)
JF-17B height is less than JF-17A (4.6 vs 4.72m)
Payload is better (4500 vs 3600kg(Blk I))

Aren't these strange parameters? They could keep the same length to accommodate more fuel? Any expert here?

@MastanKhan @Viper0011. @Tempest II

Note: the parameters for JF-17A are taken from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder