What's new

Su-30MKI & JF-17 Air Fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
dont forget ECONOMY (ability to sustain battle)
the one with a better economy almost always wins. eg. cold war

correction my friend AFGHANISTAN is a clear example and so is IRAQ and so is VIETNAM!! infact the one with a poor economy actually does better because it has not much to loose!!! while the good economy starts spiralling down that causes panic :whistle:
 
Jf-17 is a good plane IMO. Pakistan and China ^^. Anyways, i found an article on this while i was searching jets.

"In December 2008, rumors were rife of the J-10's latest incarnation, the J-10B, had taken off for the first time. Now in April 2009, we see the initial leak of images for this plane. The J-10B appears as the next iteration of China's vaunted 4th Generation fighter and looks to take the J-10 to the 4.5 Generation level.

The differences that have been identified from the earlier J-10 include a DSI intake, similar to the one on the FC-1/JF-17. The nose is now oval, more similar to an F-16's and is slightly canted downwards. An IRST similar to the J-11Bs also feature on top of the nose. Slanted radome paint along with some of the other features suggest an AESA radar.

The J-10B incorporates a new small ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer and this stabilizer also appears to be longer and ending in a "shark-fin". The ECM housing is similar to the housing on the JF-17. The two ventral fins are also extended further and are larger irrespective of the shark-fin. The aerodynamic refinements of the longer vertical stabilizer and the ventral fins appear to be a result of the DSI intakes which create greater lateral forces on the aircraft.

The wide angle HUD featured on the J-11Bs seem to have also appeared on the J-10B. While it cannot be confirmed, it appears that the cockpit itself has been redesigned extensively. Other than the new ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer, new MAWs appear on the tail bump. Just below these, curious breaks appear on the fuselage that some observers are referring to as possible formation lights "slime lights", but expert opinion from a Lockheed Martin source suggest that they are FLIR sensors. A redesigned satellite communication unit appears right behind the cockpit.

A retractable refueling probe is likely, given the development of the J-10 thus far, and is possibly located on the port side, not visible in the latest photographs. The photographs also suggest new under-wing pylons. These appear to be strengthened for a variety of possible uses, ranging from larger drop tanks to ASMs.

The engine is likely to be either a redesigned WS-10A (B?) or possibly the WS-15, a new generation engine currently in advanced development. This would not only have higher thrust than the AL-31s, but also feature TVCs, giving the J-10Bs vaunted agility an even greater boost. The actual engine on the aircraft presently on the released pictures, is the AL-31.

Like the J-10S, a J-10BS is also eventually likely. This would be an advanced trainer with the 360 degree view similar to the J-10S. EW/Wild Weasel variants could also eventually be possible.

PAF

The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has shown a great deal of interest in the J-10 project as a possible substitute for Western combat aircraft for its high end requirements. The PAF, however, wanted a more modern version. Just as the FC-1s (and before the FC-1, the F-7s) were significantly upgraded due to the PAF's push for improvements, the J-10 appears to be going through a similar phase. The reason for this is that the PAF has a far closer view of Western technologies and trends and thus can provide deeper insight than more insulated Chinese expertise. The J-10B in all likelihood has had major input from the PAF and is the FC-20 that the PAF has ordered.

While there were rumors of the PAF receiving its first J-10s as early as 2009, the purchase has been delayed to 2014/2015. However, there is no doubt that the PAF sees its future inextricably linked to the J-10Bs/FC-20s. Informed sources suggest that PAF is not only looking to purchase, but to set up the necessary infrastructure to maintain and upgrade these birds. According to well informed sources, the aforementioned delay is primarily as a result of engine issues. The AL-31 would create maintenance and logistics problems for the PAF, given the lack of a working relationship with Russia. The WS-10A/B has not met quality standards. This leaves the PAF high and dry for now vis-a-vis the J-10. Their engine options now are to either to wait for a more reliable WS-10A version or to go for the WS-15, a new generation engine with similar dimensions.

WS-15 Milestone Celebration

The delay in procurement is critical for PAF as it needs a quality high end to counter the larger IAF with her MKIs, Mirage-2000s and MRCA. With a new sensor rich environment dominated by AWACS on both sides and a large number of BVR platforms, higher altitude BVR engagements would become vital. J-10s are ideally suited for such combat given their aerodynamics including low wing loading in an A2A configuration. The instantaneous turn rates achievable on the J-10 (or the Euro canards) are likely to give an advantage in such engagements, as opposed to the high wing loadings on the over-evolved F-16s which were essentially designed for turning dog fights rather than high altitude BVR slash and dash maneuvers.

With the AESA equipped new J-10Bs, higher thrust engines and better EW/Avionics, PAF would reclaim the qualitative edge over the IAF. These J-10s would be superior in air combat than anything that the IAF fields today and would only be matched by a possible MRCA acquisition by India. Even then, with the 5 present contenders left in the MRCA, only the Eurofighter (assuming AESA radars) would be able to match the J-10 in air-to-air combat.

The PAF is looking for a total of 150 high end aircraft like the F-16 Block 52s and the FC-20 (J-10Bs or J-10Ps). The FC-20s could be procured in greater numbers, depending on relations with the U.S. and the operability of the F-16s. The J-10Ps and the JF-17s make a perfect pair - one ideal for high altitude air superiority and deep strike missions while the other ideal as a true multirole fighter. Where the J-10 lacks in deep strike, the F-16s make up for it. Where the J-10s lack in CAS, the JF-17s make up for it. Where the JF-17 lacks in high altitude BVR engagements, the J-10s make up for it.

The J-10s, F-16s and JF-17s also fit into the AFFDP-2019 requirements. The AFFDP-2019 is the core document on the strategic planning of Pakistan's armed forces over 15 years. While this document is not available in the public domain, informed sources note that the PAF has been assigned procurement of only single engine combat aircraft. The J-10Ps/FC-20s coupled with the JF-17s and F-16s thus ideally meet these requirements.

In the event that the Indian Air Force decides to procure massive numbers of Western 4.5 generation fighters, beyond the 126 MRCA, while increasing the Su-30MKI numbers and upgrades their MiG-29s and Mirage-2000s, the PAF has a clear charted path in increasing JF-17s and FC-20s, having by then set up the infrastructure and training for these planes. Further, the JF-17s would not only allow PAF to counter numbers, but also allow her to maintain larger numbers of FC-20s and F-16s for war-time and lower their depreciation - providing a low cost training aircraft to fly liberally during peacetime. This would be a similar arrangement to how the Israeli Air Force uses F-16s to keep meet the flight time allocations of its F-15 pilots.

The PAF is looking to add as much potency as possible, within its budget constraints; shopping for avionics from Western sources to add further potential to its JF-17s and FC-20s. Thus far, Chinese developments have been so rapid that by the time decisions were to be made at the PAF, the Chinese would meet or exceed requirements and the competition at a lower price. It remains to be seen if this can be pulled off again by the Chinese when PAF goes shopping for the next block of JF-17s and the new FC-20s. For the FC-20s, EW, cockpit interface and reliability of the new Chinese AESA radar will play a critical role. The PAF is meanwhile keeping open options with European equivalents, including the M-AESA (Multi-role Active Electronically Scanned Antenna) being developed by Saab and Selex and a French AESA, yet to be revealed.

By 2014, some of PAF's F-16s would be ready for retirement as well. While they have been better kept than many other air forces, some of these birds would by then have been in service for more than 30 years. FC-20s could also be used to replace these.

J-10Bs for Iran?

There have been some reports of Iran being interested in purchasing the J-10Bs from China. Looking at Iran's present arsenal, there is no doubt Iran needs new planes. In fact, it has been seen as surprising that Iran has not procured new fighter planes from China since a small purchase of J-7s. They certainly have shown interest in the new J-7Gs and the JH-7s, both perfect substitutes for Iranian F-5s, Su-24s and F-4s. With some Israeli lineage in the J-10s, some commentators have questioned if their may not be an agreement that these birds never be sold to Iran, as a condition for Israeli technical help. Another reason is that Iran and China have not always seen eye-to-eye on patent related issues. Life is stranger than fiction it appears, as China has had issues with its products being reverse-engineered by Iran.



J-10 Vs F-16 Technical Comparison

The F-16 was designed from the outset as a dog-fighter. The moderate sweep of the wings and aspect ratios were ideal for this. The trade-off however, was greater supersonic resistance. The thrust offered by the two engine options on the F-16 is impressive even to this day. TWR in air combat is about 1.15, ensuring impressive climbing rates and sustained turn rates. As noted, the F-16 sacrificed supersonic performance, not only in its wing design but also in its fixed air intakes. In supersonic flight, engine thrust is lost. While it can reach Mach 2.0, pragmatically it has poor supersonic performance.

While the F-16 sacrificed supersonic performance for subsonic dogfighting, the J-10 did not make the same sacrifice. Thus, while when the F-16 was designed, turning dogfights were what was projected as the bread and butter of air combat, when the J-10 was being designed, the BVR era had arrived (or re-arrived). The J-10s aerodynamic design, including wing design and inlet design, take this into account. For instance, the J-10 visibly has greater wing sweep and a variable inlet. With the J-10B, a DSI intake. While the J-10B sacrifices maximum theoretical top speeds with its DSI intakes, for all relevant combat speeds, it gives the J-10 superior performance.

Under modern BVR conditions and higher altitude combat, the J-10 is significantly superior to the F-16. This is also reflected in its higher instantaneous turn rates. The Mirage-2000s have been a point of major concern both for the Pakistanis and the Turkish air forces, because of these aerodynamic issues, despite the Mirages weak engines. The Greeks, who operated both the Mirage 2000 and F-16C considered the F-16 to be better at low altitude, low speed, hard turning fights, and Mirage 2000 to be superior at hi-hi.The F-16 would have to attempt to survive the first merge in an air combat scenario, which becomes increasingly suicidal with high off-bore sight missiles. BVR further compounds these problems for the F-16s. In previous eras, flying hi and fast was fine, but you often had to come down low to engage a low flying enemy aircraft. Today, that becomes less relevant with longer range BVR missiles and look-down shoot-down capabilities.

The F-16 has also been adding weight over time and attempting to counterbalance this with increased engine thrust. However, since wing area remained the same, maneuverability has been sacrificed. Higher wing loading is particularly detrimental for higher altitude maneuverability. The J-10 on the other hand, has all the wing area it could ever need with a delta canard layout.

The newer block F-16s however, are great for low altitude air-to-ground missions. The high wing loading favors low fliers and the moderate wing sweep helps handling at lower speeds often necessary during ordnance delivery. The J-10 is thus not ideal for the CAS role. However, because of the range and payload advantages, the J-10 can be considered an effective deep striker. CAS was never a pressing need for the PLAAF, and the PAF has the JF-17 which is ideal for that role.

Chinese 5th Gen
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

The 5th Generation Chinese stealth plane is what would eventually close down J-10 production. The XXJ or J-XX as it is often referred to, has been the subject of intense competition between China's two premier fighter design institutions - CAC and SAC. While CAC's 611 Institute lost the bid to SAC's 601 Institute, both entities have begun joint development of the new fighter. How the rivalry plays out remains to be seen. It appears Chengdu has the upper hand as it is perceived to have been more successful. J-10 program director Liu Gaozhou recently stated that, " we are researching and developing a fourth generation to meet the requirements of defending the motherland." China's fourth generation is of course, the 5th generation we refer to in the West.

The design is a conventional layout in direct similarity to the F-22. The J-XX will be powered by the WS-15, a new generation engine in development. Normal TO weight would roughly measure to 20 tons and thus be in the heavy fighter class.The J-XX would possibly be superior to all but the PAKFA and the F-22, being inferior to the latter.

What has escaped most observer radars is the MiG-E and a yet unnamed fighter from China that represent a direct counterpart to the F-35. According to an informed source, the configuration of the MiG-E is a canard delta while the configuration for the Chinese equivalent is hitherto not known. It is however, this author's opinion that we will not see (as in leaked photographs on the internet) any development on the 5th Generation front for at least the next decade. Meanwhile, we will see steady evolution of the J-10 and J-11 with every new block and reworked configurations."

Just wanted to show you that topic. The J-10b would be more advanced than anything that india would field and and could counter the MRCA.

this is from rupeenews.com its a crap website famous for producing crap articles:cheers:
:cheers:

LOL Lemme just say the website, Go on google and type "The Dragon's New Claws: J-10B Emerging"


Oh yeah and btw, you really think this article is crap? TBH i read through it and this guy must be a pro.

I do think MKI is atm better but JF-17 is well being updated atm to satisfy Pak needs, wait till 2020 when India has their MRCA and LCA and HAL Tejas, the sad thing is that Chinas J-10B will be the same as the most advanced indian jet (MCA) and Pakistan will have ordered about 100 J-10b by then while operating over 250 Jf-17:toast_sign:
 
Last edited:
correction.india did not accept migs now.lca still not accepted fully accepted..
a big AF defenitely will have more crashes when compared to smaller ones.

russians dont use single engined fighters(mig-29,su-27),u no y because they no that even their best engines r not highly reliable.jf-17 has the rd-93 which is not even the best russian engine,the other case j-10(which resulted in a crash due to the engine).so i think we will see some crash activity from the jf-17 in a decade if pak continues with this engine.

Yes, thats in the mind of PAF, thats y they are not going with RD-93.
Soon they will get off with it.


Any ways Russia and China is also using these engines which India but they dont have that much crashes as India have especially in case of Mig-29.
 
The attrition rate of the Fulcrums is not bad,moreover IAF MiG-29s fly much more than those in the Russian AF,so there will be attrition.
 
Hi good people,

The leatest photos showing the FC-1 releasing tanks and bombs came with an interview. In the interview with Li Pei, Head of Aviation R&D Division, CATIC he said,
"... ... General performance is comparable with F16A/B, avionics is comparable to F16C/D Block 50, with basic datalink capability."

This says the JF-17 has better ACM than the F16C/D and matches it for avionics. The means OVERALL the JF-17 is superior to the F-16C/D Block 50.

The J-10, as the the Pentagon white paper in China 2006 - approaches the Eurofighter - http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pdfs/China&#37;20Report 2006.pdf ,
"China&#8217;s indigenous fourth-generation fighter, the F-10, completed development in 2004. DIA estimates production of 1,200 aircraft over the life of the program. Reported to be similar in weight and performance to the Eurofighter Typhoon or Dassault Rafale, newer variants of the F-10, the F-10A, and Super-10, now under development, feature improved weapons, engines, and radars.&#8221;

Am I the only one who understands it that way?
 
The J-10 has a delta wing with canards that make it "similar" to EF and Rafale, but the J-10a definitely lags behind in avionics to either of EF or Rafale. A lot of these "official reports" are just to convince congressmen for more funding. A similar report had also claimed Saddam had WMDs.

I think the J-10 should be quite good in terms of aerodynamic performances but lacks in avionics, super-cruise (EF) and EW(Rafale). Those gaps,however, should be massively bridged in the J-10b or so it seems given they have a separate EW housing on the Tail, MAWS, possibly an AESA radar, IRST, and it should also have a glass cockpit like JF-17.
 
I think you are correct mean_bird, the sentence reads:

Reported to be similar in weight and performance to the Eurofighter Typhoon or Dassault Rafale, newer variants of the F-10, the F-10A, and Super-10, now under development, feature improved weapons, engines, and radars.

The sentence is discussing "newer variants of the F-10". So yes, the West expect J-10B to be in the same class as the Eurocanards. And again with the Chinese saying the JF-17, "avionics is comparable to F16C/D Block 50" - I can see why, the J-10B, costing over twice as much can be in the same performance category as the Eurocanards.
 
umm

j-10 has a t/w ratio of .98 while ef has 1.18 and rafael has 1.13 so definately not the same performance wise.

the rf and rafael also carry more weapons and have much better performance with those weapons than a j-10 with weapons due to their 2 engines.

not to mention electronics are at least a generation ahead, yes a generation ahead.

and j-10b isn't a 5th gen fighter but a 4.5 gen and by the time it arrives 2015 mki is due for an upgrade with a new ibris aesa, al-41 supercruise engine, new ew equipment, new avionics, and possibly some stealthy features but i doubt that since airframe wont change. all of those upgrades could make it a 4.75 gen fighter but still not 5th gen.
 
umm

j-10 has a t/w ratio of .98 while ef has 1.18 and rafael has 1.13 so definately not the same performance wise.

the rf and rafael also carry more weapons and have much better performance with those weapons than a j-10 with weapons due to their 2 engines.

not to mention electronics are at least a generation ahead, yes a generation ahead.

and j-10b isn't a 5th gen fighter but a 4.5 gen and by the time it arrives 2015 mki is due for an upgrade with a new ibris aesa, al-41 supercruise engine, new ew equipment, new avionics, and possibly some stealthy features but i doubt that since airframe wont change. all of those upgrades could make it a 4.75 gen fighter but still not 5th gen.

I am not saying they are the same. I am saying same class.

Taking the J-10 from 0.98 TWR to 1.13 (the TWR for the Rafael as you gave above) is a 15&#37; increase. Considering that the JF-17 is scheduled to get a 13% TWR increase with a Chinese engine - you mean that puts the JF-17 in a different class?

I was not going to look at range and payload - if it can carry 2 or 4 MRAAMs, that is good enough. Looks like the J-10 can carry 6 - maybe 8. Consider the Gripen (lighter and shorter range) designed to take on the Flanker - so I am not looking at weight, paylod or size. Lets talk weapons and avionics.

Can we be more specific about what we know on both planes. While it maybe be true, the thing is there is a generally accepted notion that Chinese avionics have to be inferior - there is a taboo to say they have improved and are getting there. Forumites comfort/content in a whitewash statement that "but the Chinese avionics or weapons systems are not as good as the West". We have been pleasantly surprised by the JF-17 over the past 3-4 years as we see what has been achieved - why not expect the same "ooohs and aaahs" for the J-10? I would expect even more since China is building for itself. I am just saying - GIVE ME TANGIBLE FIGURES. Give me specifics on why the EF2000 is better. We don't even know what radar is on J-10 let alone its characteristics - we cannot argue with those in the know - those involved in the projects or Pentagon Defence Intelligence Agents. I am not what they say as gospel - but I am pretty sure they have a lot more info than the mojority here and if I am to take my chances, I believe them.

I just find it hard that we measure the JF-17 against the F-16. We now know it is superior to the F-16A/Bs. We have just been told it is comparable to F-16C/D in AVIONICS. We know J-10 is better but we still want to peg it at the F-16C/D level? Does that not say there is something wrong with our logic here. Methematically this is what we are saying: F-16C/D = JF-17. JF-17 < J-10B. By simple logic J-10B < F-16C/D.

Most people fear challenging the thinking that China is producing anything that surpasses the F-16C/D. Moreso for PAF enthusiasts because it has been built into us to see the F-16C/D as the gold standard and flagship of the air force.

I am not going to talk about generations - the devil is in the actual details. I don't have them - but enlighten me on what you know. I am asking for a good hard discussion and again NOT CLAIMING THAT I KNOW.

However concerning general quality, the FC-1 (JF-17) radar, the KLJ-7, is a miniturised version of the radar on the J-10. Now, the KLJ-7 beat French, Italian, British, Russian and Israeli radars for the PAF order = I am sure that says a lot about its capabilities and quality.
 
Last edited:
yes, according to the airchief KLJ-7 is markedly better than the existing radar on paf f16s...
i think peolpe confuse a lot on specs because jf17 ultimately ended up a better aircraft than originally planned fc1/super7..


i doubt you would get any credible details before j10b is inducted into paf.. before that all posts here are speculative, some credible, some wishful and some biased



who knows in 5 years it comes up with aesa and becomes comparable to block60 etc... who knows china might get some avionics teck from france or russia.. one thing is for sure , they want j10 for themselves, and they do have experience in producing j11b... markets are always open for the highest bidder

regarding j10 vs jf17 , there roles are different
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...houldve-invested-more-j-10s-7.html#post365392
 
Last edited:
umm

j-10 has a t/w ratio of .98 while ef has 1.18 and rafael has 1.13 so definately not the same performance wise.

the rf and rafael also carry more weapons and have much better performance with those weapons than a j-10 with weapons due to their 2 engines.

Its not easy a comparison. Can you quote me one official source that gives the weight of J-10 and its Thrust? All we have are speculated figures from forums.

The F-16 with a single engine is competing against twin-engine aircrafts for the indian MRCA.

As I said, I do not believe the J-10a has the same capabilities as EF or Rafale, however they are compared because of similar designs and that they are bridging the gap quite fast.

not to mention electronics are at least a generation ahead, yes a generation ahead.

and j-10b isn't a 5th gen fighter but a 4.5 gen and by the time it arrives 2015 mki is due for an upgrade with a new ibris aesa, al-41 supercruise engine, new ew equipment, new avionics, and possibly some stealthy features but i doubt that since airframe wont change. all of those upgrades could make it a 4.75 gen fighter but still not 5th gen.

Man, you gotta love indian forumers here. While we are still trying to gather bits of information about the J-10b, indian forumers seem to have already assigned it a generation and calculated its comparison with the mighty invincible MKI that has magically now grown to 4.75 generation.

( just for your information, 5th gen as its usually called has to do with stealth and the MKI's fat RCS is probably worse than a 3rd generation fighter.)

Please enlighten the rest of us just what information you know about the J-10b to already start making a comparison .

Just tell me what exactly you know about J-10b's engine, radar or EW suite? I think I can help you on this account and the answer is "nothing at all".
 
I think the J-10 should be quite good in terms of aerodynamic performances but lacks in avionics, super-cruise (EF) and EW(Rafale). Those gaps,however, should be massively bridged in the J-10b or so it seems given they have a separate EW housing on the Tail, MAWS, possibly an AESA radar, IRST, and it should also have a glass cockpit like JF-17.
Combine that all with a powerful TVC engine and you have an aircraft that could be easily compared to F16 block 60, Gripen NG and even Rafale when it comes to a2a performance. But like you said how comparable will be the avionics compared to western?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom