China does not need the R-77; in fact, they have stopped importing the R-77 with their final batch of Su-30MKKs. Their role has been supplanted by the PL-12 and soon PL-15 series.
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 16
Which actually used the same seekers as the R-77 during limited prod. batch.
But thats not my point. The Indians get a different tour in Russia compared to a PLA dispatch.
1. We don't know the relative proportion of composites used on the JF-17 and Tejas, respectively, so we can't make a judgment of that aspect.
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 16
Actually we do know the relevant portions of composite use on Tejas. Its on the skin! To do this, they need a blended wing body and large delta, hence the configuration as it is! It has low RCS equal and better than Rafale and Gripen. Does it matter? Not really given, AESA and advances in soft kill. The JF-17 is pretty much a modern assembly of F-7. It uses composites where stress is lowest and internally to reduce weight but not the extent of Tejas.
1. Tejas Elta 2052 AESA radar will track and lock on JF17. remember Tejas has lower radar cross section due to
composite body and better AESA radar
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 16
Yes but radars can be switched out! MLU or newer blocks of JF-17 will and could have aesa or anomaly scanner! pointless argument each any every time. Is the nose dia bigger on Tejas? Is the antenna superior? Are any aircraft true stealth? No.
However, I would give the edge in avionics to Tejas just because it offers more versatile weapons platform integration in the long run.
1. Tejas Elta 2052 AESA radar will track and lock on JF17. remember Tejas has lower radar cross section due to
composite body and better AESA radar.
2. Tejas will fire a pair(India can spend more missiles) of R-77-1 at 110km.
3. Israeli jammer will start jamming JF17's KLJ-7(non AESA radar). JF17 jammer fails to jam Israeli AESA radar(AESA radar speciality).
4. R-77 missile comes within 20km of JF17, the R-77 missile switches to its active radar mode.
5. Tejas makes a U-turn and fires chaff and escapes into Indian S400 range. Starts terrain hugging flight to evade radar and escape.
Tejas will repeat the above strategy again and again, and kill many JF17s.
India can afford to buy better BVR missiles in larger numbers from west. India should buy a large stockpile of BVR missiles.
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 162
Tejas may not get R-77s or advertised with such system. The IAF operated Falcrums and fired off Matras. Could come in with Derby or Astra. Its speculation because 1-not tested 2-IAF isn't operating them yet.
You have very dumb argument. These are tactical things that can be changed, and PAF might be doing this.
The real difference, engine, payload, range, efficiency, maintenance and cost are not subject in your post!
Why not read JF-17 offical data by urselves ? Pakistan had showed JF-17 carrying 2x CM-400 ... rest is not my business.
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 16
Yea, I take brochures with a pinch of salt. Information on defence systems is meant to mislead.
Where is the Indian Barak-8 missile ? I didn't see it, could u show me a photo of Barak-8 missile on Indian ship ? or just NOTHING for me coz no photo to prove the truth. Barak-8 no photo !!!
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 16
Lol, biggest threat to prego planes on strike role are interceptors. Do you know that you spinning something that isn't an issue?
No one cares about CM-400. Many nations have supersonic missiles even Taiwan! SK, Europe. My god the list is big.
Its not a kryptonite! Its no Oniks! The JF-17 fly with photon torpedoes but if its engine gives out in the middle of the ocean, would I wanna risk that! The R-33 is designed for a twin engine aircraft! quick turn around time and take off! R-33 has huge issues in terms of life span, but it costs less.
Whats the RD-93? Same stuff modernized. Still has the same flaw. You wanna know why the Falcrum gave off so much smoke in early years? Because the engine sucked! it burned fuel and leaked it too!
Its not good engine! thats why Russians are NOT building a single engine anything since they do not have the Reliability of GE!
Its bark no bite moment.
You want anti shipping duties, than you should get some heavier aircraft exp, if you gonna work from airfields.
But if what I said don't make any sense to you. I'll speak your language.
CHINA SUPAPOWER CHINA STRONG DRAGON SUPERPOWER!!!
Well no sh!te. Its heavy. But if there isn't a difference in weight between the missiles, they may have the same range not less.
Hence why I say, the Brahmos has range of excess 700km which is what 3 tons can do with an airbreathing engine. Like wise you'll not the the YJ-18 or whatever most likely has a 200 KG rail launcher. But just because you see full payload, doesn't mean it makes sense. Something armed with 2 tons of missiles and 2 tons of fuel makes sense for antishipping given the range. 4 tons and less fuel means you'll need mid air refuelling, plus you need to find your target and lets assume PAF sends those Chinese awacs they bought to the arabian sea. You sea the saturated contacts on the screen, 99% are just cargo ships and radars have hard time telling the difference between cargo ship and warship. FYI
ITS a big operation. You fortunate enough to find a warship, you find the queen of the seas! the aircraft carrier Viraat!
Harriers with Derby BVR and Python missiles vs JF-17! Dumb idea isn't it! Your aircraft could get shot down before they get a shot off. The other ships are protected by the carrier and they in turn are her loyal defenders.
The scienerio only works if you arm 1 missile per aircraft. Not to mention other assumptions.
A lighter missile with saturated attacks would be better idea for the JF-17. The CM-400 works well with bombers. Hell even a Flanker has problems with 2.2 tons of Brahmos. Why? Because 1 is not enough! Hence the development of a smaller lighter Brahmos. But this crap is off topic.
But you missed GE 404 cost 4 times then RD -93, but GE is far advance and relaible then RD . since its single engine it is v dangerous if engine failed.
Source:
Tejas, JF-17 among 108 Aircraft confimed to be participating at the Bahrain International Airshow. | Page 14
Its the same as always. The Mig-25 could do mach 2.5 but after words needs the engines completely replaced!
Same is true for the RD-33 series, they burn hot and the blades needs replacement quick. The've made it better ie, less replaced better material, lower burning?. The small life span gives enough thrust, but this means you'll have greater engine failures the faster you accelerate. Both the Mig-29 and JF-17 need the engines to take off. But for landing safely, the Mig can afford to loose 1.
tejas is competing against trucks not jets...
