What's new

What would you like to have in the JF-17

Sir,

@Zarvan is a true patriot, and a kind hearted person. His sources have been good, 3 out of 4. No need to belittle him. When it comes to patriotism, we all get a bit over zealous

@MastanKhan His intellectually stimulating conversations are a real mind opener. I may not always agree with his views, but I respect them, simply because God has given him the capability to "think outside the box." Despite not being a member of the armed forces, his knowledge is immense. It actually pains me to see that him and @Indus Falcon have not been given titles as yet, and on the contrary get belittled for petty reasons.

@Maj.Osmani I have deep respect for you and your service to your country. You have contributed very positively to this forum. My humble opinion would be, that both of you should just "agree to disagree" and leave it at that. Look at the +ve's ignore the -ve's and move on. He is a true patriot and should be the least of your worries.

Kindly do take my comments in the right spirit.

Best Regards

This will settle everything.

@Maj.Osmani I am an Indian, and many times I disagree with @MastanKhan and @Zarvan but One thing is clear both are patriotic. And I am a fan of @MastanKhan not because what he post here, but the way he thinks, and never fail to read his post, and what I think why he comes into very weird and innovative ideas sometimes, because he is a true patriotic, and always thinking for the Good and sake for his country. He had given his opinion, you may agree or disagree and if you disagree you could argue and give your opinion or ignore it.

BTW for the sake of this thread

New-Generation IRST Systems From China


The above is a laser designation pod that also mounts an integral IRST sensor.

Shown above and below are IRST sensors that have multiple mounting options, ranging from combat aircraft to helicopters and warships.

Shown below are multi-function optronic turrets with various mounting options.

 
and what about the Sniper targeting pod for JFT which PAF is already using in F-16s ???
 
A rather nooob and innocent question ? Could a Pod fill in the role of IIRST


Hi,

Off course it will----but it will take one hard point---. The problem is that we have a brand new aircraft----just coming off the design and assembly line in the 21st century---and what problems it is facing----.

Where to install three critical items---the irst---the aesa fire control radar---Hatf 8 alcm.

These items should not have been a concern at all due to a lack of real estate.

Before the paf jumped into this aircraft---they already had the example of Japan in front of them---.

Japan---a small nation with a large enemy---large air force---large naval force---pakistan a small nation with a large enemy---with a large air force and a large naval force.

So---what do the japanese do---they are not satisfied with the F16 size---but they rather make it around 15-20% larger---exactly the same aircraft.

Some say that the japanese fighter was not too successful---maybe had issues with electronics---but not with the body---it fitted everything well into it that was needed.

So---basically---paf's work was cut out for it---. They did not need to go too far---the concept was right in front.

and what about the Sniper targeting pod for JFT which PAF is already using in F-16s ???

Hi,

Paf might not want to ask uncle sam for permission to use it on the JF17 because of security breach issues.

We may learn later that uncle sam had the technology to look thru the " peep hole " of the sniper targeting pod.
 
Hi,

Off course it will----but it will take one hard point---. The problem is that we have a brand new aircraft----just coming off the design and assembly line in the 21st century---and what problems it is facing----.

Where to install three critical items---the irst---the aesa fire control radar---Hatf 8 alcm.

These items should not have been a concern at all due to a lack of real estate.

Before the paf jumped into this aircraft---they already had the example of Japan in front of them---.

Japan---a small nation with a large enemy---large air force---large naval force---pakistan a small nation with a large enemy---with a large air force and a large naval force.

So---what do the japanese do---they are not satisfied with the F16 size---but they rather make it around 15-20% larger---exactly the same aircraft.

Some say that the japanese fighter was not too successful---maybe had issues with electronics---but not with the body---it fitted everything well into it that was needed.

So---basically---paf's work was cut out for it---. They did not need to go too far---the concept was right in front.



Hi,

Paf might not want to ask uncle sam for permission to use it on the JF17 because of security breach issues.

We may learn later that uncle sam had the technology to look thru the " peep hole " of the sniper targeting pod.
This happens when the pilot's decide the design of the aircraft. A great dog fighter that can pull a lot of g's and nice tight turn circle....but a strategist will design for the future needs where BVRs will be norm not the exceptions and carrying heavy weapons more advanced avioinics and radars will win you the fight...not for the dog fights of 1965 when our pilots enjoyed knocking Indian crows out of the sky.
 
I guess I mentioned it before that there was an indigenuous design of an aircraft and that was larger, taller with wider landing gears which was shelved due to the lack of funds.
When I was studying at Embry-Riddle, Dr. Raymer came to lecture us about designs and history of the aircrafts, he told us that Masserschmitt (ME262) was a much better aircraft than the Spitfire, but it had one major drawback, the narrow landing gears. So more German pilots were killed during landing due to less stability and high speed than destroyed by allies...
I wish the designers of JF-17 had attend that lecture :(

Hi,

I think they already knew that---but their problem is that they are THICK HEADED---their arrogance gets the best of their judgements---.

A simple example is a lack of 2 seater in the JF17---. That is simply a court martial offence---. Their arrogance---' we simply don't need it---our pilots are superior '---you have F16 2 seaters---you have mirage 2 seaters---you have the F7 2 seaters---and then they go about marketing this aircraft to the world---where they get a real taste of the medicine---.

These are Adolescent mistakes by a fighting force---which should not have happened.
 
Hi,

I think they already knew that---but their problem is that they are THICK HEADED---their arrogance gets the best of their judgements---.

A simple example is a lack of 2 seater in the JF17---. That is simply a court martial offence---. Their arrogance---' we simply don't need it---our pilots are superior '---you have F16 2 seaters---you have mirage 2 seaters---you have the F7 2 seaters---and then they go about marketing this aircraft to the world---where they get a real taste of the medicine---.

These are Adolescent mistakes by a fighting force---which should not have happened.
The dual seater has already entered the production, so that will be taken care of. But I wonder if that also has the same landing size. I think a quick iteration airframe design can be performed by increasing the size because taller and wider landing gears need stronger support and slightly larger space for those to get tucked in. Also the nose xsectional area can also be increased...but it needs a decision from the top.
 
And its up to moderators what they decides.

@Arsalan
Kindly i have your adivse on this.
and @WebMaster

This person keeps taunting me and your response is encourangin him.

@Khafee @Indus Falcon @Tipu7
Sir you must report any post that is a personal attack and insult.

For this, i will request you personally to move on. You didn't knew about Mastan sahib and send him that pic, his response was a little bit rude, :P (he tends to be in such mood some time) you compared him with Zarvan and then it all went south. It all started with a light hearted post by you that was misunderstood. Let us just move on with the discussion. I hope you and @MastanKhan can forget what happened on a personal request. If you both note, it was simply a misunderstanding that went real bad.

@Maj.Osmani , Mastan sahib is a senior and very well respected members. Though can be bitter about some things some times :lol: but there are no ill feelings towards Pakistan or toward anyone else here. I hope you too will get along pretty fine once you know each other. :) :tup:

Yes, as well answered by @The SC, but it comes at a cost, i.e. you lock up a hard point. A built in IRST would free it up for ammo.
Yes, the disadvantage you mentioned in right, specially in case of JF17. However while we talk about the disadvantage it will be best to mention one advantage as well, again, specially for PAF. :) The cost factor. Instead of equipping each and every plane you can buy some PODs and use them with different planes as per mission requirement.

This said, i do hope that PAF goes for an integrated IRST.
 
Hello All
one simple question for all of you !! Is it wise enough to have 200+ JF17 with small body and less capabilities ??
or is it wise to have 200+ JF17 only???
Thank you all

Note: Please do not bring the crape called affordable or cheap Bird " As we all know technology and advance Techs are getting Expansive every day"
 
Sir,
Zarvan is a true patriot, and a kind hearted person. His sources have been good, 3 out of 4. No need to belittle him. When it comes to patriotism, we all get a bit over zealous
It gets easier when you get yourself associated with almost everything the defense industry produces :P
I agree with all of the rest! :) :tup:
 
It seems IRST is/should going to be plug and play
Reason why

1. Block 1 & 2 current can be fitted with out structural modifications
2. Different solutions can be used and for start Chinese solution will be the way to go but soon we will see some other vendors coming in as well
3. IRST/Sniper pod can both be plug and play

Question is where to mount

1. There is a couple of news flashes 2-3 days back about strengthening of underbelly and wing tips for additional hardpoints 2. If @MastanKhan is right about flat wheeling we are in trouble as the only other option will be mounting on any hardpoint ,but what i understand as an Engineer there is always a way to re Engineering until unless original design is screwed up beyond expectation.
3. Ideally should be underbelly.
 
It seems IRST is/should going to be plug and play
Reason why

1. Block 1 & 2 current can be fitted with out structural modifications
2. Different solutions can be used and for start Chinese solution will be the way to go but soon we will see some other vendors coming in as well
3. IRST/Sniper pod can both be plug and play

Question is where to mount

1. There is a couple of news flashes 2-3 days back about strengthening of underbelly and wing tips for additional hardpoints 2. If @MastanKhan is right about flat wheeling we are in trouble as the only other option will be mounting on any hardpoint ,but what i understand as an Engineer there is always a way to re Engineering until unless original design is screwed up beyond expectation.
3. Ideally should be underbelly.

Actually you raised a good question.

Some IRST are slaved with the Main Radar of the fighter plane, which can help to pilot to give both the images simultaneously. I think Raven and Skyward are both slaved to each other. Some IRST also have the laser range finder, and some IRST is coupled with Optronic sensors too, such as Russian OLS-30/35 in Su 30/35.

It would be nice if any expert could explain them further.

@Khafee @MilSpec @PARIKRAMA @Quwa @Oscar
 
Back
Top Bottom