Advanced JF-17 versions coming, 10 years after service entry

[Path-Finder]

r u from zee news?

he got confused with LCA Mk. X with space capabilities!

 

[GoldenRatio1618]

it should be more advance so to counter the indian homemade new fifth generation aspirations

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Decision to choose a radar , at least should have been announced firmly long time ago. The secrecy in this regards is a bit unwarranted

 

[khanasifm]

At 230kg and 330 mm Dia it's much lighter the slimmer plus better aerodynamic but paf went with aselpod which at 240 kg and Dia plus aerodynamic wise is std config but perhaps better

any way 2 different pods to make it compatible with both western And Chinese weapons for the market




The latest entry to the YINGS III family is the Model 330, which weighs 230 kg and appears to draw heavily from Lockheed Martin AN/AAQ-33 Sniper advanced targeting pod (ATP) with its swept/faceted transparent sapphire fixed-shroud nose configuration and lightweight, aerodynamic structure which is designed to improve stability at high speed flight.

 

[AUz]

Hopefully JF-17 Block III is packed with Aselan advance Aselpod, AESA radar, increased payload capacity to 6000kg, retractable IFR, and HMD.

IRST would be a cherry on the top!

Can't wait to see JF-17 Block IIIs getting inducted into our operational squadrons.

 

[ziaulislam]

The old age pathetic mindset of PAF strike again. They are acting as if IAF is the IAF of 90's. Instead of upgrading all the JF-17's along with Block-3 production, they are cutting corners again or delaying the whole process.

.

you dont need to update all thunders to block 3 standards, having a few capable aircraft among the rest in net centric approach is enough, i would rather save the money get more numbers, as a force of less than 300 fighters assuming paf just acquires less than 200 thunders is not enough to counter a gigantic 800+IAF in around 2025-30

 

[Trango Towers]

I have just posted a thread

Indian navy has rejected the Tejas.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

There is also the question of airframe age in the Block-I/II. By the time the PAF's 50 Block-IIIs are manufactured and put into full operational service, the older Block-Is will be over 10 years old. These jets have an airframe life of 4,000 hours, which is about 16-20 years of use, I think?

Zeroing these airframes, replacing their engines and then putting them through the Block-III could be costly relative to a new JF-17.

I'd rather the PAF just fly the Block-I and Block-IIs to the end and then replace them with new JF-17 variants. That's basically a big reason why Pakistan invested in producing fighter aircraft - i.e. be free to supplant old planes with new-built ones.

 

[Tank131]

Agree with @Bilal Khan (Quwa) . Another thought would be to hand the older frames over to the navy and replace them earlier. All Blk 1s were upgraded to Blk2 standard anyways. With a2a refueling, KLJ-7V2's 110km range, its ability to carry both CM-400AKG and C-802AK and SD-10A/PL-5Eii missiles it makes for a good naval strike and air support fighter. PAF will replace these 100 with Blk 3 sqn by sqn.

Another option is to sell them at discounted rates to a 3rd countries, in order to help facilitate bringing them into the JF-17 "environment" (to use a marketing term). I'm sure Argentina, Sri Lanka, Azerbeijan and others may be very interested in Block 2 fighters for their airforces. And if they can get them at a premium (like 10-15m/aircraft) that would be a huge win for them and for PAF as far as service chain and potential future sales of more advanced variants. Many would have 10 years plus left on their airframes.

As far as Blk 3 layout, I would hope given SAAB's offer of the GaN AESA radar on Gripen that the Chinese or Italians come with their A-game. Should the IAF go for F-16IN it may be ok as the Vixen likely staks up well against the APG-80, but if they go for Gripen, I'm not sure how the Vixen-1000E would stack up. We know that the Raven ES-05 (150km range), on the Gripen NG, is a derivative of the Vixen 1000E, it is likely more advanced and has better scanning angles and likely better range. As such I doubt the Vixen 1000E would compare favorably. I hope the Italians offer something more substantial than Vixen 1000E. The KLJ-7A (if it lives up to the rumored capabilities of 170km range, advanced jamming resistance etc) would probably stack up reasonably well, given that these ranges are not too far off from the 185-190km range of the Rafale's RBE2-AA AESA radar and the 185km range of the Eurofighter Typhoon's CAPTOR AESA radar. It is almost certain that GaN AESA range is similar to these.

Additionally, they hope would be that the PAF, if they are really trying to make this the Ultimate Thunder, would get advanced electronics like Britecloud or EAD DRFM systems, the EOTS-89 (preferrably) or EORD-31. The EOTS-89 would free up a much needed hardpoint during missions, which would otherwise be used for FLIR and IRST. It is reported that using EOTS the J-20/J-31 could detect and target stealth aircraft from over 100km even if they were being jammed by Growlers. (B-2=150km, F-22A= 110km). That would help the JF-17 tremendously in settings of significant EW environments. It would go a huge way in leveling the playing field against Rafale, MKI, and F-16IN /Gripen E. All would be given a run for their money by a fighter that would be 1/3 their price which was what was envisioned at the onset of the JF-17 program. It would give the PAF tremendous breathing room when it comes to the need to procure a 4.5 Gen fighter as this would essentially take its place, especially if it utilized more composites to decrease weight and RCS, and used a more powerful engine like WS-13E or EJ-200 (which are both rated in the 20,000lb range), although the EJ-230 would be better with a rating expected in 23,000lb range (but that is highly unlikey) for PAF.

Following the induction of the blk-3 (if load out is similar to what I have mentioned above), the J-31 could be acquired as a direct replacement for the F-16s. With 40-50 J-31's and 200-250 JF-17 Blk 3/4, PAF would be in good shape. If more numbers are needed, add a mix of J-31 and blk3/4 and you have a high capability low cost Airforce, of which the bulk are built at home.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Agree with @Bilal Khan (Quwa) . Another thought would be to hand the older frames over to the navy and replace them earlier. All Blk 1s were upgraded to Blk2 standard anyways. With a2a refueling, KLJ-7V2's 110km range, its ability to carry both CM-400AKG and C-802AK and SD-10A/PL-5Eii missiles it makes for a good naval strike and air support fighter. PAF will replace these 100 with Blk 3 sqn by sqn.

Another option is to sell them at discounted rates to a 3rd countries, in order to help facilitate bringing them into the JF-17 "environment" (to use a marketing term). I'm sure Argentina, Sri Lanka, Azerbeijan and others may be very interested in Block 2 fighters for their airforces. And if they can get them at a premium (like 10-15m/aircraft) that would be a huge win for them and for PAF as far as service chain and potential future sales of more advanced variants. Many would have 10 years plus left on their airframes.

As far as Blk 3 layout, I would hope given SAAB's offer of the GaN AESA radar on Gripen that the Chinese or Italians come with their A-game. Should the IAF go for F-16IN it may be ok as the Vixen likely staks up well against the APG-80, but if they go for Gripen, I'm not sure how the Vixen-1000E would stack up. We know that the Raven ES-05 (150km range), on the Gripen NG, is a derivative of the Vixen 1000E, it is likely more advanced and has better scanning angles and likely better range. As such I doubt the Vixen 1000E would compare favorably. I hope the Italians offer something more substantial than Vixen 1000E. The KLJ-7A (if it lives up to the rumored capabilities of 170km range, advanced jamming resistance etc) would probably stack up reasonably well, given that these ranges are not too far off from the 185-190km range of the Rafale's RBE2-AA AESA radar and the 185km range of the Eurofighter Typhoon's CAPTOR AESA radar. It is almost certain that GaN AESA range is similar to these.

Additionally, they hope would be that the PAF, if they are really trying to make this the Ultimate Thunder, would get advanced electronics like Britecloud or EAD DRFM systems, the EOTS-89 (preferrably) or EORD-31. The EOTS-89 would free up a much needed hardpoint during missions, which would otherwise be used for FLIR and IRST. It is reported that using EOTS the J-20/J-31 could detect and target stealth aircraft from over 100km even if they were being jammed by Growlers. (B-2=150km, F-22A= 110km). That would help the JF-17 tremendously in settings of significant EW environments. It would go a huge way in leveling the playing field against Rafale, MKI, and F-16IN /Gripen E. All would be given a run for their money by a fighter that would be 1/3 their price which was what was envisioned at the onset of the JF-17 program. It would give the PAF tremendous breathing room when it comes to the need to procure a 4.5 Gen fighter as this would essentially take its place, especially if it utilized more composites to decrease weight and RCS, and used a more powerful engine like WS-13E or EJ-200 (which are both rated in the 20,000lb range), although the EJ-230 would be better with a rating expected in 23,000lb range (but that is highly unlikey) for PAF.

Following the induction of the blk-3 (if load out is similar to what I have mentioned above), the J-31 could be acquired as a direct replacement for the F-16s. With 40-50 J-31's and 200-250 JF-17 Blk 3/4, PAF would be in good shape. If more numbers are needed, add a mix of J-31 and blk3/4 and you have a high capability low cost Airforce, of which the bulk are built at home.

An Indian F-16 or Gripen purchase would likely materialize (in actual planes in service) into the Block-IV or Block-V period, i.e. mid-to-late 2020s/early 2030s. By then I think the AESA radar offerings, especially in China and potentially in Turkey, would be compelling.

 

[Tank131]

An Indian F-16 or Gripen purchase would likely materialize (in actual planes in service) into the Block-IV or Block-V period, i.e. mid-to-late 2020s/early 2030s. By then I think the AESA radar offerings, especially in China and potentially in Turkey, would be compelling.

True enough, but you still have the Rafale and MKI to contend with. If you can get a top flight electronic system from your current providers now, why not go for it. A JF-17 equipped as I proposed above would rival the Rafale in terms of electronics and surpass the MKI

 

[Gryphon]

There is also the question of airframe age in the Block-I/II. By the time the PAF's 50 Block-IIIs are manufactured and put into full operational service, the older Block-Is will be over 10 years old. These jets have an airframe life of 4,000 hours, which is about 16-20 years of use, I think?

Zeroing these airframes, replacing their engines and then putting them through the Block-III could be costly relative to a new JF-17.

I'd rather the PAF just fly the Block-I and Block-IIs to the end and then replace them with new JF-17 variants. That's basically a big reason why Pakistan invested in producing fighter aircraft - i.e. be free to supplant old planes with new-built ones.

I believe there will be a program similar to MLU with the JF-17s. As Alan Warnes mentioned, Block 1/2 aircraft could get a new engine as part of an upgrade (in the future).

And BTW, a senior PAF official mentioned JF-17 Block 4 in a magazine interview around 2 years ago.


@The Eagle

Only 2 out of 50 JF-17 Block 2's are two-seat versions.

The 32nd Block 2 was inducted earlier this month.

 

[The Eagle]

Only 2 out of 50 JF-17 Block 2's are two-seat versions.

The 32nd Block 2 was inducted earlier this month.

Thanks for the tag... However, it was reported that 3 JF-17B will be produced with 2 for PAF and one for AVIC and 32 is produced so as to say... we are total at 82 Block-II + 2JF-17B=84 and remaining 16 Block-II will be produced to make it 100 and one JF-17B will remain in China so for PAF it will be 2 JF-17B and 98 Block-II. Please highlight if any mistake here.

 

[Bratva]

What mindset is it?
You have made a statement referencing a mindset but not really clarifying whatever that mindset is
What was the IAF mindset?
What corners have been cut and why in your opinion?

1 & 1.5. Mindset of putting off things because they think it is not critical at the moment without taking into calculation, that if Economic crunch occurs, whatever they thought they would achieve in future would become a thing of distant future. Case in point French avionics deal and How block-2 was supposed to be Block 2.5 ( mixture of 2 and 3 block with Swedish retractable IFR and extra hardpoint at chin)

2. IAF of 90's were like PAF. Until late 90's when they started dealing with and with their help upgraded Russian Maal and in 2000's went full throttle to upgrade their Mirages and SU-30 both to maximum . Now the dividends are paying they are fielding upgraded models of Mirage 2000 and SU-30 in quantity as well as in quantity.

3. Point 1 & 1.5 refers to the corners. By 2019-2020, When IAF would be having Super Sukhoi, Upgraded Mirages and Rafael with Long range Extremely fast BVR and Extremely agile IIR Missiles mated with HMD. We would be introducing Block-3 in limited numbers by then and Block 1 and 2 would look timid in front of them.

you dont need to update all thunders to block 3 standards, having a few capable aircraft among the rest in net centric approach is enough, i would rather save the money get more numbers, as a force of less than 300 fighters assuming paf just acquires less than 200 thunders is not enough to counter a gigantic 800+IAF in around 2025-30

Dont put your too much faith into Net Centric environment. The IAF of 2020-2021 would be capable of heavily interfering our Link-17. As far as I have seen, Pakistan has just finished laying down the foundations of Link-17 with light-to-moderate protecting but protection against Heavy Electronic jamming from French,Russian EW jammers, I doubt it would stand the test against them . In that environment, we need at least AESA capable JF's. to withstand the heavy duty Electronic jammingd

Agree with @Bilal Khan (Quwa) . Another thought would be to hand the older frames over to the navy and replace them earlier. All Blk 1s were upgraded to Blk2 standard anyways. With a2a refueling, KLJ-7V2's 110km range, its ability to carry both CM-400AKG and C-802AK and SD-10A/PL-5Eii missiles it makes for a good naval strike and air support fighter. PAF will replace these 100 with Blk 3 sqn by sqn.

Another option is to sell them at discounted rates to a 3rd countries, in order to help facilitate bringing them into the JF-17 "environment" (to use a marketing term). I'm sure Argentina, Sri Lanka, Azerbeijan and others may be very interested in Block 2 fighters for their airforces. And if they can get them at a premium (like 10-15m/aircraft) that would be a huge win for them and for PAF as far as service chain and potential future sales of more advanced variants. Many would have 10 years plus left on their airframes.

As far as Blk 3 layout, I would hope given SAAB's offer of the GaN AESA radar on Gripen that the Chinese or Italians come with their A-game. Should the IAF go for F-16IN it may be ok as the Vixen likely staks up well against the APG-80, but if they go for Gripen, I'm not sure how the Vixen-1000E would stack up. We know that the Raven ES-05 (150km range), on the Gripen NG, is a derivative of the Vixen 1000E, it is likely more advanced and has better scanning angles and likely better range. As such I doubt the Vixen 1000E would compare favorably. I hope the Italians offer something more substantial than Vixen 1000E. The KLJ-7A (if it lives up to the rumored capabilities of 170km range, advanced jamming resistance etc) would probably stack up reasonably well, given that these ranges are not too far off from the 185-190km range of the Rafale's RBE2-AA AESA radar and the 185km range of the Eurofighter Typhoon's CAPTOR AESA radar. It is almost certain that GaN AESA range is similar to these.

Additionally, they hope would be that the PAF, if they are really trying to make this the Ultimate Thunder, would get advanced electronics like Britecloud or EAD DRFM systems, the EOTS-89 (preferrably) or EORD-31. The EOTS-89 would free up a much needed hardpoint during missions, which would otherwise be used for FLIR and IRST. It is reported that using EOTS the J-20/J-31 could detect and target stealth aircraft from over 100km even if they were being jammed by Growlers. (B-2=150km, F-22A= 110km). That would help the JF-17 tremendously in settings of significant EW environments. It would go a huge way in leveling the playing field against Rafale, MKI, and F-16IN /Gripen E. All would be given a run for their money by a fighter that would be 1/3 their price which was what was envisioned at the onset of the JF-17 program. It would give the PAF tremendous breathing room when it comes to the need to procure a 4.5 Gen fighter as this would essentially take its place, especially if it utilized more composites to decrease weight and RCS, and used a more powerful engine like WS-13E or EJ-200 (which are both rated in the 20,000lb range), although the EJ-230 would be better with a rating expected in 23,000lb range (but that is highly unlikey) for PAF.

Following the induction of the blk-3 (if load out is similar to what I have mentioned above), the J-31 could be acquired as a direct replacement for the F-16s. With 40-50 J-31's and 200-250 JF-17 Blk 3/4, PAF would be in good shape. If more numbers are needed, add a mix of J-31 and blk3/4 and you have a high capability low cost Airforce, of which the bulk are built at home.

More Like.. Block- 1 was upgraded to Bloc 1.5 with KLJ V-2 and most probably datalink hardware installed in to them.Spanish EW and IFR would make them true Block 2.

We dont have any confirmation that all JF-17's have been upgraded. Bigger hint would be those Block-1 capable to fire SD-10 A are Block 1.5

There is also the question of airframe age in the Block-I/II. By the time the PAF's 50 Block-IIIs are manufactured and put into full operational service, the older Block-Is will be over 10 years old. These jets have an airframe life of 4,000 hours, which is about 16-20 years of use, I think?

Zeroing these airframes, replacing their engines and then putting them through the Block-III could be costly relative to a new JF-17.

I'd rather the PAF just fly the Block-I and Block-IIs to the end and then replace them with new JF-17 variants. That's basically a big reason why Pakistan invested in producing fighter aircraft - i.e. be free to supplant old planes with new-built ones.

This is one side of Picture where we assume all was hunky dory at LoC. India had not signed the Rafael deal. Su-30 and Mirage upgrades were being delayed. 18 F-16 Block 52 would've been getting AIM-9X. And Previous F-16's were being put through F-16 V upgrades. JF-17 production would extend beyond 250. PAF has declared they will replace Block-1 & 2 with upgraded variants b 2025-2030 timeframe.

But the other side of picture, if we are putting F-16 through SLEP. We are throwing money to extend F-16 life isnt it ? So why not do the same for JF-17 which is the mainstay of PAF. While F-16 is the minority in PAF.

 

[SQ8]

1 & 1.5. Mindset of putting off things because they think it is not critical at the moment without taking into calculation, that if Economic crunch occurs, whatever they thought they would achieve in future would become a thing of distant future. Case in point French avionics deal and How block-2 was supposed to be Block 2.5 ( mixture of 2 and 3 block with Swedish retractable IFR and extra hardpoint at chin)

2. IAF of 90's were like PAF. Until late 90's when they started dealing with and with their help upgraded Russian Maal and in 2000's went full throttle to upgrade their Mirages and SU-30 both to maximum . Now the dividends are paying they are fielding upgraded models of Mirage 2000 and SU-30 in quantity as well as in quantity.

3. Point 1 & 1.5 refers to the corners. By 2019-2020, When IAF would be having Super Sukhoi, Upgraded Mirages and Rafael with Long range Extremely fast BVR and Extremely agile IIR Missiles mated with HMD. We would be introducing Block-3 in limited numbers by then and Block 1 and 2 would look timid in front of them.



Dont put your too much faith into Net Centric environment. The IAF of 2020-2021 would be capable of heavily interfering our Link-17. As far as I have seen, Pakistan has just finished laying down the foundations of Link-17 with light-to-moderate protecting but protection against Heavy Electronic jamming from French,Russian EW jammers, I doubt it would stand the test against them . In that environment, we need at least AESA capable JF's. to withstand the heavy duty Electronic jammingd




More Like.. Block- 1 was upgraded to Bloc 1.5 with KLJ V-2 and most probably datalink hardware installed in to them.Spanish EW and IFR would make them true Block 2.

We dont have any confirmation that all JF-17's have been upgraded. Bigger hint would be those Block-1 capable to fire SD-10 A are Block 1.5



This is one side of Picture where we assume all was hunky dory at LoC. India had not signed the Rafael deal. Su-30 and Mirage upgrades were being delayed. 18 F-16 Block 52 would've been getting AIM-9X. And Previous F-16's were being put through F-16 V upgrades. JF-17 production would extend beyond 250. PAF has declared they will replace Block-1 & 2 with upgraded variants b 2025-2030 timeframe.

But the other side of picture, if we are putting F-16 through SLEP. We are throwing money to extend F-16 life isnt it ? So why not do the same for JF-17 which is the mainstay of PAF. While F-16 is the minority in PAF.

In 1. You assume that putting off is based upon negligence and not simple because they don't have the funds available, that is a very broad and frankly baseless generalization
Be it the french avionics or otherwise

Just because you put a RFP out, does not mean you have funds right now; you assume economics to stay that way to buy stuff lest you default
And our reputation as a defaulting nation is well known

2. Perhaps you are not aware of how India's economy took off in the 90s , suggest you look at historical gdp growth figures for both countries before making that conclusion

3. You are making conclusive opinions on the basis that Pakistan has always been flush with funds
Even if we take the exaggerated economics of the Shaukat aziz era as true, they still paled in comparison to what is required as you suggest
Then you have overlooked the Zardari eras economic disaster

In all of these
You have still not presented a true case for making the "IAF mindset" which you still have not clarified beyond talking about sitting still till the 90s.. considering that both Pakistan & India's economies were relatively neck in neck until the IT boom; the IAF too did whatever it could faced with all the constraints(economic ,diplomatic, social) just as we did.

Please also state techincal basis of your doubts regarding link-17
I would like to know where my old team was
A: deficient in the design&implementation of ECCM capabilities
B: negligent in OPSEC in letting you know any details of the exact capabilities link-17 has