Arguments of choosing JF-17 Thunder over JAS-39 Gripen

[xyxmt]

Before Any ones goes any further please read this is not a VS thread but on the contrary, it is to compare the 2 platforms to analise why do people think that the one is better then the other, and we should have gone for this rather then that.


JF 17

Saab Gripen

Comparison side by side.

Now many here advocate that Gripen is a better platform and Pakistan should have opted for it, rather then trying to produce their own in thunder. Now for arguments sake, let say that Gripen was not sanctions prone, and we could buy them just like we are producing the thunder. What would you still go with, being a layman while looking at the specs they look kinda similar to me, apart from the fact that Gripen has the experience of Saab behind it. What do you guys think. And again this is not a Vs thread. Please dont make it into one. Thanks.

you dirty man

 

[MastanKhan]

Back in the late 90s/ early 00s the PAF was in a far better position than the IAF in terms of capital acquisition funds so you are no doubt correct the PAF had a serious look at the Rafale, a shame really for them that for one reason or another nothing really was made of this relatively strong finical position and that over time this was eroded to the point that when there are no longer any funds to buy the PAF is now seriously wanting to.

Hi,

You guys still don't understand what happened----pak was a serious contender for the Rafale or the Grippen----the paf assessed that the peace deal with india was going to be finalized and there was no need to buy such a high tech aircraft---let us save some money and make our own aircraft---that is what Musharraf was told---.

With the procurement of Rafale----the paf would have done to the iaf what they did to paf with the purchase of mirage 2000. Indian air force had no where to go---except russian---they would never buy mericn fighter aircraft---. With the procurement of Rafale----india and pkistan would have signed th peace deal----.

fter 9/11---pakistani coffers were filling up and spilling over---india was concerned about pakistn's weapons procurement----peace was in the air---it was the earthquake & the attitude of the pakistanis that changed pakistan's position from a place of strength to a position of weakness.

Pakistanis are giving this stupid comparison on what looks good on the paper----these guys have no clue what loss of time means----. The JF 17 will give them after 15---to 20 years what the Grippen would have given it by mid 2005---if the order ws placed by 2003.

If you have limited resources---then battles are won on quality and proven systems and not on what looks good on the paper----. Paper tigers never win wars---.

Major weapons systems are procured to give the enemy a reason to think of peace----. The purchase of rafale or Grippen by 2003 would have been a good reason for that to have happened----. JF 17 does nothing of that sort.

 

[Lil Mathew]

This is just a chart made by someone. Many datas seems wrong.. For example..
Empty wt= 6411kg
Loaded wt=pilot wt+internal fuel+two wvr+pylons=9100kg
Max take off wt=12700kg
Any calculation gives max external payload less than 4000kg but here given as 4600kg..
Combat radius 1362 km for which mission??
Why you people not beleive in official PAC wrbsite.. As it is their product for sale.. Their datas are the accurate one..that is

• Empty weight: 6,586 kg (14,520 lb)
• Loaded weight: 9,100 kg (20,062 lb)
• Useful load: 3000 kg (6600 lb)
• Max. takeoff weight: 12,383 kg (27,300 lb)
• Powerplant: 1 × Klimov RD-93
  • Dry thrust: 49.4 kN / 51.2 kN (11,106 lbf / 11,510 lbf)
  • Thrust with afterburner: 84.5 kN (19,000 lbf)
• G-limit: +8 g / -3 g
• Internal Fuel Capacity: 2,300 kg (5,130 lb)

Performance

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.6 (1,217.9 mph; 1,960.1 km/h)

 

[Manticore]

This is just a chart made by someone. Many datas seems wrong.. For example..
Empty wt= 6411kg
Loaded wt=pilot wt+internal fuel+two wvr+pylons=9100kg
Max take off wt=12700kg
Any calculation gives max external payload less than 4000kg but here given as 4600kg..
Combat radius 1362 km for which mission??
Why you people not beleive in official PAC wrbsite.. As it is their product for sale.. Their datas are the accurate one..that is

• Empty weight: 6,586 kg (14,520 lb)
• Loaded weight: 9,100 kg (20,062 lb)
• Useful load: 3000 kg (6600 lb)
• Max. takeoff weight: 12,383 kg (27,300 lb)
• Powerplant: 1 × Klimov RD-93
  • Dry thrust: 49.4 kN / 51.2 kN (11,106 lbf / 11,510 lbf)
  • Thrust with afterburner: 84.5 kN (19,000 lbf)
• G-limit: +8 g / -3 g
• Internal Fuel Capacity: 2,300 kg (5,130 lb)

Performance

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.6 (1,217.9 mph; 1,960.1 km/h)

Specifications of JF-17 blk1 based on Dubai Airshow 2011

 

[Lil Mathew]

Specifications of JF-17 blk1 based on Dubai Airshow 2011

Here is the specs from IDEAS 2012..

What is the credibility of a product if you change specs by year???

 

[syed_yusuf]

i reviewed FA-50 golden eagle, it is worth comparing to JF-17. it seems that JF-17 slow pace of production has others catching up fast.

In my opinion FA-50 is a serious contender to JF-17 along with JAS-39

 

[MastanKhan]

Here is the specs from IDEAS 2012..

What is the credibility of a product if you change specs by year???

Hi,

There is nothing wrong with changing specs for an aircraft that is in development and integration and that also by the manufcturer / end user.

Performance specs for all aircraft can change from test flight to actual integration and deployment---it all depends on how conservative initial assessment was as compared to the real on field in deployment results.

What the results show is that successful changes, modifictions, compromises & additions have been successfully carried out for a better and efficient end product.

 

[Amaa'n]

Here is the specs from IDEAS 2012..
What is the credibility of a product if you change specs by year???

its not the matter of Credibility - its simply the matter of Quality Assurance / QC, if the Specs are reviewed that means certain improvements have been made, the project has far more potential and has capacity to evolve, so you will be seeing more of the Spec review in the future

 

[SQ8]

H
What is the credibility of a product if you change specs by year???

The specs of the LCA changed much more than this, that must mean its the least credible aircraft programme around then??

The specs of the F-16 changed a lot more before it got to production.. I certainly doubt that you are not going to try and doubt its credibility.

Come up with something better to try and ridicule the JF-17, otherwise you will not last on this thread.

 

[In arduis fidelis]

Hi,

You guys still don't understand what happened----pak was a serious contender for the Rafale or the Grippen----the paf assessed that the peace deal with india was going to be finalized and there was no need to buy such a high tech aircraft---let us save some money and make our own aircraft---that is what Musharraf was told---.

With the procurement of Rafale----the paf would have done to the iaf what they did to paf with the purchase of mirage 2000. Indian air force had no where to go---except russian---they would never buy mericn fighter aircraft---. With the procurement of Rafale----india and pkistan would have signed th peace deal----.

fter 9/11---pakistani coffers were filling up and spilling over---india was concerned about pakistn's weapons procurement----peace was in the air---it was the earthquake & the attitude of the pakistanis that changed pakistan's position from a place of strength to a position of weakness.

Pakistanis are giving this stupid comparison on what looks good on the paper----these guys have no clue what loss of time means----. The JF 17 will give them after 15---to 20 years what the Grippen would have given it by mid 2005---if the order ws placed by 2003.

If you have limited resources---then battles are won on quality and proven systems and not on what looks good on the paper----. Paper tigers never win wars---.

Major weapons systems are procured to give the enemy a reason to think of peace----. The purchase of rafale or Grippen by 2003 would have been a good reason for that to have happened----. JF 17 does nothing of that sort.

I think the "A" key on your keyboard is broken.

 

[MastanKhan]

I think the "A" key on your keyboard is broken.

Yes it is---.

 

[Informant]

LCA story is different .. Which is not inducted yet and undergoin trials and upgrades to meet FOC std.. Brochure of LCA IOC2 is available in NAL web site.. Final specs will be out after FOC..
JF17 story is diff.. First squandron inducted in 2010 and was in series production with an established production line.. How the basic specs changed btw 2011 &12??
What design change caused 400 kg reduction in max take off wt??
How payload reduced from 4t to 3t??
According to you 50 jft produced have various payloads and mtow..
Not me,one of the mod posted old spec.. I only expressed my doubt.. Read the previous posts..

Quit it, enough of your nonsense.

 

[SQ8]

LCA story is different .. Which is not inducted yet and undergoin trials and upgrades to meet FOC std.. Brochure of LCA IOC2 is available in NAL web site.. Final specs will be out after FOC..
JF17 story is diff.. First squandron inducted in 2010 and was in series production with an established production line.. How the basic specs changed btw 2011 &12??
What design change caused 400 kg reduction in max take off wt??
How payload reduced from 4t to 3t??
According to you 50 jft produced have various payloads and mtow..
Not me,one of the mod posted old spec.. I only expressed my doubt.. Read the previous posts..

The same happened with the F-16. Are you saying that that is not a credible fighter? Would you like to present your immaculate logic to some 27 Nations that operate the type?

Now, Ive looked at the post you refer to and it built from the airshow references. So if all you have got to push your argument is some pointless argument about the difference between what the website says and what the most recent posters say.. which are all the same throughout 2010-2011 and 2012.. then you have no reason to be in thread than to waste our time with this.
So Ill do all of us a favor and take you out of this thread permanently.

 

[Chak Bamu]

LCA trolls never learn. They just have to come back with some sort of gibberish rather than think analytically.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Well , from PAKISTAN's national security's prespective the JF17 Thunder is ideal plane

a) We manufacture majority of the components , our engineers have aquired the knowledge to construct the components
b) We have planned a modular design and this in future we can equip or upgrade the plane with new avionics and other cool
Products
c) Finally we have close ties with China which are way stronger then ties with any other nation

An additional benefit for the plane is we can use Latest Chinese Air-Air missiles which are comparable to best Missiles USA has to offer


Performance wise Pakistani Pilots have compared the JF17 Thunder to F16 C/D and that is enough from our prespective for present needs

PS : Lets not forget "SERIAL Production"