What's new

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

Three things

1. What does the Chart prove?
2. Source of the chart?

This guy:
https://defence.pk/members/manticore.13390/

Your welcome to refute it if you can.

3. Article has speculation and quotes? Lot of people make optimistic plans. Seldom do they pan out according to schedule.
Quotes of Officials involved on the project ,.. Would you prefer interviews of those officials (published) in international magazines?
Or the official chart posted by Manticore?
 
Piper, The AOA reference of jf17 is from a pilots interview in afm etc magazine-- ive linked that page image.

Rest of the jft info is from the first and only jft presentation we have, given by the project manager in 2011. We have taken it as standard as other sites and posters are in the hands of different publicity teams CAC/PAC/PAF and have slightly different specs. This presentation was given to prospective buyers.

Thrust to wt ratio>1 is from the new jft documentary

There is some slight variation, just like in the mmrca competition, the gripen team used to change the range / payload specs according to its needs to compete with rafale
 
This! This is the correct and sensible answer. JF-17 is the right choice due to 100 other reasons but you can't diss off other products just because you have chosen JF-17.

Nobody dissed the Gripen to begin with... Rather I asked what dies Gripen C or the NG bring on the table JF doesn't?

It was you coming with guns blazing with baseless rants.. To prove what?
 
This guy:
https://defence.pk/members/manticore.13390/

Your welcome to refute it if you can.


Quotes of Officials involved on the project ,.. Would you prefer interviews of those officials (published) in international magazines?
Or the official chart posted by Manticore?

Thanks for providing the source. With all due respect to manticore, the source as i suspected is not based on technical on -field evaluation but quotes and such. I can't really fault it as JF-17 has never been involved in competitive bidding process where a neutral party evaluates each claim made by designers. Hence all we have is the word of designers who are undoubtedly biased for their product.

I therefore will hold on to my skepticism

Ditto for the article. All extrapolation and quotes, no independent validation.

Where as Jets like Gripen, F-16/18/15, typhoons, rafales, migs and sukhois have all been through the grinder in neutral party evaluation with their peers so benefit of doubt in all cases will go to them.

Day JF-17 gets invited and evaluated in a peer competition, is the day people will start taking it seriously until then to customer with means it remains a curiosity and not a serious option.

Nobody dissed the Gripen to begin with... Rather I asked what dies Gripen C or the NG bring on the table JF doesn't?

It was you coming with guns blazing with baseless rants.. To prove what?

Simple, Gripen brings extra to the table in terms of better engines, avionics and missile package. The extra stuff may not be proportionate to the price being charged but it undoubtedly makes Gripen a better fighter in one to one comparison.
 
Thanks for providing the source. With all due respect to manticore, the source as i suspected is not based on technical on -field evaluation but quotes and such. I can't really fault it as JF-17 has never been involved in competitive bidding process where a neutral party evaluates each claim made by designers. Hence all we have is the word of designers who are undoubtedly biased for their product.

I therefore will hold on to my skepticism

Ditto for the article. All extrapolation and quotes, no independent validation.

Where as Jets like Gripen, F-16/18/15, typhoons, rafales, migs and sukhois have all been through the grinder in neutral party evaluation with their peers so benefit of doubt in all cases will go to them.

Day JF-17 gets invited and evaluated in a peer competition, is the day people will start taking it seriously until then to customer with means it remains a curiosity and not a serious option.

So basically you are claiming that the pilots who fly it.. And the guys who worked on it are a bunch of liars..

Okay.
 
So basically you are claiming that the pilots who fly it.. And the guys who worked on it are a bunch of liars..

Okay.

I wouldn't put it so harshly but pilots are like mothers, they think their jets are the best. So their word cant be taken at face value.
 
Simple, Gripen brings extra to the table in terms of better engines, avionics and missile package. The extra stuff may not be proportionate to the price being charged but it undoubtedly makes Gripen a better fighter in one to one comparison.


Better engine.. The JF is already generating a TWR superior to the Gripen ..

It's radar again is superior (the new KLJ-7 V2)

Avionics .. How so!

Missile package ; not really.. JF-17 has a wide range of weapons integrated to it .. From GBUs to ALCMs .. From CM-400 ASMs to H series SOWs and SD-10B to R-Darter to chose from.


Although I'd very much like to see your some source for your rather solid opinion.
 
I wouldn't put it so harshly but pilots are like mothers, they think their jets are the best. So their word cant be taken at face value.
Just like in the mmrca competition, the gripen team used to change 'adjust' the range / payload specs according to its needs to compete with rafale..ask any indian member but thats just me. If you dont believe the words presented to the prospective buyers in the presentation then there is no need to waste each others time
Good day
 
The sources I have seen state the number of flight hours for the JF-17 to be 4,000.
(That might be wrong of course)
Gripen is designed for 8,000 flight hours.



Sweden estimate the cost to be ~72M$ Per plane.
I have not seen any data for cost per flight hour
Point noted !

The engine of gripen is of american origin ? Is made assembled in Sweden or directly brought from US ?
 
I wouldn't put it so harshly but pilots are like mothers, they think their jets are the best. So their word cant be taken at face value.

So Project Directors,Marketing teams and pilots at an international Airshow like the Paris Airshow lie infront of the international press and potential customers.. Gimme a break friend.
 
Point noted !

The engine of gripen is of american origin ? Is made assembled in Sweden or directly brought from US ?
RM12 designed and built by Volvo Aerospace was based on the F404. Used in Gripen A-D.
U.S. made F414 in Gripen E, but GKN Aerospace (formerly Volvo Aerospace) is an important subcontractor for the F414.
 
Just like in the mmrca competition, the gripen team used to change 'adjust' the range / payload specs according to its needs to compete with rafale..ask any indian member but thats just me. If you dont believe the words presented to the prospective buyers in the presentation then there is no need to waste each others time
Good day

Yeah, true.

So Project Directors,Marketing teams and pilots at an international Airshow like the Paris Airshow lie infront of the international press and potential customers.. Gimme a break friend.

The break is yours. There is nothing really much to talk about as Manticore said I dont believe the JF-17 or for that matter any Chinese origin Jet brochure. I will look forward with great interest when JF17 enters into competitive bidding by third parties. Chances are low, as till now except for some poor countries no middle or high income country has shown any interest in JF-17 or for that matter any Chinese Jets. Soon the market for 4 gen jets will be over and JF-17 while being a good domestic product and an excellent debutante effort is unlikely to set charts on fire.

And who knows, I might eat shoe leather and block 3 will be the new F-16. Good Luck!
 
well ok lets do the jf-17 blk 1 vs gripen c/d

easy option......... gripen why????
more maneouverable: it delta wing canard config makes it incredibly unstable (which is a good thing)
more sophisticated electronics suite with the radar and irst and ew package. that you can't argue with.
engine : it may have less power buts its more fuel efficent and effective its topspeed is greater yet both jets are in the same weight class.
the jf-17 is cheaper

also the whole gripen vs jf-17 is flawed its like how people were comparing the ada class lcs and the f22p. just because they are the same size does not mean they should be compared. as they its like comparing apples to oranges
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom