Introducing - JF-17 Thunder Block - II

[MastanKhan]

MAR-1 was to be integrated onto Mirage and JF-17 simultaneously in 2015. Wasnt the integration done in 2015 or it got delayed further?

What was the reason all these things were not done with Block-1 and such efforts got underway only in 2012ish or 2013ish and were verified first on Block-II and if PAF is in mood it will be implemented backwards ? PT-5 of JF-17 was supposed to be weapons integration test bird. 2008-2014 is a large period where PAF could have achieved what they are trying to achieve it now.

Hi,

Integration of weapons is a long and a tedious process---specially when you have to start all over due to the Thales fiasco by paf.

Now how many would disagree with me about an impartial civilian oversight committee over this project---.

 

[Desertfalcon]

Not to derail the thread but the JF-17 was never really intended for BVR or long endurance CAP missions. It was intended as a replacement for aging Mirage III/V, A-5, J-7's in point air defence and ground attack. As far back as 2006 though, China offered the J-10, (which is designed from the beginning to have BVR, air-to-air refuelling, etc.), Pakistan signing a deal back in 2009 for 36 fighters. What has become of that?

 

[SQ8]

Not to derail the thread but the JF-17 was never really intended for BVR or long endurance CAP missions. It was intended as a replacement for aging Mirage III/V, A-5, J-7's in point air defence and ground attack. As far back as 2006 though, China offered the J-10, (which is designed from the beginning to have BVR, air-to-air refuelling, etc.), Pakistan signing a deal back in 2009 for 36 fighters. What has become of that?

Well, that would be incorrect. The program itself that began with the Super-7 back in the late 80's was based on providing a long range radar capability to the F-7 (Mig-21F-13) that Pakistan was buying. From there it evolved into the entire airframe being built from scratch with a BVR capability included from the outset.

As for the J-10, with the engine still Russian at that time and the aircraft having reliability issues in service with the PLAAF as per what the PAF knew, to finally the 2008 crash and the reign of Asif Zardari that was worse than any drought or plague left the PAF in no position for new purchases until recently.

But nobody has gone down the route of making RC F6 and A5 for F7, though i proposed this back in 89.

There was a caveat to that requirement. I remember having this discussion with AVM S Hamid quite a while ago during his tenure at Kamra.

 

[Hell hound]

WV,BV, Tank, BV, WV

little clarification pls does it carry two bvr and three tanks or four bvrs and one tank

There is no ARM integrated yet. Various REKs are under trials.

wasn't mar 1 was bought for this purpose.

 

[Tempest II]

Not to derail the thread but the JF-17 was never really intended for BVR .... ....

Janes 2004-2005. Please under armaments.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Say whatever makes you feel better and stop derailing the thread. By the way congratulations you are on my ignore list.

so you have no answer for me, give me a simple logic to me that UK will give its classified technology to pakistan, if pakistan wanted but UK not willing to give and you are derailing the thread not me

 

[MastanKhan]

Not to derail the thread but the JF-17 was never really intended for BVR or long endurance CAP missions. It was intended as a replacement for aging Mirage III/V, A-5, J-7's in point air defence and ground attack. As far back as 2006 though, China offered the J-10, (which is designed from the beginning to have BVR, air-to-air refuelling, etc.), Pakistan signing a deal back in 2009 for 36 fighters. What has become of that?

Hi,

The Thales fiasco hit the paf hard---they were all set for the french EW suite---which meant french weapons as well for the aircraft.

This aircraft was touted from the begining to be for air superiority---.

China never offered the J10's---it was Gen Musharraf---who on a visit to china asked for this aircraft---. The chinese said it did not exist---he pulled out a photograph of this aircraft---he got the deal.

This aircraft was on offer in 2012-13 by the chinese----18 of them for immediate delivery---the egos of the PAF got in the way----. That would have meant that they would have to admit to their failure.

The air chief rejected it by stating---" we are focusing on getting the aesa for the JF17 ".

The truth to the matter is that once Musharraf signed the deal and got approval for the J10's---the work on the JF17 should have been stopped and all effort put on the J10's.

Because the J10 would be at a higher pleateau than the JF17---and secondly---the chinese would be responsible for the total integration of an EW suite and weapons.

Paf would have received a fully functional aircraft---that they could modify and upgrade to their likings---.

People who are talking about russian engine----to them---if there would have been a problem---the chinese would not have signed the deal during Musharraf's regime.

Bottomline----out of its thickheaded approach---the Paf has chosen the hardest way to success---where they have been smacked back at every step due to poor and bad planning and a lack of foresight and vision.

The problem with the Paf is understanding the TEAM concept----. With them it is they---them and themselves---.

There are no mirrors in the restrooms at the air forces bases and paf academy.

 

[SQ8]

Hi,

The Thales fiasco hit the paf hard---they were all set for the french EW suite---which meant french weapons as well for the aircraft.

This aircraft was touted from the begining to be for air superiority---.

China never offered the J10's---it was Gen Musharraf---who on a visit to china asked for this aircraft---. The chinese said it did not exist---he pulled out a photograph of this aircraft---he got the deal.

This aircraft was on offer in 2012-13 by the chinese----18 of them for immediate delivery---the egos of the PAF got in the way----. That would have meant that they would have to admit to their failure.

The air chief rejected it by stating---" we are focusing on getting the aesa for the JF17 ".

The truth to the matter is that once Musharraf signed the deal and got approval for the J10's---the work on the JF17 should have been stopped and all effort put on the J10's.

Because the J10 would be at a higher pleateau than the JF17---and secondly---the chinese would be responsible for the total integration of an EW suite and weapons.

Paf would have received a fully functional aircraft---that they could modify and upgrade to their likings---.

People who are talking about russian engine----to them---if there would have been a problem---the chinese would not have signed the deal during Musharraf's regime.

Bottomline----out of its thickheaded approach---the Paf has chosen the hardest way to success---where they have been smacked back at every step due to poor and bad planning and a lack of foresight and vision.

The problem with the Paf is understanding the TEAM concept----. With them it is they---them and themselves---.

There are no mirrors in the restrooms at the air forces bases and paf academy---because the pilotsd and trainees were seen to be kissing their reflection in the mirror.

The level of lies in this post confounds me. @Horus @Manticore

Lets start taking them apart 1 by 1.

1. The J-10 was known to the world around 1998-9. At no point did Musharraf ask for the J-10 after showing them a picture. I dont think he put that in his book nor will ANY airforce official back up such a ridiculous idea.
The first PAF officials to speak about the J-10 were the team that went to Chengdu to evalute the F-7MG. At that time the J-10 was going through its development cycle and a curious PAF team was shown the jet.
The chinese then pitched the jet to the PAF after a RFI was sent, and the aircraft was evaluated well before any visits by Musharraf as wrongly claimed. International aviation deals aren't decided by showing photographs.
The rest is also total BS and out of a person's own imagination due to their own poor experiences with the PAF on the personal level(god knows when in history).

Factually, the J-10 was offered on the same low interest loan as the JF-17 program was back in 2005-6 but in the J-10A configuration(@Bilal Khan 777). The PAF was not satisfied with that configuration and wanted a more refined jet considering that certain aerodynamic and systems improvements that were in the JF-17 could be put into the system. A spec was prepared for the PAF ready by 2008 but then Asif Zardari and his government hit; the rest is history. Not some ranting tirade.

2. No basis for this statement. Rant.

3. The JF-17 has no link to the J-10 and both programs have very different implications for Pakistan. One is a local light fighter to help build an industry and the other is just another Chinese import. Additionally, just having the capability to modify does not bring in expertise of aircraft design and systems development as the JF-17 did. Please provide an iota of proof to suggest that the trickle down effects of the J-10 would be the same as the JF-17.

People are much more willing to work with Pakistan in subsystems and electronics than with the Chinese due to utter lack of trust in Chinese IP faiths. Letting the Chinese do the integration meant we would be at their mercy to decide what they could put in there and what they could not. Again, just a "hawai fire" statement with no logical backup.

The end of the quoted post gives away the member's own frothing at the mouth in terms of their posts and leaves little room to guess that most of the post is made up and a rehash of already disproven rants. One can have a personal grudge but to trying and pass off that as fact is ridiculous and unbecoming of someone who a few years ago would make sensible and logical posts.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

All deals have FINE print

The Chinese assured Pakistan that They would be able to get Russian engines for
sale of J10 to Pakistan

But the Russians never gave their approval

J 10 will be available when WS 10 is ready

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@MastanKhan

Please read this

Though it is from 2012

But it will tell you where did the J 10 got STUCK ; Pakistan did try for AL 31 for J 10

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/09/moscow-warms-up-to-islamabad.html

 

[MastanKhan]

The level of lies in this post confounds me. @Horus @Manticore

Lets start taking them apart 1 by 1.

1. The J-10 was known to the world around 1998-9. At no point did Musharraf ask for the J-10 after showing them a picture. I dont think he put that in his book nor will ANY airforce official back up such a ridiculous idea.
The first PAF officials to speak about the J-10 were the team that went to Chengdu to evalute the F-7MG. At that time the J-10 was going through its development cycle and a curious PAF team was shown the jet.
The chinese then pitched the jet to the PAF after a RFI was sent, and the aircraft was evaluated well before any visits by Musharraf as wrongly claimed. International aviation deals aren't decided by showing photographs.
The rest is also total BS and out of a person's own imagination due to their own poor experiences with the PAF on the personal level(god knows when in history).

Factually, the J-10 was offered on the same low interest loan as the JF-17 program was back in 2005-6 but in the J-10A configuration(@Bilal Khan 777). The PAF was not satisfied with that configuration and wanted a more refined jet considering that certain aerodynamic and systems improvements that were in the JF-17 could be put into the system. A spec was prepared for the PAF ready by 2008 but then Asif Zardari and his government hit; the rest is history. Not some ranting tirade.

2. No basis for this statement. Rant.

3. The JF-17 has no link to the J-10 and both programs have very different implications for Pakistan. One is a local light fighter to help build an industry and the other is just another Chinese import. Additionally, just having the capability to modify does not bring in expertise of aircraft design and systems development as the JF-17 did. Please provide an iota of proof to suggest that the trickle down effects of the J-10 would be the same as the JF-17.

People are much more willing to work with Pakistan in subsystems and electronics than with the Chinese due to utter lack of trust in Chinese IP faiths. Letting the Chinese do the integration meant we would be at their mercy to decide what they could put in there and what they could not. Again, just a "hawai fire" statement with no logical backup.

The end of the quoted post gives away the member's own frothing at the mouth in terms of their posts and leaves little room to guess that most of the post is made up and a rehash of already disproven rants. One can have a personal grudge but to trying and pass off that as fact is ridiculous and unbecoming of someone who a few years ago would make sensible and logical posts.

Hi,

There is no reason to act uppity---if you know it is different---then you have posted your views. If the air force did not trust in the chinese integration---then they could have gone elsewhere---.

And as you have posted a different version---I don't have a disagreement over that either---.

By going elsewhere---they also had their behinds handed over to them ( thales ).

The primary job of the air force to have best possible weapons system in place to defend the nation.

War is a now thing---the iaf strike force would not wait to ask the question---" does this aircraft has your experties in it or not ".

 

[SQ8]

Hi,

There is no reason to act uppity---if you know it is different---then you have posted your views. If the air force did not trust in the chinese integration---then they could have gone elsewhere---.

And as you have posted a different version---I don't have a disagreement over that either---.

By going elsewhere---they also had their behinds handed over to them ( thales ).

The primary job of the air force to have best possible weapons system in place to defend the nation.

War is a now thing---the iaf strike force would not wait to ask the question---" does this aircraft has your experties in it or not ".

Again, I would suggest keeping your emotions to yourself when posting on matters you cannot back up with logic.

Perhaps you should stop being "uppity" on the PAF then? Actually bring proper factual information and logic before going on rants rather than actual objective critique(of which there is a LOT to but nothing of the sort you imply)

There were no behinds handed to the airforce in Thales; it was a deal that was the less of the French in their business development in the reigion and was overshadowed by the MMRCA program.To ensure that the deal was still worth its salt, the French increased the price point to exorbitant prices in order to not compromise on the MMRCA offer. At no point was somehow the Thales deal left out due to the PAF not wanting the equipment.
This actually also reflects on the usual Mirage 2k mantra you repeat; without knowing that the deal then too was sabotaged due to an exorbitant increase in price for the equipment. Please get complete information before posting half baked theories.

The rest is just a one liner that has nothing to do with the allegations you made nor does it back up your current claims.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Sir,
The latest pic of block 2 showed a South African Probe in similar Mirrage arrangement. If this has been abandoned then could we see something similar to F-16's as J-10 option is not available due to nose section space limitation.

Being worked on right now. Will be probe and not receptacle.

This Probe ?View attachment 315164

This is a Zvezda probe being assembled by the Chinese.

 

[MastanKhan]

There were no behinds handed to the airforce in Thales; it was a deal that was the less of the French in their business development in the reigion and was overshadowed by the MMRCA program.To ensure that the deal was still worth its salt, the French increased the price point to exorbitant prices in order to not compromise on the MMRCA offer. At no point was somehow the Thales deal left out due to the PAF not wanting the equipment.
This actually also reflects on the usual Mirage 2k mantra you repeat; without knowing that the deal then too was sabotaged due to an exorbitant increase in price for the equipment. Please get complete information before posting half baked theories..

Oscar,

The bottomline is----when the public learns to look at the results---they are not going to accept excuses and sob stories by the paf---.

Paf may have a 1001 excuses. The mmrca started with the M2K---rafale was not in the picture---30-36 Rafales on a fastrak in 2002 - 03 would have sealed the deal for the JF17. Rafale came into the picture in 2004-05.

The end result is that the paf has failed in procuring an air superiority aircraft in the time it had to make the deal.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Again, I would suggest keeping your emotions to yourself when posting on matters you cannot back up with logic.

Perhaps you should stop being "uppity" on the PAF then? Actually bring proper factual information and logic before going on rants rather than actual objective critique(of which there is a LOT to but nothing of the sort you imply)

There were no behinds handed to the airforce in Thales; it was a deal that was the less of the French in their business development in the reigion and was overshadowed by the MMRCA program.To ensure that the deal was still worth its salt, the French increased the price point to exorbitant prices in order to not compromise on the MMRCA offer. At no point was somehow the Thales deal left out due to the PAF not wanting the equipment.
This actually also reflects on the usual Mirage 2k mantra you repeat; without knowing that the deal then too was sabotaged due to an exorbitant increase in price for the equipment. Please get complete information before posting half baked theories.

The rest is just a one liner that has nothing to do with the allegations you made nor does it back up your current claims.

Oscar, save your energy please. The JF17 Avionics deal from ATE was sabotaged by the Mirage 2000 Upgrade contract in India with the exclusion clause specifically mentioning JFT. It was Thales that walked away from a finalised contract. Calling it a PAF failure is a stretch. however, the naysayers will have a nice jolt to the "ra ra" when they find out from "websites" whats really coming on JF17, God Willing. However, we should hold our horses and only tease the curiosity of the lads who come here to learn, not blah on the screen BR