What's new

JF-17 Block-3 -- Updates, News & Discussion

Well, let's say they get the J-10C, how much of an improvement would it offer over the JF-17 B3? I mean, let's analyze this in granular terms. Will the radar offer 100% more range and targeting? Is the PL-15 tied to exclusively the J-10C? I don't think it's a "yes" on either scenario, so I can see why the PAF trusts the B3 and/or isn't interested in the J-10CE.

As for other options, well here's the rundown.

1. Su-35: the OEM isn't talking about customization, and a purchase from Russia is a sanction call via CAATSA.

2: Typhoon T3 costs $225 m all-in per plane, and it needs the approval of all consortium members, and the Meteor needs France's approval.

3. Rafale: France probably won't sell.

2 out of 3 options are clearly tied to our weak economic situation, which I can't blame the PAF for. It might be able to buy the J-10CE on a loan from China (as PN is doing for ships), but we're not 100% convinced that's enough of an added difference maker for a totally new jet.

While corruption in the PAF can be a factor, just as it stops certain programs, it can also drive others. If we had Typhoon contract on the cards and the right folks were to make a killing off it, it'd go through. Heck, if we wanted the cheapest possible Meteor truck with a good 150-200 km range radar, we can push for the Gripen E/F (and take a risk on US engines and all). I'm sure Saab will line someone's pockets and make it happen if we had the means to buy the jets...

But even that isn't happening... So, clearly, Pak lacks the fiscal means to make it happen. It's as simple as that IMHO... As it stands, anyone with money and access will import... I don't think we can make an argument of the PAF being the sole entity to go against human nature and common sense to do corruption by going in-house. It's the other way around Lol.

All good thoughts.

when are we likely to see the first image of the JF-17 Block III
 
.
Well, let's say they get the J-10C, how much of an improvement would it offer over the JF-17 B3? I mean, let's analyze this in granular terms. Will the radar offer 100% more range and targeting? Is the PL-15 tied to exclusively the J-10C? I don't think it's a "yes" on either scenario, so I can see why the PAF trusts the B3 and/or isn't interested in the J-10CE.

As for other options, well here's the rundown.

1. Su-35: the OEM isn't talking about customization, and a purchase from Russia is a sanction call via CAATSA.

2: Typhoon T3 costs $225 m all-in per plane, and it needs the approval of all consortium members, and the Meteor needs France's approval.

3. Rafale: France probably won't sell.

2 out of 3 options are clearly tied to our weak economic situation, which I can't blame the PAF for. It might be able to buy the J-10CE on a loan from China (as PN is doing for ships), but we're not 100% convinced that's enough of an added difference maker for a totally new jet.

While corruption in the PAF can be a factor, just as it stops certain programs, it can also drive others. If we had Typhoon contract on the cards and the right folks were to make a killing off it, it'd go through. Heck, if we wanted the cheapest possible Meteor truck with a good 150-200 km range radar, we can push for the Gripen E/F (and take a risk on US engines and all). I'm sure Saab will line someone's pockets and make it happen if we had the means to buy the jets...

But even that isn't happening... So, clearly, Pak lacks the fiscal means to make it happen. It's as simple as that IMHO... As it stands, anyone with money and access will import... I don't think we can make an argument of the PAF being the sole entity to go against human nature and common sense to do corruption by going in-house. It's the other way around Lol.

I concur, there needs to be a push to move as much of core technologies between J10C/JF-17 which already has borne fruit; personally the benefit for having J-10C is more for posturing as time to bring it into maturity/integration/maintenance will be at least 3-5years period. Again this is where good strong and hardened diplomacy is required from Pak govt to make its case for getting used F-16s - no less than 60 if possible. These again for interim measures. Long term strategy will be to wean off the F-16s completely and any equipment which poses sanction problems. JF-17 needs to be evolved further to be able to take in non western components - A-Darter/Marlin as a check against any non availability of Chinese strategic AAMs as well.

Again with respect to Gripen, Swedes can be made to comply with a non US engine requirement as well.
 
. . .
Whats the source of this info!
Everythng related to LERX, DSI incld basic R&D were completed at CADI. We had a very small presence then 1999-2004. Flight controls were developed entirely by the FCSE of H6 at chengdu, which is exclusively chinese with a group of russian FCSE. They are very highly trained hands-on people. We had exclusive manufacturing rights incld ToT & these were transferred much later to Kamra.

It's wrong statement that Pakistan had no contribution in jF-17 design.

DSI was first introduced in jF-17 copied into J-10 and J-31.
LERX was also Pakistani design element, MFD, FBW, HUD, all these things would not have been there, if there was no Pakistani involvement.
 
.
Whats the source of this info!
Everythng related to LERX, DSI incld basic R&D were completed at CADI. We had a very small presence then 1999-2004. Flight controls were developed entirely by the FCSE of H6 at chengdu, which is exclusively chinese with a group of russian FCSE. They are very highly trained hands-on people. We had exclusive manufacturing rights incld ToT & these were transferred much later to Kamra.
I don't know, what you mean by source here, do you have a ready reference of the information you psot?
Any ow all information, i have is by following jF-17 history on open web.

Now getting down with specifics.
All project was developed in Chengdu, there's no dispute on it. Weather Pakistani engineers were involved and more so from 2002 on wards and the listed technologies were Pakistani inputs or not, is (i suppose) the contention here.
In 1999 Pakistan was unofficially bankrupt. Project had a head start some where from 2000-2001.
Project started as super sabre.. hope there's also no dispute on it.
It continue to evolve including in areas listed, solely by the inputs from PAF. Until 2003 there were no DSI not even in PT-01, calling it basic R&D is no justice as it was second a/c in the world to have it.
 
.
Ok.
Now getting down with specifics.
All project was developed in Chengdu, there's no dispute on it. Weather Pakistani engineers were involved and more so from 2002 on wards and the listed technologies were Pakistani inputs or not, is (i suppose) the contention here.
In 1999 Pakistan was unofficially bankrupt. Project had a head start some where from 2000-2001.
Project started as super sabre.. hope there's also no dispute on it.
It continue to evolve including in areas listed, solely by the inputs from PAF. Until 2003 there were no DSI not even in PT-01, calling it basic R&D is no justice as it was second a/c in the world to have it.
 
.
So far there's no news of any foreign partner in AZM project.
Pakistan engineers were in Chengdu laying out design parameters for jF-17 development and actively participating in engineering /testing.
Musharraf sent many engineers abroad for phd in aeronautical engineering and related fields, they all were engaged in the development.
It's wrong statement that Pakistan had no contribution in jF-17 design.
Infact, before jF-17 project, China aircraft development was limited to the level of 3rd generation fighters.
DSI was first introduced in jF-17 copied into J-10 and J-31.
LERX was also Pakistani design element, MFD, FBW, HUD, all these things would not have been there, if there was no Pakistani involvement.
I remember, Indian Teja didn't had MFD until the pictures of jF-17 CP were leaked.

If Pakistani PM have had not helped India by protecting your 9 SU MKI on 27th February, today you wouldn't dare call anything joke.

I don't know, what you mean by source here, do you have a ready reference of the information you psot?
Any ow all information, i have is by following jF-17 history on open web.

Now getting down with specifics.
All project was developed in Chengdu, there's no dispute on it. Weather Pakistani engineers were involved and more so from 2002 on wards and the listed technologies were Pakistani inputs or not, is (i suppose) the contention here.
In 1999 Pakistan was unofficially bankrupt. Project had a head start some where from 2000-2001.
Project started as super sabre.. hope there's also no dispute on it.
It continue to evolve including in areas listed, solely by the inputs from PAF. Until 2003 there were no DSI not even in PT-01, calling it basic R&D is no justice as it was second a/c in the world to have it.

You talked like Mastan Khan 8-)
 
. .
Thanks dear... it's a compliment.
What you quoted was a simple argument, it will not be justice with MK to associate a simple argument with him.

Well I'm not talking about argument, I am saying about talking style / way of communicating ...... :angel::wave:
 
. .
So yes, being 'satisfied' with the JFT has become a compulsion as it stands. All thanks to our economic woes.
Well, let's say they get the J-10C, how much of an improvement would it offer over the JF-17 B3? I mean, let's analyze this in granular terms. Will the radar offer 100% more range and targeting? Is the PL-15 tied to exclusively the J-10C? I don't think it's a "yes" on either scenario, so I can see why the PAF trusts the B3 and/or isn't interested in the J-10CE.

As for other options, well here's the rundown.

1. Su-35: the OEM isn't talking about customization, and a purchase from Russia is a sanction call via CAATSA.

2: Typhoon T3 costs $225 m all-in per plane, and it needs the approval of all consortium members, and the Meteor needs France's approval.

3. Rafale: France probably won't sell.

2 out of 3 options are clearly tied to our weak economic situation, which I can't blame the PAF for. It might be able to buy the J-10CE on a loan from China (as PN is doing for ships), but we're not 100% convinced that's enough of an added difference maker for a totally new jet.

While corruption in the PAF can be a factor, just as it stops certain programs, it can also drive others. If we had Typhoon contract on the cards and the right folks were to make a killing off it, it'd go through. Heck, if we wanted the cheapest possible Meteor truck with a good 150-200 km range radar, we can push for the Gripen E/F (and take a risk on US engines and all). I'm sure Saab will line someone's pockets and make it happen if we had the means to buy the jets...

But even that isn't happening... So, clearly, Pak lacks the fiscal means to make it happen. It's as simple as that IMHO... As it stands, anyone with money and access will import... I don't think we can make an argument of the PAF being the sole entity to go against human nature and common sense to do corruption by going in-house. It's the other way around Lol.
 
.
So yes, being 'satisfied' with the JFT has become a compulsion as it stands. All thanks to our economic woes.
Well, I'd say we also consider how the JF-17 isn't like the F-7s or Mirages. I don't mean from an age or generational standpoint, but purely from the fact that the JF-17 is a multi-role fighter. It can do what the Rafale can do, just less: lighter payload, less range, etc. Yes, a smaller radome and lower cost will mean a less capable AESA radar in terms of range and simultaneous engagement, but you can also buy more JF-17s vs an import.

And thanks to its AESA radar, the JF-17 can operate in a EW dense environment.

The rest is now what the performance gap is between the individual sub systems. But if we lack an import weighing funds down, we should be able to spare more on making the JF-17 better.
 
.
Well, I'd say we also consider how the JF-17 isn't like the F-7s or Mirages. I don't mean from an age or generational standpoint, but purely from the fact that the JF-17 is a multi-role fighter. It can do what the Rafale can do, just less: lighter payload, less range, etc. Yes, a smaller radome and lower cost will mean a less capable AESA radar in terms of range and simultaneous engagement, but you can also buy more JF-17s vs an import.

And thanks to its AESA radar, the JF-17 can operate in a EW dense environment.

The rest is now what the performance gap is between the individual sub systems. But if we lack an import weighing funds down, we should be able to spare more on making the JF-17 better.
i personally think its fuel that is the main issue with JF17..its too short legged..
this should be countered with better version of rd33, more composite/weight reducing measures and finding more space for fuel..needs atleast 33% improvement in this department
 
.
i personally think its fuel that is the main issue with JF17..its too short legged..
this should be countered with better version of rd33, more composite/weight reducing measures and finding more space for fuel..needs atleast 33% improvement in this department
Whats its range when compared to the fighters is has so far replaced, i.e. A-5, F-6 and F-7P?
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom