What's new

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

@Shah_Deu In no way am I saying that the JF-17's EW suite is substandard rather that the US suite has had time to incorporate first hand lessons. They have been at it for far longer against much stronger adversaries. There are lessons only experience can teach. If I were to compare any near peer rivals then I'd say the Russians would have comparable products. A professional would have better knowledge. I say this merely from what I've gleaned from here and there.
 
.
F-16 definitely has a better EW suite than the JF-17. Thought the JF-17 has more variety of munitions available. The Thunder's advantages outweigh its short comings undoubtedly.

Jf exceeds f-16 in air to ground stand off weapon , air to sea stand off weapon and operating cost per hour with block 3 it will exceed in capability in a2a as well Not that it was not previously
 
. .
I'm not talking about flight characteristics. The F-16 EW package has proven Raytheon pedigree. There is a reason PAF wanted the DRFM perk with the F 16s. The JF-17 avionics are still going through a gestation period while the F-16's avionics are fully realised banking on experience from more evolved USAF and USN programs. But like I said I'd still put my money on the JF-17.
But why the assumption that JF-17 EW package is not being designed with Pakistani ASRs that come up to and exceed the standards of the EW package available to the PAF with Blk-52s? I get your point about maturity, but avionics is an area where Chinese are also operating at quite an advanced level and with specific inputs and requirements from Pakistan, the JF-17 will have a pretty effective EW capability.
 
.
But why the assumption that JF-17 EW package is not being designed with Pakistani ASRs that come up to and exceed the standards of the EW package available to the PAF with Blk-52s? I get your point about maturity, but avionics is an area where Chinese are also operating at quite an advanced level and with specific inputs and requirements from Pakistan, the JF-17 will have a pretty effective EW capability.

Chinese are very ahead not just in military but also civilian 5G, etc. I'm sure they have been working on counter measures along with PAF who have experience using western equipment and fighting against Russian equipment (IAF).
 
. .
EA-6B Prowler.jpg
070409-N-6247M-027.jpg
EF-111A_Raven.jpg


These represent decades of hands-on experience with electronic warfare. Granted the Chinese may have caught up quick. The Russians already have comparable experience as well. PAF is a user of an end product and they are getting experience now. This big of a lead does not disappear overnight.
 

Attachments

  • EA-6B Prowler.jpg
    EA-6B Prowler.jpg
    61 KB · Views: 73
.
I agree with you that F-16 and its subsystems are proven systems and thats what i mentioned above as well. But F-16 being a proven system doesnt automatically make the new system inferior. Gestation period is for new technologies not for new products. New products might use existing technologies hence might or might not need a 'gestation period'. Example: Huawei is a much late entry in the market of communications yet it has developed 5G faster, better and more reliable than Nokia Siemens, Cisco, Ericsson and likes. The EW suites borrow from the existing technologies present in the market. Hence it is wrong to say that the EW suite in JF-17 Blk 3 is anyway inferior to the one in F-16 Blk 50/52 without this coming from a pilot who has both the systems tested himself. This is precisely what our CCS is doing!
Look as far as EW is concerned, nothing you can speculate or write will highlight what is actually the case.

As far as US or Chinese, well in my personal experience of testing Chinese units and European (Ericson/Thales) as well as Harris - they remain a decade behind US. Most of their specs dont add up and are hyper inflated. My observation is they copy and put in modules and fail to see the bigger picture. I am watering down a lot what i can write here.
 
.
I believe the way things are being put together for the JF-17 is not the same way most other Chinese products are put together. The primary difference here is the end-user requirements are driving the solution and not the other way around (i.e. PAF take what the Chinese offer them).

From an end-user standpoint, not only is the PAF exposed to pretty significant advancements on its own F-16s, but also due to the exposure the PAF has been getting while operating with/against NATO air forces in MNExs and also with so many friendly countries operating quite advanced platforms with the latest in EW technologies.

When it comes to Chinese, based on PAF's ASRs, the latter will know clearly what it is that Chinese can deliver on and what they cannot. But PAF will not take a solution which does not meet its requirements. This was the sole point of having a joint platform, otherwise PAF could have just gone along with J-10 with off the shelf equipment.
 
.
Look as far as EW is concerned, nothing you can speculate or write will highlight what is actually the case.

As far as US or Chinese, well in my personal experience of testing Chinese units and European (Ericson/Thales) as well as Harris - they remain a decade behind US. Most of their specs dont add up and are hyper inflated. My observation is they copy and put in modules and fail to see the bigger picture. I am watering down a lot what i can write here.

So from your POV the EW suite wouldn’t be up to task against newer threats?
 
. .
From my experience with Chinese EW/RF equipment, it leaves a lot to be desired.

That doesn't give me a good feeling then; but I don't think we have much alternative right now Europe wouldn't see the Pakistanis' anything as they siding with the neighbor next door.

What other options we have, or just stay with the Chinese until it matures or something.
 
.


translation:

With everyone's discussion for many years, the "Baolong" Block Ⅲ fighter aircraft finally ushered in its first flight recently, although the actual KLJ-7A active phased array airborne radar used on this aircraft is still LKF601E air-cooled active phased array radar Up to now, it is impossible to see the details from a very few photos, but for the Pakistan Air Force, the phased array radar dream of the National Air Force fighter. Now it seems to be coming true.

For the upgrade of the "Jiaolong" fighter aircraft, the replacement of the source phased array radar was an unexpected choice. As the "Jiaolong" is a light fighter, there are many restrictions on the phased array radar. First, the take-off weight of the aircraft itself and the small radar installation position of the nose determine the overall size and weight of this type of radar must be limited; second, based on the thrust and power generation of an RD-93 thrust engine, relative The power that an array-controlled radar can use is strictly limited, and the complexity and energy consumption of the radar's cooling system cannot be too high. In short, it is not easy to use an active phased-array radar on a light fighter, so it is important to solve the problem. In addition, other things are not good too much.

Of course, in the selection of the "Nine Dragons" Block 3, from the beginning, there were two products from different industrial systems in China to choose from-KLJ-7A of China Electronics Technology and LKF601E of AVIC. Both types of radar have been installed before, but the difference is that the LKF601E is directly equipped with the earlier "Liaolong", while the KLJ-7A was previously installed on a Yun-7 test platform of the test flight academy. ——According to the private statements of some relevant personnel, it can be mounted on the "Baolong" closer to the Block 3 aircraft for testing. This can be regarded as an advantage of the LKF601E radar from the "own family" treatment.

However, for the test of airborne radar, no matter what aircraft is used in the test phase, there will be some differences between the state of the target aircraft and the current test flight of the first "Dragon" Block 3 using aluminum skin and large airspeed The nose of the tube indicates that although the selection of the radar may not be over, at least in the current test flight phase of the 3000 aircraft, the performance test flight of the aircraft platform itself after various equipment adjustments is mainly performed. Therefore, we can see the obvious changes in avionics equipment other than radar-such as the unusually large diffraction display in a cockpit such as "Jiaolong", and new radar warning equipment behind the air intake.

For the work of upgrading the fourth-generation aircraft (that is, the traditional third-generation aircraft) to the fourth-and-a-half generation, most of the major changes have focused on avionics equipment. Compared with the previous products, the new generation of avionics equipment The weight has increased, and the other side uses active phased array technology, the system consumes more power, increases heat, increases heat dissipation requirements, and consumes more power from the heat dissipation system, so we return to us What was talked about at the beginning was the engine. Theoretically, a higher-thrust engine and a stronger power generation function are undoubtedly something that must be taken care of in the improvement.

For the Chinese aviation industry, although the imitation turbofan-13 engine based on the RD-93 engine has not been put into production in large quantities, the additional models developed on the basis of this aircraft have already reached practical status long ago, and are completely available for upgrade. Model of "Liaolong" used. But at this time, it must be acknowledged that as a configuration of a foreign trade fighter, the user's own needs must be more important than the technical ability itself. As a cooperative developer, the minibus has little money. It is not a day or two, so it is being developed. China has tried to change the design as little as possible, while at the same time using the existing equipment support system of the Pakistani Army as much as possible. The Pakistan Air Force, which saves money, naturally insists.

In this way, the "Nine Dragons" Block 3's eye-changing design is to a certain extent the same as the Taiwan Army ’s current upgraded F-16V (not the F-16V Block 70/72 ordered in the future). , Is a design that pays much attention to economy. Of course, focusing on economics will affect the actual performance. Whether it is the power advantage that the J-11 / 16 series demonstrated in the electronic countermeasures in the actual combat of the PLA Air Force before, or the J-20 currently using three-generation engines in the electronic warfare field due to power constraints All fully demonstrate the extreme importance of abundant energy supply in the performance of avionics systems.

Of course, from another perspective, even if the "Baolong" Block 3 can use a better engine, the aircraft is still in a disadvantage when facing the larger and medium-sized and heavy fighters of the same generation. Although this can be regarded as an inevitable result to some extent, it is true that for the development of light fighters, in this era of technological frontiers from the fourth-generation aircraft to the fifth-generation aircraft, the survival space of light fighters seems to be about to follow Evolution has completely disappeared.

Originally, in the era when the models such as "Gripen" and "Jiaolong" appeared, the survival space of light fighters has been quite narrow. It is difficult to make up for the performance disadvantages of light fighters simply by cheap or simple quantities. To obtain balance or even advantage in the performance field, you must have at least half a generation of technical difference (just like the case of Thailand ’s JAS-39C before the PLA ’s Su-27SK fighters). Su-30MKI-class fighters will not be inferior, but after all, the latter is the overall technology of more than ten years ago. When facing contemporary technology fighters, the performance of light fighters is not enough.

As for the next-generation fifth-generation aircraft, the difficulty for light fighters is even greater. After all, the performance requirements of the 4S are here, and the crucial stealth requires that the fighters at least have all of the commonly used air combat weapons mounted inside. This requires that the fighter must have a bomb bay capable of accommodating these weapons, and the appearance of this structure naturally requires a significant increase in the cross-sectional area of the aircraft, especially considering the contemporary air-to-air missiles in order to increase the range and length of the bomb. , And the basic "2 in 2" requirement for air combat mounts, so that the five generations of fighters could not lose weight anyway. In this way, under the current level of technology, the traditionally defined "light fighter" wants to rely on a single medium-thrust engine and achieve a high maneuverability and super Sonic maneuverability is undoubtedly more difficult, and the difficulty of bridging this technological gap means to a certain extent the embarrassing situation of light fighters in the future.

Sorry for long long translation.
 
.
As far as US or Chinese, well in my personal experience of testing Chinese units and European (Ericson/Thales) as well as Harris - they remain a decade behind US
The west is not worried for no reason.
https://www.militaryaerospace.com/r...5/electronic-warfare-ew-radarjamming-aircraft

There is this company called Rohde and Schwarz which specializes in radio products for military uses too and is a premium vendor here. Had it felt a need to safeguard its 'technology secrets' it wouldnt be launching its website in chinese just to sell 'top notch technology' to china
https://www.rohde-schwarz.com.cn/so...rfare-overview_233140.html?rusprivacypolicy=0

Selling machinery; that too of jet engine technology that too to germany is not a joke, believe me!
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...hina-talks-sale-jet-engine-technology-germany

Had Daimler felt a need to safeguard its 'cutting edge engine technology' from china, it wouldnt sell its shares to BAIC and Geely to give them a seat at the board of directors
https://www.economist.com/business/2019/12/18/chinese-carmakers-may-soon-own-a-fifth-of-daimler

All this speaks volume of the level the Chinese industry is operating at! Its just a matter of time, all these pieces start coming together. It probably has already surpassed at some western products, the west would not be narrating this to you for sure!
https://www.omfif.org/2019/10/china-will-overtake-us-in-tech-race/

How Chinese products were in the past matter not that much at the pace the industry is multiplying its capabilities today. As of today, its hard to believe there exists a decade in technology difference in the chinese and western products!
 
Last edited:
.
With emphasis on Ew internal suite I would expect block 3 not requiring a poded jammer like block 52 f-16s
??
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom