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

[PakShaheen79]

I think it's doable.

In fact, the aircraft that take on the jointly-developed HMD/S could be seen as a 'Block-3A' since they're adding a significant net-new capability that isn't on the Block-3 today.

It wouldn't surprise me if the PAF didn't order the remaining 20 Block-3s because it actually hasn't frozen the configuration for those aircraft. It may have decided to 'break' the program in two batches to prevent the HMD/S from holding the program up -- so the HMD/S-equipped variant could be a Block-3A. Heck, I'd even widen the scope to include a GaN AESA radar, improved TDL and new HMI if that was the case.

I tend to agree here and it also indicates that PAF has adopted the philosophy of PLAAF for induciton newer units. PLAAF adopted new jets with small tweaks here and there by manufacturers ... It reduces the overhead of upgrading the entire fleet later on which costs more both operationally and financially. Certainly, PAF has her eyes on more things which they can integrate on Thunders. I will be not surprised if after first 30 comes a halt, a deal of J-10CE, upgrades on Block1 and 2, and then resumption of Thunder program Block4 may be with more technologies used in J-10/J-20As etc. PAF had to deal with massive fleet level upgrades on Mirages (later on F-16s) so they simply want to avoid that pain once again!

no designation yet, specifically designed to go with Block 3 and its new Radar for a very specific target

Only thing I am not getting it here is if it's a missile more capable than SD-10A, then why not choosing PL-15? Why to design something new. Now it will have to go through testing and evaluation phase before integration.

 

[ziaulislam]

I tend to agree here and it also indicates that PAF has adopted the philosophy of PLAAF for induciton newer units. PLAAF adopted new jets with small tweaks here and there by manufacturers ... It reduces the overhead of upgrading the entire fleet later on which costs more both operationally and financially. Certainly, PAF has her eyes on more things which they can integrate on Thunders. I will be not surprised if after first 30 comes a halt, a deal of J-10CE, upgrades on Block1 and 2, and then resumption of Thunder program Block4 may be with more technologies used in J-10/J-20As etc. PAF had to deal with massive fleet level upgrades on Mirages (later on F-16s) so they simply want to avoid that pain once again!

Only thing I am not getting it here is if it's a missile more capable than SD-10A, then why not choosing PL-15? Why to design something new. Now it will have to go through testing and evaluation phase before integration.

A new missle will only make sense if we are fullt vested into it for thunder azm and even a ground base SAM system on that missle and full domestic production

If thats the case a very smart move ..otherwise you are right it doesnt make sense

 

[serenity]

Also I have a question, can PL-12 have a small booster, to increase its range by 10-15 km. Even in small numbers. It will make IAF guessing that incoming PL-12 whether has a range 100 or 120 km?
Also can Chinese bomber have SFDR with booster, guided by Awacs?

P.S I have all the liberty to be non-technical.

Too hard to install process in factories and upgrade costs to different height. Simply not worth it just better with newer modern missile. Will be like upgrading 20 year old Mercedes with best new radio.

 

[Thorough Pro]

thanks for correction, I mixed up the numbers

Pl-15E is the bvr, 10E is wvr.

 

[khanasifm]

I hope Blk 3 will be bigger in Size at least Mid weight fighter jet like F16

By western /usaf standards f-16 is light weight or started as light weight and gained some but compared to f15 still light

Yes compared to Jf17 which is 13.5 ton f-16 is 18/20 ton class but f15 is 35/40 ton class

Same is the case for j10

 

[Thorough Pro]

because Thunder is still a light weight fighter and may not be able to carry two PL15's, that's why a smaller than PL15 but larger than SD10 to give a better range than meteor to retain the see first (AESA) shoot first (new longer than SD10 range missile) advantage

I tend to agree here and it also indicates that PAF has adopted the philosophy of PLAAF for induciton newer units. PLAAF adopted new jets with small tweaks here and there by manufacturers ... It reduces the overhead of upgrading the entire fleet later on which costs more both operationally and financially. Certainly, PAF has her eyes on more things which they can integrate on Thunders. I will be not surprised if after first 30 comes a halt, a deal of J-10CE, upgrades on Block1 and 2, and then resumption of Thunder program Block4 may be with more technologies used in J-10/J-20As etc. PAF had to deal with massive fleet level upgrades on Mirages (later on F-16s) so they simply want to avoid that pain once again!

Only thing I am not getting it here is if it's a missile more capable than SD-10A, then why not choosing PL-15? Why to design something new. Now it will have to go through testing and evaluation phase before integration.

 

[Ark_Angel]

Blk 3 will provide true air dominance in the sub continent theatre. The klj-7A also triumphs the RBE Aesa in TR count, around1100 vs 856 modules. The ew management system in blk 3 is on another level. The cockpit has a single large display similar to the one in F-35. Dual launch rails can mount bvr and wvr in tandem depending upon mission requirements. HMDS is there as well.

Dazzler I would have loved to accept that KLJ-7A is better but that might not be the case. Comparing a system on mere T/R is an utter injustice. For morale boosting purpose-yes but these two systems cannot be compared. RBE2 being one of the worlds finest AESA Radars out there operational. It’s rated as the BEST Non American solution available on the market. It’s been heavily tested, used in all practical manifestations of the word practical, extremely focused on EW protection, is robust , agile and damn lethal in picking up tracking, engaging targets in all domains. Works very well in a dense EW Enviornment. It’s the tried tested and go to solution these days. The best of the best out there. Thales has done an amazing work on this piece of instrument. The only draw back I foresee it’s extremely expensive to maintain in comparison to other World Leading AESA radar sets and the French are known to squeeze their client in after sales support, Software/HardWare Updation, Even a small change in PCB can cost you a treasure. Initially first 2-3 years IAF Rafales will be a beast able to punch anyone coming it’s way . They will be deadly. However keeping in view the extremely long Sub Continental Bureaucratic procedures even for regular maintenance purposes declines the shelf life of the product and results in degraded performance much earlier than it’s anticipated. Therefore after 3-4 years IAF Rafales may have degraded performance.

 

[CriticalThought]

Dazzler I would have loved to accept that KLJ-7A is better but that might not be the case. Comparing a system on mere T/R is an utter injustice. For morale boosting purpose-yes but these two systems cannot be compared. RBE2 being one of the worlds finest AESA Radars out there operational. It’s rated as the BEST Non American solution available on the market. It’s been heavily tested, used in all practical manifestations of the word practical, extremely focused on EW protection, is robust , agile and damn lethal in picking up tracking, engaging targets in all domains. Works very well in a dense EW Enviornment. It’s the tried tested and go to solution these days. The best of the best out there. Thales has done an amazing work on this piece of instrument. The only draw back I foresee it’s extremely expensive to maintain in comparison to other World Leading AESA radar sets and the French are known to squeeze their client in after sales support, Software/HardWare Updation, Even a small change in PCB can cost you a treasure. Initially first 2-3 years IAF Rafales will be a beast able to punch anyone coming it’s way . They will be deadly. However keeping in view the extremely long Sub Continental Bureaucratic procedures even for regular maintenance purposes declines the shelf life of the product and results in degraded performance much earlier than it’s anticipated. Therefore after 3-4 years IAF Rafales may have degraded performance.

Oh please, your post is literally full of adjectives. Let us talk facts. So, how many 4th gen aircraft has it shot down in combat that were flown by well trained pilots? Against which technologically advanced adversary has it been tested in a dense EW environment? And what happens when the enemy radar simply out ranges it?

I do not want to trivialize it in any manner. It is an adversary that needs to be respected. But respectfully, Pakistan can come up with better in combination with the Chinese. And that's what we need to remember.

 

[PakShaheen79]

Dazzler I would have loved to accept that KLJ-7A is better but that might not be the case. Comparing a system on mere T/R is an utter injustice. For morale boosting purpose-yes but these two systems cannot be compared. RBE2 being one of the worlds finest AESA Radars out there operational. It’s rated as the BEST Non American solution available on the market. It’s been heavily tested, used in all practical manifestations of the word practical, extremely focused on EW protection, is robust , agile and damn lethal in picking up tracking, engaging targets in all domains. Works very well in a dense EW Enviornment. It’s the tried tested and go to solution these days. The best of the best out there. Thales has done an amazing work on this piece of instrument. The only draw back I foresee it’s extremely expensive to maintain in comparison to other World Leading AESA radar sets and the French are known to squeeze their client in after sales support, Software/HardWare Updation, Even a small change in PCB can cost you a treasure. Initially first 2-3 years IAF Rafales will be a beast able to punch anyone coming it’s way . They will be deadly. However keeping in view the extremely long Sub Continental Bureaucratic procedures even for regular maintenance purposes declines the shelf life of the product and results in degraded performance much earlier than it’s anticipated. Therefore after 3-4 years IAF Rafales may have degraded performance.

I would love to see few statistics or numbers to back up all this.

A lot of stuff you wrote here is simply subjective. Robust, agile, best of the best, heavily tested???? These are subjective terms if not proven through some comparative studies.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Dazzler I would have loved to accept that KLJ-7A is better but that might not be the case. Comparing a system on mere T/R is an utter injustice. For morale boosting purpose-yes but these two systems cannot be compared. RBE2 being one of the worlds finest AESA Radars out there operational. It’s rated as the BEST Non American solution available on the market. It’s been heavily tested, used in all practical manifestations of the word practical, extremely focused on EW protection, is robust , agile and damn lethal in picking up tracking, engaging targets in all domains. Works very well in a dense EW Enviornment. It’s the tried tested and go to solution these days. The best of the best out there. Thales has done an amazing work on this piece of instrument. The only draw back I foresee it’s extremely expensive to maintain in comparison to other World Leading AESA radar sets and the French are known to squeeze their client in after sales support, Software/HardWare Updation, Even a small change in PCB can cost you a treasure. Initially first 2-3 years IAF Rafales will be a beast able to punch anyone coming it’s way . They will be deadly. However keeping in view the extremely long Sub Continental Bureaucratic procedures even for regular maintenance purposes declines the shelf life of the product and results in degraded performance much earlier than it’s anticipated. Therefore after 3-4 years IAF Rafales may have degraded performance.

As for the French systems, their Frigate was jammed at the East Med by the Turkish systems! Moreover, the “phantom” image to insinuate an imminent attack was fed up into their trackers!! So, they are beatable....

 

[serenity]

When is French AESA the best? They have just one. RBE2AA is introduced in 2012 and started developing in 2005. J-16's AESA finished before 2015 as first Chinese fighter AESA radar. First type of phased array airborne in KJ-2000 finished in early 2000s.

Since then, developed J-10b's PESA radar and then J-10C's AESA and J-20's AESA. Also developed J-11D AESA which is used for J-11BG upgrades since project J-11D is cancelled. Same with electronic war J-15 and J-16 versions.

Has France ever developed multiband and layered radar similar to 346B? Similar ground based tracking and fire control phased radar? France is very good in some field but not all and radar is never been specialty. We can say Japanese AN-1 AESA means Japan is best in AESA? Not anymore for sure.

RBE2AA may be still good for 2021 and on for a 2012 developed radar. But it is small and lower power. It may be quite good even best for 2012 standards but 2020 small light weight AESA from China should be about similar performance. Radar is used to detect and guide weapons. The more bigger problem is really Meteor missile not RBE2AA. If KLJ-7A can give PL-15 enough detection which surely can against large radar targets like Su-30 or Mig-29, it is good enough. Rafale is much stealthier with much better electronics jamming. To defeat, it is about having AESA and good modern missile, KLJ-7A may be the smallest cheapest lowest grade Chinese AESA but it is AESA so harder to jam for 2000s level electronic warfare like SPECTRA and newer jammers even.

PL-15 has two seeker and if can be applied on block 3 with AESA, then Rafale's advantage is not as effective compared to against older F-16. Everything is about having new electronics and software which block 3 is supposed to include some. Rafale is definitely many times more expensive than block 3. Old F-16 will be useless in long range.

 

[KaiserX]

When is French AESA the best? They have just one. RBE2AA is introduced in 2012 and started developing in 2005. J-16's AESA finished before 2015 as first Chinese fighter AESA radar. First type of phased array airborne in KJ-2000 finished in early 2000s.

Since then, developed J-10b's PESA radar and then J-10C's AESA and J-20's AESA. Also developed J-11D AESA which is used for J-11BG upgrades since project J-11D is cancelled. Same with electronic war J-15 and J-16 versions.

Has France ever developed multiband and layered radar similar to 346B? Similar ground based tracking and fire control phased radar? France is very good in some field but not all and radar is never been specialty. We can say Japanese AN-1 AESA means Japan is best in AESA? Not anymore for sure.

RBE2AA may be still good for 2021 and on for a 2012 developed radar. But it is small and lower power. It may be quite good even best for 2012 standards but 2020 small light weight AESA from China should be about similar performance. Radar is used to detect and guide weapons. The more bigger problem is really Meteor missile not RBE2AA. If KLJ-7A can give PL-15 enough detection which surely can against large radar targets like Su-30 or Mig-29, it is good enough. Rafale is much stealthier with much better electronics jamming. To defeat, it is about having AESA and good modern missile, KLJ-7A may be the smallest cheapest lowest grade Chinese AESA but it is AESA so harder to jam for 2000s level electronic warfare like SPECTRA and newer jammers even.

PL-15 has two seeker and if can be applied on block 3 with AESA, then Rafale's advantage is not as effective compared to against older F-16. Everything is about having new electronics and software which block 3 is supposed to include some. Rafale is definitely many times more expensive than block 3. Old F-16 will be useless in long range.

Iphones, laptops, top notch electronics the world over are made in China. Quality + quantity. When was the last time france ever built an electronic product that is world class?

french are only know for making beauty products and handbags. That would be useful for the indian army.

 

[shanlung]

China's JF-17 Fighter: Successful Thanks to America's F-16?

Design wise, the plane is a fusion of Russia's MiG-21 and America's F-16 Fighting Falcon.

nationalinterest.org

 

[FuturePAF]

I think it's doable.

In fact, the aircraft that take on the jointly-developed HMD/S could be seen as a 'Block-3A' since they're adding a significant net-new capability that isn't on the Block-3 today.

It wouldn't surprise me if the PAF didn't order the remaining 20 Block-3s because it actually hasn't frozen the configuration for those aircraft. It may have decided to 'break' the program in two batches to prevent the HMD/S from holding the program up -- so the HMD/S-equipped variant could be a Block-3A. Heck, I'd even widen the scope to include a GaN AESA radar, improved TDL and new HMI if that was the case.

Perhaps the Block 3A variants will feature a built in IRST or field the RD-93MA engine.

If it does go for the IRST as a standard feature (Freeing up the chin hard point for a dedicated self protection jammer) , coupled with the LPI GaN AESA Radar and the sensor fusion to merge the tracks from both to go along with it, I hope they update the seekers on the SD-10 into a “Dual Band Seeker” and maybe modify the ends of the missiles to have TVC nozzles.

It may sounds far fetched, I know, but it seems, from a reputable source, the Chinese are working on dual band seekers on long range missiles. So why not modify the SD-10.

Air-to-air missiles: are two heads better than one?

Up until today dual-mode seekers for air-to-air missiles have remained, for the most part, in the labs. But with the appearance of a Chinese dual-mode system in development, is this soon to change?

www.iiss.org

This technology is already fielded on the Israeli Stunner missile and there is speculation for an Air to Air version for some time now.

View topic - F-35's Stunner (Python-6) speculation • F-16.net

Military aviation forum since 2003, with high quality discussion focusing on the F-16, F-35 and F-22 jet fighters and the C-130.

www.f-16.net

 

[serenity]

I think the Indian version of Rafale is latest block and most modern electronics on Rafale including 2005 developed 2012 service RBE2AA AESA. It is good and improve Rafale so much. Then Meteor missile as well. This fighter will be very difficult to challenge for PAF unless block 3 can be service in 2 times higher numbers with PL-15 full range and support with F-16 52 and AIM-120C at least.

Perhaps the Block 3A variants will feature a built in IRST or field the RD-93MA engine.

If it does go for the IRST as a standard feature, coupled with the LPI GaN AESA Radar and the sensor fusion to merge the tracts from both to go along with it, I hope they update the seekers on the SD-10 into a “Dual Band Seeker” and maybe modify the ends of the missiles to have TVC nozzles.

It may sounds far fetched, I know, but it seems, from a reputable source, the Chinese are working on dual band seekers on long range missiles. So why not modify the SD-10.

Air-to-air missiles: are two heads better than one?

Up until today dual-mode seekers for air-to-air missiles have remained, for the most part, in the labs. But with the appearance of a Chinese dual-mode system in development, is this soon to change?

www.iiss.org

This technology is already fielded on the Israeli Stunner missile and there is speculation for an Air to Air version for some time now.

View topic - F-35's Stunner (Python-6) speculation • F-16.net

Military aviation forum since 2003, with high quality discussion focusing on the F-16, F-35 and F-22 jet fighters and the C-130.

www.f-16.net

Not working on, already done since PL-15 and PL-x is clearly in the photo having a second seeker sensor unit coming out of top. Usually it is active radar or half active radar at least and infrared. More important than having extra infrared is jamming resistance. The modern missiles have much better jamming resistance than old ones. Old ones basically are useless against any advanced country's more modern fighters and equipment.