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

[war&peace]

We have seen Russian avionics failing against
Both the Chinese and US avionics on 27 February and afterwards. Please comment
@LeGenD @war&peace

Sir it is not that easy to decide. An AK47 in the hands of a newbie will be useless if he goes against a trained commando with a knife in his hand. There are no objective studies of each system carried out by neutral experts. In fact, no OEM provides are details hence anyone making tall claims that this system is superior to this and that... is simply lying.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Besides payload it will either match or surpass the block-52s.

With AESA and PL-15 it would surpass anything we are fielding.

 

[LeGenD]

APG/83 is top of the line successor of radars from F-22 and F-35 isn't it???

Yes! 4th generation American AESA to be precise.

F-16 Block 70/72 borrow technologies from both F-22 and F-35 programs, and is believed to be a new aircraft beneath the F-16 chassis and label.

To give you a rough idea of these advances, Russia have approached 1st generation American AESA mark in its latest offerings. This is according to radar experts in F-16.net board - people whose knowledge of these systems put that of any journalist and/or enthusiast to shame, and might be involved in surveillance activities.

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

Besides payload it will either match or surpass the block-52s.

I doubt that. That would mean we have started to manufacture F16 blk52 capability in house in less than half the price.

In simple words: (common sense)
Reduced price = reduced capability.

We have raised the bar quite high for ourselves. Jf17 is the first jet our aviation industry is (to an extent) manufacturing in house and to expect a first timer to deliver a package as potent as Lockhead Martin is an unreaslistic demand.

We forget that JFTs were meant to replace aging Mirages and F7PGs. A replacement of that sort can't match F16blk52's capability this early on in its career.

 

[Dreamer.]

There is no doubt that China is manufacturing engine that can target market of planes like JF-17 but that does not validate that Engine is ready to install & go.

Actually what he said is that the contract between russia and china for the sale of RD-93 specifically contained the clause that china will be allowed to manufacture it and that china is now so doing.

This wasn't about china making some engine that can target an aircraft like JF-17.

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

Blk3's thrust to weight ratio, agility and maneuverability will still be below par with blk 52s.

With AESA and PL-15 it would surpass anything we are fielding.

 

[Haris Ali2140]

I doubt that. That would mean we have started to manufacture F16 blk52 capability in house in less than half the price.

In simple words: (common sense)
Reduced price = reduced capability.

We have raised the bar quite high for ourselves. Jf17 is the first jet our aviation industry is (to an extent) manufacturing in house and to expect a first timer to deliver a package as potent as Lockhead Martin is an unreaslistic demand.

We forget that JFTs were meant to replace aging Mirages and F7PGs. A replacement of that sort can't match F16blk52's capability this early on in its career.

AESA > PESA will turn the tables
PL-15 > AAMRAM-120-C

 

[Dazzler]

Wasn't that a fully digital fly-by-wire system for the pitch axis and a more traditional stability augmentation system for the roll and yaw axis,and blk3 is suppose to have fully FBW system.

It was switched to digital during the production of blk 2.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Blk3's thrust to weight ratio, agility and maneuverability will still be below par with blk 52s.

It's not everything,with PL-15 and AESA it would never go into fight which would put it on disadvantage.

It was switched to digital during the production of blk 2.

But still there were talks about new FBW in blk-3.

I guess rumours or may be improvement over the prior one.

 

[Haris Ali2140]

Blk3's thrust to weight ratio, agility and maneuverability will still be below par with blk 52s.

In BVR these wont matter.
Only factoors will be range of AESA,range of missiles and no. of missiles available.

 

[Dazzler]

It's not everything,with PL-15 and AESA it would never go into fight which would put it on disadvantage.


But still there were talks about new FBW in blk-3.

I guess rumours or may be improvement over the prior one.

B and 3 both have digital triplex fbw

 

[The Eagle]

Actually what he said is that the contract between russia and china for the sale of RD-93 specifically contained the clause that china will be allowed to manufacture it and that china is now so doing.

This wasn't about china making some engine that can target an aircraft like JF-17.

I realized the confusion here. A new engine from China & RD-93 being manufactured by China. I was talking about RD-93 only and am undecided with NEW CHINESE engine like WS-10.

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

AESA > PESA will turn the tables
PL-15 > AAMRAM-120-C

These differences only come into account in BVR engagements.

In close dogfights, I won't need an AESA or PL-15 rather more agility, climb rate, thrust to weight ratio will matter.

A more agile F16 with its sidewinder would be better off in a dog fight as compared to a (relatively) sluggish JF17 with a long range PL-15.

 

[The Eagle]

Saying we are satisfied with the RD93 doesnt equate to we wont make it better or upgrade pr change

You are right and my emphasis was that there is no chatter about new engine for Block-III until & unless, we are SURPRISED.

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

It's not everything,with PL-15 and AESA it would never go into fight which would put it on disadvantage.


But still there were talks about new FBW in blk-3.

I guess rumours or may be improvement over the prior one.

So basically a JF17 WVR is a dead JF17. [emoji21][emoji21]