What's new

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

Guys I was wondering considering Saab's pedigree in radars and electronic warfare why doesn't Paf go for Saab's Raven AESA radar for JF Thunder Block 3?
 
.
Grifo-E without AMRAAM or Meteor would take away the punch from the blk-3. China wont share source codes of pl-15, sd-10 and pl-10 wvr. Hence, Grifo-E may likely share the same fate as the famous Grifo-S7
In simpler terms are you referring that for JF-17 blk-3 best option is that PAF procures some EFT's. This would allow PAF to have western radar and armaments. What if PAF decided to procure a complete chinese package for domestic and western for export orders like Egypt.
 
. .
Is KLJ-7A GaN or GaA radar? and same question for Chinese Liquid Cooled AESA LKF Radar.
 
.
Grifo-E without AMRAAM or Meteor would take away the punch from the blk-3. China wont share source codes of pl-15, sd-10 and pl-10 wvr. Hence, Grifo-E may likely share the same fate as the famous Grifo-S7
I refer to certain indicators which suggest that PAF may have a hybrid solution which maybe acceptable to the Chinese. We already have integrated missiles on JFT which you have kindly noted which signify PAF being in possession of the relevant source codes which it would have required to integrate them. The emerging picture is one of an AF increasingly becoming independent and decisive in maintaing this independence. There may be reluctance on the part of the Chinese to offer turnkey technologies which may have led to this step or the cost factor and increasing technological base might be other factors in consideration. Iam merely throwing these ideas out for a discussion. Whatever else one might say PAF is no longer taking dictation from anyone in what it wants to acquire. This remains my reading into the situation so feel free to correct.
A
 
. .
Increase of HP is interested and many will like to see such improvement in that particularly. Having 13 HPs was the reason to ask.

However, we might witness 10 in total.
PAF does not seem too interested in additional wing pylons. Currently the capability has been to simultaneously fire at 2 adversaries therefore 2 BVR+2 WVR was a standard load out. When the capability increases we will bring out DERs first which means 4+2 combo. While it will be nice to have 10 HPs I dont know why PAF has not gone down the route having initially made a model with 9HPs then reverting to 7.
I fully agree that 10 would be an ideal loadout with 2 PL15S+2 SD10As +2 HOBS when they come online. This however would ensure a mutually assured destruction in most cases if we merge into WVR due to the NEZ of the HOBS and its cpability to sustain hi Gs.
A
 
Last edited:
.
PAF does not seem toointerested in additional wing pylons. Currently the capability was to simultaneously fire at 2 adversaries therefore 2 BVR+2 WVR is a standard load out. When the capability increases we will bring out DERs first which means 4+2 combo. While it will be nice to have 10 HPs I dont know why PAF has not gone down the route having initially made a mdel with 9HPs then reverting to 7.
I fully agree that 10 would be an ideal loadout with 2 PL15S+2 SD10As +2 HOBS when they come online. This however would ensure a mutually assured destruction in most cases if we merge into WVR due to the NEZ of the HOBS and its cpability to sustain hi Gs.
A
I think instead of adding more HP we should increase internal fuel capacity and develop a solution like CFTs or dorsal spine. Doing this will free 2-3 HPs without adding more weight.
 
. .
Guys I was wondering considering Saab's pedigree in radars and electronic warfare why doesn't Paf go for Saab's Raven AESA radar for JF Thunder Block 3?
chineese wont share source codes of pl15, pl12 with a swiss radar, Not feasible.
 
.
I refer to certain indicators which suggest that PAF may have a hybrid solution which maybe acceptable to the Chinese. We already have integrated missiles on JFT which you have kindly noted which signify PAF being in possession of the relevant source codes which it would have required to integrate them. The emerging picture is one of an AF increasingly becoming independent and decisive in maintaing this independence. There may be reluctance on the part of the Chinese to offer turnkey technologies which may have led to this step or the cost factor and increasing technological base might be other factors in consideration. Iam merely throwing these ideas out for a discussion. Whatever else one might say PAF is no longer taking dictation from anyone in what it wants to acquire. This remains my reading into the situation so feel free to correct.
A
@messiach said that there is an in-house solution fer radar.
 
.
No need to be rude! I'm not that knowledgeable that's why I asked.
Hi Hassannn85 don’t get me wrong just a simple piece of advice as being a new member I’ll just request you to g through the jf17 post before asking Q which offcourse is not a complication to ask for these Q but to have a basic knowledge behind your Q will give you more info to understand
I hope you don’t mind me suggesting this
Thank you for your understanding
 
.
I do think PAF needs to get 50 Block III with a Chinese based AESA platform so that the PL15 can be utilised, and also get a "all western" avionics suite/mission computers(full platform) that will allow it to use the Raven or Grifo and the Meteor missile. This will allow the intellectual propery rights of both China, and western companies to be protected, preventing leakage of military secrets as it will be a closed ecosystem in both cases. In short, Block III shold be 100 units and not 50. The western systems will allow for better sales potential with some customers who are not familiar with chinese avionics etc.
 
.
KLJ-7a can reportedly detect up to 40 targets and develop a fire solution for up to 4 in a short span. AN/APG-83 can reportedly detect up to 100 targets and develop a fire solution for up to 19 in a short span. And this is just a tip of the iceberg in terms of complexity of radar systems.
Sir G, I am not expert in this regard but from the statement, KLJ-7A numbers for detection/engagement seems more practical as JF-17 could carry 04 BVRAAM.
AN/APG-83 data for detection/engagement seems to be over exaggeration/overkill. Do F-16V could carry 20 BVRAAMs? If not, what is the usage/ benefit of over compatible radar on it. OR just to milk the customers for overly priced fighter justifying the price with over compatible integration of components. The usual USA way to sell her items with higher price tag.
Could you enlighten me for it?

just ask your abu to contact Saab who will then bypass Indian lobby.
Sir G, no need to drag someone's parents in the discussions.
On topic, SAAB was anticipating the Indian orders for aircrafts and submarines in their favour. Now the optimism for both are over. What do you think now still they have a tilt towards India?
 
.
Hi Hassannn85 don’t get me wrong just a simple piece of advice as being a new member I’ll just request you to g through the jf17 post before asking Q which offcourse is not a complication to ask for these Q but to have a basic knowledge behind your Q will give you more info to understand
I hope you don’t mind me suggesting this
Thank you for your understanding

It's ok I don't mind.

I understand your point but what purpose do these forums serve if newcomers aren't allowed to ask a relatively basic question? How many people will you have in this forum then?

Secondly if someone all-knowing is that offended by a new member's lack of knowledge just ignore the post. You aren't duty bound to respond to it.

Mind you "empty vessels make the most noise".
 
.
Back
Top Bottom