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

[SQ8]

You know what could make all this easier? UCAVs networked to a manned fighter (or AEW&C) with its own BVRAAMs. I believe they call it "air teaming" or "loyal wingman." It'd really suck if India was working on it and we didn't show anything for it, amirite... (ok to be fair, I think -- like BVR in the 1990s -- the PAF wants it, but like the SD-10/AMRAAM, it'll probably be an imported stack from China or Turkey).

India is working on the idea but having a working system is far away for even the USAF - too many variables involved that require a lot of processing power and sensors/comms to work and sync up.

To the earlier point, a flying magazine concept is great if it is capable of outranging the enemy - a flying magazine of R-77’s is pretty useless against a fighter with just two AIM-120s. 8 R-77’s are then just 2000 extra pounds of missile and pylons adding on the need to dodge an incoming missile.

 

[Zarvan]

So when we can expect pictures of first BLOCK III produced in KAMRA. Today is 5th February by now two would have been produced.

@Windjammer

 

[Khan vilatey]

So when we can expect pictures of first BLOCK III produced in KAMRA. Today is 5th February by now two would have been produced.

@Windjammer

they maybe keeping it under raps to keep folks guessing. This is similar to jf-17b suddenly showing up in 2019 and 2020.

although it’s a humongous mistake. I think they may not put a Irst probe in if-17 block 3. It would be chin mounted instead
K

 

[SQ8]

they maybe keeping it under raps to keep folks guessing. This is similar to jf-17b suddenly showing up in 2019 and 2020.

although it’s a humongous mistake. I think they may not put a Irst probe in if-17 block 3. It would be chin mounted instead
K

Based upon what?

In a machine where saving weight is a huge priority - taking 100kg worth of less used equipment from a built in position - where it would also need to have a counterweight built in that also increases weight or design complexity doesn’t seem like a “humongous mistake”.

Even the F-16V is forsaking a IRST in favor of carrying a targeting pod when needed. The JF-17 will do the same. The Aselpod likely has a A2A mode and just like the F-16s with their SNIPER pods can use it to track and pick up air targets.
This keeps unit costs low while still allowing the capability as a bolt on system whenever the mission parameters require it.

 

[TheTallGuy]

Imagine one aircraft carrying 12 missiles as compared to 6 aircrafts carrying 2 each. Which one is potentially more threatening?

You will not believe but trust me...6 aircraft with 2 each are far more threating.

 

[Black.Mamba]

You will not believe but trust me...6 aircraft with 2 each are far more threating.

Glad that we agree because I was making the same point

 

[GiG]

India is working on the idea but having a working system is far away for even the USAF - too many variables involved that require a lot of processing power and sensors/comms to work and sync up.

To the earlier point, a flying magazine concept is great if it is capable of outranging the enemy - a flying magazine of R-77’s is pretty useless against a fighter with just two AIM-120s. 8 R-77’s are then just 2000 extra pounds of missile and pylons adding on the need to dodge an incoming missile.

I would like to add that flying such a UCAV in contested airspace where you don't know the electronic and cyber warfare capabilities of the adversaries is not a good idea. Remember the RQ-170 incident back in 2011 when Iranians were able to compromise the security of (at that time) state of the art UAV of the US and were able to land it.

Flying wingman is a nice concept but as long as it relly on external communication it will remain vulnerable to external interference. Semi-autonomous systems are employed in battle arenas, however, the reaction time by human operators for high stake operations is too high due to the laws of physics. USAF is actively working on fully autonomous systems but the future is not certain yet.

From the recent inauguration of Centre of Artificial Intelligence and Computing (CENTAIC) by PAF we can argue with certainty that PAF is focusing on asymmetrical methods to achieve dominance over its adversaries. Recent news of IAF acquiring 6 AWACS is also suggesting that IAF to some extent is aware of PAF capabilities and is trying to neutralize them.

The point I am making is that until an adversary achieves sufficient defense and deterrence capabilities in non-kinetic warfare (Electronic+Cyber) they will not deploy systems for kinetic warfare that can be neutralized with non-kinetic means.

 

[GriffinsRule]

So when we can expect pictures of first BLOCK III produced in KAMRA. Today is 5th February by now two would have been produced.

@Windjammer

Not how it works. Aircraft are built simultaneously going through different phases of production as they move along the assembly lines. You don't build a complete aircraft and then start on the next one.

You will not believe but trust me...6 aircraft with 2 each are far more threating.

It depends on the aircraft. Two superior fighters with six missiles each will be more deadly than six fighters with two missiles each.

 

[Trailer23]

There is an altitude warning. However that wont help in the case of an incapacitated pilot.

Reference incase you're looking for it...

Timestamped - Just click 'Play'.

 

[ANG]

Hi, these are very interesting articles and videos on the Gripen E. I hope we find out more details on the JF-17-B3 soon.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...t-of-punch-in-an-incredibly-efficient-package

 

[Nomad40]

The Belgian Air Component RFQ puts FC-1/JF-17 at average 10sqm. I would assume that is loaded and likely that would be against an airborne radar. There is also the question of aspect/direction.

https://www.belgianmilitaryinterests.be/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Request-for-Government-Proposal.pdf

View attachment 707537

I call BS.....Logically and not emotionally.

 

[Nomad40]

Most F-16s don't have that system as its just recently been rolled out in the USAF. I also don't think the JF-17 has it. The first Thunder crashed was controlled flight into terrain I believe.
Another point is, its a huge safety plus and would certainly would have been marketed with such a feature besides the usual "its so cheap" mantra.

Controlled flight into terrain............Although it is possible and has occurred before but I remember it being daylight and clear skies besides it was at the base of the Hill and into the hill, It crashed belly first and it is a fighter.

I am not aviation nor JF17 expert however I have scaled and adjusted both the images and from my prior experience in some other fields, I can only say that "the bump near the inlet is bigger and longer" and "the angle of the inlet opening is also different, wider/more airflow".
There will of-course be some variation because of two different picture angles however I did calculations on my end, the following gif is just for illustrative purpose only. Kindly discard if it is completely B.S

View attachment 712647

Good job

So when we can expect pictures of first BLOCK III produced in KAMRA. Today is 5th February by now two would have been produced.

@Windjammer

Call them

 

[GriffinsRule]

Controlled flight into terrain............Although it is possible and has occurred before but I remember it being daylight and clear skies besides it was at the base of the Hill and into the hill, It crashed belly first and it is a fighter.

Good job

Call them

You are right, it was not CFIT ... I went back and read the news story from the crash and the pilot ejected (into ground per some) and was found a few km away from the crash site.

 

[imadul]

IRST is one technical option against LO aircrafts. Rafale stated use of RAM paint, composites, and saw-toothed design, and EW systems gives it very good stealth. It has an overall low RADAR and IR RCS, but a combination of IRST and AESA RADAR on JFT can fare better against Rafale.

 

[Xone]

Any progress on JF17B3? when it is coming before public