What's new

JF-17 Block II, A Final Thunder & The FC-20 - Updates

Hasnain wrote somewhere that JFT has got a misconception that it is inferior coz of Indian member's comments.

In fact, I feel the other way around in the case of MKI. It is like it is big, RCS is huge so can be tackle with less effort.

Just compare it rather replace it with F-15, almost the same RCS, same configuration but all will hail it coz it is battle proven and American.

RCS defintely a factor, people see MKI as a big plane---forget to see its long teeth. long range missiles, radar range, ACMs etc.

I'm not degrading anything but have to give credit to this beast.

And do not always see MKI, there are more than 100 odd Mig-29s & M2Ks who will be there for air superiority first with huge experianced guys piloting it.
 
.
Sir, AFAIK, Serbs had Approximately 5 Fulcurms in "flyable" (Meant they could fly, and hopefully intercept) conditions while the rest were irrepairable, these 5 Migs were dispersed around Serbia (2 at Nis AB ,2 at Batajnica, 1 at Ponikve AB)....
thats exactly what (maybe to lesser extent) I have learnt and read about this air war. the lack of spare parts, low maintenance and service played its part in the loss of these air crafts at the hands of the NATO.
what I meant to say was, that NATO aircrafts used their air tactics exactly as they train for which is mainly using its superior situational awareness and target identification from its set of satellites, AWACS, ground based radars and what not to out shoot the enemy and leave the place as fast as they came in. BVR seems to be their bread and butter.

I don’t want to go into that discussion because it doesn’t apply to JF-17 as it is a BRV platform thankfully and is offering what our F-16s have to offer at WVR so 2 goodies in one. Its nothing short of a miracle for a nation that is facing one tragedy after another in these current times.

Some of us here seem to be on defensive over its engine and its payload capacity, and suggest composites in next blocks to compensate for that but I think they miss out the main reason for this aircraft is to be cost effective not to field it and tout it in the league of the Western Europe aircraft although what it has already accomplished at quarter of the price tag of Western jet is itself a feature on cap of its proud developers. Every next improvement will be keeping the price per unit under consideration.
 
.
JF17 v mki a few pointers to remember

first TODAY there are 150 SERVING MKI flankers and they are a mature platform with IAF having had them in operation for nearly 10 years. Thet have carried out mock excercises over this decade with E3 sentry AWACS phalcon awacs typhoons rafale F15 & F16s over the last 5 years. THE ROLE in IAF is well trained well rehersed THEY ARE READY.

infact they are already getting MLU to super FLANKER with new AESA RADARS and RCS reduction and new jammers.

IN contrast the THUNDER JF17 is a new born baby. small limited in range, speed and weapons/radar. IS the SD10 bvr ready yet. ?? THERE are only 32 thunders in service TODAY.

by the time they are mature ready seen mock battle against typhoon./rafael f15 Which will take 5 years+ ASK YOURSELF the following

HOW MANY FLANKERS WILL IAF be fielding in 2016 ??
how much more lethal will the super flanker be AGAINST a now matured fleet of 150 thunders.

" please dont assume that IAF has just stopped upgrading. improving. learning re THEIR backbone fleet of 272 flankers
 
.
this thread NEVER is a Vs discussion.
look for another thread mate
MKI awesomeness is well established no need to prove anything here
 
. .
irfan i was replyig to a earlier post when some poster thought that the new born baby thundr would stand up to a massive mature multi role beast like the mki sinmply based on rcs and awacs support.

naive or what !!!
 
.
irfan i was replyig to a earlier post when some poster thought that the new born baby thundr would stand up to a massive mature multi role beast like the mki sinmply based on rcs and awacs support.

naive or what !!!
And that was our proud presentation, the stormforce...keep visiting the forum for more hilarious stuff....:)

---------- Post added at 11:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:18 PM ----------

this thread NEVER is a Vs discussion.
look for another thread mate
MKI awesomeness is well established no need to prove anything here
I would rather say more of "well promoted"
 
.
HILLARIOUS

thats why i thought to the 50 emergency thunders that are coming in six months (thread started like May 2011 time)

lol

no no on serious note

ITS THE F16/52 thats the real beast in PAF pity its american origin and that PAF have brought only 18 because this baby is
battle proven,
great at strike and air combat
fully fledging into PAF doctrine for 2 decades
absolute trust to do the job.

BUT THAT TAKES TIME ie 10 years +
 
. .
HILLARIOUS

thats why i thought to the 50 emergency thunders that are coming in six months (thread started like May 2011 time)

lol

no no on serious note

ITS THE F16/52 thats the real beast in PAF pity its american origin and that PAF have brought only 18 because this baby is
battle proven,
great at strike and air combat
fully fledging into PAF doctrine for 2 decades
absolute trust to do the job.

BUT THAT TAKES TIME ie 10 years +
I told you folks, you wont have to wait longer before the next episode of......"stormforce ke kalabazian" :)
 
.
amount of BVR on either side count for nothing 1 vs 1.
As for the SD-10..... there is a difference between the SD-10 and the specs we know of.... the 70km specs are very old, from 2003 in fact, SD-10A and B are what you need to be counting up.


Radar advantage? Yes MKI has a larger radar, but JF-17 has an RCS advantage.
Now to truly count up.... 1 vs 1 it will either be the MKI's radar or the JF-17s RCS that wins the day....

Now I've seen many folks overestimate the BARS range, stats... saying it's output lies between 7-8kw and other BS claiming it's max effective search and track range is 350km, mini awacs etc....

JF-17 has THE lowest RCS of any PAF fighter, lower then any of our F-16 variants... how low is unknown for now.
IMHO KLJ-7 will have no problem detecting MKI at even 150km range even more then that if I'm feeling less pessimistic.


as long as you can keep this bird away from an AWACS with a fighter that may be armed with a Long range AAM such as Novator, PL-21 etc.....

and given that a long range SAM isn't near you, or else you can kiss your very expensive bird good bye, ECM alone are not enough to evade an income AAM(s).


Not entirely.... SD-10B might have decent range.... PL-21 may come in the future, hell even AIM-120C-5 will do just fine.
Just out of curiosity.... what kind of ranges are you imagining for the MKI to 'rain death' at?


PAF has so far made all the right moves.... small birds with low RCS to cut the radar advantage MKI has, then further demolish it with AWACS+datalink (realtime) and put the advnatage with us.

SD-10A is said to have a range of close to 100km, can only get better for SD-10B.
PL-21 could be an option for the future. AIM-120C-5 with F-16 and an AWACS is enough to deal with MKI.

not to mention further RCS reduction on future variants of Chinese birds....

IMHO you are underestimating PAF's ability to deal with MKI, or over estimating MKI's reach.

regards,

Jangibaaz---Mani---Hasnain,

Here is your assignment---switch ownership----you own the SU 30 and its package----now go to work and prove its worth against your enemy who is bragging about his JF17 which is yet to get an operational BVR missile----and a bvr capable operational radar as well.

---------- Post added at 08:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:43 PM ----------

Have you considered our pilots into the equation ?

Hi,

Don't estimate the enemy pilots to be idiots either---. Just like the AK47 became the greatest equalizer in the history of mankind in warfare and combat----so has electronics and technology and bvr missiles changed the slopes of the playing field.
 
.
I think this whole idea of VS debate is crap. Thunder enthusiates must understand that MKI is well integrated combat system. And if MKI has larger RCS why would not more powerful EW/ECM/ECCM capabilities? then we have no idea in which formation and role they will be deployed against PAF or targets inside Pakistan. On the otherhand, thunder is not fully integrated yet and we have no solid idea what Block-II is all about. So i would suggest we quit this kind of nonsense ASAP!

Every machine have certain advantages over other and some disadvantages as well. If Thunder is smaller and has low RCS then it also proves that it can stay air born for much lesser time then MKI. Rest, in SEAD/DEAD operations all the advantages are with MKI due to payload, number of hard points and range factors.
 
.
I believe the use of Composites materials to reduce RCS has become essential in today's fighter development program. We cannot risk ourselves where the world is moving forward in 2011+ we should not apply what was in mids of 1980s to put RCS reduction on back-burner. We cannot risk and have a mindset that we want to save funds since West is developing expensive Jet, absolutely Not! Just like AESA Radar, BVR missiles, IHADSS etc have become an essential part of a modern fighter aircrafts; So we are discussing fighters and the cost and numbers.
Composite Materials are necessary as the aircraft mature, please take this mind set out that we need to keep costs low regarding West to fly Tins in the Skies, because the oppositions are getting better BVR, Radars, over all equipment and upgrades and development of fighters with more composite materials to reduce RCS. There are no permanent fixed price funds restriction with the development of fighter jets over the years millions are spend towards upgrades, you want JF-17 to be on par with F-16s then you need to truly spend enough to reduce its RCS for that you need to spend it does not stop here that Thunder is relatively small so RCS is smaller.

The challenges are out there many smaller Air Forces are picking and purchasing and looking towards the future SU-35, Russian is looking for a large contacts contracts in coming years it could possibly take that market as we have witnessed many Air Forces simply purchase reduced number of planes which are highly technologically advanced then procuring large number of planes in this case FC-1. So you have challenges forward with older and refurbished F-16s, mig-29s, su 27/30 could be floated in the market.
 
.
I believe the use of Composites materials to reduce RCS has become essential in today's fighter development program. We cannot risk ourselves where the world is moving forward in 2011+ we should not apply what was in mids of 1980s to put RCS reduction on back-burner.

Composites add more cost to the air craft. F-16 & Gripen cost less in the market and EF-2000 & Rafale more because of use of composites in the air craft system. You have to negotiate rather compromise in cost vs benefits.
 
.
Composites add more cost to the air craft. F-16 & Gripen cost less in the market and EF-2000 & Rafale more because of use of composites in the air craft system. You have to negotiate rather compromise in cost vs benefits.

Air Forces and aircraft development are moving forward, you have to spend enough to make sure your Aircraft also have equal on par advantage. You are not living in the past. I think you don't know even F-16s and Gripens have composites.
http://www.abdmatrix.com/phcdl/upload/design/Low-cost%20Composite%20Materials%20and%20Structures%20for%20Aircraft%20Applications.pdf
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom