JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 1]

[fatman17]

JF17 is described as being 80% as capable as some early F16 models.

if it has the chinese radar and avionics - yes
if it has the western radar and weapons suite - maybe equal to a F-16A/B?

 

[Quwa]

if it has the chinese radar and avionics - yes
if it has the western radar and weapons suite - maybe equal to a F-16A/B?

IIRC it has more to do with the F-16A/B's longer-range & higher payload, than its avionics & radar. JF-17 is actually capable of BVRAAM and can use HMS+WVRAAM in its current format through PL-9C. Although from 2011 both the F-16s and JF-17s would have gone through their respective MLU and Batch-II upgrades. At that point I expect JF-17 will be very close in terms of range/payload to F-16A/B; and IMO equal in avionics, ECM/EW & weapon-systems.

 

[EagleEyes]

JF-17 will use air-to-air refullers, so dont worry about range. Therefore, in service it can perform equivalently side by side with the new F-16 Block 50+. However, i am very unsure of what ECM/EW systems would PAF get. Thats the only problem, but it is assured that it is good enough.

 

[MastanKhan]

Mark Sien,

Isn't payload a misnomer. Unless going for ground strike support missions, the plane would have one smart bomb as payload, a jamming pod and 2 AA missiles to defend itself and all the fuel it can carry. Other wise it will have 4 missiles on the wings during air defence flts.

So maximum payload capacity is like a show off---just like some saying---my car does 0---60 in 3.9 sec w/a top speed of 200 mph---ok---so where are we going to drive it. At least not here in the U S of A.

But in air---what is more important is the rate of climb, the turning radius, the escape velocity, the elctronics package amongst so many other things---I am like a student teaching the instructor.

 

[Quwa]

Mark Sien,

Isn't payload a misnomer. Unless going for ground strike support missions, the plane would have one smart bomb as payload, a jamming pod and 2 AA missiles to defend itself and all the fuel it can carry. Other wise it will have 4 missiles on the wings during air defence flts.

So maximum payload capacity is like a show off---just like some saying---my car does 0---60 in 3.9 sec w/a top speed of 200 mph---ok---so where are we going to drive it. At least not here in the U S of A.

But in air---what is more important is the rate of climb, the turning radius, the escape velocity, the elctronics package amongst so many other things---I am like a student teaching the instructor.

I was referring to general payload and range capability...for example Block-52+ would be more strike-oriented than JF-17; and PAF may already be thinking about a more strike-capable JF-17.

 

[MastanKhan]

Mark,

Thankyou for the clarification---we all get mesmerized looking at those photos of these birds of pray and then there are all this ordinance lying in front of it in a half moon circle---and we assume that this monster can carry all of it and deliver it in one go---ain't that a har-d on for a young air force enthusiaist. I just wanted to re-direct the discussion to the objective of the JF 17.

Most people don't understand that on a lots of deep strike missions of the future warfare, it will only be just one smart bomb, two missile, electronic jamming equipment, a sortie of possibly three planes, data linked, flying so close, showing as one, one plane guiding the others, each plane switching the roles after delivering the goods. For precision bombing, deep strike missions, smaller is invisible, smaller is better. Sometimes, there will be just this one plane going in with just with one bomb and no extra protection. The pilot already knows that he is on a one way trip permit. If he gets back in one piece alive, that is an extra bonus. In these type of missions, you need something small, something potent, something that can get in, just to do the job.

PAF has taken a leap of faith with the JF 17---they knew that they can't compete with the SU 30, the jaguar, the mig 29 for the size and payload---the next best step was to get something smaller in size and potent in performance. If you look at the landing gear and wheels of the JF 17 and the F 16 side by side, you can see a clear difference---the F 16 sits taller, with a heavier landing gears and bigger wheels. JF 17 has smaller wheels, a lighter landing gear and sits lower. This all means that these two planes have two different jobs and missions in the mind of PAF. Seemingly, the Jf 17 is to complement the F 16.

The importance that PAF has on extremely low level flt training missions for their pilots has a unique significance in combat ( correct me on this ). Flying at deck level, closer to the ground clutter, they are comparatively difficult to detect, they are also a difficult target for the missiles to lock onto from above.

 

[blain2]

JF17 is described as being 80% as capable as some early F16 models.

I think this comparison was made very early on in the FC-1 program. The maneuverability of the F-16 A is something that most new aircraft also cannot match. I think the comparison was in terms of the maneuverability of the two types and not the comprehensive capabilities.

We already know that the JF-17 has a better radar than then APG-66 of the older F-16 As. The aircraft is being designed to be as MR as the F-16A was. So I think the JF-17 overall would be much more capable than the F-16As. Nobody has put up a quantified comparison of the two types...so this earlier statement is no longer relevant in my humble opinion.

 

[MastanKhan]

Blain,

You are right. I believe that at the end of the day, we are going to find out that the JF 17 is a plane in its own class. For convenience, it was compared to the F 16's because of the public opinion issues as the country would not have accepted anything less.

Now, we are learning that alongwith 250 JF 17's, we are going to have as many as 110 F 16's and possibly some of the J 10's as well.

As I stated in my last post, putting the Jf 17 and F 16 side by side, they are as dissimiliar as the "GNAT" was to the "SABRE"---the sabre---due to its design / larger wings, it was highly maneuverable at higher altitudes as compared to the gnat which was extremely deadly at lower altitude due to its smallere size but a liability at high altitude.

So, this statement of 80% capable as F 16---somehow this word popped out and the PAF let it hang---let the people believe what they want to believe.

 

[fatman17]

Pakistan and China set up JF-17 marketing body

Farhan Bokhari JDW Correspondent - Islamabad

Key Points
The head of the Pakistani export agency is bullish on the JF-17 fighter's prospects for international sales

Potential African and Asian customers have requested detailed flight demonstrations of the aircraft


Pakistan and China have established a joint marketing organisation to promote international sales of their JF-17 'Thunder' fighter aircraft, the head of the main Pakistani arms export agency has told Jane's .

Major General Muhammad Farooq, director general of Pakistan's Defence Export Promotion Organisation (DEPO), described the JF-17 in early April as an ideal "choice for countries which are mindful of their finances". He added that he could "foresee many countries taking an interest in the aircraft".

Another senior Pakistani official also revealed that at least four African and Asian countries have asked to receive detailed flight demonstrations and briefings on the fighter at Pakistan's leading defence export exhibition - the biennial IDEAS show, which is due to be hosted in Karachi in November.

"For countries in [Africa and Asia], the JF-17 is a very attractive option," the official said. "People are interested to get a detailed view of the aircraft before they can consider placing orders."

Jane's learned in March that Bangladesh, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco and Nigeria are all being targeted as potential customers.

Pakistan has a key stake in the future of the JF-17. The aircraft was jointly developed by Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) at Kamra, Pakistan, and China's Aerospace Industry Corporation in Chengdu. The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) plans to induct up to 250 of the fighters by 2013, making it the largest air force expansion in Pakistan's history.

Yang Ying, vice-president of China Aero-Technology Industry Corporation (CATIC), told Jane's during the Singapore Airshow in February that of the 40 or so countries that China Aviation Industry Corporations I and II sell military products to "at least half have expressed an interest in the JF-17".

He observed that "many countries in [Asia and Africa] have second-generation aircraft that will need to be phased out in a few years, so we feel there are many opportunities for JF-17 sales".

Meanwhile, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf began a five-day visit to China on 10 April, with his last stop scheduled to be Urumqi, the capital of the western Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, which borders Pakistan. The visit is intended to ease Chinese concerns that Muslim separatists in Xinjiang have been gaining support from militants based in Pakistan.

"President Musharraf's visit to Urumqi is meant to underline Pakistan's good intentions," a Pakistani official said. "We want peace on our border with China."

 

[0UTL4W]

can someone compare a fully matured jf-17 to the relevant fighter jet plz?

 

[Keysersoze]

can someone compare a fully matured jf-17 to the relevant fighter jet plz?

Why? It would be a pointless exercise....

 

[PakShaheen79]

Any kind of paper comparison can mislead. Only comparison can be achieved by the out come of actual air combat or at least in high level war games and exercises.

 

[0UTL4W]

i understand brother but i was just hoping for a vague comparrison not an exact one.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

i understand brother but i was just hoping for a vague comparrison not an exact one.

with all due respect.. please look through posts in JF-17 thread, that might help you with understanding of this jet..
but i can just make a quick guess, JF-17 is like a super mig-21, better then f-16 block 25 and 70% comparable to block 52.
and ohhh, dont mind Keysersoze's harsh comments..

 

[0UTL4W]

Personally, i believe the jf-17 is 10 years too late. Theres no doubting we would have benefitted greatly from this project in terms of experience but i think unless there isnt sufficient upgrades on every 50 jf-17 batch, then they are always go to be second to western fighters in the 4th generation bracket.