What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 1]

Status
Not open for further replies.
According to Wiki we have confiremd order of JF-17 from Azarbijan 26 A/C and from Zimbabway 12 A/C these are 3 years old orders, upto be its a great achivment for the team of JF-17 that they have the orders of A/C which have not in service.
 
.
So if we go by the current schedule also mentioned by the AC, we will have an operation squardon of JF-17 by the end of 2008 and correct me if i'm wrong the first squardon will be handed over to the panther squardon replacing their A-5.

Now the question here in mind arries is that we know A-5 was used for bombing roles, so the first bach of JF-17, will they have air to air capability as well and be fully operational will BVR capability along awaited by the PAF or for simply ground roles?

Secondly the capability for ground roles of JF-17 is farely limited due to the reason of its limited load carrying capability of 3800kg which is not sufficent to perform a successfull bombing mission, so how exactly will PAF address this issue in the current batch?

IMO wouldnt it be better if we would induct the current squardon for air to air roles, the BVR capability that is along awaited by the PAF and once we achieve the capability to increase the payload of the JF-17, we induct it for ground roles.
 
.
So if we go by the current schedule also mentioned by the AC, we will have an operation squardon of JF-17 by the end of 2008 and correct me if i'm wrong the first squardon will be handed over to the panther squardon replacing their A-5.

Now the question here in mind arries is that we know A-5 was used for bombing roles, so the first bach of JF-17, will they have air to air capability as well and be fully operational will BVR capability along awaited by the PAF or for simply ground roles?

Secondly the capability for ground roles of JF-17 is farely limited due to the reason of its limited load carrying capability of 3800kg which is not sufficent to perform a successfull bombing mission, so how exactly will PAF address this issue in the current batch?

IMO wouldnt it be better if we would induct the current squardon for air to air roles, the BVR capability that is along awaited by the PAF and once we achieve the capability to increase the payload of the JF-17, we induct it for ground roles.

Ice,

I do not think the first batch will go to the A-5 sqn. The first flight (after the formation of the existing TEF) will be an OCU sqn. Now one of the A-5 sqns may become an OCU sqn for the type.

On the issue of replacing the ground attack dedicated A-5 sqn, I would just like to point out that in the PAF, certain sqns are dedicated for a role due to the limitation of the platform (even though all fighter sqns are trained in multiple profiles), but not because PAF wants it to be this way. The JF-17s provide a paradigm shift as its a MR platform like the F-16s. So as an example, a squadron getting converted to the JF-17s would actually provide PAF with a ability to add another sqn with more robust capabilities in Air to Air, Air to Surface and potentially even maritime strike roles than an existing dedicated sqn.

The limited payload numbers on the JF-17 maybe for Max. Take off weight (MTOW if I am not mistaken). With IFR, this payload will also go up. Also even having A-5s capable of double the payload of JF-17 but with dumb ordnance will be less effective than JF-17s capable of LGBs and potentially Sat Guided bombs.

The JF-17 fleet with a combination of KLJ-7 and RC-400, SD-10 & MICA, HMS, MAWS, RWR, IFR and IRST in the future is shaping up very nicely. Lots of potential and capability expansion for the PAF.
 
.
Ice,

I do not think the first batch will go to the A-5 sqn. The first flight (after the formation of the existing TEF) will be an OCU sqn. Now one of the A-5 sqns may become an OCU sqn for the type.

On the issue of replacing the ground attack dedicated A-5 sqn, I would just like to point out that in the PAF, certain sqns are dedicated for a role due to the limitation of the platform (even though all fighter sqns are trained in multiple profiles), but not because PAF wants it to be this way. The JF-17s provide a paradigm shift as its a MR platform like the F-16s. So as an example, a squadron getting converted to the JF-17s would actually provide PAF with a ability to add another sqn with more robust capabilities in Air to Air, Air to Surface and potentially even maritime strike roles than an existing dedicated sqn.

The limited payload numbers on the JF-17 maybe for Max. Take off weight (MTOW if I am not mistaken). With IFR, this payload will also go up. Also even having A-5s capable of double the payload of JF-17 but with dumb ordnance will be less effective than JF-17s capable of LGBs and potentially Sat Guided bombs.

The JF-17 fleet with a combination of KLJ-7 and RC-400, SD-10 & MICA, HMS, MAWS, RWR, IFR and IRST in the future is shaping up very nicely. Lots of potential and capability expansion for the PAF.

Thanks for the detail analysis blain2 sir. It has always been a pleasure reading your informative posts which clears up many doubts.

Regards

IceCold
 
.
Thanks for the detail analysis blain2 sir. It has always been a pleasure reading your informative posts which clears up many doubts.

Regards

IceCold

While not an aviation expert, I would like to add a little tid bit to this topic. According to TPhuang of Sino defence, the chinese are presently working on a JF17 variant dedicated to ground attack. this is also the version that the chinese are interested in adapting in this role.
it is interesting that the chinese are reflecting the thinking of PAF, if the supposition is to be relied on. While there may be other reasons for this, namely their needs and availability of other platforms, given the secrecy involved with this project, you never know what is cooking in the backburner.
Regards
Araz
 
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source:
http://www.strategycenter.net/resear...pub_detail.asp



Quote:
New AAMs: Revealed by Chinese Internet sources last December and then very early January 2008, the PL-10 (PL-ASR) and a yet to be identified AAM, appear to be derived from A-DARTER and R-DARTER, both developed by the Denel Corporation of South Africa. Source: Chinese Internet
Courtesy of Sczepan of Sino defence.today

Salam
Guys this is what the chinese have been doing on JH7s.I could not get the photograph across, but it shows 3 missiles on a single pylon!!! Any chance of these adorning our thunders on one pylon either side.
regards
araz
 
. . .
Listen to this:

aTY2L6P9Aa0[/media] - Interview with Air Chief Marshal Tanveer on JF-17 Production

CAS' interview. Listen to his comparison of JF-17 with Typhoon, Gripen and Block 50/2 at around 3:00 or so. He says there is minor difference in terms of avionics, weapons load (types of ordnance) out would be the same and differences such as weapons stations (7 vs. 9) exist but overall a very competitive package in terms of avionics and weapons.

By December 2008, one operational sqn of JF-17s.

Currently two blk-15s undergoing MLU in the US.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Thanks for the detail analysis blain2 sir. It has always been a pleasure reading your informative posts which clears up many doubts.

Regards

IceCold

Np my friend. Just sharing whatever little tidbits I am aware of.
 
.
Glad to know about the plan to increase the hardpoints of the aircraft.
 
.
A little blurb about the RC-400 which is being considered for deployment on part of the JF-17 fleet:
16 June 1999
Flight International

Thomson-CSF Detexis is demonstrating its RC400 airborne radar to potential export customers during the show at a military airbase near Paris. The French company is holding talks to undertake a test programme in a Mikoyan MiG-29.

The RC400 is aimed at the retrofit market in the hope of boosting business at a time when sales to the traditionally strong domestic military market are flat, says Thomson-CSFDetexis radar division commercial director Loic de la Bourdonnaye.

Thomson-CSFDetexis says that, in its most powerful form, the RC400 has only 20% less range than the RDY radar developed for the Mirage 2000-5 and -9, while weighing half as much, at around 115kg (250lb).
This configuration provides tracking of up to 24 targets, eight of which can be targeted simultaneously, with automatic prioritisation of four. The RC400's modularity enables it to be offered in less powerful versions, says de la Bourdonnaye.
The radar can track a 5m2 (55ft2) target in low-altitude/look-down mode at 100km (55nm) range, says the company, and air-to-ground ranging is possible down to a "few metres" accuracy. The RC400 is compatible with European and Russian beyond visual range missiles, says de la Bourdonnaye, adding: "We have shown it is compatible with the latest generation of Russian air-to-air missiles." A test programme with MiG-29 design bureau Mikoyan is planned.

Export possibilities identified by de la Bourdonnaye include older aircraft such as the Northrop F-5 and Mikoyan MiG-21 and MiG-29/Sukhoi Su-27 operators which want to fire new generation air-to-air missiles. Advanced trainer/ light attack aircraft such as the MiG-AT or South Korean KTX-2 may also be candidates.

Thomson-CSFDetexis is aiming at a possible French air force requirement to retrofit older Mirage 2000DAs to enable them to fire the Mica air-to-air missile.

With Erieye support, the ranges for the radars are not an absolute consideration. I am sure some more development/tweaking has gone into the RC-400 since 1999.
 
.
AEW&Cs negates the need of a long range radar. No need to compromise the aircrafts RCS, just need to fire a capable missile in range. It fits PAF requirements perfectly. However, i still think that the ending batch or some of the JF-17 will finally be able to get an AESA radar.
 
.
blain2

Would you tag JF-17 as a direct equivalent to the JAS-39 Gripen in most terms?

I wonder how good the 2nd batch JF-17s will be in terms of their avionics & ECM/EW in comparison to the systems inside the current set of Rafale and EF...
 
.
ECM/EW in comparison to the systems inside the current set of Rafale and EF...

There is no information so far on the plans of acquiring such systems from other countries. They will probably be from the Chinese.

The French use the FSO and Spectra for Rafale's defensive capability.

http://new.isoshop.com/dae/dae/gauche/sponsors/sponsor_rafale/img/fox3_1.pdf

http://new.isoshop.com/dae/dae/gauche/sponsors/sponsor_rafale/img/fox3_5.pdf

http://new.isoshop.com/dae/dae/gauche/sponsors/sponsor_rafale/img/fox3_6.pdf
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom