JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 2]

[pakpower]

This is the reason why Typhoon is famous for high speed (supersonic) agility and extremely high thrust to weight ratio. Typhoon's ability to get in range to fire its own missiles, then get out of range of enemy missiles is better than any other jet, except possibly the F-22.
JF needs a more powerful engine and weight reduction to perform well at high speed and high altitude like Typhoon. I hope it gets enough export orders to warrant lots of block-60 style modifications.

Yaar your ambitions towards the scope of the JF are really good and you must be appreciated on this. But the thing is JF reaching towards Typhoon is way too far now.

As it looks now in the current situation where Pakistan is asking for Soft Loans for it's JF first Batch and for the reamining also i guess.

So how is that possible I know these Hypocrates type of Politians only know how to fill up their own pockets and nothing else.

GOD help Pakistan to get up on his own foot which seems quite far tooo.

 

[qsaark]

I disagree... The pilot can harldy have more then 9g (max 12 g). Missiles can go beyond 50g. If you want to use your speed and agility (it is either one of them...) then your lost. At this moment it is not abaout SAW anymore but deny opponent arena, track him first, shoot first and stay out of close combat or being shot at... If your ecm fails you are dead meat. The days of glorious close combat are history. Unless you go back to spitfire age...

There is a reason of putting thrust vectoring in the most modern fighters. If it was all about ECM, than perhaps an AWACS/AEW would be the best platform to equip and use for launching long range BVR missiles and countering the incoming BVR missiles using thier powerful ECM.

But largely I agree with you.

 

[PakShaheen79]

Thrust vectoring doesn't make pilot bear more then 9g. Still jets with thrust vectoring can merely reach 14-15g but again pilot inside cockpit cannot handle that much g pressure. ECM is one important aspect but it will always first shot that will give huge advantage to any pilot who fire first at its enemy. All current US origin jets follow same doctrine of taking first shot at enemy. An incoming missile will always keeps enemy pilot in pressure to evade it no matter how good ECM system he might have with his jet.

Not only in BVR first shot is equally critical in WVR perhaps more critical.

 

[qsaark]

Thrust vectoring doesn't make pilot bear more then 9g. Still jets with thrust vectoring can merely reach 14-15g but again pilot inside cockpit cannot handle that much g pressure. ECM is one important aspect but it will always first shot that will give huge advantage to any pilot who fire first at its enemy. All current US origin jets follow same doctrine of taking first shot at enemy. An incoming missile will always keeps enemy pilot in pressure to evade it no matter how good ECM system he might have with his jet.

Not only in BVR first shot is equally critical in WVR perhaps more critical.

I never said that TV makes a pilot bear more than 9g (I may be a biologists but not an idiot). Why the leading fighter manufacturers are wasting their time, efforts and resources on basic design, speed and thrust vectoring? If basic design and TV is so irrelevant what is the need of 4.5th or 5th generation fighters?

Why Chinese want J-11 but not the J-7A/H as WVR/BVR launchers? What was wrong with M2K? Modify its ECM suites, Radar that’s it, why Rafael? Why to spend humongous amount on making Eurofighter Typhoon?

A single pilot fighter will never have a radar an ECM suite as capable as it is found on the AWACS/AEW or EW-dedicated aircrafts. Why not to fit these aircrafts with long range missiles? Certainly nothing can beat an AWACS in picking up a fighter at 150NM.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

In order to understand the engineering concepts---you have to look into the human mind behind it as well. In order for you to understand thrust vectoring---you need to study the psyche of the russian aeronautical and design engineer as well.

The SU 30's are a massive machines---and still the russian bear makes them dance in the skies like delicate ballerinas / butterflies / humming birds at incredibly low speeds---sometimes suspended in the air like a raptor ready to strike at its enemy from any different angle---the russian is the ultimate gamesman---a daredevil in form---never to miss a chance at showmanship.

The thrust vectoring may have had an advantage against the missiles of the 80's and early 90's---but today with missiles moving around at lightening speeds and going around any which way like darts in the skies and making higher G turns than any aircraft could possibly dream of---thrust vectoring may have met its demise even before coming up against a missile that it was supposed to counter.

When we talk of thrust vectoring---must we ask the question---at what time and at what speed---time meaning---is the plane loaded on all external hard points with fuel and missiles---and speed mean cruise speed of 600 --- 650 mph. Well in that case---a possible direction change of 90 + degrees could induce 10----15 g's possibly there is every chance in book that the plane will buckle in the middle and possibly tear itself up due to centrifugal forces being the harshest on the hanging equipment from the hard points---the pilots harness could possibly be torn apart and the pilot himself slamming into the control panels or the canopy like a rag doll---say goodbye machine---say goodbye pilot. Even if the harness hold strong---the pilot may not be alive or in his senses to make any moves after such tremendous forces being applied against him.

In slower speed maneavours---TV could give an oppurtune moment for the adversary to take a shot as well---unless the adversary missiles cannot reach the TV plane and the TV planes missiles can reach the adversary coming from behind---but what if the other plane has BVR as well---the TV plane would loose critical speed to make its maneaveur to launch missile---the plane coming from behind would be closing in at a higher rate of speed---and then there is every chance possible that the TV plane trying to escape, will get within the firing range of the chase plane---before gathering escape velocity.

TV will work real good at slower speeds if the plane coming from behind doesnot have BVR's to match the distance of TV plane. Then it will be like shooting ducks in a gallery.

Could TV work better WVR---possibly---but then today's missiles are extremely deadly and turn on a dime faster than an SU 30 could---.

Then there are off-boresight missile that could counter TV.

 

[qsaark]

I am not arguing with you guys. I am aware (probably not as much as you guys are) of the technological advancement of the new generation missiles and the obsoleteness of missile evasive maneuvers. But I am not getting the answers of the questions I have asked earlier. Still, the leading aircraft manufacturers are constantly improving on the basic design, TV capable engines, and modern electronics (whatever the psychology, Russians are not alone). If long range firing radar and ECM are the only things that can save one, why other modifications are being introduced in the newer generation fighters? Why not to equip older designs (not older airframes) with the up to date avionics, radars, IFF, ECM, all the other goodies and of course newer generation WVR/BVR missiles. I guess my question is very straight forward. Why there is so much fuss about the 60s or 70s design of the JF-17 if it is eventually going to be equipped with the latest avionics and missiles? Why so much debate on delta, swept wing, canards? why so much fuss about the poor engine?

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi

Advancement in technology of design, is a neccessity in itself. Designers strive to make newer and better than before equipment and that is a part of development. Newer designs, newer ideas, more investment, more jobs.

They think that maybe once awhile---the two adversaries will face each other at close combat---that is when the inherent superiority of one plane over the other will be ascertained. But until and unless we don't have a major air to air combat between similiar adversaries---we really don't know if all that is neccessary or not.

Like when they came up with the original phantom without a gun---they thought that the missiles would do the job---but then they found out that was not true---missile systems were poor quality---now they are gun shy---even though there were designers not in favour of installing a gun on the F 22 Raptor---in the end they still did---even though the Raptor is not designed to get in close combat under any circumstance and the american pilots follow the guidelines like gears on a swiss watch---. "It is reported now that the Raptor should have been without the gun ". Current day missiles have reached a totally different pleateau of kill and destroy. Otoh the western ECM's are way ahead of any of their opponents---

Why all the fuss about all the different design perimeters---they are just a function of the design---they tell about the man behind the design.


Why does the rotor of one helicopter from one country turns clockwise and the rotor of another helicopter from another nation turns anti-clock-wise.

 

[saiko]

Something to keep in mind that the faster the missile is moving relative to the target the higher Gs it must pull relative to the target. If the missile is gonig Mach 4 and the target is going mach 0.8 the target, with a properly timed high-G maneuver can dodge the missile every single time and force it to break lock (and normally self-destruct).

Also keep in mind that most BVR missiles are not fired at maximum range. The PK is very low at maximum range, with the possible exception of the Meteor. I don't know if it lives up to the marketing hype, but if it does it will revolutionize BVR combat.

The No Escape Zone for the AMRAAM is only something like 25-30km. Firing outside that zone will make it quite possible to dodge the missile with high G maneuvering or with certain tricks. Of course it means you have probably blown most of your energy and it will make pulling a high G maneuver for the follow up missile much tougher. So being able to fire first is still a big advantage, but you are not going to get too many kills from outside the no escape zone.

The great irony is that the short range AAMs are extremely deadly whereas BVR missiles are not (by comparison - with the possible exception of the Meteor). With the electro-optical seekers on the new generation of short range AAMs it's basically impossible to break the lock and the short range missile ranges are basically all within the no escape zone.

 

[mean_bird]

There is a reason of putting thrust vectoring in the most modern fighters. If it was all about ECM, than perhaps an AWACS/AEW would be the best platform to equip and use for launching long range BVR missiles and countering the incoming BVR missiles using thier powerful ECM.

But largely I agree with you.

I agree

Just would like to add that apparently missiles can do high g manuevers and on the face of it, it might look that aircraft agility is no longer important except for maybe reaching the confrontation point quickly.

Well, apart from that I would mention 2 things

- Its not like a pilot will try to out-run a missile that is following him. But when you are using flares, etc you would like to be very agile. Also you would be at an advantage to engage or run away, etc

- More importantly, BVR, as of today, are not something that are 100% accurate. To fire a BVR you need to be in a good position to maximize its effectiveness. There is where agility and maneuverability would come into play. This is also where pilot training come into play

Having said this, I agree that ECM, better missiles, better radar have gained tremendous importance in recent times.

 

[Zob]

wel the wayi look at it is for example in the WILD WEST... two cowoys have a fight and one is carryinga pistol and the other arrying a rife.....theyboth run out of ammo and r stnding infront o each other the guy with the rifle can litreally hit the guy with the pistol with the long reach of his gun ok bad example but i uess u get my point......now my point is TVC is useful when bth the opponents have wasted there BVRs and WVRs it will come down 2 who can turn harder in a merge....TVC is not usless it is a less used feauture i guess...bcause the das of old style RED BARON dogfighting will never be over....i think i posed a link to futue dogfights from history channel in which they exlain similar things that ogfight wil never be extinct

 

[Munir]

There is a reason of putting thrust vectoring in the most modern fighters. If it was all about ECM, than perhaps an AWACS/AEW would be the best platform to equip and use for launching long range BVR missiles and countering the incoming BVR missiles using thier powerful ECM.

But largely I agree with you.

TVC makes you a dead bird...

-heavier
-huge rcs
-huge ir sign
-does only change aircraft heading but does kill kinetic energy

It maybe makes a huge heave fighter do things smaller agile fighters like stol but in real acm it is hardly valuable.

 

[Contrarian]

From a very old post:

Ofcourse

The TVC makes an aircraft highly maneuverable. The aircraft is capable of near-zero airspeed at high angles of attack and dynamic aerobatics in negative speeds up to 200 km/h. Su-30MKI is the worlds first TVC equipped operational fighter aircraft.

Normal planes when they change direction, lose a lot of energy while doing so, their speed is reduced, etc, etc.

You must understand that TVC essentially can make the plane change its direction with very very little loss of energy.

It can change its direction faster, recover from almost any manover,etc, etc. Su-30MKI for examples has no AoA limitations.

Now the advantages from this are limitless...for example in SEAD missions, your plane can deliver the munitions and turn around faster and quicker than what any other plane would be able to do, against incomming missiles, it would give you the cruicial few extra seconds against it,a plane with TVC and FBW even though damaged could manage its way back to the AFB.

This is all but just the begining of the advantages of having TVC.

You are limiting yourself to thinking that TVC helps only in WVR, which it does, but its just a small part of the overall advantages of TVC.


Please, what i meant to say is that there must be a reason for USAF to NOW have TVC equipped in its frontline fighter when you would expect them to know full well that(acc. to you and many others) its only need and advantage is in WVR.

Im not saying TVC is good just because the Raptor uses it, far from it.

In the end i would mention again that the Su-30MKI has both TVC and HMS.

I disagree with you blain. TVC is very very useful, which is why all the new generation planes are trying to get TVC in them, inlcluding the Super J-10.

3-D TVC is very useful to dodge missiles. The main purpose of TVC is that the plane does not lose energy while turning. TVC gives the plane Super-Manouverability. The Su-30MKI, despite being big is ssuperbly manouvereable, just because of its 2-D TVC.

It also gives the plane the ability to turn rapidly and re-enter combat in a favourable position or inclination so as to launch missiles.

As is quoted above. a WVR fight with a TVC plane would be very much a mistake unless the opposing a/c has an advantage wrt its positioning.

Ofcourse, this does not apply to a BVR fight, where things are heading nowadays. Still, without losing energy dodging, gives it an advantage to dodge missiles.

TVC gives the plane a higher ability or a greater number of options wrt whether or not it wants to engage in a battle or not. The ability to change directions with minimal loss of energy, and thus the ability or i should say a greater ability to choose the direction, angle, etc to enter a battle with another plane.

You are all obsessed with just one reason that with TVC the plane would be able to dodge missiles. Thats just a small part of it.

There must also be a reason why the F-22 is equipped with TVC now, and why the Typhoon originally intended to be retrofitted with TVC equipped versions of the Eurojet. Something not being done now because of finances(unless India joins-in which case the option is on the table).

 

[Munir]

>>>It also gives the plane the ability to turn rapidly and re-enter combat in a favourable position or inclination so as to launch missiles.

It is well documented that it (TVC) leads to loss of kinetic energy cause the plane does not turn faster but creates more drag. You end up having less speed and bigger RCS. And if you have drag then you are remembered that one of the most important rule of engagement in the air is that either you have eormous power (potential) to recreate kinetic energy or you are ready to be crushed by that missile... If you think that you can evade highly agile missiles with RCS and the re-enter in a favourable position then we ou have to know that you will be dead by the time you start rethinking...

For the rest I am not a big fan of copy pasting posts from either low quality journalists/press or posters without technical background. If we so that then there is no limit in crap that we have to read. The fact that it is mentionned that F22 and MKI both are superb and have TVC could be a sign that the post is not seriously correct. F22 uses sat data, interlinks, superb rcs... The problem is that is must be huge to have internal weapons, electronis and fuel. So it neads TVC to make STOL. IT is extremelu handy to get more altitude and it is handy to make a huge plane turn a litter bit faster. But is surely not making a plane more agile then a lighter (normal) fighterjet.

 

[adnan1479]

Future JF-17 design as proposed to Air Chief Pervez Mehdi QUreshi 9 years ago

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was the design of a future jf-17 which was sent to the PAF chief almost 10 years ago - - - Complete with a larger engine, dual missile launchers, conformal tanks, wingtip ECM pods, twin tail fins, IRST and full internal avionics.
The drawing below shows a notional future knife-fight with israeli f-15s over the golan heights. the picture is titled "Masters of Golan"
(I apologise for the poor quality but this is a photo of the drawing. the scanned image was too big to upload)

 

[sohailbutt]

JF-17 Thunder Aircrafts Squadron to be set up in Peshawar: Air Chief​

PESHAWAR: Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman, Chief of the Air Staff, Pakistan Air Force, who is undertaking his inaugural visits to various PAF Bases after assuming the command of Pakistan Air Force, visited PAF Base, Peshawar on Friday.

On his arrival at the Base, he was presented with Guard of Honor by smartly turned out contingent of Pakistan Air Force. He also reviewed the parade presented by the base personnel, according to a press release of PAF Media Affair.

Addressing the Airmen, Air Chief said, “The first ever Fighter Squadron of JF-17 Thunder aircraft will be raised and stationed at Pakistan Air Force Base, Peshawar.

By the end of year 2009, full strength of JF-17 Thunder aircraft squadron, which will also be the first ever squadron in the world, will be operational at PAF Base, Peshawar”.

While addressing a joint session of Airmen, the Air Chief said, “The cardinal points of my vision are Integrity, Professional Excellence and Teamwork. The top most priority will remain operational preparedness of PAF.

JF-17 Thunder Aircrafts Squadron to be set up in Peshawar: Air Chief - GEO.tv