What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 2]

Status
Not open for further replies.
In my opinion, the first things they will/should do to the JF is increase the number of hard-points. This should come as a result of increased thrust on the 'improved RD-93' to somewhere near 90-95kN which had been rumored before when Russia formally allowed the re-export of the engine.

That would probably slightly affect the dimensions of wings and/or tail to counter the extra weight/drag. That's as far as the physical changes to the metal frame is concerned.

Second thing is avionics, which would get more changes including development and integration of a complete EW/ECM suite, possible radar change, full integration of weapons, complete networking with AEW&C, A2A refueling (which probably is already done).

Frankly, I do not see any more changes than this in the near future (second batch). Any hint of a different plan should be visible once they develop a twin-seat version.

I think they should try to minimize the changes to the airframe in the second batch so as to bring it into production as early as possible, say 2011. The 3rd batch should be a major upgrade with a much more powerful engine [13 ton class], bigger nose diameter, bigger and more powerful esa radar+irst, a 5000+ kg payload capacity, and a new generation of a2a and a2g weapons, but that is just my fanboy wishlist.

The most critical requirement i think right now is in the sensors, a2a munitions and datalinks. I personally would've preferred them to go for a chinese pesa and Iris-T+Meteor combo and a gripen like datalinking system for the 2nd batch.

Is there any work going on to equip the JF17 with dual ejector racks or triple ejector racks like those on F18/F16. If they use four underwing double ejector racks, then wouldn't current jf17 be able to carry 8 mraam + 2 wingtip sraam. With 2 triple racks and 2 dual racks, it will be 10 mraam. Wouldn't that be a easier option than modifying the airframe by adding more pylons?

I wonder if the paf has ever tried to get russian missiles for the jf-17. I think the R-77M could be a very good option if it is available.
 
Last edited:
.
Ideally you would not want the same missile as India!

South African is abandoning some of their home developed missiles because it is very expensive to integrate the weapons into different avionics.
 
.
It is interesting that you call F-16s and Gripen NG cheap options for lightweight fighters!

Didn't we get the news a few month ago that the costs of making the JF-17 for PAF is $12m? ... You can add 25% mark-up for selling to everybody else = $15m... or even 50% to make $18m. ... And about 8 weeks ago the price for the J-10A to Egypt was quoted at $30m! i.e. the difference is $15m and not $5m as per your assumptions. You get 2 FC-1s for each J-10.

As it turns out, we don't know what radar is on the JF-17. Do you have the full specification of the APG-81?

I am just trying to pull us away from unqualified statements which after being repeated enough - most people begin to take as facts.

I'm calling F16 & Gripen/Gripen NG the cheapest options america and europe have to offer.

I didn't know that at all. But it'd be helpful if you could tell me if 12m is just the airframe cost or cost of a fully equipped jf17. Didn't the first 42 production planes actually cost 1 billion.

that was typo, I meant the APG-80 on the F-16 Blk 60. It is supposed to have 2 to 3 times range compared to APG-68V5. I'm assuming the APG-80 aesa would substantially outrange any chinese mechanical array radar available for export.
 
.
I'm calling F16 & Gripen/Gripen NG the cheapest options america and europe have to offer.

I didn't know that at all. But it'd be helpful if you could tell me if 12m is just the airframe cost or cost of a fully equipped jf17. Didn't the first 42 production planes actually cost 1 billion.

that was typo, I meant the APG-80 on the F-16 Blk 60. It is supposed to have 2 to 3 times range compared to APG-68V5.

well when still in prototype stage the price was taged at 17 million and not 12 million dollar. now with some improvement it might have gone slightly higher and is bound to rise further in next upgraded block. but it wont ever cross a certain limit as it is what it is, and that is a cheap, affoardable yet competant option to replace our old fleet!!

i gues this make it clear!
regards!
 
.
i get your point.

however, i'm pointing out that if a 3rd world country requires a replacement for an old plane like mig21/mirage/f7/f5 the cheapest options are the american F-16, euro Gripen/ Gripen NG, ruskie Mig-35 or chinese jf17/j10.
certianly its only the jf-17,the rest of them are too expensive for most of the third world countries,even j10 is also quite expensive as compared to the thunders.
now i don't think the current configuration thunder can compete with f-16 or mig 35 in sensor and weapon capability. the klj-7/sd-10 has no chance against the zhuk-ae/r-77m or the apg-81/aim-120d/aim-9x? Even the RD-93B/RC-400/Mica/upgraded SD-10 combo doesn't quite match up.
well definetly the american technolgy is best in the world right now, even the ruassians cant match that, but then how many third world countries can afford that.The chinese thechnology has been mostly derived from the russians,yes we dont know much abot sd-10 but RC-400 is a very good radar and definetly mica currently used by rafales and Meteor which is going to equip almost all euorpean fighters are one of the best in the world.There are even rumours that the second batch of thunders might be equiped with an aesa radar. furthermore any radar superiority of the enemy fighters can be nutralised by the AWACS support.
Cost is the one and i think only factor favoring the jf17, but customers may prefer the 25mn J-10 over a 20mn JF17, especially once the j-10b version is cleared for export.
No dear the export price of a j10a was 41 million, even that figure is quite old now, and definetly j10 b will be more expensive.
that's why i believe the thunder needs a major upgradation in order to be competitive in the export market.
i think you are underestimating the jf-17,its a capable fighter in an afordable price range,secondly its in evalution phase, not even a single sqaurdron has been raised yet, you have to see that f-16 block60 took along time to reach this level, so will the thunder evolve with the passege of time, and finally its a light a combat aircraft and cant be compared to havier plateforms like mig 35, eurofighter and f16, its best comparison are LCA tejas and gripen,and yes gripen has the edge over it(keeping in mind the amount of american input it has) furthermore we even dont know the real specs of thunder yet.

then we've to consider the aircraft it will face post 2015. In a worst case the IAF in 2020 could well have around 240 MKI, 126 FA-18, 50-100 Mirage 2000-9, 60 upgraded Mig 29, upto 100 FGFA and any number of LCA . The JF-17 will have to be good enough to taken on any of these planes.
i highly doubt the 100 FGFA figure by 2020, and by then the thunders will be fully evolved blockIII and in numbers from 250- 300. and wont face the IAF alone it will aslo be accompanied by f16 block 52 and FC-20 and who knows about jxx. so definetly we will be capabale enough to defend our homeland:pakistan:
 
Last edited:
.
I'm calling F16 & Gripen/Gripen NG the cheapest options america and europe have to offer.

I didn't know that at all. But it'd be helpful if you could tell me if 12m is just the airframe cost or cost of a fully equipped jf17. Didn't the first 42 production planes actually cost 1 billion.

that was typo, I meant the APG-80 on the F-16 Blk 60. It is supposed to have 2 to 3 times range compared to APG-68V5. I'm assuming the APG-80 aesa would substantially outrange any chinese mechanical array radar available for export.

I will look for the discussion a few months ago saying $12m/plane COST!.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htproc/20090309.aspx
These 42 will cost $14.3 million per aircraft. The final 250 will cost $12 million each.

Also: http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/18902-jf-17-hal-tejas-lca-2.html (the original www.daily.pk/200811256812/paf-need-to-replace-its-fleet/ link is not longer valid)
KARACHI November 25

Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Tanvir M Ahmed said ...
He said that Chinese government and private sector would be approached for acquiring $ 700 to 800 million on soft terms to buy 40 to 42 JF-17 thunder jets for PAF.

The above includes a production line and initial induction costs.
 
Last edited:
.
any news on Dual-seat strike/training variants ???? is their any possibility that the first sqad will have them???
 
.
any news on Dual-seat strike/training variants ????
The only statement we heard sometime in 2008 was that PAF is interested in a twin-seater and development is focusing on that.

is their any possibility that the first sqad will have them???

No possibility. Prototypes will be developed that will undergo flight tests first. No chance before the second batch of JF-17 or 2011.
 
.
any news on Dual-seat strike/training variants ???? is their any possibility that the first sqad will have them???

Twin Seat JF-17 Back On

A Pakistani official stated that the Pakistan side has elected to proceed with the development of a twin-seat version of the Chengdu FC-1 or JF-17 in Pakistan service. A CATIC official refused to comment on this development. The Pakistan Air Force’s requirement for a twin seat version of this fighter was first noted to the author by Pakistan Air Force officials in 2004. However, subsequent reports have noted that China was not interested in such a twin-seat version of the FC-1. The Pakistani official at the Dubai show stated, however, that Pakistan has elected to pay for the development of the twin seat version, and that is now proceeding. This official explained that as Pakistan is sharing in the full spectrum of production, usage and sales of the JF-17, that it therefore requires the twin seat version to fully exploit this aircraft. The twin seat version will be used to support training missions and will also be developed into a dedicated attack model. This same official noted that Pakistan will only purchase the Chengdu J-10 fighter, which is therefore of less industrial interest to Pakistan. Other sources have noted that Pakistan intends to purchase an initial force of 40 J-10 fighters.

Since the Dubai show Russia’s Kommersant has reported that Russia has approved the Klimov RD93 engine in the FC-1/JF-17 for re-export to six countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Re-export to Pakistan had been an issue of serious contention between Russia and India, which uses the RD33, the basis for the RD93, in its MiG-29 fighters. Russia’s decision is a blow for Delhi, which will now face the JF-17 in significant numbers not only in Pakistan but also potentially in Bangladesh. China will also soon be able to arm the FC-1/JF-17 with 5th generation air-to-air missiles, such as the PL-10 derived from the South African Denel A-DARTER, and another radar-guided missile derived from the Denel R-DARTER. These weapons will greatly increase the combat potential of this low-cost but modern platform. At the same time, it is a major boost for Pakistan’s and China’s effort to promote the FC-1/JF-17 as the pre-eminent low-cost 4th generation multirole fighter. Until South Korea can market a single-seat combat version of its T/A-50 trainer, the FC-1/JF-17 will face no competition in its price range. The willingness of China and Pakistan to transfer full co-production capability will enhance the attractiveness of this fighter to many countries also looking to bolster their developing aerospace industries.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...houldve-invested-more-j-10s-7.html#post445942
 
.
a twin seat version will come but not before the JF17 single seat have evolved and matured. it will take some time and when by Block III, JF17 will be upgraded by superior systems then it may come into play as then the aircraft will be capabale of strike mission and then it will be good to have a twin seat version.
moreover for now the production rate is the main point of focus as PAF is trying to get them in large numbers as quickly as possible in order to meet the required number to phase-out its old fleet of A5, F7ps and Mirage (un-upgraded). fot this reason even the second block may not undergo massive uppgrades as this will take time. we may see a blok II quite similar to the existing one!!

regards!
 
.
a twin seat version will come but not before the JF17 single seat have evolved and matured. it will take some time and when by Block III, JF17 will be upgraded by superior systems then it may come into play as then the aircraft will be capabale of strike mission and then it will be good to have a twin seat version.
moreover for now the production rate is the main point of focus as PAF is trying to get them in large numbers as quickly as possible in order to meet the required number to phase-out its old fleet of A5, F7ps and Mirage (un-upgraded). fot this reason even the second block may not undergo massive uppgrades as this will take time. we may see a blok II quite similar to the existing one!!

regards!

As far as I know it is not big deal to make the dual. Exactly a few months ago PAF had to decide for what to do... Less fuel, bigger weight cause they want to have it exact same capabilities. For the rest it will be almost same as single..
 
.
As far as I know it is not big deal to make the dual. Exactly a few months ago PAF had to decide for what to do... Less fuel, bigger weight cause they want to have it exact same capabilities. For the rest it will be almost same as single..

well sir i doubt that point,
although it wont be that hard to acheive this goal after making the single seat version but still there are a lot of things that need to be done,
foe instance:
the avionics are to be modified to make hem accesible to both the pilots, specially if considering a strike role aircraft, it will be more important as the tasks of both pilots onbpard will be divided eg plane comtrol with the pilot and target identification, accquisition and engagement with the other.
twinn seat wont only increse the weight of plane by just a seat but will include the addition of control pannel and displays for the man in rear. this means almost an entire cockpit will be additional!
this increas in weight will need a poweerfll engine, not only to support the increased weight but allso to keep running the entire additional pannel!
slight modifications in design, making te plane to grow in size! thjis also will need the powerfull engine!
it wont be as simple as to go with less fuel as the whole lot of systems will also require more power to be generated by engine, so again, eventually it means an engine with increased power!

there may well be some other technical points that have missed but i guess you will agree with the above ones!!
:cheers:

regards!
 
.
well sir i doubt that point,
although it wont be that hard to acheive this goal after making the single seat version but still there are a lot of things that need to be done,
foe instance:
the avionics are to be modified to make hem accesible to both the pilots, specially if considering a strike role aircraft, it will be more important as the tasks of both pilots onbpard will be divided eg plane comtrol with the pilot and target identification, accquisition and engagement with the other.
twinn seat wont only increse the weight of plane by just a seat but will include the addition of control pannel and displays for the man in rear. this means almost an entire cockpit will be additional!
this increas in weight will need a poweerfll engine, not only to support the increased weight but allso to keep running the entire additional pannel!
slight modifications in design, making te plane to grow in size! thjis also will need the powerfull engine!
it wont be as simple as to go with less fuel as the whole lot of systems will also require more power to be generated by engine, so again, eventually it means an engine with increased power!

there may well be some other technical points that have missed but i guess you will agree with the above ones!!
:cheers:

regards!

You have summed it up nicely but if you buy the book about PAF of Alan Warnes you can read exactly what I said... :)
 
.
You have summed it up nicely but if you buy the book about PAF of Alan Warnes you can read exactly what I said... :)
:lol: well sir i actually dont have this book with me in my collection so i will appreciate if you can put some light on it.
anyway i agree it wont be that much difficult as we would have experience in plane desiggn, avionics, radars, weapons and all that. it will only require modification of these systems and will be easier then developing an entirely new one but will surely need some time and effort!
anyway thatnks for your thoughts, i am obliged!

regards!
 
.

Pakistan on June 30 began the licenced-assembly of the JF-17 ‘Thunder’ new-generation light multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA), with the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal (ACM) Rao Qamar Suleman, saying that this would help retain the ‘balance in airpower’ in South Asia. ACM Rao said this while formally inaugurating the final assembly facility of the JF-17 at the state-owned Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) in Kamra. “The aircraft would add to the PAF’s operational capability manifold and help retain the much-needed balance in airpower in the sub-continent,” he said. Pakistan and China had signed an agreement last March for the licenced-production of the first 42 JF-17s, and ACM Rao said that these new aircraft would begin replacing the PAF’s existing Nanchang A-5IICs and Chengdu F-7Ps and Dassault Mirage IIIPs. The roll-out of the first indigenously-assembled JF-17 is scheduled for this October. “The JF-17 programme has two main objectives—strengthening of our national security through indigenous production of new-generation combat aircraft, and building up Pakistan’s aviation industries. The programme has so far made very significant progress on both these counts,” ACM Rao said. “Most of the technical-industrial infrastructure for building the JF-17s is complete, and both Pakistan and China are looking at third-party export sales in big numbers,” he added.

The JF-17 has been jointly developed by a consortium of companies comprising PAC and China Aviation Industry Corporation (AVIC), Chengdu Aircraft Group Corp (CAC) and its Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute, China Aero Technology Import and Export Corp (CATIC), and China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp (CASIC). The first two JF-17s were airlifted to Kamra from Chengdu in early March, 2005. The aircraft were subsequently assembled at PAC’s brand-new JF-17 assembly line at Kamra (which was commissioned on April 6, 2005) and were ready for flight tests by March 18. The same day, these two aircraft were publicly rolled out for the then Chief of the Air Staff of the PAF, Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed. The first eight JF-17s are fitted with CETC-built KLJ-7 airborne multi-mode X-band monopulse radars, but two of CETC’s state-owned research institutes in Nanjing and Wuxi (No14 Institute and No607 Institute) subsequently won the bid for supplying the improved KLJ-10 multi-mode X-band monopulse radars. The PAF in future is expected to select the Vixen 1000ES AESA radar made by Italy’s Galileo Avionica (the Italian unit of SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems and part of the Finmeccanica group) for installation on board at least 100 JF-17s as well as on board the 40 Chengdu FC-20 medium-MRCAs. The PAC had licence-assembled 15 JF-17s in 2008 and another 20 this year. Later this year, the PAF will have its first operational JF-17 squadron—26 Sqn—which will be deployed at Peshawar and this will be followed by 16 Sqn. By 2018 the PAF will receive about 240 JF-17s to equip eight squadrons.

The PAF has to date committed to acquiring 150 JF-17s in its present configuration (which has a single-axis fly-by-wire flight control system for yaw, and not for pitch or roll), whilst China is expected to buy 250 for the PLA Air Force depending on the outcome of on-going flight trials. Pakistan will initially produce 50% of the aircraft locally, progressively increasing to 100% of the airframe. The unit price of a JF-17 will be kept under US$20 million. Potential export customers for the JF-17 Thunder include the air forces of Bangladesh, Egypt, Ghana, Iran, Libya, Mynamar, Nigeria, North Korea, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Originally known as Super-7, the JF-17 Thunder/FC-1 Xiaolong (Fierce Dragon) has been developed at a cost of $150 million (with Pakistan contributing 50% of this amount) by the Chengdu Aerospace Corporation (CAC) under a China-Pakistan joint venture. The JF-17 is a lightweight MRCA powered by a single Klimov RD-93 turbofan (imported off-the-shelf from Russia), rated at 49.4kN (11,103lb st) dry or 84.4kN (18,969lb st) with afterburner. It was in June 1999 that China and Pakistan inked the joint development and production agreement to co-develop the JF-17. The first JF-17 was rolled out on May 31, 2003 and it made its maiden flight on August 24, 2003. This was followed by a second airframe (PT-2) being built for static tests, and two more flying prototypes. The third prototype, called PT-3, joined PT-1 in the flight-test programme on April 9, 2004. First flight of the redesigned and definitive prototype (PT-4) took place on May 10, 2006 at Wenjiang Airport in Chengdu, capital of southwest China’s Sichuan Province. The JF-17’s sixth prototype first flew on September 10, 2006. The first two pre-production JF-17s (Nos101 and 102) were delivered to Pakistan on March 2, 2005. PT-4 was used for avionics integration tests and weapons qualification trials. Conducting the flight tests on behalf of CAC were experimental test pilots Liang Wan Jun and Wang Wen Jiang.
The 13-tonne JF-17 is not a true unstable design, just relaxed stability, which simply means an aircraft that was designed without consideration for positive stability. The airframe features ‘diverterless’ engine inlets, has larger wing leading-edge root extensions, longer ventral strakes either side of the aft fuselage, and a taller, less swept fin. In place of the conventional ramp of the original two-dimensional intake, the new design features a ‘hump’ to aerodynamically divert turbulent boundary-layer airflow away from the engine inlet. Diverter plates are used to separate the boundary layer of air that comes off the body of the aircraft in front of the inlet. The angled sides just in front of the inlets in PT-1 were meant to create a consistent gap between the body of the aircraft and the diverter plates, therefore ensuring a separation of the boundary layer. The JF-17’s fourth prototype—which is the definitive design—uses a diverterless bump to deflect the slowed air coming off the body of the aircraft in the boundary layer. The design no longer depends on a gap but on the angle of the bump and the angle along the body of the aircraft in front of the inlets that air rush in. The mouths of the inlets are also now scooped (angled forward, instead of being perpendicular) as part of the DSI principle of dealing with the boundary layer. The JF-17’s fuselage is built of lightweight aluminium alloys. Airframe life according PAC is 6,000 hours, or 25 years). Internal fuel capacity is 2,200kg. For flight controls, the JF-17 currently uses a Type 634 longitudinal fly-by-wire (FBW) system, while the lateral flight control system is still mechanical. For enhancing the JF-17’s combat radius, a fixed in-flight refuelling probe mounted on the starboard side of the aircraft’s cockpit area has been developed. The RD-93 turbofan’s service life is 2,100 hours (with a time-between-overhaul of 800 hours. Specific fuel consumption is 2.1kg/kgf/hr in afterburner mode. It has been optimised to provide a maximum speed of Mach 1.8 at an altitude of 55,000 feet. Russia’s Rosoboronexport State Corp is currently fulfilling orders under a $267 million contract signed in mid-2005 for the supply of 100 RD-93s, with an option to order another 400 engines. A total of 15 turbofans were supplied by late 2004. Future plans call for Klimov to increase the RD-93’s thrust from 8.3 tonnes to 9 tonnes.

The JF-17’s avionics package, integrated via a MIL-STD-1553B digital databus driven by twin 32-bit mission computers, includes a HUD with a 24-degree field of view, three AMLCD-based multifunction cockpit displays measuring 20.3cm x 30.6cm (8-inch x 12-inch), a hybrid ring laser gyro/GPS-based inertial navigation system, hands-on-throttle-and-stick (HOTAS) controls, and a health and usage monitoring systems (HUMS). The KLJ-10 radar can currently detect 40 airborne targets, track 10 targets and engage two targets simultaneously at beyond visual range. The radar’s detection range for a 3 square metre target is 75km in the look-up mode, and 45km in the look-down mode. Seaborne targets can be located out to a distance of 135km. The CETC-built radar warning receiver has a library capable of recognising more than 100 threatening emitters. This will later be increased to 300. The on-board HF/VHF/UHF communications suite will be supplemented by a another radio to serve as a receive-only data link for data relayed by airborne early warning and control aircraft like the Saab 2000 AEW & C, four of which are on order by the PAF. For weapons management purposes the JF-17 makes use of a MIL-STD-1760 databus.

The JF-17’s weapons package comprises one internal GSh-23-2 twin-barrel 23mm cannon, and up to 3,629kg (8,000lb) of ordnance carried on up to seven external stations (two wingtip stations, four underwing and one on the centre fuselage). Precision-guided munitions (PGM) to be carried will include the 500kg (1,102lb) Lei Ting LT-2 laser-guided bomb developed by China’s Luoyang Optical-Electro Technology Development Centre, and GPS-guided PGMs like the 500kg FT-1 bomb, 250kg FT-3 bomb, and the LS-6 500kg.

Target designation for the LT-2 will be carried out by a pod-mounted system developed by Xi’an Sicong Group. For air combat, the JF-17 will be armed with the CPMIEC-built PL-12 beyond visual range air-to-air missile and the PL-9C within visual range air combat missile. The SD-10’s range is 70km when launched at an altitude of 60km and it takes only 20 seconds for it to attain a speed of Mach 4 to travel 30km. The missile can attain a maximum g load of 38, and its active radar seeker’s target detection range is 20km.
The PL-9C, weighing 115kg, has a range of 22km, and can sustain a g load of 40. Meanwhile, in what is seen as a counter to India’s effort to jointly develop the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) with Russia’s Sukhoi Aircraft Corp, the PAC and CAC in October 2006 inked a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to jointly develop an advanced, stealthy, single-seat and single-engined derivative of the JF-17 Thunder MRCA.

Last Updated ( Monday, 17 August 2009 )
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom