JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 3]

[Aslan]

Self deleted Old info.

 

[TaimiKhan]

yaar, I haven't met a single person with first hand experience with JF. If anybody had an experience he would have been able to explain to me what all equipment it had and what makes it exceptional.

Even the ones who claim to have first hand experience are quoting from fanboy sites and blogs.

There is no one on the forum who has any experience with either the JF or its manufacturing facility.

Well then you need to study the whole JF-17 thread and see how many people have nearly first hand experience with people involved with JF-17.

I have 2 friends, one flying a JF-17 and another ROSE upgraded Mirage, and my major source is from them. nabil_05 is another one with very authentic inside information. pshamim is another ex-PAF with very reliable information on projects of PAF, MuradK himself ex-PAF with inside information, x_man another PAF veteran with knowledge, Black Blood has PAF contacts and many other members who have very good and authentic information from inside the PAF.

So it has been suggested many times to you, to read the full JF-17 thread and see what these members had to contribute and what has been told from insiders.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Air-Ground Configurations:

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....

The above is what the PAC web site has about JF for now.

Khalid, even this is old information which has not been fully updated.

Specifications have changed.

 

[jagjitnatt]

Well I have to see the praise from the other side, which I haven't and especially from you haven't seen it.

And there are no stupid assumptions about it. It will get AESA radar, more composites, it has modular structure, meaning not restricted to only one thing in field of avionics and radar.

Just tell me one thing. How do you implement modularity in an aircraft? and up to what extent?

And as told again and again and read the Chinese manufacturer promo also, the export variants of Chinese radars and weapon systems are made based on Western MIL-STD-1553 stuff and MIL-STD-1760, so when that is done, it means it can support western weapon system also. If Chinese manufacturers say such thing in international exhibitions, that would not be a lie as they have to prove it also later when someone buys it from them.

Western Avionics is the NAME of the company that designed the above mentioned bus. It doesn't mean it will be compatible with western weapons.

You are a mod and posting without any research.

Read about JF-17, its whole avionics package, including the radar is based on 1553 standard architecture and weapons store management and hard points communicate through the 1760 standard architecture, thus JF-17 can support western weapon system, even if it AMRAAM.

Explained above. The above mentioned products are buses that help transfer control and data signals on a common channel.

And as for comparing, JF-17 has been compared to our current F-16s, not the latest ones.

You are comparing a new fighter to a 30 years old fighter sir.
How fair is that?
Majority of the people here believe that just adding some fancy screens make the aircraft world class. Unfortunately its not so.

The current F-16s will be getting upgraded to MLU standards which features avionics from block 40 and block 50 standards. They will be way ahead of JF-17s

And before accusing me of siding with those who do these comparisons, provide me the posts where I have done the comparison and sided with those. I am waiting for that, as if you don't, that would mean you are the liar here.

You are telling me how JF-17 will be upgraded to AESA and composites when you have no proof of that.
You know that PAF is currently looking for upgrades to avionics. It is seeking a PESA radar. It will take 8-10 years for the JF-17 strength to go above 200. What do you think, PAF will switch to PESA and then to AESA before completing the orders?
Two upgrades even before the orders for the plane are completed?

Aren't you talking like them now?

So before lecturing me, update your own knowledge about what you are talking about. As your ignorance is not limited to just JF-17s.

I have seen you from day one and seen from where you have learned and from where you post. So don't lecture me.

Elaborate please.

 

[TaimiKhan]

what is the technical support of pakistan In JF-17? could anyone share some light on it.... Like Cockpit design, avionics, softwares... Pakistans contribution... Anyone?

Well nabil_05 may help you in that. For now:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/5354-su-30mki-jf-17-air-fight-103.html#post810884

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/5354-su-30mki-jf-17-air-fight-103.html#post810852

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...tirole-fighter-thread-3-a-108.html#post791993

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...e-backs-away-chinese-threat-2.html#post782380

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/5354-su-30mki-jf-17-air-fight-103.html#post810881

 

[IndianArmy]

Well nabil_05 may help you in that. For now:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/5354-su-30mki-jf-17-air-fight-103.html#post810884

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/5354-su-30mki-jf-17-air-fight-103.html#post810852

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...tirole-fighter-thread-3-a-108.html#post791993

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...e-backs-away-chinese-threat-2.html#post782380

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/5354-su-30mki-jf-17-air-fight-103.html#post810881

That Was of great Help, Thanks a lot..... I will take my time and read it... thank You once again

 

[TaimiKhan]

Just tell me one thing. How do you implement modularity in an aircraft? and up to what extent?

Here is some basic knowledge: "In systems engineering, modular design — or "modularity in design" — is an approach that subdivides a system into smaller parts (modules) that can be independently created and then used in different systems to drive multiple functionalities. Besides reduction in cost (due to lesser customization, and less learning time), and flexibility in design, modularity offers other benefits such as augmentation (adding new solution by merely plugging in a new module), and exclusion. "

Hope this above definition helps. And as for JF-17, modular design means it is not restricted to just one radar or avionics set or even engine, meaning the structure has been made such that if required as per customer specification radar, avionics suite can be changed without major structural changes to the aircraft, extra room has been left in the engine compartment to accommodate a newer engine if available. These all things are limited to the current structure of the aircraft, meaning it can have anything of the size and shape which it can accommodate. In the start of JF-17 development, it suffered as the aircraft could not be made and designed till a radar or avionics suite or engine be selected, but when it was decided to have such an airframe which can accommodate anything at future date, the project took off and became a success. Hope you now get the modularity concept of JF-17.

Western Avionics is the NAME of the company that designed the above mentioned bus. It doesn't mean it will be compatible with western weapons.

Have you even read the MIL STD material ?? MIL STD is a set of codes, commands and architecture design, an international one, based on which systems in the aircraft communicate with each other. Take the example of a hard points in a computer and the software which lets the computer work and communicate with each other. The computer may be made in US, but it will be able to communicate with keyboards and mouse or speakers made in China, Taiwan, India or wherever, if the manufacturer has followed the international standard of codes set for such things to be compatible with them. So MIL STD are an international set of codes, if anything is manufactured based on these standard codes, then it will be compatible with anything which has built in interface to work with any device which has these standards. Plz read about these standards and then come and discuss.

You are a mod and posting without any research.

It seems its you who needs some research and understanding of how things communicate and how they work.

Explained above. The above mentioned products are buses that help transfer control and data signals on a common channel.

Explained above, for further reading, plzz read about MIL STD standards, and IEEE set of codes for electrical appliances and other stuff like that.

You are comparing a new fighter to a 30 years old fighter sir.
How fair is that?
Majority of the people here believe that just adding some fancy screens make the aircraft world class. Unfortunately its not so.

We have to compare it to the 30 year old plane, as that is the best we have got and is our front line fighter. So we compare it to what we have got, when we get something superior, then we may again compare it with and see where it lacks and try to improve those features.

The current F-16s will be getting upgraded to MLU standards which features avionics from block 40 and block 50 standards. They will be way ahead of JF-17s

When it will get the updates, automatically it will become superior to JF-17, about which we have no doubt, nor do we compare it with Blk 52s, as they are much superior to JF-17.

You are telling me how JF-17 will be upgraded to AESA and composites when you have no proof of that.

Buddy, go and search the net, you will find many official and non official links specifying the planned upgrades. here is something from a very respected defence analyst who has inside information and so far whatever he has reported, its been authentic.

The JF-17 Thunder: A hefty punch at an affordable price.

You know that PAF is currently looking for upgrades to avionics. It is seeking a PESA radar. It will take 8-10 years for the JF-17 strength to go above 200. What do you think, PAF will switch to PESA and then to AESA before completing the orders?
Two upgrades even before the orders for the plane are completed?

PAF is not seeking for an PESA. It is searching for an AESA. Chinese and Italians are for now on the table and we may see a decision regarding that in future. As said before, PAF has a plan for looking at JF-17 upgrades every 5 year. This plane is still being produced and first batch order has been for 50. So the current configuration is for just 50 JF-17s, when it comes to second batch, then we will see what new is to be brought into it. Such programs have always room of upgrade and as this program is in its infancy, it has a lot of room of upgrade even if full 200 are not added. Told many times it will upgraded in batches of 50.

Aren't you talking like them now?

No I am not, thanks.

Elaborate please.

No need, record and other peoples comments are infront of you, want to ignore them, no worries. We are used to such comments and members.

 

[jagjitnatt]

Here is some basic knowledge: "In systems engineering, modular design — or "modularity in design" — is an approach that subdivides a system into smaller parts (modules) that can be independently created and then used in different systems to drive multiple functionalities. Besides reduction in cost (due to lesser customization, and less learning time), and flexibility in design, modularity offers other benefits such as augmentation (adding new solution by merely plugging in a new module), and exclusion. "

Hope this above definition helps. And as for JF-17, modular design means it is not restricted to just one radar or avionics set or even engine, meaning the structure has been made such that if required as per customer specification radar, avionics suite can be changed without major structural changes to the aircraft, extra room has been left in the engine compartment to accommodate a newer engine if available. These all things are limited to the current structure of the aircraft, meaning it can have anything of the size and shape which it can accommodate. In the start of JF-17 development, it suffered as the aircraft could not be made and designed till a radar or avionics suite or engine be selected, but when it was decided to have such an airframe which can accommodate anything at future date, the project took off and became a success. Hope you now get the modularity concept of JF-17.

I know what modularity is. I was asking how modularity has been implemented. If you think, space is a problem then let me tell you its not.

The problem is the integration of different class of equipment on the aircraft.

Have you even read the MIL STD material ?? MIL STD is a set of codes, commands and architecture design, an international one, based on which systems in the aircraft communicate with each other. Take the example of a hard points in a computer and the software which lets the computer work and communicate with each other. The computer may be made in US, but it will be able to communicate with keyboards and mouse or speakers made in China, Taiwan, India or wherever, if the manufacturer has followed the international standard of codes set for such things to be compatible with them. So MIL STD are an international set of codes, if anything is manufactured based on these standard codes, then it will be compatible with anything which has built in interface to work with any device which has these standards. Plz read about these standards and then come and discuss.

MIL STD defines a bus as I said earlier. It is just an interconnect to transfer data and control signals.
Its like a telephone wire, a medium to send signals across. You can send all sorts of signals over it but that doesn't meant that the receiver and transmitter are compatible with each other. The signal are encrypted and can only be understood by someone who has the key to decrypt the data.

Western equipment has different cryptography methods and encryption standards. They are not compatible with Russian or chinese equipment, no matter what bus you use.

The above bus was used since it is a standard and reduced the costs of designing a new bus. And because buses have nothing exclusive about them. They are all the same except for the bus width, controller and bandwidth.

It seems its you who needs some research and understanding of how things communicate and how they work.

No. Read more about bus.

Explained above, for further reading, plzz read about MIL STD standards, and IEEE set of codes for electrical appliances and other stuff like that.

Being an IT engg I know more about buses and how they operate.
It was you who said that these buses allow western equipment to be operational with chinese equipment.
It was you who said these bus would enable AMRAAM could be used with chinese radar. And you've failed to prove the same.

Buddy, go and search the net, you will find many official and non official links specifying the planned upgrades. here is something from a very respected defence analyst who has inside information and so far whatever he has reported, its been authentic.

The JF-17 Thunder: A hefty punch at an affordable price.

As far as I know there are just NON OFFICIAL links telling me about upgrades. No official links suggest any composites or AESA radar.

The only AESA offering was the VIXEN-500E radar, but its worse than a PESA and PAF have rejected it. It has a scan angle of just 60 degrees with a look up range of just 35 NM ie 65 km. The KLJ is still better than this.

PAF is not seeking for an PESA. It is searching for an AESA. Chinese and Italians are for now on the table and we may see a decision regarding that in future. As said before, PAF has a plan for looking at JF-17 upgrades every 5 year. This plane is still being produced and first batch order has been for 50. So the current configuration is for just 50 JF-17s, when it comes to second batch, then we will see what new is to be brought into it. Such programs have always room of upgrade and as this program is in its infancy, it has a lot of room of upgrade even if full 200 are not added. Told many times it will upgraded in batches of 50.

No aircraft in the world(except F-16) has seen upgrades as frequently as 5 years. Economically its just not feasible.

Even US has not upgraded its F-18, F22, F15, A10 so frequently, with a mammoth budget.

What makes you think Pakistan would be able to upgrade the aircraft every five years. You're talking like a fanboy now.

 

[TaimiKhan]

I know what modularity is. I was asking how modularity has been implemented. If you think, space is a problem then let me tell you its not.

The problem is the integration of different class of equipment on the aircraft.

What other example do we have to provide to show it has modular design ?? When we are saying, with PAF guys too that it can have any radar which can be fitted into it, it can have any avionics suite and it can accommodate any engine of its class, all this without having to do any change in the aircraft infrastructure. What is hard in there to understand. The airframe is not restricted to just one set of radar or manufacturer or avionics or engine.

Have you seen how when aircraft have to get some other specified or origin equipment, the aircraft goes through some structural changes. Take example of PAF Mirage ROSE upgraded ones, who have not bigger nose cone to accommodate the Grifo M series radar, or the SAF Cheetah fighters when upgraded with Israeli avionics and radars. So in case of JF-17 such changes won't be required and even as said a larger engine can be installed too, as extra space has been kept in the fuselage for this purpose.

What is so hard in understanding this simple thing.

And integration is always the problem to let different things work together.

MIL STD defines a bus as I said earlier. It is just an interconnect to transfer data and control signals.
Its like a telephone wire, a medium to send signals across. You can send all sorts of signals over it but that doesn't meant that the receiver and transmitter are compatible with each other. The signal are encrypted and can only be understood by someone who has the key to decrypt the data.

Western equipment has different cryptography methods and encryption standards. They are not compatible with Russian or chinese equipment, no matter what bus you use.

The above bus was used since it is a standard and reduced the costs of designing a new bus. And because buses have nothing exclusive about them. They are all the same except for the bus width, controller and bandwidth.

JF-17 has a western data link, which is fully able to communicate between the Chinese radar and avionics and JF-17 with even Chinese radar and avionics can communicate, receive and send data to any western AWAC platform. The current Saab Erieye is compatible with JF-17. Any idea how it was done ?? By using the western MIL standards for the hardware stuff and the software stuff is with the user and manufacturer, who can twist it as per their understanding and usage. That is why we bring in here the source codes thing, if we have the source codes for the weapon which will enable the weapon and the avionics or radar to communicate with each other , then it can be integrated with western weapon systems.

The ROSE upgraded Mirages have Chinese MAWS installed, and it has a Western Radar and avionics, thus how are they working together in the same cockpit and aircraft ??

If you have the source codes for the radar and weapon system, then you can make them work together as it is software, that is how computers and its different software from different manufacturers work & communicate with each other as behind the scene the integration is done through source codes sharing, all it needs is the physical structure to communicate or send receive structure, hardware architecture.

No. Read more about bus.

Being an IT engg I know more about buses and how they operate.
It was you who said that these buses allow western equipment to be operational with chinese equipment.
It was you who said these bus would enable AMRAAM could be used with chinese radar. And you've failed to prove the same.

If you are in real an IT engineer, then you should not have indulged in such a lengthy debate and would have understood, that if the hardware structure is compatible with western standards, then all it is needed is the radars, avionics software to be compatible with the weapon system. The western data link in JF-17 is working with Chinese radar, avionics due to the sharing of source codes and due to hardware compatibility. If hardware structure data buss or channels had not been compatible, then it would not have worked together, but it is. So its all about integration of software, source codes and hardware structure.

As far as I know there are just NON OFFICIAL links telling me about upgrades. No official links suggest any composites or AESA radar.

The only AESA offering was the VIXEN-500E radar, but its worse than a PESA and PAF have rejected it. It has a scan angle of just 60 degrees with a look up range of just 35 NM ie 65 km. The KLJ is still better than this.

Is everything to be official ?? How much you guys know about Pakistan Armed forces capability ?? How much you know how Babur Cruise missile and what is official about it ?? Same about Ra'ad ?? H-2 & H-4 BVR capable programs ?? Don't you guys get it, Pakistan Defence Forces are secretive and not very public about its programs. Same case with JF-17. The radar of JF-17, its designation and real specifications are not even real, its data link is not yet known, what are its defensive measures are not known, each and everything is not put forward, few things are left for desired purpose.

Well it doesn't matter what you believe or not, but currently JF-17 has composites in it, percentage will rise in future variants and currently 2 AESA options are on the table and viable enough. One is Italians and other is Chinese, believe it or not, when will be done, you will know yourself.

No aircraft in the world(except F-16) has seen upgrades as frequently as 5 years. Economically its just not feasible.

Even US has not upgraded its F-18, F22, F15, A10 so frequently, with a mammoth budget.

What makes you think Pakistan would be able to upgrade the aircraft every five years. You're talking like a fanboy now.

Sorry for not clarifying it properly, the CAS had said we will review the situation about JF-17 upgrade every 5 years and as per current situation, decisions about its up gradation would be done. It doesn't means that the moment 5 years pass, it will go to Kamra and upgrade would be done. It will be an ongoing process and don't compare it with US F-16 or other programs.

And when you make something yourself, then the costs are much lover compared to getting it done from abroad, as western systems and upgrades are expensive due to high labor costs and the factor of huge profit margins. The same task can be done in house at 1/3 or even less the price when compared to western upgrade programs.

JF-17 is being made in house by PAF people, thus costs would be much less.

 

[sancho]

You brought in the LCA, thus it got deleted but have restored it and given you the reply also.

Not at all! It was luftwaffe, a Pakistani member, that brought it up, by posting one of jagjitnatt comments from another forum and even you commented on it! So why can't he answer, or as I did, point out the right points of his post?

And you or some of your other Indian counterparts not all of them, intention is not to degrade JF-17, but inadvertently that is what you guys do. While some do it on purpose.

Yes some Indian do it, but you can't generalize it and moreover Pakistanis including you (JF 17 is better no matter what), are doing the same about the LCA right?

It may have less T/W ratio and not many composites, but do remember, it has just gotten into production. We badly need replacements for our 2nd generation aircraft which have served PAF for decades and need replacement. A-5s, F-7Ps, Mirages and other stuff, and JF-17 with less T/W ratio and all metal body is still generations ahead of what it is replacing. That is the point to ponder about, if it had been inferior to what it is replacing, then your and others like you viewpoint had been valid, but since our air force officials confirming that it is not going to be our front line fighter and is going to be our work horse fighter and replacing the decades old aircraft in our service, JF-17 is the perfect choice and great achievement.

Let time pass, let it get more mature and let the future variants come into service, they would be more effective and deadly compared to this one.

I totally agree with this part, because that's what I always said!
JF 17 was developed and meant for the low end of PAF and is not the main frontline fighter. The first blocks can be good 4. gen fighters, but are only cost-effective replacements, nothing top of the notch and that's also why I always said it is not a good choice to compare it with MKI.
The only really interesting version imo will be the block 3 with AESA and possibly big improvments, but that's so far away that we can only speculate about it.

It has surpassed the bench mark set for it and exceeded the expectations and is the most maneuverable aircraft in our service and has beaten our current front line F-16 fighter in simulated dog fights.

I did not comment on this till now, because it would have just caused more trouble, but what exactly does that mean?
Even you said:

Its has gone up against the 80s PAF F-16s and performed better except in all fields except for weapon payload capacity and engine performance

We must keep in mind here that the block 15 have not real 4. gen capabilities in weapons, avionics, or radar. So if you think about it neutral (without Pakistani proud, or Indian bias), it shouldn't be a surprise that even early JF 17 (meant to be a 4. gen multi role fighter) is on par with these F16 on certain levels or?
But way more interesting will be the comparison of F16 MLU and JF 17 block 1, because then both fighters will have the same capabilities and can be compared on the same basis and I wouldn't be surprised if the MLUs will have clear advantages (weapons, radar, avionics, engine thrust...).

The figures and facts that your are presenting are very old. ...

Could be true, even the specs of LCA on the ADA site are old, but as I said, for a fair comparison it is still better to use older official specs, than just claims of what it could, or will get anytime in future. That is the main problem, be it for Indians, or Pakistanis, that everybody is using possible specs, or configs just to have an argument and that's why I said, keep discussion (if necessary) on basis of the first versions only, with available techs and weapons.

 

[mughaljee]

jagjitnatt Jee Jalandar Walay

Don't you see any thing which is good in JF-17 ?

 

[jagjitnatt]

What other example do we have to provide to show it has modular design ?? When we are saying, with PAF guys too that it can have any radar which can be fitted into it, it can have any avionics suite and it can accommodate any engine of its class, all this without having to do any change in the aircraft infrastructure. What is hard in there to understand. The airframe is not restricted to just one set of radar or manufacturer or avionics or engine.

Have you seen how when aircraft have to get some other specified or origin equipment, the aircraft goes through some structural changes. Take example of PAF Mirage ROSE upgraded ones, who have not bigger nose cone to accommodate the Grifo M series radar, or the SAF Cheetah fighters when upgraded with Israeli avionics and radars. So in case of JF-17 such changes won't be required and even as said a larger engine can be installed too, as extra space has been kept in the fuselage for this purpose.

What is so hard in understanding this simple thing.

And integration is always the problem to let different things work together.

As I said earlier, I am not talking about the space, its not the problem in 90% cases.

The problem lies in integration.

If you swap the engine, do you think the flight control computer would be compatible with the new engine? What will be the changes required to the FBW system?
If a radar antenna is changed, will it be compatible with any of the onboard computers? It won't be. Any radar in the world comes with its own antenna, processsing unit, receiver and transmitter, etc. So is there any scope for modularity here, when everything needs to be changed?

In any case when something onboard the aircraft is changed, changes are required to be done to the various equipment communicating with the device.

The only place where modularity can be shown is the airframe, but I said earlier also that it is very seldom that airframe becomes a restriction to an upgrade.

JF-17 has a western data link, which is fully able to communicate between the Chinese radar and avionics and JF-17 with even Chinese radar and avionics can communicate, receive and send data to any western AWAC platform. The current Saab Erieye is compatible with JF-17. Any idea how it was done ?? By using the western MIL standards for the hardware stuff and the software stuff is with the user and manufacturer, who can twist it as per their understanding and usage. That is why we bring in here the source codes thing, if we have the source codes for the weapon which will enable the weapon and the avionics or radar to communicate with each other , then it can be integrated with western weapon systems.

Please go read something on the Western Avionics systems that are integrated on JF-17. They are not for communication between AWACS and JF-17.

MIL-STD-1760 is the electrical interface between weapons and the aircraft. It is used to datalink the bombs and air to surface weapons mostly. It doesn't facilitate datalinking of aircraft with other aircraft.

MIL-STD-1553 is a bus standard and has nothing to do with data linking JF-17 to AWACS. It is a very normal and outdated design and has been in use civil use for decades now.

I repeat, a bus is not a system but a means of connecting two systems. Its just like a wire. It doesn't govern or control anything. In order to transmit data over these, a protocol needs to be established and it is possible only when the two devices understand each other and are compatible with each other, which is not the case here. A bus can not make two incompatible things compatible.

In case of computer, protocols are set for every component. You can't install a Power PC processor in an Itanium computer, even though both are similar. And we have AMD and Intel processor, both are x86 architecture based and yet both have different buses, and bus controllers.

The ROSE upgraded Mirages have Chinese MAWS installed, and it has a Western Radar and avionics, thus how are they working together in the same cockpit and aircraft ??

The ROSE upgraded Mirages do not have chinese MAWS installed. The French MAW and RWR were a part of the ROSE upgrade.

If you have the source codes for the radar and weapon system, then you can make them work together as it is software, that is how computers and its different software from different manufacturers work & communicate with each other as behind the scene the integration is done through source codes sharing, all it needs is the physical structure to communicate or send receive structure, hardware architecture.

Correct. But emphasize on the word IF.
US is not going to hand over the AMRAAM source codes to Pakistan. So what you said earlier is just not possible.

If you are in real an IT engineer, then you should not have indulged in such a lengthy debate and would have understood, that if the hardware structure is compatible with western standards, then all it is needed is the radars, avionics software to be compatible with the weapon system. The western data link in JF-17 is working with Chinese radar, avionics due to the sharing of source codes and due to hardware compatibility. If hardware structure data buss or channels had not been compatible, then it would not have worked together, but it is. So its all about integration of software, source codes and hardware structure.

The reason why western datalink work with chinese radar and chinese weapons is because China has the source code for the chinese weapons and the source codes for the datalink system are available to everyone.

The problem would arise when you try to integrate western system for which you don't have the source codes.

Is everything to be official ?? How much you guys know about Pakistan Armed forces capability ?? How much you know how Babur Cruise missile and what is official about it ?? Same about Ra'ad ?? H-2 & H-4 BVR capable programs ?? Don't you guys get it, Pakistan Defence Forces are secretive and not very public about its programs. Same case with JF-17. The radar of JF-17, its designation and real specifications are not even real, its data link is not yet known, what are its defensive measures are not known, each and everything is not put forward, few things are left for desired purpose.

Even official sources let out a lot of inside info. They need not be necessarily Pakistani official sources but any international source.

Well it doesn't matter what you believe or not, but currently JF-17 has composites in it, percentage will rise in future variants and currently 2 AESA options are on the table and viable enough. One is Italians and other is Chinese, believe it or not, when will be done, you will know yourself.

Kindly reveal what composites are used and where on the aircraft, if you know so much.
Also let me know the two AESA options being offered.

And when you make something yourself, then the costs are much lover compared to getting it done from abroad, as western systems and upgrades are expensive due to high labor costs and the factor of huge profit margins. The same task can be done in house at 1/3 or even less the price when compared to western upgrade programs.

JF-17 is being made in house by PAF people, thus costs would be much less.

That is the reason why its so inexpensive. Its the biggest pro of the aircraft.

 

[jagjitnatt]

jagjitnatt Jee Jalandar Walay

Don't you see any thing which is good in JF-17 ?

I see.
Its great price wise. Great for replacing the old fleet of mirages.
It is a great jump from 3rd gen aircraft. It brings true BVR capability to Pak. Also SD10 missiles would be great jump from previous systems.

Precision bombing is another feat due to its datalinking capability.

It is cheap so can be mass produced. Another advantage is that it can be assembled in Pak itself. Even repair won't be a big deal. Even incase of sanctions you'll not have problems, not to mention the jobs it will create in Pak.

 

[wangrong]

èÉÁúÏȽøº½µçÎäÆ÷ϵͳÆعâ_ÔÚÏßÊÓƵ¹Û¿´_ÍÁ¶¹ÍøÊÓƵ èÉÁú Ö麣º½Õ¹ »·ÇòÍø

JF-17's avionics

 

[Peregrine]

Hi
If JF-17 can get a long range radar along with long range BVRM then i don't see a reason why it wont be worthy opponent to so called 4.5 gen fighters