What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 3]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi,

That is absolutely correct----the psyche of IAF revolves around the su 30--- 1/2 a dozen su 30's taken out in the first sorties of the war wil completely change the picture----the IAF will get mad and make a full scale air assualt---.

I believe that iaf will take a no holds barred startegy approach and make a full scale assault with all their available air power on the pak bases---a blitzkreig from the air---. This will result in the damage to pak bases but also the iaf may lose a large number of strike air craft as well---.

The bottomline is that how many aircraft losses the iaf is willing to bear to dominate the skies over pakistan----30--40--50%.

The problem also is that at the first sign of massive air strikes from india, the war will take a turn for the worst. Pak will possibly release all its assets against the enemy--conventional and non conventional.

Bottomline is that paf and iaf may only fly their planes around for show. Any kind of war will the precursor of terrible things to come.

Hi MastanSirji,

Don't you think that IAF would properly factor out the losses of MKIs in an Indo-Pak war scenario? After all IAF does take part in war games with other nations and slowly this will include regular engagements with advanced militaries. So IAF will know what to expect. For PAF '65 was good but history does not always have to repeat.

I think that it will be more of a case where the GoI will have to convincingly tell Indians that "We need to retaliate against Pakistan for such and such reasons and for that we must be prepared to lose this many of our patriotic sons."

The bolded part makes me always uncomfortable because it means that Cold Start has escalated beyond its designs.
 
.
An indian told me

jf-17 is comparable to ther Mig bisons

and LCa MK1 comparable to f-16 bock 50,mig 29,gripen Ng

while LCA mk2 comparable to typhoon,rafale,mig 35 and f-18..


and i said very true along with this shair

Dil khush rakhnay ka ye khayal acha hay ghalib...

now that is a complete ignorance from their side.. one should not entertain their idiotic and stupid statements like these..
 
.
Guys, keep the discussion on topic, this is not the Vs or MKI topic.

Keep it centered around JF-17.
 
.
China’s Emerging 5th Generation Air-to-Air Missiles

Internet source imagery from January 4 has offered the first glimpses of what may be China’s emerging 5th generation air-to-air missiles (AAM). One missile, called the PL-ASR or PL-10, shows a very close resemblance to the South African Denel A-Darter AAM. A second image, discovered on a China’s Northwestern University web site in mid-December, shows another missile similar to the radar-guided South African Denel R-Darter, designed in cooperation with Israel. Both of these missiles are likely designed for use with modern Helmet-Mounted Displays (HMD), which enable pilots to “look to kill” their targets. But there is more: additional imagery suggests that a previously reported ramjet powered development of the Chinese Luoyang PL-12 active-radar guided AAM, called the PL-13, could give the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) an AAM that could out-range existing U.S. AAMs

Data along with one image suggests the PL-10 could enter production in 2010 but it is not known when the other two new AAMs would enter production. When they do enter service, these AAMs could give both old and new PLA Air Force fighters a decisive advantage over Taiwan Air Force fighters armed with shorter range U.S. AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. The PL-ASR/PL-10 could have up to double the range of the new U.S. AIM-9X, the first U.S. HMD sighted AAM, which is just now entering service with U.S. Air Force and Navy squadrons. The ramjet powered “PL-13” may out-range current variants of the AIM-120.

Absolute determination of AAM capabilities is greatly hampered by the efforts of governments and manufacturers to deny information, such as that regarding missile range and countermeasures, which would allow potential adversaries to gain an advantage.[2] Furthermore, the utility of an AAM is also determined by many attributes of the carrying aircraft: its radar and electronic support systems, the availability of off-board sensor data, and the degree of training and experience of the launching pilot. But there is little margin for error when considering a major factor such as weapons, especially when considering that China’s increasing numbers of competitive 4th generation combat aircraft may be followed by 5th generation combat aircraft early to mid-next decade. Absent a U.S. response, such as the purchase of more 5th generation fighters, the development of a new generation of AAMs, or even the purchase of more capable European AAMs, the air power balance in Asia could shift dangerously toward China.


5th Generation Short Range Air to Air

Since the 1940s the progress of combat aircraft and their weapons have been measured in “generations.” The latest 5th Generation combat aircraft, of which the U.S. Lockheed-Martin F-22A Raptor is the only one operational, are defined usually by their ability to combine the attributes of stealth, advanced electronically scanned (AESA) radar, and engines powerful enough to cruise supersonically without recourse to fuel-guzzling afterburners (super-cruise). These capabilities give the F-22A the ability to detect and attack before being detected, and to evade new and deadly Russian surface-to-air missiles. But since their introduction in the 1970s, American, Russian and other manufacturers have been constantly upgrading their 4th generation fighters such as the Boeing F-15 Eagle and the Sukhoi Su-27/30 Flanker with ever more modern electronic systems and weapons.

In the 1980s Russia began the trend toward the 4th generation AAMs with the introduction of the Vympel R-73, the first thrust-vectored AAM with a 45-degree off-bore-sight view (90-degree field of view) infrared seeker, and the ability to be targeted with a helmet-mounted sight (HMS). This gave Soviet-Russian fighters a decisive advantage over U.S. and European fighters: the Soviets could always launch their short-range AAMs first as they did not have to orient or “dogfight” their fighter, but merely needed to “look” at the target to direct the R-73 AAM. This technology has evolved into a 5th generation defined by the inclusion of more sensitive imaging-infrared seekers that home in on a specific part of the target aircraft; seekers with wider 90-degree off-bore-sight view(180-degree fields of view); seekers that incorporate advanced anti-jamming and anti-decoy technology; and those which use more advanced helmet-mounted displays. Examples of 5th generation infrared guided AAMs include the British ASRAAM, German IRIS-T, Israeli Python-5, Japanese AAM-5, U.S. AIM-9X, the improved Vympel R-73 and the South African A-Darter. Should a longer range 5th generation AAM like the Python-5 miss its target on the first pass, it usually has the range and agility to attack once more.

While first generation short range infrared guided AAM relied on the pilot to find and maneuver to attack an often rapidly moving target, 4th and 5th generation short-range AAMs rely on aircraft sensors and advanced helmet mounted displays to target these latest AAMs which usually have much greater range than a pilot’s sight. In the 1980s, in addition to using the aircraft’s radar, the Soviets introduced more sophisticated optical infrared search and tracking (IRST) systems, which allowed aircraft to turn off emitting radars which in turn could be targeted by opposing electronic sensors and jamming. The Russian OLS-30 IRST used in late versions of Sukhoi fighters, and Shenyang co-produced Su-27/J-11 fighters, is reportedly able to passively search and track targets out to 50-90km. While Russian IRSTs are reportedly not able to determine range, the Russians apparently network several fighter IRSTs and radar to find the range of targets, even stealthy targets.[3] HMDs are able to collate data from radar, optical sensors, plus aircraft performance data onto the pilot’s helmet visor, allowing him to target distant threats without having to concentrate on cockpit instruments. Israel’s DASH HMD became the basis for the U.S. Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) HMD, which support the AIM-9X AAM that in 2003 started entering service on U.S. F-15, F-16 and F/A-18 fighters.



Active Radar-Guided AAMs

While the U.S. has lagged in the development of 5th generation HMD sighted AAMs, it has helped to lead the field in the development of medium range active-guided AAMs. The Raytheon AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) began in 1975 leading to fielding in the early 1990s, while the Vympel R-77 program began in 1982 and first appeared in the early 1990s. Both missiles sought to perfect the advancement of incorporating an active radar seeker to allow the AAM to guide itself autonomously for part of its flight. Previous “semi-active” radar guided AAMs like the AIM-7 Sparrow and the Vympel R-27 required continuous “painting” by aircraft radar with constant radio signals to guide the missile until reaching its target. Active radar guided missiles like the AIM-120 and R-77 still require target location data from the launching aircraft, or more recently, from an off-board sensor like an AWACS aircraft, but after the missile’s active radar acquires the target the launching aircraft has the option to maneuver to safety or commence another attack.

The AIM-120, the Russian R-77 and the French MICA dominate the market for active-guided AAMs. In this decade Japan, China and Taiwan have fielded active guided AAMs, with the latter two relying on imported technology. All active-guided AAM makers have sought to improve their products with better seekers, some using satellite navigation guidance, enhanced electronic counter measures, the addition of data links to provide updated target location data, and better engines to enable longer range. The U.S., Russia, Europe, South Africa, and perhaps more recently China, have developed ramjet engine powered AAMs to achieve longer ranges without increasing missile size. Ramjets also allow the missile to sustain its high speed over most of its range, which significantly expands the “no escape zone” or area within which a target will likely be killed. The only ramjet powered AAM soon to enter service is the MBDA Meteor, which advertises a 100+km range, and a constant Mach 4+ speed and a “no escape zone” three times that of early AIM-120 AAMs.[4] More recently Russia has revived its very long range missile program with the Novator K-100 or K-172, which has been variously reported to have a 200km to 400km range. The last U.S. very long range Hughes AIM-54C Phoenix, capable of reaching 150km, was retired from U.S. Navy service in 2004. While the U.S. had two-stage and ramjet missile engine AAM test programs in the 1980s and 1990s,[5] it has chosen not to replace the long range AIM-54C.



China’s Record of Foreign AAM Technology Reliance

Almost from the beginning the PLA has relied on foreign technology, whether from the United States, Russia, Israel and now South Africa, to develop ever more modern air-to-air missiles. In September 1958 a U.S. AIM-9B Sidewinder short range air-to-air missile (AAM) was captured by China after it was fired by a Taiwanese F-86 Sabre fighter at a Chinese MiG-17, becoming lodged in the airframe without exploding. At the time the AIM-9B was the most modern air-to-air missile anywhere and it was soon copied by the Soviet Union and China. For the Soviets it became the K-13 (NATO: AA-2 Atol) and for China the PL-2 (PL meaning Thunderbolt). During the Vietnam War China was able to obtain unexploded copies of more advanced AIM-9 missiles, which influenced the PL-5, as well as early version of the Raytheon AIM-7 Sparrow, which influence the radar-guided PL-11. During the 1980s China obtained the French Matra 550, which was copied as the PL-7 and the Israeli Python-3, which was copied as the PL-8.

From the 1990s to the present period the PLA has purchased thousands of modern Russian AAMs, including the Vympel R-73 short-range AAM, and multiple variants of the semi-active radar and infrared guided Vympel R-27 medium range AAM. In addition the PLA has purchased about 1,000 of the more modern active radar guided Vympel R-77 medium range AAM. These missiles almost exclusively arm Sukhoi/KnAAPO made Su-27SK/Su-30MKK/MKK2 fighters or the Shenyang Aircraft Co. co-produced version of the Su-27SK called the J-11, or J-11A. It has been reported that some number of early purchase Su-27SKs and early J-11s were upgraded in order to be able to fire the R-77, whereas the Su-30s had this capability from delivery.

Starting in the 1990s, as it did with other weapons purchases, the PLA decided to purchase the underlying technology of weapons systems or their components, so as to make weapon systems with increasing indigenous Chinese content. By the mid 1990s China’s main missile maker Luoyang had developed the PL-9, which took the fuselage of the Python-3, attached different guidance fins, and incorporated a copy of the Ukrainian Arsenel helmet sight, called the TK-14 in Chinese service, to make a new AAM.[6] The latest PL-9C features an increase in range to 22km, up from 15km for the PL-9, PL-8 and Python-3 AAMs. One mystery has been why the PL-9 has not seen widespread usage in the PLA air forces. From the 1996 Zhuhai show and at subsequent shows, Luoyang officials have noted to the author that the PLA was not interested in buying the PL-9, even though it has occasionally been seen on some fighters like the late model Chengdu J-7G.

Perhaps a key reason for not purchasing the PL-9 has been the expectation that the PLA would be building an even better AAM. At the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow Luoyang officials told this analyst and other reporters that the company was working on an advanced AAM. The few details disclosed, such as advanced guidance, the use of thrust vectoring and helmet displays created a basis for speculation that Luoyang was interested in an AAM like the British ASRAAM. Despite the heavy reliance on purchased Russian short range AAMs like the R-73, the inspiration for Luoyang’s 5th generation AAM was to come from elsewhere.




Possible “South African” AAMs

At the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow South African firms set up a small booth and spoke of their desire to do business with the PLA but did not go into specifics. At subsequent shows the South African presence grew larger and it is now clear that there have been several cooperative programs, including unmanned aircraft, air defense systems and air to air missiles. While South African firms have said little about the latter, in 2004 Yihong Chang reported on PLA interest in purchasing the 5th generation Denel A-Darter AAM.[7] The data revealed on January 4 indicated that development of the PL-10 started in 2004, which might track very well with the reported deepening of South African-PLA cooperation. The few clear images of the PL-ASR/PL-10 show a near 95 percent similarity with the Denel A-Darter AAM. The main differences are in the rear fin shape and configuration, but it is a relatively minor difference. So it is possible to speculate that the PL-10 may very well have a performance similar to or better than the A-Darter, which would include use of advanced imaging infrared guidance and a maximum range of 20km or better. The January 4 revelation indicates the seeker has a 90-degree off-bore-sight capability (180 degree field of view). It also has a lock-on-after-launch capability, meaning it can be launched from a high off-bore-sight position and acquires the target, usually accomplished with the aid of a helmet sight or IRST.

This missile could arm most PLA fighters equipped with an IRST, even a short range radar but also with computers capable of processing for the helmet mounted display. This would likely initially include J-10 and J-11B fighters, but then older J-11As, and then late model J-8II and J-7 fighters.



New Type AAM

The revelation of PL-10 imagery with the clear implication of South African technical participation also provides possible insights into another AAM found on a Chinese university website in mid-December 2007. This AAM has not yet been identified by any official or unofficial PLA source, but this single picture shows some similarity to the Denel radar-guided R-Darter, which is virtually the same missile as the Israeli Aircraft Industries Derby. The product of Israeli and South African cooperation during the 1980s and 1990s, the R-Darter has a light weight of 120kg and reported range of 63km.[8] It appears that the R-Darter/Derby program intended to produce a very maneuverable but light-weight radar-guided AAM that could be back-fitted to advanced 3rd and 4th generation fighters. R-Darter entered service with the South African Air Force but Derby has not yet entered service with the Israeli Air Force, though it is reportedly being used by the Singapore Air Force.


The key similarity between the new PLA AAM and the R-Darter appears to be their shape and the possible inclusion of a small roll stabilization fins behind the front fins. However, it also appears that this new missile is appreciably smaller than the R-Darter, perhaps weighing only about 100 to 110kgs.[9] This would mean a shorter range, perhaps 20 to 30km. It is not known whether this new AAM has a semi-active, active, or even a passive seeker. One possibility may be a version of the new small 150mm seeker being marketed by Russia’s AGAT.[10] It is clear that the PLA intends to exploit this missile’s light weight, as its first public illustration shows two of the new missiles paired with a PL-12 on a single three-missile launch pylon. This pylon configuration allows newer fighters such as the FC-1, J-10, J-11B and JH-7A to increase their beyond-visual-range AAM carriage capability. This missile could also be intended to quickly upgrade the latest models of 3rd generation fighters like the Shenyang J-8IIF/H and the Chengdu J-7E/G with a lightweight radar guided AAM to complement the PL-10 infrared/imaging AAM.

If these two new PLA AAMs were aided substantially by South Africa, then it would stand to reason that South Africa may have also provided key enabling technologies such as Helmet Mounted Display systems and data links. Denel’s Archer HMD was developed to support the A-Darter and R-Darter and would likely have been sold to China along with the AAM technology. China’s Luoyang group has also long commented, albeit cryptically, on its interest in developing HMD technology, with images of experimental HMDs appearing from time to time. A new Luoyang HMD may benefit from indigenous and foreign technology. A helmet mounted sight displayed by the Cigong Group at the 2004 Zhuhai show uses prominent light-emitting diodes to allow cockpit computers to track the position of the pilot’s head, in order to target weapons, the same system used by the Denel Archer HMD.


PL-12

Indicating a major advance in its AAM technology, in 2001 Chinese sources began revealing the first data on the Leihua Electronic Technology Research Institute (LETRI) SD-10, later PL-12 active radar guided AAM. It is likely that at about the same time that the PLA was negotiating to purchase the R-77, it was also pressing Russia’s missile concerns for technology to support an indigenous Chinese program. Russia’s missile radar maker AGAT reportedly sold China drawings of the 9B-1103M radar for the active-guided version of the R-27 AAM. But China presumably also gained insights from the AGAT 9B-1348 radar on the R-77.[11] The PL-12 also reportedly has a “passive” seeking mode that would allow it to home in on an emitting target, such as a jamming or AWACs radar aircraft.[12] However, the SD-10 uses a Chinese-made missile motor, which when combined with a “lofted” flight profile, can achieve a maximum range of 70km, about 10km less than the R-77. Nevertheless, in the PL-12 the PLA has a modern self-guided AAM that is in the same class as the U.S. AIM-120 and the Russian R-77. In 2002 China revealed basic data about the SD-10 and began to display models of the missile at air-shows, such as Zhuhai in November 2002. By 2005 to 2006 the PL-12 began to appear in photos of PLA fighters, especially the Chengdu J-10 and some versions of the Shenyang J-8II. It has also been tested on the Shenyang J-11B, now in advanced development, and has been seen in at least on photo on a wing pylon of a Xian JH-7A fighter attack fighter.


“PL-13”

Another surprise in the imagery made available on Chinese web pages on January 4 was a curious computer-generated depiction of a missile called the “PL-13.” However, it must be stressed that this is the first image of this missile and a definitive determination of its existence and performance must await further disclosures. Arguing in favor of this program’s existence is the fact that its image appears with clear images of the PL-12 and the new PL-10, which would tend to lend credibility to the new missile depiction. In addition, Luoyang was reported to have been interested in ramjet propulsion to develop the PL-12.[13] This PL-13 image also points to the possibility that Vympel has sold China the technology needed to make such an AAM. The PL-13 image appears to show a two-intake ramjet motor, a configuration that Vympel had come to prefer as it was developing its R-77M-PD, following early 1990s collaboration with France’s former MATRA Corporation.[14] The ramjet intake shape on the PL-13 appears to conform to one known Vympel configuration. Furthermore, the four cruciform fins at the front end of the PL-13 are also characteristic of other Vympel missiles like the R-27, and Vympel was also reportedly discarding the “grid” shape fins for conventional fins,[15] which also coincides with the PL-13 image. Inasmuch as Russia apparently decided not to purchase the R-77M-PD, it is possible that Vympel was allowed to sell this missile technology to China.[16] But it is also possible that South Africa was a source for some AAM ramjet engine technology, inasmuch as South Africa also had an unrealized program called the Long Range Air-to-Air Missile (LRAAM).

If a real program, then the PL-13 would give the PLA a long-range AAM with considerable new capabilities. The R-77M-PD was reported to have an estimated range of 160km and the PL-13 should be expected to do as well or better. Furthermore, as it a ramjet powered missile, it is expected to sustain its high speed, likely about Mach 4 and greater, throughout its engagement, meaning that it has a substantial “no escape” zone, perhaps similar to that of the MBDA Meteor. Should the PL-13 see a near-term introduction, the it will likely be used in conjunction with the PLA’s AWACS aircraft that can find distant targets and then pass targeting data to attacking aircraft, likely J-11B and J-10 fighter. But the potential range of the PL-13 offers an indication that the PLA is also likely developing long-range radar for its 4th and 5th generation fighters, or may be interested in upgrading existing fighters with new longer range Russian radar. Inasmuch as Vympel has been marketing passive guided versions of the R-27 and R-77, it is reasonable to speculate that a version of the PL-13 may feature a passive guidance system, to better enable long-range attacks against critical support aircraft like AWACS, electronic warfare and tanker aircraft. The PL-13 could also form the basis for a future light-weight anti-radar or supersonic anti-ship missile.



There is also the possibility that the PLA could purchase new Russian very long-range AAMs or develop similar AAMs themselves. Inasmuch as the PLA is reportedly interested in purchasing some number of the new Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter, it may also purchase the unique weapons offered with this fighter, like the 300-400km range Novator K-100/172. India may be interested in an advanced version of this missile capable of anti-missile intercepts.[17] Asian military sources also note that China is developing a 400km range surface-to-air missile.[18] If this new PLA SAM is based on Russian S-400 components, for which China is reportedly an investor, then this new SAM may be small enough to be developed into a very long-range AAM, perhaps even with future anti-missile intercept capabilities.



complete article
International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > China’s Emerging 5th Generation Air-to-Air Missiles
 
.
.
.
Hi MastanSirji,

Don't you think that IAF would properly factor out the losses of MKIs in an Indo-Pak war scenario? After all IAF does take part in war games with other nations and slowly this will include regular engagements with advanced militaries. So IAF will know what to expect. For PAF '65 was good but history does not always have to repeat.

I think that it will be more of a case where the GoI will have to convincingly tell Indians that "We need to retaliate against Pakistan for such and such reasons and for that we must be prepared to lose this many of our patriotic sons."

The bolded part makes me always uncomfortable because it means that Cold Start has escalated beyond its designs.

Hi,

There is no containment to the cold start strategy---there is no prediction which direction the war will go---.

When we are well off---we never know how bad things can get till they get really bad---and then you stop and say God---please---I didn't mean it to end this way---give me another chance---I will be more accomodating to others---and by that time it is too late.
 
Last edited:
.
It is easy to start a war, difficult to control it and even harder to contain it. You start with one area and the next thing you know you are fighting on a 1000 kilometer area.
 
. . .
I have only one question.

Is current JF-17 is comparable with F-16's that Pakistan got in early 80's.

Pls some one answer this..............:pakistan::cheers:
 
.
I have only one question.

Is current JF-17 is comparable with F-16's that Pakistan got in early 80's.

Pls some one answer this..............:pakistan::cheers:

Avionics wise, radar wise and maneuverability wise, it is better in all three when compared to our 80s F-16s.

But it lacks in engine and payload deptts, which can be overcome to great extend through a more powerful engine.
 
.
Avionics wise, radar wise and maneuverability wise, it is better in all three when compared to our 80s F-16s.

But it lacks in engine and payload deptts, which can be overcome to great extend through a more powerful engine.

You made my day, Mr Taimi Khan, thanks.:cheers:
 
.
I have only one question.

Is current JF-17 is comparable with F-16's that Pakistan got in early 80's.

Pls some one answer this..............:pakistan::cheers:

Avionics wise, radar wise and maneuverability wise, it is better in all three when compared to our 80s F-16s.

But it lacks in engine and payload deptts, which can be overcome to great extend through a more powerful engine.

just want to add one more thing, thunder will improve with the introduction of composites as the weight of thunder will lowered and will improve thrust to weight ratio and also help to increase payload

:china::pakistan::china::pakistan:
 
.
The improvements were specified at a five year interval. First thing to be addressed is airframe parts replaced with composites, second is engine, payload, third is avionics, integration of IRST, FLIR, new radar etc, and so on. I again saw the thunder very low, roaring in Karachi skies three hours ago hence I felt so proud. It seems very agile indeed !
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom