JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[Donatello]

Dear,

I am sorry to inform you that you are mistaken. Kamra is very low altitude area, and the airbase in question is only 1250 feet high from sea level.

The highest airbase is Skardu Forward Operating Base (FOB), which is 7500 feet above sea level, with Quetta Air Base (full fledged airbase) at almost 5500 feet height from sea level.

Rest of all Pakistan's airbases lay between 0 feet to 1500 feet above sea level.

I don't know if JF-17 has ever been tested from Quetta and Skardu, but do keep in mind that A-5 were very routinely operated from Skardu Airbase, and since JF-17 is replacing A-5, their roles-responsibilities and will soon take over their complete operation portfolio, it is only matter of time before we see footage of JF17 taking off from Skardu.

Regards,
Sapper

I stand corrected thanks!

Indeed the elevation there is around 2000ft. I checked on an atlas.

I probably quoted the highest elevation earlier in my post.

My bad.

 

[SEAL]

 

[S.U.R.B.]

 

[BATMAN]

why do we need to test JFT on 2000ft, if it is already flying at 40000ft?
Those sort of tests are done before the first flight.

 

[SQ8]

why do we need to test JFT on 2000ft, if it is already flying at 40000ft?
Those sort of tests are done before the first flight.

The takeoff performance.. the amount of load an aircraft can carry differs at higher altitudes.. and hot temperatures..
for Instance..
An aircraft that took 2000 feet of runway to take off with 8000kg of load at sea level might need 5000 feet of runway at say an airstrip at 6000 feet

 

[BATMAN]

Well, shouldn't the gravity be less at higher altitudes?
Only deficiency i see is with less oxygen but since JFT is flying 40K ft a.s.l. why oxygen should be a problem at 2k ft.?
Temperature, is always less at higher altitudes so i see no temp. issues at 2k ft.

Gravity of Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not convinced, yet!

 

[nightcrawler]

Well, shouldn't the gravity be less at higher altitudes?
Only deficiency i see is with less oxygen but since JFT is flying 40K ft a.s.l. why oxygen should be a problem at 2k ft.?
Temperature, is always less at higher altitudes so i see no temp. issues at 2k ft.

Gravity of Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not convinced, yet!

Gravity variations are insignificant (at stated altitudes)you need not bother about it!!

At high altitudes density variation of air is significant.
Provided that the volume of JF17 along with payload...........will be same at sea level or at high altitudes the vol of air displaced will be same for both cases.

But in former case(at sea level) the weight(density) of displaced air is greater & thus produces more lift(Archimedes Principle) & in latter case the weight is lesser of equal vol air displaced & thus a greater runway ( for equivalent payload )

 

[Donatello]

The takeoff performance.. the amount of load an aircraft can carry differs at higher altitudes.. and hot temperatures..
for Instance..
An aircraft that took 2000 feet of runway to take off with 8000kg of load at sea level might need 5000 feet of runway at say an airstrip at 6000 feet

Yea, but most of the airbases are not that high. So it's should be a problem with PAF. Maybe that's one reason to set up Jacobabad airbase for new F-16s, because the planes can be vectored anywhere very quickly, given small nature of Pakistan's airspace.

 

[anathema]

It has been discussed repeatedly that JFT/FC-1 configuration can vary from a baseline 10 mil to moderate 15-17 mil depending on the goodies asked by customer. Egyptian version is likely to be around 15-17 mil because they want the JFT version with a few changes such as radar etc.

Nabil --

10 mil for a fighter plane ? Seriously...

Not only 10 Mil for a fighter plane will kill almost every export market for figher planes -- it will also kill all the export prospects Chinese J10 fighter aircraft as well which is valued at 28 million dollars for PLAF. Why would any one pay 18 million dollar aircraft for a single engine aircraft with same avionics (as per you guys) - the only difference being tonnage...but surely 2 a/c's for 20 mill will be hard to resist.

So honestly -- please dont quote figures such as 10 mil for a fighter aircraft , it just doesnt make sense from a economical and feasibility POV.

Nabil -- secondly where you getting these information from ? Links please.

 

[TaimiKhan]

10 Mil really ? AFAIK - The cost of Block I JF17 is upwards of 17 million dollars. You can check my conversation/posts with Taimi on this very thread. Block 2 will be more especially if you incorporate western avionics.

Agreed Sir, we had come to a price tag for about 19Mln per plane with reference to the last contract signed by Pakistan & China for about 800Mln for 42 planes.

Now what the 800Mln contains, we don't know. How much spare engines, how much spare parts, how much spare radar systems and other miscellaneous things, most probably atleast the wing tip missiles and may be extra missiles, God knows what and what not, aviation deals are complex.

Also, the PAF version has few things which are not Chinese, like the communication system, Data Link & ejection seat etc, which may add further to its cost for PAF.

Thus most probably, the production cost of just the simple plane without adding the spares and stuff like that, may be less, in the range of something in between 10-15Mln. And with all Chinese stuff, the price could be in the same range.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Nabil --

10 mil for a fighter plane ? Seriously...

Not only 10 Mil for a fighter plane will kill almost every export market for figher planes -- it will also kill all the export prospects Chinese J10 fighter aircraft as well which is valued at 28 million dollars for PLAF. Why would any one pay 18 million dollar aircraft for a single engine aircraft with same avionics (as per you guys) - the only difference being tonnage...but surely 2 a/c's for 20 mill will be hard to resist.

So honestly -- please dont quote figures such as 10 mil for a fighter aircraft , it just doesnt make sense from a economical and feasibility POV.

Nabil -- secondly where you getting these information from ? Links please.

It won't, as J-10 is a high tech, high performance fighter, at the hi end of the table, while JF-17 is a high tech fighter but at the lo end of the table.

Those who want a powerful fighter and can afford it, will go for J-10s, as its bigger, more payload, bigger and powerful radar.

Those who can't afford and don't need such a high end aircraft like J-10, or where JF-17 can meet their doctrine, they will go for JF-17s.

Air forces will choose aircraft based on their performance & requirements and not just cost.

 

[anathema]

It won't, as J-10 is a high tech, high performance fighter, at the hi end of the table, while JF-17 is a high tech fighter but at the lo end of the table.

Those who want a powerful fighter and can afford it, will go for J-10s, as its bigger, more payload, bigger and powerful radar.

Those who can't afford and don't need such a high end aircraft like J-10, or where JF-17 can meet their doctrine, they will go for JF-17s.

Last i heard -- both fighters were going to feature KLJ 10. Currently i believe JF has KLJ7 but Pshamim reportedly said that KLJ10 was tested out.

Payload -- well if airforces can afford 2 JF's at the price of one J10 ...then well then it would just give more flexibility as well as the combined payload will turn out to be more ! There is quality in quantity afterall !

Air forces will choose aircraft based on their performance & requirements and not just cost.

That depends on the market that you are targeting. Egypt maybe yes - they will look at performance. But some of the other countries i have heard (Zimbabwe, Bangladesh , african nations , etc) will definetly look at the cost twice ! But at the end the cost may just prove irresistible -- look at whats happening in Brazil -- Gripen giving tough fight to Rafale ! Although Brazil can very well afford whatever it wants.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Last i heard -- both fighters were going to feature KLJ 10. Currently i believe JF has KLJ7 but Pshamim reportedly said that KLJ10 was tested out.

Payload -- well if airforces can afford 2 JF's at the price of one J10 ...then well then it would just give more flexibility as well as the combined payload will turn out to be more ! There is quality in quantity afterall !

Yes both would be getting, but antenna size would still be a problem for JF-17 & J-10. Other features may be same, like number of tracking targets and engagements, but range of the radars for both may still have a difference. And with J-10 you have a long range, deep strike aircraft too, it can carry more heavy payload to its target compared to JF-17s, this is what JF-17s lack. Its a good option for short range, light attack or limited heavy payload capability, J-10 is much superior in these categories. So as said before, it all depends on the price, doctrine of the operator, requirements etc which will decide what an operator goes for.

That depends on the market that you are targeting. Egypt maybe yes - they will look at performance. But some of the other countries i have heard (Zimbabwe, Bangladesh , african nations , etc) will definetly look at the cost twice ! But at the end the cost may just prove irresistible -- look at whats happening in Brazil -- Gripen giving tough fight to Rafale ! Although Brazil can very well afford whatever it wants.

Yes these countries would be looking at cost as well as their defensive needs, if a country has no enemy or regional ambitions and just needs an air force, it may go for the smaller one, but if someone is needing a performance jet due to its requirements it will go for the J-10 even if its short of money.

A poor nation may not be able to afford a 30-40Mln J-10, that is where JF-17 will come into play.

Both these jets will be targeted at markets where they have a chance of being sold. Plus do remember, both are Chinese planes, so its upto them where to offer which one, one at a time or both. A country may ask for JF-17, China can offer J-10, but if the country doesn't wants J-10, JF-17 would still be there, so win win situation for China. It needs to sell jets and make its mark and influence, whether it be J-10 or JF-17.

 

[Manticore]

 

[Stealth_fighter]

is the jf-17 firing sd-10 missile?