What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

Status
Not open for further replies.
JF17 is BVR capable Aircraft...
Look at the pic of JF17 with SD10A ..

Pakistan+air+force+JF-17+Thunder+FC-20+carryies+PL-12+%2528PiLi-12%2529+SD-10+%2528ShanDian-10%2529+BVRAAM+%2528Beyond+visual+range+Air+to+Air+Missile%2529+People%2527s+Liberation+Army+ariforce++%25281%2529.jpg


But SD10A dont meet PAF and JF17 requirements.....so another version of SD10 is in development......
The issue is not in JF17 but in the missile....that needs to suit JF17. :D

SD-10 is cleared for use on PAF JFT's. the tests were performed last winter.
 
. .
People need to remember that JF-17 is a brand new platform for the PAF and it's evolves a multi-role capability rather than just being a point defence fighter. PAF, for a long time now has been seeking the BVR capability, albeit the F-7PG has now this capacity but the JF-17's original inception was to be BVR capable, hence no doubt there.
 
. .
Have we yet seen a PAF F-16 with AMRAAM? If not, it could be for the same reasons we have not seen a JF-17 with SD-10.
 
. . . . .
JF17 is BVR capable Aircraft...
Look at the pic of JF17 with SD10A ..

Pakistan+air+force+JF-17+Thunder+FC-20+carryies+PL-12+%2528PiLi-12%2529+SD-10+%2528ShanDian-10%2529+BVRAAM+%2528Beyond+visual+range+Air+to+Air+Missile%2529+People%2527s+Liberation+Army+ariforce++%25281%2529.jpg


But SD10A dont meet PAF and JF17 requirements.....so another version of SD10 is in development......
The issue is not in JF17 but in the missile....that needs to suit JF17. :D

this is a pt-06. our current thunder is based on pt-04!
post pics of operational thunder in PAF with SD-10, if u have them.

on a side note i have no doubt that in future newer blocks will carry SD-10, but im worrying about the first 48 or so...
 
.
this is a pt-06. our current thunder is based on pt-04!
post pics of operational thunder in PAF with SD-10, if u have them.

on a side note i have no doubt that in future newer blocks will carry SD-10, but im worrying about the first 48 or so...

and you dont need to worry

because i heard that first 48-50 are replacing a-5.so they are for a2g role mainly

even if they had the SD-10A bvr capability(which indeed it has) they would be of no use.as they are for A2G role

the a2a role which will replace the f-7pg will have SD-10 bvr capability and will be known as block II
 
.
this is a pt-06. our current thunder is based on pt-04!
post pics of operational thunder in PAF with SD-10, if u have them.

on a side note i have no doubt that in future newer blocks will carry SD-10, but im worrying about the first 48 or so...
Well. I am sure the first squadron cannot carry the SD-10, but the second and third might.
and you dont need to worry

because i heard that first 48-50 are replacing a-5.so they are for a2g role mainly
Yes they were replacement for A-5 Fantans.
Yet, JF-17 is a MULTIROLE fighter which carries both Air to ground and Air to Air capabilities.
The Thunders I believe have taken part in attacks on militant hideouts.
even if they had the SD-10A bvr capability(which indeed it has) they would be of no use.as they are for A2G role
Wrong. They are not for Air to Ground. The squadron it replaced was for Air to Ground warfare, but now the Squadron (16 and 26) can engage into Air to Air warfare too.
the a2a role which will replace the f-7pg will have SD-10 bvr capability and will be known as block II
I can assure everyone that the block two and block three (obviously) carry BVRAAM technology due to boasted avionics.
The Mirage and F-7s will be replaced by J-10Bs and JF-17 Block IIs.
Both of which would be specialized for Air to Air war hence serve ADA.


I get the trace you are trying to find and apply. But you have committed some mistakes, I am afraid in your little research.
One more thing we can extract from your post is, the first 48-50 JF-17s would be used for main Air-to-Ground attacks as the avionics don't quite serve BVR. But they still can take part in non-BVR dogfights.
The other blocks can serve Air-to-Ground quite normally too, but they are given priority for air-to-air with BVR tech.
That is the difference between block I and block II, and it's operational objectives.

Regards.
 
.
and you dont need to worry

because i heard that first 48-50 are replacing a-5.so they are for a2g role mainly

even if they had the SD-10A bvr capability(which indeed it has) they would be of no use.as they are for A2G role

the a2a role which will replace the f-7pg will have SD-10 bvr capability and will be known as block II

thats what my point was dear but still i think they will carry SD-10 after few years
 
.
pt 6 and pt 4 are are same other than fact one is running test in CAc other in PAC.
pt 6 isnt a block 2 aircraft. we hav seen sd-10 with prototype 6, 2 years back so implying block 1 wouldnt carry sd-10 is ridiculous.
all PAF reports and words have always said the jf-17 is bvr aircraft why would they say so if block 1 wasnt suppose to carry sd-10.

i think the reason why we are not seeing sd-10 is that sd-10 is very new weapons and its undergoing constant upgrades.

up till now i havnt seen a single report out of a good source claiming block 1 will not carry sd-10
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom