JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[v9s]

Damn those jets look sleek!

Only thing missing is some weapons.

 

[Dazzler]

Yes.. or more appropiately.. guesstimates based on what one hears.
Do not expect too much out of Batch-2.. but do not keep low expectations either.
Since what may seem like not much on the surface may be a lot more in terms of electronics and extra lines of code.

---------- Post added at 04:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:47 AM ----------




NO

The KLJ-7 has a performance rating someplace between the APG-68 in A2A and APG-66 in A2G.
Slight changes in ECM which can be compared to the alq-131 that the PAF has used before.

ground performance is also comparable to apg-68V5+ but slightly inferior to V9. Both have pretty good SAR modes and similar ranges in both hemispheres. apg-66 is already considered obsolete in PAF and even Grifo M has bettered it in ranges and modes, not to mention the MTBF of 220 hours.

 

[Donatello]

ground performance is also comparable to apg-68V5+ but slightly inferior to V9. Both have pretty good SAR modes and similar ranges in both hemispheres. apg-66 is already considered obsolete in PAF and even Grifo M has bettered it in ranges and modes, not to mention the MTBF of 220 hours.

APG 66 being the radar of F-16 BLK A/B
APG 68 v5 and v9 being the radar of F-16 BLK 52

How is KLJ7 better in range...i mean..it is only 100km in BVR search and 75km in look down mode......isn't APG 68 200km+ range?

 

[Imran Khan]

APG 66 being the radar of F-16 BLK A/B
APG 68 v5 and v9 being the radar of F-16 BLK 52

How is KLJ7 better in range...i mean..it is only 100km in BVR search and 75km in look down mode......isn't APG 68 200km+ range?

APG 68 range 296.32 km, 184 miles

 

[Dazzler]

go through JFT info pool or Fighter radar thread for this. You will find your answers as there is plenty of discussion done on this issue. 200 km is for various RCS targets not for all of them. Same is the case with KLJ-7 and other radars.

Thanks

 

[farhan_9909]

300km range of F-16 radar is for sea targets

klj-7 range was 105km for 5m2 target bt we have heard that KARF has also made improvement

even klj-7 would be able to detect sea targets with bigger RCS at 200km range.

 

[Dazzler]

can detect a destroyer sized target at 240+kms away.

 

[Dazzler]

notice two dual launch rails under each wing....

 

[SQ8]

You know, Ive always wondered if that section between stations 1&2 or 5&6 is strong enough to bear the weight of missile and still pull some moderate G-maneuvers without coming off.
Apprently(as future plans suggest)its not.

---------- Post added at 12:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 PM ----------

APG 66 being the radar of F-16 BLK A/B
APG 68 v5 and v9 being the radar of F-16 BLK 52

How is KLJ7 better in range...i mean..it is only 100km in BVR search and 75km in look down mode......isn't APG 68 200km+ range?

A little more than that.. check the info pool for some close guesstimates.
But the actual restriction is antenna size and power. There is only so much room in that nose.

 

[abdulbarijan]

You know, Ive always wondered if that section between stations 1&2 or 5&6 is strong enough to bear the weight of missile and still pull some moderate G-maneuvers without coming off.
Apprently(as future plans suggest)its not.

---------- Post added at 12:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 PM ----------



A little more than that.. check the info pool for some close guesstimates.
But the actual restriction is antenna size and power. There is only so much room in that nose.

That being your own "Guesstimate".

 

[SQ8]

That being your own "Guesstimate".

No.. that being an official one.

 

[Donatello]

You know, Ive always wondered if that section between stations 1&2 or 5&6 is strong enough to bear the weight of missile and still pull some moderate G-maneuvers without coming off.
Apprently(as future plans suggest)its not.

---------- Post added at 12:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 PM ----------



A little more than that.. check the info pool for some close guesstimates.
But the actual restriction is antenna size and power. There is only so much room in that nose.

Yea...the 100km estimate i gave was from the JFT Thread that i have read here......but if APG 66/68 size is bigger, then doesn't that imply it will have more range anyway? Compared to KLJ 7.


Secondly, if the range is 100km, that is indeed less, compared to what IAF will be fielding. I know it is a huge gain over the Mirage III and F-7s, but c'mon, lets not gauge JF-17 in comparisons with Mirage and F-7s...those are almost half a century old. Let's aim a bit high and compare JF-17s to say, Newer F-16s, Mirage 2000s or perhaps the Rafale.

Which makes me think, that AESA is a must for the rapidly evolving Electronic warfare environment in the sub-continent.

 

[SBD-3]

But with very different performance! JF 17 with this config could only use the smaller centerline fuel tank and would have very limited range, even if refuelled in air after take off.
The F16s on the other side, can carry 2 x Harpoons + up to 3 fuel tanks, the Block 52s could even add CFTs. So combining F16s and P3s with Harpoons in the anti ship role would make much more operational sense, than using JF17.

Probably a fuel tank on the centre and two MRMs on inner hardpoints and two SRAAMs on wingtips. A fuel tanker would certainly be able to extend its range to grater extent and given the thunder operate from karachi means that its ferry range would ensures it has long range strike capabilities.

 

[nomi007]

i hope new engine will be better than present

 

[Edevelop]

We should work on improving thrust to weight ratio. This should be done in blk 2 & 3 when we add more composites. Is that going to happen?