JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[BATMAN]

i hope new engine will be better than present

If you are talking about WS-13 than it is reported to have 10% more thrust than RD-93.
PLAAF is test flying a prototype in China, since last year.

 

[Jungibaaz]

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.

The AN/APG-66 can detect a phantom sized target at 40 nm...
translate that to figure we can use... roughly 74 km for a target with an RCS >6m2.

Given that^ the KLJ-7 is superior to the AN/APG-66, and superior to the improved AN/APG-66(v)2 with 25% greater detection range.

The AN/APG-68(v)5/7/9 have greater detection ranges then the KLJ-7.
The APG-68(v)5 has a detection range of 130km for a target with an RCS of 5m2.

Oscar is right...

Ill let you know when that is complete, a basic form of it has been done..
The KJL-7 has capabilities that match or exceed the APG-66 and equal the APG-68 in some respects. So it is a VERY good radar.
Any tweaks will take to a capability level of the APG-68V9 less that SAR.. and that is a very big compliment.

______________________________________________________
You can see why PAF is pleased with the KLJ-7, it is a good radar.
As I've said before, many folks have underestimated it.

Any info on the said 'tweaks' to the KLJ-7, was it tweaked up to the given ranges of 75km and 105km or improved from these ranges?

I'd like to hear your views...

regards,

 

[gambit]

The AN/APG-66 can detect a phantom sized target at 40 nm...
translate that to figure we can use... roughly 74 km for a target with an RCS >6m2.

Given that^ the KLJ-7 is superior to the AN/APG-66, and superior to the improved AN/APG-66(v)2 with 25% greater detection range.

The AN/APG-68(v)5/7/9 have greater detection ranges then the KLJ-7.
The APG-68(v)5 has a detection range of 130km for a target with an RCS of 5m2.

I will clarify a bit on how to interpret these claims.

A radar cross section (RCS) is a 'fictitious' value, meaning it can and does change. Currently, the official unofficial standard for any credible targeting purpose is 1 m/sq at about 100-150 km distance out. That is derived from a clean F-16. An RCS value is calculated from many factors but the main ones are illustrated below...

When we get into other radar transmission characteristics such as 'continuous wave' or methods of exploitation such as 'bi-static' then the issue of RCS gets much murkier, but for now, we can stay with the above popular method of pulsed characteristic and mono-static method. It is about 80% of the world's radar systems, from civilian to military use.

Can a B-52 have an RCS of 1 m/sq? Yes, but at several hundreds km distance out. So at the expected 100-150 km, the B-52 would produce dozens of m/sq from the frontal aspect alone. For a clean F-16 at that distance, the radar would experience periods of ambiguity due to background clutter processing and could (but not always) miss the F-16 from one moment to the next. That is why even when fully loaded 'for bear' the F-16 always proved to be problematic for opposition aircrafts in the radar front.

So when we talk about differences in radar systems, it is always good to have a fixed distance for ALL aircrafts, such as 100 km or 300 km, with the guesstimated different RCS values for each aircraft. Or to set a fixed RCS value for ALL aircrafts, such as 1 m/sq or 10 m/sq, with the guesstimated different distances for each aircraft.

Remember this truth: EVERY body under radar bombardment will produce different RCS values at different distances.

Can an F-22 produce a 100 m/sq RCS value? Yes, but pretty much right 'in your face' distance and with pretty much every fighter-class radar systems out there.

 

[air marshal]

February 2012

 

[SBD-3]

February 2012

Yaar please ask Awais Lali sahib to change J-10B's Dummy missiles with real ones next time

(this missiles carred by J-10B pictures are dummy ones, the same have been shown by author in picture)

 

[SQ8]

Any info on the said 'tweaks' to the KLJ-7, was it tweaked up to the given ranges of 75km and 105km or improved from these ranges?

Its better you find out officially.. but as an appetizer.. the LRU's on the KLJ-7 will be upgraded with faster processors.

 

[Mughal-Prince]

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

well Nabil IMHO their is no any dual launch rail their in fact it seems the hooks which make it feel like that ... the dual launch rail which we have seen in JF-17 thread earlier was different and have inverted V shape even if its the different one then dual rail is significantly bigger and identifiable ...

in the end I may be wrong because I am feeling that my sight is a little weak then before and I have not tested it yet ... Please confirm

 

[farhan_9909]

well Nabil IMHO their is no any dual launch rail their in fact it seems the hooks which make it feel like that ... the dual launch rail which we have seen in JF-17 thread earlier was different and have inverted V shape even if its the different one then dual rail is significantly bigger and identifiable ...

in the end I may be wrong because I am feeling that my sight is a little weak then before and I have not tested it yet ... Please confirm

 

[Mughal-Prince]

This one surely have it ... but in previous image these were not their ...

 

[Edevelop]

 

[alimobin memon]

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

does that means under wing harpoints have ejector racks i-e like 4 Hard points per wing ?

 

[farhan_9909]

does that means under wing harpoints have ejector racks i-e like 4 Hard points per wing ?

Hard points
1-Pl-5EII
2-2xMk82
3-2xSD-10B
4-drop tank
5-2xSd-10B
6-2xmk82
7-Pl-5EII

4xBVR=800kg
4xmk82=900kg
1 drop tank=900kg
2xpl-5eii=300kg

total=2900Kg

 

[farhan_9909]

A dream of JFT to have such a radar

 

[nomi007]

A dream of JFT to have such a radar

get secretly from israel is the only way

 

[SQ8]

A dream of JFT to have such a radar

Contribute a couple of million dollars to the program.. it might just happen.
Such a system uses a lot of space for Cooling.. how will that be done with the JF-17's nose?