JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[GURU DUTT]

Good morning Mastan Sir

 

[mughaljee]

Moderator Sir,
I am not receiving reply of JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4] via email ?

 

[araz]

Pshamim,

These are all very goods system on the jf17's---there are no ifs and buts about it---but the problem is the very good systems are not the answer all the way---untill and unless you have some systems that are extra-ordinary.

You are a warrior---you know very well---that in order for your weaker system to succeed---your primary system need to have the strength to smash thru the frontline enemy aircraft to give a headway to for faster and nimble forces to move in.

Over 2000 years ago the roman armies had triarii a heavy equipped force that would smash through the opposing armies center to make way for the faster and agile forces---the roman general Pompey uses this technique against he massive army of Spartacus---even though the romans are out numbered by the Spartacans---the Spartacans don't have any answer for the heavy armoured roman troops.

When Ghenghis Khan attacks any place anywhere---what advantage does his millitary have over the enemy----his soldiers havefaster moving horses and those soldiers can launch missiles ( arrows ) from a much longer distance than their opponents---relentlessly--where everyone of his soldiers carries around what do the historians say---60 to 80 to a 100 arrows in two quivers----which gives them a similiar advantage to a bvr---because the mongol missile can out distances a muslim missile---plus the mongol carries more missile per sortie---and what happened to the muslim armies----the muslim soldiers were holding their shields in front of them and hiding under the shields and the shields were being filled up with the strikes of he arrows and getting hevaier and heavier and the muslim sldiers were getting tired while holding the shields full of arrows stuck on them and when the close assault starts they have to dump their shields---they are physically tired---they have already lost the battle---.

As much the things and technology changes---so much it stays closer to its origin---the basic fundamentals of warfare have not changed---.

That is why I keep telling you kids---read history---read of those who concquered you---read of those who defeated you---read withut prejudiceand read without anger to learn---.

Again---I agree with everyone--JF17 is a great aircraft by itself---but in comparison to what---?

An excellant post Mastan and i dare say one to ponder on. i am afraid the answers you are looking for will only be found in the war theatre. No one in their right mind will come on to an open forum and tell you why they think or know the Thunder to be an exceptional aircraft. However as a genralisation, with thunder PAF has finally ACHIEVED acccess to netcentric warfare and BVR missiles which have prhaps not been tried in the heat of the battle but on tests have been shown to be good. I would again reiterate that for a country like Pakistan it is no more possible to openly have technology which is so far advanced as compared to India that we can sit tight and sip coffee while our forces will trash the Indians. There is far too big a gap in resources and buying power between them and us for it to be true. Add to it the complexity of the US trying to contain China and its romance with India, and you have another complicating factor.
But even if you had all the superiority in the world, this would still be a zero sum Zero game because of the nuclear factor. So all that the influx of technology has done has lowered the threshold at which the opposition responds with a nuclear strike. So we do have a MAD scenario.
So we now have to look at increasing this threshold by implementing what we can as a responsible nation(which with our corrupt inept leadership, I dare say we are not!!!) without breaking our backs and busting our all too empty bank. You may again go back to your time honoured talk about talking about this phase or that, but the fact is that the past is the past and a mistake of the past, for whatever reason cannot be rectified. We have to live with now. in this light if you think that even after we had bought M2Ks at X+10 million $s which was the dream of our earstwhile leader, it would have desisted france from selling the rafale to Indiatoday after ditching us, that logic does not hold true.
So again we are bought back to the zero sum Zero game. Our only logical way forward is to develop technology in house and implement it in our own planes and assume that we are not going to get any help from outside. This is not out of choice, but the way the world has decided to roll. We have to live with it. We have in the last decade grovelled like the precious poodle of the US, but not gained anything out of it. Believe me if we had given them everything , evne then the outcome would still have been the same. i dont want to go into the reasons of it but I think you are smart enough to know the answers yourself. So without further ado this is what you have to contend with and this is where you have to move forward from. Our only way ahead is on self eliance and this is where we are. if you look at the picture from where we are looking at it, it seems to be a managable situation . If you try to push this envelope too far your already over burdened economy will not bear the brunt of you advances and you may have a momentary advantage with a busted bank and abankrupt country.
Araz

 

[Farooqi1]

An excellant post Mastan and i dare say one to ponder on. i am afraid the answers you are looking for will only be found in the war theatre. No one in their right mind will come on to an open forum and tell you why they think or know the Thunder to be an exceptional aircraft. However as a genralisation, with thunder PAF has finally ACHIEVED acccess to netcentric warfare and BVR missiles which have prhaps not been tried in the heat of the battle but on tests have been shown to be good. I would again reiterate that for a country like Pakistan it is no more possible to openly have technology which is so far advanced as compared to India that we can sit tight and sip coffee while our forces will trash the Indians. There is far too big a gap in resources and buying power between them and us for it to be true. Add to it the complexity of the US trying to contain China and its romance with India, and you have another complicating factor.
But even if you had all the superiority in the world, this would still be a zero sum Zero game because of the nuclear factor. So all that the influx of technology has done has lowered the threshold at which the opposition responds with a nuclear strike. So we do have a MAD scenario.
So we now have to look at increasing this threshold by implementing what we can as a responsible nation(which with our corrupt inept leadership, I dare say we are not!!!) without breaking our backs and busting our all too empty bank. You may again go back to your time honoured talk about talking about this phase or that, but the fact is that the past is the past and a mistake of the past, for whatever reason cannot be rectified. We have to live with now. in this light if you think that even after we had bought M2Ks at X+10 million $s which was the dream of our earstwhile leader, it would have desisted france from selling the rafale to Indiatoday after ditching us, that logic does not hold true.
So again we are bought back to the zero sum Zero game. Our only logical way forward is to develop technology in house and implement it in our own planes and assume that we are not going to get any help from outside. This is not out of choice, but the way the world has decided to roll. We have to live with it. We have in the last decade grovelled like the precious poodle of the US, but not gained anything out of it. Believe me if we had given them everything , evne then the outcome would still have been the same. i dont want to go into the reasons of it but I think you are smart enough to know the answers yourself. So without further ado this is what you have to contend with and this is where you have to move forward from. Our only way ahead is on self eliance and this is where we are. if you look at the picture from where we are looking at it, it seems to be a managable situation . If you try to push this envelope too far your already over burdened economy will not bear the brunt of you advances and you may have a momentary advantage with a busted bank and abankrupt country.
Araz

Gentlemen:

I have some very good arguments as I beleive but since I promised myself not to destory this thread anymore as I am blamed by some posters therefore no comments from my side on Single Vs Twine or JFT this or that.

 

[ziaulislam]

vs what?
vs any indian aircraft it can manage itself. other than a fifth gen aircrfts

whats its better from in most aspects? all indian aircrfts (mig21.mig27,jaugers,old mirage200s,mig29,LCAmk1) at moment other than the su 30mki

and its highly unjustified to say that su30 can carry 4 times armament or BVR missles because

it can carry 10 on multiple racks that is most maximum (against minimum of 4, we dont know max limit of thunder)
its radar can engage 4 and track 15 targets vs 2 and 8 of thunder

its ordinance is 8 tones vs 4 tones of thunder..

so maximum figure should be twice that of thunder mr mastan khan

but if you ask me the real thing that matters will be quality of sd-10 vs r-77

chinese claims that sd-10 is far better but so do the russians!

 

[Last Hope]

^

To be successful, and to have a huge dominance, here are golden words.
Ensure that your aircraft's lower limits are superior to the upper limits of your enemy.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

8 bvr's is a known number for the su30----and 2 is the known number for Jf17-----4-sd10 is far fetching at this time---. Secondly---you are also forgetting about the massive radar and capabilities that the su30 carries on itself----.

Sd10 is not a fully operational missile as of now---the version we are looking at is a brand new version---the r77 has been in operation for a while now----the indians know what happens to an r77 when it sits on the shelf or when it is exposed to the environment----they know what the effects of time are on a sitting missile----.

You super stars---you super st-uds---do you know that missiles deteriorate in storage--under adverse conditions--under adverse weather. You don't buy a missile to shoot it today---you may want to use it 10 years from now or maybe never----.

That is where a time proven and time tested system is always favoured over a brand new system---because you cannot change your strike weapons in mid stride---in the middle of a war---and you cannot predict the future of an upcoming and new manufacturer of weapons----.

Again---in order for your JF17 to succeed---you will have to have some aircraft that can smash thru the enemy frontline aircraft to give them passage to perform their job what they are designed to do---.

Without a proper air dominance air superiority aircraft---you are asking too much of the pilots of the paf---it is not right---it is not fair to send them in just like that----.

The gamesmanship and strategy in war has not changed for thousands of years----. Either smash thru the enemy with heavy weapons---or demolish it thru airstrikes of heavy aircraft----have fast moving flanks and follow thru the middle with fast strike capable resources------.

As much as the things change---so much they stay the same---fast moving armies with a heavy weapons strike capability will take out the slow and sluggish armies with average fire power---.

 

[Pfpilot]

Well put Mr. MastanKhan. This has always been my bone of contention. On its own, the jf-17 is a great aircraft. A great achievement from a people ravaged by war and corruption. I owe my interest in these military forums to the jf-17s. It is hard to be Pakistani and not be proud of this accomplishment.

But when this achievement is looked at from a relative position, that is where reality and our own bias towards are military start to deviate. While it may be a massive leap over Pakistani capability of the 90s, it is not a similar leap relative to the Indian military machine. While we did nothing, the IAF improved and when we started to improve, they did not just sit around twiddling their thumbs.

If the enemy were flying just mig-21, 27s and 29s, the jf-17 would have been good enough. But that is just not the reality. The su-30mki, and for all the agitation it brings other members that it is brought up again and again, is the trump card in the region. Can the jf-17 hold its own in localized territory, over areas backed up by Pakistani SAMs? Probably. But its capabilities diminish manifold as it's zone of operation moves closer and closer to the Indo-Pak border.

Enough members have pointed out the inability of the PAF to afford better fighters to form the high end of the airforce, but it begs the question, what are we going to do if war were to break out tomorrow? Apparently, we are doing all we can to maintain some sort of skewed parity, yet we have an aircraft that can carry only 2 BVR missiles if it wants any sort of loitering time. It is a situation that is hardly optimal. The jf-17 is good, maybe great...the problem is the IAF aircraft are better, some barely and others decidedly so.

As we found out in our past skirmishes with the Indians, without a weapon providing a decisive edge, no conflict will ever end in anything but a stalemate. That status quo allowed us some breathing room in the past, but is no longer applicable. The IAF has an air superiority fighter we have no chance against, and a multi-role fighter on the way that is a better air to air fighter than anything we field.

The MAD scenario does hang over the entire subcontinent, but as Kargil showed, even a small and localized conflict may be enough for the Indians to make a decisive blow to our psyche and Geo-political considerations.

 

[cw2005]

Pshamim,

These are all very goods system on the jf17's---there are no ifs and buts about it---but the problem is the very good systems are not the answer all the way---untill and unless you have some systems that are extra-ordinary.

You are a warrior---you know very well---that in order for your weaker system to succeed---your primary system need to have the strength to smash thru the frontline enemy aircraft to give a headway to for faster and nimble forces to move in.

Over 2000 years ago the roman armies had triarii a heavy equipped force that would smash through the opposing armies center to make way for the faster and agile forces---the roman general Pompey uses this technique against he massive army of Spartacus---even though the romans are out numbered by the Spartacans---the Spartacans don't have any answer for the heavy armoured roman troops.

When Ghenghis Khan attacks any place anywhere---what advantage does his millitary have over the enemy----his soldiers havefaster moving horses and those soldiers can launch missiles ( arrows ) from a much longer distance than their opponents---relentlessly--where everyone of his soldiers carries around what do the historians say---60 to 80 to a 100 arrows in two quivers----which gives them a similiar advantage to a bvr---because the mongol missile can out distances a muslim missile---plus the mongol carries more missile per sortie---and what happened to the muslim armies----the muslim soldiers were holding their shields in front of them and hiding under the shields and the shields were being filled up with the strikes of he arrows and getting hevaier and heavier and the muslim sldiers were getting tired while holding the shields full of arrows stuck on them and when the close assault starts they have to dump their shields---they are physically tired---they have already lost the battle---.

As much the things and technology changes---so much it stays closer to its origin---the basic fundamentals of warfare have not changed---.

That is why I keep telling you kids---read history---read of those who concquered you---read of those who defeated you---read withut prejudiceand read without anger to learn---.

Again---I agree with everyone--JF17 is a great aircraft by itself---but in comparison to what---?

Dear Mastan:

Your point is also good for the otherside of the border for their light fighter. And it might be also applicable to China when they want to fight the Americans. India as well as China are now playing the economic catch up game. While China's target is USA and Indian's China. I don't believe Indian would give up this game by starting war with Pakistan. Just look at China's Behavious towards Phillipine. In short, there will be no war, only business and money. Everyone is trying to get this as much as possible. China's export of fighter is for money. China developes fighter is for export. You may see they are even trying hardly to sell their J10 and very soon, the J20 is for sale targeting those buyer with the need and deep pockets. It is purely business and that is all.

 

[ziaulislam]

as far as i know the posters indicating armament of thunder shows 4 bvr ,2 antiship,3 fuel tanks,2 short range missles in different configuration. some members in this forum speculated more numbers but thats just to level of speculation.

radar of su 30 is simply double the capability befitting its size. real deal will be its ECM capablity.

loitering time is not issue looking at the size of Pakistan and its operational versatility from so many concentrated airbases.

first versions of sd-10 was completed more than a decade ago(according to janes) while newer versions have been tested now. it has been delivered to and tested by PAF according to renowned aviation journals. and is considered to be in service for atleast 5 years now in PLAAF. this is all open nothing speculation here.

better to give a comparison of Swedish, how they countered the USSR with fleet of versatile small and numerous aircrafts rather than Genghis khan i guess.
i think guys here should see how the Swedish air force operated in 80s and 70s to have an idea to counter an enemy far superior.

 

[Viper0011.]

Hi,

8 bvr's is a known number for the su30----and 2 is the known number for Jf17-----4-sd10 is far fetching at this time---. Secondly---you are also forgetting about the massive radar and capabilities that the su30 carries on itself----.

You super stars---you super st-uds---do you know that missiles deteriorate in storage--under adverse conditions--under adverse weather. You don't buy a missile to shoot it today---you may want to use it 10 years from now or maybe never----.

That is where a time proven and time tested system is always favoured over a brand new system---because you cannot change your strike weapons in mid stride---in the middle of a war---and you cannot predict the future of an upcoming and new manufacturer of weapons----.

Again---in order for your JF17 to succeed---you will have to have some aircraft that can smash thru the enemy frontline aircraft to give them passage to perform their job what they are designed to do---.

Without a proper air dominance air superiority aircraft---you are asking too much of the pilots of the paf---it is not right---it is not fair to send them in just like that----.

The gamesmanship and strategy in war has not changed for thousands of years----. Either smash thru the enemy with heavy weapons---or demolish it thru airstrikes of heavy aircraft----have fast moving flanks and follow thru the middle with fast strike capable resources------.

As much as the things change---so much they stay the same---fast moving armies with a heavy weapons strike capability will take out the slow and sluggish armies with average fire power---.

Mr. Mastan - please see my post on J10 MRCA thread from yesterday. It might shed some light. Interestingly, I agree with you on somethings and disagree on some . It is the quality of the Radar & Missile Tech that'll matter going forward. No major wars will happen in Indo-Pak scenario if common sense prevails or people have half the brains I think they do.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/3218-j-10-fc-20-mrca-378.html

 

[JunaidP]

Hi..

I’ve been following this forum since '09.. Maybe even before that as time flies and it keeps getting harder to keep track of it.. Being a military enthusiast but owing to my nature, I took a back seat and indulged myself to the great information this forum has to offer and the arguments and counter arguments that went with it.. What really compelled me to join this forum officially was the sense of negativity that’s going around here especially with regards to PAF and its choices in the past, present circumstances and future prospects..

My dear armchair generals (and i consider myself one too ) my 2 cents on the subject;

Wars are not fought on the basis or backs of "In Your Face" machines (as Sir Mastan so ardently puts it).. Yes they can make one side cockier or can boost the morale of that side not to mention the capabilities that go with them but it’s not the only factor that goes into winning a war.. Tactics/Strategy, Planning, Logistics, Intelligence, actual implementation of the said and a fair bit of luck all go into making a winning recipe.. In a war, these machines would be useless if proper tactics are not devised or proper planning is not done or there is a lack of proper logistical support or even lack of intelligence (underestimating the opponent’s capabilities etc.). Even if all the planning and strategy is devised, it is the actual execution of all this that play the most vital role.. And Luck!! All the best laid plans are at the mercy of this little thing called probability.. All latest machines are designed from the get go to reduce their probability of failure.. But one cannot predict when this failure might actually occur.. When a trigger mechanism might fail to deploy a bomb or release an AMRAAM.. When a bird might strike an engine or a lightning strike disable some onboard equipment.. Military history is full of events where sides going against unimaginable odds came out victorious.. All sides play to win.. In the end there is either a clear winner and loser or a stalemate after which either sense prevails and peace is promoted or wounds are licked and lessons are learned and new strategies devised on how to defeat the other side when they come to battle the next time..
Coming to PAF and its decisions, before judging and crucifying the decision makers, one should always keep in mind that these decision makers change every few years.. As with any organization, some heads are visionaries, some are just cautionary, some just go by the books and some are so thick headed, one is amazed on how in the world that guy came to be where he is today.. Thankfully, the screening process in PAF minimizes these kind of people but that does not mean everyone who comes to the top is a visionary.. Sometimes, these visionaries are so good, they do actions that may seem unacceptable at that stage or after a few years.. But going down 15, 20 years, you realize that hey! That guy was a genius.. If he hadn’t done this thing 15, 20 years back, we would be in DEEP $h!t right now.. But of course skeptics would still be there and possibilities would be presented that would show that if such and such thing was done this way, the outcomes would have been different and much better.. But they fail to realize that when that person thought things out, he was in a very different situation.. He was in a position where he had the Big picture of things in front of him and the cards he played were to the best of his abilities given the situation.. Looking into the past and playing out scenarios knowing something has already happened is very different to predicting the future and acting accordingly.. This is where the skeptics lose their argument.. This does not mean blunders have not been made but they are far few than some would believe.. Mostly it was the case of “you do you’re damned, you don’t do you’re damned”.. Decision are always made keeping in mind the pros and cons of every situation may it be technical, financial, political or future growth.. When the Pros outweigh the Cons in the eyes of the decision maker, or the Cons are sufficiently acceptable in light of the Pros, a decision is made..

Having said all this, ill say something about Sir Mastan's recent comment.. The JF17 was never meant to be the tip of the spear.. It was part of the Foot soldiers that filtered in when the breach was made.. Sufficiently armed and equipped to really rattle the opposing force.. the Tip of the spear would always rest on the shoulders of the likes of F-16 for now and FC-20 in the near future.. And of course one cannot disregard the Chinese 5th generation single engine concept for the future after that.. By then JF17 block 3 would be out that would really complement it.. But regardless of this, modern air warfare is never fought with the likes of Ghenghis Khans war fighting strategy.. The enemy will never send all its fighters against you to impose a so called "air superiority". The risk of heavy attrition rate would be too great.. Instead, strike packages (ranging from 4 to 10 aircrafts with different configurations i.e air superiority+ground strike+electronic attack etc) will be sent to chip of the other sides armor.. Aircrafts flying CAPs would act as the main interceptors vectored in on the strike packages heading with support from local assets and backup from FOBs.. So PAF essentially needed an aircraft that could be up in the air more often in the least amount of time and resources and still be able to hold out till help arrives.. And JF17 fits the bill perfectly.. With a single centre line tank it can carry 4 BVRs and that centre line tank would be enough in my opinion for a CAP mission in its designated sector.. That is the work of the workhorse.. Doing all the maintenance intensive work (CAPs CAS etc) and leaving the rest to the Specialists (F-16/FC-20)..

What one fails to realize is that for IAF, the number game also caters for the slow maintenance.. how quickly they can send the next strike package.. Most of their planes are maintenance intensive and to counter that they need the greater numbers to quickly send in the next strike package.. Plus they will always need to be vary of the the north or any flanking maneuver by the PAF so enough presence will be sustained in other OBs and aircraft from these OBs will be moved to the FOBs only incase of desperate times for the IAF (when mission objectives of their current fleets in the FOBs failed to accomplish their assigned tasks).. And that would leave the IAF at a tactical disadvantage vis a vis their war planning.. This scenario would be their "worst comes to worst" option..

Ofcourse i could be wrong in my analysis or partially wrong for that matter because being knowledgeable is really all relative and everyday brings new chances to learn..

regards,

JunaidP

 

[TAC]

The JF-17 was concieved as a cheap but effective and modern replacement for older types such as the A5, F7, Mirage. Certain key performance / capability requirements were set and local production / industrial development was also desired. In all of these key goals it is an astounding success in the face of huge odds and a tribute to PAF's vision and Chinese freindship. Its payload / range etc can be compared to death by its detractors -- but it is a viable, reliable and localy supported threat to anything and everything the enemy has - and with its planned block upgrades will remain so moving forward.
Ofcoarse it is not enough on its own and ofcoarse PAF needs to aquire something even more potent - but thats where the J-10B comes in.
I recall that when India ordered its first AWACS -- PAF's detractors were quing up to say that with no BVR and no AWACS by 2010 Pakistan airspace will be free flying space for the mighty IAF - 2010 has come and gone and Pakistan has maintained / improved its minimum credible detterance. In the same way people are ready to run for the hills (or perhaps just point other people to the hills)even though Rafale deal hasn't even been inked yet. Read the PAF ACM interview where he says that by 2016 Pakistan will have 100's of JF-17's, 60 odd uptodate F-16's, 40 odd FC-20 -- i do not see any reason to believe those plans have changed. In a nuclear backdrop - minimum credible detterance is the order of the day and PAF / Pakistan continue to maintain that very well.

 

[Farooqi1]

Let there be no doubt about the utility of JFT. But We do need "something else" beside JFT, F16 and FC-20.

I am requesting from moderators to start a new thread away from JFT thread so that progress of JFT could be discussed over here in this thread and we could have a separate place to discuss overall PAF strategy past present and future, what it is lacking, Twine Vs Single Engine etc and all the topics which we have been discussing other then technical specification and progress of JFT.

I don't know how to start a thread so could some one or any moderator start a new separate thread?

 

[nomi007]

artistic image of jf-17 twin seater