What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Indo pak war theatre is not small-scale or just on the border. That attitude exists in the jf17 mindset ie small low cost.agile dog fighter only. Almost t
identical to oaf mig21 doctrine. It's too limited in operat
ional flexbility whe n you have massive borders massive sea lanes and a mindset to hit hard and hit deep. Paf has a different doctrine to likes of India China saudi who operate much larger platforms.

Not correct. Yes it it is the workhorse... But painting it as small low cost dog fighter is plain wrong. Why does it have:

WMD-7
KG200G
SD10B
Ra'ad
C802
CM400AKG
LS-6 and smaller versions
KG40

And if Block 2 (not Block 1 which start production now) may get AESA then we have different set of weapons and sensors. Your Mig21 Bison or LCA does not come near to anything the JF17 offers right now.

Yes every plane begins with the very basic but painting JF17 as low cost and dog fighter is outdated... Even now.
 
It will follow the same rule as Infantry, there will still be a need for close combat under certain circumstances. Low hit ratio for BVRs makes it inevitable.

Would like to present some data about these hit ratios so I can be educated Sir?
 
OK, so thank you for understanding the element of surprise isn't there. That's a topic that your fellow countrymen drag and try to act like it doesn't exist.
Next, yes, you are ALSO correct in that SU-30 can carry larger jamming systems, etc. But realize that for a modern fire-forget bvr.....dodging a missile also means it'll e-acquire a lock unless it explodes its warhead on a defensive target chaffs, flares, etc. Otherwise, if the missile has range and fuel, it'll come back. So in which case, what's easy to reacquire from an RCS's standpoint? A small Horse or an Elephant? Next, in dog fights, what's easy to maneuver.....a small plane or a larger twin turbine jet?
Why do you think Mig-21 and F-16's have always been considered two of the hardest to beat dog fighters in their basic configuration? Because both are small and agile.

I am not trying to project JFT or SU-30's superiority. I am taking both of them into account in combat, SU-30 in offense and JFT in a defensive role. Elsewhere, it will be an entirely different scenario and SU-30 will have an upper hand but in Indo-Pak's scenario, your best strength (in peace if that ever happens) is also your weakest link (such close proximity).

So in this case, SU-30's capabilities are marginalized by your distance. And, it doesn't matter what the bvr doctrine is. That's just focuses on pilot training and engagements. Proximity is just a reality and plays a role. A doctrine can't change the fact that both planes will see each other at the same time, irrespective of one have 200 km extra range.

Second, the doctrine also can't control the fact that the lock ons and missiles away will happen virtually at the same time. I'd be saying the SAME thing if Pakistan had SU-30's and India had JFT's. So my post shouldn't be considered 'anti India' or 'anti Pakistan'. I just speak the truth and if it hurts at times, too bad!

same was point of view of one of JF-17's pilot , according to him Jf-17 is for defensive role and it is best suited for this purpose .... jf-17 is best for our needs
 
Indo pak war theatre is not small-scale or just on the border. That attitude exists in the jf17 mindset ie small low cost.agile dog fighter only. Almost t
identical to oaf mig21 doctrine. It's too limited in operat
ional flexbility whe n you have massive borders massive sea lanes and a mindset to hit hard and hit deep. Paf has a different doctrine to likes of India China saudi who operate much larger platforms.

This is funny. You keep using the terms doctrine, hit hard, deeper, massive attacks, etc, etc. Ever imagine if PA's radars pick up 50 inbound jets.....what would be the next step for them?????? I think your "hit hard, deeper, and over a massive land mass" scenario just got buried. A smaller country like Pakistan will resort to immediate escalation as soon as they noticed a major air strike inbound. You can now run your imagination wild, deeper, harder and over a major landmass in your brain to calculate the results of that on each end.
There will be no war between the two of you. Any war will turn into a major war with nukes ready to be used within a very short amount of time. That's the sad and MOST DANGEROUS reality about this region. Establish peace, be friends with each other and trade. Everyone makes money, lives longer and a more prosperous life
 
I would like to request all the Pakistani Members not to reply to Storm force, because we come to this thread to read some new info about JF17 and constructive debate NOT his stupid analysis or his made up scenarios.

I Have not come to this conclusion now, As you can see I am following this forum for a very long time and finally said it what I wanted to say to this Geezer.

(Never learns from getting banned).
 
As always, you guys butcher an argument!! Re-read my post and try to understand what I said. I wasn't talking about 'detection' or 'AEW'. Of course early detection or AEW is super important. I was talking about a conflict and combat. Not peace time where the SU-30's can fly at the end of the border, see a JFT, wave hands at each other and exchange birds and gestures!!

First you need an argument, before somebody can butcher it! And is it my origin, or your faulty logic that is the problem here? You were talking about radars and that everybody sees and locks on each other at the same time and now make a U turn? :rolleyes:

Again, the close proximity doesn't mean any fighter would automatically detect any target in the airspace around him, because the FOV of fighter radars is way too small. That's where additional sensor data of AWACS or other fighters are important to have more situational awareness of the battlefield, to stay out of the detection range/FOV of enemy fighters, or to get close enough to make a successful BVR attack. So it's far more complicated than you describe it in your claims here. JF 17 will work most effectively with AWACS support in this air defence roles and not by relying on it's own radar.


Anyway, there are a lot of other threads available to discuss combat scenarios, so everybody should stick to news and discussions about JF 17 here again!
 
BVRs would remain decoration pieces in all air forces because of their hit ratio for atleast 2020+……
just a stupid pilot can take a hit from BVR or a UAV……
most hit ratios even after BVRs induction are of WVRs……
BVRs mainly used to disperse the enemy fighters and then engage in dogfight then……
most BVR kills are of US in Iraq and i don't need to explain Vietnam and Iraqi pilots training……
situation about Vietnam changed when their pilots learned BVR tactics in favour of Vietnam in 1967…
same goes for serbia……:yu:
well counter tactics of BVR are now too priority of PAF……:coffee:

i am afraid it is just opposite, vwr will be used only when necessary and un avoidable, most of the times bvr shots will be used to bring down the enemy jet, ask gambit if you don't believe me.
 
You keep using the terms doctrine, hit hard, deeper, massive attacks, etc, etc. Ever imagine if PA's radars pick up 50 inbound jets.....what would be the next step for them?????? I think your "hit hard, deeper, and over a massive land mass" scenario just got buried. A smaller country like Pakistan will resort to immediate escalation as soon as they noticed a major air strike inbound. You can now run your imagination wild, deeper, harder and over a major landmass in your brain to calculate the results of that on each end.
There will be no war between the two of you. Any war will turn into a major war with nukes ready to be used within a very short amount of time. That's the sad and MOST DANGEROUS reality about this region. Establish peace, be friends with each other and trade. Everyone makes money, lives longer and a more prosperous life

You could have said that on Chinese Thread where you chose to and were glorifying US. Good to see you came back to senses.
 
i am afraid it is just opposite, vwr will be used only when necessary and un avoidable, most of the times bvr shots will be used to bring down the enemy jet, ask gambit if you don't believe me.

I am just saying that wvr:bvr kill ratio is not more then 3:1 including US kills against Iraq,Serbs and such nations which were not even trained basics of BVR……
and when the fight is between two professional airforce then wvr:bvr is as much as 5:1………
this is not my concern that how much BVR is used……
they may can use 8-10 BVRs per fighters………:coffee:

I would like to request all the Pakistani Members not to reply to Storm force, because we come to this thread to read some new info about JF17 and constructive debate NOT his stupid analysis or his made up scenarios.

I Have not come to this conclusion now, As you can see I am following this forum for a very long time and finally said it what I wanted to say to this Geezer.

(Never learns from getting banned).

chk out JF-17 Information Pool………
http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-thunder/71435-jf-17-thunder-information-pool-30.html
 
You could have said that on Chinese Thread where you chose to and were glorifying US. Good to see you came back to senses.

You got me SO confused....what does this scenario has to do with the US? None of these scenarios are applicable to the US's war machine and its capability. I don't know why you'd bring that up here in an entirely different topic?
I said in my posts earlier and I'll repeat that again, I don't take sides and play 'anti India' or 'anti Pakistan' or 'anti China' crap. I'll say the truth and if someone doesn't like it, sorry.
I don't remember which thread you are talking about. But if that was a thread like the Chinese are making weapons equal to the US or are equal in military force, then sorry to disappoint you, but that's a dream. The US is about two decades ahead of everyone and that's a fact. The Chinese are moving fast but that doesn't mean the US's stopped moving. Hope this makes sense. It's a separate thread to let me know what thread and I'll come participate in it. Thx.
 
You got me SO confused....what does this scenario has to do with the US? None of these scenarios are applicable to the US's war machine and its capability. I don't know why you'd bring that up here in an entirely different topic?I don't take sides and play 'anti India' or 'anti Pakistan' or 'anti China' crap. I'll say the truth and if someone doesn't like it, sorry.

Here is what you wrote earlier.
here will be no war between the two of you. Any war will turn into a major war with nukes ready to be used within a very short amount of time. That's the sad and MOST DANGEROUS reality about.

Chinese are more capable then any country behind US and Russians, they are worthy and capable not every country is like Pakistan hell your stupid reply was Pakistan will do this & that first shoot down a drone then we'll talk first go into afghanistan and take out those taliban/aq then we'll see...ball-less people your words have no weight incompetent people. I brought this up because you are contradicting if a country like Pakistan in your imagination can hit back india so can China which has 10 times bigger arsenal then Pakistan. It does no matter who is 20 decades ahead once you have destructive weapons in your hand and someone threaten your home you'll most likely use it incase they attack you..Again stop glorifying US first let US takecare of N. Korea so far nothing...

Now to the main Topic.
 
Kargill was clearly a war... No nukes. I think with Mutual destruction there will be only minor wars that will not lead to a all out war as was in the past...
 
Kargill was clearly a war... No nukes. I think with Mutual destruction there will be only minor wars that will not lead to a all out war as was in the past...

Going strictly by the definition of War; Kargil was no war. The only conflict that fell under that definition was 1971.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom