JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[farhan_9909]

the first pic is either photoshopped

or it is a combination of both Wmd-7 and KG300G.
and bt the 2nd pic seem real and the pod look like KG-300G

 

[Dazzler]

LOL, that was my point and it was a general statement. I only quoted you because you were talking about stealth and RCS reductions. I never stated that you said anything like that, but I can understand your reaction.



Besides what you claim and the confusions about DSI, we have several senior Pakistani members here that confirmed that JFT currently don't use any RAM materials or coating, but this is one of the prime requirements to reduce the RCS of a non stealth fighter!
We also know that nearly the whole airframe was build with normal metal structures and not with more costly composites and again several senior Pakistani members confirmed that the ammount will be increased in Block 2 only to a very low ammount.
Now add 1 + 1 and you will understand that JF 17 block 1 logically might have a lower RCS than the older and bigger F16 Block 15s, but that it can't have a low RCS compared to modern designed fighters.
The use of DSI infact is very logical when you don't use RAM, because it deletes the air intake inlets, that would increase the RCS unless treated with RAM. Therefore DSI is a cost-effective way to counter this problem, while the main idea behind it is, increased engine performance not RCS.

As Oscar often tries to make clear here, the main idea behind JFT is heaving a cost-effective fighter that can be used in different roles and not a high end top of the line fighter!
Especially the early blocks therefor will have a focus on basic radar and avionics + weapon integration, while the Block 3 might bring JFT to a comparable 4.5 gen level, including techs, coatings, materials... The fact that PAF wants J10B as a topline fighter above JF 17, although both shares most of the radar, avionics and weapons, makes this clear as well, so I don't need it ignore anything, just to look at the reality of JF 17 and what PAF wants (which you can see when you follow this and the JF 17 info pool thread) to understand the differences.

it is really getting boring now

J-10b/ fc-20 has always been deemed as a front-line fighter and jf-17 as the mainstay/ low end, complementing the blk 52s and the former. Its RCS is the lowest in all of PAF fighters and this is not from me but from someone whom i can believe any time. You will find many of my posts in the info pool thread so i don't need your advise to go through that thread. No one can and will make an argument about the cost efficiency of this project but cost efficient does not mean sub standard as many from the neighbourhood proclaim jf-17 to be. Also, do you know how much composite is being used in the first block? Do not be surprised because despite a small quantity, those that are assembled in PAC Kamra, are using some composite parts as of now.

 

[HavocHeaven]

large version with higher resolution

 

[SQ8]

As Oscar often tries to make clear here, the main idea behind JFT is heaving a cost-effective fighter that can be used in different roles and not a high end top of the line fighter!

I think the point of confusion is this cost effectiveness.
To what abilities required is it cost effective?

Look-Down Shoot Down BVR multiple target engagement capability - Check
High manoeuvrability , comparable to F-16 block-15 - Check
High serviceability- Check
Advanced Man Machine Interface with sensor fusion- Check
Comprehensive A2G capability with both guided(GPS) and unguided weapons- Check
Provide the above at an affordable price - $15 million -- Check

This is the basic Block-I (first batch of 50).

Block 2 adds.
Advanced ECM and ECCM -- Check
Advanced PGM(laser and LGB) capability --Check
A2A Refuelling capability-- Check
Further improvement in Radar and ESM Sensors - Check (whole exact capabilities are debatable)

Block-III improvements are undeclared publicly so I will refrain from commenting on them or adding them.

What is confirmed is that any and all capability improvements(which were introduced in the later batches ) that can be added to Block-I without physically altering the structure will be done so in a phased program.(as is similar to other modern combat Acft programs such as the EF and Rafale; software upgrade increments, updated processors ..etc).

With the above in mind.. You both are talking about the same thing.. but with a different perspective.
The JF-17 is not designed to dominate 4.5th gen fighters.. but hold its own.
Its designed to survive a fight with them and possibly bring them down over friendly(and maybe enemy) territory.
It does not guarantee a win over them, or comes close to matching their avionics specifications range for range.
What it brings is an increase in probability for survival and capable integrated weapons system for the PAF(and other customers if that happens).
The F-16's are the primary strike Acft..destined to take the fight into the enemy's airspace.. and attack targets deep within enemy territory.

The Fc-20's are supposed to be the tip of this capability.. aimed to be capable of going toe-to-toe with any 4.5th gen fighter in A2A combat and win. Along with having a respectable A2G deep strike capability.

However..any cynic who considers the Jf-17 or the FC-20 to be sub-standard.. "make-do" Chinese equipment is very very wrong. These aircraft are built with the highest quality standards.. and have the most sophisticated avionics available for their cost.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

Perhaps its a targeting pod then..
Using the same body as the KG-300?

you gave a hint and my bulb turned on.
Have a look at closer view .... Binogooo .... Its an IRST Pod similar to what PAC made for Mirage-3

 

[Safriz]

@ Oscar.....PAF isnt allowed to use F 16 outside pakistani territory...Thats the contract with americans?
so basically PAF has no strike fighter.

 

[Viper0011.]

Hi, to add to Mr. MK's point. There is an article in the current issue of Air Forces Monthly on the evolution of the J-11. One interesting snippet of information was, that the J-11 has a RCS that is one fourth the size of the original Su-27 and also weighs less. This was accomplished by using RAM and composites.

Future incarnations of the JF-17 could easily leverage this technology.

Thank you ANG. You've just verified what I've bee saying for a while now but soooo much opposition had to happen. The reality is, USAF tested Stealth shortly after WWII, they didn't need it at the time so they built only SR 71 as Spy planes and in 80's, they decided to build fighter / bombers that had Stealth capability.

The point was, making a plane semi-stealthy or reduce it RCS so its less detectable from distances is NOT a big deal, nor does it require to redesign the whole aircraft or design a brand new one.

India is buying jets left and right and JFT will form workhorse backbone of PAF. So if its stealthy or stealthier (if they already used some stuff in it), then the enemy aircraft will have a HARD TIME finding it or locking it from distance. THAT serves two CRITICAL purposes for PAF:
1) Force multiplier capability impacting enemies planning as they won't exactly know how many interceptors they'll deal with, and the fear that their own defense might get penetrated and when they realize it, it may be a bit too late
2) MOST importantly, the survivability of the aircraft in BVR scenarios. You can't shoot on an object that you can't see or can't identify as a hostile bogie. By the time you identify them, you've lost that long range detection aspect of it and it may be down to a WVR conflict at that point. OR, the 'stealthy' object locked on you and fired due to your size / rcs while you were trying too busy figuring out where that object was.

All the above benefits for a couple of million additional dollars (in my opinion), NOT BAD AT ALL!!!!

 

[Jango]

@ Oscar.....PAF isnt allowed to use F 16 outside pakistani territory...Thats the contract with americans?
so basically PAF has no strike fighter.

I don't think that would be a huge issue, considering that PAF is not necessarily offensive.

When a war breaks out, then these boundaries are finished, and US is not going to keep track of the jets, which went out and which not. A degree of freedom will be allowed and exercised.

BTW, does this contract really exist? Would be intriguing to know.

 

[farhan_9909]

I heard that the Pt-04 and the Pt-06 had 8% composite
as well as the mass produced one

which are to be increased.if increased even to 15%-20% would be great

 

[Dazzler]

you gave a hint and my bulb turned on.
Have a look at closer view .... Binogooo .... Its an IRST Pod similar to what PAC made for Mirage-3

Great job DZ

It is quite interesting that we came up with an advanced IRST on our own back in the 90s, it is also a hint at those who underestimate our capability as respectable avionics manufacturers because not many are able to make an IRST system on their own even today. The pod does look similar to an IRST from the front end, lets see what is revealed in the blk 2

 

[regular]

When are we getting those 50 JF-17 Block 2 Planes which we were supposed to get from China on emergency bases now where the hell are those planes ?

I guess we would start getting them from July 2012 or onwardz.......hopefully if everything goes alright.......

 

[Tempest II]

This might give credence to the theory that the pod we saw below is actually a camera. The FC-1 likely being used as a chase plane.

 

[HANI]

This might give credence to the theory that the pod we saw below is actually a camera. The FC-1 likely being used as a chase plane.

quite big for the sake of camera

 

[Luftwaffe]

orangzaib;

sir, you MK and i have the same thoughts, people are not willing to accept to chip-in a few million dollars to built up mixed fleet. We are stressing on low cost but we are neglecting & not looking at the repercussions of low cost what would it cost us tomorrow.
Long time ago i posted in response to someone's post that PAF was investing $500M on JF-17 and I argued had PAF invested a 200-300 million dollars more we would have come up with J-10A/F-16 class fighter and wouldn't have to wait for J-10. You know what response i got no need its low cost: comrades don't understand $200-300 million is not a big thing where billions of dollars are spent on national projects "on paper" and ghost towns have been built "on paper". See nothing is on time time is what we Pakistanis waste along with money and then we run out of time we've to run here and there to come up with plan B,C,D...Now imagine you had a F-16 Class JFT in design parameters along with those Stealthier featured applied you would have seen the look on the face of iaf, with the advantage that you would not have a long waiting time for the delivery for another aircraft that is waiting due to long testing and be certified for PAF for delivery. Coming back at your idea It is no big deal to spend $300M-400M more on 30-35% of JFT total inventory it is better we spend it on an already in house project rather than wait for FC-20 that WILL BE delivered in some Year no one has clue about.

 

[ziaulislam]

above image shows that its most likly an IRST.
JF-17 seemingly costs so low because its your own product with very cheap engine and cheap avionics some borrowed from j-10 and other ongoing projects.
in any BVR scenario both the Indian or Pakistani fighters have to come at least with 50-60 km to effectively even try to get a kill. as the BVR ranges of 100 km are at perfect altitude and conditions in actual the range is around 50 km. in such a case is it so important to have a radar that can detect any enemy aircraft at more than 150 km ahead for JFT, especially when most likly it will be used near its home with support of AWACS and ground base radars. is that the sole indicator of superiority that is used by memebers here. i guess not, ECM capabliites (additional can be/will be carried on external pod) will probably matter more.
to face MKI thunder will probably be in air superiority mode carnying 4 SD-10s and if the MKI is coming for strike mission, on average it will also be carrying same amount of ammunition.(for people who heavily quote the no. of BVrs as the absolute indicator for superiority)

in the end it seems that things we dont know about, i.e avionics and ECM capabilities will matter the most..if we can rate a gripen as top rated aircaft soley based upon avionics where will thunder be positioned?..coming years will shed more light once Chinese show their might in avionics by inducting modern fighters.