JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[satishkumarcsc]

Pakistan is a small country with a defensive doctrine.
What munir said is correct.

We are not going to write a physics tutorial for you now.

SO what? Having a higher speed means you have more energy to bleed in a turn. It is basic ACM. So I think higher speed is necessary.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

Speed and energy dictates air combat.

Going by this logic, Argentina Mirage should have outclassed Harriers in falkland war.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Going by this logic, Argentina Mirage should have outclassed Harriers in falkland war.

They did....but the Harriers never fought the Mirage's fight. The Mirages were designed as an high altitude interceptor but the Harriers never went to higher altitude. The Mirage pilots later understood not to get into turning fights with Harriers...Sometimes even when the Argentine pilots saw the harriers below them they would never dive down to engage and the Harriers wouldnt come to higher altitude to engage the Mirage.

 

[Munir]

That is nice to say but you have not added the real situation. The harriers send to the Maldivas (and I say that because they belong to Argentina cause otherwise India should own Ireland) had a major BVR and radar upgrade. The Argentinians had outdated and hardly 2nd gen airplanes like A4 and Mirages... The Mirages can do major destructive air to air fighting. LCA is one example. If it has speed, altitude and weapons then you better stay out of the range, even in a F16.

About Mirages being high altitude... It was an island warfare. The UK had enough naval assets and radars to intercept them at high altitude. So most attacks were very low altitude... They needed to go down to shoot targets. And those were not harriers. The mirages were not doing CAP.

If the French were not providing source codes and data to the UK about Exocet and if the Argentinians had more then a few then it would have been a different war. This war showed that the French screwed the Argentinians. No wonder almost no one (except maybe Brasil) is buying from them now...

 

[fatman17]

FC-1/JF-17 Thunder Dragon/Thunder

First revealed in 1995 as the successor of the cancelled Sino-US Super-7 project, FC-1 (Fighter China-1, max TO weight 12,700kg, max speed M 1.8, service ceiling 16,920m, max weapon load 3,900kg, ferry range 3,480km, combat radius 1,352km, max g load +8.5) is being developed by CAC/611 Institute (with some technical assistance from Russian Mikoyan OKB) as a "medium tech", light weight fighter/ground attack aircraft carrying a relatively cheap price tag (~$20m). As a fighter designed for export, its main customer is expected to be Pakistan who also shares 50% of the total cost (around $150m). It may also compete with second-hand F-16s to seize the market created by the retirement of Mig-21s, Mirage III and F-5s. Currently powered by a Russian RD-93 turbofan (upgraded RD-33, rated 8,795kg with a/b), it may also be powered by a locally produced WS-13 Taishan once the engine is ready. The A-6 style "V" shaped air-intakes are believed to provide smooth air flow to the engine at high AoA. The fire control radar is thought to be a Chinese KLJ-7 X-band multi-functional PD radar (track 10 and engage 2 simultaneously, look-up range 75km, look-down range 45km for RCS=3m2). A European high performance radar (e.g. Italian Vixen 1000ES AESA) has been planned in later batches. Other electronics include an NVG compatible glass cockpit (EFIS) with three 8"x6" color MFDs, HOTAS, AIFF, 1553B data bus and INS/GPS. Weapon load includes both short (PL-5EII/PL-9C/AIM-9M) and medium-range AAMs (SD-10A). LGBs (LT-2/LT-3/GBU-16), GPS/INS guided bombs (LS-6), anti-radiation missiles (Brazilian MAR-1 or Chinese LD-10) and IRST/laser designation pod (WMD-7) can also be carried for ground attack missions. Up to 2 C-802AK AShMs can be carried for anti-ship missions. For high value fixed targets, the new CM-400AKG standoff supersonic ASM can be carried. For self-protection purpose a KG300G ECM pod can be carried. The development schedule of FC-1 was repeatedly delayed caused by various problems, such as lack of funding, the reluctance of western countries to supply advanced avionics, as well as the revised specifications set by PAF to counter the threat from India's LCAs. These specifications included a true BVR attack capability with active radar guided medium-range AAMs (SD-10). However, FC-1's prospect in the domestic market was not very promising, as PLAAF had largely committed to the more advanced J-10 as its new generation fighter along with J-11 and was reluctant to take a large number of FC-1s due to its less advanced design and a Russian engine. After lengthy negotiations, Pakistani government finally signed the contract with CATIC and CAC/611 in 1999 and gave the "go ahead" order to the much delayed project. The development was further accelerated after PAF recommitted the project and confirmed FC-1's technical specifications in detail in February 2001. A full-scale mock-up was quickly constructed. A total of 6 prototypes (01-06) would have been built at CAC. The 01 prototype rolled down the assembly line on May 31, 2003 with two small wing fences. Its maiden flight took place on August 25, 2003. The 03 prototype first flew on April 9, 2004 without the two small wing fences. The 04 prototype was expected to fly by the end of 2005 with full suite of avionics but this was delayed until April 2006 due to several structural modifications. They include new diverterless supersonic inlets (DSI/Bump) similar to those of American F-35 to reduce weight and achieve better performance. A large rectangular-shaped fairing is installed on top of the vertical tailfin which may house ECM equipment. Its flight control includes a Type 634 quadruplex digital FBW in pitch axis and a duplex analog FBW in roll axis. A UV band MAWS has been installed at the root of the vertical tailfin to provide rear hemisphere coverage. Two enlarged F/A-18 style LERX are thought to offer higher AOA as well. The first flight of 04 prototype took place on April 28, 2006, and 06 prototype on September 10, 2006. The first two preproduction JF-17s (Joint Fighter-17, 00 batch/07-101 & 102) were delivered to Pakistan on March 2, 2007, with the nose-tip pitot tube removed. The 01 batch of 6 JF-17s (08-103 -- 08-108) were delivered between March and April 2008. The contract for PAF to acquire 42 JF-17s (mostly assembled by PAC) was singed on March 7, 2009. The first two (09-109 & 110) have been built by CAC. The first JF-17 (09-111) in the batch of 4 assembled by PAC rolled out on November 23, 2009. It was reported in May 2011 that PAF plans to acquire another 50 JF-17s on an "expedited" basis as the production continues. Besides Pakistan, several Asian and African countries also expressed interest in FC-1, including Egypt, Bangladesh, Iran, Sri Lanka and Azerbaijan. FC-1 passed design appraisal in December 2009. The first taxi test of FC-1 powered by an indigenous WS-13 took place on March 18, 2010. A further improved version (JF-17A/JF-17 Block 2?) featuring an AESA radar, IRST and IFR probe has been proposed and is likely to be under development as well. The latest news (December 2012) suggested that Sri Lanka plans to acquire 6 JF-17s starting in 2013.

- Last Updated 5/15/13

 

[SQ8]

Yes I know that but still IMHO Speed is life in air combat....more like acceleration right now and more speed you have more you can bleed in a knife-fight.



That post was for Munir who told Pakistan was a small country so speed in not a mandate.

There is a difference between top speed and acceleration.
Top speed may not be on the top priority for Pakistan as most of its bases are within 7-15 minutes of flying time from the border.
Since a quite a few of the missions that are to be conducted by its primary threat are going to be at low level the need for getting to height is also not of the priority.
There is a nice video and explanation I gave on the way the JF-17 bleeds energy vs the F-16.. you may have to look it up here since I get too many posts added for me due to moderation duties.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

There is a difference between top speed and acceleration.
Top speed may not be on the top priority for Pakistan as most of its bases are within 7-15 minutes of flying time from the border.
Since a quite a few of the missions that are to be conducted by its primary threat are going to be at low level the need for getting to height is also not of the priority.
There is a nice video and explanation I gave on the way the JF-17 bleeds energy vs the F-16.. you may have to look it up here since I get too many posts added for me due to moderation duties.

turn was done and at what speed

I dont trust those videos as they never tell at what altitude the turn was done and at what speed it was done....the fuel load inside the aircraft what was the AoA of the turn. Having more speed than the enemy is the top priority of most of the aircrafts till date...that is why the top speed of the aircraft is mostly kept secret.

You can look up to the top speed of F 22, PAK-FA and the J 20...you cant find any accurate data on the top speed of these aircrafts for a long time that is how much important the top speed of fighter aircrafts.

Above all I think the major mission of the JF-17 is going to be interception of strike packages and it might be facing high end aircrafts...like the Flankers and Eagles...once caught in a turning or climbing fight you will need energy as the big boys coming in will have a lot of fuel to expend.

 

[SQ8]

turn was done and at what speed

I dont trust those videos as they never tell at what altitude the turn was done and at what speed it was done....the fuel load inside the aircraft what was the AoA of the turn. Having more speed than the enemy is the top priority of most of the aircrafts till date...that is why the top speed of the aircraft is mostly kept secret.

You can look up to the top speed of F 22, PAK-FA and the J 20...you cant find any accurate data on the top speed of these aircrafts for a long time that is how much important the top speed of fighter aircrafts.

Above all I think the major mission of the JF-17 is going to be interception of strike packages and it might be facing high end aircrafts...like the Flankers and Eagles...once caught in a turning or climbing fight you will need energy as the big boys coming in will have a lot of fuel to expend.

I choose the videos specifically to get the closest measure.
However, if it is a turning fight you refer to.. rest assured.. there are those in the PAF that swear by the JF-17's turning.
Moreover, none of these future fights will last beyond a minute as the newer generation of WVR HOBS heaters and their impressive accuracy makes it pointless. its no longer a knife fight or pistol fight.. every guy here is equipped with a machine gun in their WVR weapons and most will get hit.
Slash and dash tactics are what is important..

Now the shots are not made in the rear aspect but where the pilot can point his head..
In a merge the missiles will not be fired in the rear quarter but anywhere where you can behind the aircrafts 5/8th rear hemisphere..no matter where you are pointing your nose.

There will be turning and burning.. but that amount that is required to get your target into the No-escape zone of a missle can be accomplished easily by the fighters currently in the PAF arsenal.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

I choose the videos specifically to get the closest measure.
However, if it is a turning fight you refer to.. rest assured.. there are those in the PAF that swear by the JF-17's turning.
Moreover, none of these future fights will last beyond a minute as the newer generation of WVR HOBS heaters and their impressive accuracy makes it pointless. its no longer a knife fight or pistol fight.. every guy here is equipped with a machine gun in their WVR weapons and most will get hit.
Slash and dash tactics are what is important..

Now the shots are not made in the rear aspect but where the pilot can point his head..
In a merge the missiles will not be fired in the rear quarter but anywhere where you can behind the aircrafts 5/8th rear hemisphere..no matter where you are pointing your nose.

There will be turning and burning.. but that amount that is required to get your target into the No-escape zone of a missle can be accomplished easily by the fighters currently in the PAF arsenal.

The opponent also has counter measures like chaff and flares ECM and ECCM. These can easily fool the missile Then where does all this advantage go?

 

[SQ8]

The opponent also has counter measures like chaff and flares ECM and ECCM. These can easily fool the missile Then where does all this advantage go?

Chaff and ECCM are for Radar weapons.You are referring to a turning fight.
Newer weapons are moving to seekers that are able to "see" the aircraft and easily differentiate between flares and other heat sources.
Like I said, turning performance is NOT dead.. but many of the options previously available in turning fights have been negated due to the HOBS heaters.. as I repeated earlier.. it no longer a knife fight.. but one with a shotgun.

 

[Dazzler]

SO what? Having a higher speed means you have more energy to bleed in a turn. It is basic ACM. So I think higher speed is necessary.

Sadly, F-35 designers missed the trick

 

[Munir]

The opponent also has counter measures like chaff and flares ECM and ECCM. These can easily fool the missile Then where does all this advantage go?

Easily fool... You right.

 

[aziqbal]

Does anyone have all the serial numbers for the JF-17? So we can see how many were built in each year and when

 

[Munir]

Let us go back to the subject...

I am not drawing any conclusion of the picture of the PAC website with a little different CAD design and the future plans but since it is there we can indeed analyze it... Let us assume that it is the next block with the lower RCS, redesigned frontal section (cause no way one can make something fast and better out of the rest of the plane without doing serious retesting) and maybe some more things I see...

This was the first flying prototype

V shaped frontal section, no DSI, No LERX

Here we have the normal JF17 as we see it flying right now...

Round frontal section, DSI, LERX

And now we come to the CAD design

The DSI is still there, the typical stealthy frontal section with the AESA kind of nosecone and.... I have seen the JF17 many times but I did not expect it to be added in this version already. If you look at the LERX you will notice the same changes as Gripen NG... It has been thickened and not only from top but also underside... So either this will be extra fuel of repositioning of gear and extra fuel...

Let me show you Gripen NG LERX...

On the other hand... It does remind me of a few PS earlier...

 

[Cool_Soldier]

See here some JF 17 Pictures: JF17 Thunder