JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[Chak Bamu]

Typical target size for puls doppler radars is 5m² and that's also the size that the KJ 7 manufacturer states:

Sancho, you seem to be saying that there is some relation between Pulse Doppler radars and a target size of 5 sq. M. I can not quite understand what to make of it. As I recall every radar has a threshold value above which it would identify a target and track it. I can not believe that for KLJ series of radars that figure is 5 sq. M. That would mean the radar is a failure - that can not be right. Can you clarify?

 

[GreenFalcon]

Is the RD-93MA coming with block II?

I think they are going to use the WS-13

 

[sancho]

Sancho, you seem to be saying that there is some relation between Pulse Doppler radars and a target size of 5 sq. M. I can not quite understand what to make of it. As I recall every radar has a threshold value above which it would identify a target and track it. I can not believe that for KLJ series of radars that figure is 5 sq. M. That would mean the radar is a failure - that can not be right. Can you clarify?

Every radar tech has a usual standard target size, for older puls doppler tech that is 5m², for the newer PESA and AESA tech it's 3m². Now you can calculate that against higher or lower targets of course too, but the standard target size that will be evaluated with such radars remains the same and that sets the base for any other calculation. So IF the latest versions of the radar were improved to 130Km vs 5m² you can calculate it downwards to a 1-3m² target, just like upwards to a 10-15m² target, but 5m² remains the base.

 

[GreenFalcon]

• JF-17 Block II – Production began in 2013. Includes a refueling probe and improvements in radar and avionics.
• JF-17 Block III – The block III will feature more advanced avionics and engine. It will be a twin seat variant. Induction is expected to start around 2016.

 

[Ammyy]

• JF-17 Block II – Production began in 2013. Includes a refueling probe and improvements in radar and avionics.
• JF-17 Block III – The block III will feature more advanced avionics and engine. It will be a twin seat variant. Induction is expected to start around 2016.

Can you post pic for Block II

 

[GreenFalcon]

Can you post pic for Block II

Im sorry the pic is not available anywhere yet I think

 

[Informant]

The article is wrong, they are interested in Mig 29SMTs and Mi 35 combat helicopters, which some media reports simply mixed up to Mig 35s. However, loosing out against Mig 29SMT on that marked would be a blow for Pakistan and for JF 17.
\

And it's more political than one based on merits. The Egyptian Junta wants to strong arm the US into their demands by cozying up to the Ruskies.

And on the Radar tracking, i believe its 130km++ for 5 square meters. Also the tracking for 3 square meters is around 110km.

 

[sancho]

And it's more political than one based on merits. The Egyptian Junta wants to strong arm the US into their demands by cozying up to the Ruskies.

Possible, but still a blow since the talk was even for a co-production of JF 17, which had indicated a larger order.

 

[araz]

I worry about your smart phone that does not let you type well enough.

On the serious side, we Pakistanis have often worried about Russian engine issue. I remember very well the days leading up to acquisition of JF-17 in 2007, when Indians had made a lot of noise about Russians never allowing re-export of RD-93.

Some Chinese posters, such as renowned TPHuang on SDF was dead set against prospects of Chengdu Aircraft Corporation spending resources to install, test, and certify a new engine (such as WS-13) I remember locking horns with TP on this point.

So, we have had issues. The big thing would be if Russians support engine overhaul of RD-93 in Pakistan and also sell RD-93MA.

But in the future I definitely see up-rated WS-13 powering JF-17 and possibly J-31. I think WS-17 is WS-13 with TVC. Am I right in this?

Bhai.
I wont blame my smart phone for my stubby fingers. These keyboards are not designed for these fingers.
@ informant
I have given up the TT responsibilities about a year or so ago. However Webby refuses to let me go. I would be very glad if you relieved me of the burden.
Chak Bamu. I mostly agree with your post but frankly dont see the JFT with a TV engine. However I fully agree that for the russians and even the chinese to "tow the line" an alternative supply chain is highly desirable. Too much dependence on any one party is not good especially in a dynamic world with rapidly changing alignments what happens in the future can be difficult to predict

 

[Informant]

Possible, but still a blow since the talk was even for a co-production of JF 17, which had indicated a larger order.

Still a political gimmick since it would give them the capability of BVR with no strings attached. The Egyptians arent gonna leave the US it was just their way of strong arming the US. The fanboys do not understand the implications or the motives that easy

And could you please reply on the thread where i tagged you.

Peace.

Bhai.
I wont blame my smart phone for my stubby fingers. These keyboards are not designed for these fingers.
@ informant
I have given up the TT responsibilities about a year or so ago. However Webby refuses to let me go. I would be very glad if you relieved me of the burden.
Chak Bamu. I mostly agree with your post but frankly dont see the JFT with a TV engine. However I fully agree that for the russians and even the chinese to "tow the line" an alternative supply chain is highly desirable. Too much dependence on any one party is not good especially in a dynamic world with rapidly changing alignments what happens in the future can be difficult to predict

Nah man I'd be the last person to consider for a TT

I pretty much post off topic, and on topic if im in the mood. PRetty much the opposite of a normal member.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Sancho, you seem to be saying that there is some relation between Pulse Doppler radars and a target size of 5 sq. M. I can not quite understand what to make of it. As I recall every radar has a threshold value above which it would identify a target and track it. I can not believe that for KLJ series of radars that figure is 5 sq. M. That would mean the radar is a failure - that can not be right. Can you clarify?

You are right about the threshold but ignoring one of the input factors. The amount of return a you get from a particular target (could be due to size or shaping), a target at a given range will give you a return of 5m^2. A slightly smaller/stealthier 3m^2 target will register as a valid target but only at a shorter range. So there are 2 factors, including range.

So no, you cannot interpret that as 5m^2 as some sort of minimum. Even a target sized 0.01m^2 can be detected, but only at a very short range.

So if the current KLJ-7 detects a 5m^2 target at 105km in look-up. A larger target it will detect above 105km and a smaller target eg 3m^2 below 105km.

edit: The quoted 130km detection range is for 5m^2 not 3m^2.

 

[Chak Bamu]

You are right about the threshold but ignoring one of the input factors. The amount of return a you get from a particular target (could be due to size or shaping), a target at a given range will give you a return of 5m^2. A slightly smaller/stealthier 3m^2 target will register as a valid target but only at a shorter range. So there are 2 factors, including range.

So no, you cannot interpret that as 5m^2 as some sort of minimum. Even a target sized 0.01m^2 can be detected, but only at a very short range.

So if the current KLJ-7 detects a 5m^2 target at 105km in look-up. A larger target it will detect above 105km and a smaller target eg 3m^2 below 105km.

edit: The quoted 130km detection range is for 5m^2 not 3m^2.

I understand this. I was merely querying to know exactly what @sancho had meant. But thanks for the clarification anyway.

Bhai.
I wont blame my smart phone for my stubby fingers. These keyboards are not designed for these fingers.
@ informant
I have given up the TT responsibilities about a year or so ago. However Webby refuses to let me go. I would be very glad if you relieved me of the burden.
Chak Bamu. I mostly agree with your post but frankly dont see the JFT with a TV engine. However I fully agree that for the russians and even the chinese to "tow the line" an alternative supply chain is highly desirable. Too much dependence on any one party is not good especially in a dynamic world with rapidly changing alignments what happens in the future can be difficult to predict

Araz, I had not meant to indicate that a TVC engine is planned or even desirable. What I do strongly suspect is that J-31 would likely have a 10,000 + KgF class engine with Thrust Vectoring. That is supposed to be WS-17, it seems like. But it is still pretty much a conjecture at this stage. Engine commonality between JF-17 and J-31 is supposed to be the crucial link between these two that would make them mutually complementary and cut cost, maintenance, and possibly engine inventory level, etc... So, all I am saying is that engine issue is a bit up in the air at the moment. Let us see what happens.

 

[K!ngmad]

does we have mark 4 ?????????

 

[My-Analogous]

does we have mark 4 ?????????

You mean block 4. Actually its depend on Pakistan and if they continue research and upgrade after 2016 then yes or otherwise no

 

[Donatello]

Every radar tech has a usual standard target size, for older puls doppler tech that is 5m², for the newer PESA and AESA tech it's 3m². Now you can calculate that against higher or lower targets of course too, but the standard target size that will be evaluated with such radars remains the same and that sets the base for any other calculation. So IF the latest versions of the radar were improved to 130Km vs 5m² you can calculate it downwards to a 1-3m² target, just like upwards to a 10-15m² target, but 5m² remains the base.

There is no standarization as such that what RCS would the RADAR design look into. Depends on how ambitious your program is. You can create a figure of 0.001 square meters, or for 20 square meters. However, since most light-medium fighters are in 3-6 square meters RCS, these are generally quoted.

In any case, you won't know the exact specs of any radar. JF-17's KLJ7 is quoted with 3m2 and 5m2 in various sources. So it is difficult to know exactly what it is.