JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[nomi007]

may be not posted before

 

[mughaljee]

Brother nomi007,

Is this already discussed in PDF or new one ? >2 Missile Approach Warning Receivers (MAWRs) are installed on the tail section of the Pakistani JF-17 Thunder aircraft. These sensors detect an approaching Surface to Air Missile (SAM) or Air to Air Missile (AAM) and alerts the Pilot in advance to take evasive action to protect the aircraft.

 

[aliaselin]

may be not posted before

I just translated nomi using Google translation and find something interesting. Are you Xyl?

 

[Bratva]

may be not posted before

Posted before. Pic publish in tribune last year

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

 

[gambit]

Sir the Most latest source for KLJ-7 confirms that it can detect a 3m2 target at 130km.

Can you calculate us at what range it would detect a 5m2 rcs target?

What it really mean is that a target BECAME 3 m2 at 130 km distance from the seeking radar.

At one point, a body was 1 m2 at -- say 200 km for a rounded figure. Could any radar system discriminate this body from background ? Most systems would answer: No.

Then as the seeking radar and this body approaches each other, at 130 km, the body was perceived to be 3 m2, and the system flagged it as a 'target', meaning this level of intensity was enough for the system to discriminate against background.

Let me put it another way...This radar system was designed to call 'target' only when a body is perceived to be 3 m2 within a certain frequency band, generally the X band. The distance is not important because a B-52 will be 3 m2 at greater than 130 km while an F-22 will be 3 m2 at 10 km.

Can a system declare 'target' at 2 m2 regardless of distance ? Yes, depending on sophistication of hardware and software.

Except for the sphere, no body, no matter how complex, have a fixed RCS value. So the phrasing: '...can detect a 3m2 target at 130km.' is technically incorrect.

I know how frustrating it can be for interested laymen who seeks definitive answers. I have seen the frustration about the RCS subject in my trainees many many years ago when I was in aviation. But once you understand that the RCS figure is a variable, or BECOME a certain figure, based upon distance, you will see that most of these publicly available figures, and the way they are phrased, are suspect.

 

[Bilal.]

@gambit, so what I gather is that KLJ-7 would be able to pick a target once it becomes 3 m2 even say at 200km or any other arbitrary range?

 

[Bilal.]

During his presentation JF-17 Chief designer discussed the future upgrades showing IFR, etc. I was not able to ID the component in the attached screenshot. Can someone identify what this is?

My hunch is towards IRST.

The chief designer of JF17 J10B J10AS J20.YANGWEI introduce the PAK-china JF17 project at dubai - YouTube


@Manticore @Munir @Oscar @Dazzler @Aeronaut @Informant

 

[Munir]

What it really mean is that a target BECAME 3 m2 at 130 km distance from the seeking radar.

At one point, a body was 1 m2 at -- say 200 km for a rounded figure. Could any radar system discriminate this body from background ? Most systems would answer: No.

Then as the seeking radar and this body approaches each other, at 130 km, the body was perceived to be 3 m2, and the system flagged it as a 'target', meaning this level of intensity was enough for the system to discriminate against background.

Let me put it another way...This radar system was designed to call 'target' only when a body is perceived to be 3 m2 within a certain frequency band, generally the X band. The distance is not important because a B-52 will be 3 m2 at greater than 130 km while an F-22 will be 3 m2 at 10 km.

Can a system declare 'target' at 2 m2 regardless of distance ? Yes, depending on sophistication of hardware and software.

Except for the sphere, no body, no matter how complex, have a fixed RCS value. So the phrasing: '...can detect a 3m2 target at 130km.' is technically incorrect.

I know how frustrating it can be for interested laymen who seeks definitive answers. I have seen the frustration about the RCS subject in my trainees many many years ago when I was in aviation. But once you understand that the RCS figure is a variable, or BECOME a certain figure, based upon distance, you will see that most of these publicly available figures, and the way they are phrased, are suspect.

Have been following classes about that. Noise ratio... Fooling radars... I did know something but it is very very interesting these days. As Gambit says. Like our brain sometimes fools up by using predictions etc... Radars are no different. They are used to work with predictions otherwise it would be tooooo much to do.

View attachment 31152

During his presentation JF-17 Chief designer discussed the future upgrades showing IFR, etc. I was not able to ID the component in the attached screenshot. Can someone identify what this is?

My hunch is towards IRST.

The chief designer of JF17 J10B J10AS J20.YANGWEI introduce the PAK-china JF17 project at dubai - YouTube


@Manticore @Munir @Oscar @Dazzler @Aeronaut @Informant

IRST.

 

[acetophenol]

@gambit and others: Is a dual seat Jf-17(trainer) on cards?

 

[Donatello]

@gambit and others: Is a dual seat Jf-17(trainer) on cards?

No, because there is no need. If a specific customer wants it, they can foot the bill.

 

[Bilal.]

@gambit and others: Is a dual seat Jf-17(trainer) on cards?

Yes. But PAF may not induction it. It's more for export customers.

Paris Air Show 2013: Two-seat JF-17 model

 

[Munir]

The plane is very small so a dual would hardly be effective like F116D... And since it (plug and play)/(strap in and fly) there is no need to do hundreds of hours besides some intro in a very good simulator...

 

[Donatello]

Yes.
Paris Air Show 2013: Two-seat JF-17 model

This is just a concept. It can be made, by increasing the length of the fuselage, but no immediate plans, since the usual aim of dual seaters is for training of the crew, which in this case is sufficed using the simulators.

 

[Bilal.]

This is just a concept. It can be made, by increasing the length of the fuselage, but no immediate plans, since the usual aim of dual seaters is for training of the crew, which in this case is sufficed using the simulators.

I read it may be developed due to export customer demands. PAF is not opting for it for the reasons you stated.