What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

10th Paragraph:
"This is a 2 to 2 air combat confrontation, he and his comrades opposed two Pakistani "Fierce Dragon." However, just before taking off his comrades aircraft appeared a small situation."

"Fierce Dragon" is what Chinese call JF-17 / FC-1.

But what exactly do you want to know?
I want to know where it says J-11 has beaten JF-17 as said by IHK_PK
 
.
AWACS ZDK were not involved here as i understood. It was an aggressor scenario to see whether FC1 can escape from a highly vulnerable position in a 1-1 not 1-2 scenario. Someone from a fighter pilot background may better comment. @Knuckles @Oscar & others.

On September 7, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) began their bilateral air exercise – Shaheen VI – China. The annually-held exercise, which will conclude on September 27, involves as many as 19 PAF fighter and support aircrafts.

The PAF appears to be participating with the JF-17 Thunder, which is jointly produced by Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group (CAIG) and Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC), CAIG F-7P and the Karakoram Eagle ZDK03-based AEW&C.
 
. . . . .
Still if it is true a single engagement cant point to jf17 being poor in performance. Funny that people still think here that Different role fighters and class cant compete. They can and They shud.
 
. .
J11 had Aesa radar jf 17 didnt.....once jf17 have Aesa things will change...
First of all, In a WV engagement radar doesn't matter.
Second, only the pilots and combat commanders know the results and no one else.
Whatever you hear is just hearsayand is based on speculations and definitely has no merit to it.
 
.
Getting a Radar lock during exercise count as a "kill", when certain criteria matches the rules set by exercise umpires.
In real air to air combat, the "kill" will count when the plane would be out of the sky and into the ashes.
There is a huge gap in between getting a lock and scoring a kill
 
.
I posted a link to SDF Flanker Thread discussion where was discussed at length on that thread. The mods took off the link and truncated my post. So, you can do your own fishing at SDF. But apparently this did happen, and naysayers are not doing themselves any favors by denying this. However, this is a one-off and can not be said to be an accurate reflection of the relative merits of Flankers and Thunders. Remember JF-17 was designed to survive a confrontation with a flanker (SU-30 MKI particularly). Nobody should assume that JF-17 is superior to SU-30. It depends on individual situations and result would most likely be determined by the relative strengths and whether or not particular situations favor JF-17 or SU-30. That said, there are many other factors such as force multipliers, Air defense assets, terrain, etc...
 
.
I posted a link to SDF Flanker Thread discussion where was discussed at length on that thread. The mods took off the link and truncated my post. So, you can do your own fishing at SDF. But apparently this did happen, and naysayers are not doing themselves any favors by denying this. However, this is a one-off and can not be said to be an accurate reflection of the relative merits of Flankers and Thunders. Remember JF-17 was designed to survive a confrontation with a flanker (SU-30 MKI particularly). Nobody should assume that JF-17 is superior to SU-30. It depends on individual situations and result would most likely be determined by the relative strengths and whether or not particular situations favor JF-17 or SU-30. That said, there are many other factors such as force multipliers, Air defense assets, terrain, etc...

You still saying this on hearsay. No confirmation from Chinese or Pakistan Air force. Assuming you are right then that's good at least we will be learning how to come adversaries in different situations. JF-17 is a pane not God's chariot which cannot be beaten.
 
.
You still saying this on hearsay. No confirmation from Chinese or Pakistan Air force. Assuming you are right then that's good at least we will be learning how to come adversaries in different situations. JF-17 is a pane not God's chariot which cannot be beaten.

Good luck with trying to find official confirmations. Let me know when you do.

Nice to know that you are trying to think of JF-17 as something other than a chariot, etc...
 
.
Shopping for Fighters: Is the Chinese/Indian JF-17 Thunder the Real “Joint Strike Fighter”?

Pakistan_Air_Force_Chengdu_JF-17_Gu.jpg


Cheap, Easy, Available: Asia’s JF-17 Thunder Contrasts U.S. and Russian Tactical Aircraft.
Develop it faster, build it cheaper and make it more available. From electronics to automobiles, the Asian doctrine of the 20th century. With the rush toward globalization and the blurring of borders in the internet age, manufactured products in every category move across borders and subvert political boundaries with impunity.

Tactical combat aircraft may be the next category.

Traditionally, high level defense and aerospace programs have been slow to move toward global distribution largely because of regional security concerns, partially because of technology concerns, and definitely because of economic concerns. But those concerns may be taking a back seat to the new priorities of updating old air forces as new political boundaries and alliances are drawn, and old ones are erased.

Enter the Chinese and Indian co-manufactured PAC JF-17 Thunder tactical aircraft, also referred to as the CAC FC-1 Xiaolong or “Fierce Dragon”. The JF-17 is a lightweight, single-engine, multi-role combat aircraft developed from a joint venture between the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) and the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) of China.

In the ethos of eastern imports competing with western aircraft like the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter program, the JF-17 Thunder can be hawked as “better, cheaper, faster” to many end users who could not afford to participate in the U.S. Joint Strike Fighter program for political or financial reasons or both. While the “better” and “faster” are certainly doubtful, the “cheaper” is set in stone. For many countries, that is the single most important acquisition metric; affordability.

Global political change has mandated the need for new mass-market, non-western import/export multi-role tactical aircraft. When the former Soviet Warsaw Pact defense industry collapsed along with the Iron Curtain at the end of the Cold War it left huge inventories of largely Russian-built tactical aircraft in service with third world air forces.

The Russian-built MiGs and Sukhois in African and Arab service were sturdy, easy to maintain and designed to operate in austere conditions. They were perfect for air forces in developing nations. When countries engaged in a greater or lesser degree of political alignment with the former Soviet Union, the price of the Russian-built tactical aircraft went down, sometimes to zero in lend-lease or other political machinations.

But those old Eastern Bloc, Cold War Russian planes supplied to banana republic countries and oil nations with shifting global agendas are wearing out, and many of the lines that separated the countries who use them have been erased and redrawn in the Arab Spring and the new Africa. These changes have created a market for a new, affordable, regionally capable fighter plane. The Chinese and Pakistani JF-17 may fill that need.


The JF-17 many fill a low-cost, more available niche for many nations (Photo: PAC/CAC)

The generic looking, “no-brand” JF-17 is what most people would sketch on a napkin to show what jet fighters look like. It is quite unremarkable by 5th generation combat aircraft standards. If U.S. wholesale retailers Costco or Sam’s Club sold fighter planes, they would sell the JF-17. The JF-17 probably may have more in common with the 1950’s F-100 Super Saber than the current F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

In numbers, a JF-17 Thunder costs (approximately) between $25 million USD-$32 million USD, depending on the tranche and avionics version. Contrast that with the $94 million to $134 million USD price tag of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. If you are a sales agent for the Chinese/Pakistan consortium building the JF-17 one of the first lines in your pitch at the Paris or Dubai Air Show will be, “For the price of one F-35 you can fly almost four JF-17s!” Then you open your slick PowerPoint (in one of 6 languages) and back up your sales pitch with shorter training cycles for air crew, lower maintenance cost, easier and faster acquisition, and on and on.


New upgrade proposals and capability expansion for the JF-17 program make a versatile and affordable option. (Photo: PAC/CAC)

If you are selling the JF-17 Thunder it is unlikely you will be courting the same prospective market as F-35 program participants. And you will certainly do well to also stay away from comparisons about capability, because comparing an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in any version to the JF-17 Thunder is like comparing a Bomar Brain pocket calculator from the 1970’s to a new MacBook Pro computer. They are completely different products.

But the JF-17 is still a capable aircraft that is well-engineered for a burgeoning market of basic tactical aircraft consumer nations. To date, operators include Myanmar, Nigeria and Pakistan. Countries that have indicated, at some point, an interest in the project include Argentina, Algeria, Bangladesh, Egypt, Qatar, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka and Uruguay.

Given the dynamic nature of global politics and fluid changes in alliances the JF-17 fills a niche for many countries. That alone is reason to be familiar with it.
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom