JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[Maxpane]

I saw a pic of jf 17 which states that jf operated in plaaf

 

[devil thunder 302]

I saw a pic of jf 17 which states that jf operated in plaaf

View attachment 455043

yes i saw it too earlier today and it might be the jf17b one out of those three being produced two for paf and one for plaaf for training and research purposes

 

[Bratva]

The CM-400 launch pics have caused some serious constipation in the neighbourhood. Expect the slums of Delhi and Mumbai to overflow soon.

Just so, not everyone gets their hopes up. CM-400 AKG is still not in PAF inventory and as per Project Director JF-17 interview in 2016 CM-400 AKG is not a requirement of PAF and not in their inventory. This test pic either from 2016 when they were testing CM-400 AKG with

or it is from 2014 when 10-115 and PT-04 was in china for Block-2 weapon integration testing

 

[khanasifm]

 

[DJ_Viper]

It is being fired from the jf-17, notice the long slanted front under fuselage mounted comm antenna coupled with few small ones..

for reference..

Wasn't the blue color for training rounds? Why the blue missiles on a combat patrol as this is over the Himalayas, right by your neighbor?

 

[The-Hack]

I saw a pic of jf 17 which states that jf operated in plaaf

View attachment 455043

I think this is the training aircraft JF-17B ........... whose tests are undergone in China from September 2017

 

[fatman17]

CM-400AKG

This supersonic standoff missile was first on display at the 2012 Zhuhai Airshow as part of FC-1/JF-17's "complete" weapon package. Unlike most modern ASMs flying at the low altitude, the missile flies a rare high ballistic trajectory, powered by a solid rocket motor. It appears that CM-400AKGmay have evolved from the earlier SY-400 SRBM. Therefore the effectiveness of such attack profile is still unknown. Some specifications: weight 900kg, max range 240km, max speed Mach 5.5 (at diving stage?). It has INS during the mid-course and utilizes active/passive radar/IIR seeker with target-recognition capabilities at the terminal stage, which may improve its accuracy. CM-400AKG is speculated to have been designed to attack fixed or "slow moving", high value ground targets. Up to two CM-400AKGs can be carried by an FC-1/JF-17. A small yellow dorsal antenna was installed probably to provide the datalink between the missile and the aircraft. It has yet to see if CM-400AGK will enter the service with PAF. A recent image (July 2016) suggested that the program was still making progress with JF-17 seen undergoing weapon integration tests, possibly to meet the requirement of a new customer.
- Last Updated 2/19/18

 

[The-Hack]

CM-400AKG
View attachment 455130


This supersonic standoff missile was first on display at the 2012 Zhuhai Airshow as part of FC-1/JF-17's "complete" weapon package. Unlike most modern ASMs flying at the low altitude, the missile flies a rare high ballistic trajectory, powered by a solid rocket motor. It appears that CM-400AKGmay have evolved from the earlier SY-400 SRBM. Therefore the effectiveness of such attack profile is still unknown. Some specifications: weight 900kg, max range 240km, max speed Mach 5.5 (at diving stage?). It has INS during the mid-course and utilizes active/passive radar/IIR seeker with target-recognition capabilities at the terminal stage, which may improve its accuracy. CM-400AKG is speculated to have been designed to attack fixed or "slow moving", high value ground targets. Up to two CM-400AKGs can be carried by an FC-1/JF-17. A small yellow dorsal antenna was installed probably to provide the datalink between the missile and the aircraft. It has yet to see if CM-400AGK will enter the service with PAF. A recent image (July 2016) suggested that the program was still making progress with JF-17 seen undergoing weapon integration tests, possibly to meet the requirement of a new customer.
- Last Updated 2/19/18

"Supersonic"???

But i read yesterday about the specifications of this missile that when this missile is diving towards his target, his speed makes him a hyper-sonic missile........... am i right???

 

[Dazzler]

Wasn't the blue color for training rounds? Why the blue missiles on a combat patrol as this is over the Himalayas, right by your neighbor?

The Pic was meant to compare antennas on fuselage, not the training missile.

 

[Deino]

w

nope thats never been posted and plaaf !!! interesting

No, it's surely not PLAAF. It's only the markings the twin-seater has ... nothing more.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Any chance they might look at 2~3 squadrons of off-the-shelf FC-31 as a stopgap for Azm? It could make for a good option for replacing the Mirage III/5 in the strike and maritime roles.

Would it be wise for Pak to go for 2 to 3 squadrons of a fighter jet that may not be acquired in numbers by PLAAF/PLAN or other countries?

If an original design done with support from Chengdu, then Chengdu might look to market the design to the PLAAF and PLAN as well. I'd say twin engine is plausible, but with emphasis on different design concepts, such as omitting the horizontal stabilizer (an area Chengdu has evident experience in via the J-10 and J-20). Interestingly, the PAF even referenced the Airbus FCAS.View attachment 454737

It could be a single engine design by Chengdu that would be pitched as a replacement for J10s for PLAAF and would work out per the needs of PAF(going for single engine design) as well. By the time Azm may be ready for mass production(10-15years), at least the older J10 blocks will be nearing the end of their service. So this way the Azm fighter can be produced in numbers and finally PAF and PLAAF may be able to achieve what they both missed earlier(the much debated J10/JF17 saga).

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Would it be wise for Pak to go for 2 to 3 squadrons of a fighter jet that may not be acquired in numbers by PLAAF/PLAN or other countries?

That's the main issue I think, but the paucity of other options is also a problem. Between now and Project Azm, what else is there if you need a fighter that's capable of maritime operations, deep-strike and other offensive operations? If China is willing to write-down/expense some of the R&D overhead and sell the FC-31 closer to the direct cost of manufacturing, then I think it can be an option, even with lack of PLAAF/PLAN orders.

It could be a single engine design by Chengdu that would be pitched as a replacement for J10s for PLAAF and would work out per the needs of PAF(going for single engine design) as well. By the time Azm may be ready for mass production(10-15years), at least the older J10 blocks will be nearing the end of their service. So this way the Azm fighter can be produced in numbers and finally PAF and PLAAF may be able to achieve what they both missed earlier(the much debated J10/JF17 saga).

Potentially, but the PAF has no 'preference' for single engine in as much single engine being the result of wanting to lower cost. However, if a high-performance system with two engines can be had for a reasonable price, then they can proceed with it.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Potentially, but the PAF has no 'preference' for single engine in as much single engine being the result of wanting to lower cost. However, if a high-performance system with two engines can be had for a reasonable price, then they can proceed with it.

No doubt PAF wouldn't hesitate to acquire a twin engine jet if it could be had for a reasonable price but my guess is that Azm is a long term solution/replacement for the current mainstay of PAF(aka JF17). By the time Azm materializes JF17(specially the older blocks) would have become quite old. This leads me to think that PAF would be acquiring it in numbers replacing JF17s(also keeping the size of IAF in mind). If it's to be acquired in numbers(possibly in hundreds to replace JF17s as the mainstay of PAF) then of course the cheaper cost of acquiring/operating single engine jets stands out in comparison to a twin engine jet. Even if the difference in cost somehow turns out to be rather small...at that quantity and over the life span of the jets, the difference in the total overall cost will still be significant enough to consider.

As for maritime role and specially for deep strikes, yes a twin engine jet would be desired but I don't think that Azm would fulfill that role. I'm not sure what PAF would acquire for that...but that twin engine jet would be limited to a few squadrons and not be acquired in numbers for the reasons discussed above. This is all just guesswork of course. I'm just basing it off of PAF's habits...PAF does try to make the most of its available funds. If the economy improves a great deal and PAF has more money to work with...this could all change but currently this is what I think Azm is intended to be.

My guess for future PAF is Azm(5th gen single engine) as the workhorse in hundreds and a few squadrons of some 5th gen twin engine platform(FC31/TFX/some other platform?) for deep strike capability forming the tip of the spear. These platforms will make up the High/Low mix for the next gen.

That's the main issue I think, but the paucity of other options is also a problem. Between now and Project Azm, what else is there if you need a fighter that's capable of maritime operations, deep-strike and other offensive operations? If China is willing to write-down/expense some of the R&D overhead and sell the FC-31 closer to the direct cost of manufacturing, then I think it can be an option, even with lack of PLAAF/PLAN orders.

Yes there is a lack of available options but that still wouldn't justify going for a platform that may not enter mass production. Also I doubt China would be willing to cover some cost bcuz that's simply not a good business move. The only gain China would have by doing that would be geostrategic in nature...keeping India occupied by strengthening Pak a bit. Still though there's other ways of doing that than bearing some of the cost of an orphaned project. This is not to say that FC31 is a dead project...it could pan out in the future if more countries are interested in it...but at the moment I don't think it would be great for PAF to go all in.

 

[CriticalThought]

That's the main issue I think, but the paucity of other options is also a problem. Between now and Project Azm, what else is there if you need a fighter that's capable of maritime operations, deep-strike and other offensive operations? If China is willing to write-down/expense some of the R&D overhead and sell the FC-31 closer to the direct cost of manufacturing, then I think it can be an option, even with lack of PLAAF/PLAN orders.


Potentially, but the PAF has no 'preference' for single engine in as much single engine being the result of wanting to lower cost. However, if a high-performance system with two engines can be had for a reasonable price, then they can proceed with it.

Deep strike against India's multi-layer air defence IS NOT a one window purchase. A complex multi-platform strategy will need to be employed comprising SEAD/DEAD along with stealth. AD of 80s and 90s was easily broken by 5th gen F22. To get the same mind boggling simplicity, you would need 6th gen or higher, and even that is not guaranteed. The world has smartened up to stealth and it is no longer a case of sending in a couple of extremely hi-tech aircrafts that completely fool the enemy, destroy all targets, and return home, all the while juggling balls with one hands and standing on one leg on top of a unicycle.

If anything, it is Pakistan and its dependence on Western technology that may see our air defences compromised so thoroughly that we don't even realize what hit us.

 

[MiG-35-BD]

I think its a lot wiser to leave deep strike against S-400s, Su-30MKIs, Rafales, AEWCs, EW, comprehensive radar coverage, spy satellites, etc is a fool's errand.

Anyone who read's up on US assessments of even less comprehensive IADS, leaves with the impression that the US would have a hard time.

It is better to leave it to cruise missiles, and re-usable cruise missiles like UCAVs. There was a PAF officer who wrote a paper on this - on using UCAVs to attack major Indian targets. Another paper written by me on UCAVs in an air-defence role.

A bare basic UCAV, low level penetrator would essentially be a cruise missile on steroids, which would return to base. One could build it with the same parts bin as the present cruise missile inventory of Pakistan.