JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[HRK]

Turn Rate of Rafale

At a typical cruise speed of M0.82/347kt, the aircraft could sustain a 60º banked turn at maximum dry power. Slamming the throttle to maximum reheat and rolling quickly into a full stick-back hard turn to simulate a break away from a threat gave a rapid response, automatically limited initially to 18.8º alpha and 4g. As the turn progressed, the FCS allowed the incidence to increase to 19.2¼ alpha as the airspeed decayed. Again, I was impressed with how easy it was to extract the maximum performance from this heavily loaded aircraft.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/combat-ready-53125/

 

[Tempest II]

Would love to get a lecture on how ITR is calculated. I observed some JF-17 videos in the past and it could do the 1st 90 degrees in aprroximately 3 seconds. Unless I am totally wrong on my assumptions, I expected the ITR to be about 30.

If I remember correctly, the graph below was presented by SAAB

 

[Basel]

Am going to speak from a missile designer's perspective, not because I was a missile designer, but because of due to certain aspects of my (once) job, I had to know something about designing missiles, specifically air-air missiles.

Q: Why do we have categories of 'long', 'middle', and 'short' range missiles ?

Before we answer that question, there is one thing we must know that is COMMON to every missile, whether it is air-air, air-ground, or ICBMs, which is surface-surface.

That common thing is that for a period of time starting immediately after the missile exited its restrains, the carriage rail or the underground silo, its sensor package is INACTIVE. During this time, the missile, while in free flight, is essentially blind. The missile maybe designed to receive target updates from the parent, but that info does not occur until a certain period of time.

The reason is very simple: Safety.

We do not want to kill the launcher, whether it is an aircraft or the underground silo.

I, the missile, do not want to endanger the parent launcher while I am severing restrains and controls. During these milliseconds, I will leave the launcher in as stable flight as possible. So during those same milliseconds, I will not allow the sensor package to give me target information, no matter how bad or good that information maybe. It does not matter even if target information came from the parent. I will not allow any attributes of my physical state, such as vibrations from my rocket motor and/or from aerodynamic stresses on my body, to endanger the parent. I will fly in as stable a flight as possible.

Everything in the above paragraph are represented by mathematics, which are then translated into computer languages, which are known as 'flight control and guidance laws'.

So then...Why do we have categories of 'long', 'middle', and 'short' range missiles ?

In interception laws, everything must be exploited to their fullest. If the target is 'long', no matter how arbitrary is this 'long' distance figure, the missile should have an altitude advantage. So we program the missile to gain some altitude BEFORE its sensor package can have influence. The flight profile would have a sharp nose up to gain altitude, a stable burn in a plateau, then sensor guidance begins.

Skip the 'medium' range and jump to the 'short' range missile.

What happens for the 'short' range missile is that there is no gain in altitude. The assumption is that the target is so close that high altitude gain to get that 'big picture' perspective, then gravity assist to gain speed are meaningless. It is best that, as soon as I am safely away from the parent, I am going to turn on my sensor and begins accepting its guidance.

A: The post launch safety margin is common to all missile designs. What the missile DOES after this time and distance is what create the categories of 'long', 'medium', and 'short' range air-air missile.

Will there be a situation where the target is so close, once that safety margin is passed, that the target is too close that the missile cannot adequately detect and maneuvers to intercept ? Yes, and that is where the gun comes in.

Modern avionics are sophisticated enough to warn the pilot that even his specifically designed missiles have reduced odds of success and that reduction is so great that not even the computer cannot compensate for target variations. Hence, the gun.

With the gun, the fighter aircraft basically said to the pilot: 'F-kit. I cannot handle this. Shoot him yourself.'

Now it falls back to Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM). This is where pilot training in BFM shines. Either the pilot survives to paint his jet, or he dies. This is why the USAF have Fighter Weapons School, the USN have 'Top Gun', and everybody tries to go to Red Flag.

This is why selecting your loadout is so time consuming. You have a finite hardpoint count. What is your mission ? If you are required to VISUALLY identify your target in an interception, then 'long' and 'medium' missiles are useless. Visual ID pretty much put both into each other's short range missiles and gun range. On the other hand,if Command says this part of the sky is hostile, then a 'long' and 'medium' range loadout make sense. As soon as you make radar contact and if the IFF response is not valid, you shoot at the longest distance your guidance suggest. With modern fighters backed up by sophisticated radars, the gun is the weapon of final resort.

What is your opinion about any future interception by PAF over Pakistani skies against IAF, which weapon they should use short, medium, long for their interceptors? Will interceptors like F-7s with short missiles like AIM-9 with guns will be able to intercept successfully incoming enemy package of IAF?

 

[Tempest II]

By using this

video, I am estimating the Tiffy at 35 deg/sec and this us closely agreeing with the SAAB presentation:

 

[Mohammad ahsen]

jf 17b is greater than jf 17 block 3 because more hardpoint dual seat give more attraction power

 

[ghazi768]

Would love to get a lecture on how ITR is calculated. I observed some JF-17 videos in the past and it could do the 1st 90 degrees in aprroximately 3 seconds. Unless I am totally wrong on my assumptions, I expected the ITR to be about 30.

View attachment 318591

If I remember correctly, the graph below was presented by SAAB

View attachment 318592

This chart is not correct, I remember commenting on it in another thread, take it with a big pinch of salt.

About turn rate of JF-17 videos you mentioned, I remember a zuhahi show a few years back, demos were not too 'scripted' than and he took some freedom during demo. If you can find that zhuhai show video you can time 90,180 degree turns. Also he did 90 degree via rudder while in a turn, never done again. Will give you some idea about JF-17 capabilities and stability at high alpha.

F-16 demos lately by USAF have been much freer, you may find a couple of videos where it executes some swift consecutive 2-3 90 degree turns, will give you an idea of its ability to turn and conserve energy as well. Also I think you know that best turn rates are usually at medium altitude at transonic speeds for F-16/JF-17 like fighters.

 

[gambit]

What is your opinion about any future interception by PAF over Pakistani skies against IAF, which weapon they should use short, medium, long for their interceptors? Will interceptors like F-7s with short missiles like AIM-9 with guns will be able to intercept successfully incoming enemy package of IAF?

It depends on your rules of engagement.

If your ROE demands visual IDs, your load will consist of short range missiles. From our air combat experience, 40 km is considered WVR. Forty km is about the best the human eye can discern sufficient details. Am not talking about a pilot who can see national markings on the wings at that distance, although supposedly some legendary pilots could. Forty km is the best distance the human eye-brain combination can discern moving objects against a background that warrants further investigation.

Within this distance, aircraft maneuverability is at its most unpredictable. If you are tasked to make out national markings on the wings, you are required to be much closer to your targets. You need a missile that is programmed to be able to maneuver as soon as it is safely away from you in case your targets turned out to be hostile and non-obedient.

You need to look at your bases as in relation to your borders. How quickly can you approach the borders also affect your decision for loadout. If the order is all non-ID aircrafts are to be considered hostile, you will have a mix of missiles, which is limited by your available hardpoints.

Simply put, there is no way anyone can give you, a Pakistani, definitive solutions regarding India. The most your air leadership can do is study how other air forces compensate for variables in their needs and adapt those methods for Pakistan's needs.

 

[Tank131]

I wonder how long till we see the CM-400AKG in PAF or maybe if PN orders the JF-17, then in PN.

 

[Arsalan]

Also today at CAC together with the LRIP J-20A ....looks like a new colour scheme on an older JF-17-prototype or a new bird ?

View attachment 316628

Flying with CM-400AKG!!

I wonder how long till we see the CM-400AKG in PAF or maybe if PN orders the JF-17, then in PN.

There is some confusion.

 

[HRK]

This chart is not correct, I remember commenting on it in another thread, take it with a big pinch of salt.

About turn rate of JF-17 videos you mentioned, I remember a zuhahi show a few years back, demos were not too 'scripted' than and he took some freedom during demo. If you can find that zhuhai show video you can time 90,180 degree turns. Also he did 90 degree via rudder while in a turn, never done again. Will give you some idea about JF-17 capabilities and stability at high alpha.

F-16 demos lately by USAF have been much freer, you may find a couple of videos where it executes some swift consecutive 2-3 90 degree turns, will give you an idea of its ability to turn and conserve energy as well. Also I think you know that best turn rates are usually at medium altitude at transonic speeds for F-16/JF-17 like fighters.

can you plz comment abot JF-17 turn rate ....

 

[Basel]

It depends on your rules of engagement.

If your ROE demands visual IDs, your load will consist of short range missiles. From our air combat experience, 40 km is considered WVR. Forty km is about the best the human eye can discern sufficient details. Am not talking about a pilot who can see national markings on the wings at that distance, although supposedly some legendary pilots could. Forty km is the best distance the human eye-brain combination can discern moving objects against a background that warrants further investigation.

Within this distance, aircraft maneuverability is at its most unpredictable. If you are tasked to make out national markings on the wings, you are required to be much closer to your targets. You need a missile that is programmed to be able to maneuver as soon as it is safely away from you in case your targets turned out to be hostile and non-obedient.

You need to look at your bases as in relation to your borders. How quickly can you approach the borders also affect your decision for loadout. If the order is all non-ID aircrafts are to be considered hostile, you will have a mix of missiles, which is limited by your available hardpoints.

Simply put, there is no way anyone can give you, a Pakistani, definitive solutions regarding India. The most your air leadership can do is study how other air forces compensate for variables in their needs and adapt those methods for Pakistan's needs.

What would you do with current PAF capabilities to tackle IAF in all out war, if you were to make the decisions?

 

[Army research]

What would you do with current PAF capabilities to tackle IAF in all out war, if you were to make the decisions?

AWACS tell us about raider and we strike them with Sam's and air misslws from Max distances so as to stay away from enemy Sam and missle and kill any interceptor in our own air space ,scenario 2 ,relations are bad in the mask of an exercise strike planes try to take out maximum enemy planes and spec ops paratrooper or infiltrated take or pin down iaf bases to stop them for flying and them sead ops IE ops to disable enemy air defence by ARM anti radiation missles and after that all paf needs to do is strike their nuke faciltis and armored columns and that's the best case scenario

 

[Thunder.Storm]

Latest Pic Of JF-17 In Pac Kamra...

 

[Army research]

Latest Pic Of JF-17 In Pac Kamra...

Aerial refuler

 

[Thunder.Storm]

Aerial refuler

It's aerial refueling prob on jf-17