JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[Zhukov]

General Musharaf also served in Malaysian Army? (Pic at top Right)

 

[Thorough Pro]

you caught the resemblance but missed Air force uniform...

General Musharaf also served in Malaysian Army? (Pic at top Right)

 

[Zhukov]

you caught the resemblance but missed Air force uniform...

Armed forces include Air force as well

 

[volatile]

there is no difference between C802 and ALCM..whether RAAD can be carried or not is not known but there shouldn't be any problem under the wing

there is no fault in jf-17 design as cheap effective light weight fighter..i think may be the lack of pod hard point(like tejas) could be argued as deficiency

those who pitch that it needed to be 25% bigger need to understand that it would also need 25% bigger engine and perhaps 25% increase price tag, both of which were out of reach when it was envisioned in 1990s

VS Mirage

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/anatomy-of-the-hatf-viii-raad-air-launched-cruise-missile.436702/
@JamD has already put a scholarly article on this ,I guess you are missing the point raising the height doesnt require cost increase

 

[wulff]

Hi,

It did not stop china from developing the J20 even though the engine for that aircraft was not ready---. So they decided to go ahead with the weaker engine and work on the other stuff---the EW suite---the pilot flying and training---air combat and strike missions and everything else that they could do---.

Now they are getting close to the stage where the engine when it gets ready would be an easy swap---and the chinese saved a ton of time---.



Hi,

The Paf did not recognize the need for fitting the aircraft with all the modern day electronic gadgets inside of the aircraft in the begining---.

They were so ineffective in their design considerations that they did not even make room to install the IRST on the main frame---and that was a very basic thing at that time---.

Now they are finding out that they fckd up good---they are realizing that a 25% larger JF17 would have given them a FORCE MULTIPLIER EFFECT of almost 1.5 to 1.75---.

Mastan Sb,

Allow me to express my 2 cents:

A 25% larger JF-17 with the same engine would have drastically lower A2A performance. The plane would have higher weight, increasing wing loading and drag would also be almost certainly higher. There will be a significant decrease in TWR, climb rate... you get the idea?

A 25% larger JF-17 with a correspondingly larger engine (F-100/F-110/AL-31 class) would however likely have demonstrably better A2A performance than the JF-17 just by virtue of the ~50% higher thrust available from the engine and the increase in aircraft volume and load carrying ability. It would also be much costlier to procure and operate, both of which mattered to the PAF greatly in those austere times when it was designed. Still, this aircraft wouldn't have been a bad idea for Pakistan: it would basically displace the F-16 and it would also fulfill the FC-20 role, but CAC wouldn't have liked to develop a cheaper competitor to the J-10 in export markets and share 50% of the profits with PAC when the J-10 was already going to be offered for export. Furthermore, pursuing such an aircraft would basically have required CAC/PAC to throw away all the Super-7 work done during the 90s, which is probably what the PAF wasn't willing (or audacious enough) to do. They needed an aircraft fast, tensions with India were at an all time high (Kargil and all) and pragmaticism prevailed.

I think PAF took the right decision in 1999. The JF-17 was the right aircraft for the PAF that was trying to recover from the 1990s. It was what the PAF needed in the 2000s.

Was the JF-17 the right aircraft for 2010? Maybe. For 2020? Absolutely not? Could they have done better by now? You bet. The JF-17 production should have been much faster. 15 years from maiden flight to 100 aircraft is too slow for an aircraft that incorporates only proven and no groundbreaking technology. It is also sad to see that despite the generational advancement in Chinese aircraft design and production capabilities in the last 15 years, the PAF has kind of stuck its head in the sand and failed to update the JF-17 airframe. They should have re-designed the aircraft from scratch by 2010. An aircraft with a lifting body, low drag/ high lift airframe, capable of supercruise (like the Gripen is), able to take off and land from grass runways or semi prepared strips, with an advanced radar and passive sensor suite (IRST+ELINT/ESM sensors) was comfortably within the reach of chinese industry once the J-10B/J-11B had been developed.

The JF-17 has suffered from lack of vision more than anything else. Which is incredibly sad because it is a big achievement. They failed to turn it into a great one.

 

[Armchair-General]

We should have bought 18 J-10Bs on cash and a further 36 on credit with payment in installments instead of wasting money buying second hand F-16s that won't live past 2030. We could have replaced mirages in strike role with this:

 

[MastanKhan]

Mastan Sb,

Allow me to express my 2 cents:

A 25% larger JF-17 with the same engine would have drastically lower A2A performance. The plane would have higher weight, increasing wing loading and drag would also be almost certainly higher. There will be a significant decrease in TWR, climb rate... you get the idea?

A 25% larger JF-17 with a correspondingly larger engine (F-100/F-110/AL-31 class) would however likely have demonstrably better A2A performance than the JF-17 just by virtue of the ~50% higher thrust available from the engine and the increase in aircraft volume and load carrying ability. It would also be much costlier to procure and operate, both of which mattered to the PAF greatly in those austere times when it was designed. Still, this aircraft wouldn't have been a bad idea for Pakistan: it would basically displace the F-16 and it would also fulfill the FC-20 role, but CAC wouldn't have liked to develop a cheaper competitor to the J-10 in export markets and share 50% of the profits with PAC when the J-10 was already going to be offered for export. Furthermore, pursuing such an aircraft would basically have required CAC/PAC to throw away all the Super-7 work done during the 90s, which is probably what the PAF wasn't willing (or audacious enough) to do. They needed an aircraft fast, tensions with India were at an all time high (Kargil and all) and pragmaticism prevailed.

I think PAF took the right decision in 1999. The JF-17 was the right aircraft for the PAF that was trying to recover from the 1990s. It was what the PAF needed in the 2000s.

Was the JF-17 the right aircraft for 2010? Maybe. For 2020? Absolutely not? Could they have done better by now? You bet. The JF-17 production should have been much faster. 15 years from maiden flight to 100 aircraft is too slow for an aircraft that incorporates only proven and no groundbreaking technology. It is also sad to see that despite the generational advancement in Chinese aircraft design and production capabilities in the last 15 years, the PAF has kind of stuck its head in the sand and failed to update the JF-17 airframe. They should have re-designed the aircraft from scratch by 2010. An aircraft with a lifting body, low drag/ high lift airframe, capable of supercruise (like the Gripen is), able to take off and land from grass runways or semi prepared strips, with an advanced radar and passive sensor suite (IRST+ELINT/ESM sensors) was comfortably within the reach of chinese industry once the J-10B/J-11B had been developed.

The JF-17 has suffered from lack of vision more than anything else. Which is incredibly sad because it is a big achievement. They failed to turn it into a great one.

Hi,

Welcome---.

What air to air performance do you want---?

None of your opponents are into air to air performance ( dog fight ) any more---.

They are all trained to launch BVR and scoot---launch BVR and scoot---launch bvr and scoot.

When a SU30 can launch a volley of 4 BVR's at a single target---why does it need to be in a position of performance---.

Peformance is a totally over rated term---the great early F15 had barely 6G capabilities---but was the greatest twin engine air craft flying.

F14 Tomcat was severely under powered---but was still way ahead of the curve---.

Performance is an overrated term---.

Please don't fall for it---.

Second thing---you never understood what I wrote---.

If you want to---read my post again---and if you still don't understand it---let me know and I will explain it further. Thank you.

 

[Maxpane]

@MastanKhan sir whats your opinion about j 10 ? I mean j 10 still need of the time or not?

 

[Shabi1]

Only an increase in wing area for JF-17 for additional fuel is ok. Its a light fighter the rest of the airframe is perfect for its size.
Needs a towed decoy or eject-able decoy system.

 

[Armchair-General]

Hi,

Welcome---.

What air to air performance do you want---?

None of your opponents are into air to air performance ( dog fight ) any more---.

They are all trained to launch BVR and scoot---launch BVR and scoot---launch bvr and scoot.

When a SU30 can launch a volley of 4 BVR's at a single target---why does it need to be in a position of performance---.

Peformance is a totally over rated term---the great early F15 had barely 6G capabilities---but was the greatest twin engine air craft flying.

F14 Tomcat was severely under powered---but was still way ahead of the curve---.

Performance is an overrated term---.

Please don't fall for it---.

Second thing---you never understood what I wrote---.

If you want to---read my post again---and if you still don't understand it---let me know and I will explain it further. Thank you.

What if we did not go for the JF-17 at all and just licence built the J-10?
We would have achieved far more transfer of technology regarding the engines with money also being circulated in Pakistani hands due to final assembly and production of some parts in Pakistan.
Downsides would be less learning of designing, higher operating and procurement costs.

 

[LKJ86]

@MastanKhan sir whats your opinion about j 10 ? I mean j 10 still need of the time or not?

The production of J-10 is said to stop soon.

 

[Maxpane]

The production of J-10 is said to stop soon.

So what option pakistan to fulfill the gap ?

 

[Shabi1]

VS Mirage

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/anatomy-of-the-hatf-viii-raad-air-launched-cruise-missile.436702/
@JamD has already put a scholarly article on this ,I guess you are missing the point raising the height doesnt require cost increase

Comparing Raad 1 & 2. Raad 2 seems to be more slender. Looks like this solves the JF-17 debate, it's dimensions have been changed for use on the JF-17.

 

[Fawad alam]

Hi,

Welcome---.

What air to air performance do you want---?

None of your opponents are into air to air performance ( dog fight ) any more---.

They are all trained to launch BVR and scoot---launch BVR and scoot---launch bvr and scoot.

When a SU30 can launch a volley of 4 BVR's at a single target---why does it need to be in a position of performance---.

Peformance is a totally over rated term---the great early F15 had barely 6G capabilities---but was the greatest twin engine air craft flying.

F14 Tomcat was severely under powered---but was still way ahead of the curve---.

Performance is an overrated term---.

Please don't fall for it---.

Second thing---you never understood what I wrote---.

If you want to---read my post again---and if you still don't understand it---let me know and I will explain it further. Thank you.

Dear your idea is very much clear, our neighbor is spending lot of money for quantity and quality, at least we need to spend 1/3 of that on heavy and modern platforms otherwise survival will be difficult.

 

[volatile]

Comparing Raad 1 & 2. Raad 2 seems to be more slender. Looks like this solves the JF-17 debate, it's dimensions have been changed for use on the JF-17.

please share dimensions for both since i can only find difference is range