JF-17 trumps the Viper in certain domains

[Windjammer]

Recently in an interview, the PAF Air Chief made some startling disclosures.
In the words of ACM Sohail Aman, JF-17 trumps F-16 Block 52 in three different domains.

''Meanwhile, Aman was keen to say that the JF-17 trumps the F-16 Block 52 in three different domains – although he wouldn’t elaborate on what they were. “Let me keep something to myself,” he smiled.''
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/dubai-airshow-pakistan-jf-17-returns-to-dubai.html

While some of you called it a marketing ploy while others just put it down to Airchief's sense of humour, however i was dismayed as how the leader of a reputable organisation would openly make such remarks and claims to an International journal without some substance. So making my own enquiries from some well placed sources, i have managed to get the following information which goes to prove that JF-17 indeed betters the F-16 in certain scenarios.

''No doubt the Falcon is superior to the JF, its a bigger aircraft than the JF, more powerful engine, more faster...but as a complete-package, as an all-rounder the Thunder is far better no two views about it''

1. Lower RCS > believe it or not the Thunder is more stealthier than the Falcon

2. SOW / REK > Stand-Off Weapon / Range Extension Kit. The Falcon has the JDAM, but the one on the JF is more superior, lethal and dead-accurate. In fact it goes even further than the JDAM which gives a huge offensive punch and is all the more remarkable considering the fact that the payload / warhead was developed indigenously by our own software engineers and technicians.

3. Faster turnaround - believe it or not, the Thunder can be prepared in shorter duration of time for its next mission after landing. Rumor has it 45mins (same time as a Typhoon) which includes refuelling, re-arming and doing all the other ground checks.

@Hodor @MastanKhan @Oscar @Tempest II @Knuckles @araz @Irfan Baloch

 

[Windjammer]

Only this member is allowed to make tall claims without any proif in this site

So you are back with your fake id, well every one is not as sham as you.

@The Eagle

 

[monitor]

Recently in an interview, the PAF Air Chief made some startling disclosures.
In the words of ACM Sohail Aman, JF-17 trumps F-16 Block 52 in three different domains.

''Meanwhile, Aman was keen to say that the JF-17 trumps the F-16 Block 52 in three different domains – although he wouldn’t elaborate on what they were. “Let me keep something to myself,” he smiled.''
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/dubai-airshow-pakistan-jf-17-returns-to-dubai.html

While some of you called it a marketing ploy while others just put it down to Airchief's sense of humour, however i was dismayed as how the leader of a reputable organisation would openly make such remarks and claims to an International journal without some substance. So making my own enquiries from some well placed sources, i have managed to get the following information which goes to prove that JF-17 indeed betters the F-16 in certain scenarios.

''No doubt the Falcon is superior to the JF, its a bigger aircraft than the JF, more powerful engine, more faster...but as a complete-package, as an all-rounder the Thunder is far better no two views about it''

1. Lower RCS > believe it or not the Thunder is more stealthier than the Falcon

2. SOW / REK > Stand-Off Weapon / Range Extension Kit. The Falcon has the JDAM, but the one on the JF is more superior, lethal and dead-accurate. In fact it goes even further than the JDAM which gives a huge offensive punch and is all the more remarkable considering the fact that the payload / warhead was developed indigenously by our own software engineers and technicians.

3. Faster turnaround - believe it or not, the Thunder can be prepared in shorter duration of time for its next mission after landing. Rumor has it 45mins (same time as a Typhoon) which includes refuelling, re-arming and doing all the other ground checks.

@Hodor @MastanKhan @Oscar @Tempest II @Knuckles @araz @Irfan Baloch

Very good but F-16 can use JASSM for stand off weapons with range of 370~1000 km What JF-17 still lacking.

 

[Raider 21]

Recently in an interview, the PAF Air Chief made some startling disclosures.
In the words of ACM Sohail Aman, JF-17 trumps F-16 Block 52 in three different domains.

''Meanwhile, Aman was keen to say that the JF-17 trumps the F-16 Block 52 in three different domains – although he wouldn’t elaborate on what they were. “Let me keep something to myself,” he smiled.''
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/dubai-airshow-pakistan-jf-17-returns-to-dubai.html

While some of you called it a marketing ploy while others just put it down to Airchief's sense of humour, however i was dismayed as how the leader of a reputable organisation would openly make such remarks and claims to an International journal without some substance. So making my own enquiries from some well placed sources, i have managed to get the following information which goes to prove that JF-17 indeed betters the F-16 in certain scenarios.

''No doubt the Falcon is superior to the JF, its a bigger aircraft than the JF, more powerful engine, more faster...but as a complete-package, as an all-rounder the Thunder is far better no two views about it''

1. Lower RCS > believe it or not the Thunder is more stealthier than the Falcon

2. SOW / REK > Stand-Off Weapon / Range Extension Kit. The Falcon has the JDAM, but the one on the JF is more superior, lethal and dead-accurate. In fact it goes even further than the JDAM which gives a huge offensive punch and is all the more remarkable considering the fact that the payload / warhead was developed indigenously by our own software engineers and technicians.

3. Faster turnaround - believe it or not, the Thunder can be prepared in shorter duration of time for its next mission after landing. Rumor has it 45mins (same time as a Typhoon) which includes refuelling, re-arming and doing all the other ground checks.

@Hodor @MastanKhan @Oscar @Tempest II @Knuckles @araz @Irfan Baloch

On a lighter note....he might have meant number of aircraft, accessibility of spare parts and more aircrew per squadron.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Very good but F-16 can use JASSM for stand off weapons with range of 370~1000 km What JF-17 still lacking.

We can hook up JF with RAAD,H-4 etc.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

On a lighter note....he might have meant number of aircraft, accessibility of spare parts and more aircrew per squadron.

Or it has a better per litre mileage.
Faster 0-60.
Better music and entertainment system.

 

[Windjammer]

Very good but F-16 can use JASSM for stand off weapons with range of 370~1000 km What JF-17 still lacking.

Which is not exactly available to PAF or many F-16 operators and all weapon systems associated with JF-17 are not disclosed openly.

 

[Malik Usman]

Only this member is allowed to make tall claims without any proof in this site

And only you guys are allowed to be Jealous and show your jealousy...

 

[Windjammer]

On a lighter note....he might have meant number of aircraft, accessibility of spare parts and more aircrew per squadron.

He specifically mentioned the Block-52 version....

 

[Ultima Thule]

Very good but F-16 can use JASSM for stand off weapons with range of 370~1000 km What JF-17 still lacking.

Not JASSM

but JDAM with a range of 28 Km

 

[BHarwana]

Something to add here in the recent Dubai Air show video which i saw online there were both JF-17 and F-16 also Gripen present and performed. Now in their performance there was on this that all three did and that was a slow pass in the end of their performance which was done by all three Jets. In case of F-16 and Gripen they both went nose down to recover from the slow pass but JF-17 exited the slow pass with nose up going into a straight climb. Now was it due to pilot training or what but it showed that JF-17 has a better climb rate and can exit stall situation with more options.

 

[salman-1]

The low rcs of thunder would only work against any aircraft if it's not being tracked by an AWACS or ground radars. Just fighters trying to track each other for Bvr is gonna be a rare chance as multiple stations are on tracking alert, where as the rek is concerned it could be an advantage as to avoid hit and run over the target. Third domain could be Anti-ship capability which our F-16s don't have.

 

[Windjammer]

Something to add here in the recent Dubai Air show video which i saw online there were both JF-17 and F-16 also Gripen present and performed. Now in their performance there was on this that all three did and that was a slow pass in the end of their performance which was done by all three Jets. In case of F-16 and Gripen they both went nose down to recover from the slow pass but JF-17 exited the slow pass with nose up going into a straight climb. Now was it due to pilot training or what but it showed that JF-17 has a better climb rate and can exit stall situation with more options.

Not sure about the Gripen but the F-16 has much more powerful engine and i have seen it from idle thrust as soon as it lights the candle it can almost go ballistic.

 

[BHarwana]

Not sure about the Gripen but the F-16 has much more powerful engine and i have seen it from idle thrust as soon as it lights the candle it can almost go ballistic.

yes but with each new upgrade F-16 has become bulkey, any how not my concern as I said what I saw in the video it is there. Flying from idle truest to lighting a candle is something else but exiting a near stall situation is some thing else. Slow pass is a situation where the computer is not letting the plan stall keeping the minimum speed and angle required to keep the jet in air as you know. This thing has all factors come in not just engine but aero dynamics and many other things. F-16 has more drag than JF-17 due the placement of it's air intakes under the main fuselage. there are many things that count in a jet it is never the engine, actually engine is the least concerning part it can always be upgraded but when you design a new air frame it becomes a new jet.

 

[DarX]

Recently in an interview, the PAF Air Chief made some startling disclosures.
In the words of ACM Sohail Aman, JF-17 trumps F-16 Block 52 in three different domains.

''Meanwhile, Aman was keen to say that the JF-17 trumps the F-16 Block 52 in three different domains – although he wouldn’t elaborate on what they were. “Let me keep something to myself,” he smiled.''
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/dubai-airshow-pakistan-jf-17-returns-to-dubai.html


3. Faster turnaround - believe it or not, the Thunder can be prepared in shorter duration of time for its next mission after landing. Rumor has it 45mins (same time as a Typhoon) which includes refuelling, re-arming and doing all the other ground checks.

@Hodor @MastanKhan @Oscar @Tempest II @Knuckles @araz @Irfan Baloch

Very recently the IAF requested the Indian govt to approve the import of single engined jets and it pointed to the deficiencies of the Tejas. One of the main things among them was that the Tejas had a turnaround time of more than 2 hours, so a quick turnaround time for the JF-17 is definitely an asset.