JF-17 VS MIRAGE-2000

[GR!FF!N]

JF-17 Block I/II EASILY counters Mig-29s, old Miraages, and Mig-21s of IAF (not included most latest Mig-29 SMT one's)

F-16s will handle Su-30MKI..

So your assertion of "JF-17 not that much capable" is probably a way to make yourself better, but it has no evidence.

JF-17 offers everything: BVRs, WVRs, Modern Avionics/Radars, Integration with AWACS, Anti-Ship missiles, hypersonic air-to-ground missiles, and so on..

It can carry 4000kg+ payload..

Okk..lets discuss about the part..

JF-17 easily counters MIG-29s and Mirages(Old?? I think you meant Mirage 2000 and not upgraded ones like Mirage 2000-5 and Mirage 2000-5-9)..ald FYI,IAF MIG-29s are of SMT standard.

MiG-29SMT FULCRUM
Mikoyan MiG-29M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

now,lets compare...

JF-17 vs Mig-29(SM version)

Load- 3400 kg with Weapons vs 4000 kg weapons in Mig-29S

Engine- 1 vs 2,which pushes it upto Mach 2.25,where JF-17 can only reach at Mach 1.6.So,Mig-29 can outruns JF-17.

same TtoW

Radar- 105 km (65 mi) in look-up mode and ≥ 85 km (53 mi) in look-down mode(KLJ-7) vs 120 km for fighter sized target(10 tracked,4 attacked) (Zhuk-ME)

Hardpoint- 8(3400 kg) vs 7(4000 kg)

BVR-PL-12(70 km) vs R-27(latest ones having range over 130 km),R-77(greater than 110 km)
WVR capability is about same- Python,Sidewinder vs R-73(R-73 possibly has little advantage because of its greater HOBS and range)

So,no.JF-17s can't "Easily" handle MIG-29 SM as MIG-29 has better RADAR,better Missiles and It is one of the greatest dogfighter ever designed..remember,I choose MIG-29 SM which is having little bit A2G capability and not MIG-29S which was an "in between product" in my opinion.It came to existence 20 years before JF-17 came.I didn't compare it with MIG-29 SMT which IAF has..I didn't enter into unknown domains like IRST,Jammer etc.I don't know if JF-17 uses Jammer.MIG-29 uses L203 Gardenia..

it is a good jammer..

Overscan's guide to Russian Military Avionics

Now..

JF-17 VS MIRAGE-2000(Base Version)


Engine-1
Speed- Mach 2.2
TtoW-.7,lesser than JF-17
Hardpoint-9,can carry some 6300 kg..far greater..
Radar-Thomson-CSF has range over 100 km(same),RDY has around 110 km range.
Armament- MICA- 50 km,Super-530(40 km)..IAF uses R-27
Magic-17 km

uses Dassault Sabre radar jamming and deception pod.

So,nope..spec is around same,but due to better sensors,Mirage has advantage.India uses much upgraded version of this basic version and now they're upgrading them again.

 

[NKVD]

Okk..lets discuss about the part..

JF-17 easily counters MIG-29s and Mirages(Old?? I think you meant Mirage 2000 and not upgraded ones like Mirage 2000-5 and Mirage 2000-5-9)..ald FYI,IAF MIG-29s are of SMT standard.

MiG-29SMT FULCRUM
Mikoyan MiG-29M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

now,lets compare...

JF-17 vs Mig-29(SM version)

Load- 3400 kg with Weapons vs 4000 kg weapons in Mig-29S

Engine- 1 vs 2,which pushes it upto Mach 2.25,where JF-17 can only reach at Mach 1.6.So,Mig-29 can outruns JF-17.

same TtoW

Radar- 105 km (65 mi) in look-up mode and ≥ 85 km (53 mi) in look-down mode(KLJ-7) vs 120 km for fighter sized target(10 tracked,4 attacked) (Zhuk-ME)

Hardpoint- 8(3400 kg) vs 7(4000 kg)

BVR-PL-12(70 km) vs R-27(latest ones having range over 130 km),R-77(greater than 110 km)
WVR capability is about same- Python,Sidewinder vs R-73(R-73 possibly has little advantage because of its greater HOBS and range)

So,no.JF-17s can't "Easily" handle MIG-29 SM as MIG-29 has better RADAR,better Missiles and It is one of the greatest dogfighter ever designed..remember,I choose MIG-29 SM which is having little bit A2G capability and not MIG-29S which was an "in between product" in my opinion.It came to existence 20 years before JF-17 came.I didn't compare it with MIG-29 SMT which IAF has..I didn't enter into unknown domains like IRST,Jammer etc.I don't know if JF-17 uses Jammer.MIG-29 uses L203 Gardenia..

it is a good jammer..

Overscan's guide to Russian Military Avionics

Now..

JF-17 VS MIRAGE-2000(Base Version)


Engine-1
Speed- Mach 2.2
TtoW-.7,lesser than JF-17
Hardpoint-9,can carry some 6300 kg..far greater..
Radar-Thomson-CSF has range over 100 km(same),RDY has around 110 km range.
Armament- MICA- 50 km,Super-530(40 km)..IAF uses R-27
Magic-17 km

uses Dassault Sabre radar jamming and deception pod.

So,nope..spec is around same,but due to better sensors,Mirage has advantage.India uses much upgraded version of this basic version and now they're upgrading them again.

Leave it Mate Rationality Doesn't Suit their Image

 

[abdulbarijan]

Okk..lets discuss about the part..

JF-17 easily counters MIG-29s and Mirages(Old?? I think you meant Mirage 2000 and not upgraded ones like Mirage 2000-5 and Mirage 2000-5-9)..ald FYI,IAF MIG-29s are of SMT standard.

MiG-29SMT FULCRUM
Mikoyan MiG-29M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

now,lets compare...

JF-17 vs Mig-29(SM version)

Load- 3400 kg with Weapons vs 4000 kg weapons in Mig-29S

Engine- 1 vs 2,which pushes it upto Mach 2.25,where JF-17 can only reach at Mach 1.6.So,Mig-29 can outruns JF-17.

same TtoW

Radar- 105 km (65 mi) in look-up mode and ≥ 85 km (53 mi) in look-down mode(KLJ-7) vs 120 km for fighter sized target(10 tracked,4 attacked) (Zhuk-ME)

Hardpoint- 8(3400 kg) vs 7(4000 kg)

BVR-PL-12(70 km) vs R-27(latest ones having range over 130 km),R-77(greater than 110 km)
WVR capability is about same- Python,Sidewinder vs R-73(R-73 possibly has little advantage because of its greater HOBS and range)

So,no.JF-17s can't "Easily" handle MIG-29 SM as MIG-29 has better RADAR,better Missiles and It is one of the greatest dogfighter ever designed..remember,I choose MIG-29 SM which is having little bit A2G capability and not MIG-29S which was an "in between product" in my opinion.It came to existence 20 years before JF-17 came.I didn't compare it with MIG-29 SMT which IAF has..I didn't enter into unknown domains like IRST,Jammer etc.I don't know if JF-17 uses Jammer.MIG-29 uses L203 Gardenia..

it is a good jammer..

Overscan's guide to Russian Military Avionics

Now..

JF-17 VS MIRAGE-2000(Base Version)


Engine-1
Speed- Mach 2.2
TtoW-.7,lesser than JF-17
Hardpoint-9,can carry some 6300 kg..far greater..
Radar-Thomson-CSF has range over 100 km(same),RDY has around 110 km range.
Armament- MICA- 50 km,Super-530(40 km)..IAF uses R-27
Magic-17 km

uses Dassault Sabre radar jamming and deception pod.

So,nope..spec is around same,but due to better sensors,Mirage has advantage.India uses much upgraded version of this basic version and now they're upgrading them again.

I thought that as a rule of thumb senior members were to have alot better posts, qualitative wise atleast --

I mean sure, I wont go on and make a sweeping statement such as JF-17's can easily counter the Mig-29 SMT's or the newest Mirage 2K 5's -- but I won't go on and say that the Mirages and Mig-29's will have an easy day either --

You can go on and state ranges of Mig-29's/M2k's radars -- sure and go and say that KLJ-7 has such and such ranges, hence the Mig-29's and M2K's are better -- but you forget that the radar onboard the JF-17 is not a simple KLJ-7, its an upgraded model KLJ-7 V(II) -- how good it is -- well the KLJ -7 V (I) was as per many sources (that you will find in the info pool thread) is far better then the APG-66 (on board the blk-15 F-16's) and is more or less as good as an earlier APG-68 ( onboard block 40 F-16's ) -- as it happens there were ranges quoted in 130 Km arena for the KLJ-7 V (II) (reported by Kanwa if im not mistaken) so I wouldn't hold my breath on the "radar advantage" --

As far as the weapons go, it is understood that firing weapons at their max ranges is a waste, otherwise missiles like the french MICA BVR wouldn't be considered amongst the best, even though their ranges are around 50 Km's or so --- so that plain is also quite even -- where SD-10A offers similar capability to an AMRAAM C5 (while SD-10B with upgrades is also in the pipeline)

Lets not forget the RCS debate either -- and ofcourse the EW suite, I won't say much because the comparison would not be conclusive because many things surrounding the JFT EW suite aren't known, what is known is that it has a high level of integration amongst different sensors and that PAF at one time was looking for a miniaturized SPECTRA as an upgrade, because the current levels of EW suite performance were already beyond expectations ...

The difference of payload etc. is there because the aircrafts are of two different categories, one is a light category aircraft (JF-17), the other two are medium/heavier category aircrafts hence the comparison between the payloads is useless because it is already understood that a heavier aircraft would be carrying more --

As far as the WVR goes, the T/W ratio would be dependent, on the load being carried by the jets, so depending on the load, a JFT might even have a better T/W ratio then a Mig-29 or a M2K, because the general makeup of the PAF is defensive, and in a defensive role one wouldn't need the extra fuel, the A2G weapons etc. especially if one were to fly to intercept the IAF fighters entering the Pakistani airspace -- as far as maneuverability goes, the block 10/15 F-16's were supposed to be the most maneuverable aircraft in the falcon family, the king of dogfighting in the modern era as considered by some, and yet it got its a$$ handed to it by JF-17's when they were first flown against each other, you can also look up interview of pilots in the info pool threads, who have flown the jet and admit that it is indeed a very maneuverable aircraft and holds its own against the modern fighters being flown today ...

and lets not forget the PAF obsession with dogfighting, you have an airforce who lost an entire decade due to sanctions and didn't have a BVR for quite sometime while its main adversary the IAF was fielding BVR's, guess what PAF was busy perfecting all that time -- and ofcourse there are quotes surrounding the excellence in the training provided by the PAF etc.

So the conclusion is, don't underestimate the thunder -- while you can pull out numbers etc. the real fighting wouldn't be of numbers, it would be in an environment where both sides will be fielding AWACS and ground assets plus JF-17 as a "stand alone" asset is no easy adversary either... so like I said, while one cannot go "a JF-17 can easily counter a Mig-29 or an M2K" but one can say " A JF-17 is quite even with a Mig-29 or an M2K" --

 

[AUz]

Okk..lets discuss about the part..

JF-17 easily counters MIG-29s and Mirages(Old?? I think you meant Mirage 2000 and not upgraded ones like Mirage 2000-5 and Mirage 2000-5-9)..ald FYI,IAF MIG-29s are of SMT standard.

MiG-29SMT FULCRUM
Mikoyan MiG-29M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

now,lets compare...

JF-17 vs Mig-29(SM version)

Load- 3400 kg with Weapons vs 4000 kg weapons in Mig-29S

Engine- 1 vs 2,which pushes it upto Mach 2.25,where JF-17 can only reach at Mach 1.6.So,Mig-29 can outruns JF-17.

same TtoW

Radar- 105 km (65 mi) in look-up mode and ≥ 85 km (53 mi) in look-down mode(KLJ-7) vs 120 km for fighter sized target(10 tracked,4 attacked) (Zhuk-ME)

Hardpoint- 8(3400 kg) vs 7(4000 kg)

BVR-PL-12(70 km) vs R-27(latest ones having range over 130 km),R-77(greater than 110 km)
WVR capability is about same- Python,Sidewinder vs R-73(R-73 possibly has little advantage because of its greater HOBS and range)

So,no.JF-17s can't "Easily" handle MIG-29 SM as MIG-29 has better RADAR,better Missiles and It is one of the greatest dogfighter ever designed..remember,I choose MIG-29 SM which is having little bit A2G capability and not MIG-29S which was an "in between product" in my opinion.It came to existence 20 years before JF-17 came.I didn't compare it with MIG-29 SMT which IAF has..I didn't enter into unknown domains like IRST,Jammer etc.I don't know if JF-17 uses Jammer.MIG-29 uses L203 Gardenia..

it is a good jammer..

Overscan's guide to Russian Military Avionics

Now..

JF-17 VS MIRAGE-2000(Base Version)


Engine-1
Speed- Mach 2.2
TtoW-.7,lesser than JF-17
Hardpoint-9,can carry some 6300 kg..far greater..
Radar-Thomson-CSF has range over 100 km(same),RDY has around 110 km range.
Armament- MICA- 50 km,Super-530(40 km)..IAF uses R-27
Magic-17 km

uses Dassault Sabre radar jamming and deception pod.

So,nope..spec is around same,but due to better sensors,Mirage has advantage.India uses much upgraded version of this basic version and now they're upgrading them again.

You get your basic facts wrong.

JF-17's payload is more than 4000kg since 2011 (as presented by CATIC/KAMRA in official presentation to potential buyers during 2011 Turkish Air Show). Payload has increased with block II upgrade to the wing-structures. Probably 4500kg at the minimum right now.

Secondly, radars of JF-17s and Migs of IAF are same. BVR engagements happen at 60km to 80km (maximum!) range. Its more about tactics and weaponry carried than radar range.

Secondly JF-17 carries SD-10A version, not PL-12 basic. SD-10A has range of around 120km and has similar performance to AMRAAM-120C of U.S (which is a superior platform to Russian BVRs).

JF-17 also carriers jammers, targeting pods, and counter ECM avionics.

Your knowledge on air warfare is pathetic, sorry to say.

JF-17, btw, faced Chinese Su-27 derivatives (superior dog fighters to mig 29s/miraages) and the result was

2-1 in favor of JF-17. (There were three different settings involving multiple aircrafts and scenarios).

As I said, Mig-29s can be dealt with by JF-17 Thunders...quite easily in Pakistani Air Space where ECM will be enhancing JF-17s performance and decreasing Migs performances (then we have SAMs and AWACS as well).

But you can continue to believe whatever you like, I mean...some indians still believe that pathetic failure tejas is better than JF-17

JF-17's are thing of a future. Block III is coming with AESA in next five years Inshallah..Migs/Miraages are of bygone era.

PLUS: Miraage 2000-9s are awesome for ground strikes. Superior to JF-17 in that regard. Air-to-air, not so.

 

[GR!FF!N]

I thought that as a rule of thumb senior members were to have alot better posts, qualitative wise atleast --

I mean sure, I wont go on and make a sweeping statement such as JF-17's can easily counter the Mig-29 SMT's or the newest Mirage 2K 5's -- but I won't go on and say that the Mirages and Mig-29's will have an easy day either --

You can go on and state ranges of Mig-29's/M2k's radars -- sure and go and say that KLJ-7 has such and such ranges, hence the Mig-29's and M2K's are better -- but you forget that the radar onboard the JF-17 is not a simple KLJ-7, its an upgraded model KLJ-7 V(II) -- how good it is -- well the KLJ -7 V (I) was as per many sources (that you will find in the info pool thread) is far better then the APG-66 (on board the blk-15 F-16's) and is more or less as good as an earlier APG-68 ( onboard block 40 F-16's ) -- as it happens there were ranges quoted in 130 Km arena for the KLJ-7 V (II) so I wouldn't hold my breath on the "radar advantage" --
As far as the weapons go, it is understood that firing weapons at their max ranges is a waste, otherwise missiles like the french MICA BVR wouldn't be considered amongst the best, even though their ranges are around 50 Km's or so --- so that plain is also quite even --
Lets not forget the RCS debate either -- and ofcourse the EW suite, I won't say much because the comparison would not be conclusive because many things surrounding the JFT EW suite aren't known, what is known is that it has a high level of integration amongst different sensors and that PAF at one time was looking for a miniaturized SPECTRA as an upgrade, because the current levels of EW suite performance were already beyond expectations ...

The difference of payload etc. is there because the aircrafts are of two different categories, one is a light category aircraft (JF-17), the other two are medium/heavier category aircrafts hence the comparison between the payloads is useless because it is already understood that a heavier aircraft would be carrying more --

As far as the WVR goes, the T/W ratio would be dependent, on the load being carried by the jets, so depending on the load, a JFT might even have a better T/W ratio then a Mig-29 or a M2K, because the general makeup of the PAF is defensive, and in a defensive role one wouldn't need the extra fuel, the A2G weapons etc. especially if one were to fly to intercept the IAF fighters entering the Pakistani airspace -- as far as maneuverability goes, the block 10/15 F-16's were supposed to be the most maneuverable aircraft in the falcon family, the king of dogfighting in the modern era as considered by some, and yet it got its a$$ handed to it by JF-17's when they were first flown against each other, you can also look up interview of pilots in the info pool threads, who have flown the jet and admit that it is indeed a very maneuverable aircraft and holds its own against the modern fighters being flown today ...

and lets not forget the PAF obsession with dogfighting, you have an airforce who lost an entire decade and didn't have a BVR for quite sometime where its main enemy was fielding BVR's, guess what PAF was busy perfecting -- and ofcourse there are quotes surrounding around the training provided by the PAF etc.

So the conclusion is, don't underestimate the thunder -- while you can pull out numbers etc. the real fighting wouldn't be of numbers, it would be in an environment where both sides will be fielding AWACS and ground assets plus JF-17 as a "stand alone" asset is no easy adversary either... so like I said, while one cannot go "a JF-17 can easily counter a Mig-29 or an M2K" but one can say " A JF-17 is quite even with a Mig-29 or an M2K" --

That post was against a Troll's post..

where you posted pretty decently,but in that case,you can't compare one aircraft with another either..We know nothing about actual capabilities.nobody publishes actual capabilities of an equipment,forget about Aircraft.

Actually,there is no comparison between M2K,MIG-29 with JFT.JFT doesn't belong to medium class.also,JFT came atleast 20 years after MIG-29 and M2K.If you compare JFT with current MIG-29 versions like Mirage-200-5-9,MIG-29SMT and MIG-29 K it differs more than heaven and hell in capability.

thats why I've quoted that JF-17 is an "Affordable Aircraft" for those who can't afford high end aircrafts.

and I can't agree with your "A JF-17 is quite even with a Mig-29 or an M2K" comment.JF-17 is comparable with Scorpion Jet,whle Mirage and MIG-29 is with F-16.we might see a future "JF-17 vs MIG/Mirage battle",and outcome may tell the tale.but if one can take hint,PAF is buying F-16 and don't want to go all JFT tells something.

JF-17's payload is more than 4000kg since 2011 (as presented by CATIC/KAMRA in official presentation to potential buyers during 2011 Turkish Air Show). Payload has increased with block II upgrade to the wing-structures. Probably 4500kg at the minimum right now.

Let Block II come first.In PDF,people talks about BLOCK III when there is no concrete data on Block I alone.and payload as mentioned in various site is 3400.

Secondly, radars of JF-17s and Migs of IAF are same. BVR engagements happen at 60km to 80km (maximum!) range. Its more about tactics and weaponry carried than radar range.

Secondly JF-17 carries SD-10A version, not PL-12 basic. SD-10A has range of around 120km and has similar performance to AMRAAM-120C of U.S (which is a superior platform to Russian BVRs).

show where it is quoted that SD-10A has 120 km + range..

here,it is quoted that range is 100 km,while others saying its 70-90 km
Defense Updates: SD-10A and LD-10 Missiles at Zhuhai Airshow 2012

JF-17 also carriers jammers, targeting pods, and counter ECM avionics.

Your knowledge on air warfare is pathetic, sorry to say.

JF-17, btw, faced Chinese Su-27 derivatives (superior dog fighters to mig 29s/miraages) and the result was

2-1 in favor of JF-17. (There were three different settings involving multiple aircrafts and scenarios).

really??wow..it dwarfs F-16 then..as..

Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience - positives and negatives

As I said, Mig-29s can be dealt with by JF-17 Thunders...quite easily in Pakistani Air Space where ECM will be enhancing JF-17s performance and decreasing Migs performances (then we have SAMs and AWACS as well).

But you can continue to believe whatever you like, I mean...some indians still believe that pathetic failure tejas is better than JF-17

JF-17's are thing of a future. Block III is coming with AESA in next five years Inshallah..Migs/Miraages are of bygone era.

PLUS: Miraage 2000-9s are awesome for ground strikes. Superior to JF-17 in that regard. Air-to-air, not so.

and that is your knowledge??M2K is inferior to JFT regarding A2A??Hell..

F-16 Block 52 vs Mirage 2000-5 Mk2

keep your $h!t to yourself..

 

[abdulbarijan]

That post was against a Troll's post..

where you posted pretty decently,but in that case,you can't compare one aircraft with another either..We know nothing about actual capabilities.nobody publishes actual capabilities of an equipment,forget about Aircraft.

Actually,there is no comparison between M2K,MIG-29 with JFT.JFT doesn't belong to medium class.also,JFT came atleast 20 years after MIG-29 and M2K.If you compare JFT with current MIG-29 versions like Mirage-200-5-9,MIG-29SMT and MIG-29 K it differs more than heaven and hell in capability.

thats why I've quoted that JF-17 is an "Affordable Aircraft" for those who can't afford high end aircrafts.

and I can't agree with your "A JF-17 is quite even with a Mig-29 or an M2K" comment.JF-17 is comparable with Scorpion Jet,whle Mirage and MIG-29 is with F-16.we might see a future "JF-17 vs MIG/Mirage battle",and outcome may tell the tale.but if one can take hint,PAF is buying F-16 and don't want to go all JFT tells something.

I can agree with the weight class difference, however the statement of JF-17 being quite even with say a Mig-29 or an M2k was based on the condition of an air to air engagement, where JF-17 is most likely is operating in a defensive role, whereas the Mig-29 or M2K are entering Pakistani airspace --

So when I take a look at that air- air engagement scenario, I do believe the aircrafts are quite even, however I also agree with the weight class difference and the repercussions of that noticeably limited range, payload etc. and this is the reason why PAF has F-16 MLU/Blk-52's as they are mid weight class fighters which are not restricted in those regards...

However, in air-air the capabilities that these aircrafts provide, (they) are quite even is what my opinion is, and ive stated my reasons of believing so, in the previous post .. and likewise I strongly urge the IAF to try and demonstrate the " Heaven and hell" difference of capability that the Mig-29's and the M2K's have over the JF-17's -- because as it stands, there is no definitive edge on either aircraft vs the JFT except the weight class advantages ...

Lastly, the JF-17's have gone up against the chinese SU-27's and our own F-16's with very positive results for the JF-17 and the interviews of pilots with experiences on both su-27 and f-16 and positive feedback on how thunder maneuvers etc. is a good omen to say the least --

Bottom line, the same aircrafts that you believe is comparable with the M2k or Mig-29 (F-16) has gone up against the thunder in an air-air engagement, and the results have been positive for the JFT -- hence, there is reason enough, for me atleast -- to believe that JF-17 is even with a Mig-29 and M2K in the air to air engagement arena ...

Lastly, your assertion of "if one can take hint,PAF is buying F-16 and don't want to go all JFT tells something." can also be applied on the IAF, where IAF is looking for rafale while still having the Su-30 MKI, which atleast according to the fanboys was the best aircraft after Raptor --

so I suppose one should have enough sense to understand why the PAF is going for both the falcons and the thunders i.e different weight classes and the ultimate effects of that, making up different roles in the ultimate strategy of the PAF ...

 

[Bilal.]

Leave it Mate Rationality Doesn't Suit their Image

Rationality does not mean quoting old outdated specs. Check the specs of KLJ-7 vII radar. Then check the later interviews that talk about the payload increase to 4600. Then go back and read the post of your compatriot and give your (ir)rational opinion.

 

[NKVD]

however the statement of JF-17 being quite even with say a Mig-29 or an M2k was based on the condition of an air to air engagement,

Fanboys Stuff
Well Now I bust your Buble Let me take the comparison

JF-17

• Crew: 1
• Length: 14.93 m (49 ft)
• Wingspan: 9.45 m (31 ft, including 2 wingtip missiles)
• Height: 4.72 m (15 ft 6 in)
• Wing area: 24.4 m² (263 ft²[118])
• Empty weight: 6,586 kg (14,520 lb)
• Loaded weight: 9,100 kg (20,062 lb)
• Useful load: 3100 kg (6700 lb)
• Max. takeoff weight: 12,500 kg (28,000 lb)
• Powerplant: 1 × Klimov RD-93
  • Dry thrust: 49.7 kN / 51.2 kN (11,106 lbf / 11,510 lbf)
  • Thrust with afterburner: 84.6 kN (19,000 lbf)
• G-limit: +8 g / -3 g
• Internal Fuel Capacity: 2,350 kg (5,130 lb)

Performance

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.6 (1,217.9 mph; 1,960.1 km/h)[6]
• Combat radius: 1,352 km (840 mi[3])[dubious – discuss]
• Ferry range: 3,482 km (1,880 NM)
• Service ceiling: 16,920 m (55,500 ft)
• Thrust/weight: 1.09 [119]

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra - JF-17 Thunder Aircraft

Mirage 2000 mk2


Dimensions :

Span 29.9 ft
Length 47 ft
Combat weight 21,000 lbs.
Maximum thrust of the SNECMA M53-P2 98 kN
Two versions single and twin-seater
Internal weapons (single-seater) 2 * 30 mm guns
Store stations 9
Maximum take off weight 38,500 lbs.
Fixed (removable) probe for in-flight refuelling Buddy-Buddy capability
Maximum Mach number Mach 2.2+
Approach speed 140 Kts
Maximum climbing speed 60,000 ft/min
Authorised minimum speed in flight 0 Kt
Time to climb to 36,000 ft/Mach1.8 5 min
Operational ceiling 55,000 ft
Loiter time at 150 N.M. from the base at Mach 0.8/25,000 ft* 2hr 40 min
Range / combat at M 0.8/15,000 ft** 830 N.M.
Turn Around Time (Refuelling and 6 Air to Air reloading) 15 min
* 3 external tanks + 6 MICA.
** 6 Mica, external tanks dropped prior to combat.
Demonstrated availability in war time (Kosovo) 100%



Extended carrying capabilities

The Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 provides nine hard-points for external stores (five under its belly, four under its wings). These hard-points can be used to attach weapons, pods, launchers, jettisonable external tanks or pylons, or for carrying various combinations of external stores, up to 6.3 metric tons, including ‘smart’ weapons for a wide variety of operational requirements:

• The non-French weapons can be integrated more easily.
• The installation of specialised pods allows using the aircraft for dedicated missions such as electronic reconnaissance or in-flight buddy-buddy refuelling of other aircraft.
• The underwing store stations are thereby available to carry 1,700 or 2,000 litres fuel drop tanks, providing the aircraft with increased range.
• In air-to-ground mission, the future French AASM modular weapon will also allow simultaneous firing against multiple targets (even close together).
• The Scalp/Storm-Shadow missile is a long-range cruise missile with a conventional warhead, best employed for pre-planned strikes against hardened and protected stationary or moving targets. This missile will be used for long-range surgical strikes. It has an all-weather, day/night capability and will be used at low altitudes in order to give the launching aircraft maximum operational flexibility. Fire-and-forget type missile, it readily adapts to firing conditions and involves only a minimal pilot workload — an invaluable attribute during stressful wartime conditions. This long-range pre-strategic cruise missile is also considered to be an economical weapon for use against heavily defended airfields. An outstanding feature is its ease of deployment from safe stand-off distances.
  The Scalp is fully ‘fire and forget’, allowing the aircraft to depart from the firing zone immediately after launch. The missile then flies on, at low altitude, until it impacts the target.
• In air-to-air missions, the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 derives full advantage from the high firepower conferred by its load of 6 radar-guided and heat-seeking Mica missiles. It can fire 6 missiles simultaneously. An aircraft/missile data link feeds in-flight target designation data updates to the launched missile. If circumstances demand, a Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 pilot can also fire the 6 Mica missiles in the fire-and-forget mode, dispensing with the data link. The BVR and “discrete” MICA IR missile firing capability constitutes a threat that is very difficult to counter, even for the best ECM-protected opponent.
• The Mica missile can operate at ranges from a few hundred meters to 60 km. It is the only missile in the world capable of performing all air defence missions, from long-range interception to aerial combat and self-protection.
• The optional helmet-mounted sight, when associated with the IR MICA missile, considerably increases the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 efficiency in air combat. Like the Magic 2, the MICA IR missile features an autonomous search mode, which is perfectly integrated with the weapon system. In all mission phases, the pilot uses the IR homing heads of these missiles as IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track).

To date, 5 different air forces have chosen the new-generation Mirage 2000-5 under a program involving almost 200 aircraft.
About 600 Mirage 2000 are operational world-wide; they equip eight Air Forces and are considered by several more.


Aircraft characteristics


PS: This is Capibility of Mirage-2000-5 mk2 French Version Indian Version is Most Ugraded Mirage-2000 Uptill now Comparable to F-16 Blk-52
MICA is Most Leathal Missile in WVR and Bvr With TVC its G Load Highest in Modern BVRs


AS For Mig-29 Upg its the best Mig-29 Upgrade uptill Now

Indian Air Force MiG-29s best on the block | AIRheads↑FLY

 

[NKVD]

Simple answer for me.
F-16's radar and aim-120 AMRAAM missile.I would go toe to toe with an mki with that.
I wouldn't go toe to toe against an mki with current jf-17 chinese radar and unproven chinese sd-10.Not without support.
AIM-120C AMRAAM is best BVR on the subcontinent - its a great equalizer and will be respected by all IAF aircraft,and will remain so until mica/meteor are introduced.
Range and payload are additional bonuses.

Imo,f-16 is steel tip of the lance as far PAF is concerned.The rest are the body.Someday jf-17 may take over the role but not yet.

Some Members Here Claiming that Jf-17 Payload is 4700 KG with Single Limited RD-93 Max thrust 84.7 Kt
Even Mig-29 SMT version Carries Same Combat Payload with 2 × Klimov RD-33MK afterburning turbofans, 9,000 kgf (88.3 kN, 19,800 lbf) Each How Can It be Possible @AUSTERLITZ

 

[abdulbarijan]

Fanboys Stuff
Well Now I bust your Buble Let me take the comparison

JF-17

• Crew: 1
• Length: 14.93 m (49 ft)
• Wingspan: 9.45 m (31 ft, including 2 wingtip missiles)
• Height: 4.72 m (15 ft 6 in)
• Wing area: 24.4 m² (263 ft²[118])
• Empty weight: 6,586 kg (14,520 lb)
• Loaded weight: 9,100 kg (20,062 lb)
• Useful load: 3100 kg (6700 lb)
• Max. takeoff weight: 12,500 kg (28,000 lb)
• Powerplant: 1 × Klimov RD-93
  • Dry thrust: 49.7 kN / 51.2 kN (11,106 lbf / 11,510 lbf)
  • Thrust with afterburner: 84.6 kN (19,000 lbf)
• G-limit: +8 g / -3 g
• Internal Fuel Capacity: 2,350 kg (5,130 lb)

Performance

• Maximum speed: Mach 1.6 (1,217.9 mph; 1,960.1 km/h)[6]
• Combat radius: 1,352 km (840 mi[3])[dubious – discuss]
• Ferry range: 3,482 km (1,880 NM)
• Service ceiling: 16,920 m (55,500 ft)
• Thrust/weight: 1.09 [119]

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra - JF-17 Thunder Aircraft

Mirage 2000 mk2


Dimensions :

Span 29.9 ft
Length 47 ft
Combat weight 21,000 lbs.
Maximum thrust of the SNECMA M53-P2 98 kN
Two versions single and twin-seater
Internal weapons (single-seater) 2 * 30 mm guns
Store stations 9
Maximum take off weight 38,500 lbs.
Fixed (removable) probe for in-flight refuelling Buddy-Buddy capability
Maximum Mach number Mach 2.2+
Approach speed 140 Kts
Maximum climbing speed 60,000 ft/min
Authorised minimum speed in flight 0 Kt
Time to climb to 36,000 ft/Mach1.8 5 min
Operational ceiling 55,000 ft
Loiter time at 150 N.M. from the base at Mach 0.8/25,000 ft* 2hr 40 min
Range / combat at M 0.8/15,000 ft** 830 N.M.
Turn Around Time (Refuelling and 6 Air to Air reloading) 15 min
* 3 external tanks + 6 MICA.
** 6 Mica, external tanks dropped prior to combat.
Demonstrated availability in war time (Kosovo) 100%



Extended carrying capabilities

The Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 provides nine hard-points for external stores (five under its belly, four under its wings). These hard-points can be used to attach weapons, pods, launchers, jettisonable external tanks or pylons, or for carrying various combinations of external stores, up to 6.3 metric tons, including ‘smart’ weapons for a wide variety of operational requirements:

• The non-French weapons can be integrated more easily.
• The installation of specialised pods allows using the aircraft for dedicated missions such as electronic reconnaissance or in-flight buddy-buddy refuelling of other aircraft.
• The underwing store stations are thereby available to carry 1,700 or 2,000 litres fuel drop tanks, providing the aircraft with increased range.
• In air-to-ground mission, the future French AASM modular weapon will also allow simultaneous firing against multiple targets (even close together).
• The Scalp/Storm-Shadow missile is a long-range cruise missile with a conventional warhead, best employed for pre-planned strikes against hardened and protected stationary or moving targets. This missile will be used for long-range surgical strikes. It has an all-weather, day/night capability and will be used at low altitudes in order to give the launching aircraft maximum operational flexibility. Fire-and-forget type missile, it readily adapts to firing conditions and involves only a minimal pilot workload — an invaluable attribute during stressful wartime conditions. This long-range pre-strategic cruise missile is also considered to be an economical weapon for use against heavily defended airfields. An outstanding feature is its ease of deployment from safe stand-off distances.
  The Scalp is fully ‘fire and forget’, allowing the aircraft to depart from the firing zone immediately after launch. The missile then flies on, at low altitude, until it impacts the target.
• In air-to-air missions, the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 derives full advantage from the high firepower conferred by its load of 6 radar-guided and heat-seeking Mica missiles. It can fire 6 missiles simultaneously. An aircraft/missile data link feeds in-flight target designation data updates to the launched missile. If circumstances demand, a Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 pilot can also fire the 6 Mica missiles in the fire-and-forget mode, dispensing with the data link. The BVR and “discrete” MICA IR missile firing capability constitutes a threat that is very difficult to counter, even for the best ECM-protected opponent.
• The Mica missile can operate at ranges from a few hundred meters to 60 km. It is the only missile in the world capable of performing all air defence missions, from long-range interception to aerial combat and self-protection.
• The optional helmet-mounted sight, when associated with the IR MICA missile, considerably increases the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 efficiency in air combat. Like the Magic 2, the MICA IR missile features an autonomous search mode, which is perfectly integrated with the weapon system. In all mission phases, the pilot uses the IR homing heads of these missiles as IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track).

To date, 5 different air forces have chosen the new-generation Mirage 2000-5 under a program involving almost 200 aircraft.
About 600 Mirage 2000 are operational world-wide; they equip eight Air Forces and are considered by several more.


Aircraft characteristics


PS: This is Capibility of Mirage-2000-5 mk2 French Version Indian Version is Most Ugraded Mirage-2000 Uptill now Comparable to F-16 Blk-52
MICA is Most Leathal Missile in WVR and Bvr With TVC its G Load Highest in Modern BVRs


AS For Mig-29 Upg its the best Mig-29 Upgrade uptill Now

Indian Air Force MiG-29s best on the block | AIRheads↑FLY

So much for "busting bubbles" -- I can answer all of your criticisms with just one simple observation, i.e while you bold out the figures of loaded weight and the power plant, which you think give the M2k an advantage, why don't you bold out the T/W ratio comparison, which for some reason was skipped in the M2k comparison --- and to think you were the one talking about "fan boy stuff"

So the fact of the matter is this, your entire approach is --- "Ohh lemme find figures that M2k dominates JF-17 in, but lets skim out on the details that JF-17 has an advantage in" -- and when your approach is such -- your criticism would be neutral right ??

I've already conceded that the M2k, Mig-29 have the weight class advantage over the thunder, like more payload, more missiles etc. but that is where the advantage ends -- and for one, when you quote me on the situation of air to air engagement and write a whole essay (or copy i suppose) on extended weapon carrying capability where your talking of the kinds of A2G weapons etc. the M2k has, only to squeeze in MICA at the last to somehow make it seem legit, well, that kinda shows your understanding of what the debate was about -- it was about one jet "countering" or being "even with" another, hence the "air to air" engagement situation --

As far as your legit points are concerned lemme just make a list --


* Maneuverability -- No mentioning there except maybe the G-load -- but that is all -- no mentioning of how the JF-17 on a horizontal plane is more maneuverable then an F-16, or owing to a higher T/W ratio, the JF-17 might be better in the vertical plane as well (compared to a M2K)--
*Weapons -- mentioning only the MICA missile -- no mentioning of what the opponent even fields ...
* Radar -- again skipped -- KLJ-7 VII vs RDY ( if i were to go by what GR!FF!N said, the RDY has a range around 110 Km for a fighter sized target, while the KLJ-7 V II has been reported up to 130 odd Km for a fighter sized target)
* BVR Weapons --- MICA --ofcourse and what's on board the thunder ?? -- I mean if its supposed to be a comparison, it should incorporate the other sides capability as well right -- take an SD-10A with HOJ (home on jam) capability, like an AMRAAM .. So even though MICA is indeed a great weapon, lets not simply assume that MICA would simply dominate, because the SD-10A onboard the thunder is also a very capable missile..
EW suite -- no mentioning there as well, only a faint mention of how MICA will be able to defeat even the best EW suites -- but what about the M2k, how will it perform against a SD-10A etc etc. is all up for debate --

So again, I can also post a whole lecture on how many weapons JF-17 has, from anti radiation weapons to hypersonic missiles against fixed targets, how great it is in such and such and such --- but that wouldn't be exactly a comparison now would it ... Hence I still stand by my belief that under the air-air engagement criteria, JF-17 would be more or less even with M2K or Mig-29 --

 

[NKVD]

* Maneuverability -- No mentioning there except maybe the G-load -- but that is all -- no mentioning of how the JF-17 on a horizontal plane is more maneuverable then an F-16, or owing to a higher T/W ratio, the JF-17 might be better in the vertical plane as well (compared to a M2K)--

Its Myth Twr of of Delta Plane Mirage-2000-5 higher than jf-17. Even Clean its almost Equal to LCA
Thrust-to-weight ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EW suite -- no mentioning there as well, only a faint mention of how MICA will be able to defeat even the best EW suites -- but what about the M2k, how will it perform against a SD-10A etc etc. is all up for debate --

yeah Chinese EW Suite

 

[abdulbarijan]

Its Myth Twr of of Delta Plane Mirage-2000-5 higher than jf-17. Even Clean its almost Equal to LCA
Thrust-to-weight ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and your argument is irrelevant because LCA is also a light weight class aircraft -- you were the one harping about how much load M2K can carry guess what, with 95-98 KN engine and that huge a load, your T/W comes down quite a bit --

BTW, I wonder why Wikipedia was quoted with its "t/w ratio article", and not the specs from individual articles on both aircrafts -- oh I get it -- thats cuz the T/W ratio mentioned on the M2K with loaded weight is 0.7 as mentioned in wiki ... cant have the JFT having a spec advantage now can we...

Dassault Mirage 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

yeah Chinese EW Suite

so being from chinese origin means its not up to the mark -- good --- noted -- I suppose IAF can beat the PLAAF in a matter of days seeing how the PLAAF has all that "backward chinese equipment"

 

[NKVD]

BTW, I wonder why Wikipedia was quoted with its "t/w ratio article", and not the specs from individual articles on both aircrafts -- oh I get it -- thats cuz the T/W ratio mentioned on the M2K with loaded weight is 0.7 as mentioned in wiki ... cant have the JFT having a spec advantage now can we...

Yes the Both Not but Correctly Because 1.09 TWR of Jf-17 you are quoting is Empty Weight Same in Case of LCA with Full combat load there TWR will be LoW Comparatively

 

[abdulbarijan]

If Chinese origin was soo good then you why asking Italy and French to provide radars and EW suit . only when both denied you have no option left other then Chinese.

Ever heard of the term "upgrades" -- the system PAF was perusing included an AESA from Selex, an EW suite based on SPECTRA onboard rafale and other such upgrades -- while also the option of other lethal weapon systems such as MICA missile ---

correction, the selex offer is STILL on the table, the Vixen AESA is still pretty much a possibility, while the other AESA is based on a J-10 B design -- and for your information, PAF operates western equipment as well, we have amongst the biggest fleet of Mirage Roses, and are amongst the most experienced operators of the falcons, so we know the western equipment and how good it is and what the JFT needs based on the philosophy behind the jet ...

as far as the JFT goes, research the info pool thread and look up the interviews of the reviews of pilots who fly the likes of falcons and the SU-27 -- and their take on it -- instead of your half baked assertions with no relevant proof backing them up...

Yes the Both Not but Correctly Because 1.09 TWR of Jf-17 you are quoting is Empty Weight Same in Case of LCA with Full combat load there TWR will be LoW Comparatively

Correction, I never quoted any T/W ratio figure, I was simply basing my opinion on GR!FF!N's post who said that the t/w ratio of JFT is indeed better, and while your at it, you should atleast research the very source your quoting, because the loaded weight T/W ratio of JFT (0.9 something) is also given in the link you posted, but its funny -- your quoting wikipedia knowing that its false -- for JFT -- but when one points out what it says for M2K -- your like yeah its false ...

 

[NKVD]

Correction, I never quoted any T/W ratio figure, I was simply basing my opinion on GR!FF!N's post who said that the t/w ratio of JFT is indeed better, and while your at it, you should atleast research the very source your quoting, because the loaded weight T/W ratio of JFT (0.9 something) is also given in the link you posted, but its funny -- your quoting wikipedia knowing that its false -- for JFT -- but when one points out what it says for M2K -- your like yeah its false ...

But IaM correct JFT TWR is 1.09 Claimed by PAF Pilot During Paris Air Show
So,WikiPedia Source Can't be blamed they just are Open Source for Information

Here is Link for My post
Sqr Leader Nadir ALI quoting it on 2:00 Minutes

because the loaded weight T/W ratio of JFT (0.9 something) i

Mirage-2000 has More G Load

• G limits: +9.0 g / -3.2 g (override mode: 11 g, structural limit: 12 g)

In comparison

jf-17 G Limits of

8g,-3

Post Link to Confirm your Source