JF-17's ECM & Design Limitations

[MastanKhan]

yes PAF need a heavy fighter there only few options for pakistan buy euro fighter but it is too expensive OK let see a another one SU-35 which India would not let us buy it how about Chinese J-11 or J-15 still expensive but let's say we gave the order of 40 planes and when we going to get India going to receive rafale in 2020 if they signed the Final contract now the problem with 4th+ generation of fighter in my opinion is in very short future there will be many 5th generation fighter like chines J-20 or J-31 Russian Sukhoi PAK FA japness Mitsubishi X-2 turkey TAI TFX or USA F-22 or F-35 those are few exp you have 2 options 1st buy 4th+ heavy fighter now add it in your air force in 5 or 6 year with all the maintenance and pilot training or make your current aircraft better make it more lighter that sort of stuff and wait for 7 year and buy a 5th and you will be in next gen of fighter with your enemy

and MastanKhan what you said India have more heavy air power India can not even maintain half of there SU-30 if that happened with India with their economy what will going to happened with us
JF-17 can destroy Su-30 it is not that difficult the only problem is with JF-17 is loading limit because it is a light weight fighter it is going to have and flue capacity because of it's small size which can be solve by air refueling if u think BVR missile is magic i can not help u man it can be dodge by signal jammier or flares or maneuvering JF-17 is a fine plane in it's class it is a light weight fighter it bound to have some problems but not able to fight is not one of them

Hi,

It amazes me when every pakistani comes swining with a BEST CASE SCENARIO in their favor---.

The 5th gen fighter do not fill int the hole for a 4 / 4.5 gen heavy fighter strike aircraft---.

@Viper0011. At max range the chance of hitting the target fro an R77 is miniscule----even at a close enough range it is never a 100%---it is more like somewhere in the 90% range---as you mentioned.

The SD10B even though gets a lot from the R77 is a much newer missile and is pretty close to the aim 120's that pakistan has---.

 

[randomradio]

I agree with some parts of your post but the bold part. There was a scandal in PN a few times in the past and I won't be surprised if one exists in the PAF also.

But on the MKI, its totally false to assume an MKI can fire at the JFT from 400 KM's away or the BVR option becomes useless for the JFT. The reality is, say you fired a BVR at me from 100 KM's away, and my operating base or FOB is 80 KM's away from the border (the case for Pakistan). I can turn back around and really land if I wanted to. Do you really think the BVR can find me?

Also, there are many other tactics to confused a BVR fired from that far away. I can simply turn around and fly 30-40 more KM's inside my territory, and making the missile run out of fuel with a really week lock, almost useless anyway!! The most effective lock parameter for any modern BVR is around 50-60 KM's (that's a BVR with over 100 KM range). And even then, it is suggested during training to fire two BVR's at one target to achieve a 90% kill ratio within 50-60 KM's. So there is nothing guaranteed. The best BVR kills have actually taken place way below 50 KM (or around 40 NM).

So in Pakistan and India's scenario, the MKI's massive radar is really a great advantage towards the Chinese due to hundreds of miles worth of mountains in between before you face the enemy's plane. I know for a fact that the PAF's sector commanders can watch everything inside Afghanistan, over 100 miles, and over 80 miles inside India. And these are ground radars.

In JFT and MKI's case, the PAF will scramble the JFT within 60-80 KM's of the border during hostilities with FOB's being used. Inbound MKI will be within 20-40 KM's when the scramble takes place. 10-20 KM's will pass by in acquiring lock and all and directing the aircraft towards the vector. So both the jets will be within 70-100 KM's of each other. Meaning, they will both fire their BVR's within seconds of each other. I'd suspect 2 BVR's per plane will be fired. After that, the winner is who has better radar evading tech and tactics, the distance reduces the probability as is by 20-30%.

MKI's larger RCS would pose a risk as the missile will easily obtain a lock. But its TVC and other tech gives it advanced ability to evade the missile. Thrust Vectoring is great to defeat any missile, but ONLY the first one. If there is a second missile which was fired a few seconds after the first one, it would find the MKI like a helicopter and would have no issues in hitting it as the MKI would be recovering from the Cobra or other TVC maneuvers with energy already bled and drag taking its toll for the next 30-45 seconds. But if only one missile was fired, due to MKI's larger fuel carrying capacity, it can come back into the fight after it dodges the first missile. While JFT, after out maneuver the first missile could only go home and land for refuel.

So as you can see, there are MANY variables here. Having a bigger radar gives you a bigger threat perception, but it doesn't mean that you can take down others from hundreds of KM's that easily. There are dozens of variables involved. In a BVR missile chase, both the planes have their own strengths and weaknesses, and both can evade one missile fired from over 60-70KM away easily.

All of this discounts electronic warfare. The Bars can survive a dense EW environment that the JF-17's obsolete radar cannot. I'm willing to bet the JF-17s will be radar blind throughout the war when up against the MKI or any other IAF aircraft. The MKI's larger RCS won't matter in such circumstances. Not counting the MKI's ability to fire five different classes of air to air missiles while the JF-17 has just two.

They have to have offencive strike aircraft----that can target mumbai and neighboring areas---.

You will need a brand new air force in order to do that.

That's a LOT of area the MKI will have to go one way so he'll be short on fuel too.

The more the PAF is pushed back, the more the IAF can bomb with impunity. It is convenient to the MKI due to its large fuel reserves. It's not like MKIs close to the border fly with 100% fuel anyway.

India can not even maintain half of there SU-30

I hope you know that has more to do with bureaucracy than technical.

The 5th gen fighter do not fill int the hole for a 4 / 4.5 gen heavy fighter strike aircraft---.

What do you have in mind, then?

 

[randomradio]

what the hell are you talking about and what you said to answer all of that what you said i just want to say have sweet dreams

So the old mechanical scan radar cannot be jammed at all, and I am the one dreaming.

During exercises between India and the US, Indian Mig-21s successfully jammed the mechanical radars of American F-15s and F-16s 10 years ago. What's so special about the JF-17? The JF's radar is obsolete. It won't work against India.

 

[his5850]

So the old mechanical scan radar cannot be jammed at all, and I am the one dreaming.

During exercises between India and the US, Indian Mig-21s successfully jammed the mechanical radars of American F-15s and F-16s 10 years ago. What's so special about the JF-17? The JF's radar is obsolete. It won't work against India.

please share the source of that
JF-17 using KLJ-7V2 multi-mode, pulse-Doppler radar it has same kind as Tejas EL/M-2032 multi-mode, pulse-Doppler radar if u think it is useless then why are u using it in your own planes

 

[Tank131]

MastanKhan you have no idea what are you talking about US did not even build a 3rd generation of fighters they directly jumped to 4th generation of fighter if they can do that why don't we and please explain how and why
The 5th gen fighter do not fill int the hole for a 4 / 4.5 gen heavy fighter strike aircraft and please also tell which 4.5 generation plane pakistan could have
SD-10A is pretty good for new missile it is more capable than the American AIM-120 A/B, but slightly inferior than the AIM-120C



what the hell are you talking about and what you said to answer all of that what you said i just want to say have sweet dreams

Actually you are the one who has no idea what your talking about. The US produced 2 very successful 3rd Gen fighters (F-4 Phantom and the F-5 Freedom Fighter and proposed numerous more like the F-20 tigershark which was more of the 3.5).
As for why a 5th gen does not fill the role of the 4.5 Gen heavy strike fighter...that depends on the 5th Gen fighter.

Realistically of the current/future projects, ONLY THE J-20 seems to be able to fit that mold due to the large size/ability to house a vast amount of munitions internally. Now the F-22 could if operating without stealth (i.e. external stores), but if it wants to operate as a stealth aircraft and carry weapons internally it only has the ability to carry 2 1000lbs JDAMs or 8 250lbs small diameter bombs (even JDAM equipped). That is not going to be much of large scale strike. Remember, the point of the stealth strike fighter is precision and taking out specific targets. While the F-22 or potentially even the PAK-FA could do this in non-stealth form, they will be redundant as an F-15 or Su-35 can carry as much without the astronomical cost of acquiring and operating.

As to which 4th gen heavy strike fighters are available to Pakistan, that is a different story. People here talk alot about J-11/J-15/J-16. That isnt gonna happen. These are reverse engineered flankers that Russia never gave permission to make. The Chinese operating them is something the russians have come to grips with, but selling them without russia's permission would be a different story. The russians gave the Chinese a hard enough time in buying the Su-35, if they have a sale of a high caliber flanker that may be the end of Russia selling high end defense equipment to the Chinese...something the Chinese still rely on. Now there have been offers for the Typhoon in the past and this is politically feasible but economically it is unlikely.There is also talk about Russia and Pakistan discussing the sale of Su-35. If either are available thats great, but if they are not, the only other option is a modified JH-7B which has sparked huge debate here before. This fighter/bomber lacks agility quite severely, BUT has a huge payload (9000kg, which is 1000kg larger than even the MKI) and a huge nose cone to boot (to allow a very large radar and subsystems. Its has great range as well. If upgraded with a high powered AESA radar (say the one from J-16) and given HMD/S and a HOBS 5th Gen Missile (say A-darter), it would eliminate much of the WVR short comings. This thing could carry 4 Ra'ad and 2 CM-400AKG, 2 Sd-10A and a 1000kg Fuel Tank and still have room to spare.

As for SD-10A, it is widely believed to be equal to Aim-120C and superior to R-77.
Regarding BVR engagement...the average BVR engagement kill range is 20-30km. Engagements from beyond this range have a significantly lower proportion of killing their targets, even for MRAAMs. The notion that the JF-17 wont detect the Su-30MKI before both are in firing range is nonsense, especially when looking at the fact that PAF operate 8 AWACs of which 2 are in the air at all times. The PAF will see the MKI coming long before it is in firing range of the R-77, even long before it is in strike range of A2G targets. The R-77 will not have any advantage over the Sd-10A in such an engagement, the major area of advantage is the manouverability and the amount of ordnance the MKI carries (not the type). Add to this the jamming over an area like Pakistan where there will be heavy electronic warfare from AWACs, ground stations and fighters (JF-17 and F-16) and the situation is not as clear as who has a bigger radar.

The major area where PAF needs to focus on With respect to defending its airspace is the ability to strike at IAF targets across the boarder. The majority of IAF bases in the western theater are within 250-300km of Pakistan's boarder. This means that pushing the originating/returning point of IAF strike package back further (to around 500km or more) is vital. At this range only IAF's MKI's will have the endurance to operate over Pakistan's skies and return home with aerial refueling (which PAF can also target with SD-10A and AMRAAM from JF-17/F-16. How to push the strike packages back is by hitting FOBs with saturation attacks and that is where the heavy strike fighters like JH-7B come in handy. Using Numerous Ra'ad (350km stand off range) and GB-6 130km ammunition dispenser, PAF strike packages could wreak havoc on IAF FOBs and armored columns. Additionally I had in the past advocated for PAF acquiring H-6K strategic bombers (~8-10 of them) for saturation attacks using Babur missiles, (can carry 8 of them). With this sitting 500km inside Pakistan it can hit out against Radar Stations, SAM Sites and FOBs with saturation style attacks, overwhelming IAF airdefenses while sitting well inside Pakistan under the protection of SAMs and Fighters, with AWAC support to enable them to vector away from IAF fighters over Pakistan Airspace.

 

[his5850]

Actually you are the one who has no idea what your talking about. The US produced 2 very successful 3rd Gen fighters (F-4 Phantom and the F-5 Freedom Fighter and proposed numerous more like the F-20 tigershark which was more of the 3.5).

May be you should read some history F-4 Phantom was created as 3rd generation fighter because of it's heavy weight it could not it was turn into a bomber then comes the F-4 Phantom II which fixed some of it's problems but it was still wasn't a dog fighter so US worked on 4th generation F-16 and F-14 to fill that gap
if F-4 Phantom II was dog fighter then why US navy was using Vought F-8 Crusader 2nd generation plane as dog fighter
Northrop F-5 never seen in action because of it short range the program was considered a political gesture intended to aid the export of more F-5s than a serious consideration of the type for U.S. service

 

[randomradio]

please share the source of that
JF-17 using KLJ-7V2 multi-mode, pulse-Doppler radar it has same kind as Tejas EL/M-2032 multi-mode, pulse-Doppler radar if u think it is useless then why are u using it in your own planes

Who says we are going to use that radar?

Firstly the radar is not 2032, that's a misconception. The Tejas Mk1 has an Indian made MS radar. And the numbers for this variant is capped at 20. They will be used for testing and training in South India. From Mk1A onwards, the radar will be the Israeli EL/M 2052 AESA.

Jaguars will be equipped with the EL/M 2052 too.

The only aircraft which will continue to use older mechanical radars will be the upgraded Mig-29 and Mirage-2000 after 2020. And out of those it is possible that even the M-2000 will get AESA.

The notion that the JF-17 wont detect the Su-30MKI before both are in firing range is nonsense, especially when looking at the fact that PAF operate 8 AWACs of which 2 are in the air at all times.

So, it's not the JF-17 detecting the MKI, but the AWACS. So the JF-17 won't detect the MKI.

And in a USAF vs PLAAF scenario, the USAF AWACS are not expected to survive. What's so special about PAF that its AWACS will survive? Especially when it is taken for granted that the IAF has a technologically superior air force compared to the PLAAF and has a far superior numbers advantage over the PAF compared to PLAAF's disadvantage in numbers over USAF and JASDF.

The PAF will see the MKI coming long before it is in firing range of the R-77, even long before it is in strike range of A2G targets. The R-77 will not have any advantage over the Sd-10A in such an engagement, the major area of advantage is the manouverability and the amount of ordnance the MKI carries (not the type).

The R-77 family of missiles have far surpassed even the Aim-120D. Just like how there are different variants of the Su-27, there are also different variants of the R-77. But the most advanced version is yet to enter service, should be this year. This new version has a 200+Km range and has a GaN AESA seeker.

 

[Tank131]

Do you have any clue what you are talking about? Whether they were good dog fighters or not, they are 3rd Gen Fighters. This was in response to you saying the US never created had 3rd Gen fighters. And it is you who should review your history, ALL F-4's were called Phantom II. The Phantom was the McDonnell FH-1 which was a 1st Gen Carrier based jet fighter of which 62 were built.

Infact the US had hundreds of Phantom IIs and it, along with Mig-21 and F-5 was one of the most successful 3rd Gen fighters, with over 5000 built. As for the F-4 not being a good dogfighter, that had more to do with the fact that it originally exlcuded a gun and relied only on very early missiles whose reliablility was poor. This was initially overcome with externally mounted gun pods until the F-4E. With the addition of the internal vulcan cannon, the F-4 was actually a very successful dogfighter. Also, the USAF and USN had moved away (post Korea) from training their pilots much about dog-fighting. With the severe lack of success over inferior aircraft like Mig-19, (partly due the gun and partly due to pilot training) the creation of training programs for dog-fighting was reinstituted. Among these was the creation of Topgun at Miramar. In fact it dominated the skies over vietnam with the re-inclusion of a gun and renewed training in the skill dogfighting on part of the USAF and USN. The initial idea was that the new era would be supersonic encounters with Radar guided missiles and WVR missiles (which would not require guns). This was not the case and as a result, every US fighter since then (including the F/A-22) has guns. Regarding the F-8s use over the F-4, this again turned with advent of the F-4E, which addressed many of the issues with the F-4. While the Mig-21 and F-8 were no doubt more nimble, the F-4 had huge thrust/speed advantages and advantage at long range (d/t its superior radar and weapons). As a result, the very first American Ace in vietnam was Randy Cunningham (Call sign "Showtime 100") who shot down 3 Mig-17s. Infact the Navy lost 73 Phantoms during the vietnam war, of which only 7 were to enemy aircraft, compared to 40 kills in a2a combat. A 40-7 margin does NOT indicate a bad dog fighter.

The F-5 also served in the USAF (2600 sorties flown over Vietnam with 9 losses, 7 to ground fire and 2 to malfunction, 0 to enemy aircraft). It was, as you said, supposed to be for export primarily but using it over vietnam was an important part of its export success with over 2200 F-5s built...it was a very successful 3rd gen fighter, agan by the US. And it saw combat in other countries as well. During the Ethiopian/Somali War in late 70s, 2 Ethiopian F-5 faced off against 4 somali Mig-21s and shot 2 down and forced the other 2 to collide while avoiding the Ethiopian Aim-9Bs fromt he F-5s (these were flown by Israeli pilots). During the Iran-Iraq War the F-5 saw heavy action, with Iranian F-5s scoring heavy wins against supposedly superior aircraft (while also suffering considerable losses). The very first Mig-25 ever shot down in a2a combat was by an IRIAF F-5. There are still F-5Es and Iranian Variants like HEZA Saeqeh and Azarakhsh Fighters still in service.

And both types are still in service with various airforces around the world...they are among the target aircraft that the JF-17 was created to replace.

 

[Tank131]

So, it's not the JF-17 detecting the MKI, but the AWACS. So the JF-17 won't detect the MKI.

And in a USAF vs PLAAF scenario, the USAF AWACS are not expected to survive. What's so special about PAF that its AWACS will survive? Especially when it is taken for granted that the IAF has a technologically superior air force compared to the PLAAF and has a far superior numbers advantage over the PAF compared to PLAAF's disadvantage in numbers over USAF and JASDF.

1. According to who are USAF AWACs not suppossed to survive an encounter with PLAAF? The USAF fleet is far superior to anything in any other airforces' inventory. Lets not get ahead of ourselves with thinking otherwise, the US knows how to defend its AWACs and even the FT-2000 SAM would not have the range to hit these AWACs which (likley naval) will be defended by F/A-18s, Destroyers and Cruisers carrying SM-3/6 to knock out fighters from hundreds of km away from the AWAC.

2. No one except you would ever make the claime that IAF is technologically superior in any way to the PLAAF. You have MKI which is the only current fighter in the fleet that would worry the PLAAF. They have far larger numbers of flankers (From Su-27, Su-30MKK, Su-30MKK2 and Su-30MKK3 to J-11B/BS/D, J-15, J-16) and hundreds of J-10As and J-10Bs coming on line. Your airforce vis-a-vis the PLAAF is far outgunned. Your M2K and Mig-29 are not a match for their flankers and J-10s (especially not their newer flankers and J-10B)

3. IAF is definately technologically and numerically superior to the PAF. No question. But that is why the AWACs are more important for PAF/IAF senario. While the JF-17 (even without AWAC) will detect the MKI beyond its striking capability (KLJ-7V2 is said to have a detection range of 150km for 5 m^2 or 130km for 3 m^2) and as I have said (and feel free to look it up) the best kill range for BVR combat is 20-30km. That being said, with the the BARS has a 300-400km range in search, can track at 200km, Detection range fighter type MIG-29 in area of review of over 300 sq. deg: - on towards course - up to 140 km; - in pursuit of - up to 60 km so its not the "god-radar" everyone here makes it to be. It has the ability to allow the MKI to vector to a more suitable position, but still to attack a fighter sized aircraft, it still needs to be inside 140km (where its missiles would be unlikely to hit anyways given the huge range that is...again 20-30km is the golden range for most bvr engagements.

http://www.niip.ru/index.php?option...12-25-58&catid=8:2011-07-06-06-33-26&Itemid=8

The R-77 family of missiles have far surpassed even the Aim-120D. Just like how there are different variants of the Su-27, there are also different variants of the R-77. But the most advanced version is yet to enter service, should be this year. This new version has a 200+Km range and has a GaN AESA seeker.

There is no evidence to suggest the R-77 is at all better than the Aim-120D. Secondly the SD-10 used the R-77 seeker with a chinese rocket motor to improve the range. The Sd-10A modified the weapon to be compatible with MIL-STD-1533 STD, made it a bit heavier d/t better motor for speed and range with improved seeker and a 12G turning capability.

A 200km range missile may be great against slow moving targets but again, not good against those targets that are fast moving, or slow movers that are much beyond its range (like the AWACs you are supposedly trying to shoot at that range). It would be effective against bombers (but as I mentioned the H-6K would be able to hit indian targets far beyond the range of the R-77) but best against tankers. MKI while superior in most respects to both the F-16 and JF-17 is not the king of all it surveys like people in South Asia like to think it is. There are many things that go into a2a combat that are not as simple as what its tracking range is or what the missile's max range is. With the support of AWACs, the JF-17 and the F-16 stand a reasonable chance against the MKI...the huge advantage it has is how many missiles it can deliver on target. While the JF-17 may only be able to deliver 2-4 missiles at BVR range (depending on the setup). and the F-16 may only be able to deliver 4-6 BVR missiles the MKI could potentially deliver up to 10 per aircraft, and attack 4 enemy aircraft at once (meaning 2+ missiles per aircraft).

During exercises between India and the US, Indian Mig-21s successfully jammed the mechanical radars of American F-15s and F-16s 10 years ago. What's so special about the JF-17? The JF's radar is obsolete. It won't work against India.

What makes you think the JF-17s radar is obsolete? Because you dont know anything about it? Remember, it was selected after all, over other western radars such as Grifo S7. Also the french had reoffered the RC400 in 2009 (along with MICA) and the PAF turned it down saying the KLJ-7 (now PAF has equipped the KLJ-7V2) was as good if not better. As for Mig-21s, firstly, lets see any proof that the Mig was able to jam the US planes, then also please recall there are strict limits to the allowed functionality of both sides in an exercise. The US was prohibited (in the scope of those exercises) from using BVR ranges at any point. Dont sit here and try to get anyone to believe your pathetic Mig-21 is any type of match electronically for F-15 or F-16. Its not.

 

[randomradio]

1. According to who are USAF AWACs not suppossed to survive an encounter with PLAAF? The USAF fleet is far superior to anything in any other airforces' inventory. Lets not get ahead of ourselves with thinking otherwise, the US knows how to defend its AWACs and even the FT-2000 SAM would not have the range to hit these AWACs which (likley naval) will be defended by F/A-18s, Destroyers and Cruisers carrying SM-3/6 to knock out fighters from hundreds of km away from the AWAC.

According to USAF, according to everybody else, including civilians who do military funded simulations.

Survivability of the AWACS is heavily dependent on the escort fighters around it and of course the old fashioned running away. You will be surprised how vulnerable they are.

That's the reason why FGFA will be carrying multiple radars all along its fuselage and wings for 360 degree coverage. They will replace the AWACS in anti-access areas.

2. No one except you would ever make the claime that IAF is technologically superior in any way to the PLAAF. You have MKI which is the only current fighter in the fleet that would worry the PLAAF. They have far larger numbers of flankers (From Su-27, Su-30MKK, Su-30MKK2 and Su-30MKK3 to J-11B/BS/D, J-15, J-16) and hundreds of J-10As and J-10Bs coming on line. Your airforce vis-a-vis the PLAAF is far outgunned. Your M2K and Mig-29 are not a match for their flankers and J-10s (especially not their newer flankers and J-10B)

The advantages the IAF has had over the last 15 years, the PLAAF is only achieving now. The future is questionable, but it doesn't change the fact that the IAF is better than the PLAAF today, so there is no question of PAF being an effective force against the IAF with their older aircraft.

You should see an interview of two PAF retired ranking officers, one of them was AM Shaheed Latif, he pointed out the conventional disparity between IAF and PAF is too high.

But that is why the AWACs are more important for PAF/IAF senario.

They are not survivable. PAF has no strategic dept. So there's no running away. MKIs can shoot down AWACS without having to cross borders.

The IAF has deployed new hypersonic air to air missiles for that purpose.

While the JF-17 (even without AWAC) will detect the MKI beyond its striking capability (KLJ-7V2 is said to have a detection range of 150km for 5 m^2 or 130km for 3 m^2) and as I have said (and feel free to look it up) the best kill range for BVR combat is 20-30km. That being said, with the the BARS has a 300-400km range in search, can track at 200km, Detection range fighter type MIG-29 in area of review of over 300 sq. deg: - on towards course - up to 140 km; - in pursuit of - up to 60 km so its not the "god-radar" everyone here makes it to be. It has the ability to allow the MKI to vector to a more suitable position, but still to attack a fighter sized aircraft, it still needs to be inside 140km (where its missiles would be unlikely to hit anyways given the huge range that is...again 20-30km is the golden range for most bvr engagements.

These figures for the MKI's radar are 20 years old. This was the first version that was inducted in 2000. Today's figure for a Mig-29 type fighter is well above 250Km.

The Russians have already upgraded the Bars. Now they are offering an Irbis upgrade for the versions that are yet to be built. That's separate from the AESA upgrade. The RuAF Su-30SMs have been operational with the newer Bars versions for years now.

There is no evidence to suggest the R-77 is at all better than the Aim-120D.

What? There's plenty of evidence. The K-77M has dual pulse motors and a GaN AESA seeker. The Aim-120D has a MS seeker with a regular rocket motor. Dual pulse means the K-77M can boost its speed to its highest level before impact, the Aim-120D can't. Basically, the Aim-120D is also obsolete as far as the K-77M is concerned.

A prototype GaN seeker

There's also a new RAMJET version.

Secondly the SD-10 used the R-77 seeker with a chinese rocket motor to improve the range. The Sd-10A modified the weapon to be compatible with MIL-STD-1533 STD, made it a bit heavier d/t better motor for speed and range with improved seeker and a 12G turning capability.

If the Chinese say their latest Flankers are better than the Su-35, would you believe them? The SD-10A is an old missile.

A 200km range missile may be great against slow moving targets but again, not good against those targets that are fast moving, or slow movers that are much beyond its range (like the AWACs you are supposedly trying to shoot at that range).

The range indicates how much more capable the missile has become using the same airframe. It's more than double that of the old RVV-AE.

What makes you think the JF-17s radar is obsolete? Because you dont know anything about it? Remember, it was selected after all, over other western radars such as Grifo S7. Also the french had reoffered the RC400 in 2009 (along with MICA) and the PAF turned it down saying the KLJ-7 (now PAF has equipped the KLJ-7V2) was as good if not better. As for Mig-21s, firstly, lets see any proof that the Mig was able to jam the US planes, then also please recall there are strict limits to the allowed functionality of both sides in an exercise. The US was prohibited (in the scope of those exercises) from using BVR ranges at any point. Dont sit here and try to get anyone to believe your pathetic Mig-21 is any type of match electronically for F-15 or F-16. Its not.

Grifo S7, RC400, APG-68 etc are all obsolete radars.

The Mig-21 Bison uses the same jammer the Israelis use on all of their F-15s.

http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/27537.pdf

Hundreds of ELTA's Self-Protection Jamming Pods are deployed worldwide, installed onboard F-16, F-15, F-111, F-4, F-5, A-4, Jaguar and Eastern fighters.

The Jaguar and Eastern fighters reference points to India.

The JF-17 is way too obsolete for a shooting war against the IAF. It doesn't matter what type of support it has.

 

[his5850]

According to USAF, according to everybody else, including civilians who do military funded simulations.

Survivability of the AWACS is heavily dependent on the escort fighters around it and of course the old fashioned running away. You will be surprised how vulnerable they are.

That's the reason why FGFA will be carrying multiple radars all along its fuselage and wings for 360 degree coverage. They will replace the AWACS in anti-access areas.



The advantages the IAF has had over the last 15 years, the PLAAF is only achieving now. The future is questionable, but it doesn't change the fact that the IAF is better than the PLAAF today, so there is no question of PAF being an effective force against the IAF with their older aircraft.

You should see an interview of two PAF retired ranking officers, one of them was AM Shaheed Latif, he pointed out the conventional disparity between IAF and PAF is too high.



.

If u really think that pakistani air force is that weak and and cannot fight and Indian air force can beat every one in the world then why are wasting your time here if u think that Indian air force technology far better then good for you if you think MIG 21 is better or same as F-15 then i think my answer will could not help you this Thread is about JF-17 when i come here i want to read about JF-17 not a nonsense if u think India air force is better then good for just stop wasting mine and your time by posting here and if you think JF-17 will make PAF more weak then what are worried about Well, you got the Tejas, so you won't need the Russian fighter anyway.The Tejas is very stealthy craft, having been almost entirely undetected for nearly 30 years.

 

[Tank131]

According to USAF, according to everybody else, including civilians who do military funded simulations.

Survivability of the AWACS is heavily dependent on the escort fighters around it and of course the old fashioned running away. You will be surprised how vulnerable they are.

That's the reason why FGFA will be carrying multiple radars all along its fuselage and wings for 360 degree coverage. They will replace the AWACS in anti-access areas.



The advantages the IAF has had over the last 15 years, the PLAAF is only achieving now. The future is questionable, but it doesn't change the fact that the IAF is better than the PLAAF today, so there is no question of PAF being an effective force against the IAF with their older aircraft.

You should see an interview of two PAF retired ranking officers, one of them was AM Shaheed Latif, he pointed out the conventional disparity between IAF and PAF is too high.



They are not survivable. PAF has no strategic dept. So there's no running away. MKIs can shoot down AWACS without having to cross borders.

The IAF has deployed new hypersonic air to air missiles for that purpose.



These figures for the MKI's radar are 20 years old. This was the first version that was inducted in 2000. Today's figure for a Mig-29 type fighter is well above 250Km.

The Russians have already upgraded the Bars. Now they are offering an Irbis upgrade for the versions that are yet to be built. That's separate from the AESA upgrade. The RuAF Su-30SMs have been operational with the newer Bars versions for years now.



What? There's plenty of evidence. The K-77M has dual pulse motors and a GaN AESA seeker. The Aim-120D has a MS seeker with a regular rocket motor. Dual pulse means the K-77M can boost its speed to its highest level before impact, the Aim-120D can't. Basically, the Aim-120D is also obsolete as far as the K-77M is concerned.

A prototype GaN seeker

There's also a new RAMJET version.

If the Chinese say their latest Flankers are better than the Su-35, would you believe them? The SD-10A is an old missile.



The range indicates how much more capable the missile has become using the same airframe. It's more than double that of the old RVV-AE.



Grifo S7, RC400, APG-68 etc are all obsolete radars.

The Mig-21 Bison uses the same jammer the Israelis use on all of their F-15s.

http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/27537.pdf


The Jaguar and Eastern fighters reference points to India.

The JF-17 is way too obsolete for a shooting war against the IAF. It doesn't matter what type of support it has.

Very little of anything you said has any basis in reality. The notion that your mig-21 bis is at all capable of handling f-15s is not only foolish to utter out loud but is laughable. The idea that the IAF in any way has any type of edge over the PLAAF is hysterical (you fail to even realize that half ur fleet is unservicable by your own air chiefs admission). Superior to PAF, yes, to the PLAAF please be serious. Additionally i suggest u look at the link regarding the MKIs radar and stop living in a dream world. Your fan boy dreams blind you to reality. And now im done with you.

 

[MastanKhan]

The major area where PAF needs to focus on With respect to defending its airspace is the ability to strike at IAF targets across the boarder. The majority of IAF bases in the western theater are within 250-300km of Pakistan's boarder. This means that pushing the originating/returning point of IAF strike package back further (to around 500km or more) is vital. At this range only IAF's MKI's will have the endurance to operate over Pakistan's skies and return home with aerial refueling (which PAF can also target with SD-10A and AMRAAM from JF-17/F-16. How to push the strike packages back is by hitting FOBs with saturation attacks and that is where the heavy strike fighters like JH-7B come in handy. Using Numerous Ra'ad (350km stand off range) and GB-6 130km ammunition dispenser, PAF strike packages could wreak havoc on IAF FOBs and armored columns. Additionally I had in the past advocated for PAF acquiring H-6K strategic bombers (~8-10 of them) for saturation attacks using Babur missiles, (can carry 8 of them). With this sitting 500km inside Pakistan it can hit out against Radar Stations, SAM Sites and FOBs with saturation style attacks, overwhelming IAF airdefenses while sitting well inside Pakistan under the protection of SAMs and Fighters, with AWAC support to enable them to vector away from IAF fighters over Pakistan Airspace.

Hi,

The primary BVR for the JF17 is SD10B---.

On one hand paf and pakistani's are bragging about the Mirage 3's with their rose upgrades and F7PG's and on the other hand they are ' bad mouthing ' the JH7B----.

1 JH7B carries as much load as almost 3 1/2 mirages that we have or 3 1 /2 time that of F7PG's that we have and over 6 times the flying radius---and 2 1/2 JF17's load---The J16 size aesa 1600 T / R modules radar in the JH7B puts this aircraft light years ahead of those in the paf's inventory---

The JH7B is more nimble than the israeli reburbished aircraft that they were trying to sell to argentina---.

Being sharp and nimble is good---but that is not all---the important thing is what kind of electronics that you can carry and how potent they are. The F35 may not be as nimble as the F16 in a dog fight---but it will be more potent due to its electronics which can better challenge and evade an incoming threat.

The ' overall ' qualities of a JH7B far exceed any other aircraft in paf's inventory.

This aircraft can be designed to carry almost 10 + BVR missiles---or 16 WVR missiles---with its massive jammers----it can lead an attack of other aircraft into enemy territory and give them electronic protection---it can be designed to be used as a buddy refueller amongst many other things---you can have an off bore sight missile programmed as well.

If I may use military terminology----the F16 is like the 9 mm---the JF 17 is the the Herstal 5.7---and the JH7B is like a 357 Magnum.

The kids are looking at show and pomp---sleek and slender---and in real life they will always fall down to the heavies---.

Every pakistani claims about the lack of funds----and that is a lie---it is not a lack of funds---it is a lack of direction and commitment to the flag---the theft and stealing in the paf is at all times high---.

Instead of a fighting force---they are more interested in selling their aircraft---. Instead of procuring the right heavy aircraft---all their attention is to make a more potent aircraft so that they can have more sales.

All the available manpower is directed towards the JF 17 project---and the induction of a JH7B or a J10C would take manpower away from JF17's.

Inferior products are procured and label as the top best. Spada is a perfect example of a missile that should not have been bought.

Like---the JF 17 will never be able to catch up to the J10's---even the BLK 4 JF17----as the JF17 progresses---the J10's will as well.

The J10 will always have a larger aesa radar---will always carry more weapons will always have a more powerful engine---will always have a better loiter time---.

I also understand the mental problems of the young pakistanis---they have always worshipped the paf----so it is next to impossible for them to accept that their demigods have been lying to them for so long---for that reason---they will believe the paf rather than the one opposing it.

 

[randomradio]

Very little of anything you said has any basis in reality. The notion that your mig-21 bis is at all capable of handling f-15s is not only foolish to utter out loud but is laughable.

So you did not understand my point. The point is it doesn't matter what type of aircraft it is, the EL/L 8222 will easily jam any mechanical scan radar. This has nothing to do with the Mig-21.

If the Mig-21 could jam the F-15 in air exercises, then the MKI will have no problems dealing with the old obsolete radar of the JF-17 because it has better equipment. And even the 8222 is obsolete.

Our Air Chief Marshal has this to say:
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/fighter-aircrafts-make-in-india-iaf/

Pointing out that some of the aircrafts like the MiG-29, Jaguar and Mirage were being upgraded, the air chief said, "Some of our old fleets are becoming absolutely obsolete and so we need to replace them."

Just because the Mig-21s can jam a F-15's radar doesn't mean it has suddenly become an equivalent in other factors. It is still an 'absolutely obsolete' aircraft. That's just you dabbing in useless strawman arguments.

The idea that the IAF in any way has any type of edge over the PLAAF is hysterical (you fail to even realize that half ur fleet is unservicable by your own air chiefs admission).

It's a bureaucratic hurdle for peacetime spares imports. It has nothing to do with the actual technological prowess of the aircraft. Once those spares are manufactured in India, things will go back to normal.

IAF also carries war reserves that will push availability to well over 80% when necessary. But that comes at extra cost that's unnecessary during peacetime.

Superior to PAF, yes, to the PLAAF please be serious.

Yes, we have superior technology compared to the PLAAF. This is taken for granted everywhere. You are just new to it.

As of today we have over 200 ESA equipped fighter aircraft with internal EW suites and have been using advanced networking concepts for over 15 years. PLAAF is just beginning to do that. Once the Rafale starts coming in, the advantage will only increase.

IAF is the only air force in the world today that trains with the widest assortment of weapons and weapons systems. It started due to the import culture, but it is very effective. It is extremely difficult to deal with an air force that has brought in completely different types of aircraft to an exercise, all carrying different weapons. MKIs with the R-73, Jaguars with ASRAAM, LCA with Python-V, Mirage-2000 with MICA-IR, each of these need to be dealt with differently during a fight.

The air force is the only service wing that India has an advantage over China. And we are planning on maintaining that advantage.

Additionally i suggest u look at the link regarding the MKIs radar and stop living in a dream world.

Those are obsolete specs. Novices are not expected to know such things without ever having followed the program. If you notice the specs carefully, the peak power in the specs is 5KW, 4.5KW to be exact, which means the website specs are not accurate. But Bars can be upgraded up to 20KW of peak power, like the Irbis-E. There is also a 7KW version.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

The BARS remains in production for the Indian and Malaysian Irkut built Su-30MKI/MKM variants. The radar is available with a range of TWT power ratings, this being the source of considerable confusion to observers who have not tracked this program since its inception.

Posting the specs for the lowest and oldest configuration is obviously what's misleading you.

Are you one of the observers who has tracked the program since its inception? You obviously are not. Hence why you have a poor understanding of Russian radar technologies.

Your fan boy dreams blind you to reality. And now im done with you.

Yes, hide in your bubble instead of learning.

The ' overall ' qualities of a JH7B far exceed any other aircraft in paf's inventory.

The JH-7s have very low TWR. So you cannot use them without having achieved air superiority first. The Super Hornet is a far better aircraft.

If you are hoping PAF would get their hands on the export version, FBC-1, then it's too late. The aircraft is way too obsolete if you want to buy it now. By the time you buy it, get it in decent numbers and start training on it, IAF would already have inducted 100+ Rafales and would have started induction of the FGFA.

 

[MastanKhan]

The JH-7s have very low TWR. So you cannot use them without having achieved air superiority first. The Super Hornet is a far better aircraft.

If you are hoping PAF would get their hands on the export version, FBC-1, then it's too late. The aircraft is way too obsolete if you want to buy it now. By the time you buy it, get it in decent numbers and start training on it, IAF would already have inducted 100+ Rafales and would have started induction of the FGFA.

It is JH7B and not JH7---.

An old american saying---" the enemy gets to vote as well ".