JF17 Block III: AESA Vs IRST - which system should take priority?

[Paksanity]

@Bilal Khan 777

I have a feeling that PAF has a thing or two to learn about marketing. If I was to suggest measures for making block III an export success, it would go something like this.

PAF must chalk out a clear path to what Block 3 would include dictated by three factors alone. There is no need to deviate or interfere with program every now and then once you understand these factors. I write them in order of priority, explain them and then suggest how to go about them.

1. What PAF wants its own fleet to look like. This solely depends on threats it will face and the tasks it will be assigned to do.

2. What layman public and politicians of importing countries want to see on their fighter (not what their Air force requires).

3. What these fighters will actually be used for in the export country.

This leads essentially to an aircraft which is customizable as per user requirements. How it should play out then?

For first objective, it is clear that PAF needs as advanced version of JFT as it can get and afford. It should have AESA and IRST both along with a single chin station for a targeting or jamming pod. It must also incorporate datalink as well as self protection suite. Now that brings costs exponentially higher if you throw in all the goodies. Therefore PAF should develop only few copies of that with option available in all. Those few (perhaps a single unit worth 18 aircraft) will serve as technology demonstrators or proof of concept to export parties. The showroom stuff you know. All shiny and awesome looking! That brings me to second factor.

Fighter aircraft are pride of a nation. Some paint them on back of truck, some boast about them on internet and some troll simply showing their specs and pictures. PAF needs to understand this phenomenon. No nation however small or deficient in budget wants to know their fighter is inferior. Politician releasing the money also has to look good to its public. Therefore JFT must offer advanced capabilities and possible upgrades. We all know they won't be top of the line given the space and cost of the fighter but there must be an option to integrate at delivery or later in mid life. A small AESA, limited range IRST, just the possibility of a small low power jammer and you have hit the right nerve by giving people a reason to boast around to their neighboring countries. Those who have the money will pay for it at the purchase. Others will leave the option open and will constantly be asked by their people to avail the option, you know just so they get the bragging rights. If PAF wants to sell, they have to work in this direction.

Now the last part. It is where JFT has to perform in real world. You are spot on about guided rockets and SDB. Let's not kid ourselves about who are going to be potential buyers. These will be smaller nations with limited budgets fighting insurgency. There will be corrupt politicians or military dictators ruling them and they want their regime secured. Countries like Myanmar, Yemen, Iraq, Nigeria etc etc. They don't need AESA , BVRs, datalink, jammers etc. They need capability to hit ground targets accurately, day and night in all weathers that too on a budget. Targeting pods, guided bombs and rockets is the name of the game here. Some countries might even want to skip Radar, BVR, IRST and all that air to air stuff in order to keep costs down. They should have that option. What about reconnaissance pods? These countries need'em to fight insurgency. Give them that option and they will buy. When they have more money they will ask for other goodies to be integrated too. Again good business for us.

Seeds of all these will be sown in the version PAF builds for itself. Once you have got that right, you open the buffet for export nations. Come choose your package depending your needs and depth of pocket and we will deliver you. That would be an export success I believe. My 2cents there if they are any worth.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Dude you talk like a moron

Kindly keep the discussion civil. We don't need to know where you come from.

@Bilal Khan 777

I have a feeling that PAF has a thing or two to learn about marketing. If I was to suggest measures for making block III an export success, it would go something like this.

PAF must chalk out a clear path to what Block 3 would include dictated by three factors alone. There is no need to deviate or interfere with program every now and then once you understand these factors. I write them in order of priority, explain them and then suggest how to go about them.

1. What PAF wants its own fleet to look like. This solely depends on threats it will face and the tasks it will be assigned to do.

2. What layman public and politicians of importing countries want to see on their fighter (not what their Air force requires).

3. What these fighters will actually be used for in the export country.

This leads essentially to an aircraft which is customizable as per user requirements. How it should play out then?

For first objective, it is clear that PAF needs as advanced version of JFT as it can get and afford. It should have AESA and IRST both along with a single chin station for a targeting or jamming pod. It must also incorporate datalink as well as self protection suite. Now that brings costs exponentially higher if you throw in all the goodies. Therefore PAF should develop only few copies of that with option available in all. Those few (perhaps a single unit worth 18 aircraft) will serve as technology demonstrators or proof of concept to export parties. The showroom stuff you know. All shiny and awesome looking! That brings me to second factor.

Fighter aircraft are pride of a nation. Some paint them on back of truck, some boast about them on internet and some troll simply showing their specs and pictures. PAF needs to understand this phenomenon. No nation however small or deficient in budget wants to know their fighter is inferior. Politician releasing the money also has to look good to its public. Therefore JFT must offer advanced capabilities and possible upgrades. We all know they won't be top of the line given the space and cost of the fighter but there must be an option to integrate at delivery or later in mid life. A small AESA, limited range IRST, just the possibility of a small low power jammer and you have hit the right nerve by giving people a reason to boast around to their neighboring countries. Those who have the money will pay for it at the purchase. Others will leave the option open and will constantly be asked by their people to avail the option, you know just so they get the bragging rights. If PAF wants to sell, they have to work in this direction.

Now the last part. It is where JFT has to perform in real world. You are spot on about guided rockets and SDB. Let's not kid ourselves about who are going to be potential buyers. These will be smaller nations with limited budgets fighting insurgency. There will be corrupt politicians or military dictators ruling them and they want their regime secured. Countries like Myanmar, Yemen, Iraq, Nigeria etc etc. They don't need AESA , BVRs, datalink, jammers etc. They need capability to hit ground targets accurately, day and night in all weathers that too on a budget. Targeting pods, guided bombs and rockets is the name of the game here. Some countries might even want to skip Radar, BVR, IRST and all that air to air stuff in order to keep costs down. They should have that option. What about reconnaissance pods? These countries need'em to fight insurgency. Give them that option and they will buy. When they have more money they will ask for other goodies to be integrated too. Again good business for us.

Seeds of all these will be sown in the version PAF builds for itself. Once you have got that right, you open the buffet for export nations. Come choose your package depending your needs and depth of pocket and we will deliver you. That would be an export success I believe. My 2cents there if they are any worth.

Sound Analysis!

This is not an apples to apples comparison. IRST and AESA are for different roles. While AESA can be readily added and so can the SD-10B to make use of it, you would need good HOBS IR missiles to make use of IRST.

I would say, AESA should take priority, because in immediate geographic vicinity, low RCS aircraft do not exist, so i would prefer to kill them at 100km from my radar guided BVR , than, to scan in the IR spectrum and send IR guided missile from 50-60km away.

I think that an IRST may get realised before an AESA. A limited AESA may not outperform KLJ7, but a fully capable IRST gives the aircraft BVR edge with SD10. For your HOBS IR comment, a capable HMCS is needed to fully take advantage of look and shoot.

Although voltage was never the issue with AESA in the JF-17 in the first place.
Still, Ill refrain from this overly speculative talk other than bringing up the usually ignored subject of cost.

I agree, voltage and "current" not voltage is the issue here, but cost of AESA will be quiet considerable factor.

AOA

Sorry for mentioning 3.6, it was mistake on my par. Also LAD.
1-MAWS is there.
2-SHUD is there and its VERY safe to assume it have SSHUD not Tube one because JF is developed incorporated avionics in 2000-2002 not in 1980.
3- JF have targeting pod WMD-7.
4- IFR is selected and will be installed stated by ACM and other officaials and all JF Block I will be upgraded to Block II level.

Reference:

1 -- Avionics | JF-17 Thunder
2 -- Avionics | JF-17 Thunder , Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra - Avionics Systems Co-produced Projects , JF-17 Thunder - Information Pool
3 -- JF-17 Thunder - Information Pool
4 -- Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) Vice-Director and JF-17 sales & marketing manager interview , DIB_Issue7_2015_IQPC PDF | Your Title JF-17 Thunder - Information Pool

Please correct me if i am wrong.

Jazak ALLAH

many of your assumptions are incorrect about JF17, but i cannot any further on what JF17 has or doesn't.

 

[abdulbarijan]

@Bilal Khan 777

I have a feeling that PAF has a thing or two to learn about marketing. If I was to suggest measures for making block III an export success, it would go something like this.

PAF must chalk out a clear path to what Block 3 would include dictated by three factors alone. There is no need to deviate or interfere with program every now and then once you understand these factors. I write them in order of priority, explain them and then suggest how to go about them.

1. What PAF wants its own fleet to look like. This solely depends on threats it will face and the tasks it will be assigned to do.

2. What layman public and politicians of importing countries want to see on their fighter (not what their Air force requires).

3. What these fighters will actually be used for in the export country.

This leads essentially to an aircraft which is customizable as per user requirements. How it should play out then?

For first objective, it is clear that PAF needs as advanced version of JFT as it can get and afford. It should have AESA and IRST both along with a single chin station for a targeting or jamming pod. It must also incorporate datalink as well as self protection suite. Now that brings costs exponentially higher if you throw in all the goodies. Therefore PAF should develop only few copies of that with option available in all. Those few (perhaps a single unit worth 18 aircraft) will serve as technology demonstrators or proof of concept to export parties. The showroom stuff you know. All shiny and awesome looking! That brings me to second factor.

Fighter aircraft are pride of a nation. Some paint them on back of truck, some boast about them on internet and some troll simply showing their specs and pictures. PAF needs to understand this phenomenon. No nation however small or deficient in budget wants to know their fighter is inferior. Politician releasing the money also has to look good to its public. Therefore JFT must offer advanced capabilities and possible upgrades. We all know they won't be top of the line given the space and cost of the fighter but there must be an option to integrate at delivery or later in mid life. A small AESA, limited range IRST, just the possibility of a small low power jammer and you have hit the right nerve by giving people a reason to boast around to their neighboring countries. Those who have the money will pay for it at the purchase. Others will leave the option open and will constantly be asked by their people to avail the option, you know just so they get the bragging rights. If PAF wants to sell, they have to work in this direction.

Now the last part. It is where JFT has to perform in real world. You are spot on about guided rockets and SDB. Let's not kid ourselves about who are going to be potential buyers. These will be smaller nations with limited budgets fighting insurgency. There will be corrupt politicians or military dictators ruling them and they want their regime secured. Countries like Myanmar, Yemen, Iraq, Nigeria etc etc. They don't need AESA , BVRs, datalink, jammers etc. They need capability to hit ground targets accurately, day and night in all weathers that too on a budget. Targeting pods, guided bombs and rockets is the name of the game here. Some countries might even want to skip Radar, BVR, IRST and all that air to air stuff in order to keep costs down. They should have that option. What about reconnaissance pods? These countries need'em to fight insurgency. Give them that option and they will buy. When they have more money they will ask for other goodies to be integrated too. Again good business for us.

Seeds of all these will be sown in the version PAF builds for itself. Once you have got that right, you open the buffet for export nations. Come choose your package depending your needs and depth of pocket and we will deliver you. That would be an export success I believe. My 2cents there if they are any worth.

Props to you ... that was quite a good analysis, but I would disagree ..

In my opinion, JFT Block III virtually would have lesser export potential, compared to the standard block II. It's simply because the "appeal" infact the entire philosophy behind the program, is focused towards "price". You will see that in more or less all of our promotional stuff in airshows ... where we go out and claim something like " the jet does everything for 1/3rd of the cost of western counterparts" .. So therefore we're serving a segment of customers that is more "price oriented" ...

As of now our main competition is 3+ generation fighters being upgraded with the latest avionics and second hand F-16/Mig-29 class fighters. To that we put up an alternate by saying ... hey ... our product can do all of the things equally or better then the one in your consideration set ... for a similar price tag AND it has alot more life + growth potential on it . This becomes a very sound point of difference on which we can compete. The main hindrance we'll have to face would be the "proven" tag that the Mig-29's/F-16's etc carry or if China doesn't want to export certain subsystems etc.

But when you consider block III and the price tag it'll carry due to the upgrades planned, your going in territory of "un-affordable" for many of the countries that we consider as our current potential customers. Changing that marketing appeal from "price" to "performance" will be more challenging as it would require us to go in to another market segment altogethr. Add to that, in that segment the Blk III would be facing competition like Gripen, F-16 Block 50/52+, M2K -5/-9, Mig-29K/ SMT, & the other high end platforms like EF-2000 and rafale. So there we would be having relatively alot more competition.
Another consideration would be that the products whose appeal from their inception is price oriented find it especially hard to compete in a "performance focused" market. eg. If Suzuki tries and makes a luxury car to get and try to capture the market share of say Mercedes, Audi or BMW. Even with the "price advantage" suzuki will have its hand full trying to crack and have a piece of the market share of the segment that has been tightly held by these other companies.

Therefore I believe, when it comes to exports our main focus should be towards block II and JFT B. Lastly, after the block III delivery is finished, or maybe parallel to their delivery, PAC and CAC should definitely look in to starting a MLU program that can upgrade the block II in to something in between block II and III. That right there might be the avenue that higher/mid tier JFT can take for export. So to conclude, the JFT program has a long way to go ... both project wise and marketing wise ... what it needs is (marketing wise)

-to stay true to its "price appeal"

-demonstrate that its a true turn key solution ( by incorporating a MLU program, integrating with new weapons, customizing according to customer needs etc.)

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Props to you ... that was quite a good analysis, but I would disagree ..

In my opinion, JFT Block III virtually would have lesser export potential, compared to the standard block II. It's simply because the "appeal" infact the entire philosophy behind the program, is focused towards "price". You will see that in more or less all of our promotional stuff in airshows ... where we go out and claim something like " the jet does everything for 1/3rd of the cost of western counterparts" .. So therefore we're serving a segment of customers that is more "price oriented" ...

As of now our main competition is 3+ generation fighters being upgraded with the latest avionics and second hand F-16/Mig-29 class fighters. To that we put up an alternate by saying ... hey ... our product can do all of the things equally or better then the one in your consideration set ... for a similar price tag AND it has alot more life + growth potential on it . This becomes a very sound point of difference on which we can compete. The main hindrance we'll have to face would be the "proven" tag that the Mig-29's/F-16's etc carry or if China doesn't want to export certain subsystems etc.

But when you consider block III and the price tag it'll carry due to the upgrades planned, your going in territory of "un-affordable" for many of the countries that we consider as our current potential customers. Changing that marketing appeal from "price" to "performance" will be more challenging as it would require us to go in to another market segment altogethr. Add to that, in that segment the Blk III would be facing competition like Gripen, F-16 Block 50/52+, M2K -5/-9, Mig-29K/ SMT, & the other high end platforms like EF-2000 and rafale. So there we would be having relatively alot more competition.
Another consideration would be that the products whose appeal from their inception is price oriented find it especially hard to compete in a "performance focused" market. eg. If Suzuki tries and makes a luxury car to get and try to capture the market share of say Mercedes, Audi or BMW. Even with the "price advantage" suzuki will have its hand full trying to crack and have a piece of the market share of the segment that has been tightly held by these other companies.

Therefore I believe, when it comes to exports our main focus should be towards block II and JFT B. Lastly, after the block III delivery is finished, or maybe parallel to their delivery, PAC and CAC should definitely look in to starting a MLU program that can upgrade the block II in to something in between block II and III. That right there might be the avenue that higher/mid tier JFT can take for export. So to conclude, the JFT program has a long way to go ... both project wise and marketing wise ... what it needs is (marketing wise)

-to stay true to its "price appeal"

-demonstrate that its a true turn key solution ( by incorporating a MLU program, integrating with new weapons, customizing according to customer needs etc.)

I also disagree, partially with both of you. There is no one export variant. Block III will integrate many technologies that are on request by various customers. That in itself opens the options for many countries to opt for JF17, albeit in its own specific conops and requirements. Every country will be different, and price is hardly the driver for people making fighter decisions. JF17 marketing team has been wrong from day one, harping on price. Cheap, is seen as "cheap."

 

[SQ8]

I agree, voltage and "current" not voltage is the issue here, but cost of AESA will be quiet considerable factor..

The cost depends upon the sophistication of the ancillary system that supports the AESA(and which is the core issue for the JF-17 and not the electrical supply as such). AESA has been available, but none that have solved that ancillary issue which is a core requirement for AESA's compared to their mechanically steered predecessors. Hopefully, things are better off now than the gloomy days of PPP heyday's when even managing flight regular flight hours was becoming near impossible.

 

[Quwa]

Just a thought but I think the JF-17 Block-III is going to mark a separate line of JF-17s from the current Block-I and II build. I don't think the present airframe can just take in AESA radar and IRST, the PAF has reached a point where it has to seriously consider an enlarged and lighter airframe with a more powerful engine. If not for Block-III, then potentially for ensuring that there's room for future upgrades or additional capabilities (e.g. increased payload and fuel capacity).

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Just a thought but I think the JF-17 Block-III is going to mark a separate line of JF-17s from the current Block-I and II build. I don't think the present airframe can just take in AESA radar and IRST, the PAF has reached a point where it has to seriously consider an enlarged and lighter airframe with a more powerful engine. If not for Block-III, then potentially for ensuring that there's room for future upgrades or additional capabilities (e.g. increased payload and fuel capacity).

Block III will become the foundation for all future aircraft, and may even become the core, where earlier aircraft may get sold off.

 

[Al-Taïr]

Cant we use both?? and then superpose the signals received from both the sensors to get one stronger signal and get a bigger blip on the radar.... I dont know know if would works,,, but common sense says it should work. ans probably is being used by jet designers. you just need a hell lot of signal processing.. It wont be cheapest solution but it sure will give the jet the versatility it deserves.

 

[abdulbarijan]

I also disagree, partially with both of you. There is no one export variant. Block III will integrate many technologies that are on request by various customers. That in itself opens the options for many countries to opt for JF17, albeit in its own specific conops and requirements. Every country will be different, and price is hardly the driver for people making fighter decisions. JF17 marketing team has been wrong from day one, harping on price. Cheap, is seen as "cheap."

I would agree with your point regarding the marketing aspects atleast as far as concepts go ..

-In certain product categories ... price indeed CAN take the back seat when your considering that product from a customer's point of view ..

-Promoting a product as "cheap" does have a negative association attached to it ...

However, the fact of the matter is, for the segment we've chosen price is DEFINITELY an important variable if not the most important one ... See, while your decision making for purchasing a product, does start with a "needs/wants/desires" --- the price becomes a limiter --- and as you get richer that limitation loosens its grip. Who wouldn't want EF-2000's, Rafales etc. in PAF ... but we can't, thanks to our economic conditions ... and there are alot more countries like us, that definitely need a mid-tier 4th generation platform however are limited by their capability to spend money because of poor economic conditions. This is where they would have to search the market and go by what options they have (second hand platforms etc./JFT ) ... the set of options in consideration would be the "consideration set" of that organization/potential customer.

Another consideration that you have to go by, is to see what kind of market segments does this company have a history of serving ... and this in itself is very important ... Chinese defence companies usually have done business with countries that don't have the best of economies... So shifting from one segment to another or serving another segment in addition to what your already serving becomes one hell of a challenge ... eg. if you research up on it you will find different brands ...who are infact would be taken /perceived as competitors in the market owned by the same parent company.
I won't go in to much detail, but this approach is usually referred to as "house of brands" in which you have a company having multiple un related brands ... so that it can serve multiple segments altogether .... because a single brand with a perception associated with it (that the company projects) will not be meddled with unless absolutely necessary ...

So my argument would be, for some countries (the segment we're trying to seve with JFT) price is a big issue, and it is a driver in the decision making process ...

Secondly regarding the "cheap stigma" ... that is indeed a factor ... but when you don't have any other option besides buying a cheap new product, a second/third hand good product with less life, an older product with newer upgraded gadgets then that negative stigma also takes a back seat because "cheap" is all what you can afford ... Secondly, when you look at the Representatives of the project, the usual word that THEY use, is not "cheap" but "cost effective"

 

[barbarosa]

jf 17 block 3 should IRST or EASA but not less than 4th generation fighter. as i think should to increase height and speed not less than 2 mach.

 

[gambit]

I personally think that AESA is overkill of JF17,...

I disagree.

World's most advanced fighter jet joins battle against ISIS in Syria for first time | Page 2

In air combat, overkill is never a bad thing.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

I disagree.

World's most advanced fighter jet joins battle against ISIS in Syria for first time | Page 2

In air combat, overkill is never a bad thing.

Theoretically, its a nice to have. But, the feasibility of actually putting it on and integrating may put the project behind.

 

[SQ8]

Theoretically, its a nice to have. But, the feasibility of actually putting it on and integrating may put the project behind.

Not at all. What matters is that any aircraft in the new batch are pre-engineered to accommodate candidates for the system. Since the issue is not with electrical power but rather elsewhere, it also means that putting an AESA on Thunder is essentially down to good engineering principles and whether the real problem once solved can be overcome.

The F-16's new RACR and SABR radars aptly solved the problem associated with putting the AESA on the F-16... the same can be done with the JF-17.

Although, as such the issue with AESA was almost resolved some 4 years ago, the price meant it was not feasible. It is always going to be price that drives the JF-17.

 

[SQ8]

Just a thought but I think the JF-17 Block-III is going to mark a separate line of JF-17s from the current Block-I and II build. I don't think the present airframe can just take in AESA radar and IRST, the PAF has reached a point where it has to seriously consider an enlarged and lighter airframe with a more powerful engine. If not for Block-III, then potentially for ensuring that there's room for future upgrades or additional capabilities (e.g. increased payload and fuel capacity).

The present airframe is just fine with both the AESA and IRST. There is no need to enlarge the size.. all that is needed is structural strengthening in the right areas. The F-16 did not chance any sizes except for the F-2 which is an entirely new aircraft(and also ended up structural issues).

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The Thunder is maturing wonderfully, with advancement in Nano Technology , I am sure , we can develop a next generation AESA , which is sufficient size

For time being priority for Pakistan Airforce is to Induct 100 JF17 thunder Block 2/3 Standard, based on available Radar options with minor adjustments