No J-10B for PAF | A.C Khalid, calls for a focus on 5th generation platform instead.

[sancho]

Considering current JF-17 is not far off from the gripen c/d then it's not impossible to imagine for block III to be close to Ng/E.

That depends on what you mean with it's not far from the Gripen? Both a light class 4th gen fighters and with the Block 2 JF 17 will get IFR capability too, techs are broadly comarable too, but then it ends.
The Gripen C comes with better maneuverabitly, more speed, HMS, HOBS missiles and now even will get METEOR at first. It's materials, coatings and design will give it a clear advantage in RCS too. It has a dedicated pod station, which gives it advantages in LGB strikes too.
The E upgrade puts the Gripen on a whole new level, be it the new payload, or fuel capabilities, the repositioner AESA, advanced EW..., which will give JF 17 Block 3 more than just a few things to catch up. It might be technically in the same generation, the performance of both fighters however might be pretty different at the end.

 

[Donatello]

That depends on what you mean with it's not far from the Gripen? Both a light class 4th gen fighters and with the Block 2 JF 17 will get IFR capability too, techs are broadly comarable too, but then it ends.
The Gripen C comes with better maneuverabitly, more speed, HMS, HOBS missiles and now even will get METEOR at first. It's materials, coatings and design will give it a clear advantage in RCS too. It has a dedicated pod station, which gives it advantages in LGB strikes too.
The E upgrade puts the Gripen on a whole new level, be it the new payload, or fuel capabilities, the repositioner AESA, advanced EW..., which will give JF 17 Block 3 more than just a few things to catch up. It might be technically in the same generation, the performance of both fighters however might be pretty different at the end.

The avionics part of any aircraft is a major component these days. The good thing is, it can always be developed and improved. The F-16 and F-16 MLU proved that a 20 year old plane can be upgraded to a whole new level. Since JF-17 got its inspiration from F-16 and Gripen program, it may be safe to assume that JF-17 will be upgraded. AESA/IRST, RWR etc are all of those components that can be retrofitted at a later stage. The aim now is to induct JF-17 in large numbers. First prototype flew in 2003, first small production version unveiled in 2007, production fully started in 2009 and by 2013 two squadrons stood up along with a few in the Test and evaluation squadron at the PAC. That's all within 5-10 years. How many fighter programs in the world have achieved so much in so little? The block 2 is already coming with improvements and all these would be retro-ed on the blk1 models. Comparing with Gripen only is not fair since Gripen had a start earlier on. What jf-17 needs now is perhaps AESA and IRST. IFRs are not a biggie, as shown on a blk1 aircraft recently. The kinematic performance is already very good. The missile arsenal is already very lethal. The unveiling of CM400AKG naval missile took everyone by surprise. If there is a HOBS in development we probably won't hear it unless it is fully ready.

Confidence in JF-17 is increasing day by day and so is the progress. The permanent presence of some of the earlier prototypes in China indicates that development of the plane is an ongoing process.

 

[Bilal.]

That depends on what you mean with it's not far from the Gripen? Both a light class 4th gen fighters and with the Block 2 JF 17 will get IFR capability too, techs are broadly comarable too, but then it ends.
The Gripen C comes with better maneuverabitly, more speed, HMS, HOBS missiles and now even will get METEOR at first. It's materials, coatings and design will give it a clear advantage in RCS too. It has a dedicated pod station, which gives it advantages in LGB strikes too.
The E upgrade puts the Gripen on a whole new level, be it the new payload, or fuel capabilities, the repositioner AESA, advanced EW..., which will give JF 17 Block 3 more than just a few things to catch up. It might be technically in the same generation, the performance of both fighters however might be pretty different at the end.

With very similar g limits, climb rate, AoA limits and so forth the manueveribility does not goes vastly on favour of either. Avionics as you agree are comparable. There is high chance we will see a dedicated Hard point for targeting and other pods in block II JFT. For RCS we don't have data for either but JFT was a very low RCS too thanks to hidden engine blade and DSI. There is no limitation in JFT platform to not have an HMD and HOBS missile and so as a platform it is not far off from gripen as I said in my previous post.

 

[sancho]

The avionics part of any aircraft is a major component these days.

That's why I left that out and went to more important differencens, flight performance, RCS, load capability, that's where the JF 17 and where more fuel, coatings, additional hardpoints or more thrust will be needed.

For RCS we don't have data for either but JFT was a very low RCS too thanks to hidden engine blade and DSI.

Actually we do, since it's not designed nor developed to have a low RCS. It has several right angles in it's design itself, mainly makes use of metal compared to modern figthers with non reflecting composites and most crucial it doesn't use RAM or specialised coatings. That makes it comparable or slightly better (due to the smaller size) to older F16s in the fleet, but not comparable to modern fighter in the RCS field.
Btw, as often discussed, DSI is no feature to hide the compressor (that's why it has a Y-duct that turns their airflow around the gearbay), but to improve engine performance!

There is no limitation in JFT platform to not have an HMD and HOBS missile and so as a platform it is not far off from gripen as I said in my previous post.

There is not even a limitation that it could have METEOR (other than costs), but don't confuse wishes of it's capability and the reality! It doesn't have these features yet and it needs to be seen when they will be added Block 2 or 3 only and until these shortcomings are not dealt, there is a clear difference between both fighters.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I expect the J10B with Pakistan forces , if it does not arrives it would be sad 2014 no doubt

 

[Munir]

I expect the J10B with Pakistan forces , if it does not arrives it would be sad 2014 no doubt

I would have loved it but let us look at it objectively... The new plane needs a few years introduction, testing and optimizing. And what extra does it give? Everything the J10B has will end up sooner or later in the next bock JF17. So instead getting a new headache we optimize what we have.

 

[think@best]

I would have loved it but let us look at it objectively... The new plane needs a few years introduction, testing and optimizing. And what extra does it give? Everything the J10B has will end up sooner or later in the next bock JF17. So instead getting a new headache we optimize what we have.

Waiting for JF 17 Block-II, as you mentioned in your several post that it will be inducted in March 2014. Any concrete news?

 

[think@best]

NO J10, and eye on Fifth generation????


Originally we have F-16 52 only 18 in service (4++ Gen) , 40 are MLU`ed (4+) and other are block-15 ( 4 Gen) . with total of 76 numbers.
JF-17 Block - 1 with total of 49 only comparable to F16-ADF. (+- 4 Gen)
With (3 Gen) Mirages/F7.

We dont have any alternate of SU30MK1 180+ numbers ( with up coming Rafale 136 ) First priority of PAF should to look into this matter, MODI is elected and he seems like have a very defensive approch against PAKISTAN.

We should procure 4.5 gen aircrafts ( Non American ) at priority at-least 50+ by politics or by loan. After that we can go for 5th Generation.

 

[ziaulislam]

NO J10, and eye on Fifth generation????


Originally we have F-16 52 only 18 in service (4++ Gen) , 40 are MLU`ed (4+) and other are block-15 ( 4 Gen) . with total of 76 numbers.
JF-17 Block - 1 with total of 49 only comparable to F16-ADF. (+- 4 Gen)
With (3 Gen) Mirages/F7.

We dont have any alternate of SU30MK1 180+ numbers ( with up coming Rafale 136 ) First priority of PAF should to look into this matter, MODI is elected and he seems like have a very defensive approch against PAKISTAN.

We should procure 4.5 gen aircrafts ( Non American ) at priority at-least 50+ by politics or by loan. After that we can go for 5th Generation.

I think it should be known that PAF plans/ desires
+/-100 f-16s
150-250 thunders, those 300+ fighters will counter 600 + 4 th gen indian jets
50 odd fifth gen fighters to counter 150+ pakfa.
This will make around 350-400 jets which comes out to be 20 sq.
Even this is best case estimate or wish list. Beyond this, is simply not possible.
J-10 was probably a backup plan in case f-16 didnt materialize in weapons,systems or numbers.

 

[Bilal.]

Actually we do, since it's not designed nor developed to have a low RCS. It has several right angles in it's design itself, mainly makes use of metal compared to modern figthers with non reflecting composites and most crucial it doesn't use RAM or specialised coatings. That makes it comparable or slightly better (due to the smaller size) to older F16s in the fleet, but not comparable to modern fighter in the RCS field.
Btw, as often discussed, DSI is no feature to hide the compressor (that's why it has a Y-duct that turns their airflow around the gearbay), but to improve engine performance!



There is not even a limitation that it could have METEOR (other than costs), but don't confuse wishes of it's capability and the reality! It doesn't have these features yet and it needs to be seen when they will be added Block 2 or 3 only and until these shortcomings are not dealt, there is a clear difference between both fighters.

Since you did not reply on the performance/manueverability related points so I will assume that you agree that there is not much difference there.

Now coming to RCS your points are valid but they apply to gripen too which was not built ground up as a LO/VLO design so again both are similar for all we know. DSI is not a design feature to intended to reduce RCS but it oes have a side effect of reduced RCS.

As for weapons integration. HOBS missile and HMDS is not my wish list but part of the plan and not just for future blocks. JFTs weapons integration is going on as we speak and all blocks will get HOBS and HMDS .

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra - JF-17 Thunder Aircraft

Highly agile Imaging infrared short range missiles

 

[random123]

But I don't think so J-10 will be with PAF ratehr J-31 is more likely.

 

[sancho]

Since you did not reply on the performance/manueverability related points so I will assume that you agree that there is not much difference there.

Nope, but I already stated that the Gripen has the better performance and maneuverability (speed, wingloading...).

Now coming to RCS your points are valid but they apply to gripen too which was not built ground up as a LO/VLO design so again both are similar for all we know.

It was designed and developed with high ammounts of non refelcting materials, coatings, radar blockers in the intakes..., all modern design features to reduce the RCS from the start. JF17 on the other hand was not developed with that aim (since the priority were aimed on low costs), but will get some of these features as later upgrades.[/quote]

 

[Bilal.]

Nope, but I already stated that the Gripen has the better performance and maneuverability (speed, wingloading...).

speed yes but that's not so important, as for wing loading, it's a design feature to impact manoeuvrability but is not manoeuvrability on it's own. As I said in my previous posts, the measures of manoeuvrability (climb raye, AoA, etc) are virtually the same for both.

It was designed and developed with high ammounts of non refelcting materials, coatings, radar blockers in the intakes..., all modern design features to reduce the RCS from the start. JF17 on the other hand was not developed with that aim (since the priority were aimed on low costs), but will get some of these features as later upgrades.

Again hypothetical assumptions. Neither of us have the actual RCS figures for JFT and gripen. Let's not indulge in speculation but I still hold that the RCS of JFT is quite low given the anecdotal accounts which put it as the lowest in PAF inventory including the F-16 block 52.

 

[Storm Force]

JF17 stil uses all metal alloy airframe RATHER than more expensive but far superior composite material found on more modern 4th gen fighters.

without composites the airframe of thunder is weaker and more suspectable to fatigue damage and will emit far more radar signals.

PAF saved money by cutting corners but at cost of inferior airframe

so bilal your comment about lowest RCS is flawed

 

[Side-Winder]

NO J10, and eye on Fifth generation????


Originally we have F-16 52 only 18 in service (4++ Gen) , 40 are MLU`ed (4+) and other are block-15 ( 4 Gen) . with total of 76 numbers.
JF-17 Block - 1 with total of 49 only comparable to F16-ADF. (+- 4 Gen)
With (3 Gen) Mirages/F7.

We dont have any alternate of SU30MK1 180+ numbers ( with up coming Rafale 136 ) First priority of PAF should to look into this matter, MODI is elected and he seems like have a very defensive approch against PAKISTAN.

We should procure 4.5 gen aircrafts ( Non American ) at priority at-least 50+ by politics or by loan. After that we can go for 5th Generation.

Rafales aren't confirmed at all -- secondly those 180 Su-MKi aren't only for pakistan. there is a fleet bigger than indian in china.