PAF JF-17 in Farnborough Air Show 2010

[owais.usmani]

 

[TOPGUN]

Pakistan JF-17 Thunder. Flying Home From Farnborough Airshow.

Gosh i just love the sound of thunder...

 

[TOPGUN]

Here are my pics...

Growler is that you in the last pix bro?

 

[Super Falcon]

karara jawab milaga un ko jo thunder ko aesa wesa samjhta hai main sirf iska khilaf isi liya tha kyonka is main bhot der lag rahe hai induction main anyway love the sound of this beast

 

[Usama86]

I thought the black smoke problem was fixed but during take off black smoke is clearly visible from both fighters. Is it really a problem? if so then what and why?
Thanks in advance.

 

[Dazzler]

Just a reminder on my part, a few days ago i replied to Salman about the ideology behind JFT was inspiration from the f-16 and Gripen and that at the moment it is compared to Gripen C, D version which in itself an achievement for China and Pakistan. The next block will be most likely on par with Gripen NG. Interesting to see similar revelations made by Munir on pakdef after visiting FIA......


"The radar follow up... We will keep this block as it is. Just like the engines and other parts. It is not going to be upgraded towards later versions cause it is a lot cheaper to just make a whole new body then refitting an older one. So probably we will never hear about MLU-ing JF17. But the next radar is already being tested and we will move to the next block towards AESA. That is for sure cause it will get also small changes to become lower observable then this edition. The media talks about stealthier but that is a but unrealistic. JF17 will not have internal bay nor does it have the body to achieve extreme results.

3rd block sure but I agree with GAF. Block II is called JF17 NG. "

 

[graphican]

Nabil you have made a wonderful contribution to the forum. Thanks a lot for all that valuable information. But sometime while reading your posts, I fear you would reveal something that outside people are not meant to know.. so keep your filtration procedures vigilant and only share that is not dangerous for the National Security and Defense.

On the side note, what does "NG" stands for in JF17-NG ? and

Will JF-17 (NG or NG++ or any planned block) be a close match to F-16 Block 60? and Last question

What is wisdom behind keeping the range of this bird to 1350KMs only. Why not 1500KM or 1800KMs. Will it have external fuel-tanks like F-16 contains? if so, how much will that increase the range of this aircraft?

 

[Patriot]

Graphican sir jee, you don't need special tech to put fuel tanks on Jet.Just need hardpoints.You can see fuel tanks attached to it on youtube on it's journey to UK.It's a small plane so of course range is going to be limited.You can't have a F15 like range on Gripen.

 

[graphican]

Graphican sir jee, you don't need special tech to put fuel tanks on Jet.Just need hardpoints.You can see fuel tanks attached to it on youtube on it's journey to UK.It's a small plane so of course range is going to be limited.You can't have a F15 like range on Gripen.

Patriot,
Thanks for information but I am asking about ones that are attached above the wings and not under them.

The Hardpoints are meant to hold weapons and if they would hold fuel-tanks, like the ones that JFT were holding while their trip to England, those will "eat" the space originally meant for the weapons. Isnin't it so?

 

[Hasnain2009]

Patriot,
Thanks for information but I am asking about ones that are attached above the wings and not under them.

The Hardpoints are meant to hold weapons and if they would hold fuel-tanks, like the ones that JFT were holding while their trip to England, those will "eat" the space originally meant for the weapons. Isnin't it so?

lol....u are talking about CFT's, Conformal Fuel Tanks.

 

[Dazzler]

Nabil you have made a wonderful contribution to the forum. Thanks a lot for all that valuable information. But sometime while reading your posts, I fear you would reveal something that outside people are not meant to know.. so keep your filtration procedures vigilant and only share that is not dangerous for the National Security and Defense.

On the side note, what does "NG" stands for in JF17-NG ? and

Will JF-17 (NG or NG++ or any planned block) be a close match to F-16 Block 60? and Last question

What is wisdom behind keeping the range of this bird to 1350KMs only. Why not 1500KM or 1800KMs. Will it have external fuel-tanks like F-16 contains? if so, how much will that increase the range of this aircraft?

Thanks a lot for your appreciation bro as i am great full to you all dearly for this. I am not a teenager any more and trust me what i tell you folks, its like 10 % of what i am told and i know what i can reveal and what i must not so no danger to our country's integrity from my side

NG stands for New Generation and in JFT's context, second block will be newer and more capable than current block and is deemed to have a better radar, mission computer, ew, sensors, retractable IFR, and likely chin mounted hard points for Jammer and WMD-7 LDP which is mounted on a wing or under fuselage pylon as of now. And most of these are being developed in Pakistan including a radar variant !!

Whether it matches blk 60? Unlikely

Blk 52 and Gripen NG maybe? most likely

Range is quite enough for now and does not need to be increased.

 

[ANG]

Hi, I wanted to thank Mr. Growler for the photos.

Also Mr. Osama86 raises some very good points. It you look at the video of the JF-17s leaving, the engines release a lot of smoke. If you look at the point that the pilots apply full throttle for takeoff, there is a huge black cloud. Reminds of flooring a Russian Lada car... Also at takeoff the engine is really smoking in the second plane, and the black trail is clearly visible. I hope the PAF moves to the WS-13, and it does not have similar issues. Thanks!.

 

[Qasibr]

The JFT was designed to fulfill the role of a point-defence fighter, performing CAP around high-value targets and being able to engage the sort of things our adversaries would throw at us, in that sort of scenario.

If the JFT two-seat variant does eventually fly(the Pakistan AF committed to fund it's development a few years back, when we weren't strapped for $), it's increased size would likely mean increased fuel capacity, increasing the range.

 

[Quwa]

The JFT was designed to fulfill the role of a point-defence fighter, performing CAP around high-value targets and being able to engage the sort of things our adversaries would throw at us, in that sort of scenario.

If the JFT two-seat variant does eventually fly(the Pakistan AF committed to fund it's development a few years back, when we weren't strapped for $), it's increased size would likely mean increased fuel capacity, increasing the range.

I'd say it has exceeded those requirements and has transformed into a proper lightweight multi-role fighter with clear force-multiplier effect. Armed with weapon-systems such as MAR-1 & other A2G missiles; H2/H4; potentially Umbani and HGSS/HGK JDAM; Ra'ad and possibly tactical-range (<300km) ALCM; contemporary BVR (SD-10/MICA-RF?/T-Darter?) and WVR (PL-9C/MAA-1B/MICA-IR?/A-Darter?); AShM (C-802/Exocet?/Atmaca?).

...It alone can cause a lot of problems for IAF and Indian Military in general. The above weapon-systems and the fighter's ability to fully data-link with other assets; proper ECM/EW; high operational availability (presumed) & reasonable maintenance; and later AESA, IFR, IRST, etc...

It isn't about dominating India, but rather about nullifying any idea of uncontested Indian air superiority. When your immediate enemy has as much relative firepower (if not more), then you can't exactly threaten USAF-style "preemptive strikes" on them.

My hope is that JF-17 crosses that "21st century MiG-21" threshold and becomes to PAF what the Mirages and F-16s are today...ideal mainstay fighters. Higher performance fighters can then be relegated to give that extra potency above and beyond what is critically needed - i.e. Block-52+/MLU & FC-20. If JF-17 will make IAF (and others) hesitate about engaging Pakistan, then FC-20 should make them drop the conflict business and return to the table.

 

[ANG]

Hi Mr. Qasibr, most two-seater aircraft have less avionics and/or fuel, due to the extra seat. If you look a the J-10B or F-16D-52 they have enlarged dorsal splines to mitigate this. It will be interesting to see what the two-seat JF-17 looks like. Thanks!