Selex ES radar & other technology on JF-17?

[MastanKhan]

Both F16 and JF17 are almost the same size, F16 has a bigger engine (more fuel consumption), why then Thunder would have lower internal fuel capacity and lower on station time than F-16?

Is the available space in Thunder not optimally utilised?

Hi,

The F16 engine is very fuel efficient---. The RD 93 is extremely thirsty engine---.

Even though I bash the JF 17 a lot---I just want to give the pakistani readers very goods news---. Once the JF 17 switches over to the chinese engine---the fuel efficiency will get better---if not double than at least 50% better.

I been sitting on this information for awhile now---. So---just wait for the engine---what is it---the WS13!!!!!

@Indus Falcon @Khafee there was a reason for 3 1/2 hour oxygen capacity----

 

[Tipu7]

just wait for the engine---what is it---the WS13!!

For block 3'.......?
Doubt that.......

The RD 93 is extremely thirsty engine--

Smoke emission is the proof that engine has poor fuel consumption. RD93 is not thirsty.... but has poor digestion......

there was a reason for 3 1/2 hour oxygen capacity

And what is this Sir.......?

 

[MastanKhan]

And what is this Sir.......?

Hi,

The new engine buddy---once they get the WS13----you might be looking at around 2 hour loiter time---.

Thirsty or bad digestion---it all boils down to efficiency---and miles per gal----remember the difference in gas mileage between carburated engines and fuel injection---almost 1 1/2 time better.

 

[HRK]

Don't you think its time we see dual racks for BVR and WVR missiles in Jf17?

I believe we will have this news quit soon (it's my assumption)

Also tests of C802, CM400 AKG? Raad too?

C-802 & CM-400 AKG are already tested & integrated with the platform (even with block-1), but PAF has not acquired CM-400 (I wonder what is the reason)

ACR Khalid Mahmood reply regarding same weapons integration

RAAD will be integrated with Block-1 & 2 along with H-4

secondly now JF-17 have a tag of battle proven platform as well ....

so in short any integration of additional weapon package from any other source will help in its marketing but their value regarding the increment of existing weapon package will be minimal .... my humble opinion ...

 

[CHI RULES]

Hi,

If you were a 20 years old indian---I would not reply to you---but as a 20 years old pakistan---it is for me to share---and for you to learn---.

Pakistanis have to change their mindset from giving the enemy " a bloody nose "----it does not work right that way. You have to change your mindset to " we will smash their important assets that they will hurt bad " and will feel the real pain.

A bloody nose only infuriates the enemy further---. And I don't blame you for this kind of thinking---because that is what you have heard from your elders and leaders.

Your pilots were best when their aircraft were the best---the enemy's pilots are NO GOOFBALLZ either---they are extremely superior pilots in equally superior machines but in a higher number.

The money issue is a drama----I guess you missed the news---the paf wants to spend 1.5 billion dollars on 8 F16's---which equals to at least 30 J10C's---30 J16's--around 40 JH7B's----and all the chinese aircraft will be equipped with the frontline aesa radar and all the frontline tier 1 chinese goodies---and you can also shop for the selex and south african goodies for them as well.

In the 5 years time period---the fire control radars and other electronics can be modified and upgraded to make them more potent.

The issue is not of lack of funds----it is the mindset. We used to have full fledged bomber sqdrn in the past---and as the F16's started coming in---the fighter mafia took charge of the air force and completely wiped out the bombers from the air force---.

Even though the current F16 and the JF17's can carry more load than those old bombers---but then current day heavy strike aircraft carry 3 to 5 times that load of the old bombers----.

It is a simple military fact---if you are fighting a larger army---you ought to have dedicated heavy fighting force to take the blunt of the enemy strike---.

And for as for " parroting "----that term does not suit you---you are too young to address me in that manner---and even if we were in the same age group----these kinds of terms look cheap---and they also show that the opponent has gone thru your armor---.

And I will keep writing it either they get them or I CONK OUT---.

Dear Sir I want to comment on two points, one it is discussed in detail that Pak so far can't get J11 series Jets due to Chinese/Ruskie understanding. So we should not discuss getting any J11 variant now or near future until and unless any effective development done by Pak Gov which is doubtful. The J10 sereies facing serious tech issues, many accidents happen in nlast few years due to engine/tech issues.

Secondly on lighter side the guy using Parroting term in discussion in American way of which perhaps u are more familiar.

 

[Tank131]

There is a limitation to this theory. Any missile launch by either side has the risk of panic nonconventional escalation. So this option is basically a non-starter. @MastanKhan is right .... dependence will still remain on deep penetration strikes for either countries, the main determinant being the declared first use policy of Pakistan. If somehow Pakistan was to declare a no first use policy, your contention above may hold true.



Very true

I think you misread my point. My piint was if PAF wants to hit India it has to do it with stand off weapons from the air... I was not implying ballistic missile launch..hence advocacy for good strike fighters.

Check out the range of Meteor & K-100 BVRs and what they can do to unprotected birds like H-6K and JH-7s. There is a reason PN & PAF personals are totally against those obsolete birds.

Your right...these types of aircraft are obsolete which is why the USAF still operates B-52s and why the PLAAF is inducting more H-6K, and of coursePAF would let these aircraft run around unattended. There is not thought to escorts. By your logic there is no point of having air tankers or AWACS cuz they are sitting ducks. Oh and an AESA equipped JH-7B with a nose cone and structure large enough to house J16s electronics and the ability ti carry 11 a2a and a2g missiles is completely unable to defend itself... Nevermind that it is able to search and target and attack the same number of targets at j16 at similar range if equipped with similar electronics.

H-6K would be defended by JF-17 OR F-16 the same way as other transports tankers and AWACS. They would be enormously helpful in destroying IAF FOBs, and they can do so from deep inside Pak airspace with coverage from fighters and SAMs.

 

[Hellfire]

I think you misread my point. My piint was if PAF wants to hit India it has to do it with stand off weapons from the air... I was not implying ballistic missile launch..hence advocacy for good strike fighters.

I read your post twice actually ... you have interspersed usage of Nasr and Babur along with stand off weapons .... that is why was clarifying realities to you. On another side note, you have to know that at present any aircraft lifting off Pakistani airbase today is tracked and tagged by India!

 

[Basel]

Hi,

That assesment is incorrect. Neither the F15---ther F18---the EFT are LR heavies to SUITE our purpose.

Just because the H6 is a dedicated bomber does not mean that it has lost its strike capabilities----and the JH7B is no weaner either---.

What you kids are looking at is just the glory of the names of these aircraft---you need to understand the significance and importance of current high tech electronic gadgetry---state of the art fire control radars and jammers and to top them---the state of the art missiles BVR's and WVR's and other smart weapons as well.

Is selex the solution to the problem or the chinese are good enough---I think that selex has tier 1 equipment and the chinese are not far behind---they are fighting real hard in the defense indusrty to come up with extremely potent electronic warfare package for their aircraft to compete against the U S and its allies---in a very short time period---.

The main purpose is to move away from american fighter and strike aircraft---so---they should not even be a part of the discussion---. The EFT is purely an air superiority aircraft---that is what the EFT introduction factory video states---that is what its primary function is---.

The chinese option gives you an opportunity to draw the enemy out to even the playing field---.

You kids need to learn that there need to be found ways to do the battle on enemy's turf as well---.

And when I say that---you kids see the response of the indian members---how they scream that they will have s400 sams and many of their air superiority fighters to take out the incoming naval strike---and their aircraft carriers and frigates etc etc etc----what you kids miss out because of your INEXPERIENCE is that you do not hear the PANIC in their voices----you cannot comprehend the financial damage and loss that these strikes would create---.

The air force and military needs to worry about the first strike at this stage---that how long they can prolong it---because that is where the succes of the mission lays---just take the nuc drama out of the picture---keep the conflict non nuclear---take a beating but give them a good drubbing as well by destroying their money making centers---.

The basic goal of this war needs to be to---FIND WAYS TO MAKE THE FOREIGN MONEY RUN OUT OF INDIA---that must be the primary goal---.

Once the money goes away---it is not coming back---.

With due respect, I know what I have said, because I have discussed it with several on duty officers, on question of JH-7 & H-6K they really got annoyed, they will slap the person who will push those Obsolete Systems on them.

PN will go for more subs with JFT if long range multi role jet fighter is not available.

I think you misread my point. My piint was if PAF wants to hit India it has to do it with stand off weapons from the air... I was not implying ballistic missile launch..hence advocacy for good strike fighters.



Your right...these types of aircraft are obsolete which is why the USAF still operates B-52s and why the PLAAF is inducting more H-6K, and of coursePAF would let these aircraft run around unattended. There is not thought to escorts. By your logic there is no point of having air tankers or AWACS cuz they are sitting ducks. Oh and an AESA equipped JH-7B with a nose cone and structure large enough to house J16s electronics and the ability ti carry 11 a2a and a2g missiles is completely unable to defend itself... Nevermind that it is able to search and target and attack the same number of targets at j16 at similar range if equipped with similar electronics.

H-6K would be defended by JF-17 OR F-16 the same way as other transports tankers and AWACS. They would be enormously helpful in destroying IAF FOBs, and they can do so from deep inside Pak airspace with coverage from fighters and SAMs.

Don't compare Apples with Oranges.


PAF and PN will not go for any attack platform which is very old, need constant upgrade and maintenance, need heavy protection, they will not put there limited resources on those systems.

AWACS, MPAs, MRTTs are different, they enhance fleet operations, they are not burden, they are force multipliers.

 

[Tank131]

I read your post twice actually ... you have interspersed usage of Nasr and Babur along with stand off weapons .... that is why was clarifying realities to you. On another side note, you have to know that at present any aircraft lifting off Pakistani airbase today is tracked and tagged by India!

Nasr while it could raise the spector of nuclear exchange, babur is unlikely to do so. If you are suggesting that India will go nuclear with a CM launch from air (as i suggested off H-6K) It is unlikely. Any aircraft lifting off any regional airbase is tracked by both countries. You think that Pakistan is going hold back a conventional cruise missile launch cuz India may think its nuclear... Unlikey. They will use whatever means are available to defend themselves. Launching babur and ra'ad will be expected in any conflict. If they feel like they are facing a mortal risk of annihilation then they will risk going nuclear, so what you are sayin (missile launch will be perceived as nuclear strike) may be true but in any conflict those particular missiles will be launched. It is modern combat which is centered around these weapons.

@Basel please explain how these are apples and oranges? If Russian flankers are unavailable...you think JF-17 has the range and payload to do deep strike? You think IAF wont go after AWACS and tankers but only strategic bombers? An airforce needs more than a2a fighters to defend its troops and airspace. The fact that the A-10 was extended in USAF should be testament to this. If PAF can defend its large scale assets like AWACS and tankers, it will defend bombers too. And why not let JF-17 Focus on a2a where is it is superior and let the strike duty be left to a strike aircraft. The thunder and falcons will defend these aircraft the which, though attacking IAF ground stations and SAMs from stand off range... Will make it more difficult for the IAF to operate over Pakistan and easier to defend Pakistani skies. To say they are obsolete despite the fact that major strike aircraft and strategic bombers are operated bu the top airforces in the world is ludicrous. While you may prefer flankers the JH-7B with an AESA set up is not a bad aircraft for PAF and PN.

 

[_NOBODY_]

I read somewhere that for JF-17 Block 3 it is being redesigned, is it true or false?

 

[Basel]

Nasr while it could raise the spector of nuclear exchange, babur is unlikely to do so. If you are suggesting that India will go nuclear with a CM launch from air (as i suggested off H-6K) It is unlikely. Any aircraft lifting off any regional airbase is tracked by both countries. You think that Pakistan is going hold back a conventional cruise missile launch cuz India may think its nuclear... Unlikey. They will use whatever means are available to defend themselves. Launching babur and ra'ad will be expected in any conflict. If they feel like they are facing a mortal risk of annihilation then they will risk going nuclear, so what you are sayin (missile launch will be perceived as nuclear strike) may be true but in any conflict those particular missiles will be launched. It is modern combat which is centered around these weapons.

@Basel please explain how these are apples and oranges? If Russian flankers are unavailable...you think JF-17 has the range and payload to do deep strike? You think IAF wont go after AWACS and tankers but only strategic bombers? An airforce needs more than a2a fighters to defend its troops and airspace. The fact that the A-10 was extended in USAF should be testament to this. If PAF can defend its large scale assets like AWACS and tankers, it will defend bombers too. And why not let JF-17 Focus on a2a where is it is superior and let the strike duty be left to a strike aircraft. The thunder and falcons will defend these aircraft the which, though attacking IAF ground stations and SAMs from stand off range... Will make it more difficult for the IAF to operate over Pakistan and easier to defend Pakistani skies. To say they are obsolete despite the fact that major strike aircraft and strategic bombers are operated bu the top airforces in the world is ludicrous. While you may prefer flankers the JH-7B with an AESA set up is not a bad aircraft for PAF and PN.

First Don't compare USAF to PAF both are way different in terms of capabilities, doctrine, resources and mandate assigned to them.

PAF and also PN are not interested in any dedicated strike platform, India can monitor parts of Pakistani airspace with AESA radars which it self an issue for Pakistan. A country who is struggling to replace its old fleet with new advance jets don't have leverage to go for items which are exclusively big powers items, which they can afford easily and fits in there doctrine.

 

[Tank131]

Then you have already lost any even small scale conflict. You will lose each of your facilities through the attrition lf your ability to defend your skies. If you have not conventional ability to hurt your enemy then there is no way you will be able to defend your borders your sea lanes and your skies. Furthermore you are extremely wrong in your assement of PAFs lack of interest in strike platforms. The entire project ROSE was designed to improve strike capabilities and the plethora of standoff weapns were developed to do exactly what im suggesting (hitting iaf positions, pushing their FOB further back away from Pakistans borders.

Remember you are fighting a force that is much larger and better equipped. If you dont hurt them offensively you will always lose.

As for comparing USAF and PAF, iam not saying you have to match USAF but look at the tactics and what professional organizations call "best practices" of the leaders in the field. If you have the means to employ a tactic effectively through a similar platform, saying "we arent them" is self defeating. The need for strike aircraft is important, and while H-6K is a stretch, i grant you, its capabilities to launch a large number of airlaunched babur missiles from 500km inside Pakistan and reach around 500km inside India will be distinctly useful in destroying IAF FOB and SAM sites (like s400 which has a 400k range and with rafale and mki can destroy fighters from inside India) .

While IAF can see PAF aircraft so too can PAF.

Small less well off forces can focus on their particular needs of course but the need of a small highly specialized fleet inside of that force can turn the tide in a conflict. As for the navy, there is nit better Antiship platform other than Flankers that is readily available to you. 1 sqn of Jh-7B and 1 of JF-17 will be dynamic altering for PN.

But while i respect your opinion, i dont think we will agree on these issues. So lets get back to the topic at hand (Selex or other gear cor JF-17)

 

[Paksanity]

but do you really believe it to be the answer to the imbalance, the purpose of the Jf-17 is to give PAF a mid-tech capability they are unable to recieve with the bulk of mirages, F-7s etc, its not necessary the answer to the SU-30MKI, this is the thing i find a little worrying, the aircraft should have evolved to the point its capable of challenging and eliminating some of the threats across the border,
i see many positives in the JF-17 providing a good industrial base,and there is plenty of room to add additional gadgetry but the purpose of the machine is to protect pakistans skys, since the 80s theres never been a real answer to the imbalance, PAF is in need of a heavyweight kind of fighter, that has range and payload, and excellent strike ability, and its been 30+ years since we inducted an aircraft of this generation worthy of its time.

JF-17 poses serious threat to anything that comes its way except for 5th Gen aircraft. It takes PAF capabilities to whole new level. Let's give some credit to professionals who know better than us what they are doing. 300+ JFT and F-16s in the hands of well trained air force is no joke.

 

[Blue Marlin]

I believe we will have this news quit soon (it's my assumption)



C-802 & & CM-400 AKG are already tested & integrated with the platform (even with block-1), but PAF has not acquired CM-400 (I wounder what is the reason)

ACR Khalid Mahmood reply regarding same weapons integration
View attachment 292259

RAAD will be integrated with Block-1 & 2 along with H-4

View attachment 292261

secondly now JF-17 have a tag of battle proven platform as well ....

View attachment 292268
so in short any integration of addition weapon package from any other source will help in its marketing but their value regarding the increment of existing weapon package will be minimal .... my humble opinion ...

can you post the full interview please

 

[Hellfire]

Nasr while it could raise the spector of nuclear exchange, babur is unlikely to do so. If you are suggesting that India will go nuclear with a CM launch from air (as i suggested off H-6K) It is unlikely. Any aircraft lifting off any regional airbase is tracked by both countries. You think that Pakistan is going hold back a conventional cruise missile launch cuz India may think its nuclear... Unlikey. They will use whatever means are available to defend themselves. Launching babur and ra'ad will be expected in any conflict. If they feel like they are facing a mortal risk of annihilation then they will risk going nuclear, so what you are sayin (missile launch will be perceived as nuclear strike) may be true but in any conflict those particular missiles will be launched. It is modern combat which is centered around these weapons.

@Tank131 I assume you have a military background, if not then, to quote John Travolta in Broken Arrow 'assumption is the mother of all fcuk ups' ...... anyways, assuming you as a professional soldier, would you, faced with an enemy who has a declared first use policy in both strategic and tactical environment, sit idly with multiple missiles heading your way? Honestly, if you would wait for multiple missiles to strike you and see if they are conventional or not, the game is up. Understand something about the dynamics of any future (improbable) conflict in Indian subcontinent. The nuclear threshold will be crossed, and will be maintained at low level. Both the countries are prepared for that and both the countries train their armies for that.

As for the bold underlined part, nope. The LRTR project of India "Swordfish" a derived project of Israeli Green Pine, has range in excess of 1500 kms. That covers the Pakistani airspace as the crow flies, from east to west. Additionally, the constellation of satellites in orbit put by India IRS series (remote sensing) and the dedicated military satellites are tasked for continuous watch over Pakistani airspace albeit in rotation. For India, the distance of bases off the border is sufficiently away for an aircraft to be airborne, refueled just outside the range of Pakistani radars and then commence hostile action, giving vital few minutes of advantage. @MastanKhan has taken pains to explain these points, but I guess his efforts are in vain. A small example, in Kargil War, Pakistan decided to load one F-16 with a nuke, and immediately a call from Vajpayee went to Nawaz Sharief intimating if the aircraft takes to air, Indian nuclear strike will take place in 8 mins of lift off ......!

I have elucidated the Indian doctrine in related threads and will not indulge here as it will be off topic. However, knowing the scenario first hand, there is no way that any officer of Indian army will sit waiting for missiles to strike. If a solitary missile is fired, yes then they will sit and watch the effect, but that will negate the effect you have elucidated.

Just my 2 cents worth!