Selex ES radar & other technology on JF-17?

[salarsikander]

Hi,

We could look back 10 years from now and say if the paf change directions mid stride today---it would not miss a beat.

So---instead of going for the 8 F16's for 1.5 billion dollars---if they could split the funds between the J10 C and the Jf 17----1 billion +- for the J10C's and 500 ++ millions for the JF 17----the paf would be in a much better position tactically.

The minimum threshold of capability of the JF 17 would be raised from below the F16 BLK 52 to above it with the induction of aesa---irst---refuel probe---.

A billion dollars would fetch in a sqdrn of the J10C's fully equipped and operational---and 500 million ++ would upgrade the majority of the JF17 in operation and the coming JF17 for the next year or so.

So---in this case---the face of force projection totally changes the appearance and capabilities of the air force by at least a factor two if not three and that is a massive increase----just being achieved by dispersing funds in a very different and un-conventional manner.

Be it Italian or be it Chinese---for paf---both the systems will work fine. They will give the air force as a whole more power projection and that is what is needed under the current circumstances----and not 8 F 16's.

Now if the product is available and if any foreign buyer wants it----more power to them----but to tell the truth---the chinese package would not be any less potent.

We just need to remember one thing about the chinese fire control radar and other weapons---.

The chinese are preparing them to fight the american weapons---even though today---the chinese equipment is a few tiers below---in the next 2-5 years time---it would be very close to them or the same level---.

I mean to say the chinese are not going to put tier 2 equipment in the J20's or the J31's or the J10C's and live with forever---.

Salam Khan saheb,

Always a pleasure reading your posts.

I would like to pose a question humbly. Janab, The process of integrating j-10 as you suggested would take time as opposed to the platform f sola.

But then again as you always mention, its not as if we are going to for a full head on with our enemy tomorrow, so will it be safe to say that if we integrate j10c, it will take a minimum of 5 years to fully integrate with AF ?

 

[ssethii]

Kuch loog josh-e-khitabat mein haqeeqat ki dunya se bht door nikal gaye hain.
Maybe I am unable to grasp the gist of this argument but isn't every fighter aircraft developed keeping in mind the requirements of their air force. How's JF-17 any different from others in this respect and what specific edge this program has from others from direct involvement of PAF engineers.

 

[Paksanity]

. We are hoping too much from PAF. Aesa from Selex is not a new phenomena. We've been hearing about Vixen-500 or Vixen-1000 radar since 2006. If my memory serves me right. British ambassador offered this radar back in 2007. But PAF remained mum on it and still obfuscating the whole E-Scan issue into whether they are going to go PESA or AESA route. We heard Pakistan going for IRST and PESA radar and additional hardpoints in block 2 but what happened is JF-17 down the road faced serious structural, software issues (MFD going blank mid flights, Missiles not leaving the rail launch after Pilot pressing the joystick button) and all the upgrades were put on hold and pushed back to Block-III. So what is the guarantee that PAF is finding it hard to mate AESA radar with JF-17 due to space and modifications require to install cooling system. As we all know there would be no structural changes



All the nations who are involved in fighter jet manufacturing lay out their definitive radar requirements well advance in 1 or 2 years e.g Rafael, EF, LCA, F-16, Chinese fighter jets but there is no news from PAF except we are looking into this and that.


What we are seeing is the repeat of PAF IFR fiasco

In the end, what was being propagated that JF-17 doesn't have enough space to host this kind of solution in it.

Then comes the reliability issues. JF-17 entire AAM, majority of AGM armory is chinese origin. How SELEX would give Pakistan go ahead to integrate Chinese missiles into its product ? If Pakistan can not get selex radar, then one might think Chinese AESA might be installed which in my humble opinion would be wishful thinking .Chinese AESA solution is not matured. Only in the last year, they started testing their AESA radars on J-10 B and J-16They have to overcome the reliability issues, Quality issues regarding the hardware and software controlling AESA. Pakistan has to go through the same painful road of heavy modification which it went with KLJ PD radar so it can fire BVR SD-10 A and majority of PGM's. It took KLJ-7 4-5 years to be reliable. Chinese AESA solution will be no exception

but there PESA solution has matured well enough. It has been perfected on J-10 B and can be minituarised in 2-3 year time frame.

Another thing to consider is cost of the AESA radar. PAF wants to equip its block II with the Block-III upgrades. You cant spend a large amount of money on AESA radar and then install other goodies on JF-17 because of the trade offs JF has to face for being a cost effective solution.



قویٰ

put paysh on Kaaf and and read Small Yay with Khari zabar.

An insight into history of program may reveal the reasons. One of the reason for fast progression of JFT program was de-linking avionics integration from structural and engine development. On one hand, it allowed aircraft part to move at rapid pace = good. On the other electronics lagged behind because of finances, politics (French denial etc) and indecision = bad. We can debate whether decision was right or wrong. IMHO it was right otherwise we would be where LCA is today. At least we are able to replace older aircraft with something far more capable unlike our neighbours who have to watch their numbers decline. They can afford it, we couldn't. One of the reason PAF would go for Chinese radar and weapons is their immediate compatibility coming with reasonably good performance. Notwithstanding the price benefits of Chinese package, it is no secret that PAF had its heart set on Western avionics and weapons. Conditions did not favour it though.

As far initial issues, well that was bound to happen given that both were being joined later instead of being developed and tested together on development path. But as it turns out PAF, more specifically PAC was able to iron out these issues to a great degree (evidence: operational squadrons especially CCS). So far so good then but that's the story of Block-1 apparently. Block-2 is suppose to roll out with these issues settled and a notch above. Block-3 entirely in different league, supposedly.

Before we move onto subject at hand, it is important to zoom out and take an overview of the broader picture. Put yourself in the shoes of Air Force generals for a while. Here you have an air force two third of which is flying second generation fighters facing an enemy 3 times bigger and half of them flying 4th generation fighters. Funds are scarce and procurement sources limited. Take time to grasp the fact what PAF has already procured for earlier blocks of JFT. That's 500 SD-10s 1000 PL-5 IIs, C-802A, CM-400 AKGs, KLJ-7 V1/2s and perhaps some ARMs. By far these are much superior weapons to Gen-2 fighter's inventory. When you want to go upgradation path or Western avionics+weapons path, would you replace these weapons first or would you replace Gen-2 fighters first? So who gets the upgrades? Of course the newly rolled out ones and not the block-1 and 2s. Do we have the money to throw away Klj-7s and associated weapons while F-7s and Mirage-III/ Vs are still around?

A cross section of F-16 squadrons gives an insight into PAF thinking and acquisition philosophy. We have them in three distinct classes; Block-15, MLU and Block-52 +. On the other hand PAF is bent on sucking the last drop of blood from legacy fighters; yet another class at the bottom of food chain. So my guess is we are beginning to see JFT going that path with each newer block occupying the top slots in food chain with ever decreasing gap between Block-52 and JFT. Meanwhile older blocks will continue to field Chinese package till all legacy fighters are replaced (7-10 years I guess). They will start to receive upgradation there on like MLU F-16s and ROSE Mirage did.

Block-III getting a Western AESA along with A-Darter and R-darter for air to air are entirely plausible and a good way forward. Integrating western TGP with South African/ Brazilian / Pakistani precision bombs and missiles is the right way to go. Trying to marry Chinese weapons with Western radar is not a good idea. There are just too many stumbling blocks. So it will be wiser to marry initial 100 JFTs with Chinese radars and weapons while marry next ones entirely with Western+South African weapons and radars. It will create two distinct classes of JFT flying in same Air Force. Well, that's how PAF has been managing its affairs due to budgetary constraints and diplomatic doldrums. Won't be a surprise for me.

 

[Wolf]

Is there any possibility of licensed production of selex tech at PAC kamra especially if we intend to procure around 150 to 200 kits ? Furthermore, i would recommend a mix of selex and chinese aesa on JF 17 i.e. a 50-50 number. It is not sensible and advisable imho to put all eggs in one basket unless offcourse if a landmark deal of tot regarding such radar is involved. In such case, our avionics industry will make a giant leap forward.

Hi,

Thanks for asking----. A new problem has arisen over the horizon--and that would be critical in all the key decisions being made in the future---.

The recent leak of news a couple od days ago a=regarding the British and the americans spying on israeli drones and F16----thru data link

Dale Brown---in one of his works of fiction---some 18 years ago I believe---wrote about a super computer in an awacs type of aircraft that could decode an incoming enemy BVR missile and make it go astray during its flight---means within seconds the supercomputer was able to break into the datalink guided missile-----or if it was a regualr missiles with with radar lock information provided from the radar---I don't remember what type.

But the thing is----what was imagined---has become a reality now.

If you get the idea from someone---plz give some credit.

Sir, your futuristic insight is highly commendable and paf must think on the same line. If one can think about it then it can be done. SO better to get it with tot with further modifications to plug loopholes of any high tech software intervention and manipulation of radar data in critical time. And both chinese and selex (if it happens) solution may be installed on 50 - 50 basis on JF 17. Regards

 

[MastanKhan]

Salam Khan saheb,

Always a pleasure reading your posts.

I would like to pose a question humbly. Janab, The process of integrating j-10 as you suggested would take time as opposed to the platform f sola.

But then again as you always mention, its not as if we are going to for a full head on with our enemy tomorrow, so will it be safe to say that if we integrate j10c, it will take a minimum of 5 years to fully integrate with AF ?

Hi,

Integration is always an issue----. As I stated a longtime ago---2 aircraft came out at the same time---the J10 the JF17----two allies---two seperate air forces---both integrating them and going thru the fix and fly process.

So---in this case---as the weapons being the same---the systems similar---the integration would be a lesser issue---but it would still be there.

Supposedly---if the chinese wanted to integrate the JF 17 into their air force---the process would not be the same as that of paf---and same if paf wanted to take in the J10C---vice versa----because most the work has been done by both the sides because of input on one and joint venture on the other---.

So---both the sides will be way ahead into the learning curve if they decide to get the aircraft.

What has happened in the U S congress---the F16 sale is predictable----yes they might give the okay----but the delivery is un-predictable---.

And to put the nation in that position is not good----and to put the U S in that position is not good either.

You are asking a sorpion not to sting you---when it does it by habbit---so you cannot blame the U S for what it does to it secondary allies who are financially weaker. It does it out of habbit.

So---why not lessen the U S burden---and not put it into a position where it feels that its hands are tied----.

As good friends---let us go in a different direction and still keep the friendship.

The bottom line here is that china is going to find way to take on the U S air force in the next 5 years---. The potency of the chinese systems will increase by double if not tripple---and we need to keep one thing in mind----our enemy is not the U S----our enemy is deadly but much less potent.

I truly would like to see this 1.5 billion dollar procurement go towards getting the J10C's---JF17's and aesa and irst amongst other things.

 

[Khafee]

Hi,

Integration is always an issue----. As I stated a longtime ago---2 aircraft came out at the same time---the J10 the JF17----two allies---two seperate air forces---both integrating them and going thru the fix and fly process.

So---in this case---as the weapons being the same---the systems similar---the integration would be a lesser issue---but it would still be there.

Supposedly---if the chinese wanted to integrate the JF 17 into their air force---the process would not be the same as that of paf---and same if paf wanted to take in the J10C---vice versa----because most the work has been done by both the sides because of input on one and joint venture on the other---.

So---both the sides will be way ahead into the learning curve if they decide to get the aircraft.

What has happened in the U S congress---the F16 sale is predictable----yes they might give the okay----but the delivery is un-predictable---.

And to put the nation in that position is not good----and to put the U S in that position is not good either.

You are asking a sorpion not to sting you---when it does it by habbit---so you cannot blame the U S for what it does to it secondary allies who are financially weaker. It does it out of habbit.

So---why not lessen the U S burden---and not put it into a position where it feels that its hands are tied----.

As good friends---let us go in a different direction and still keep the friendship.

The bottom line here is that china is going to find way to take on the U S air force in the next 5 years---. The potency of the chinese systems will increase by double if not tripple---and we need to keep one thing in mind----our enemy is not the U S----our enemy is deadly but much less potent.

I truly would like to see this 1.5 billion dollar procurement go towards getting the J10C's---JF17's and aesa and irst amongst other things.

Very well said

 

[Super Falcon]

Well if it is making thunder prog expansive im afraif PAF going against its own saying that it needex cost efective jet this is primary objective if it expansive than better bought gripen

 

[MastanKhan]

Kuch loog josh-e-khitabat mein haqeeqat ki dunya se bht door nikal gaye hain.
Maybe I am unable to grasp the gist of this argument but isn't every fighter aircraft developed keeping in mind the requirements of their air force. How's JF-17 any different from others in this respect and what specific edge this program has from others from direct involvement of PAF engineers.

Hi,

The difference is that this size of a fighter reflects the mindset of the paf pilot---what he wants.

Now if as a civilian----defence enthusiaist---my input was asked---my choice would be similar to the japanese---a JF17 slightly larger than the F16---so---basically a J10---.

There is a reason for the size of the JF17---its design structure and what the paf pilot had in mind in how to use and operate this aircraft---.

After flying the F16 for decades---it would betough to find another aircraft to compete with it----so that is where the input of the paf pilots came in---. The JF17 can not have obvious F16 feateures but very similar.

The ease of operation but more so on ease of maintenance---and in this case---only one technician can do the basic maintenance of this aircraft---.

This aircraft is not for show and pomp---like the twin engine twin tails aircraft---but it is rather a work horse.

The only problem that we see over here is the 1 - 2 punch package is not complete. The JF 17 needs to be complimented by a larger aircraft----the likes of J10C---the J16 or something similar---.

It needs a bigger brother to show its maximum potential.

Well if it is making thunder prog expansive im afraif PAF going against its own saying that it needex cost efective jet this is primary objective if it expansive than better bought gripen

Hi,

In military matters---truth is not always the best policy---deception and deceit is the ultimate goal---.

The JF17 is a cost effective aircraft----actually it an extremely cost effective aircraft. So---the first primary goal and target is already accomplished.

You got you MA degree---and you got a job---you got a decent income and decent living---but now you have the opportunity to do your PhD and then sky is the limit---.

So you say what-----I don't want to be ordinary---I want to be extra-ordinary---I want to be someone special---.

As you have already built up your foundations well---you see an available opportunity that would rocket your progress upwards with a bang. So---you tell your dada and mom and wife and kids that you are on a mission to seek niravana and you need their support to propel you in the right direction. And they all say---" yeah daddy let us do it "---.

And after you get your degree and and get what you wanted---you are now strutting around like a peacock with the feather stuck up his ar-se---.

So---life is not treating the JF17 any different---. It is just telling it---that if it removed that module---it can install a module 10 times more potent in the same place---.

Because as there is a program of building JF17---there are parallel programs being run by other vendors to take it the levels way beyond imagination or whatever the original planning was at the time of conception.

These vendors produce complimentary systems in competition to each other to get the contracts to have their systems installed and in operation.

So---they make the ordinary into extra-ordinary---.

So---when you look at " inexpensive "---you have to take into consideration---" inexpensive in relation to what "---because inexpensive by itself mean nothing---it has to have a comparable replacement.

So---you can have a Honda Accord LX---a Sport package---an EX---an EX-L---EX-l Navi-EXV-L---EXV-L navi( v6 )----.

Growth is a natural progression of things in life---stagnant things die fast.

 

[Khafee]

Hi,

Integration is always an issue----. As I stated a longtime ago---2 aircraft came out at the same time---the J10 the JF17----two allies---two seperate air forces---both integrating them and going thru the fix and fly process.

So---in this case---as the weapons being the same---the systems similar---the integration would be a lesser issue---but it would still be there.

Supposedly---if the chinese wanted to integrate the JF 17 into their air force---the process would not be the same as that of paf---and same if paf wanted to take in the J10C---vice versa----because most the work has been done by both the sides because of input on one and joint venture on the other---.

So---both the sides will be way ahead into the learning curve if they decide to get the aircraft.

What has happened in the U S congress---the F16 sale is predictable----yes they might give the okay----but the delivery is un-predictable---.

And to put the nation in that position is not good----and to put the U S in that position is not good either.

You are asking a sorpion not to sting you---when it does it by habbit---so you cannot blame the U S for what it does to it secondary allies who are financially weaker. It does it out of habbit.

So---why not lessen the U S burden---and not put it into a position where it feels that its hands are tied----.

As good friends---let us go in a different direction and still keep the friendship.

The bottom line here is that china is going to find way to take on the U S air force in the next 5 years---. The potency of the chinese systems will increase by double if not tripple---and we need to keep one thing in mind----our enemy is not the U S----our enemy is deadly but much less potent.

I truly would like to see this 1.5 billion dollar procurement go towards getting the J10C's---JF17's and aesa and irst amongst other things.

You know the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that PAF should ask for atleast 2 squadrons of Blk61.
Payment after delivery. Take it, or leave it.

 

[Blue Marlin]

Hi,

We could look back 10 years from now and say if the paf change directions mid stride today---it would not miss a beat.

So---instead of going for the 8 F16's for 1.5 billion dollars---if they could split the funds between the J10 C and the Jf 17----1 billion +- for the J10C's and 500 ++ millions for the JF 17----the paf would be in a much better position tactically.

The minimum threshold of capability of the JF 17 would be raised from below the F16 BLK 52 to above it with the induction of aesa---irst---refuel probe---.

A billion dollars would fetch in a sqdrn of the J10C's fully equipped and operational---and 500 million ++ would upgrade the majority of the JF17 in operation and the coming JF17 for the next year or so.

So---in this case---the face of force projection totally changes the appearance and capabilities of the air force by at least a factor two if not three and that is a massive increase----just being achieved by dispersing funds in a very different and un-conventional manner.

Be it Italian or be it Chinese---for paf---both the systems will work fine. They will give the air force as a whole more power projection and that is what is needed under the current circumstances----and not 8 F 16's.

Now if the product is available and if any foreign buyer wants it----more power to them----but to tell the truth---the chinese package would not be any less potent.

We just need to remember one thing about the chinese fire control radar and other weapons---.

The chinese are preparing them to fight the american weapons---even though today---the chinese equipment is a few tiers below---in the next 2-5 years time---it would be very close to them or the same level---.

I mean to say the chinese are not going to put tier 2 equipment in the J20's or the J31's or the J10C's and live with forever---.

@waz this guy is ruining this very good thread with nonsense the j10c is not relevant here nor is he

 

[Khafee]

@waz this guy is ruining this very good thread with nonsense the j10c is not relevant here nor is he

No he is not. He is talking perfect sense. IF he is offending you so much, feel free to quit this thread.

 

[waz]

@waz this guy is ruining this very good thread with nonsense the j10c is not relevant here nor is he

It's related bro.

 

[Quwa]

Is there any possibility of licensed production of selex tech at PAC kamra especially if we intend to procure around 150 to 200 kits ? Furthermore, i would recommend a mix of selex and chinese aesa on JF 17 i.e. a 50-50 number. It is not sensible and advisable imho to put all eggs in one basket unless offcourse if a landmark deal of tot regarding such radar is involved. In such case, our avionics industry will make a giant leap forward.

It might be a stretch, but it is possible provided Pakistan offers enough money as well as respect for Selex ES' intellectual property and sensitive technology. A reasonable compromise would be Selex ES taking a portion of the Pakistani deal and re-investing it back into Pakistan through a subsidiary, which in turn could manufacture the radars and other subsystems within Pakistan. Long-term, the key would be to ensure that the maintenance, overhaul and repair is done in Pakistan, as you'd only be buying the radar for each fighter once, but you'll need to maintain and repair it numerous times over the radar's lifespan.

In regards to the J-10C. To be frank, I think the PAF should disregard the pursuit of medium-weight fighters and baton down the hatches on the JF-17 (intermediate term) and begin putting money aside for FC-31 (long-term). Inducting a new fighter platform is a costly venture, and it may not be worth the pursuit if one is only planning to induct a handful of squadrons; it'd be a much better idea to take $1.5bn U.S. in its entirety and put it towards the JF-17, i.e. the mainstay.

This is why it's important we remember the original point of the thread. If given enough money, could we make the JF-17 (with Selex ES and Denel Dynamics support) a credible means of defence against whatever IAF throws at us? If so, then shouldn't be all funding for intermediate needs be allocated to the JF-17?

Long-term:

1. JF-17 for all general multi-role fighter duties.

2. FC-31 for strike, maritime operations, strategic operations (i.e. serve as new Mirages)

3. F-16 to hold the fort down until JF-17 comes to its next tiers (Block-III/IV/V) and FC-31 enters the fore.

 

[MastanKhan]

You know the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that PAF should ask for atleast 2 squadrons of Blk61.
Payment after delivery. Take it, or leave it.

Hi,

The problem is with the time frame---3 years and that is too long.

2 sqdrn's of BLK61's would mean around 6--7 sqdrn's of J10C's or similar number of J16's---which could easily be split into 3 1/2 sqdrn each. Paf needs numbers.

It might be a stretch, but it is possible provided Pakistan offers enough money as well as respect for Selex ES' intellectual property and sensitive technology. A reasonable compromise would be Selex ES taking a portion of the Pakistani deal and re-investing it back into Pakistan through a subsidiary, which in turn could manufacture the radars and other subsystems within Pakistan. Long-term, the key would be to ensure that the maintenance, overhaul and repair is done in Pakistan, as you'd only be buying the radar for each fighter once, but you'll need to maintain and repair it numerous times over the radar's lifespan.

In regards to the J-10C. To be frank, I think the PAF should disregard the pursuit of medium-weight fighters and baton down the hatches on the JF-17 (intermediate term) and begin putting money aside for FC-31 (long-term). Inducting a new fighter platform is a costly venture, and it may not be worth the pursuit if one is only planning to induct a handful of squadrons; it'd be a much better idea to take $1.5bn U.S. in its entirety and put it towards the JF-17, i.e. the mainstay.

This is why it's important we remember the original point of the thread. If given enough money, could we make the JF-17 (with Selex ES and Denel Dynamics support) a credible means of defence against whatever IAF throws at us? If so, then shouldn't be all funding for intermediate needs be allocated to the JF-17?

Long-term:

1. JF-17 for all general multi-role fighter duties.

2. FC-31 for strike, maritime operations, strategic operations (i.e. serve as new Mirages)

3. F-16 to hold the fort down until JF-17 comes to its next tiers (Block-III/IV/V) and FC-31 enters the fore.

Hi,

J31 in itself is nothing without a complimentary heavy BVR truck aircraft.

In order for it to succeed---it needs to have heavy bvr capable aircraft at its disposal to guide and launch missile thru.

If we were facing an equal number of aircraft---that would be a different situation---but we are facing 3 times the number---and aircraft hat can carry 5 times the load of bvr's than our aircraft.

Plus---J31 is too far away----. The real need of pakistan is deep strike heavy----it could be the JH7B---the J16---the SU34.

The JF17 in its current status is like your 8th grade little brother and you want to send him to take care of the 10th grade boyz---.

If it does not happen in real life----it cannot happen in the ranks of air force either----.

I mean to say---there has to be a REALITY CHECK---. The enemy's HEAVY weapons need to be RESPECTED. D

Disrespecting the enemy's heavy weapons is like disrespecting the sovreignty and security of your nation.

The enemy is not sleeping---it would sabotage the italian sales as well--and it would do it at a time where it hurts the most.

It would do it when the equipment is almost ready to be installed and then it would create problems.

So---on the paper---selex looks very good and deadly----but in reality---I have my doubts----guarantees---guarantees---guarantees.

 

[Quwa]

Hi,

The problem is with the time frame---3 years and that is too long.

2 sqdrn's of BLK61's would mean around 6--7 sqdrn's of J10C's or similar number of J16's---which could easily be split into 3 1/2 sqdrn each. Paf needs numbers.



Hi,

J31 in itself is nothing without a complimentary heavy BVR truck aircraft.

In order for it to succeed---it needs to have heavy bvr capable aircraft at its disposal to guide and launch missile thru.

If we were facing an equal number of aircraft---that would be a different situation---but we are facing 3 times the number---and aircraft hat can carry 5 times the load of bvr's than our aircraft.

Plus---J31 is too far away----. The real need of pakistan is deep strike heavy----it could be the JH7B---the J16---the SU34.

The JF17 in its current status is like your 8th grade little brother and you want to send him to take care of the 10th grade boyz---.

If it does not happen in real life----it cannot happen in the ranks of air force either----.

I mean to say---there has to be a REALITY CHECK---. The enemy's HEAVY weapons need to be RESPECTED. D

Disrespecting the enemy's heavy weapons is like disrespecting the sovreignty and security of your nation.

The enemy is not sleeping---it would sabotage the italian sales as well--and it would do it at a time where it hurts the most.

It would do it when the equipment is almost ready to be installed and then it would create problems.

So---on the paper---selex looks very good and deadly----but in reality---I have my doubts----guarantees---guarantees---guarantees.

Sir we have to go back to the original point. If the JF-17 (from Block-III and onwards) is equipped with the same kind of subsystems as the Gripen NG, then why couldn't it be a credible means of defence against Su-30MKI and Rafale? What is the decisive edge that those platforms have besides higher performance parameters? Does the Su-30MKI launching a radar-guided BVRAAM from farther away deprecate the effectiveness of the BriteCloud DRFM-based decoy? This was a key point in some of the earlier posts. When you bring the cutting edge technology to the JF-17, you enable the fighter to become a credible means of defence almost anything thrown at it. Is it 'superior?' No. Absolutely not. But it isn't markedly hopeless either.