The JF-17 is a truly remarkable plane

[Bratva]

It was not about Think Tanks in general. Was specifically for you and the inability you exhibited in understanding the post you responded to. But guess, even that was beyond your comprehension. Meh

keeping your continued verbal diarrhea aside. Please, enlighten me, what do you wanted to convey in your post then? I replied to the inaccuracies contained in your post. But instead of understanding the content of my post is about correcting your fallacies you propagating, you started harping about that I didn't even talked about

 

[Imran Khan]

see i just asked one question. . no response yet... jf 17 need to slow down to mach 0.7 to launch cm 400akg... and it need to come within 150km radius ... can the jf 17 launch missile safely???

bhai tu tension na le kal kabaar wala subah ayee ga to usy JF-17 de ker chaay ke cups ka set le loon ga ab khush ? enjoy:

 

[Basel]

bhai tu tension na le kal kabaar wala subah ayee ga to usy JF-17 de ker chaay ke cups ka set le loon ga ab khush ? enjoy:

Yeh nhe samjhay ga JF-17 k mutaliq koi baat kyun k dil aur demagh main nafrat aur kena jo hain Pakistan k leye, Buzurgon ka Qol hai k Jab banda baat samjhna he na chahay tow khamosh hojao, Sahchai khud aik din samnay aa jati hai.

 

[Max Pain]

Such Posts are better suited for Humor section.
btw, a similar perception by Musharraf caused the Kargil Disaster.

u pissed brah? good let the butthurt flow.
but seriously as much as you hate it your bisons have the worst crash rate.

 

[temporary handle]

The advent of BVR has even neutralised that to a great extent, during an exercise based on the BVR scenario, the subject , was picking up the larger more manoeuvrable opponent before the smaller JF-17 was detected, by that time, it had launched weapon and broke off. !!

Like to interject here.

BVR's are never fired at more half their maximum range. All those fantastic range statistics on paper are just that, statistics on paper. While a BVR certainly has more range than a WVR, but hit probability of a BVR of any kind is less than that of WVR, and WVR's could be fired at close to their maximum range.

BVR may have changed Air-combat but not to the extent that you think. A superior plane would be victorious over an inferior plane in BVR combat ( provided training of pilots is same ), even if the inferior plane has small RCS, unless the RCS of targetting plane is so small that it could not be detected by aircraft that is targetting before Aircraft that comes within 90% Kill range; a feat that could be achieved only by full stealth Aircrafts.Also introduction of AWACS nullify much of small RCS advantage that JF-17 would have over Su-30's.With or Without AWACS, it would be detected before it could bring a Su-30 inside it's kill envelope but with AWACS, it could be detected a lot earlier.


Currently, a Su-30 could detect a JF-17 ( as per public literature for Radar ranges ) before that 30 enters kill envelope of 17. It would matter little as to how far away a Su-30 could be detected by 17, if it could not take any action against 30.


Your analysis suffer from the flaw of overestimating 17 because it ignores radar capabilities. SU-30 may have a large RCS but it also carries much bigger radar compared to 17. Indians would be truly fücked, if their plane had a large RCS and a small Radar. A large radar of 30 balance it's large RCS disadvantage.

 

[temporary handle]

You Indians forgot one thing that all those planes of IAF have to cover much more area, that is why they are bought in numbers, PAF will have upto 100 F-16s and majority will be upgraded to 50/52+ standard while they will be supported by other assets too, and Pakistan is not that huge to have a big force to defend it.

But warfare would more like contesting a line rather than area. In case with war why would IAF leave any fighter to defend South or central India. They would throw everything to Indo-Pak border ( except assets reserved to counter China ).

You cannot discount any asset of IAF in war.

 

[Windjammer]

Like to interject here.

BVR's are never fired at more half their maximum range. All those fantastic range statistics on paper are just that, statistics on paper. While a BVR certainly has more range than a WVR, but hit probability of a BVR of any kind is less than that of WVR, and WVR's could be fired at close to their maximum range.

BVR may have changed Air-combat but not to the extent that you think. A superior plane would be victorious over an inferior plane in BVR combat ( provided training of pilots is same ), even if the inferior plane has small RCS, unless the RCS of targetting plane is so small that it could not be detected by aircraft that is targetting before Aircraft that comes within 90% Kill range; a feat that could be achieved only by full stealth Aircrafts.Also introduction of AWACS nullify much of small RCS advantage that JF-17 would have over Su-30's.With or Without AWACS, it would be detected before it could bring a Su-30 inside it's kill envelope but with AWACS, it could be detected a lot earlier.


Currently, a Su-30 could detect a JF-17 ( as per public literature for Radar ranges ) before that 30 enters kill envelope of 17. It would matter little as to how far away a Su-30 could be detected by 17, if it could not take any action against 30.


Your analysis suffer from the flaw of overestimating 17 because it ignores radar capabilities. SU-30 may have a large RCS but it also carries much bigger radar compared to 17. Indians would be truly fücked, if their plane had a large RCS and a small Radar. A large radar of 30 balance it's large RCS disadvantage.

All said and done, in a hot and high scenario, due to close proximity of border i doubt pilots or in some cases RIOs from either sides will be sitting glued to their radar screens. In fact as some military expert pointed out that unlike say US and Russia or China, Pakistan and India share a common border, with a few minutes of fast jet flying, the AWACS and participating combat aircraft will have to distinguish between the incoming and outgoing traffic before before any IFF.

 

[Etilla]

u pissed brah? good let the butthurt flow.
but seriously as much as you hate it your bisons have the worst crash rate.

The USMC Harrier disagrees with you

 

[temporary handle]

All said and done, in a hot and high scenario, due to close proximity of border i doubt pilots or in some cases RIOs from either sides will be sitting glued to their radar screens. In fact as some military expert pointed out that unlike say US and Russia or China, Pakistan and India share a common border, with a few minutes of fast jet flying, the AWACS and participating combat aircraft will have to distinguish between the incoming and outgoing traffic before before any IFF.

But AWACS could not guide Radar guided missile to their target. It has to be done by Airplane's radar. An Aircraft would still need to bring it's adversary within it's Radar envelope.

 

[DrWatson775]

But AWACS could not guide Radar guided missile to their target. It has to be done by Airplane's radar. An Aircraft would still need to bring it's adversary within it's Radar envelope.

An AWACS can guide a BVR missile after launch by a fighter aircraft. The launch aircraft can then safely exit and let the more powerful AWACS radar guide the missile from a safe distance until the missile gets closer to get a lock with its own radar. This is possible. I am not sure if this is implemented by any air force in the sub-continent yet.

 

[temporary handle]

An AWACS can guide a BVR missile after launch by a fighter aircraft. The launch aircraft can then safely exit and let the more powerful AWACS radar guide the missile from a safe distance until the missile gets closer to get a lock with its own radar. This is possible. I am not sure if this is implemented by any air force in the sub-continent yet.

Only in theory.Not possible with current level of technology.

Data-Link would be a nightmare and AWACS energy is too dispersed for proper targetting.( Planes narrow down their beam to allow Radar guided missile to lock onto Target)

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

It would be tactical folly to allow 1 player to control BVR capabilities of 50 units in air , it goes down , suddenly you lost BVR for 50 units

 

[foxbat]

keeping your continued verbal diarrhea aside. Please, enlighten me, what do you wanted to convey in your post then? I replied to the inaccuracies contained in your post. But instead of understanding the content of my post is about correcting your fallacies you propagating, you started harping about that I didn't even talked about

Keeping your complete absence of comprehension aside along with the so called verbal diarrhea, it will do you well to go thru my original post again and this time without the blinders of intrinsic hatred, and maybe then you will understand that I am simply contrasting a manufacturing JV (obviously with design contributions) with a technically more advanced country to beef up the airforce (India with Su 30 MKI and Pakistan with JF 17s) to an indigenous system integration project aimed primarily at improving design capabilities of the country among other things (LCA).

You guys need to stop being so defensive about the JF 17 JV. Its a great product, no doubt but every reference to that does not need to bring in a comparison with LCA, which, as a project is very different, both in terms of objectives and construct.

If you even now can not understand my original post, then I guess its better for both of us to move on.

 

[Basel]

for those who think AWACS can't guide BVR its all going to change soon just google what new E-2D Hawk Eye can do, NCW is revolutionizing warfare.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I am sure it can work , just that what happens when your only 1 awac goes down its better to have 200 jets AESA enabled rather then depand too much on the awac, for countries that have trillion dollar budgets yes they can have 40-50 awacs