What's new

Thoughts of an InAF fighter pilot on the JF-17

hj786

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
773
Reaction score
0
Could Pakistan base nukes in China as it develops its nuclear submarine? (URL: http://kuku.sawf.org/Articles/60033.aspx)
(scroll down to read the comments section)

Reply to comment: "Interview with PAF General"
14 September 2009 (EST)
vkthakur said:
dhruva0211 said:
"I came through an interview of PAF Air Chief Marshal Tanveer discussing the production of JF-17. Here is the link:

aTY2L6P9Aa0[/media] - Interview with Air Chief Marshal Tanveer on JF-17 Production

He says that Pakistan is right now only assembling the JF-17 in Pakistan. In the coming years (the interview was in 2008), Pakistan hopes to make 50-60% of the airframe and 70-80% of avionics (even that is aspirational). Right now, they are just making the fuselage section of the airframe which is less complicated. They are not at all talking of either the engines or the radar.

Pakistan became a partner in the JF-17 project in 1999. The first batch of production aircraft is expected to roll out later this year. The Pakistan Air Force plans to make the first JF-17 squadron officially operational later this year or next year.

India has been working on the LCA for 25 years now with no light at the end of the tunnerl.

To move from 0% manufacture to 100% will understandably take time. However, the confidence of the PAF in the aircraft is astounding. The 150 aircraft initial order is expected to go up to 275 with the aircraft replacing Pakistan's MiG-21-derived Chengdu F-7, Nanchang A-5 and Dassault Mirage III/Mirage Vs.

The IAF does not seem to have the same level of confidence in the LCA. Of course, you could blame the IAF for it.
dhruva0211 said:
> "In contrast, entire LCA airframe is designed by India using composites. India also has tried to developed the radar and engines (but failed!). Be that as it may, we might use all this knowledge as a base to design a good fighter in the future."

The ADA effort in designing and building the LCA is commendable. We are ahead of Pakistan in most of the technologies that go into a fighter aircraft. However, we haven't been successful, so far, in putting those technologies together into an aircraft that will delight the IAF pilots. Should we still ram it down their throats!

LCA is just not a world class aircraft. It is not even a match for JF-17 in WVR combat.

dhruva0211 said:
"As a fighter pilot, what is your assessment of JF-17 capabilities? A US Air Force general once said that JF-17 would not stand even for 5 seconds in front of an F-16."

Give the JF-17 the same radar and electronic suite as the F-16 and it will be a pretty serious threat to the F-16.

dhruva0211 said:
"Also in Indian forums, I read that JF-17 is a third generaion plane, whereas Indian LCA is a 4.5 generation plane much more advanced in technology and capabilities."

A 4.5 generation aircraft is supposed to have limited super-cruise, stealth and sensor fusion. I don't believe the LCA has any of those.

IAC how does it matter if the LCA is a generation ahead of the JF-17 when it cannot take on the JF-17? Remember, the PAF is going fit its own avionics in the JF-17. Considering Pakistan's close defense ties with Italy the JF-17 could end up with the Vixen 1000E, the AESA radar that will equip the Gripen NG.

"vkthakur" is Vijainder K. Thakur, a former fighter pilot who served for 20 years in the Indian Air Force flying the SEPECAT Jaguar attack/strike fighter.

A little something for JF-17 detractors to think about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Who is this so called "American General" by the way? Another self-comforting tactic by the Indian media? No American General would even discuss something like this and if he did, then he'd look pretty stupid since Americans know nothing about the capabilities of the JF-17.

If there is anyone who knows how well the JF-17 stacks up against the Viper its the folks in the PAF.

The reality of the situation is that PAF is very confident about the efficacy of the JF-17 and the role it will play. All those who said nay have been proven wrong because this aircraft has opened up venues for the PAF which were never open to the PAF in the past.
 
.
Americans are to arrogant to even consider the JF an acute threat!!! as for Indians see currently it is impossible to debate if JF is better or the LCA is better on PAPER LCA is light years ahead...but ON PAPER!!! in reality JF is actually flying while LCA is still under development!!!!! so yes both have their own advantages & disadvantages!!
 
.
Who is this so called "American General" by the way? Another self-comforting tactic by the Indian media? No American General would even discuss something like this and if he did, then he'd look pretty stupid since Americans know nothing about the capabilities of the JF-17.

If there is anyone who knows how well the JF-17 stacks up against the Viper its the folks in the PAF.

The reality of the situation is that PAF is very confident about the efficacy of the JF-17 and the role it will play. All those who said nay have been proven wrong because this aircraft has opened up venues for the PAF which were never open to the PAF in the past.

i think he wasnt a u.s general, rather some political leader of a third world country. he was also qouted by mr.ansari... ive forgotten the country though
 
.
"If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”

This statement was given by Mr. Richard L. Aboulafia, Vice President, Analysis, Teal Group.

Teal Group
Richard L. Aboulafia, Vice President, Analysis

-----------------------------------------------------------

" Aboulafia on JF-17

The FC-1 has come under a lot of fire from every quarter that one can think of. One prominent quarter was from Mr. Aboulafia of the Teal Group. He originally wrote:

"If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”

Thinking perhaps that he has not been aware of the later developments of the FC-1, I contacted him to find out more, and whether he was still sticking to his guns. This is the response I got from him:

I do [still stand by my statement], with twosmall caveats. One is that although we aviation fans love our planes, the side with the superior AWACS/AEW, satellite, and C3I links is going to have a huge advantage. But assuming we're looking at two planes with equal amounts of external sensor access (or no access), and assuming equal pilot training, the F-16 would win in seconds. For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe on the FC-1 (other radars proposed for the type are worse, particularly the Grifo). For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's. In either case the F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated. Also, the FC-1 and its systems have never been tested in combat, which makes a huge difference in effectiveness.

The second caveat, of course, is which F-16. An early A model would have a harder time than a recent C model. All of this ignores the much greater reliability of the avionics and engines on the F-16. We have no idea what mission capable rates are on an FC-1; I suspect they're relatively low, especially for the RD-93.

Lets take a deeper look at the arguments:

“For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe”

Firstly, the FC-1 and Elta pairing is old news and has been proved otherwise. The radar you’re comparing with is the KLJ-7. Leaving aside the fact that it is appalling for an aviation expert to not know this, it is not improbable that the KLJ-7 is of the same generation as the APG-68, given recent comparison statements by the PAF.

And even if at the end of the day you have marginally better radar, it in no way means you’re going to thump your opponent (and that too in mere 5 seconds). If that were the case then the F-15s would be swatting out the F-16s in air combat training, which goes against results from virtually every Red Flag event. Further, with AWACS on both sides, you might find that you don’t have a better situational awareness in any case because AWACS has evened the field (again, all this is merely considering a theoretical marginal advantage in detection range).

Comparing the AMRAAM to the SD-10 is another major question mark. The SD-10 has greater range while being more bulky. This means that AMRAAM may be slightly more agile. No clear advantage exists for either except that AMRAAMs are battle tested. Last but not the least, it may be of some interest to Mr. Aboulafia that even in the highly unlikely event that F-16s are knocking out FC-1s like flies, for an AMRAAM to launch and reach a target 50 Kms away, it would take more than 5 seconds for sure.

“For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's”

We all wish WVR combat were that simple. With modern high off-bore sight missiles maneuverability becomes less relevant. Even if we take the unrealistic view that such missiles will not be available, you still find that a TWR margin of 0.07 at best will only give you a marginal advantage. Clearly, nothing that would be a decider in combat.

Again, one can look to Red Flag results.

“The F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated.”

Perhaps the most solid part of Mr. Aboulafia’s rather flimsy argument is this. China has traditionally lagged behind in EW. However, the new generation that the JF-17 entails is a couple of generations ahead of anything seen before. This includes a fully integrated EW suite, the level of integration being in the same plain as the Rafale or the Super Hornet. A good deal of information has emerged on the surprising advancement in this regard. For instance, one such advancement is that the EW system can directionally beam energy, creating the same impact as a large electronic warfare airplane in that particular direction.

The whole point becomes moot in any case because Pakistan would never receive the full EW suite but only a monkeyfied version of it, given the sensitive technologies involved. The US is unlikely to package its F-16s with anything that would be something new for the Pakistanis / Chinese to discover, come next U-turn in the mercurial Pakistani-US relations."

Above Posted from:
A Light Sabre for the Third World: The FC-1 / JF-17 - Grande Strategy
 
.
Who is this so called "American General" by the way? Another self-comforting tactic by the Indian media?

No sir, the commenter is referring to a statement made by Mr. Abouliafia of the Teal Group (URL: http://www.tealgroup.com/): "If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”. The Teal Group is an aerospace and defence industry research/analysis organisation. One of the writers at grandestrategy.com (I think he posts under the username "PLA-MKII" on several messageboards) wrote an article to debunk Abouliafa's statements (URL: A Light Sabre for the Third World: The FC-1 / JF-17 - Grande Strategy).
 
.
the major reason for Thunder's "degrading" is perhaps the outdated information available about it most of the information about it is still portraying 2000 era information
 
.
Americans are to arrogant to even consider the JF an acute threat!!! as for Indians see currently it is impossible to debate if JF is better or the LCA is better on PAPER LCA is light years ahead...but ON PAPER!!! in reality JF is actually flying while LCA is still under development!!!!! so yes both have their own advantages & disadvantages!!

Hey LCA is flying as well ... DRDO is just trying to figure out if it can do anything other than just flying around :)
 
.
The reason JF17 is so highly thought of by Pakistanis is because its the first combat plane in PAF to have a true BVR capability.

Up until 2008 PAFS fleet of 40 F16 300+F7 & mirages had no real BVR capability.

We all know about 18 F16/52 but they will arrive 2011 and the MLU to F16 has just started recently.

Thunder is a big leap from wvr F7 and to be fair older generation mirages
 
.
this Indian Pilot is trying to be a journalist.

India is different my friends.. here Journalist will try to sell their news by bashing Inidan armed forces.. but when some thing gets done they will forget what ever they gave already and their news will be tons of sugar..

e.g.
Chandrayaan..
15 days back... News were like this
" Did Isro overestimated Chandrayaan..."
" Did MIP caused the mission failure..."
" Did Chandrayaan worth? for the $ "

now after the water discovery the same stupids are telling tons of sweet news about ISRO..

The problem is because of Greed nothing else.. they need money



I am little envy on your side.. those guys always talk about success story and never projected any thing bad.. It could be because of tolerence level too..


Wait for another two years this same guy will tell JF17 is a Crap and LCA is super doooper fighter... who Knows

By the way why he ran off from airforce god only knows
 
.
"If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”

This statement was given by Mr. Richard L. Aboulafia, Vice President, Analysis, Teal Group.

Teal Group
Richard L. Aboulafia, Vice President, Analysis

-----------------------------------------------------------

" Aboulafia on JF-17

The FC-1 has come under a lot of fire from every quarter that one can think of. One prominent quarter was from Mr. Aboulafia of the Teal Group. He originally wrote:

"If you put it (JF-17) head to head against an F-16, it would probably last about five seconds”

Thinking perhaps that he has not been aware of the later developments of the FC-1, I contacted him to find out more, and whether he was still sticking to his guns. This is the response I got from him:

I do [still stand by my statement], with twosmall caveats. One is that although we aviation fans love our planes, the side with the superior AWACS/AEW, satellite, and C3I links is going to have a huge advantage. But assuming we're looking at two planes with equal amounts of external sensor access (or no access), and assuming equal pilot training, the F-16 would win in seconds. For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe on the FC-1 (other radars proposed for the type are worse, particularly the Grifo). For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's. In either case the F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated. Also, the FC-1 and its systems have never been tested in combat, which makes a huge difference in effectiveness.

The second caveat, of course, is which F-16. An early A model would have a harder time than a recent C model. All of this ignores the much greater reliability of the avionics and engines on the F-16. We have no idea what mission capable rates are on an FC-1; I suspect they're relatively low, especially for the RD-93.

Lets take a deeper look at the arguments:

“For beyond visual range combat it's APG-68/AMRAAM combination would out-shoot the Elta 2032/AMRAAM wannabe”

Firstly, the FC-1 and Elta pairing is old news and has been proved otherwise. The radar you’re comparing with is the KLJ-7. Leaving aside the fact that it is appalling for an aviation expert to not know this, it is not improbable that the KLJ-7 is of the same generation as the APG-68, given recent comparison statements by the PAF.

And even if at the end of the day you have marginally better radar, it in no way means you’re going to thump your opponent (and that too in mere 5 seconds). If that were the case then the F-15s would be swatting out the F-16s in air combat training, which goes against results from virtually every Red Flag event. Further, with AWACS on both sides, you might find that you don’t have a better situational awareness in any case because AWACS has evened the field (again, all this is merely considering a theoretical marginal advantage in detection range).

Comparing the AMRAAM to the SD-10 is another major question mark. The SD-10 has greater range while being more bulky. This means that AMRAAM may be slightly more agile. No clear advantage exists for either except that AMRAAMs are battle tested. Last but not the least, it may be of some interest to Mr. Aboulafia that even in the highly unlikely event that F-16s are knocking out FC-1s like flies, for an AMRAAM to launch and reach a target 50 Kms away, it would take more than 5 seconds for sure.

“For closer in combat the F-16's thrust-to-weight ratio outclasses the FC-1's”

We all wish WVR combat were that simple. With modern high off-bore sight missiles maneuverability becomes less relevant. Even if we take the unrealistic view that such missiles will not be available, you still find that a TWR margin of 0.07 at best will only give you a marginal advantage. Clearly, nothing that would be a decider in combat.

Again, one can look to Red Flag results.

“The F-16's EW systems are considerably more sophisticated.”

Perhaps the most solid part of Mr. Aboulafia’s rather flimsy argument is this. China has traditionally lagged behind in EW. However, the new generation that the JF-17 entails is a couple of generations ahead of anything seen before. This includes a fully integrated EW suite, the level of integration being in the same plain as the Rafale or the Super Hornet. A good deal of information has emerged on the surprising advancement in this regard. For instance, one such advancement is that the EW system can directionally beam energy, creating the same impact as a large electronic warfare airplane in that particular direction.

The whole point becomes moot in any case because Pakistan would never receive the full EW suite but only a monkeyfied version of it, given the sensitive technologies involved. The US is unlikely to package its F-16s with anything that would be something new for the Pakistanis / Chinese to discover, come next U-turn in the mercurial Pakistani-US relations."

Above Posted from:
A Light Sabre for the Third World: The FC-1 / JF-17 - Grande Strategy

The less said the better about Mr. Lafia's knowledge of JF-17.
 
Last edited:
.
The reason JF17 is so highly thought of by Pakistanis is because its the first combat plane in PAF to have a true BVR capability.

Up until 2008 PAFS fleet of 40 F16 300+F7 & mirages had no real BVR capability.

We all know about 18 F16/52 but they will arrive 2011 and the MLU to F16 has just started recently.

Thunder is a big leap from wvr F7 and to be fair older generation mirages

BVR is not the primary reason that the aircraft is liked by the PAF. There are many reasons for it, and BVR is one of them. Others include:

i) It has the capabilities that PAF wanted. The ASRs from PAF drove the design and capabilities of this aircraft. Unlike the usual case where ASRs have to accommodated into the design and where not possible, some of the ASRs have to be disregarded.
ii) It has a roadmap for feature integration that PAF want.
iii) It is a Multi-role aircraft which will replace 3 other types in the PAF service.
iv) It brings considerable aeronautics and aviation know-how into the PAF and PAC.
 
.
BVR is not the primary reason that the aircraft is liked by the PAF. There are many reasons for it, and BVR is one of them. Others include:

i) It has the capabilities that PAF wanted. The ASRs from PAF drove the design and capabilities of this aircraft. Unlike the usual case where ASRs have to accommodated into the design and where not possible, some of the ASRs have to be disregarded.
ii) It has a roadmap for feature integration that PAF want.
iii) It is a Multi-role aircraft which will replace 3 other types in the PAF service.
iv) It brings considerable aeronautics and aviation know-how into the PAF and PAC.

And to add more to it

v)- Thunder will open new venues for PAF/PAC for exporting this fighters.
vi)- Will considerably lower the training, logistical and maintenance hassle for PAF.
:pakistan::cheers::pakistan:
 
.
Great find, hj786. The reason why the JF-17 can be favorably compared to the F-16 is because they are two children of the same ideology. Lightweight Multi-role Fighters, with incredible WVR combat performance. The JF-17 is what the F-16 was always intended to be, which is why the aircraft is so vital to the PAF. For a "first" of almost everything in Pakistan, it can already be termed an engineering success story. Add to that everything that blain2 and PakShaheen79 have said above, and it only makes sense that the PAF has "astounding" confidence in the aircraft. I mean, you could buy a ready-made suit, or you could have one tailor-made for you. Which would you be more confident about?

As for "Mr. Lafia" (good one, blain2, I actually laughed out loud), well, though most of his arguments have been soundly defeated by the good folks at Grandestrategy, the point remains that technological upgrades will be absolutely necessary to bring the JF-17 to the same levels of overall war competency as the trusted old F-16s (higher blocks). We can start with the Radar and Engine, and move our way down the list.

this Indian Pilot is trying to be a journalist.

The problem is because of Greed nothing else.. they need money

I am little envy on your side.. those guys always talk about success story and never projected any thing bad.. It could be because of tolerence level too..

Wait for another two years this same guy will tell JF17 is a Crap and LCA is super doooper fighter... who Knows

By the way why he ran off from airforce god only knows
Speaking of tolerance, it's ironic that the first thing that you could do is bad-mouth the pilot. Chandrayan was a success, and for that, your Air Force should "shove" an inferior aircraft "down your pilots throats". Clearly, tolerance levels for criticism, no matter how constructive or well-informed it might be, are not so different on either side of the border.
 
Last edited:
.
PAFace

your comment

The reason why the JF-17 can be favorably compared to the F-16 is because they are two children of the same ideology. Lightweight Multi-role Fighters, with incredible WVR combat performance. The JF-17 is what the F-16 was always intended to be, which is why the aircraft is so vital to the PAF. For a "first" of almost everything in Pakistan, it can already be termed an engineering success story.

F16 has fantastic WVR performance but JF17 nobody knows its not yet performed in any scenarion not even mock combat with other fighters.

Engineering on the plane is Russian engine and chinease radars and weapons unless i have missed some electronics involvement from PAC. ????
 
.
Back
Top Bottom