What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stop spreading rumours, blk 2 will not get AESA
The sooner you guyz except this fact, the better it is.

There is no AESA radar for jf-17 in china YET.
And European options are too expensive to exercise.

please first read carefully! its believed to have AESA radar in Block 2....so please sit calm n wait for blk 2...
 
Any News about the prototype of jf-17 block2... ?? I would love to see structural changes in the design for more advanced avionics..
 
The Block II JF-17 is believed to have AESA radars similar to those observed on the J-10B.The integrated avionics, sensors and EW suite is entirely Chinese and is believed to be at the level of Europe's..

The structural changes needed to convert the Block Is to Block II standard are significant, suggesting considerable changes to the revised edition. The following are believed to be some of the key changes:

1. AESA radar

2. Comprehensive upgrades for low RCS profile including cockpit glass, RAM paint, refined structure, completely new nose structure for AESA, significant increase in the use of composites and refueling probe.

3. Awaited integration of A-Darter missiles from Brazil / South Africa with HOBS capability and South African HMS possibly Archer?

4. The BVR missile is the SD-10B which has been found more than a match for the AMRAAM-120 C5s. An unknown Meteor class missile is in the works beyond the SD-10Bs.The SD-10Bs are dual mode and capable of passive attack, this and other design input was provided by the PAF to China. They have an increased range of 15 more kilometers over the older version. The JF-17 Block II has significantly improved ECM capabilities and has some capabilities similar to the Rafale..

Good sir, there have been numerous posts dispelling your notions about some wholly transformed jf-17. The wholesale changes you are proposing are essentially requirements for a completely new platform. Redesigning large parts of the aircraft requires a huge financial outlay. The aircraft is likely to improve at a far more gradual pace, not only from a funding point of view, but an organizational one. A new aircraft requires unique training, tactics and maintenance processes that are customized to emphasize it's strengths. All of this requires time and money; neither of which PAF has at this time.

On a side note, while Chinese avionics and weaponry has improved exponentially over the last two decades, it has done so in comparison to it's own predecessors. A radical leap compared to the f-7 maybe a worthy achievement for us, but in comparison to what the Westerners offer, it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. The Chinese maybe able to compare with the Europeans in some aspects, but its the whole package that counts. And that is where they lag behind. A superior radar is great, but is the sensor fusion up to par? A great design can allow the pilot to maneuver the aircraft with great agility, but with an underpowered engine is that sustainable? Equally, the sd-10 maybe highly capable, but if the opposing aircraft can't be detected or jams the jf-17 into oblivion, what is the real advantage of the missile? In short, it is a bad idea to compare the jf-17 to the Rafale in any capacity. It is an insult to the last half century of French aeronautical development.
 
Good sir, there have been numerous posts dispelling your notions about some wholly transformed jf-17. The wholesale changes you are proposing are essentially requirements for a completely new platform. Redesigning large parts of the aircraft requires a huge financial outlay. The aircraft is likely to improve at a far more gradual pace, not only from a funding point of view, but an organizational one. A new aircraft requires unique training, tactics and maintenance processes that are customized to emphasize it's strengths. All of this requires time and money; neither of which PAF has at this time.

On a side note, while Chinese avionics and weaponry has improved exponentially over the last two decades, it has done so in comparison to it's own predecessors. A radically leap compared to the f-7 maybe a worthy achievement for us, but in comparison to what the Westerners offer, it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. The Chinese maybe able to compare with the Europeans in some aspects, but its the whole package that counts. And that is where they lag behind. A superior radar is great, but is the sensor fusion up to par? A great design can allow the pilot to maneuver the aircraft with great agility, but with an underpowered engine is that sustainable? Equally, the sd-10 maybe highly capable, but if the opposing aircraft can't be detected or jams the jf-17 into oblivion, what is real advantage of the missile? In short, it is a bad idea to compare the jf-17 to the Rafale in any capacity. It is an insult to the last half decade of French aeronautical development.

Well let me tell u the major changing's which will give it the name of block 2 are refueling capabilities, New shape of Nose Cone for AESA! and Two seat version..WS-13A Engine and other internal changing's i don't think for these modifications there is any need of new platform these can be performed on the earlier one'z...and the other air frame will almost be the same...
 
Well let me tell u the major changing's which will give it the name of block 2 are refueling capabilities, New shape of Nose Cone for AESA! and Two seat version..WS-13A Engine and other internal changing's i don't think for these modifications there is any need of new platform these can be performed on the earlier one'z...and the other air frame will almost be the same...

And your source is? Our source JF-17 Project Director AVM Javaid Ahmaid said, Block 2 will only get software increment, upgraded ECM and Fixed IFR only.
 
Well let me tell u the major changing's which will give it the name of block 2 are refueling capabilities, New shape of Nose Cone for AESA! and Two seat version..WS-13A Engine and other internal changing's i don't think for these modifications there is any need of new platform these can be performed on the earlier one'z...and the other air frame will almost be the same...
All this is like a Breaking News for even your ''Chief Of Air Staff''..
 
And your source is? Our source JF-17 Project Director AVM Javaid Ahmaid said, Block 2 will only get software increment, upgraded ECM and Fixed IFR only.


So no matching leather trim or upgraded stereo?

Seriously though, adding new software and in-flight refueling will increase the capabilities of the JF-17 very usefully.
 
JF-17 and Lca Tejas: Difference in approach

With 40 JF-17 aircrafts already inducted into Pakistan air force and Zero Tejas inducted in IAF, at least in papers JF-17 seems to be a successful project, but it is also clear that approach taken by IAF and PAF on LCA and JF-17 have been completely opposite to each other in terms of participation and acceptance levels of the aircraft.

For Pakistani air force JF-17 will be replacing aging A-5C, Mirage-III, Mirage-V, and F-7P/PG by 2015 and JF-17 is slated to become the backbone of Pakistan Airforce (PAF), JF-17 will also will be providing PAF next Gen technology, But for IAF Lca will not be bringing any new technology which it does not possess and will not be backbone or even lead secondary aircraft in future ,role of JF-17 and Tejas to their respected air force are different and also shows different approach taken by them .

PAF inducted JF-17 when it was capable only to carry PL-5EII WVR air to air missiles and fuel tanks over the time BVR missiles and other weapons were added to the aircraft; it took two years for PAF and Pakistani Aeronautical establishment to bring it to IOC standards. PAF already has Two Squadrons of JF-17 which are mostly used for carrying out such tests and for pilot conversion training.

IAF on other hand only agreed to accept 20 IOC-2 standard LCA and 20 more of FOC standards , while whole 40 JF-17 inducted by PAF are of IOC standards , this clearly shows IAF hesitance in inducting more LCA at its Initial stage , while PAF inducted larger number of JF-17 aircrafts with their IOC limitations . Both air forces have plans to induct close to 250 of such aircrafts in their fleet and approach taken by PAF will lead them to higher induction rate and better production line.

JF-17 has been developed in Blocks, first 40 aircraft which has already been delivered to PAF are of Block- I stage and first Block –II aircraft will likely be ready by end of this year or early next year and will come with ”enhanced features” like IFR, New ECM/data link, infra-red search and track (IRST) system and new weapons integration, PAF also has agreed to stick with Russian built Klimov RD-93 engines .Block II will incorporate features which PAF could not integrate with Block-I aircrafts leading to limited combat capabilities of JF-17 , Initial plans of Block-II aircrafts were to equip it with new WS-13 turbofan Chinese engine delivering higher thrust then current Russian engines and also equip it with an AESA radar , but now Block-III has been planned which will incorporate this features and plans are to have first aircraft ready by 2016 , Block-III will have reduced RCS and will feature twin seat variant and likely to have some stealth elements in the airframe .

While Tejas MK-2 which cannot be considered has another block variant, since MK-2 will feature new higher thrust engine, IFR, new mission computers, higher fuel and weapons carrying capacity and will also have different dimensions compared to Tejas MK-1 and first flight of Tejas MK-2 is expected by end of 2014 or early 2015, while FOC of Tejas MK-1 has been planned in 2014. Without any induction of MK-1 aircrafts, IAF forced development of MK-2 which has lead to delays and shift in focus for development of two variants of Tejas. PAF inducted JF-17 when it had not matured and suffered from technical deficiencies but brought standard of aircrafts in blocks to make it combat capable.

If IAF had agreed to more Tejas MK-1 in IOC standards, it could have helped starting and stabilizing production line for the aircraft. With limited orders for Tejas MK-1, aircrafts will be produced at slower rate and even Induction will be at much slower rate, while PAF with a stable production line will induct next 20 JF-17 of Block-II standard next year bringing total to 62 aircrafts while Tejas MK-1 handed over to IAF will only stand at 4.

JF-17 and Lca Tejas: Difference in approach | idrw.org
 
Old picture; Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev writing his comments during a defence exhibition in Pakistan with JF-17 in background...I believe no exports orders will be met till 2015.

942057_561219697256745_1240985658_n.jpg
 
8E5636E0A.jpg


Is this the CGI of PAC and CAC 5th Generation that might enter service with PAF till 2020.
 
I am sure that if PAC and CAC had started marketing in South America, Africa and in Muslim world from PAC then it might have sold like Hot Cakes. Although there are something that were missing from the block-Is which are:
1. Dual Seat
2. RD-93B with TVC
3. Composites
4. Under air-intakes Hardpoints for carrying IRST Pods and FLIR near Canopy.
5. Retractable In Flight Refueling Probe like on Gripen.

I am sure all these have increased the per unit cost of JF-17 from $18 Million in China and about $20 Million in Pakistan to $21.5 Million in China and about $23-25 Million in Pakistan . Which is not bad as it enable many countries from Muslim world like Egypt, Libya, Algeria and Jordan to buy the license to assemble and produce it in their own country as well as in the first 5 years of block-Is it would have been possible to sell about 300+ Aircraft all over the world.
 
No news for Block II ????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom