JF-17 and Lca Tejas: Difference in approach

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by p2prada, May 1, 2013.

  1. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    JF-17 and Lca Tejas: Difference in approach | idrw.org

    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.
     
  2.  
  3. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    When it comes to production rates, PAF will be inducting one squadron a year while IAF will be inducting 2.5 squadrons of different aircraft a year.
     
  4. Austin

    Austin Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    354
  5. datguy79

    datguy79 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    937
    Location:
    Canada
    @p2prada

    Generally speaking, does the JF-17 pose any credible threat to the IAF or will it just be cannon fodder? It seems bizarre to rely so heavily on a dated system when everyone else is opting for 5th generation fighters.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  6. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Depends on the quality of their weapons.

    Overall, we have the advantage in every way. We have better air defense, better surveillance (it will be taken up a notch further once we get our BMD system operational). We have more numbers of better quality jets, weapons etc.

    The problem is PAF knows what they want to counter IAF, but they can't afford it. Meaning if they manage to induct 4 to 6 squadrons of J-10s as their high end, they will have some credible capability. Only JF-17, it's more or less cannon fodder.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    sayareakd, datguy79 and gokussj9 like this.
  7. gokussj9

    gokussj9 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    1,137
    Location:
    USA
    Will it still be cannon fodder after Blk-2 and Blk-3 upgrades, assuming it gets AESA with increased thrust engine?
     
  8. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    B2 is the equivalent of LCA Mk1. Its threat value is as much as a Mirage-IIIE.

    Block 3, we will see when details are released. Because we don't know if it is just a modified JF-17 B2 with AESA or a much larger aircraft.
     
  9. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,624
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    they need something to show in numbers against IAF. Those who know IAF knows that single SU 30 MKI when armed to teeth means it can carry 11 A2A BVR missiles.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    sob and Keshav Murali like this.
  10. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    A small correction. It is 12. One missile in the centerline seems to not be attached or was fired already.

    It is 6-8 R-77s or 6 R-27s along with 4-6 R-73s and combinations thereof. R-73s are similar to MICA in terms of range. So they qualify as BVR. Apart from that the centerline hardpoints can hold multi-ejector racks for 4 R-77s instead of two.
     
    pankaj nema, sob, gokussj9 and 2 others like this.
  11. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Back to studies :( Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    688
    Location:
    The city of Humidity
    That confirmed my suspicions. Su-30 Mk1 is South East Asia's NO.1 fighter. :yey:
     
  12. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,624
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    you mean something like this

    [​IMG]

    how many BVR their will be if this method is used ?

    I think 18 BVR.
     
    sob likes this.
  13. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Similar. The current racks are known to be used in the centerline. It is not known if it will be used on other hardpoints. Meaning we have never seen or heard any source claiming this. Note that the Sea Harrier is carrying 100Kg missiles while the new R-77s are upwards of 200Kg each. So the effect on drag will be greater. So 18 may not be possible for combat operations even if the MKI can carry that many.

    F-22 is supposed to use this method to increase BVR count to 8 on external hardpoints apart from the 6 inside.
     
    sob and sayareakd like this.
  14. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Back to studies :( Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    688
    Location:
    The city of Humidity
    Won't F-22's stealth will be greatly affected if it uses external hardpoints? Sorry, Don't know anything about planes.
     
  15. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,624
    Likes Received:
    11,703
    That is after they take out enemy radars. Thereafter when enemy is blind you can use it as regular fighter.
     
  16. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,661
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Thanks to @sayareakd and @p2prada just go to learn something new today -multi-ejector racks.
    I had seen the pics but never gave much attention to it.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  17. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Yes, by hundreds of times, if not more in case of the F-22.
     
    Keshav Murali likes this.
  18. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Back to studies :( Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    688
    Location:
    The city of Humidity
    Off topic, but

    Will stealth fighters with weapons carried only internally still pack a punch?
     
  19. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Yes, a very significant punch. Earlier you needed many aircraft for a single SEAD mission. You needed aircraft carrying a large strike package that can take out multiple SAM batteries, you needed escort for protecting these aircraft and so on. Today you just need one or two aircraft and hit the command center or radar that controls the SAM batteries. Maybe even ignore the SAM system and simply hit a much more important target like a powerplant or a factory.
     
    Keshav Murali likes this.
  20. DivineHeretic

    DivineHeretic Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    1,183
    Location:
    Assam
    About the surveillence. Even now, with the massive LRTR, the French-designed TRS-2215D 3-D surveillance radar and the THD-1955 3-D long-range surveillance radar (detection range 620 miles/1000km), the IA/IAF can see all the way over Iranian and Afgan airspace. Then we also have the Phalcons. Fact is, everytime the PA conducts a missile test, live flight characteristics data is received by the ADC of the Indian AF. Fact is, with a rather weak AD, it is possible that India receives better tracking of pak missiles.
     

Share This Page