JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,472
Likes
2,200
Country flag
God I really hope there's a war soon. I can't wait to see the unprecedented amount of humiliation these blunders will recieve at the hands of our Flankers.
Acc to Chinese, they will bring TRM(for EW ) on Jf17 body, and if it comes, it will have better survivability than current Jf17 with podded EW.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,018
A shit plane which has no credible future.
Lol, they have 100+ of them on order and even exporting it and you worry about JF17s future? :biggrin2:

It's a low end fighter, like any light class fighters and it's normal that no advanced AF like PLAAF goes for it, since their low end is J10, just as most western countries use F16s as low end too.

But without bias, there is no way than to admit that they did well with the programme and that for PAF and PAK as a nation, it's a game changer!

They went from complete dependence on the US, to full operational and upgrade freedom, just as from importer of fighters to Co exporter of fighters. Not to mention the leap in operational capability JF17 means for PAF, since it's a force multiplier for them, that gets it's strength from the variety of weapons it can use in combination with modern tactics and capabilities like AWACS and stand off strikes.

It don't have to outperform the MKI, it just needs to be able to be data linked with their AWACS and be able to launch a missile. That's in fact a page of IAFs play book, that we have seen when they combined MKI and Bisons with similar tactics too, just that the JF 17 is far more advanced as a proper 4th gen fighter.

So downplaying it out of bias, instead of understand the threat the enemy poses, is not the way you should look at it.
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,472
Likes
2,200
Country flag
Lol, they have 100+ of them on order and even exporting it and you worry about JF17s future? :biggrin2:

It's a low end fighter, like any light class fighters and it's normal that no advanced AF like PLAAF goes for it, since their low end is J10, just as most western countries use F16s as low end too.

But without bias, there is no way than to admit that they did well with the programme and that for PAF and PAK as a nation, it's a game changer!

They went from complete dependence on the US, to full operational and upgrade freedom, just as from importer of fighters to Co exporter of fighters. Not to mention the leap in operational capability JF17 means for PAF, since it's a force multiplier for them, that gets it's strength from the variety of weapons it can use in combination with modern tactics and capabilities like AWACS and stand off strikes.

It don't have to outperform the MKI, it just needs to be able to be data linked with their AWACS and be able to launch a missile. That's in fact a page of IAFs play book, that we have seen when they combined MKI and Bisons with similar tactics too, just that the JF 17 is far more advanced as a proper 4th gen fighter.

So downplaying it out of bias, instead of understand the threat the enemy poses, is not the way you should look at it.
It's a game changer for an airforce which has Falling strength. They hardly did a thing in the Aircraft so despite being a "co-partner", they will hardly get any cash which can make them feel proud. But they indeed are due to hideous work and share, they hardly have a knowledge of design and development.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
Lol, they have 100+ of them on order and even exporting it and you worry about JF17s future? :biggrin2:

It's a low end fighter, like any light class fighters and it's normal that no advanced AF like PLAAF goes for it, since their low end is J10, just as most western countries use F16s as low end too.

But without bias, there is no way than to admit that they did well with the programme and that for PAF and PAK as a nation, it's a game changer!

They went from complete dependence on the US, to full operational and upgrade freedom, just as from importer of fighters to Co exporter of fighters. Not to mention the leap in operational capability JF17 means for PAF, since it's a force multiplier for them, that gets it's strength from the variety of weapons it can use in combination with modern tactics and capabilities like AWACS and stand off strikes.

It don't have to outperform the MKI, it just needs to be able to be data linked with their AWACS and be able to launch a missile. That's in fact a page of IAFs play book, that we have seen when they combined MKI and Bisons with similar tactics too, just that the JF 17 is far more advanced as a proper 4th gen fighter.

So downplaying it out of bias, instead of understand the threat the enemy poses, is not the way you should look at it.
hahahaha! They went from complete dependence on the US to full dependence on China. The JF-17 in current PAF service can't do much more than a modernised MiG-21 . They have a total of 8 targeting pods among the whole fleet. What data links are they using exactly? They haven't developed their "Link 17" yet so they aren't using Chinese ones either. I am still waiting to see it use the ASM and anti-radiation missiles they keep going on about. The BVRAAM test regurgitated on Paki forums was recorded from the ground and covers the launch and destruction of target so it wasn't a BVR shot. One squadron of MKI would wipe out their entire Thunder Blunder fleet. Even the Bison can out fight it. All of the things that make you think it is better than that have not been demonstrated. The ROSE upgraded Mirage is their cruise missile carrier, that has demonstrated more strike ability than a JF-17 Blunder.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,018
hahahaha! They went from complete dependence on the US to full dependence on China.
Exactly and that's the preferable choice, which is evident by the lack of restrictions and the increase of industrial opportunities.

The JF-17 in current PAF service can't do much more than a modernised MiG-21
- IFR
- stand off and precision strikes
- SEAD
- maritime attack

All this is range limited, like it's the case for any light class fighter, but perfectly suitable to the Pak environment and operational requirements of PAF and far beyond what a Mig 21 (even the Bison could do). => A 4th gen light class fighter

One squadron of MKI would wipe out their entire Thunder Blunder fleet.
If the MKIs would fight only JF17 sureit would have an edge of course, but without the first sight advantage anymore, thins changes. The addition of AWACS in numbers, was the best counter to MKI, that PAF could make.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,018
It's a game changer for an airforce which has Falling strength. They hardly did a thing in the Aircraft so despite being a "co-partner", they will hardly get any cash which can make them feel proud. But they indeed are due to hideous work and share, they hardly have a knowledge of design and development.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
Nope, it's a game changer in operational and industrial capability and they basically got the same deal as we initially got from the Russians for FGFA.

- Joint development and funding of an own version
- industrial know how and benefits from exports
- freedom of customization
- integration of indigenous systems
- participation in designing the twin seater and developing future upgrades


So if you look at it from an industrial pov only, it's an excellent deal for PAK, just as the FGFA deal would had been for us.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
Exactly and that's the preferable choice, which is evident by the lack of restrictions and the increase of industrial opportunities.
I think Pakis liked the free US aid they received, China actually makes them pay it back.

- IFR
- stand off and precision strikes
- SEAD
- maritime attack
None of which have been demonstrated.

If the MKIs would fight only JF17 sureit would have an edge of course, but without the first sight advantage anymore, thins changes. The addition of AWACS in numbers, was the best counter to MKI, that PAF could make.
An Su-30 RCS don't need an AWACs to pick it up beyond an SD-10 range. They need it to find the tiny little blips known as Bison. As troubled as the R-77 has been, it still has a better rocket motor than that Chinese junk they bought and will kill the Blunder before they get a shot off.
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,472
Likes
2,200
Country flag
Nope, it's a game changer in operational and industrial capability and they basically got the same deal as we initially got from the Russians for FGFA.

- Joint development and funding of an own version
- industrial know how and benefits from exports
- freedom of customization
- integration of indigenous systems
- participation in designing the twin seater and developing future upgrades


So if you look at it from an industrial pov only, it's an excellent deal for PAK, just as the FGFA deal would had been for us.
Comparing with FGFA is hilarious, as FGFA involved Indigenization of Russian things in Su57, for example the mission computers and avionics, usage of Indian materials on the aircraft and possibly Indian EW suite on FGFA with mostly Indian weaponry. What Pakistan got is Vanilla, apart from IP rights they hardly have achieved anything, they can't design a new cockpit on their own and their displays are imported from China assembled in Pakistan. China still recognizes The aircraft which Pakistan uses as FC1 and takes full credits of design and development, Pakistan on other hand have hardly a know how and know why. And matter of fact FC1 is a light fighter with capabilities limited to light missions with an smokey RD93 engine which porks plans to change with Mk and that only possible if India allows so.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,018
for example the mission computers and avionics, usage of Indian materials on the aircraft
Just as JF 17 got indigenous avionics and custom weapons as well. If they could afford it and had less import restrictions, they would had gone for more western stuff too (French EW and MICA, just as Chobham refueling systems were offered too) and if their industry were at out level, they also would had done more. But it still is pretty much the same industrial deal as we got.

China still recognizes The aircraft which Pakistan uses as FC1
Just as Russia would have called it Su 57 (SM?) and not FGFA.
 

nongaddarliberal

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
1,873
Likes
5,672
Country flag
If the MKIs would fight only JF17 sureit would have an edge of course, but without the first sight advantage anymore, thins changes. The addition of AWACS in numbers, was the best counter to MKI, that PAF could make.
I guess that's where the s400's will be useful. I dont think those AWACS will survive very long when have s400's being operational.
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,472
Likes
2,200
Country flag
Just as JF 17 got indigenous avionics and custom weapons as well. If they could afford it and had less import restrictions, they would had gone for more western stuff too (French EW and MICA, just as Chobham refueling systems were offered too) and if their industry were at out level, they also would had done more. But it still is pretty much the same industrial deal as we got.



Just as Russia would have called it Su 57 (SM?) and not FGFA.
JF17 indigenous avionics, such as???? They're more prone to western sanctions, and western systems need money to exchange things, it can't be bought at cheap Chinese rate. As for today Su57 is known as Frazer on West and as for per Russians, they gonna induct Su57.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,472
Likes
2,200
Country flag
I guess that's where the s400's will be useful. I dont think those AWACS will survive very long when have s400's being operational.
The question is will those AEW&C be able to detect aircraft in Kashmir sector. Nap of the earth will simply make them "useless", and aircraft like Su30mki can fly above their most of the turboprop radars if case terrain making isn't required .

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,018
JF17 indigenous avionics, such as????
=>

Pakistan Begins Domestic Fighter Avionics Production

05 Juni 2010

...During the May 28 ceremony, the PAC's chairman, Air Marshal Farhat Hussain Khan, outlined the JF-17 avionics, in which he stated, "four indigenously designed and developed avionics systems were also being produced," and that the "production scope would be progressively broadened to include the production of a complete JF-17 avionics suite at the complex."...
http://pena-abad.blogspot.de/2010/06/pakistan-begins-domestic-fighter.html?m=1

There was a more recent picture of the systems posted on IDF last year, need to look it up when I have time.

They're more prone to western sanctions, and western systems need money to exchange things, it can't be bought at cheap Chinese rate.
Don't let bias guide your opinion and stick to facts.
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,472
Likes
2,200
Country flag

lcafanboy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
3,938
Likes
15,738
Country flag
The JF-17 in current PAF service can't do much more than a modernised MiG-21 .
IAF MIG 21 bisons are much more deadlier than these junk Fighters 17s. Not only they have better jammers they have lower RCS due to RAM Painting. During red flag excercise with US these were used with su30mki s and were using links for communication. This made them invisible to USAF fighter radars and BVRAAMs were fired in simulation which even mighty US air force could not make out and were defeated. This is documented and was appreciated by USAF.

This is now repeated again with much more modern LCA Tejas which have more capabilities, AESA radar and better BVRAAMs. Tejas in combination with su30mki will be biggest headache for both porkistan and lizard China.
 

undeadmyrmidon

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
548
Likes
868
Lol, they have 100+ of them on order and even exporting it and you worry about JF17s future? :biggrin2:

It's a low end fighter, like any light class fighters and it's normal that no advanced AF like PLAAF goes for it, since their low end is J10, just as most western countries use F16s as low end too.

But without bias, there is no way than to admit that they did well with the programme and that for PAF and PAK as a nation, it's a game changer!

They went from complete dependence on the US, to full operational and upgrade freedom, just as from importer of fighters to Co exporter of fighters. Not to mention the leap in operational capability JF17 means for PAF, since it's a force multiplier for them, that gets it's strength from the variety of weapons it can use in combination with modern tactics and capabilities like AWACS and stand off strikes.

It don't have to outperform the MKI, it just needs to be able to be data linked with their AWACS and be able to launch a missile. That's in fact a page of IAFs play book, that we have seen when they combined MKI and Bisons with similar tactics too, just that the JF 17 is far more advanced as a proper 4th gen fighter.

So downplaying it out of bias, instead of understand the threat the enemy poses, is not the way you should look at it.
AWACS is something even IAF has. Datalinking, signal jamming, EW warfare, decoys are all force multipliers and not operational strengths inherently.

JF 17 is effectively a light trainer aircraft opted for fighter - interceptor roles. Even PLAAF has no place for this.

100 orders? LOL! Pakis can't afford decent equipment. There are three parameters for fighter design:

1) Survivability
2) Kinetic Performance
3) Future Proofing

In all three it fails. Even their MK3 is not able to compete with an F 16 Blk 52.

Comparing JF 17 to a Mig 21 ++ is more apt than any fourth generation fighter. LCA is actually closer to an F 16 than a JF 17.

Here are stats compare for yourself.

LCA Tejas

General characteristics

  • Crew: 1
  • Payload: 3,500 kg (7,716 lb) external stores[118]
  • Length: 13.20 m (43 ft 4 in)
  • Wingspan: 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in)
  • Height: 4.40 m (14 ft 9 in)
  • Wing area: 38.4 m² (413 ft²)
  • Empty weight: 6,560 kg (14,300 lb)
  • Loaded weight: 9,800 kg (21,605 lb)
  • Max. takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (29,100 lb)
  • Internal fuel capacity: 2,458 kg
  • External fuel capacity: 2 x 1,200-litre drop tank inboard, 1 x 725-litre drop tank under fuselage
  • Powerplant: 1 × General Electric F404-GE-IN20 turbofan
Performance

JF 17

General characteristics

  • Crew: 1
  • Length: 14.93 m (49 ft)
  • Wingspan: 9.48 m (31.1 ft, including 2 wingtip missiles)
  • Height: 4.72 m (15.5 ft)
  • Wing area: 24.43 m² (263 ft²)
  • Empty weight: 6,586 kg (14,520 lb)
  • Useful load: 4,325 kg (9,535 lb)
  • Max. takeoff weight: 12,383 kg[184] (29,750 lb)
  • G-limit: +8 g / -3 g
  • Internal Fuel Capacity: 2,329 kg (5,135 lb)
  • Powerplant: 1 × Klimov RD-93 Afterburning Turbofan, with DEEC
    • Dry thrust: 49.4 kN (11,105 lbf) [185]
    • Thrust with afterburner: 85.3 kN (19,180 lbf)
Performance

 

jat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
244
Likes
198
- IFR
- stand off and precision strikes
- SEAD
- maritime attack

All this is range limited, like it's the case for any light class fighter, but perfectly suitable to the Pak environment and operational requirements of PAF and far beyond what a Mig 21 (even the Bison could do). => A 4th gen light class fighter
Yea more capable than the Bison but a lot more expensive and not retired anytime soon. OTOH its reliable as 3 legged horse. Think about it yaar. You think the Super 7 or JF-17 or J-10 was orginally envisioned with a Russian engine? For the JF-17 its weakness are major. Unlike the J-10 the JF-17 has design flaws that will never be fixed.
Its a complete clone of J-7 with RD-33 engine. Its all metal, no digital FBW if so its C++ not ADA and programmers know why thats a bad idea. But that design isn't its biggest weakness.
The RD-33 engine is unreliable. So much so, that its dangerious to fly during peace time by new pilots and at low altitudes. Imagine a engine failure on the seas and then having to deploy resources to find the pilot. J-10 has the same weakness but atleast that thing is big enough for more upgrades and has head start in avonics with potiental for further technology.
What both PAF and PLAAF wanted was orginally a LCA. They did not get it. IAF did, and they know what they have is great for new pilots. Its a LCA. Easy to use, train, and capable despite not being a trainer, its a great trainer in both 2 seat or single seat config. USAF, USN are also looking into something like this as trainers are becoming expensive.
PAF would have gone in for Gripens if they could afford it. But they have to make due with JF-17, at the very least they can kick start a industry that did not exist at all in Pakistan. JF-17 offers some LCA features, like small size, allowing it to use J-7 shelters. Low cost allowing it fill the role of J-7 in numbers. Like J-7 its hazard to the pilot. Now if the PAF wants it to be more capable, what they need is for Mig Corp to make a more reliable RD-33 engine. Lets see how this plays out.
 

jat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
244
Likes
198
JF 17 is effectively a light trainer aircraft opted for fighter - interceptor roles. Even PLAAF has no place for this.
Thats got to be worst trainer ever. Imagine a unreliable engine in your car when your trying to get your license. Each red light the engine craps out. You think you'll get your license than?lol. Its a lot but its the worst trainer. Lack of combat aircraft for new pilots will require both the PLAAF and PAF to make up ground simulators to keep flying hours up on ground. This is why PAF and PLAAF have shown interest in advanced ground training facilities.
Trainer aircraft are also suppose to be very reliable, with a huge uptime.
Comparing JF 17 to a Mig 21 ++ is more apt than any fourth generation fighter. LCA is actually closer to an F 16 than a JF 17.
F-16 can't be compared to the Tejas or LCA. Its a MMRCA and Tejas is a LCA. The korean LCA is what its comparable too and Gripen in terms of performance and even the same engine. With the F414 it maybe upto comparison in to the F-16 but technology wise, it'll lack behind for a while. OTOH its got potential for RCS reduction on major fronts thanks to its small size and composite single piece wings.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top