JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

jat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
244
Likes
198
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.
None of that. Those 500 or so AMRAAMs are the biggest threat. Those Chinese weapons are lacking things to be desired which is why they have 2 sources. Imagine the quality of Russian weapons. Imagine Chinese weapons. The Chinese don't really have support system in place for their products, you buy their stuff in packpage but no quality guarantee or manual. Just a single piece instruction paper. This gap in PAF aircraft led the PA and PAF to finally decide on air defense SAMs. It took them this long to get SAMs that too Chinese. Meaning before this period, Chinese SAMs were, undesirable. PAF exists to be pushed back and punched hard at this point. They are no longer dreaming of offensives even with initial strikes like in 1965/71. The gap just got too wide between IAF and PAF.
Imagine what it costs China to arm Pakistan. You think Pakistan pays for all those weapons when they are near bankrupt? Paper dragon is not far from the truth, all thats required is small fire to get the world realize this obvious truth.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,017
JF 17 is effectively a light trainer aircraft opted for fighter - interceptor roles. Even PLAAF has no place for this.
Nonsense, as explained because PLAAF like most advanced air forces don't use light class fighters. In fact only IAF has the light/medium/heavy mix.

In all three it fails. Even their MK3 is not able to compete with an F 16 Blk 52.
Based on what? You need to keep in mind that PAF has downgraded F16s, while JF17 even in the block 2 offers more capabilities than their B52s.

- IFR
- weapon variety
- modern cockpit MFDs

The Block 3 is meant to add AESA, upgraded weapons and avionics too, which puts it "technically" on the level of the F16 Block 70.

Comparing JF 17 to a Mig 21 ++ is more apt than any fourth generation fighter.
Mig 21++ is = any 4th gen light class fighter => JF17 B1&2, LCA IOC/FOC, Gripen C/D

Your bias is clouding your judgement!

@Sancho
Either you are a Pakistani sniffing support here or a European trying to promote EF.
Or I'm simply not naive enough to "belive" that anything our opponents have is inferior, or anything our opponents produce is bad.

I prefer to inform myself first and then come to a proper opinion based on facts and not on bias.
Underestimating your enemies is the best you can do to make them take advantage.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,017
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.
The RD93 is based on the RD33 series 3, the same engines that IAF uses in the upgraded Mig 29. The Russians already offer an uprated RD93, which is based on the RD33MK, the engine of INs Mig 29K/Mig 35. So even if China wouldn't come up with an own engine, they already have an alternative available and in the worst case scenario (with the current state of Indo-Russian relations), could even have 3D TVC as an option.
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,467
Likes
2,186
Country flag
Nonsense, as explained because PLAAF like most advanced air forces don't use light class fighters. In fact only IAF has the light/medium/heavy mix.



Based on what? You need to keep in mind that PAF has downgraded F16s, while JF17 even in the block 2 offers more capabilities than their B52s.

- IFR
- weapon variety
- modern cockpit MFDs

The Block 3 is meant to add AESA, upgraded weapons and avionics too, which puts it "technically" on the level of the F16 Block 70.
Only if the power supply to he radar is more than F16 bl70 with cooling better than Block and TRM efficiency better than Americans. And if Jf17 bl3 matches the payload capability and range of F16 bl52.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,467
Likes
2,186
Country flag
The RD93 is based on the RD33 series 3, the same engines that IAF uses in the upgraded Mig 29. The Russians already offer an uprated RD93, which is based on the RD33MK, the engine of INs Mig 29K/Mig 35. So even if China wouldn't come up with an own engine, they already have an alternative available and in the worst case scenario (with the current state of Indo-Russian relations), could even have 3D TVC as an option.
Switching from 84kN engine to 88kN, what a big thrust achieved. Initially Jf17 was designed for 100kN Ws13 engine which they failed to achieve so far on that heavy piece of metal. It's a big failure for Jf17, have you ever seen a Jf17 performing as it's specs say so, never say taking 8g turn or making 8g climb, neither the STR stated ever achieved not the ITR, never saw claiming more than 20 degree AOA.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

patriots

Defense lover
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
4,525
Likes
15,165
Country flag
Switching from 84kN engine to 88kN, what a big thrust achieved. Initially Jf17 was designed for 100kN Ws13 engine which they failed to achieve so far on that heavy piece of metal. It's a big failure for Jf17, have you ever seen a Jf17 performing as it's specs say so, never say taking 8g turn or making 8g climb, neither the STR stated ever achieved not the ITR, never saw claiming more than 20 degree AOA.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
still jf17 is the backbone of paf. after f16 ...
and in iaf tejas comes 3rd ....su30 and mig 29 comes in first then rafale and mirage 2000 comes in 2nd ...tejas comes in 3rd.
and mk1a will beat their f16 .
 

darshan978

Darth Vader
Regular Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
472
Likes
754
Country flag
The RD93 is based on the RD33 series 3, the same engines that IAF uses in the upgraded Mig 29. The Russians already offer an uprated RD93, which is based on the RD33MK, the engine of INs Mig 29K/Mig 35. So even if China wouldn't come up with an own engine, they already have an alternative available and in the worst case scenario (with the current state of Indo-Russian relations), could even have 3D TVC as an option.
JF 17 WITH NO FLYBY WIRE IS HOW BETTER THAN TEJAS WITH FULLY FLY BY WIRE (4 AXIS) PUT YOUR BIAS ASIDE
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,420
Likes
1,125
Country flag
Let's see just two prototypes since first flight in 2012 i.e. two prototypes in 6 years.

Either SAC has a magical wand that doesn't require more prototypes for testing as is the norm (even in China) or it is that the project is dead until a foreign buyer is found. You choose.

Last I checked, J-31 was an internally funded project of SAC. Feel free to correct me.

No J-31= No WS-13
Well, as I said SAC is a state-own company, technically, every cent of their internally fund is owned the government. The project which will require more than 10billion RMD for just initial investment. Such scale of money will require approval from SASAC. SASAC will only give the green light when PLA agrees.

By the way: J-31 involves much Chinese latest technologies, some of them are used in J-20. They can't show to any foreign buyer without PLA's on board. A simple fact: those test pilots are PLAAF officers. They won't fly without order.

There are 3 reasons why J-31 development is so slow:
1. Resources limitation: J-20 is always on the top of priority list, so the best part of Chinese aviation industry has been focused on this project: manpower, sub-system supplying, testing infrastructure, etc. Even some top experts of SAC were borrowed by J-20. In such condition, how can you expect them to be quick?
2. Technology limitation: Carrier-base fighter is one of J-31's direction. However, we all know that Chinese J15 just started its operation from 2012. There are still too much things need to learn about sea environment affects on carrier-base fighter, especially those stealth technologies. So, there are lots of modifications need to be made on J-31's design.
3. Economic reason: Untill 2030, the majority of Asian countries airforce (India, Japan, Korea, etc) will still be 4th generation. The 5th generation fighter won't get enough quantity to threat Chinese sky. When Chinese already got J-20 to handle these, why should they rush to build up J-31 fleet to make up the quantity?
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,467
Likes
2,186
Country flag
Well, as I said SAC is a state-own company, technically, every cent of their internally fund is owned the government. The project which will require more than 10billion RMD for just initial investment. Such scale of money will require approval from SASAC. SASAC will only give the green light when PLA agrees.

By the way: J-31 involves much Chinese latest technologies, some of them are used in J-20. They can't show to any foreign buyer without PLA's on board. A simple fact: those test pilots are PLAAF officers. They won't fly without order.

There are 3 reasons why J-31 development is so slow:
1. Resources limitation: J-20 is always on the top of priority list, so the best part of Chinese aviation industry has been focused on this project: manpower, sub-system supplying, testing infrastructure, etc. Even some top experts of SAC were borrowed by J-20. In such condition, how can you expect them to be quick?
2. Technology limitation: Carrier-base fighter is one of J-31's direction. However, we all know that Chinese J15 just started its operation from 2012. There are still too much things need to learn about sea environment affects on carrier-base fighter, especially those stealth technologies. So, there are lots of modifications need to be made on J-31's design.
3. Economic reason: Untill 2030, the majority of Asian countries airforce (India, Japan, Korea, etc) will still be 4th generation. The 5th generation fighter won't get enough quantity to threat Chinese sky. When Chinese already got J-20 to handle these, why should they rush to build up J-31 fleet to make up the quantity?
Japanese Korea and possible Taiwan will be armed with F35, reasons to worry. India in case will be armed with Rafales, another case to worry.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

BON PLAN

-*-
Contributor
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
5,463
Likes
4,371
Country flag
JF 17 WITH NO FLYBY WIRE IS HOW BETTER THAN TEJAS WITH FULLY FLY BY WIRE (4 AXIS) PUT YOUR BIAS ASIDE
Are you sure JF17 is not FBW equipped?

Whatever the answer, it's difficult to compare orange and apple : The 2 planes used very different wing configurations : a cranked delta with a classical tail arrangement. It's even more difficult than to compare Mirage 2000 (pure Delta) and F16 ! and the result is very different if you compare instantaneous turn rate (Mirage 2000 better) and sustain turn rate (F16 better).

And without the knowing of the level of instability and the skill in the FBW developpment, the results may be very different.

And all the FBW planes are not instable....
 

BON PLAN

-*-
Contributor
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
5,463
Likes
4,371
Country flag
JF 17 WITH NO FLYBY WIRE IS HOW BETTER THAN TEJAS WITH FULLY FLY BY WIRE (4 AXIS) PUT YOUR BIAS ASIDE
At least one is operationnal and not the other ....

JF17 was developped as a low cost low technical challenge plane. It's a success according to that.

The low end modern and less affordable plane in the chinese arsenal is J10.
 

Flame Thrower

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
1,676
Likes
2,721
At least one is operationnal and not the other ....

JF17 was developped as a low cost low technical challenge plane. It's a success according to that.

The low end modern and less affordable plane in the chinese arsenal is J10
Go through Ex Gaganshakti related news and I am sure that you will change your opinion.

And all the FBW planes are not instable....
Exactly....

FBW role is to control the unstable plane.

If the design of the plane itself is a stable then!!!???

JF-17 design is inheritantly a stable one. If I remember it was a Russian design of mid 1980s where they thought of designing a cheap plane to replace Mig-21s. It was sold out to China during the breakup of Soviet Union. Do you know that JF-17 doesn't have digital FBW only for Pitch not for Roll or Yaw axis manoeuvres!?

Coming to Tejas, here it from the horses mouth i.e Group Captain Madhav Rangachari, an ex TACDE who has 3000 hrs of experience and a prior mirage 2000 pilot
"It is easily the best aircraft I've flown"

http://indianexpress.com/article/in...lown-group-captain-madhav-rangachari-2887419/

When it comes to FBW between JF-17 and Tejas, then Tejas wins it hands down.
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
6,013
Likes
11,334
Country flag
Was watching Animal Planet. This interesting thought came to mind and sharing it here. Don't take it seriously.

JF-17 = Hyena................. Would be effective as a pack hunter. Whether you rear it up in captivity or in wild, it would always be a pack hunter. Success rate of it depends on the agility of the victim. A agile victim could turn table on atleast a couple of hunters before escaping.

Tejas = Tiger.................... Silent and stealthy till the last moment. Could bring down a worthy opponent with its surprise attack. But its hunting capability depends on how you rear it. A tiger cub reared in captivity would be less successful then one whose upbringing has been done in wild.

As Mr Dhanoa rightly said

“There is a very good article in one of the aviation journals. He (the author) says JF-17 is not as technologically advanced as Tejas. So, he said JF-17 aircraft is of today because they have fielded much more squadrons than us, and Tejas is the aircraft of the future. It has much better systems. It depends on how we equip it. I am sure we can come up with a better plane,” Dhanoa said on Thursday in response to a question on which one is a better aircraft.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...e-iaf-chief/story-rOH7icPW1ax3wk52QN3WeM.html

So lets stop this Tejas vs JF-17 comparison. If we really want to compare JF-17 with something in IAF arsenal, then lets compare it with MKI. MKI is our frontline fighter, whereas JF-17 is PAF's.
 

porky_kicker

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
5,564
Likes
39,650
Country flag
At least one is operationnal and not the other ....

JF17 was developped as a low cost low technical challenge plane. It's a success according to that.

The low end modern and less affordable plane in the chinese arsenal is J10.
No of aircraft's pushed into service determines the level of operationability and might i add potency ? Lolzzzz

We are talking about paf here , so transparency is that last thing we should worry ourselves with. Beggars can't be choosers.

Let me give you a solid example

For all the song and dance the porkies were doing regarding bvraam capability of Fc1 since ages and numerous super duper expert foreigners adding to the music,

it is a miracle that they all collectively did not suffer from a heart attack when Fc1 was officially certified / cleared for bvraam capability only a month or so ago.

Well all the experts, porky and expert foreigners should have said something , given jf17 / Fc1 which is super duper operational and inducted in large numbers was till now flying with the imaginery bvraam capability powered by the brain farts of porky and foreign experts.

Guess how many more imaginery capabilities of fc1 / jf17 needs the touch of reality ,
oh before I forget except for the capability of " large no of jf17 already in Opera-national service .":tongue2::pound::tongue2:
 
Last edited:

patriots

Defense lover
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
4,525
Likes
15,165
Country flag
if jf17 is a capable one then why pakis denied to show it in Bahrain air show .....with tejas........

they know what they have ........but it really hurts when Indian s praise jf17 ..... without any fact
 

DAC O DAC

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
38
Likes
25
Country flag
JF-17 design is inheritantly a stable one. If I remember it was a Russian design of mid 1980s where they thought of designing a cheap plane to replace Mig-21s. It was sold out to China during the breakup of Soviet Union. Do you know that JF-17 doesn't have digital FBW only for Pitch not for Roll or Yaw axis manoeuvres!?
The Jaguar, a very stable plane, was used by GB to test FBW by modifying it so as to be unstable.
With just a look to a plane, even a derivativ of a old russian stable one, isn't enough to judge it is stable or not !
 

DAC O DAC

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
38
Likes
25
Country flag
Coming to Tejas, here it from the horses mouth i.e Group Captain Madhav Rangachari, an ex TACDE who has 3000 hrs of experience and a prior mirage 2000 pilot
"It is easily the best aircraft I've flown"
all the LM pilots say about the F35 : "it's a marvellous plane, very agile".... even when a 40 years old F16 smashed it every day.
It means nothing.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top