I am being completely serious here, but is there any realistic chance of those simply being cinematic videography pods with few secondary purposes in use to film other aircraft? I remember seeing clips of aerial maneuvers on CCTV-7 from some years back that definitely surpassed qualities of cameras mounted within the fighter jet cockpits.
JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter johnqh
- Start date
Exactly my point
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
correct
timepass
Brigadier
Pakistan's JF-17 among eight aircraft shortlisted for the Royal Malaysian Air Force's Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) requirement for 36 aircraft
IMO, JF17 & L15 are the strongest contenders ...
I think only Tejas and JF-17 are realistic L-15 is a combat capable trainer but Malaysia may as well throw away their money if they seriously want to consider a trainer. It all depends on what they want these fighters to do but they obviously haven't gone through any serious process of elimination yet. The other lightweight euros can't compete with the range and payload of the JF-17 or Tejas. Not to mention the avionics and radars should be a step above since no serious airforce uses these ultra lightweights as fighters. Trainers will only be realistic if they intended to purchase combat capable trainers in the first place.
The biggest challenge to the Tejas and JF-17 is the Gripen of course. But at least more than twice the price of the likely Thunder package, it's not comparable. Is Pakistan offering the block 3 or 2?
Including Gripen and those euro lightweights is like including M1A2 with 1990s T-72 in the same tender. Doesn't make much sense at all.
Tejas should be considerably more expensive than JF-17 as well if IAF procurement prices are anything to go by. What weapons will Tejas offer? We know JF-17 with Chinese radar will only take Chinese weapons. Will this be an issue for RMAF? Then again the decision will mostly be political and probably a corrupted one.
For the price, JF-17 seems the obvious choice in this group. Tejas being the closest second obvious choice is hurt by IAF's own slow procurement rates. This could be because of HAL's manufacturing but if winning the contract means expanding production lines, maybe they can work something out between India and Malaysia. Surely Pakistan is going all in with this and will be aiming to offer attractive deals. Would be a good earning for both Pakistan and China with respect to selling ordinance.
Unless of course RMAF really just wants the best one, the latest Gripen and doesn't mind spending for it. But then it may as well get into a deal with the US and go for F-16V or "F-21".
The biggest challenge to the Tejas and JF-17 is the Gripen of course. But at least more than twice the price of the likely Thunder package, it's not comparable. Is Pakistan offering the block 3 or 2?
Including Gripen and those euro lightweights is like including M1A2 with 1990s T-72 in the same tender. Doesn't make much sense at all.
Tejas should be considerably more expensive than JF-17 as well if IAF procurement prices are anything to go by. What weapons will Tejas offer? We know JF-17 with Chinese radar will only take Chinese weapons. Will this be an issue for RMAF? Then again the decision will mostly be political and probably a corrupted one.
For the price, JF-17 seems the obvious choice in this group. Tejas being the closest second obvious choice is hurt by IAF's own slow procurement rates. This could be because of HAL's manufacturing but if winning the contract means expanding production lines, maybe they can work something out between India and Malaysia. Surely Pakistan is going all in with this and will be aiming to offer attractive deals. Would be a good earning for both Pakistan and China with respect to selling ordinance.
Unless of course RMAF really just wants the best one, the latest Gripen and doesn't mind spending for it. But then it may as well get into a deal with the US and go for F-16V or "F-21".
Last edited:
There is something called a bus, mil std 1553 or mil std 1760 or something, that the radar maker and the weapons maker only needs to conform to, in order to make their systems work with each other without giving away secrets to each other. Chinese radar that meets 1553 or 1760 bus spec can in theory, use US weapons that meet these standards, and vice versa. Same with European, Russian, Scandinavian and Israeli systems.
If you are one of those into computer engineering, you would know what this "bus" means. I am not referring to the transportation kind. Bus as in...what is the most popular bus being used around... USB of course.
Not familiar with the details at all but surely having the same bus isn't enough? I mean having your plane's electronics accepts and fire a different missile is one thing but the bus mentioned doesn't comprehensively solve all the problems does it? Not knowing better I would guess that allowing the fighter's detection, targeting, and continuous tracking (for non active missiles) for the missile isn't something handled by the bus alone and refitting it doesn't mean it can magically resolve the software issues right? Otherwise wouldn't Russian fighters in PLAAF easily be converted to accept Chinese missiles? And Meteor integration wouldn't take years for new platforms.
Admittedly I'm totally ignorant on even the basics of computer science. Operating them and doing some basic programming is the limit of my conceptual understanding. But just because the bus fits equipment doesn't mean the software allows for the sought after function?