JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter johnqh
- Start date
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
The news is ,it's still under testing. Fastest it can deputy is nex year...
The news is ,it's still under testing. Fastest it can deputy is nex year...
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
not quite sure what to make of that pic?
WS13 is under progress and we will most likely see it on the later version of the Block II, because Block III is due to enter after 2016 which is still 4-5 years away and WS13 is certainly not that far away
Block II is due to consist of 100 units, there still enough RD-93 there to fill the entire Block II inventory but PAF is happy for now, to stick with RD-93
with aerial refueling no target is safe, the 4 Midas tankers with PAF are running very well and can refuel 3 aircraft at a time, 4 IL-78s can refueling 12 JF17 in one single go, thats why I hope we get the opitional extra 1 tanker from Ukraine to make 5 IL-78s, we can then basically re-fuel a entire sqaudron of JF17 Thunders, essentially giving us the luxury of having a "extra sqaudron", that is the great thing about aerial refueling
but for IL-78 the cockpit is still analogue, the engines are very inefficient and also extremely loud, it lacks electronic counter measures and doesnt deploy flares, its self defence capability is hence limited
the consequence of this is that it must stay within Pakistan airspace or a very heavy escort outisde, but if its due to be operating in time of war then i would like to see a new glass cockpit, its self defence countermeasures installed and over-haul/upgraded or new engine
for now though, its important that our 30 pod equipped Mirage III Rose I provide vital training for PAF pilots who will eventually convert to JF17 Block II aircraft
incidently the Mirage IIIs are also very fuel thirsty and extremely loud, when you see a Mirage III take-off with full afterburner it will burst your eardrums, F7 funnly enough is the quietest
not quite sure what to make of that pic?
WS13 is under progress and we will most likely see it on the later version of the Block II, because Block III is due to enter after 2016 which is still 4-5 years away and WS13 is certainly not that far away
Block II is due to consist of 100 units, there still enough RD-93 there to fill the entire Block II inventory but PAF is happy for now, to stick with RD-93
with aerial refueling no target is safe, the 4 Midas tankers with PAF are running very well and can refuel 3 aircraft at a time, 4 IL-78s can refueling 12 JF17 in one single go, thats why I hope we get the opitional extra 1 tanker from Ukraine to make 5 IL-78s, we can then basically re-fuel a entire sqaudron of JF17 Thunders, essentially giving us the luxury of having a "extra sqaudron", that is the great thing about aerial refueling
but for IL-78 the cockpit is still analogue, the engines are very inefficient and also extremely loud, it lacks electronic counter measures and doesnt deploy flares, its self defence capability is hence limited
the consequence of this is that it must stay within Pakistan airspace or a very heavy escort outisde, but if its due to be operating in time of war then i would like to see a new glass cockpit, its self defence countermeasures installed and over-haul/upgraded or new engine
for now though, its important that our 30 pod equipped Mirage III Rose I provide vital training for PAF pilots who will eventually convert to JF17 Block II aircraft
incidently the Mirage IIIs are also very fuel thirsty and extremely loud, when you see a Mirage III take-off with full afterburner it will burst your eardrums, F7 funnly enough is the quietest
Last edited:
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
Wow, what is that on the 2nd image now ?
As regards to the 1st image i think it is pretty clear that it is a camera pod with data link as evidenced by the words BFSK-01 written on the pod, which point to Frequency Shift Keying or Fast Frequency Hopping demodulator . So it is most likely a camera with secure frequency hopping , jam resistant radio communication device as the FC-1/JF-17 is being used as a chase plane for China's top secret Jet .This is also augumented by the fact that the pod in question had a UHF antenna popping out.
But i may be wrong
Wow, what is that on the 2nd image now ?
As regards to the 1st image i think it is pretty clear that it is a camera pod with data link as evidenced by the words BFSK-01 written on the pod, which point to Frequency Shift Keying or Fast Frequency Hopping demodulator . So it is most likely a camera with secure frequency hopping , jam resistant radio communication device as the FC-1/JF-17 is being used as a chase plane for China's top secret Jet .This is also augumented by the fact that the pod in question had a UHF antenna popping out.
But i may be wrong
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
Tnaks for Your explanation.
Reg. the 2. pic I would say these are PL-8/-9 dummies !
Tnaks for Your explanation.
Reg. the 2. pic I would say these are PL-8/-9 dummies !
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
Or most probably smoke winders as seen on the J-10 August 1st aerobatic team. As they look exactly like those.
Or may be some kind of inflight data transmission kind of thing.
Or most probably smoke winders as seen on the J-10 August 1st aerobatic team. As they look exactly like those.
Or may be some kind of inflight data transmission kind of thing.
Last edited:
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
the weapons package for the JF17 is vast, PAF is taking delivery of
(750) x LS-3 Guided bomb
(750) x LS-6 Guided bomb
(750) x LT-2 Guided bomb
(100) x WMD-7 Aircraft EO system
(30) x C-802/CSS-N-8 Anti-ship missile
(900) x PL-5E SRAAM
(600)x PL-12/SD-10 BVRAAM
the weapons package for the JF17 is vast, PAF is taking delivery of
(750) x LS-3 Guided bomb
(750) x LS-6 Guided bomb
(750) x LT-2 Guided bomb
(100) x WMD-7 Aircraft EO system
(30) x C-802/CSS-N-8 Anti-ship missile
(900) x PL-5E SRAAM
(600)x PL-12/SD-10 BVRAAM
Re: Test Flaws Postpone JF-17
Quoting from a serbian military forum thread on JF-17 :
In reply to antibody the poster mareCar writes the following by first giving refrence to what Antibody wrote earlier. and I quote:
ANTIBODY ::jf17 will be a reply to indian mig29/mirage2000/lca etc
a southafrican member proved based on published stats that the jft will see su30mki first [even without help of paf awacs] .. thus would be able to fire the bvr first .. the thread was on ***********
the radar dome size of jf-17 is comparable/bigger than the f16 .. which means it has the capabilty to fit a stronger radar ..granted it gets a stronger engine
(Izvinite sto pisem na engleskom, ali hocu da me razume bez da mu translator nesto pobrka.)
I have to disagree, for the sake of facts. There's four reasons, please read everything before replying, and try not to get me wrong Also, I know that you probably know most of this already, but I still have to write it down when elaborating
a) The radome and subsequently the antenna size of the JF-17 is being grossly overestimated on ***********. I understand where it comes from, but I will still point it out to you guys, for your own benefit (if you are really interested in the technical specifications of the airplane and not just do it for the good feeling of knowing yours is better than others) I've read claims of around 1 meter, which is, realistically, far from the truth (more on that later). They are based on pixel counting with unreliable numbers and unusable angles, which are only good for guesswork in the +/- several decimeter range, and often feature obvious errors in measurement which are overlooked, but even if they didn't, then:
b) The diameter of the radome at the point of attachment, or even of the antenna itself, doesn't necessarily give you any reliable information about the range of the radar unless you have a lot of other factors to factor in together, and even then there is no reliable calculations to be made, and until then it is pure guesswork and wishing.
c)The radar antenna is not necessarily located in the backmost position of the painted radome part.
d) The most important part. Here's the brochure for the Selex Grifo radars. It contains the antenna diameters for the planes that the radars are intended for, including JF-17 and F-16. I am sure you've seen it before, but why you wouldn't believe it is beyond me. Let's assume that all the diameters are the maximum, full antenna diameter available in each planes radome, and why wouldn't they be? They are made to fit, after all.
The antenna diameter of the radar intended for the older Mirage fighters is 51cm's. AFAIK Pakistan has them and is replacing them with the JF-17. So far so good.
The antenna diameter of the radar intended for the JF-17 is 60cm's. It is larger than that of the old Mirage's, which is pretty much the way it should be when the plane is intented to replace them for the future, it should be better. And comparing it to the pictures above (starting from the last one from outside, then working up to the shots of the radar antenna and it's respective position inside the previously seen radome), it seems more than reasonable, it seems perfectly realistic to me. And I would be hard pressed to come up with a reason why it should be smaller than the antenna diameter of the KLJ-7, after all Selex Grifo radars are all about small space optimization, so there is no reason to not believe that they exploited the full and maximum available space.
Now, the radar antenna diameter given for the Grifo for the F-16 is the known 74cm x 48cm's. So that's correct.
If we now calculate the area of the 60cm radar antenna on the JF-17 and the 74x48 cm radar antenna on the F-16 we'll see that they are of pretty much the same size:
F-16= 2789cm^2
JF-17= 2827cm^2
A difference of 1,3%, which is nothing.
So I have to disagree on the point that it has a larger radar antenna. Also, refer to point b, that the radar antenna diameter alone doesn't determine the range of the radar. The F-16 Block52+'s radar is much more advanced by itself and delivers more range per watt and cm^2 than the KLJ-7 radar. Also, the (as you already pointed out yourself) engine power of the JF-17 is the limiting factor and not the antenna diameter, and since the F-16 has a more powerful engine (due to the larger size/diameter of the engine itself), it will also be able to power much more powerful radars than the JF-17 ever will, even when it gets a new radar or engine.
Don't get me wrong, I hope I don't step onto your pride or something like that, I just want to discuss the technical aspects.
Comparing the JF-17 with the F-16 is a mute point anyway, because one is simply a class above the other in engine power and MTOW, while the other one has other advantages, like price and therefore numbers, and operational costs, while proportionally (in proportion to the difference in engine and weight class) being good enough/just as good or even better (it's anyones own opinion). It would be much more correct to compare the J-10 to the F-16, due to the similar engine class and weight load, and the J-10 could in fact support a radar similar in characteristics to the F-16, while carrying (if they work on the construction) just as much load and having an engine in the same power range. Of course, there's the whole technology thing, and jamming and jamming resistance and other gizmos, but I'll stick to the measurable, simple stuff now.
So they are both excellent planes and good designs to improve upon. They offer a lot of bang for the buck, and are a great addition to Pakistan and many other Air Forces in the world, but one shouldn't overestimate their features. I mean I totally understand it, we guys are exited if our country builds a piston engined or turboprop plane, we would probably get together and celebrate the sht out of the weekend if our country would start producing an aircraft like the JF-17, even if with assistance from another country. The JF-17 is a perfect replacement for the Q-5 and older Mirage and Mig-21 fighters, while the J-10B will be a good replacement for the older F-16 versions. I am not trying to belittle them or anything, but I am just assessing their possibilities and characteristics realistically. They both will guarantee the future of the Pakistani Air Force for at the next 3-4 decades, until China comes up with a medium sized 5th gen aircraft, so you guys are very lucky there, that you have such a good partner that can provide you with very affordable and perfectly useful hardware tailored for your needs, and that you have no outside pressure on who you can buy from.
Quoting from a serbian military forum thread on JF-17 :
In reply to antibody the poster mareCar writes the following by first giving refrence to what Antibody wrote earlier. and I quote:
ANTIBODY ::jf17 will be a reply to indian mig29/mirage2000/lca etc
a southafrican member proved based on published stats that the jft will see su30mki first [even without help of paf awacs] .. thus would be able to fire the bvr first .. the thread was on ***********
the radar dome size of jf-17 is comparable/bigger than the f16 .. which means it has the capabilty to fit a stronger radar ..granted it gets a stronger engine
(Izvinite sto pisem na engleskom, ali hocu da me razume bez da mu translator nesto pobrka.)
I have to disagree, for the sake of facts. There's four reasons, please read everything before replying, and try not to get me wrong Also, I know that you probably know most of this already, but I still have to write it down when elaborating
a) The radome and subsequently the antenna size of the JF-17 is being grossly overestimated on ***********. I understand where it comes from, but I will still point it out to you guys, for your own benefit (if you are really interested in the technical specifications of the airplane and not just do it for the good feeling of knowing yours is better than others) I've read claims of around 1 meter, which is, realistically, far from the truth (more on that later). They are based on pixel counting with unreliable numbers and unusable angles, which are only good for guesswork in the +/- several decimeter range, and often feature obvious errors in measurement which are overlooked, but even if they didn't, then:
b) The diameter of the radome at the point of attachment, or even of the antenna itself, doesn't necessarily give you any reliable information about the range of the radar unless you have a lot of other factors to factor in together, and even then there is no reliable calculations to be made, and until then it is pure guesswork and wishing.
c)The radar antenna is not necessarily located in the backmost position of the painted radome part.
d) The most important part. Here's the brochure for the Selex Grifo radars. It contains the antenna diameters for the planes that the radars are intended for, including JF-17 and F-16. I am sure you've seen it before, but why you wouldn't believe it is beyond me. Let's assume that all the diameters are the maximum, full antenna diameter available in each planes radome, and why wouldn't they be? They are made to fit, after all.
The antenna diameter of the radar intended for the older Mirage fighters is 51cm's. AFAIK Pakistan has them and is replacing them with the JF-17. So far so good.
The antenna diameter of the radar intended for the JF-17 is 60cm's. It is larger than that of the old Mirage's, which is pretty much the way it should be when the plane is intented to replace them for the future, it should be better. And comparing it to the pictures above (starting from the last one from outside, then working up to the shots of the radar antenna and it's respective position inside the previously seen radome), it seems more than reasonable, it seems perfectly realistic to me. And I would be hard pressed to come up with a reason why it should be smaller than the antenna diameter of the KLJ-7, after all Selex Grifo radars are all about small space optimization, so there is no reason to not believe that they exploited the full and maximum available space.
Now, the radar antenna diameter given for the Grifo for the F-16 is the known 74cm x 48cm's. So that's correct.
If we now calculate the area of the 60cm radar antenna on the JF-17 and the 74x48 cm radar antenna on the F-16 we'll see that they are of pretty much the same size:
F-16= 2789cm^2
JF-17= 2827cm^2
A difference of 1,3%, which is nothing.
So I have to disagree on the point that it has a larger radar antenna. Also, refer to point b, that the radar antenna diameter alone doesn't determine the range of the radar. The F-16 Block52+'s radar is much more advanced by itself and delivers more range per watt and cm^2 than the KLJ-7 radar. Also, the (as you already pointed out yourself) engine power of the JF-17 is the limiting factor and not the antenna diameter, and since the F-16 has a more powerful engine (due to the larger size/diameter of the engine itself), it will also be able to power much more powerful radars than the JF-17 ever will, even when it gets a new radar or engine.
Don't get me wrong, I hope I don't step onto your pride or something like that, I just want to discuss the technical aspects.
Comparing the JF-17 with the F-16 is a mute point anyway, because one is simply a class above the other in engine power and MTOW, while the other one has other advantages, like price and therefore numbers, and operational costs, while proportionally (in proportion to the difference in engine and weight class) being good enough/just as good or even better (it's anyones own opinion). It would be much more correct to compare the J-10 to the F-16, due to the similar engine class and weight load, and the J-10 could in fact support a radar similar in characteristics to the F-16, while carrying (if they work on the construction) just as much load and having an engine in the same power range. Of course, there's the whole technology thing, and jamming and jamming resistance and other gizmos, but I'll stick to the measurable, simple stuff now.
So they are both excellent planes and good designs to improve upon. They offer a lot of bang for the buck, and are a great addition to Pakistan and many other Air Forces in the world, but one shouldn't overestimate their features. I mean I totally understand it, we guys are exited if our country builds a piston engined or turboprop plane, we would probably get together and celebrate the sht out of the weekend if our country would start producing an aircraft like the JF-17, even if with assistance from another country. The JF-17 is a perfect replacement for the Q-5 and older Mirage and Mig-21 fighters, while the J-10B will be a good replacement for the older F-16 versions. I am not trying to belittle them or anything, but I am just assessing their possibilities and characteristics realistically. They both will guarantee the future of the Pakistani Air Force for at the next 3-4 decades, until China comes up with a medium sized 5th gen aircraft, so you guys are very lucky there, that you have such a good partner that can provide you with very affordable and perfectly useful hardware tailored for your needs, and that you have no outside pressure on who you can buy from.