JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 / Super-7 Discussions
- Thread starter kilo_4que
- Start date
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
by the way are you sure about the fov of the hud(25 degrees seems to be very less) french and israeli ssytems have a fov of 32 degrees.
kashif he meant an indigenous radar not a radar being manufactured under tot,is pakistan developing an indigenous radar for the jf17?kashifshahzad said:
by the way are you sure about the fov of the hud(25 degrees seems to be very less) french and israeli ssytems have a fov of 32 degrees.
hovercraft
New Member
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
grifo-s7 is italian radar which pakistan is making under licence and i dont think pakistan is also making its IC's(chips) and processing systems maybe they are only essembling radar here and importing the all high tech parts from italy.
but this thing is only good when your relations with that country are good, if relations goes bad they will cancel the licence.
pakistan needs to develp all things for better and safer future.
grifo-s7 is italian radar which pakistan is making under licence and i dont think pakistan is also making its IC's(chips) and processing systems maybe they are only essembling radar here and importing the all high tech parts from italy.
but this thing is only good when your relations with that country are good, if relations goes bad they will cancel the licence.
pakistan needs to develp all things for better and safer future.
Elite-Pilot
Banned Member
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
Does anyone know the effective range of the S-7 radar for the JF-17? and how will this Radar make an implact on our JF-17?
Does anyone know the effective range of the S-7 radar for the JF-17? and how will this Radar make an implact on our JF-17?
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
As I said, JF-17 is not using Grifo S-7. It's using KLJ-10. The pakistani ACM said that the first 50 are using Chinese radar and avionics. Despite all the hype, Grifo failed to pass all of PAF's standards, yet the Chinese radar did.Elite-Pilot said:
Elite-Pilot
Banned Member
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
Tphuang,
I got a couple of questions for you since you seem to know alot about Chinese equipment. I recently read some where that KLJ-10 has a detection range that reaches roughly 100KM . While the Grifo S-7 has a total range around 100KM and can engage two enemies at once, and if Grifo failed to meet the pakistan Air force's requirements then obviously the KLJ-10 would be better then the Grifo S-7? Its probably the fact that we dont know alot about the KLJ-10 that makes us doubt its abilities. In addition to that id like to ask you how will this impact the JF-17? If Pakistan wishes to choose the KLJ-10 over the Grifo S-7 then we should atleast trust our decision. Chinese equipment does not only further the experiences of PAF but also improves the trust between the two countries and not to mention the relationships.
Also one last thing, If you can please find an english link briefly describing the KLJ-10 radar please post it here.
Tphuang,
I got a couple of questions for you since you seem to know alot about Chinese equipment. I recently read some where that KLJ-10 has a detection range that reaches roughly 100KM . While the Grifo S-7 has a total range around 100KM and can engage two enemies at once, and if Grifo failed to meet the pakistan Air force's requirements then obviously the KLJ-10 would be better then the Grifo S-7? Its probably the fact that we dont know alot about the KLJ-10 that makes us doubt its abilities. In addition to that id like to ask you how will this impact the JF-17? If Pakistan wishes to choose the KLJ-10 over the Grifo S-7 then we should atleast trust our decision. Chinese equipment does not only further the experiences of PAF but also improves the trust between the two countries and not to mention the relationships.
Also one last thing, If you can please find an english link briefly describing the KLJ-10 radar please post it here.
mysterious
New Member
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
The Chinese radar is a temporary solution until PAF decides on what western radar to be finally installed in the JF-17. The current modifications in JF-17 design were largely due to PAF's changed expectations from the fighter jet.
We all know PAF is quite secretive about what it actually is doing onboard the jet and we would probably never know for sure beyond speculation what finally ends up being part of the avionics suite until serial production begins.
The Chinese radar is a temporary solution until PAF decides on what western radar to be finally installed in the JF-17. The current modifications in JF-17 design were largely due to PAF's changed expectations from the fighter jet.
We all know PAF is quite secretive about what it actually is doing onboard the jet and we would probably never know for sure beyond speculation what finally ends up being part of the avionics suite until serial production begins.
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
I wouldn't say KLJ-10 is definitely better than Grifo S-7, but just that it passed all of PAF's requirement and Grifo did not. It's quite possible that Grifo passed certain requirements by a lot more. I do know that when SD-10 came out for export, its brochure mentionned that it was supported by a radar that was capable of 4 concurrent engagements of SD-10. Since JF-17 is mainly export, I would think that has to be talking about JF-17's radar.
And even when you are talking about range, there is range in different situations like search range, lock on range in look up, look down and such. And also what is the size of the target (5 m^2, 3 m^2, 1 m^2)? I'm sure in certain profiles, KLJ-10 exceeds 100 KM.
And I wouldn't call 50 out of 150 fighters to be a temporary solution.
I do have to say that I have no source on KLJ-10. The only thing i know is that it's a smaller version of the radar on J-10. And honestly, I have a feeling that even KLJ-10 will not be the Chinese radar on the production version of JF-17, because I think China will come out with AESA radars by 2009.Elite-Pilot said:
I wouldn't say KLJ-10 is definitely better than Grifo S-7, but just that it passed all of PAF's requirement and Grifo did not. It's quite possible that Grifo passed certain requirements by a lot more. I do know that when SD-10 came out for export, its brochure mentionned that it was supported by a radar that was capable of 4 concurrent engagements of SD-10. Since JF-17 is mainly export, I would think that has to be talking about JF-17's radar.
And even when you are talking about range, there is range in different situations like search range, lock on range in look up, look down and such. And also what is the size of the target (5 m^2, 3 m^2, 1 m^2)? I'm sure in certain profiles, KLJ-10 exceeds 100 KM.
And I wouldn't call 50 out of 150 fighters to be a temporary solution.
kashifshahzad
Banned Member
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
I dont think Thunder will be fitted with the KLJ-10 radar read below please:
The fire-control radar is expected to be selected among Israeli Elta-2032, Italian FIAR Grifo S-7, and Russian Phazotron Kopyo. The JF-17 Thunder fighters in service with the PAF will be fitted with the Italian Grifo S-7 fire-control radar, which has 25 working modes and a non-break-down time of 200 hours. The radar is capable of look-down, shoot-down, as well as for ground strike, but lacks multi-targets tracing and attacking capability.
I dont think Thunder will be fitted with the KLJ-10 radar read below please:
The fire-control radar is expected to be selected among Israeli Elta-2032, Italian FIAR Grifo S-7, and Russian Phazotron Kopyo. The JF-17 Thunder fighters in service with the PAF will be fitted with the Italian Grifo S-7 fire-control radar, which has 25 working modes and a non-break-down time of 200 hours. The radar is capable of look-down, shoot-down, as well as for ground strike, but lacks multi-targets tracing and attacking capability.
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
It's not the S-7(still somewhat under development) but the Griffo-7(used in F-7) and 7P(better variant of the Griffo7 used in F-7PGs) which are made under license in Pakistan. Only the first few units were assembled, the rest has all been local production from bottom up.hovercraft said:
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
As far as the rest of the avionics and cockpit layout position is concerned, whatever Kashifshehzad has been posting is outdated, I have rectified it a number of times with regards to what the PAF version is/will be. You will find all that in my earliest posts on the forum in various Thunder related threads.
Hope that helped.
Tp, just to add what I know, the first 50 will be equipped with klj-10, but it will be replaced in the first retrofit(planned for 3 years after initial service entry). The GriffoS-7 is the front runner among western options, more due to the lack of political strings than anyother factor. As I posted above, it still needs a few glitches fixed hence the use of KLJ-10 on the first 50.tphuang said:
As far as the rest of the avionics and cockpit layout position is concerned, whatever Kashifshehzad has been posting is outdated, I have rectified it a number of times with regards to what the PAF version is/will be. You will find all that in my earliest posts on the forum in various Thunder related threads.
Hope that helped.
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
That's what a lot of people seem to be assuming. Again, if Grifo S-7 can fix some glitches, what makes you think China will not be improving the radar being offered? A lot of Pakistanis seem to assume that all Western radars must be better than Chinese radars. I will tell you this. You won't hear a lot of news about Chinese radars, because Chinese tend to keep things secret, but they are a lot better than people think and they are advancing really fast. Remember, a few years back, people thought the Chinese radars would have no way of passing PAF standard, yet it advanced far enough to be able to do so. There is still probably 5 years until the date that you mentionned. By the time, Grifo S-7 is fixed, China will be equipping JF-17s with AESA radars. If China is prepared to give Pakistan full ToT on the radar and avionics as the Italians are willing to, I don't see why PAF would not choose a Chinese radar.umair said:
mysterious
New Member
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17
Seven years is a long time. You never know what might become available on the market for PAF and suddenly we see both Grifo S-7 and KLJ-10 losing their attractiveness for the next batches of Jf-17s to be procurred.
Seven years is a long time. You never know what might become available on the market for PAF and suddenly we see both Grifo S-7 and KLJ-10 losing their attractiveness for the next batches of Jf-17s to be procurred.
hovercraft
New Member
i am agreed with mysterious, Paf also looking for new radars the small version of j-10's radar is one of them and pakistan is also trying to improve relations with russia and there are few chances that paf get new better radars from russia or help to make improved radar, if only relations goes too much better witch is difficult, but possible because usa also making problems to russia and improving relations with x soviat statesmysterious said:
mysterious
New Member
That is the reason why PAF is quite interested in acquiring a much better western avionics suite (including the radar) which leaves the Grifo S-7 behind.
chinawhite
New Member
Delete :lam
Last edited:
chinawhite
New Member
Current FC-1 progress
Heres just posts i made about the FC-1. I think it covers it pretty well. This is the usual mis-understandings about the FC-1 project
The changes on the FC-1
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/5104/051114milfc1039hb0wh.jpg
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/3338/051114milfc1041hy5ez.jpg
But believe me this was not planned out of th blue with a thought like "of lets add DSI". They weren't sitting down after 2003. This is probaly a good expenation why it wasn't put inot low level production.
Did you know that even before the FC-1 was being pyhiscally flown it was being tested on simulators and wind tunnels or stability and air performace. so when it was time to actually fly the plane it was not needed to fly thousands of man hours since most of the testing was done with computers
And heres a quote from cowlan to sum it up
"DSI stands for Divertless Supersonic Intakes. The bumps seen at the intakes are litterally called Bumps. At high aircraft speeds through supersonic, the bumps work with forward-swept inlet cowls to redirect unwanted boundary layer airflow away from the inlets, essentially doing the job of heavier, more complex, and more costly approaches used by current fighters. It proved to save significant weight, reduce RCS by concealing the engine's fans which generate most of the RCS when searching from the front. It improves performances both when supersonic and subsonic. The DSI bump functions as a compression surface and creates a pressure distribution that prevents the majority of the boundary layer air from entering the inlet at speeds up to Mach 2. In essence, the DSI does away with complex and heavy mechanical systems."
Or code magzine
JSF Diverterless Supersonic Inlet
So the basic point is it reduces your RCS it decreases the parts in your fighter and makes it lighter, cost cheaper and the DSI with bigger airflow will increase the speed of the FC-1. Efficiency etc etc
This is for the current prototypes of the FC-1 and it would be safe to assume that this new prototype will perform even better
Maximum Weapon Load: 3,600 kg
Maximum Speed: Mach 1.6
Range: Ferry range 3,000 km; Operational Radius 1,352 km
Seven storage places
Avoincs
The avionics suite onboard the FC-1/JF-17 is said to be Chinese design, comprising a head-up display (HUD), infra-red search-and-track system, night-vision goggle capability and ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS input.
Sinodefence
There is no actual package per say to go with the FC-1. Its a export fighter with different packages. There are serval radars which the FC-1 can use and different avoincs packages it can use. Grifo, Kopyo some israeli radar and of course chinese radar. With each one price goes up. So theres a difference in price. A all chinese model should cost 10million a piece thou not nessary less capable it is made in china and cost can be kept down
Pakistani version is pretty basic with chinese avonics and the possible Grifo radar installed. But all this is speculative because its there for one minute then its not. But since the FC-1 was oringally going to have a chinese platter array now it was moving towards a mechanical phassed array radar in the 90s. It might be possible that the pakistanis might wait it out or already have planned a newer ESA radar installed. Stealth spy posted a link about pakistan wanting british avonics or something alone those lines
Anyway the FC-1 is being designed so different systems can be fitted in so no definate answer yet
Its the cheaper market and its not about capability but about price. WIth a F-16 your paying for a old airframe with upgrade technology. Just imagine its potenial customer market the FC-1 will appeal to countries will a small budject but want the most aircraft with this budget. Those planes are all better than the FC-1 in their current forms but with the DSI the FC-1 is getting it will get more cheaper to maintain and more simpler to maintain.
The possible planes it will replace are. F-5, Mig-21, Mig-19, Mig-17(all those older designs). And some aircraft which have been used in the ground attack role. All these aircraft need replacing and some people dont want some expensive aircraft with cannot take off or land from a dirt airfield or needs some speical attention
Chinas ability to make flexible payment choices. China will accept different types of payments and are flexible in what you pay them. Bartering and such. I give you a some FC-1s you give some natural resources(oil LPG and such). This compared to the americans which nearly always want hard currency which countries cant afford to give up. and a lesser extent the russians which are not really economicly confindent to barter goods. So the FC-1 can be based on a flexible payment choice.
The FC-1 offers 70% of the performance of a F-16(maybe more). If you buuy two FC-1 aircraft you will get to platforms instead of one and will have the aded benfit of low maintanice and you save money on the armnements.Can a F-16 carry more weapons than 3 aircraft?.
So basically the FC-1 is offering a brand new airframe with basic BVR capabilities for 10million dollars. Considering the potenial market is for african and south american countries which by the way want planes which can fly longer are good choices and any second hand F-16 is going to have trouble competing
And no. It was originally expected to fly in late 2005 but was delayed into 2006. The revised FC-1 was formulated in 2004 while the model of the plane was released after the design had already started. The expected entrance of the FC-1 into low level production is under 2 years time and they have already started hiring people for the job.
This thread about this resent news and nothing is about what was rumoured before hand. With the 01 and 03 they only flew a hour for flight testing without any testing later because most of the FC-1 testing was done using simulators which did not require it to actually fly. But it was first powered by a RD-33 instead of the RD-93 which it has now so the computer simulations proved more accurate than actual flying.
The new prototype 04 will already have been in testing on simulators because its flight goal was at the end of 2005 and only postponed because of a techical matter. So from these dates when can figure out that the 04 has already been though a lot of testing on simlutors and the 16 pre-production fighters are expected half way though 2006.
Doesn't look western to me
uz: . This is the revised number 04 With a different cockpit confriguration and is the more expensive version of the FC-1 being produced. See from the items below its the all chinese version with technologies supposly coming from the J-8H like the new phased array radar KLJ-7?. Or even wait for a ESA radar Kopyo is vering for this along with some other compaines. so different versions will consist of different systems.
When people said futuristic avonics it didn't mean the picture of the plastic FC-1 cockpit before that cockpit has the barely everything you need with a few gauges missing. The JF-17 was to have 3 MFDs while the FC-1 was to have only have 2 like the picture below. But this has all changed since these where not permanent plans nor any of the avoincs a permanent thing. These were implemented when the FC-1 was only suppose to counter the LCA now it has new threats and the pakistanis want more out of their fighter.
http://img79.imageshack.us/img79/6092/p0044484small5py.jpg
Ok now looking back at the FC-1 program it was only being designed at the first stage to be a cheap light BVR capable platform with only limited capability. this was inclusive of the Grifo with only limited detection range and some very cheap Avonics with limited capabilty and no HMD. Thats prototypes 01-03 with nhumber 01 and 03 being the ones which did the test flights and 02 doing ground testing. It was only basic stuff included and was only being designed as a space filler for ageing J-6s some older J-7s and the mirage III. This was designed as a competitor towards the LCA and was being agreed on in 1992. This has now dragged on into the 21th century and new threats have emerged
But now with the MRCA tender getting more advanced and more upgraded than the oringal proposed Mig-29s and Mirage 2k-5 the pakistanis and possiblity the chinese military want more than jsut a simple BVR but a all together more capable platform. It seems the J-10 has become more expensive than previously expected because of increase complexity it seems like it has been decided to get some FC-1s to swell the ranks and act as a replacment for older J-7C~E and maybe some older J-8s.
Anyway with the FC-1 there is going to be a definate improvment on speed weight and overall efficeny and performance. With DSI you get composities and with composties you get benifits like less weight and a lower RCS figure. Less weight will also decrease your take off weight and your engine performance. And the only thing that can be moldef into that distinctive bump is composties which the chinese have been developing as substutes for titaium on the J-11s she is building and also from the J-10 program and commerical aircraft she is building like airbus and beoing parts which are made of compostie material. So if the FC-1 04 is making more use of compostie materials i wouldn't be surprised because the trend is heading towards that way.
Because the FC-1 timeline has now overlapped with the J-10 deployment it has now come into the J-10 technologies and avoincs gear developed for the J-10 can and will be used for the FC-1. Both of these are from Chengdu industries and that measn both of them have access to the same technologies. Also the FC-1 is now going to have a HMD incorpated and i think the PL-8 is being intergrated for high off-boresight shots
And about the prototype stages it was to be
Prototype-01 For Flight Performance Verification
Prototype-02 Ground and Load Testing (Static Ground Testing)
Prototype-03 For Flight Performance Verification
Prototype-04 Weapons Integration And Avionics Testing
Only during the start of prototype 04 was it going to be fitted with its avonics and the prototype beforehand did not have avoincs fitted on during its test flight but only basic ones to test the airframe and aircraft stabbility while number 02 was only used as static ground testing.
While pakistani has not confirmed any orders of the Grifo S7 it has a moderatly good range of 100km supposely for a F-16 target. well below the MKI radars but respectable for a fighter of its size and the size of the radar. But the KLJ-7 is to have comparable range to the Grifo radar it will be cheaper and have a backed up warranty with china. There was also talk of pakistan getting british avoincs (article posted by you) I cant remember if you said AESA or the article. So im not to sure about this. Anything lower than this range and it wouldn't be acceptble for a BVR platform considering the chinese SD-10 has a range of 70KM. anything less would not be sufficent and there are a number of radars which can furfill its needs
So remember that the FC-1/JF-17 will not be the same plane in different airforces because from the on set it was being marketed as a export fighter and not a permanent fighter with certain capabilities. Thats why there are iinconsisitancies with the pricing. Going from 10~17million a piece
They never said they wanted to equip their whole force with the Grifo but was a misconsrued rumour based on the interview with Shahid Lateef and Shahzad Aslam which only stated that the FC-1 might be intergrated with the Grifo as a temporay option which has been spread around by people to be the true option. Because the Grifo S7 was allowed with full TOT it was the best option to test the SD-10 missile on since the itailians gave them the lanuch codes to laucnh the missiles and partly because the chinese radar was not yet finished
And your numbers are wrong. they were in 2001-2002 that the pakistanis were making the deals after their purchase of Grifo-Ms for the F-7MG that they brought. None the less the pakistanis have never confirmed they will use the Grifo as the FC-1 radar but it has been mainly forum talk.
07/06/2004
"Two years ago we were still not hopeful of a resolution to our avionics
problems and the Chinese could not meet our requirements. We had worked
with GEC Marconi, Thomson CSF and SAGEM as the Chinese could not match out
needs, and we were finalising our requirements when the sanctions bit in.
So we went on a tour of Chinese factories that were building the J-10 to
look at their avionics, but we were not impressed. However, they promised
to improve their technologies, and with out guidance - and more time - they
have met our expectations and we now have an avionics package available
So in 2002 chinese avonics were not up to pakistani expectations even the ones that were being developed for the J-10 pre-2002. But after the following two years(2004) chinese provided suitable avoinics that were up to pakistani expectations.
The first 50 FC-1s will have all chinese avonics confirmed by the pakistani airforce general. And because of this massive increase in technology from a analogue pad which the FC-1 was oringally meant to have to a glass cockpit which is a lot better.
And unhappy about chinese radar?. You must be kidding since in 2004 the KL-7 was non-existant which means it was not finished and not examined. How could be unhappy about a radar you cant see.
The problem with other radars is that you have to have lanuch codes to intergrate the weapons with. The FC-1s main weapon is the PL-12 and PL-8 combo. Plus this can also be intergrated with chinese anti-ship missiles if this radar was built using JL-10A technology which is used on the J-7HA and has a suitble range for the requirement of BVR. 110km track.
Just casually adding in the JF-17 avonics package. with out refering back to that or being more specific. But im just wondering what fighter britian could supply because if your going to supply a avonics package you need to know the radar in which to intergrate it with. Plus this does not factor in that the systems will not be just imported but made in pakistan
Here is something from Janes APRIL 28, 2004
The avionics suite is of Chinese origin, comprising a smart head-up display, infra-red search-and-track system, night-vision goggle capability and ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS. An advanced radar is expected to be procured from French, Italian or Russian sources.
According to AVM Lateef, the staff requirement for the avionics package was prepared five years ago, is based on Western standards and is regularly updated. The PAF is satisfied with the avionics systems developed by China and these will be installed in the third prototype. It is planned to establish a co-production facility for the avionics at the Kamra Avionics and Radar Factory. A similar strategy is planned for the BVR missile, which would be a major technological breakthrough for Pakistan.
And according to AVM Lateef (pakistans FC-1 project director) it was satified with chinese avonics. And in the article there is no mention of the chinese radar since in 2004 it was not known ./
And the last paragraph og the article it says there are already plans on making a joint production plant in pakistan for the avonics. Kind of like the K-8 which is also co-produced
Heres just posts i made about the FC-1. I think it covers it pretty well. This is the usual mis-understandings about the FC-1 project
The changes on the FC-1
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/5104/051114milfc1039hb0wh.jpg
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/3338/051114milfc1041hy5ez.jpg
This is the closet thing your get to the current status. Models just give you a idea of what the engineers are working on and the way they see it in development. Well number 4 is suppose to fly when Musharraf visits chengdu sometime this year. The pictures are of models Chengdu put out on display for a airshow so its what they want it to look like and the technologies it will be impemented on
But believe me this was not planned out of th blue with a thought like "of lets add DSI". They weren't sitting down after 2003. This is probaly a good expenation why it wasn't put inot low level production.
Did you know that even before the FC-1 was being pyhiscally flown it was being tested on simulators and wind tunnels or stability and air performace. so when it was time to actually fly the plane it was not needed to fly thousands of man hours since most of the testing was done with computers
Your've asked this question before
And heres a quote from cowlan to sum it up
"DSI stands for Divertless Supersonic Intakes. The bumps seen at the intakes are litterally called Bumps. At high aircraft speeds through supersonic, the bumps work with forward-swept inlet cowls to redirect unwanted boundary layer airflow away from the inlets, essentially doing the job of heavier, more complex, and more costly approaches used by current fighters. It proved to save significant weight, reduce RCS by concealing the engine's fans which generate most of the RCS when searching from the front. It improves performances both when supersonic and subsonic. The DSI bump functions as a compression surface and creates a pressure distribution that prevents the majority of the boundary layer air from entering the inlet at speeds up to Mach 2. In essence, the DSI does away with complex and heavy mechanical systems."
Or code magzine
JSF Diverterless Supersonic Inlet
So the basic point is it reduces your RCS it decreases the parts in your fighter and makes it lighter, cost cheaper and the DSI with bigger airflow will increase the speed of the FC-1. Efficiency etc etc
This is for the current prototypes of the FC-1 and it would be safe to assume that this new prototype will perform even better
Maximum Weapon Load: 3,600 kg
Maximum Speed: Mach 1.6
Range: Ferry range 3,000 km; Operational Radius 1,352 km
Seven storage places
Avoincs
The avionics suite onboard the FC-1/JF-17 is said to be Chinese design, comprising a head-up display (HUD), infra-red search-and-track system, night-vision goggle capability and ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS input.
Sinodefence
There is no actual package per say to go with the FC-1. Its a export fighter with different packages. There are serval radars which the FC-1 can use and different avoincs packages it can use. Grifo, Kopyo some israeli radar and of course chinese radar. With each one price goes up. So theres a difference in price. A all chinese model should cost 10million a piece thou not nessary less capable it is made in china and cost can be kept down
Pakistani version is pretty basic with chinese avonics and the possible Grifo radar installed. But all this is speculative because its there for one minute then its not. But since the FC-1 was oringally going to have a chinese platter array now it was moving towards a mechanical phassed array radar in the 90s. It might be possible that the pakistanis might wait it out or already have planned a newer ESA radar installed. Stealth spy posted a link about pakistan wanting british avonics or something alone those lines
Anyway the FC-1 is being designed so different systems can be fitted in so no definate answer yet
Well when the FC-1 enters the market which areas do you think the grippen and F-16 will be aiming at?.
Its the cheaper market and its not about capability but about price. WIth a F-16 your paying for a old airframe with upgrade technology. Just imagine its potenial customer market the FC-1 will appeal to countries will a small budject but want the most aircraft with this budget. Those planes are all better than the FC-1 in their current forms but with the DSI the FC-1 is getting it will get more cheaper to maintain and more simpler to maintain.
The possible planes it will replace are. F-5, Mig-21, Mig-19, Mig-17(all those older designs). And some aircraft which have been used in the ground attack role. All these aircraft need replacing and some people dont want some expensive aircraft with cannot take off or land from a dirt airfield or needs some speical attention
Chinas ability to make flexible payment choices. China will accept different types of payments and are flexible in what you pay them. Bartering and such. I give you a some FC-1s you give some natural resources(oil LPG and such). This compared to the americans which nearly always want hard currency which countries cant afford to give up. and a lesser extent the russians which are not really economicly confindent to barter goods. So the FC-1 can be based on a flexible payment choice.
The FC-1 offers 70% of the performance of a F-16(maybe more). If you buuy two FC-1 aircraft you will get to platforms instead of one and will have the aded benfit of low maintanice and you save money on the armnements.Can a F-16 carry more weapons than 3 aircraft?.
So basically the FC-1 is offering a brand new airframe with basic BVR capabilities for 10million dollars. Considering the potenial market is for african and south american countries which by the way want planes which can fly longer are good choices and any second hand F-16 is going to have trouble competing
The pictures are from last year. exactly may 2005. This is not recent if you consider the actaul time frame of a project. Also this would have to be based on a aplane which would have been already planned to make a model of it and wouldn't have just made a model without having the plane finalised
And no. It was originally expected to fly in late 2005 but was delayed into 2006. The revised FC-1 was formulated in 2004 while the model of the plane was released after the design had already started. The expected entrance of the FC-1 into low level production is under 2 years time and they have already started hiring people for the job.
This thread about this resent news and nothing is about what was rumoured before hand. With the 01 and 03 they only flew a hour for flight testing without any testing later because most of the FC-1 testing was done using simulators which did not require it to actually fly. But it was first powered by a RD-33 instead of the RD-93 which it has now so the computer simulations proved more accurate than actual flying.
The new prototype 04 will already have been in testing on simulators because its flight goal was at the end of 2005 and only postponed because of a techical matter. So from these dates when can figure out that the 04 has already been though a lot of testing on simlutors and the 16 pre-production fighters are expected half way though 2006.
http://img414.imageshack.us/img414/1701/untitled7qb.jpg
Doesn't look western to me
uz: . This is the revised number 04 With a different cockpit confriguration and is the more expensive version of the FC-1 being produced. See from the items below its the all chinese version with technologies supposly coming from the J-8H like the new phased array radar KLJ-7?. Or even wait for a ESA radar Kopyo is vering for this along with some other compaines. so different versions will consist of different systems.When people said futuristic avonics it didn't mean the picture of the plastic FC-1 cockpit before that cockpit has the barely everything you need with a few gauges missing. The JF-17 was to have 3 MFDs while the FC-1 was to have only have 2 like the picture below. But this has all changed since these where not permanent plans nor any of the avoincs a permanent thing. These were implemented when the FC-1 was only suppose to counter the LCA now it has new threats and the pakistanis want more out of their fighter.
http://img79.imageshack.us/img79/6092/p0044484small5py.jpg
Ok now looking back at the FC-1 program it was only being designed at the first stage to be a cheap light BVR capable platform with only limited capability. this was inclusive of the Grifo with only limited detection range and some very cheap Avonics with limited capabilty and no HMD. Thats prototypes 01-03 with nhumber 01 and 03 being the ones which did the test flights and 02 doing ground testing. It was only basic stuff included and was only being designed as a space filler for ageing J-6s some older J-7s and the mirage III. This was designed as a competitor towards the LCA and was being agreed on in 1992. This has now dragged on into the 21th century and new threats have emerged
But now with the MRCA tender getting more advanced and more upgraded than the oringal proposed Mig-29s and Mirage 2k-5 the pakistanis and possiblity the chinese military want more than jsut a simple BVR but a all together more capable platform. It seems the J-10 has become more expensive than previously expected because of increase complexity it seems like it has been decided to get some FC-1s to swell the ranks and act as a replacment for older J-7C~E and maybe some older J-8s.
Anyway with the FC-1 there is going to be a definate improvment on speed weight and overall efficeny and performance. With DSI you get composities and with composties you get benifits like less weight and a lower RCS figure. Less weight will also decrease your take off weight and your engine performance. And the only thing that can be moldef into that distinctive bump is composties which the chinese have been developing as substutes for titaium on the J-11s she is building and also from the J-10 program and commerical aircraft she is building like airbus and beoing parts which are made of compostie material. So if the FC-1 04 is making more use of compostie materials i wouldn't be surprised because the trend is heading towards that way.
Because the FC-1 timeline has now overlapped with the J-10 deployment it has now come into the J-10 technologies and avoincs gear developed for the J-10 can and will be used for the FC-1. Both of these are from Chengdu industries and that measn both of them have access to the same technologies. Also the FC-1 is now going to have a HMD incorpated and i think the PL-8 is being intergrated for high off-boresight shots
And about the prototype stages it was to be
Prototype-01 For Flight Performance Verification
Prototype-02 Ground and Load Testing (Static Ground Testing)
Prototype-03 For Flight Performance Verification
Prototype-04 Weapons Integration And Avionics Testing
Only during the start of prototype 04 was it going to be fitted with its avonics and the prototype beforehand did not have avoincs fitted on during its test flight but only basic ones to test the airframe and aircraft stabbility while number 02 was only used as static ground testing.
While pakistani has not confirmed any orders of the Grifo S7 it has a moderatly good range of 100km supposely for a F-16 target. well below the MKI radars but respectable for a fighter of its size and the size of the radar. But the KLJ-7 is to have comparable range to the Grifo radar it will be cheaper and have a backed up warranty with china. There was also talk of pakistan getting british avoincs (article posted by you) I cant remember if you said AESA or the article. So im not to sure about this. Anything lower than this range and it wouldn't be acceptble for a BVR platform considering the chinese SD-10 has a range of 70KM. anything less would not be sufficent and there are a number of radars which can furfill its needs
So remember that the FC-1/JF-17 will not be the same plane in different airforces because from the on set it was being marketed as a export fighter and not a permanent fighter with certain capabilities. Thats why there are iinconsisitancies with the pricing. Going from 10~17million a piece
Italian avonics?
They never said they wanted to equip their whole force with the Grifo but was a misconsrued rumour based on the interview with Shahid Lateef and Shahzad Aslam which only stated that the FC-1 might be intergrated with the Grifo as a temporay option which has been spread around by people to be the true option. Because the Grifo S7 was allowed with full TOT it was the best option to test the SD-10 missile on since the itailians gave them the lanuch codes to laucnh the missiles and partly because the chinese radar was not yet finished
And your numbers are wrong. they were in 2001-2002 that the pakistanis were making the deals after their purchase of Grifo-Ms for the F-7MG that they brought. None the less the pakistanis have never confirmed they will use the Grifo as the FC-1 radar but it has been mainly forum talk.
Not mid-2005 think 2004 and the original articles goes as follows. Most only one half of this article is supplied
07/06/2004
"Two years ago we were still not hopeful of a resolution to our avionics
problems and the Chinese could not meet our requirements. We had worked
with GEC Marconi, Thomson CSF and SAGEM as the Chinese could not match out
needs, and we were finalising our requirements when the sanctions bit in.
So we went on a tour of Chinese factories that were building the J-10 to
look at their avionics, but we were not impressed. However, they promised
to improve their technologies, and with out guidance - and more time - they
have met our expectations and we now have an avionics package available
So in 2002 chinese avonics were not up to pakistani expectations even the ones that were being developed for the J-10 pre-2002. But after the following two years(2004) chinese provided suitable avoinics that were up to pakistani expectations.
The first 50 FC-1s will have all chinese avonics confirmed by the pakistani airforce general. And because of this massive increase in technology from a analogue pad which the FC-1 was oringally meant to have to a glass cockpit which is a lot better.
And unhappy about chinese radar?. You must be kidding since in 2004 the KL-7 was non-existant which means it was not finished and not examined. How could be unhappy about a radar you cant see.
The problem with other radars is that you have to have lanuch codes to intergrate the weapons with. The FC-1s main weapon is the PL-12 and PL-8 combo. Plus this can also be intergrated with chinese anti-ship missiles if this radar was built using JL-10A technology which is used on the J-7HA and has a suitble range for the requirement of BVR. 110km track.
You mean this fine piece of journalism?
Just casually adding in the JF-17 avonics package. with out refering back to that or being more specific. But im just wondering what fighter britian could supply because if your going to supply a avonics package you need to know the radar in which to intergrate it with. Plus this does not factor in that the systems will not be just imported but made in pakistan
Here is something from Janes APRIL 28, 2004
The avionics suite is of Chinese origin, comprising a smart head-up display, infra-red search-and-track system, night-vision goggle capability and ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS. An advanced radar is expected to be procured from French, Italian or Russian sources.
According to AVM Lateef, the staff requirement for the avionics package was prepared five years ago, is based on Western standards and is regularly updated. The PAF is satisfied with the avionics systems developed by China and these will be installed in the third prototype. It is planned to establish a co-production facility for the avionics at the Kamra Avionics and Radar Factory. A similar strategy is planned for the BVR missile, which would be a major technological breakthrough for Pakistan.
And according to AVM Lateef (pakistans FC-1 project director) it was satified with chinese avonics. And in the article there is no mention of the chinese radar since in 2004 it was not known ./
And the last paragraph og the article it says there are already plans on making a joint production plant in pakistan for the avonics. Kind of like the K-8 which is also co-produced
Last edited: