Redesigned JF-17 prototype revealed at Beijing Airshow

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

I just wanted atleast thunder could see the there are threats comong form other side and in this way it can inform the other squardons that thunders cant handle this situation more and other types of planes are needed to handle the enemy aircrafts (i mean to say the MKIs )if a thunders come infront of a MKI there is no chance that thunder can escape.Firstly the MKI will be watching thunder form a distance of 300+KM and if MKI thinks that the thunder is alone or there are a few thunders there then it can know down all the thunders.
Atleast thunder must have a powerfull radar their Bisons have that then why we cant have that on thunders.
About the missiles there are two posibilities first is that the RR-77 doesnot have 170KM range and the second is that it does have.In first situation thunder can come infront of the MKI and there will be a fare battle and about the second posibility if it does have the range then all of PAFs plane have to run and they will not come infornt of MKIs.

First to Pursuit, the S-300PMU series is SA-10 Grumble. If you want to check out China's missile defense capabilities, this article gives a good rundown. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/8/165529.shtml

Okay, as for JF-17 vs su-30mki, there is no way JF-17 can take on su-30mki, but it is probably more matched up against LCA. If you want to take on su-30mki, use those new F-16s and buy some J-10s.

I wouldn't worry about 150KM range radar if I were you. RCS for JF-17 is probably tiny because of its size. The specs for Bars is overblown. It's only about 80-100 KM detection vs 2 m^2 targets and it's not even 100% electronically steered, that's why Russia is developing irbis. (Don't believe me, check their own site http://www.niip.info/main.php?page=raz_sky_bars and remember the Russians use 5 m^2 targets for their ranges as opposed to 3 m^2 for Chinese and 1 m^2 for Americans) As I said in the past post, the range for RR-77 is overblown. The mentionned range for R-77M1 is 150KM, but it's probably much less in reality. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe R-77M1 is in service yet. The range for the normal R-77 is probably less than that of SD-10 and depending on which AMRAAM you guys are getting, probably less than AMRAAM.

As for Bison's radar, it uses Kopyo-M as its radar. The more advanced Kopyo-F has a less than 50KM frontal detection range (note, that's detection not search) against 5 m^2 targets. At least that's the specs given on the recent Beijing airshow. I have a picture of kopyo-M's specs saved on my computer. Check on http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/fi021.htm, it says the track/engage numbers is 8 and 2 and 57 KM detection range vs 5 m^2 (I doubt this actually due to information above). Trust me, KLJ-7 will be better than that. Griffo S7 should be slightly better than KLJ-7, although I think PAF is a little prejudiced against Chinese Avionics.

 

[BasitS]

Another image of the re-designed JF-17

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Griffo S7: Range is about 100KM, Simultaneous engagement of atleast 2 targets.

Kopyo-F: This Phased-Array Radar has range of about 75 KM. It can track 20 targets and engage 4 simulataneously.

Small details - radar can't engage targets, it deals with processing concurrency. Concurrent engagement is done by the weapons/FC system.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

First to Pursuit, the S-300PMU series is SA-10 Grumble. If you want to check out China's missile defense capabilities, this article gives a good rundown. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/8/165529.shtml

Okay, as for JF-17 vs su-30mki, there is no way JF-17 can take on su-30mki, but it is probably more matched up against LCA. If you want to take on su-30mki, use those new F-16s and buy some J-10s.

I wouldn't worry about 150KM range radar if I were you. RCS for JF-17 is probably tiny because of its size. The specs for Bars is overblown. It's only about 80-100 KM detection vs 2 m^2 targets and it's not even 100% electronically steered, that's why Russia is developing irbis. (Don't believe me, check their own site http://www.niip.info/main.php?page=raz_sky_bars and remember the Russians use 5 m^2 targets for their ranges as opposed to 3 m^2 for Chinese and 1 m^2 for Americans) As I said in the past post, the range for RR-77 is overblown. The mentionned range for R-77M1 is 150KM, but it's probably much less in reality. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe R-77M1 is in service yet. The range for the normal R-77 is probably less than that of SD-10 and depending on which AMRAAM you guys are getting, probably less than AMRAAM.

As for Bison's radar, it uses Kopyo-M as its radar. The more advanced Kopyo-F has a less than 50KM frontal detection range (note, that's detection not search) against 5 m^2 targets. At least that's the specs given on the recent Beijing airshow. I have a picture of kopyo-M's specs saved on my computer. Check on http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/fi021.htm, it says the track/engage numbers is 8 and 2 and 57 KM detection range vs 5 m^2 (I doubt this actually due to information above). Trust me, KLJ-7 will be better than that. Griffo S7 should be slightly better than KLJ-7, although I think PAF is a little prejudiced against Chinese Avionics.

If there is one thing I have learned in all of my years of following developments and more importantly, use of military systems, it is this, rarely do systems perform at their best detection or engagement envelopes, that is, it is a very cooperative enemy that will allow an enemy to utilise their platforms at 100 percent efficiency.

Example: If one were to take the performance and engagement envelope of the AIM7 armed PhantomII fighter in the Vietnam war, and predict the number of NVAF Migs that "Should" have been shot down, then the Air War in that period would have been very short and totally an american victory.

I take all the paper calculations and predicted engagement envelopes with a large grain of salt. Frankly too many times does a system that should be able to successfully engage an enemy at BVR is reduced in capability because the real danger of Blue on Blue casualties are ever prevelant, case in point again, the first BVR success in the Vietnam war was a F105 thunderchief splashed by a F4C!

China, India and for that matter Pakistan have, as far as I can see, no experience to speak of regarding the useage and deployment of BVR systems, and will no doubt have alot of friendly fire casualties until somone can fix the ever present problem of IFF and other identifiers that will ensure 100 percent ID in BVR engagements.

Oh, and one other thing, there is no such thing as an invulnerable aircraft, An MKI can be shot down by an older or less capable aircraft as easily an any other aircraft, depending on the situation and the pilot capabilities, if you are on the wrong side of a missile, or in the path of cannon shells, it doesn't matter much what you are flying.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Small details - radar can't engage targets, it deals with processing concurrency. Concurrent engagement is done by the weapons/FC system.

Actually, radar can be defined as engagement, namely when the target aircraft recieves the threat indication that he is being painted and then either jettisons its stores, or uses up a lot of chaff, or manuevers itself in such a way that burns up fuel or forces him to be distracted from the mission.

Radar can be used to attain a mission kill, as it was successfully employed in SEA against USAF, Navy or Marine Strike packages, lock ons but no missile engagement forced alot of aircraft to jettison stores.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Actually, radar can be defined as engagement, namely when the target aircraft recieves the threat indication that he is being painted and then either jettisons its stores, or uses up a lot of chaff, or manuevers itself in such a way that burns up fuel or forces him to be distracted from the mission.

I was referring to it in the literal discretion response sense. ie it's not the actual spear that gets thrown.

Radar can be used to attain a mission kill, as it was successfully employed in SEA against USAF, Navy or Marine Strike packages, lock ons but no missile engagement forced alot of aircraft to jettison stores.

See above.

But, if you're referring to its capability to influence the enemy pilot to react then yes you're right. But in general its associative or co-operative in its effect.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

I was referring to it in the literal discretion response sense. ie it's not the actual spear that gets thrown.

See above.

But, if you're referring to its capability to influence the enemy pilot to react then yes you're right. But in general its associative or co-operative in its effect.

GF, all I know is that if a enemy radar switches from Track while scan to CW, I am in a hurry to start evasive action, so in a indirect way a radar is a spear, just like a fake jab by a boxer, keeps the opponent off balance and totally in your control.

 

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

If there is one thing I have learned in all of my years of following developments and more importantly, use of military systems, it is this, rarely do systems perform at their best detection or engagement envelopes, that is, it is a very cooperative enemy that will allow an enemy to utilise their platforms at 100 percent efficiency.

Example: If one were to take the performance and engagement envelope of the AIM7 armed PhantomII fighter in the Vietnam war, and predict the number of NVAF Migs that "Should" have been shot down, then the Air War in that period would have been very short and totally an american victory.

I take all the paper calculations and predicted engagement envelopes with a large grain of salt. Frankly too many times does a system that should be able to successfully engage an enemy at BVR is reduced in capability because the real danger of Blue on Blue casualties are ever prevelant, case in point again, the first BVR success in the Vietnam war was a F105 thunderchief splashed by a F4C!

China, India and for that matter Pakistan have, as far as I can see, no experience to speak of regarding the useage and deployment of BVR systems, and will no doubt have alot of friendly fire casualties until somone can fix the ever present problem of IFF and other identifiers that will ensure 100 percent ID in BVR engagements.

Oh, and one other thing, there is no such thing as an invulnerable aircraft, An MKI can be shot down by an older or less capable aircraft as easily an any other aircraft, depending on the situation and the pilot capabilities, if you are on the wrong side of a missile, or in the path of cannon shells, it doesn't matter much what you are flying.

With the su-27 IFF system possibly in the hands of the Estonians, who knows what kind of implication that might have on su-27 users like China and India. As for invulnerable, you are right. MKI can be shot down by less aircraft. However, we are talking about in a situation where the pilot abilities are about equal and other situations are equal. Personally, if one plane has a 4:1 kill ratio vs another plane or greater, then we can safely say that we don't want to use the other plane to match up against it. In the case of JF-17 vs mki, that's most likely the case. Although, I do think mki is overrated by many of the posters.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

With the su-27 IFF system possibly in the hands of the Estonians, who knows what kind of implication that might have on su-27 users like China and India. As for invulnerable, you are right. MKI can be shot down by less aircraft. However, we are talking about in a situation where the pilot abilities are about equal and other situations are equal. Personally, if one plane has a 4:1 kill ratio vs another plane or greater, then we can safely say that we don't want to use the other plane to match up against it. In the case of JF-17 vs mki, that's most likely the case. Although, I do think mki is overrated by many of the posters.

TP, again I cannot restate the point I was making, where in the history of Air Combat has 2 opponents been on an equal footing? Or, for that matter, maybe 1 engagement out of a hundred where 2 pilots are of equal ability, or the tactical situation is equal or neutral. As for the SU27 IFF being in Estonian hands, I do understand the troubles associated with that, but will the new system be utilising 1990's technology for IFF? If that is the case, then it is just as dangerous for the user without enemy knowledge.

Remember, planes do not have kill ratios, pilots do.

 

[gf0012-aust]

BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

GF, all I know is that if a enemy radar switches from Track while scan to CW, I am in a hurry to start evasive action, so in a indirect way a radar is a spear, just like a fake jab by a boxer, keeps the opponent off balance and totally in your control.

Point taken.

 

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

TP, again I cannot restate the point I was making, where in the history of Air Combat has 2 opponents been on an equal footing? Or, for that matter, maybe 1 engagement out of a hundred where 2 pilots are of equal ability, or the tactical situation is equal or neutral. As for the SU27 IFF being in Estonian hands, I do understand the troubles associated with that, but will the new system be utilising 1990's technology for IFF? If that is the case, then it is just as dangerous for the user without enemy knowledge.

Remember, planes do not have kill ratios, pilots do.

I'm just saying that you don't want to face JF-17 against mki. You will need some extraodinary circumstances for JF-17 to win.

 

[Air Marshal]

How many JF-17 Prototypes are there supposed to be in future if Fatigue?

 

[nanotaku]

Nice aircraft. Good range and speed. Armament and radar system quite good for a cheap a/c like this, Malaysia should have bought 60 or more of these machines, just to supplement the few first tier fighters that we have.

 

[SABRE]

Nice aircraft. Good range and speed. Armament and radar system quite good for a cheap a/c like this, Malaysia should have bought 60 or more of these machines, just to supplement the few first tier fighters that we have.

Well right now the prime producers and buys, China & Pakistan, dont even have the aircraft in their forces, not as yet. But Malaysia can fill the order, that is if China doesnt have any problem with it. I am sure Pakistan would be more than happy to make a deal for 60 or more with Malaysia.

 

[TheDefender]

Well right now the prime producers and buys, China & Pakistan, dont even have the aircraft in their forces, not as yet. But Malaysia can fill the order, that is if China doesnt have any problem with it. I am sure Pakistan would be more than happy to make a deal for 60 or more with Malaysia.

I dont think Malaysia would be going to buy thunders they have huge economy they can go to Russia or to US depending upon relations and there is a better option for them to buy J-10s i dont know what kind of relations do Malysia maintains with China.Any guess Indonesia buying thunders ??

 

[SABRE]

I dont think Malaysia would be going to buy thunders they have huge economy they can go to Russia or to US depending upon relations and there is a better option for them to buy J-10s i dont know what kind of relations do Malysia maintains with China.Any guess Indonesia buying thunders ??

Malaysia has some old F-5 series which needs to be replaced. JF-17 would be a good alternative. As for J-10, I dont think China would be so easily willing to sell it to just about any one. They are upgrading the J-10 program to meet up with 4th gen fighters.

Indonesia doesnt have good relations with China. China does sell them small arms at times but dnt knw whether large military sells can be carried out. Pakistan would be willing to sell jf-17 though, but if China aint happy, Pakistan will pull back as well.

 

[tphuang]

you can pretty much be guaranteed that China would not oppose JF-17 to any country with the exception of Taiwan. So yeah, I would not be surprised if Malaysia or Indonesia buys some thunders.

 

[TheDefender]

you can pretty much be guaranteed that China would not oppose JF-17 to any country with the exception of Taiwan. So yeah, I would not be surprised if Malaysia or Indonesia buys some thunders.

Yep I think Pakistan should be guaranteed to give thunders to any Muslim country except that of Iran.And if there is somewhat denyal from China sit and solve it after all what you will be getting is money.

 

[SABRE]

Yep I think Pakistan should be guaranteed to give thunders to any Muslim country except that of Iran.And if there is somewhat denyal from China sit and solve it after all what you will be getting is money.

Why would Pakistan deny JF-17 to Iran ?? The relations of Iran with Pakistan have improved recent months to a good hight (due to a certain political turn over). I dont think either China or Pakistan would have any problems selling Thunders to Iran, that is if Iran wants to buy them.

If there is any (Muslim) country Pakistan (or china) wont sell their weapons to is probably Afghanistan, besides it cant even afford a single unit of JF-17.

 

[TheDefender]

Why would Pakistan deny JF-17 to Iran ?? The relations of Iran with Pakistan have improved recent months to a good hight (due to a certain political turn over). I dont think either China or Pakistan would have any problems selling Thunders to Iran, that is if Iran wants to buy them.

If there is any (Muslim) country Pakistan (or china) wont sell their weapons to is probably Afghanistan, besides it cant even afford a single unit of JF-17.

Dont you think US will exert pressure on Pakistan and this can also block the way for those new F-16s which would be reaching Pakistani land in 2-3 years.What do you think how US will react if Iran gets thunders with SD-10 BVR missiles with a high radar which would surely be inducted in the thunders in coming years.