Jf-17 thunder block-2 is under construction in real ????

[ADMk2]

Asian Defense News was VERY critical of the JF-17, Calling it the "Junk Fighter 17" and referring to its avionics as being a "Pirated software copy", its speed of Mach 1.6 as being slower than the F-7 (a Mig-21 derivative) it replaces, and to its structural design deficiency being such that the wings may take separate trajectories under anything more than an 8G load.

Well that's no great surprise, the blog itself (which is all it is) at least prefaces itself with this:

This Portal is all about the defence news of asia, defence news of india...

You'd hardly expect to see a tremendous review of the aircraft there...

The JF-17 is designed as a low cost replacement for a variety of aging aircraft, to allow it's users to obtain a viable number of relatively modern strike fighters, to provide a respectable air combat and strike capability and to support (as an enabling capability) the higher end fighters / strikers in their job.

With these roles firmly in mind, no honest reviewer could state that the JF-17 won't meet it's design requirements perfectly.

Anyone who says otherwise I would suggest, is being intellectually dishonest.

 

[T.C.P]

Well that's no great surprise, the blog itself (which is all it is) at least prefaces itself with this:



You'd hardly expect to see a tremendous review of the aircraft there...

The JF-17 is designed as a low cost replacement for a variety of aging aircraft, to allow it's users to obtain a viable number of relatively modern strike fighters, to provide a respectable air combat and strike capability and to support (as an enabling capability) the higher end fighters / strikers in their job.

With these roles firmly in mind, no honest reviewer could state that the JF-17 won't meet it's design requirements perfectly.

Anyone who says otherwise I would suggest, is being intellectually dishonest.

Agreed.

The JF-17 was designed to replace the F-7 , the A-5s and the old Mirages and it does a good job replacing them.

Air forces which still operate 3rd gen air craft like F-7s, see the JF-17 as a cost effective entry into the world of 4th Gen fighters.

China already has replacement for its 3d gen ACs so the JF-17 is not required.

 

[PCShogun]

Air forces which still operate 3rd gen air craft like F-7s, see the JF-17 as a cost effective entry into the world of 4th Gen fighters.

Absolutely. Kept in this context, the JF-17 is a definite improvement over the 3rd generation aircraft currently being fielded. At the costs being reported on, it is a much lower cost alternative for those nations needing upgrades but without the budget for the more advanced, but costly, American, European, or even Russian aircraft. $12 million for a Gen 4 aircraft is extremely cheap.

 

[mysterious]

Agreed.

The JF-17 was designed to replace the F-7 , the A-5s and the old Mirages and it does a good job replacing them.

Air forces which still operate 3rd gen air craft like F-7s, see the JF-17 as a cost effective entry into the world of 4th Gen fighters.

China already has replacement for its 3d gen ACs so the JF-17 is not required.

Hmm... I see contradictions in this post if I compare the first and the last sentence of it. China 'already' has replacements for its 3rd Gen aircraft? Where?

Last I checked, the PLAAF still had about 300 obsolete J-7s (not to be confused with JH-7A) in its inventory. The Pakistan Air Force is replacing its F-7PG (more modern version of J-7s) fleet with JF-17s; so it baffles logic as to why PLAAF would still be flying vintage J-7s. Personally, I wouldn't even rate JH-7A better than JF-17 - not to mention that two JH-7A's have already crashed between 2009 & 2011 killing three pilots in total, badly injuring a fourth.

All this, considering the fact that neither the J-10s, J-11s, or other similar mission-oriented aircraft are really entering service at a rate where they'd become the backbone of PLAAF at about 300-400 fighter strength.

If I have missed something or am unaware of regarding this, please do correct me. Thanks

 

[T.C.P]

Hmm... I see contradictions in this post if I compare the first and the last sentence of it. China 'already' has replacements for its 3rd Gen aircraft? Where?

Last I checked, the PLAAF still had about 300 obsolete J-7s (not to be confused with JH-7A) in its inventory. The Pakistan Air Force is replacing its F-7PG (more modern version of J-7s) fleet with JF-17s; so it baffles logic as to why PLAAF would still be flying vintage J-7s. Personally, I wouldn't even rate JH-7A better than JF-17 - not to mention that two JH-7A's have already crashed between 2009 & 2011 killing three pilots in total, badly injuring a fourth.

All this, considering the fact that neither the J-10s, J-11s, or other similar mission-oriented aircraft are really entering service at a rate where they'd become the backbone of PLAAF at about 300-400 fighter strength.

If I have missed something or am unaware of regarding this, please do correct me. Thanks

Lets see 3d hen replacements-J-10s, J-11s, Su-30s/27s

True, they are not entering service at a fast enough rate, which is why China keeps on modernizing the F-7s to keep them flyable.

The JF-17 at the end of the day provides no capability that the above mentioned air craft can't so really no point in adding another different fighter to the PLAAF's list.

When I said the JF-17 was mostly meant to replace the 3d gen fighters I was taking it mostly in the pov of Pakistan and other interested countries.

 

[mysterious]

Lets see 3d hen replacements-J-10s, J-11s, Su-30s/27s

True, they are not entering service at a fast enough rate, which is why China keeps on modernizing the F-7s to keep them flyable.

The JF-17 at the end of the day provides no capability that the above mentioned air craft can't so really no point in adding another different fighter to the PLAAF's list.

But.. at what point does PLAAF begin to realize the 'law of diminishing returns'? Instead of constantly modifying its J-7 fleet which is well past its prime and ending up having 6-7 different variants of J-7s flying, wouldn't it make more sense to replace them all with ONE version of JF-17 - new aircraft + fresh life + return on investment in JF-17 program - which is definitely better than all the plethora of J-7s in service?

 

[gf0012-aust]

the issue is what relevance the platform has in chinas future orbat construct and in their changing CONOPs for those platforms.

I'd argue that they determined long ago that it was not suitable for main force development within the PLAAF and decided to use it as a partnering technology and political development solution.

ie. china is a continental power. look at her geograpgy from a geospatial and theatre perspective.. for the types of enemies potentially in play, I don't see much utility and benefit for her in fielding "hundreds" of these assets.

logistically her focus is on being able to reach and sustain in depth. I'm not convinced the JF17 offers that up at a sufficient level to make it more useful than the heavy twins already in play.

 

[Ananda]

Last I checked, the PLAAF still had about 300 obsolete J-7s (not to be confused with JH-7A) in its inventory. The Pakistan Air Force is replacing its F-7PG (more modern version of J-7s) fleet with JF-17s; so it baffles logic as to why PLAAF would still be flying vintage J-7s. Personally, I wouldn't even rate JH-7A better than JF-17 - not to mention that two JH-7A's have already crashed between 2009 & 2011 killing three pilots in total, badly injuring a fourth.

All this, considering the fact that neither the J-10s, J-11s, or other similar mission-oriented aircraft are really entering service at a rate where they'd become the backbone of PLAAF at about 300-400 fighter strength.

According to PLAF, by end of last year, they already inducted close to 200 J-10 to their sq. If this true, then by this rate, they will replace most of J-7 by 2014. On relative slower rate the J-11 also being prepared for 300 in number. With around 400-500 J-10 and 200-300 J-11, I believe PLAF replacement for J-7 already complete.

Well you'll not expect PLAF back to thousand fighter fleet as before. After all with J-10 and J-11, they already move to quality then quantity.

 

[thrall]

I wasn't aware of any such developments. Is there any news article pointing to the same ?

Egypt is currently discussing a deal with Pakistan to co-produce the JF-17 for the Egyptian Air Force.[106] The Azerbaijani Air Force has negotiated with China for the purchase of several dozen JF-17, worth between 16 and 18 million dollars each.[107][108] The Sudanese Air Force is also reported to be negotiating for 12 aircraft.[109] The Air Force of Zimbabwe reportedly ordered 12 JF-17 in 2004,[110] but there are no current sources that confirm payment or intent of delivery.[111][112][113] An article in 2008 reported several other countries including Bangladesh, Iran and Nigeria have been identified as potential buyers.[4][114] In early 2010 it was reported that China had been in talks with around 5 to 6 countries on the JF-17, some of whom had sent air force pilots to test-fly the fighter.[115

source: wikipedia

 

[Twinblade]

Egypt is currently discussing a deal with Pakistan to co-produce the JF-17 for the Egyptian Air Force.[106]

Does not equal to sold.

The Azerbaijani Air Force has negotiated with China for the purchase of several dozen JF-17, worth between 16 and 18 million dollars each.[107][108]

From the referenced article
China supplies FC-1 multipurpose fighters to Azerbaijan | Armenia News - NEWS.am

China intends to supply FC-1 multipurpose fighters to Azerbaijan, Izvestia daily reads Nov.19 referring to the information that design was made with the assistance of Russian Aircraft Corporation “MiG”.

No deal made yet.

The Sudanese Air Force is also reported to be negotiating for 12 aircraft.[109]

Lets wait for a deal to happen before declaring it sold.

The Air Force of Zimbabwe reportedly ordered 12 JF-17 in 2004,[110] but there are no current sources that confirm payment or intent of delivery.[111][112][113]

I doubt the deal holds valid after such a long period. 7 years, no payment, no delivery ?

An article in 2008 reported several other countries including Bangladesh, Iran and Nigeria have been identified as potential buyers.[4][114] In early 2010 it was reported that China had been in talks with around 5 to 6 countries on the JF-17, some of whom had sent air force pilots to test-fly the fighter.[115]

No one is denying that jf-17 has a sales potential, but the fact is that no one other than Pakistan has bought it yet.

source: wikipedia

Which is a good source, if the references the article is using are good or are properly referenced.

 

[Qasim57]

I think China's engine problems with Russia have alot to do with it. The PLAAF officially cleared JF-17's design as meeting their requirements a little while back, and they have continued test-flying test-variants with the WS-13A engine they're developing for the aircraft. The continuing test-flights, despite Pakistan already inducting the aircraft, would logically suggest Chinese interest. But I doubt if they'll go for JF-17s with Russian RD-93 engines, given the headaches Russia has been giving them over the engines.

Russia knows China's own engine development projects are coming along nicely but they've still got China in their control for a little more time, China was really hoping they wouldn't have to order more AL-31s for their J-10s but problems producing WS-10s in sufficient numbers neccessitated another Russian deal. And the comments from all sides have been pretty public, Russians accusing Chinese of stealing and pushing prices up, etc.

China has large numbers of J-6, J-7s to replace, if it wants to maintain the size of it's airforce(which they clearly do, they're trying to compete with the USAF which's combat aircraft fleet numbers in the thousands not the hundreds), the JF-17(which, if you keep up with Chinese sources, is rumoured likely to have the J-9 designation in PLAAF service) would very likely be inducted. But not with Russian engines, senior officials from Russia's aeronautics industry already went public about how Russia should block RD-93(JF-17's engine) sales to China in order to prevent competition from the JF-17 in many markets later on. China obviously can't have it's fleet be at the mercy of Russia, especially the J-9/FC-1 fleet which would likely be a large fleet, given the J-6, J-7 fleet it would replace is very large.

China has already stopped developing the J-7, the JL-9 is likely to be the most advanced MiG-21 modification we'll ever see. So unless China goes all-out and spends alot more money putting J-10s on their bases bordering Mongolia, JF-17s would very likely be a nice inexpensive backup option for places China doesn't need J-10, -11s, or J-20s for.

 

[legoboy]

I think China's engine problems with Russia have alot to do with it. The PLAAF officially cleared JF-17's design as meeting their requirements a little while back, and they have continued test-flying test-variants with the WS-13A engine they're developing for the aircraft. The continuing test-flights, despite Pakistan already inducting the aircraft, would logically suggest Chinese interest. But I doubt if they'll go for JF-17s with Russian RD-93 engines, given the headaches Russia has been giving them over the engines.

Russia knows China's own engine development projects are coming along nicely but they've still got China in their control for a little more time, China was really hoping they wouldn't have to order more AL-31s for their J-10s but problems producing WS-10s in sufficient numbers neccessitated another Russian deal. And the comments from all sides have been pretty public, Russians accusing Chinese of stealing and pushing prices up, etc.

China has large numbers of J-6, J-7s to replace, if it wants to maintain the size of it's airforce(which they clearly do, they're trying to compete with the USAF which's combat aircraft fleet numbers in the thousands not the hundreds), the JF-17(which, if you keep up with Chinese sources, is rumoured likely to have the J-9 designation in PLAAF service) would very likely be inducted. But not with Russian engines, senior officials from Russia's aeronautics industry already went public about how Russia should block RD-93(JF-17's engine) sales to China in order to prevent competition from the JF-17 in many markets later on. China obviously can't have it's fleet be at the mercy of Russia, especially the J-9/FC-1 fleet which would likely be a large fleet, given the J-6, J-7 fleet it would replace is very large.

China has already stopped developing the J-7, the JL-9 is likely to be the most advanced MiG-21 modification we'll ever see. So unless China goes all-out and spends alot more money putting J-10s on their bases bordering Mongolia, JF-17s would very likely be a nice inexpensive backup option for places China doesn't need J-10, -11s, or J-20s for.

WOW. Thanks for your extremely in depth post. Using the JF-17 for lower threat regions does seem viable. However, with China's rising power, perhaps they simply don't want to use a inferior aircraft just to save some money. I mean the U.S has I believe over a thousand F-16's, and they are similar to the J-10 in price and capabilities I think.... So to match this, maybe China will use it's J-10 as a backbone fighter rather than the JF-17.

Placing J-10's on less risker boarders might save some money but in case of a conflict wouldn't the J-10's on say the border of Mongolia act as a backup to squadrons to the rest of the country ? Like if all the J-10's around Beijing are taken down J-10's from the Mongolian border could be brought in as replacement. While if they were JF-17's they would be much less useful.

What are your thoughts on this ?

 

[Qasim57]

@legoboy

I don't think the JFT is as mediocre as it's made out to be over here. Some official statements coming out of China, Pakistan, and even Farnborrough highlight that.

For example, the Thunder's demo at Zhuhai surprised the Chinese audience there, Wng Cmdr Khalid Mehmood(who's been involved in the JFT programme for many many years) talked about this in an interview on Sept 6 this year. According to him, the crowd at Zhuhai, which didn't know any better, believed the JFT to be superior to the J-10, mainly due to it's superior manouvering. The huge delta wings on the J-10 are probably not very helpful in sub-sonic manouverability(JF-17 actually seems to outdo the J-10 in this). Cmdr Khalid also quoted the Chengdu designers(who had worked on the JF-17 and the J-10) as saying that overall the J-10 was a better aircraft, but the JF-17 had won the crowd there because of superior piloting.

No-one in their right mind would say the JF-17 is equal or superior to the J-10, they both fit in entirely different categories(J-10 isn't a Light Fighter). The real question is, how much of a difference really exists in the JF-17 and the J-10. It's very easy to say the JF-17 is inferior or "bad", but an in-depth analysis of components is required to do a fair analysis. It's important to keep in mind the fact that many components in JF-17's avionics suite were derived from the J-10(or atleast, in some way, benefitted from the work and experience China's aeronautics sector had gained working on the J-10). That means some things like the JF-17's radar, the KLJ-7, have a very similar design to J-10's KLJ-10 - the main difference is KLJ-7's sender/reciever dish, which ofcourse does reduce the performance. The future AESA radar programmes for both these aircraft are also going on in parrallel at NRIET. Ofcourse it's not a one-way street, with advancements like the DSI inlets first being made for the JF-17 and later on moving on to the J-10. I've also seen many experts talk about the JF-17's MMI(Man Machine Interface), being the most advanced of any Chinese aircraft for years before the J-10B was developed. JF-17's pilot-friendly cockpit with large Multi-Function Displays even look much more advanced than the J-10A's 90's vintage cockpit design.

So the point I'm trying to make is, the JF-17's still a pretty capable little fighter, and given the little tidbits of info coming out of China from time to time(like their flight-tests on the JF-17 using the WS-13/A engine) seem to suggest that China also realizes this. You mentioned the F-16(and USAF's large fleet), look at how far the F-16 has come from what it was in 1976 when it first flew. The F-16 has come a very long way over the course of it's life, the Thunder's just at the beginning of it's lifespan. We're still "in the 70's" so to speak, and we're likely to see quiet a few modifications on these aircraft. Look at how far Turkey's modernized F-4/F-5 fleet's come over the decades, we *own* the JF-17 and have alot more freedom to tinker with it, that'd suggest modifications at a grander scale.

Even right now, given that the JFT uses the same frontline missile/weapons suite the J-10B(and even the J-20) would use, like the latest SD-10B AAM, PL-8C/D(or whatever the latest Israeli Python derivative heat-seekers China has), China shouldn't have a problem deploying this in Mongolia. This bird provides vastly superior capabilities to the J-6/J-7s they employ now, and for a pretty decent cost.

 

[Qasim57]

Double post

 

[Ananda]

I

China has large numbers of J-6, J-7s to replace, if it wants to maintain the size of it's airforce(which they clearly do, they're trying to compete with the USAF which's combat aircraft fleet numbers in the thousands not the hundreds),

Can you put your source (and in here official source not some fan boys fantasy) saying that China wants to replace all the J-6 ? Replacing J-6 means building 3000 more aircraft. Remembered the most numerous aircraft in PLAF inventory is J-6 and not J-7. PLAF already said that J-10 is to replace J-7. No PLAF new fighters program intended to replace J-6. If they ever want to replace J-6, then perhaps they will thinking of JF-17. After all if they want to replace J-6, then they need something that relative cheap and less sophisticated then J-10 to fill the gap.

 

[gf0012-aust]

For example, the Thunder's demo at Zhuhai surprised the Chinese audience there, Wng Cmdr Khalid Mehmood(involved in the JFT programme for many years) talked about this in an interview on Sept 6 this year. According to him, the crowd at Zhuhai, which didn't know any better, believed the JFT to be superior to the J-10, mainly due to it's superior manouvering. The large delta wings on the J-10 aren't very helpful in sub-sonic manouverability(JF-17 actually seems to do better). Cmdr Khalid also quoted the Chengdu designers(who had worked on the JF-17 and the J-10) as saying that overall the J-10 was a better aircraft, but the JF-17 had won the crowd there because of superior piloting.

that tidbit alone should have had serious commentators wondering at the merits of the message against a sophisicated audience.

its technical nonsense without context, and the WCDR did not use context.

 

[swerve]

Can you put your source (and in here official source not some fan boys fantasy) saying that China wants to replace all the J-6 ? Replacing J-6 means building 3000 more aircraft.

Nope. Those 3000 J-6 are mostly scattered around the world in saucepans, bicycles, & other things which incorporate recycled aluminium. The last survivors in front line service were retired several years ago, & the remaining JJ-6 trainers are being replaced by newer types.

The PLAAF has greatly reduced fighter numbers, while increasing quality.

 

[surpreme]

There has to be something wrong for the PLAAF not to have the JF-17 in its air force. What really going on with this jet? It just don't seem right for it to just go into a some joint production with the Pakistan Air Force. Has to be a problem with the program if it let the PAF have deal like that. It don't make scent.

 

[gf0012-aust]

There has to be something wrong for the PLAAF not to have the JF-17 in its air force.

Why? It was an export partner/development project.

if it doesn't fit in their orbat then it doesn't matter as there was a political imperative as well.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

To keep this short:

1. FC-1/JF-17 was developed mainly for the export market. The Chinese military did not actually provide much funding for the project. It was mainly supported by plane developer's own money as well as Pakistan.

2. China does not aim to maintain the current number of fighter planes. In fact, the mainstay of the air force has been shrinking for the past two decades. J-10 pretty much fills up any role JF-17 can take.

3. J-6 is no longer in active service, and there are no plans to replace them.