yes, due to the export restrictions around RD-93, WS-13 is needed if they want to export it to other countries.
JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 / Super-7 Discussions
- Thread starter kilo_4que
- Start date
With Russia now pretending to block all RD-93 sales intended for Pakistan's JF-17.. (possibly due to the prospect sale/deal for developing a fifth generation aicraft with HINDUSTAN aeronautics limited).....is the WS-13 now the sole choice for the JF-17? And is it even ready yet?
DragonKing786
New Member
Their was a report last month in Chinese news like on Dec. 16 that WS-13 is almost near completion and it will go into testing, either way PAF was going to get WS-13, I really don't see the problem sure it would be delayed about 1-2 years tops but not more than that, plus China is becoming self sufficient in weapons soon in about 15-20 years it wouldn't need to buy from Russia.
falconlover81
New Member
Guys just got the news that two JF-17 Thunder aircraft will be delivered to the PAF on March the 10th.
LINK:TPhuang
LINK:TPhuang
can u provide the source pls.Guys just got the news that two JF-17 Thunder aircraft will be delivered to the PAF on March the 10th.
LINK:TPhuang
where did u get that from??
the source is huitong, one of the most accurate pla sources there is.
the question is what's going on with the engine situation, but we will see.
DragonKing786
New Member
That's what i'm waiting to know, I hope it's WS-13, with those aircraft and engine in it PAF can give their rating and tell China, whats need to be done and what not. Whats nice is that the plane will fly according to the above source on my last day of University (Spring Term).Sorry for late interrupts. IMO AESA cannot fit into a JF-17/FC-1.
It's cockpit needs a big renovate to do so. And JF-17 in my knowledge is a low end light fighter, low altitude and low speed. What for to carry a heavy radar? AESA is no suit for it's assign missions.
An average radar with reasonable weight and leave the extra job to the ground support with meanwhile the a/c itself equip with a real time data exchange link is the best solution.
Anyways, only my 2 cents.
Why can't an AESA radar fit into it? They aren't all the same, & they aren't all large & heavy. The Vixen 500E, for example, is a lightweight, compact radar being marketed specifically for aircraft in the class of the JF-17. It's being offered for the Korean T-50 armed trainer, & as suitable for other armed trainers & lightweight fighters. Other small AESA radars are also being developed.Sorry for late interrupts. IMO AESA cannot fit into a JF-17/FC-1.
It's cockpit needs a big renovate to do so. And JF-17 in my knowledge is a low end light fighter, low altitude and low speed. What for to carry a heavy radar? AESA is no suit for it's assign missions.
An average radar with reasonable weight and leave the extra job to the ground support with meanwhile the a/c itself equip with a real time data exchange link is the best solution.
Anyways, only my 2 cents.
The radar itself may be light, but AESA radars have higher power and cooling requirements than MSAs. The worst thing is transformers have cores that have to be made of iron. The good thing is we have learned to make very light airconditioning compressors thanks to civilian developments.
The JF-17 has quite a hefty nose and radome space for a plane of its size. I got no questions that it can fit any advanced radar later on. The design of the radome, considerations for its size, radome diameters, space and access for components have impressed Chinese designers so early in the game, that this attention was specifically built with the J-8II,which got a radome bigger than even the F-4 Phantom. Likewise, the J-10 has a radome bigger than the F-16, while the JF-17 likewise is slightly smaller than the J-10's.
To reply to another post, no the J-11B does not use an AESA radar; it uses a mechanically scanned array radar that looks like it has a strong family relation to the radars used in the J-10 and J-8F. Likewise, the JF-17's radar is a smaller sibling of the radars used in these three planes. By reusing components proven on other aircraft, it is reasonably quick to come out with a new variant of a radar.
What's more important is that these radars, being developed so recently, will have access to much later data and signal processing technologies behind those planar arrays. Those things also account much of a radar's performance, like the ability to filter out weaker signals from farther ranged objects, or in more severe situations of ground clutter like an object flying much closer to the ground.
The JF-17 has quite a hefty nose and radome space for a plane of its size. I got no questions that it can fit any advanced radar later on. The design of the radome, considerations for its size, radome diameters, space and access for components have impressed Chinese designers so early in the game, that this attention was specifically built with the J-8II,which got a radome bigger than even the F-4 Phantom. Likewise, the J-10 has a radome bigger than the F-16, while the JF-17 likewise is slightly smaller than the J-10's.
To reply to another post, no the J-11B does not use an AESA radar; it uses a mechanically scanned array radar that looks like it has a strong family relation to the radars used in the J-10 and J-8F. Likewise, the JF-17's radar is a smaller sibling of the radars used in these three planes. By reusing components proven on other aircraft, it is reasonably quick to come out with a new variant of a radar.
What's more important is that these radars, being developed so recently, will have access to much later data and signal processing technologies behind those planar arrays. Those things also account much of a radar's performance, like the ability to filter out weaker signals from farther ranged objects, or in more severe situations of ground clutter like an object flying much closer to the ground.
It looks to me its about the same weight with slightly more power (8600kg vs. 8300kg).
Personally I believe that the engine was originally designed for a twin engined J-10 sourced development, kind of like the PRC's MiG 1.44 if you will, and was conveniently available when the FC-1 needs it.
Personally I believe that the engine was originally designed for a twin engined J-10 sourced development, kind of like the PRC's MiG 1.44 if you will, and was conveniently available when the FC-1 needs it.
AESA on present, still a huge and heavy equipment. Well as you can see, a conventional size AESA is expensive, even a mini-sized one will not go any cheaper. For those whom chose JF-17, will probably not having that money to equip is with a radar that almost out-cost the a/c itself. I am not trying to bias any party, but user class for JF-17 to go for a lower class equip to maintain high cost efficiency is the best solution.That's my logic on the cost efficiency part.
Anyways, my opinion on why should not an AESA upgrade for JF-17 on another reason is that it need not one for its assigned missions. JF-17 fly along with AWCS can save cost and save capacity for other avionic upgrades.
You're orders of magnitude wrong on the cost of AESA radars if you think one that fits in the nose of a JF-17 would cost more than the aircraft. It might add 10% to the price - and that's being pessimistic. A small AESA radar is much cheaper than a large one, because the most expensive part is the antenna array, and the cost of that is almost directly proportional to the number of T/R elements, & therefore the size. The cost is dropping fast, as the price of MMICs comes down, & Selex are now touting Caesar as a Captor replacement partly on grounds of cost advantages. The higher purchase price is outweighed by lower operating cost, because of very much lower maintenance costs. Fewer expensive spares needed, & much less maintenance effort needed.
You're also wrong on the size & weight. As Crobato says, they need cooling equipment & more power, which adds weight, but both of those can be made fairly lighweight. They certainly aren't "huge & heavy" nowadays. I suspect you're basing what you say on information from several years ago. It was true, but is now out of date.
Follow this link & you'll see a picture of an A-50, with a mockup of the AESA antenna (a Vixen - but larger than the basic 500 element one) proposed for it. Remember that the entire radar fits in the A-50, & KAI clearly have no worries about its weight. Selex market it as "compact and lightweight" - and they compare it with non-AESA radars when they say that.
Last edited by a moderator:
thanks for the informations.
Cant say that i master radar knowledge well, but actually I am working in a related field and know basics about radars. And also sorry for my poor english, which i cannot express myself clearly.
AESA in my knowledge is a whole new idea of scanning. Yes, it still remain the basic component of a traditional radar but as for present tech, to light weigh it and remain a high performance is still very challenging. AESA itself, the power to run the radar is pushing limit for current status of development. And AESA works in a system which includes computer to compute data gathered by the radar, thats another burden for small plane.
I didn't want to push how hard to fit in an AESA radar in JF-17. Just that if the plane can go for a cheaper convention radar with the closest performance to an AESA will be maximizing cost efficiency.
Or i misunderstood your point, if "future" you referring to is over 10~15yrs, than i would agreed with the AESA upgrade.
Last edited by a moderator:
Basics is all I know. More about mobile phones.thanks for the informations.
Cant say that i master radar knowledge well, but actually I am working in a related field and know basics about radars. And also sorry for my poor english, which i cannot express myself clearly.
AESA in my knowledge is a whole new idea of scanning. Yes, it still remain the basic component of a traditional radar but as for present tech, to light weigh it and remain a high performance is still very challenging. AESA itself, the power to run the radar is pushing limit for current status of development. And AESA works in a system which includes computer to compute data gathered by the radar, thats another burden for small plane.
I didn't want to push how hard to fit in an AESA radar in JF-17. Just that if the plane can go for a cheaper convention radar with the closest performance to an AESA will be maximizing cost efficiency.
Or i misunderstood your point, if "future" you referring to is over 10~15yrs, than i would agreed with the AESA upgrade.
AESA has actually been around a long time, but first AESA radars were on ships - too big, heavy, power-hungry & expensive for aircraft. It's been in use in fighter radars since 2000, when the Japanese F-2 entered service & a few F-15C were fitted with the APG-63(v)2. Since then, the F-22 & F-16E (for the UAE) have entered service with AESA, & the APG-79 radar is currently in operational evaluation on the F-18E, & soon to enter service. That's 5 types in service or on the edge of it.
They're all bigger than the JF-17, but there are a few AESA radars under development, up to the point of having been flight-tested, which are suitable for the JF-17. As well as the aforementioned Vixen 500E, there's the Saab (formerly Ericsson) NORA for the Gripen, an aeroplane about the same size as JF-17. http://products.saab.se/PDBWeb/ShowProduct.aspx?ProductId=1570
BTW, all fighter radars nowadays include computers, & won't work without them. Some current AESA developments are being offered as upgrades to existing radars - stick an AESA antenna on the front of your old radar, re-using the existing processor.
10-15 years is a long time. I agree that early production JF-17 won't be able to have an AESA, but I think it would be imprudent not to work towards introducing it on the production line in about 5 years, or as soon afterwards as possible.