tphuangThe way the aircraft was first presented it sounded as if the entire plane had been re-designed with RCS reduction and super-cruise in mind. However at the time it was suggested that the BM was to replace the SM as the Russian Su-27 upgrade programme, which naturally limts how different the aircraft can be from the original flankers.
Whilst the new radar/sensors engines and munitions are a great improvement they are all things that can and probably will be beackfitted to earlier flankers. I still maintain that this will be at least a good match for the Euro birds if not an all round better aircraft.
I think if that kind of changes is to be made, it is probably more worthwhile just develop a new plane. But yes, the problem this plane would have is that it still has much larger RCS compared to Raf/Typhoon.
tphuangWith 230 MKIs, the JF-17s and J-10s seem somewhat immaterial. The Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 will be upgraded as well. Secondly, as the JF-17s come in, the Mirage III/Vs in PAF service will be retired, dont think that more than a 2-3 squadrons worth were upgraded anyways..OTOH, the IAF is upgrading 40 Jags + 37 new build to same standards, and upgrading 70 MiG-27s. Then there are the Bison, MRCA (when it comes), LCA etc. So the JF-17 will be dual tasked for strike as well as Point Defence.
If I were in charge of PAF procurement, I’d cancel the JF-17, push for the J-10 and actually, the J-11. Thats the only plane with the potential to give the PAF some breathing space. Otherwise the MKI is simply too “heavy” in terms of sensor reach, payload and range for the PAF to effectively counter it. The situation will become far worse for the PAF if the IAF operationalizes the K-172 and a sensor package (upgraded Bars/ Irbis) to use it effectively.
There are some obvious reasons on why J-11 probably won’t be exported anytime soon.
tphuangIn “Russian Air Power” by Yefim Gordon and Alan Dawes, an air-launched Iskander-M is mentioned; this could be the large AG missile. The all-up weight of an Iskander is 3,900 kg; in comparison the Kh-41 (air-launched Moskit) is 4,500 kg. The Iskander’s 400-500 km range, LO characteristics, boost and terminal maneouvring and terminal guidance would give the RFAF a very potent strike capability.
That’s interesting, they mentionned on Chinese bbs about an air launched version of B-611 for JH-7A, I thought they were being overly optimistic. I guess not.
tphuangWill China allow integration of Western Avionics on J-10? or what is being suggsted is that Chinese Avionics tailored for PAF requirements?
well, the idea is that China has to design an export version that’s okay for them and for Pakistan. As for avionics, I’m quite confident China will offer something of better value than what Western countries are willing to offer. It’s just pure discrimination from Pakistanis to assume that Chinese avionics is inferior. I remember just a year ago how people were surprised at the cockpit and some of the other stuff unveiled on Prototype 04.
tphuangWell china could have given pakistan the J-10 instead of the JF-17.:rolleyes:
if there is one technical part that I disagree with several posters here, it would be this. I was extremely surprised in 2006 that China was willing to sell J-10 this early and at this point, there is no way that China would offer Pakistan the kind of deal for J-10 that it offered on JF-17. In fact, a well informed insider on Chinese bbs even mentionned that PAF approached China about the availability of J-11B and got turned down. China is not just going to give Pakistan everything it has.
tphuangAhhh thanks guys! People do love me really (even if Star49 missed the point of my argument – oh and I do know how to use quote I wanted to post my reply in that way).
don’t let star49 get to you, he has already pissed off too many people on this forum.
tphuangAs of Aug 2006 it cost approximately 95 Million for a F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and slightly over 100 million for a E/A-18G Growler……………:o
interesting, I was going by a figure I saw on a recent issue of Janes weekly.
The purchase order is $2.9 bn, IIRC – and that’s Australian dollars, so it’s less in USD, & it includes the usual extras.
it was 6.6 billion AUD.
tphuangYou can’t really blame the manufacturer for having a go with the Q-5, they have a factory geared up to make it and as Showtime said its probably dirt cheap. Also I bet the manufacturer over produced parts for this type and they probably have warehouses full of components.
yeah, it’s kind of like what they are doing with J-7s. The service life of these things are like 3000 hours, so they are probably just purchased to keep the regiments going while some of the others regiments get better replacement.
I disagree, the Q-5s roles have been all but completely absorbed either by types now enetering service or likely to do so in the near future.
CAS- nicely covered by the WZ-10 and the J-10s light attack capability.
Long range strike- JH-7A was built for the role and is/will remain far more capable than the JF-17.As far as the PLAAF is concerned the JF-17 should be considered a complete waste of time, effort and resources, there is no operational need for it whatsoever.
I totally agree with your points, it’s just one of those Chinese things where they believe they have to maintain a certain number of regiments and that they would only be able to do that if the continually replace the old J-7s with new J-7s/JF-17s and the old J-8s with new J-8s and Q-5s with new Q-5s.
tphuangThis is a big misconception. F-16 are being sold to Pakistan for war on terror rewards and has nothing to do with J-10. Secondly J-10 doesnt stand a chance in front of F-16 as off today and pakistan needs planes today and not 5-7 years from now when J-10 would have matured with good avionics and weapons system.China cannot supply Pak all the avionics,JDAM etc today what America can.
hmm, that’s why PAF reduced their orders of F-16s for J-10s, huh?
The J-10s supplied to PAF will be better than F-16s you get for sure. Considering America will deny PAF usage of GPS in a war against India, those JDAM will be less accurate than the SGBs China can offer.
tphuangCheck the URL below for full story.
So is this just to give Norway more leverage in its agreements for the F-35, or could this develop into a realistic alternative
so first F-35, then Gripen and now the typhoon, interesting what they will get.
tphuangWith the JH-7A coming on stream in increasing numbers with the PLAAF, the light attack capabilities of the J-10 already demonstrated and the WZ-10 surely about to enter service the question has to be asked- why bother?
Even on the export front the JF-17 will soon bury the Q-5 once and for all.
I figure the service life of these things are probably not that long and the procurement cost for the upgraded versions is probably still pretty low and so they may just be doing this to wait until a replacement for Q-5 is available. It seems at this point from the talk of Chinese BBS that this is the most likely role of JF-17 in PLAAF.
tphuang$50 million aircraft’s
What the blazes????? Why are Australia paying $6.6Bill for 24 of these things plus extra then???
fyaway cost is 59 million actually, 6.6 billion is in Australian money I think, as for the rest, you know the spares, maintenace and stuff like that. You can buy a one dollar American fighter and you are going to end up paying 50 million for it after including the spare, maintenance and training.
tphuangHasn’t the Rooivalk been reincarnated as the ZW-10? I thought SA was collaborating with China on it. Not to mention the HJ-10L/Mokopa; HJ-9/Ingwe; and Anjian/Seraph.
Denel did say that China asked for technique documentation and cooperation on Helicopter, so there could be some stuff that China got out of Rooivalk.
tphuangIMHO, the MiG 35 (as shown in bangalore) is both the landbased version of the 29k and also is the next evolution of the K. It is surely based on the K – same airframe (slightly greater wing area), same engines, similar IRST. It is also an evolution above the K because it has a greater payload (1000 kgs), range, similar but more comprehensive IRST suite, TVC, AESA radar. All in all it looks like a beast for the price.
One question, a detailed pic of the 35 from Aeroindia 07 showed its intakes to contain a sort of netting in front of the compressor blades (i’ll try to dig it up if i can). Is this mainly for preventing bird hits or does it also help in diffusing radar waves and thereby help in RCS reduction? The b2 is supposed to have its windows meshed to prevent radiation from getting out.
Regards,
uss
Well, see the part on range + payload is not saying much, since they are the sacrifices that you get for putting a fighter on a STOBAR carrier. As for the AESA radar, who knows if the Russians are actually going to have it ready for mass production when they say they will. At least from PLAAF experience, the promised radar was often not delivered, so a less capable one had to be used.
tphuangIf all that is true it would be a very impressive achievement, especially the RCS reduction. I am sure that somebody here will be able to analyse the pictures we have of the J-11B to see if this is indeed the case?
Yeah, I’m not sure how much of the article is accurate. RCS reduction does sound fishy, but it sounds a little like the Russian claim that their RAM paint that can decrease RCS by 500%.
I’m not too surprised by the improvement in radar though, because we’ve seen some modern stuff on J-11B like upgraded IRST, UV MAWs and wide-angled HUD
Sign In
