tphuangI really hate how every thread turns into China vs India.
To Awaara, don’t believe in everything time says. Go to China for a visit. You will know that’s not the case. The problem with the land seizures are caused by local gov’t corruption.
tphuangits been announced PAF will buy 150 JFz……and might up it to 250 units…..
i know how complicated weapons intergration is……its a joint project…..and PAF and agencies like AWC PAC PMO n NDC have been involvoed in every dept…
one example being……PAF intergrated AIM-9P/L on F-7P/PG , F-6 and A-5s….china had no part in the intergrations
For the first point, most people know about it.
As for the second part, the software systems and stuff like that are getting more and more complex these days. Actually, I question how much control software is even on the fighters that you just mentionned. Just because you were able to do it by yourself on the simple fighters, it does not mean you can do it on JF-17. Then again, I’m not sure what kind of integration interface China will provide for you guys.
tphuangjust look at how F-16s are going……a few weeks back…it was PAF is purshase MORE USED vipers n a few ( upto 30) NEW BLOCK 50 Vipers…….today it is UPTO 60 NEW BLOCK 50/52 ( weapons package not finalized yet) and 25 USED Vipers……i wouldnt call that any specs hav been finalized….if u will….i cant see how
We will see later how many F-16s PAF will get. Currently, it seems to be more interested in getting used ones and upgrading them. Cost is a big issue with PAF as you might know. Musharraf even said block 60 is available of PAF if it can afford it.
as for JF….all weapons intergration will be done by AWC n PAC at minhas…..not in china……
If you want to integrate a weapon with a fighter so the control software can get it launched, you will have to know exactly how the software works. I’m sure it’s not just a matter of plug and play. If you want to integrate a new weapon, you have to work with the radar/control systems developer on this. I don’t think you have any idea of the complexity of coding that goes on in fighter jets. Not something that you can just pick up through ToT.
as for the claim that pakistan has openly said 1st 50 will use chinese avionics and radars…..now it just wouldnt make sense if half of you fleet of JF-17s are using chinese avioincs n radar…n the rest western systems……would it?……
ab the EriEye……PAFs specs asked for an AEW config….not the AEW&C systems which the EriEye originally is…..
I believe PAF hasn’t made a decision on the following JF-17s yet. Only the first 50 have been announced.
tphuangSo much for all the J-10 speculation, check this :
I don’t think you read any of the PAF statements. This is just part of their plan to acquire used F-16s to be upgraded to MLU standard. Remember, they were originally planning for 80 F-16s (including 24 used I think). They are getting another fighter outside of F-16 and JF-17. The speculation for that has always been Gripen or J-10 or possibly the Rafale/Typhoon. Musharraf has repeated spent time talking about J-10 in the recent days.
tphuangtphuang…according to an interview of JF-17 project director, The aircraft will also be equipped with IRSTS, CLDP, and Helmet Mounted Display
http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/airforce/index.html
click on aircraft on the left hand side, and then on ‘PakDef Special: Q & A with Chief Project Director, JF-17 Project, PAF’ at the bottom.denlopviper…point was that integration can be and is performed locally. BTW, what do u mean by we dont have any other AAM in service rite now? Is your point exclusive to F-7PGs?
Well mate, most of us (probably?) dont have cousins or uncles working in AFs or defence factories, and our knowledge is based upon newspapers. 🙂 Having said this, defence related magazines are ‘generally’ more credible than ordinary newspapers when it comes to defence related news. Finally, let me rephrase the question…if this news of simulating R-Darter turns out to be true, then why did PAF did so?
i never really doubted HMD or CLDP, but IRST is first for me. The reason is because there was place where I read about IRST with J-10 or JF-17 before this.
As for JF-17, the Pakistanis have openly told the world that the first 50 JF-17s are using Chinese radar and avionics. If you want to integrate one of the darter on it, that’s fine, but Chinese would know about it, because they would have to carry out the integration work.
tphuangWhat is more stupid is attempting to say that people can get a 01 version and a 04 version when both are from the SAME initial development series of prototypes.
well, that was a bad idea to suggest, but I was simply trying to say that while the upgrades/downgrades may include avionic differences, missile package. There could also be differences in the cost of airframes, if certain customers is willing to pay money to CAC for more composite materials or other changes in JF-17.
tphuangIf you don’t know what a term means, don’t use it. A “block” in aviation parlance is a production series. The FC-1 is still in prototype, there are no “blocks.”
There are Blocks 50, 52 and 60 for the F-16 production run. These are separate production series of the same run. Know the difference between a production run, a production series and prototypes? A series means a number of production aircraft made the same way during a run. Each series usually have new prototype (like the J-7G prototypes) after the last variant run.
Please stop it. There are three flying prototypes. Again, prototypes are not production so they can’t constitute separate blocks. If CAC began production of machines based on 01 and 03 then we would have a block. But there is no production now. There is no block.
04 is part of the same development cycle as 01 and 03. The changes from 03 to 04 all go into the same production machine in the future. 01, 03 and 04 are contributing to the same initial production run series or the same block when production does happen.
agreed, block was a stupid word to use for this.
tphuangthat’s quite interesting, I didn’t think JF-17 had IRST. I guess that would mean J-10 also has IRST. Now, I just need to get that issue of JDW.
tphuangthey could, but I don’t think you can make J-10 a stealth aircraft, you can make it more stealthy. Also, there is an issue with the reliability of Chinese engines. China knows its engines are not as reliable as Western ones, so it has reservations about single engined fighters for the future. So if you want a hi-lo combination, a Mig-29 sized fighter would work well for lo-end. Mig-29’s size&weight > J-10’s size&weight.
tphuangThe 04 change was for at least three possibly more reasons.
1) The US offered pakistan F-16, in order to keep the FC-1 in favour in pakistan and maintain chinese influence in that country improvements were made.
2) The IAF MRCA requirement, introduced the spectre of yet more adavanced combat aircraft in the region, thus more capabiliyu was needed in an attempt to combat the ever increasing proliferation of advanced 4th generation types.
3) The PLAAF had not ans still has yet to fully commit to the type, thus more incentive was required for indigenous orders.
4) It was apparent from flight testing that there were serious problems with the original design, so something had to be done and fast.
There will not any major airframe changes between production FC-1’s they will all have the DSI intakes and the LERX. The only difference’s wll be in avionics and weapons intergration.
1 and 2 are basically the reasons for the raised specs. The third point is unlikely. CAC is concentrated on making more changes to J-10 to get more orders from PLAAF. Would CAC rather have plaaf order the more expensive J-10 or the less expensive JF-17? As I said, minor changes can be done to fit the needs of the customers. (I’m not sure what those are necessarily, could be using more composite materials or something like that).
tphuangyeah, but that’s not expected to be certified until after 2015. Until then, you can continue upgrading WS-10 and WS-13. Also, CJ-2000 is for a large engine (ie: WS-10 size). If you get competing designs for J-XX (which might well happen with both CAC and SAC both looking for work after J-10 and J-11), you will most likely get two sized fighters (one mig-29 size, the other su-27 size). In this case, you sort of have to use WS-13’s upgraded version for the mig-29 size one.
tphuangWho says china is going to offer the original design and the FC-104 prototype as seperate entitys, in fact wasnt the reason for the redesign due to design issues with the original prototypes?
China will only build the FC1-04 prototype but obviously you will be able to add features as money allows.
There is no way china will manufacture both the design of the original 3 prototypes and the FC104, I have a feeling this is another case of tphuang talking cr*p.
the redesign was partly due to that, but more because PAF raised the specs and such, so CAC had to come up with something better (which amazingly happened in less than a year). I would guess that the redesign probably increased the cost of the airframe and such. My entire point is that you can add features to JF-17 or not add them for cost reasons. Depending on whether you are PAF looking for something to counter IAF’s 4th generation fleet or you are Bangladesh looking for something that has reasonable manuverability and BVR capability. You will not select the same avionics, weapon set and the airframe you choose might even be slightly different. JF-17 is designed for customers, CAC will make whatever changes to it to satisfy the customers’ needs. The 04 change was obviously for PAF.
tphuangI dont think WS-13 is good idea to begin with. World is clearly moving towards either single engine or twin fighter but with powerful engine. even MIG will ditch the Rd series engine in favor or AL-41f for next fighter. with twin small engines u are going to create fighter with lesser range and more weight than single engine fighter.
It is from previous page and . an u have to consider these statements from past also. there is major thrust in acquiring tech from around the world for this project.
the thing is no one buy down graded fighter once it enters BVR and Standoff weopon stage. u have to put things like IRST, HMD, navigation and communication equipment, multi-mode radar.
just look at Sudan it bought MIG-29 and has i think J-7 for low end. ideally it should have gone for F-8 type aircraft due to major investment of China in Oil industry.
It’s a puzzle to me why F-8 never got any export either. I guess the maintenance is too much. I’m not sure JF-17 even has IRST. In that video, it says JF-17 has PD radar, EW suite, glass cockpit and datalink, but no mention of IRST.
As for WS-13, they said that WS-13 is important because it has a better potential to be upgraded to higher T/W ratio engine than WS-10. Maybe the next generation medium size fighter will be using two uprated WS-13 engines.
As for WS-13, this is one place they were talking about JF-17’s cost and such
http://www.war-sky.com/forum/htm_data/118/0505/122344.html
include the opening post by the resident expert.
由于最近黎阳在仿制RD93（WS13：天山发动机）以及利用国内中推技术研制WS12（泰山发动机）两个方面都取得了可喜进展，困扰超七的另一项大问题动力问题也不再尖锐和严峻——虽然两种发动机还没有到定型批产的地步，这对于超七以后价格下降很有帮助。而超七本来就可以配置国产航电以及雷达和武器系统，所以超七如果国内采购的话，所有成品和系统也基本可以立足国内，估计价格可以控制。
Notice that the domestic engines are expected to lower the cost of JF-17.
tphuangThere is no proof of that. Going by history, China almost NEVER export a downgraded version. I doubt the JF-17 can be downgraded much anyways. Unlike the US, China doesn’t have the luxury nor have they the tradition of ever doing this.
That said, the FC-1 is meant to be an open architecture (very few planes are built without a planned engine and radar from the very start) but whether Bangladesh or China gets the less capable version, only time will tell. For example, the PLAAF J-7E fleet was distinctly inferior to the J-7PG and only now is the J-7G reaching the PLAAF.
China tends to treat its friends as equals if not better.
don’t make this kind of dangerous assumption. You have to remember that there are different blocks of FC-1 now. You can get a FC-1 based on the original prototype or the new prototype. You can add FBW, uses the new MFDs and such. These are all extra options that can be attained with additional dollars. China has finally learnt market economy, it’s pretty much just doing things the capitalistic kind of way.
tphuangDo you have any proof that the J-10 has a PESA? Do you have anything to show that there are currently J-10’s fitted with TVC?
The AL-31FM1 deal was only sighned in thlatter half of last year, the engines are not likely to be delivered yet.
A further order for regular AL-31FNs was made after the original 54 deal. We have seen a picture of the last 100th J-10 and it did not have a TVC engine.
from the infamous JDW article (actually 2 of them)
the M1 deal delivery was as follows: 2005 september for the first batch, late 2005 or early 2006 for the 2nd batch and third quarter of 2006 for the final batch. You can find this on CDF’s J-10 thread.
Also, you can find from Richard Fisher’s interview with the Russians that the batch of 100 will be all delivered by 2006.
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.78/pub_detail.asp
PESA – from that JDW article
You are saying that I’m talking about BS, you are talking about this proposed Zhuk-A will fly next year. Let’s see it fly and pass its test first. When was the last Russian system that got developed and tested on time? Has Zhuk-MFE or Bars-29 being exported with Mig-29 yet? Why don’t you stop talking bs?
As for AESA, you can believe what you want to believe. China does not put its best radar on the show and the Russians put everything it has in stock on show.
Sign In
