GoldenDragonThe J-7G is based on the PG. Until the G came along, the PAF operated a more advance J-7 than the PLAAF.
There is no evident that Grifo has enter into a contract for the Bangladeshi aircraft to supply the same radars it did for the PAF PGs.
Without Grifo, the BG should have a Chinese radar, either KLJ-6 or the export SY-80. The same should go for the Nigerian F-7N.
GoldenDragonBecause we are an aircraft forum we see airplanes and air forces as essential for war.
That couldn’t be further from the truth for vast majority of the world’s nations. The most efficient way to project power for most countries is with an army. $25 million for a single medium tech aircraft can equip a whole armor battalion with 40 -50 Type 85 MBTs.
A single fighter is not only pretty much useless except in peacetime, it needs ground forces to protect its air base to which it needs to return after about a hour of combat time. Not only is it battle time extremely limited, it can’t even hold ground.
The armor battalion not only protects that stupid aircraft and its base but it can hold ground and can operate 24-7.
There are only a very few countries where the air forces have large enough numbers to actually effect the course of war.
The most important role for the air force in most countries is protecting air space sovereignty or transporting equipment and ViP during peacetime.
Even COIN is relatively minor because in most countries government troops fight insurgents on the ground since fuel, maintenance and ammo costs don’t justify using it on insurgents who tend to be disgruntle peasants with AK-47s and a few RPGs.
GoldenDragonL-15 prototype in stress test.
GoldenDragonOf course range isn’t the only performance factor. There’s also the multi-role capability that’s inherent in the F-5 and lacking in the F-7. The F-7 can carry a few unguided bombs and rockets and that’s it. The F-5 can carry bombs of various types (guided and unguided) plus missiles like the Maverick, and in a few cases the Shrike anti-radar missile.
The F-16 could carry all of that stuff too. If you’re approved for the F-5 it means you’re approved for the F-16. Why bother with a 30 year old airframe?
Even an old F-5 comes with political baggage. And it’s old with a short remaining life span.
A small air force needs a multi-purpose jet because they can’t afford another type. The F-5 is clearly the better multi-role airplane.
A small air force doesn’t really need anything except an UFO chaser to protect air space during peace time. In the third world, aircraft is a non-factor in full scale warfare. Force on force comes efficient from the army.
The F-5 is certainly no slouch in an air-to-air fight, and the F-7’s advantages in that area shouldn’t warrant a purchase over the F-5 when you need a tactical fighter for all missions.
The F-5 means old air frames and a new for spare parts from the US. Only Iran fly F-5s without a pipeline of parts from the US but it has enough of a technical to build parts that it need.
The BVR thing? Are you kidding me?
On please, the derby could be fitted to the F-7 as well and the PAF had looked into it in conjunction with Grifo.
Some BVR capability is better than none at all and none is what the F-7 has…..how can you ignore that?
BVR or no BVR is inconsequential to the countries buying
If you want a fighter that can perform that mission as well as have a limited BVR capability and be able to perform a wide variety of A/G missions, then an upgraded F-5 is a better bet.
Then tell me why the Phillipines won’t even accept Taiwan’s offer of FREE F-5s? Old air frames. The newest F-5 was built two decades ago. The PGs are brand new. BVR is inconsequential to small air forces because the other small air forces don’t have them. Having BVR won’t help you against the US or any major power anyways so why bother?
Buy the cheap new ones that can last awhile instead of smelly old craft that require you to get approval anyways. If you get approval you wouldn’t even bother with the F-5 because there are practically thousands of F-16s out there. All you need is approval.
Let’s get this straight. The surplus F-16 willdominate the low end market. But there is a good chunk of the world’s nations who won’t get that approval or who won’t bother and that’s the market which the F-7 has captured.
GoldenDragonSince we’re on airlines 😀
The Lucky Air jetliner (737) in the F-7BG pictures is a subsidiary of the Hainan Airline which operates mainly out of Hainan Island which is China’s resort destination. (Hainan is also home base to several of the South Seas Fleet PLANAF air stations. The EP3/J8II incident ended on a naval air station on Hainan.)
GoldenDragonThose Commercial Airplanes i see at the airport of the Chinese Airlines are beautiful. The flower on the tail fin makes you see the true beauty of China. Say….you guys know if these planes are locally produced?are the exported?,or do you guys import them from somewhere? if so then where?
ahhh what a nice bird.. :rolleyes:
That jetliner is China Airlines which is actually Taiwanese not mainland. The flower is the Butterfly Orchid of Taiwan. The plane is a Boeing 737.
In China, except for the few odd MD-11s remaining (assembled in Shanghai during the 1980s,) the jet fleet is composed mainly of Airbuses and Boeing from Europe and the US.
Smaller lines and feeder lines do fly China-made turboprops – Xi’an Y-7s and MA-60s and Harbin Y-12s.
GoldenDragonF7BG on route to Bangladesh…
Very lovely color scheme .
Very nice camo indeed! The two tone blue on blue is gorgeous. I’ve something similiar on Japanese F-2s.
Nice fine!
GoldenDragonNothing compares emotionally to the Mig that made MiG synonymous with fighter jets.
The MiG-15.
GoldenDragonI mean… those planes are pretty useless as of now, so they need looks as a redeeming quality
Everything is useless when facing the USAF so why bother discussing ANY aircraft except US ones? :rolleyes:
Here’s a few excepts from AFM’s Alan Warnes article on the PAF and the F-7PG. The following is about testflights of the F-7MG (PG’s parent) by PAF pilots:
F-7MG Flight Trials by Pakistan Air Force
Gp Capt Kaiser Tufail and Wg Cdr Jamshed Khan (both now Air Cdres) were detailed to test fly the F-7MG (later known as F-7PG in PAF service) in July 1997. A total of 12 sorties were planned in which the complete flight regime was to be explored, with particular focus on the improvements in performance of the already in-service F-7P.
…
Testing the Wings
On the first take-off, it was evident that the aircraft was impatient to get off the ground and had to be held down to prevent it getting airborne prematurely. Compared to the F-7P’s take-off speed of 310 kph, the MG lifted off at 280 kph with ease and the advertised 35% improvement in take-off distance was on the mark. The sight of the auto-manoeuvring flaps at work reminded the pilots of the F-16’s computer-controlled leading edge devices. Packaging the servo motors and actuators within the thin leading edge without the tell-tale bulges has certainly been a marvel of engineering at Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC).
The feel of the aircraft was smooth in all domains, none more so than in transonic flight. As expected, CP shift was minimal and both the test pilots were unanimous about the decrease in stick forces. Transonic being an important combat flight regime, this is a welcome improvement.
A good measure of a wing’s lifting efficiency is at high alpha, a regime that the PAF pilots have learnt to perform in almost as an art form. What better than to pace the MG through a slow speed loop? Normally, a safe entry speed for a loop would be between 800-900 kph (at 15,000 AMSL) on the F-7P. In the absence of any guidelines on a slower version of the manoeuvre, it was decided to try 700 kph at first. The MG went through smoothly without any hint of judder or slip at the top. With full faith in the leading edge flaps, the next loop was performed at 600 kph. Again, the same results were achieved and the aircraft went through a perfect loop without any jitter or judder. At lower altitudes it might do even slower and better, but airspace limitations at Chengdu did not permit low level aerobatics.
Several flights followed the first check of the aircraft’s aerodynamic efficiency. It was a most pleasant surprise to note that the turn rates were nearer to the F-16 at medium to high altitudes and, were exactly as advertised. A 33% improvement over the F-7P at 5,000’ AMSL, 50% at 10,000’ and 66% at 20,000 would certainly call for an end to the “supersonic sports plane” sobriquet that dogged its forerunners.
The results of the flight trials were so encouraging that the test pilots were tempted to simulate a flamed-out engine landing pattern, a not very ‘done’ thing on delta-winged fighters.
…
With engine idling and speed brakes out to simulate a dead engine, the aircraft glided much like the F-16, so after a few approaches, the high key height was lowered to 12,000’ AGL. The sink rate was well under control and, in fact was so well manageable that all later sorties were terminated through practice dead-engine approaches.
…
Coupled with excellent turning capability and acceleration, the combat potential is enhanced tremendously. The Grifo-7/AIM-9L combination on board PAF’s F-7PG brings the aircraft much closer to the F-16 in close combat capabilities and the PAF must be credited with extracting the maximum from an innovatively redesigned low-cost fighter.
GoldenDragonso basically, China was unwilling to offer a full transfer of the J-10’s technology?
It would be like the US giving full transfer of technology of the F-22 to England. It won’t even give full ToT of the F-35 to the UK.
The J-10 might not be anywhere near the F-22 but to China, it probably occupies the same strategic place among Chinese officials.
Besides, the cost structure of the J-10 might not work for Pakistan. The JF-17 is designed to be mass produced in Pakistan to the tune of at least 150. But probably more in future variants as the JF-17 will form the basis of the Pakistani ac manufacturing industry.
150 J-10s might not be economically possible. Therefore the PAF has repeatedly said it was looking at buying limited numbers of J-10 (or upgraded F-16s) to supplement the JF-17s.
GoldenDragonthe US never really viewed Africa as a market. S.America isn’t exactly poor either, they’ve been able to afford new F-16s, Mirage 2000s, MiG-29s, etc.
As for competition from JF-17s.. we shall see.. There will be, and continue to be large stocks of used F-16s, which will grow as countries begin replacing them. They are cheap and are your “modern F-5”.
Exactly. The F-16 IS the US modern day F-5. In fact, it was DESIGNED as the cheap gunfighter to go with the F-15. Of course, the base design was superb and over time it came to occupy every role possible and it’s price rose in conjunction with mission.
There are several THOUSAND of used F-16s from US and overseas stocks. Why bother with F-5’s? If you could get the F-5 then you are politically eligible for the F-16. Again, the only reason that not every nation is equipped with the Falcon is politics.
GoldenDragonEven old F-5’s come with US restrictions. And ALL F-5’s are old since the last F-5 was built in the 1980s. In Switzerland.
Besides that, it doesn’t have anything on the J-7E/PG/Gs. A much slower top speed (Mach 1.7 vs Mach 2.2) and far less maneuverable than the double-delta J-7 variants.
The PAF reported that the PG is as maneuverable as their F-16As (reported in an AFM article as well.) Slow speed handling and angle of attack before stall is unlike any other MiG-21 and it is actually able to land on an unpowered glide. The PG no longer has the same flight characteristics of MiG-21 except for the top speed. It feels and performs far closer to a F-16.
The J-7 is still selling briskly (Bangladesh, Nigeria) and will sell until the FC-1 comes out.
GoldenDragonhere’s a noobish question.
Why the JF-17? Why didn’t either Pakistan sought after or China offer the J-10 instead? money from the R&D from the JF-17 could’ve went into the more important J-10, and Pakistan would’ve had a more capable fighter.
The J-10 is more important for China but the JF-17 is more important for Pakistan.
The JF-17 was designed to be built in Pakistan will full transfer of technology. This was one of the reasons why the airframe was metal alloy and not composite. It had to fit in with the Pakistani cost structure and current industrial base.
Even before the fourth prototype has flown, Pakistan has already awarded contracts for the production line.
GoldenDragonDon’t think so. PSed from what? You need an original to PS.
GoldenDragonA look at the L-15 from beneath and behind.
Sign In
