JF-17 with SD-10

I think that’s SD-10 on J-10 too. Wonder what’s going on. One thing I know (from Farnborough 2010) is that SD-10 integration work on JF-17 was already in progress back then.

Whoever this RMS Azam chap is, he obviously failed to perform any background research or to verify the claims of the PAF pilot, if indeed he did actually interview one. Since the PAF and RAF have never been at AE at the same time, under what other conditions is his claim ‘worth believing’?

If memory serves, this interview first appeared around June 2010. Its contents were questioned back then, and to my knowledge they have not been authenticated since. What gives substance to F-16 vs Typhoon story and distinguishes it from a million other such rumours that we come across on these forums, however, is the fact that it found space in a reputable magazine such a AFM. Considering the close relations Alan Warnes enjoys with PAF and the reputation he has amongst military aviation fans, I can only assume that he must have checked or at least tried to check the facts with PAF before putting something like this in his article. The use of words ‘allegedly’ indicates to me that PAF or the other AF in question neither confirmed it nor denied it outrightly, which leaves us in this position, where everyone is free to believe what they want to believe.

Why do you say F 16 vs JF 17 is a nonsensical debate ?

I for one believe in the near-medium future with more updates it could easily reach F 16 Block 50+ capabilities, or more (if they go for an AESA for example).

It could happen. But it has not happened yet. That was the point.

I, for one, do not consider PAF to be stupid enough to pay 80 million or so for a highly sanctionable F-16 unit, if an almost sanction proof JF-17 (20-25 million per unit) could give them ALL THAT they desire from their F-16s TODAY. Makes no sense whatsoever to me.

Having said that, JF-17 is surely a potent machine with a great potential in future. It would surely see many upgrades over its life time, and one day would even surpass F-16 Blk 50+ in many areas. But if one wants all that hi tech stuff in JF-17 today, then it kills the whole aim of the entire project, which was and is, to develop a lightweight fighter that PAF can afford in required numbers.

If the J-10B and J-20 technologies trickle down to JF-17 Block II, etc. then surely this can become quite a productive debate. For example, a higher thrust Chinese engine, AESA Radar, better Avionics, smaller RCS, etc.

And we will surely see this trickle down effect over the years. 🙂

A few Tejas-related questions, which arose as a result of the discussion in the previous thread.

1. What is the current empty weight of Tejas? Soon after AI 2011, I saw the figure of 6,900+ Kg floating around some forums (people appeared to have got it from officials at AI 2011?). More recently, I have seen a figure of 5,560 Kg. So what is it??? Also what are the present official figures for NTOW and MTOW?

2. Much was said in the previous thread about Tejas design having inherent RCS reduction measures. Does anyone have any old information/articles talking about it, i.e. who first talked of such a thing? While I agree that it does have some possible RCS reduction measures, what Im trying to figure out is whether they were there from the outset or added to the programme as an afterthought?

3. Much was said about Tejas being certified for +6g, software limitations and what not, and yet doing +6.9g, during AI 2011. What’s the story behind that, i.e. what happened?

Thanks in advance!!!

i.e. Its not april fools yet.;-)
Keep doin d good job.:-)

Considering the potential consequences of such a strike, IMO the benefits must outweigh the risk, i.e. At the minimum Iran’s nuke ambitions must be delayed by years. Now before one can decide what a strike package should constitute, one must have a general idea of how many facilities have to be hit to achieve the above objective & poss their associated defences.

ANYONE?

Sure Indian threat perception are different to those in the west etc. But what would AMCA bring to IAF/Indian aviation that a strike oriented derivative of FGFA with concurrent development of UCAV cannot?

^Boom, OT. See my reply in IAF thread.