JF-17 PFX program

[FuturePAF]

Whats the point if they are only going to manufacture 50 more aircraft maybe?

Perhaps the airframe life issue will be addressed, and systems from exhausted airframes will be ported over to new airframes. A new airframe built around the WS-19 engine with 110-120 kn.

A design like the McDonnell Douglas/Northrop/BAE JSF design seems optimal, but instead of a TVC nozzle, it should have a YF-23 style exhaust for very low IR signature.

Having personally seen a model of this design on the wall of the museum of western flight in Torrance, california as well as the YF-23 there and the X-35 and X-32 at a museum on the east coast, now would be a good time to consider how more economical it can be to make these designs as a replacement of the JF-17. What was once considered cutting edge is becoming more standard equipment just to keep up with evolving threats.

 

[kaku]

The MRO facility was established in 2017. That’s a 10 years usage before overhaul. How is that not cost effective? 3000 hours over 10 years means approx 49 mins everyday. In other words, a single aircraft can fly a 4 hour mission every 5 days.

He is talking about TTSL i.e. total technical service life, not TBO (time before overhaul).

You certify airframe life in stress test facility, Not for TBO. TBO is mostly at 1000-2000 hours. Because you need to do overhaul hot-section of engine, for western engines that is 1500-2000 hours, for Russian that is around 500-1000 hours.
Here

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Also in TBO you dont do SLEP, that is totally different, but also for doing SLEP you need data from stress test facility.

 

[CSAW]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[kaku]

Do not confuse airframe lifetime with engine lifetime. PAF has ordered excess engines so the option of simply replacing the engine and minimising the downtime exists. My point is that PAF flies the Thunder with great efficiency, Alhamdu Lillah, and it is more cost effective than any other modern aircraft.

I have not, read my reply again.

 

[Quwa]

@Quwa is trying to portray it as upgrade program of BLOCK I and II and I seriously doubt that. Because like I said keep that picture in mind which was posted. That slide. It has Turkish, Saudi and Irani flags. It's a new jet by all means.

To be fair, I said it can lead to more, but only if the PAF opts to manufacture all of the JF-17 at PAC. IMO, AVIC doesn't have much of an incentive to keep its production line going when it has (1) a far better product available for sale in the J-10CE and (2) wants to ramp up the J-31.

The JF-17 serves a niche need and it isn't denting the market (aside from the PAF, and even the PAF put Block-3 orders to the backburner for J-10CEs). Perhaps AVIC wouldn't mind selling its share of the program to the PAF. This could open up the opportunity to extend the structural lives of older airframes, or develop a significant upgrade, similar to Tejas Mk2.

 

[Deino]

@Quwa is trying to portray it as upgrade program of BLOCK I and II and I seriously doubt that. Because like I said keep that picture in mind which was posted. That slide. It has Turkish, Saudi and Irani flags. It's a new jet by all means.

Come on, on the one side you make wild assumptions based on small blurry images, over-interpret things that are barely visible and spin theories without proof and then - after being asked by far more credible and knowledgeable members like him - you refuse an argument. "Best" reason given so far are totally false timelines, numbers of prototypes (as in the J-31 discussion) and the statement "the Pakistani air Chief said so" even if he never mentioned specific details nor a date and most of all you portray reasonable estimations from specialists equal in a chance of being real like your fantasies, by belittling him as if he is "trying to portray" something! What @Quwa does is analysing a situation based on little or almost zero information and to describe the most realistic outcome. You in contrast however, try to "to portray" something that has little chance of being real; simply you are dreaming wet-dreams.

It is indeed as if a 13 year old kid at school tries to tell me how atoms are build since he has a different opinion to the commonly accepted view but demands, his opinion should be treated equally valid or how people in ancient times interpreted wild creatures and great heroes from a few fixed stars in the sky to form constellations.

 

[Quwa]

Come on, on the one side you make wild assumptions based on small blurry images, over-interpret things that are barely visible and spin theories without proof and then - after being asked by far more credible and knowledgeable members like him - you refuse an argument. "Best" reason given so far are totally false timelines, numbers of prototypes (as in the J-31 discussion) and the statement "the Pakistani air Chief said so" even if he never mentioned specific details nor a date and most of all you portray reasonable estimations from specialists equal in a chance of being real like your fantasies, by belittling him as if he is "trying to portray" something! What @Quwa does is analysing a situation based on little or almost zero information and to describe the most realistic outcome. You in contrast however, try to "to portray" something that has little chance of being real; simply you are dreaming wet-dreams.

It is indeed as if a 13 year old kid at school tries to tell me how atoms are build since he has a different opinion to the commonly accepted view but demands, his opinion should be treated equally valid or how people in ancient times interpreted wild creatures and great heroes from a few fixed stars in the sky to form constellations.

You know, to be honest, there could be a disturbing possibility in all these PAF announcements: copium for the internal audience. It's no secret that the armed forces, especially the Army but also the PAF to an extent, are under public pressure over authoritarian and corruption charges.

In all the years I could recall, this is the highest public animosity against the military leadership has gotten, ever. I mean, you can even see a sense of insecurity in the PAF's PR videos where in a span of a few minutes, they'll say, "visionary PAF leadership," "exemplary PAF leadership," etc.

Things could change once the current CAS retires. @JamD @Oscar

 

[warbird]

He is talking about TTSL i.e. total technical service life, not TBO (time before overhaul).

You certify airframe life in stress test facility, Not for TBO. TBO is mostly at 1000-2000 hours. Because you need to do overhaul hot-section of engine, for western engines that is 1500-2000 hours, for Russian that is around 500-1000 hours.
Here

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Also in TBO you dont do SLEP, that is totally different, but also for doing SLEP you need data from stress test facility.

there are many variables to ttsl. You cannot give a blank range.

 

[Bilal]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

@farooqbhai any info on Skydome/JN 614 anti-swarm systems? Probably Chinese.

If I were to guess it’s the HPM system shown in the PAF video.

 

[farooqbhai]

@farooqbhai any info on Skydome/JN 614 anti-swarm systems? Probably Chinese.

JN-XXX is CETC's line of EW systems. Cant find any info on the JN-614 but we do operate the JN-1101H, JN-1101V and JN-1199 EW systems.

 

[Bilal]

JN-XXX is CETC's line of EW systems. Cant find any info on the JN-614 but we do operate the JN-1101H, JN-1101V and JN-1199 EW systems.

So jamming not HPM.

 

[farooqbhai]

So jamming not HPM.

Found this:
"In September 2021, the 28th Research Institute of China Electronics Technology Group (CETC) revealed its new Sky Dome Integrated C-UAS suite aimed at military force protection applications.
According to chief engineer Sun Yishen, the Sky Dome adopts a flexible and multi-layered architecture that enables the customer to integrate a wide variety of radar detectors, soft- and hard-kill effectors, as well as optoelectronic and command-and-control systems."

 

[AsaRad1]

Meanwhile PAC is boasting a new CAD/CAM facility:

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra - cad-cam-facility

pac.org.pk

I do not recall this on their website. Those who think PFX is merely an upgrade can go checkout the JF-17 MRO page on their website. They go into quite some detail on what MRO is being performed. And it is not the upgrade to Block 3.

In terms of capabilities, this CAD/CAM facility is step 0.1. I need to see an actual wind tunnel or a contract for access to a wind tunnel before I feel PAF is serious about indigenous design.

There is one more angle to it. We previously heard that India has captured an autoclave bound for Pakistan. Sometime after that we got official confirmation that GIDS is commercial manufacturing UAVs. Strangely enough, now we hear the Indians captured a CNC lathe machine. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is somehow related to PAF. It sounds absurd, but it seems like someone in China is telling India: “Take a good look, Pakistan now has this capability”.

I don't think there's any genuine effort from PAF to build an organic ground up defence industry.

They just occasionally buy equipment from China and set up small facilities to do a limited amount of work that is just instructions from China.

There's no proper ecosystem from proper educational institutions like NUSTs, to high-tech R&D complexes with all the machinery and yearly funding.

Just small facilities, get equipment from abroad and small batch of trainees from China.

 

[Bilal]

Found this:
"In September 2021, the 28th Research Institute of China Electronics Technology Group (CETC) revealed its new Sky Dome Integrated C-UAS suite aimed at military force protection applications.
According to chief engineer Sun Yishen, the Sky Dome adopts a flexible and multi-layered architecture that enables the customer to integrate a wide variety of radar detectors, soft- and hard-kill effectors, as well as optoelectronic and command-and-control systems."

This sounds so much like the C-UAS system from GIDS road to the future.

Counter UAV System (Cognitive SDR based Technology)

ESM and C2 (Omni RF chain)
Reconnaissance / interception in both passive and active mode
Direction Finding of single / multiple drones at extended ranges
RF & GNSS Jamming and Spoofing
Detection Range: >75km (Extendable)
RF Jamming Range: >50km (Extendable)
RADAR AND EO/IR System is also incorporated
Hard kill systems integration possible

 

[farooqbhai]

This sounds so much like the C-UAS system from GIDS road to the future.

Counter UAV System (Cognitive SDR based Technology)

ESM and C2 (Omni RF chain)
Reconnaissance / interception in both passive and active mode
Direction Finding of single / multiple drones at extended ranges
RF & GNSS Jamming and Spoofing
Detection Range: >75km (Extendable)
RF Jamming Range: >50km (Extendable)
RADAR AND EO/IR System is also incorporated
Hard kill systems integration possible

From what i have been able to find SkyDome is a integrated C-UAS Software by CETC rather than a system itself. But not sure about JN-614 that could be a Vehicle that uses the Sky dome software.