JF-17 PFX program

[Pioneer]

Respectfully, I think the focus should be on acquiring the engine (WS-10, 15 or 19) rather than ToT/Tech sharing. Franky, Pakistan isn't ready for that.

This is correct.

 

[Michael]

Could it be a dual-seater KAAN Jet? Although it will take some good time.
what about a modified L15?
Also, what if we go for the Sea Sultan type route or use AWACS type system for this purpose?

A manned fighter aircraft platform used to command UCAVs/CCAs needs to possess sufficiently powerful detection and tracking capabilities itself. That is, it needs sufficient situational awareness on the battlefield.
The L-15 clearly lacks this capability. The J-10S also struggles to meet this requirement. Of course, the JF-17B also lacks this potential.
1. It needs to possess sufficiently powerful AESA radar detection capabilities.
2. It needs the engine to provide sufficient power generation capacity.
Of course, if we are willing to lower these tactical requirements, these platforms could勉强 perform some tasks, but it's not worth doing so.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

A manned fighter aircraft platform used to command UCAVs/CCAs needs to possess sufficiently powerful detection and tracking capabilities itself. That is, it needs sufficient situational awareness on the battlefield.
The L-15 clearly lacks this capability. The J-10S also struggles to meet this requirement. Of course, the JF-17B also lacks this potential.
1. It needs to possess sufficiently powerful AESA radar detection capabilities.
2. It needs the engine to provide sufficient power generation capacity.
Of course, if we are willing to lower these tactical requirements, these platforms could勉强 perform some tasks, but it's not worth doing so.

what about a new special purpose plane for this role, like, take a plane like an Embraer Lineage 1000E business jet or some other better-suited jet/plane and modify it to do the job.

 

[Michael]

what about a new special purpose plane for this role, like, take a plane like an Embraer Lineage 1000E business jet or some other better-suited jet/plane and modify it to do the job.

Based on existing technology:

Combat-type UAVs like UCAV/CCA possess excellent operational capabilities in terms of flight speed, altitude, and maneuverability. Although our AI technology is developing rapidly, the final decision to fire these UAVs must still be controlled by humans. This is related to human morality and ethics, as well as the accuracy of AI. AI can only provide assistance and cannot directly issue commands.

Our current long-distance communication technology, including factors such as anti-interference capabilities and communication delay, cannot meet the requirements of UCAV/CCA. Therefore, we need a close-range manned command platform to make the final decisions.

Ground control stations, large naval platforms, and AEW&C aircraft cannot closely follow UCAV/CCA. These platforms can only command other UAVs with lower latency requirements. Of course, it is possible to use these platforms to command UCAV/CCA, but the effect would be far less effective than using a platform like the J-20S.

One computer.
1. We can directly control the computer using a wireless mouse and keyboard.
2. We can also control this computer remotely from another computer using the remote desktop function via a Wi-Fi network.
3. You can even remotely control this computer to play games from thousands of kilometers away.
The differences in actual usage are similar to the situations described above.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

haha. Calm down. Avoid extreme emotions. For your health.

You're just a keyboard warrior/armchair general and nothing else, you're newbie in this forum but you acted like expert who knows better than our all respected senior and professional members here

Sorry dude your mental disability has no cure lol

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

A complete fighter jet consists of the airframe platform, subsystems, and supporting environment.
The collaboration between PAC and CAC was actually focused on the JF-17's airframe platform and integration capabilities.

We generally believe that the JF-17 Block III has already pushed the JF-17 airframe platform to its limits. There is very little room for further upgrades.

Therefore, continuing to discuss the future of the JF-17 doesn't have much meaning.

Pakistan could renegotiate with AVIC to jointly develop a new airframe platform. Or, it could introduce a Chinese airframe platform for secondary development. This platform should at least have the potential to support continuous development for about 30 years. Of course, Pakistan can choose other partners instead of AVIC; this is entirely up to Pakistan.

Pakistan should abandon further development of the existing JF-17 airframe platform and focus on a new generation fighter platform. Whether it retains the "JF-17" name is not important.

Does China have a future plan for light-weight fighter program or is JH-7 going to be the last one in this weight category?

 

[maxpane]

so pfx is aplatform thst can use eastern westren weapons without any trouble. so enemy dnt get any idea what could hit them next time and paf have more options

 

[Michael]

Does China have a future plan for light-weight fighter program or is JH-7 going to be the last one in this weight category?

A manned light fighter jet?
We don't have such a project, and we won't have one. The PLAAF even dislikes the J-10C, a medium-sized fighter jet, so it's even less likely to develop a light fighter jet project.

However, there are many unmanned light fighter jet projects. You can pay attention to China's UCAV/CCA projects. Most of them are in the light fighter jet category (due to the lack of a cockpit, their actual weapon carrying capacity is equivalent to a medium-sized fighter jet), and a small number are in the medium-sized fighter jet category.

BTW.
Are you calling the JH-7 a light fighter jet?
The full name of the JH-7 is fighter-bomber. It is much larger than the J-10 fighter jet.

=========================================================
The general rule for classifying fighter jets into light, medium, and heavy categories is based on their maximum takeoff weight.

Lightweight fighter jet
Maximum takeoff weight: 15-20 tons.
Engine: Single medium-thrust engine or two small-thrust engines.

Medium-weight fighter jet
Maximum takeoff weight: 20-30 tons.
Engine: Single high-thrust engine or two medium-thrust engines.

Heavy fighter jet
Maximum takeoff weight: Over 30 tons.
Engine: Two high-thrust engines.
=========================================================
The JH-7 has a maximum takeoff weight of 28.5 tons...... which is close to the level of a heavy fighter jet...... Among the PLA's active fighter aircraft (excluding drones and trainer aircraft), the J-10C is the smallest fighter jet.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

Based on existing technology:

Combat-type UAVs like UCAV/CCA possess excellent operational capabilities in terms of flight speed, altitude, and maneuverability. Although our AI technology is developing rapidly, the final decision to fire these UAVs must still be controlled by humans. This is related to human morality and ethics, as well as the accuracy of AI. AI can only provide assistance and cannot directly issue commands.

Our current long-distance communication technology, including factors such as anti-interference capabilities and communication delay, cannot meet the requirements of UCAV/CCA. Therefore, we need a close-range manned command platform to make the final decisions.

Ground control stations, large naval platforms, and AEW&C aircraft cannot closely follow UCAV/CCA. These platforms can only command other UAVs with lower latency requirements. Of course, it is possible to use these platforms to command UCAV/CCA, but the effect would be far less effective than using a platform like the J-20S.

One computer.
1. We can directly control the computer using a wireless mouse and keyboard.
2. We can also control this computer remotely from another computer using the remote desktop function via a Wi-Fi network.
3. You can even remotely control this computer to play games from thousands of kilometers away.
The differences in actual usage are similar to the situations described above.

I appreciate your response dear. However, I would be grateful if you could provide more detailed elaboration to specifically answer my question.

what about a new special purpose plane for this role, like, take a plane like an Embraer Lineage 1000E business jet or some other better-suited jet/plane and modify it to do the job.

 

[Night Memory]

You're just a keyboard warrior/armchair general and nothing else, you're newbie in this forum but you acted like expert who knows better than our all respected senior and professional members here

Sorry dude your mental disability has no cure lol

Why are you wasting your time feeding the troll? Just avoid and completely ignore them. You are acting like sensitive thin skinned indians.

 

[puttputt]

ignoring the above speculation,

i think its becoming increasingly clear the PAF is going to need a proper twin seater if it wishes to get behind the loyal wingman trend.

The J-10 cant do the job, pilot workload would be significant

The JF-17 i fear may just not be able to have space for all the additional kit required, plus, youd probably be looking at a cockpit redesign, plus with little fuel capacity and whatnot, its not an ideal solution

Unless the Chinese come up with a twin seat J-35, which i guess isnt unlikely but isnt the most optimal solution (maintenance intensive, high cost, high cpfh, more sensitive etc)

i do feel like if the PAF had an option, it would want some sino flankers... I wonder if theres ANY way in the world the PAF can get their hands on them...

the Russian MiG 35 offer to Pakistan was effectively like, heres an airframe, customise it as you wish.

With Russia tied up in Ukraine, i do wonder, if there was a genuine solid push from Pak, could Russia grant China licenses to export something to Pakistan...

Because even now, i wonder whether the PAF would buy new F-16's, or would the PAF make a push for F-15s or 18's instead if the US option was on the table.

Typhoons i guess are the PAF's only real option, but the issue is of the restrictions that would come with, particularly when it comes to a strike focused, LwM config, not many countries would want to get behind that as theres a real risk of nuclear wpn carriage.

I just think, the PAF, if serious about the next gen, may need to switch over its procurement priorities and start looking for something heavier and better suited for being a node in a larger combat system, or rather, something capable of handling command and control. The issue with a JF-17XL is China is much more interested in the bigger fish, will they want to dedicate resources to a project that isnt going to be massively commercially viable? On top of that, will the PAF even be able to afford it? etc etc. I do wonder what the PAF is thinking on this front, it needs something on this front

@puttputt @Oscar

AFAIK - the sino-russian agreement on the flanker is tied to their general relationship. But would it work now?
Technically, China is stuck with the global mood against Russia but also has an opportunity to become a sino-flanker supply for Russia - my assumption is Russia cannot churn out enough Su-35s or 57s and needs to augment its numbers.

But if there may be experts on this relationship it would be @Deino or @Michael

I reckon there'll be a twin-seat J-35 for this role. It'd just be strange for AVIC to market CCA capability without such a platform.

That said, the missing piece in the PAF's offensive capability is the J-11/16-class fighter. While it can manage with the J-10CEs, the J-11/16 would offer the optimal range and payload capacity to carry the necessary munitions.

IMO, it's unclear what's holding the Chinese back from re-exporting the Flanker. It's not a technical or industrial issue. It could be that they don't want to put their secure energy supplies at risk. Or, it could be that they're just not interested (e.g., to reinforce their original designs or avoid the perception that they just sell ex-Russian designs).

 

[FuturePAF]

Currently, we primarily know of two types:

1. UCAV/CCA. This type of UAV is mainly commanded and controlled in collaborative combat operations by the J-20S. According to official reports, the J-35A also possesses some command capabilities in this regard.

2. Medium and large UAVs. China has many medium and large UAVs that are active in the Western Pacific region. These UAVs are primarily used for reconnaissance and patrol, with long flight ranges, high altitudes, and extended endurance. Some UAVs can carry self-defense and offensive weapons, possessing independent combat capabilities. They are mainly commanded by ground control stations, large surface warships, and AEW&C platforms. Their data can be synchronized with fighter jets, but they do not directly receive commands from fighter jets (requiring other platforms to relay instructions).

There are currently no credible reports on the capabilities of Chinese Flanker-series fighter jets in this area. The PLAAF has released news regarding the coordinated operation of large and medium-sized UAVs with Chinese Flanker-series fighter jets, but these UAVs are not directly commanded by the Flanker-series fighter jets.

Therefore, for the UAV-related activities you mentioned, the PAF's various AEW&C aircraft and ground control stations can effectively accomplish the relevant tasks.

Bro. Your ideas have gone beyond reality. Please return to reason.

I know it sounds fantastical, but so did the JF-17 when there was the J-10 already in development and on offer to the PAF. But we have to observe there is a PFX project, and if the Saudis green light funding, and want it to be a single engine midsized manned platform, and don’t want to purchase the J-35A, then what I am describing seems the optimal way to get it done, and get it done quickly, within 5 years, to a first flight. Probably, 10 years to mass production. I hope you can follow my reasoning.

P.s. I suspect, if the Saudis don’t sign on the PFX design will continue on to use the RD-93 or transition to WS-13. In this era, I suspect a WS-10 would have better sales prospects, and not cut into the sales prospect of the J-35A.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Why are you wasting your time feeding the troll? Just avoid and completely ignore them. You are acting like sensitive thin skinned indians.

was I talking to you? and why you're poking your nose in others matters?

 

[Night Memory]

was I talking to you? and why you're poking your nose in others matters?

go on man, sorry.

 

[Michael]

I appreciate your response dear. However, I would be grateful if you could provide more detailed elaboration to specifically answer my question.

I thought I had explained it clearly...
All right. I'll try a different way of explaining it.

Almost all modern UCAV/CCA (including those in presentations and those already in existence) employ stealth design. Their size and performance specifications are roughly equivalent to light/medium 5th-generation fighter jets.

I've already explained this. Due to limitations in modern communication technology and command and control methods, these UCAVs/CCAs require close-range control. This requires the command aircraft to have performance characteristics similar to those of the UCAVs/CCAs. At the very least, the command aircraft's flight speed, altitude, range, and endurance cannot differ too significantly from those of the UCAVs/CCAs.

Platforms like the "Embraer Lineage 1000E business jet" clearly cannot meet this requirement. Even if we were to extensively modify the JF-17B platform for this task, its performance would still be far superior.

Simply put, the command platform for UCAV/CCA operations needs to be based on a fighter jet platform. The capabilities of the command aircraft platform will affect the overall combat effectiveness of the MUM-T formation. This is also why the PLAAF uses the J-20S as its command platform. Single-seat 5th-generation fighter jets have some capabilities in this regard, but they cannot be compared to the combat effectiveness of dedicated two-seat command aircraft. (The F-35/J-35A also has some capabilities in this area).

Non-stealthy, heavy, two-seat 4.5th-generation fighter jets (such as the Chinese Flanker series fighters) could theoretically also be used for this purpose. However, due to their non-stealthy design, the command aircraft itself would be the first to be detected by the enemy and become a target for attack. But it could be feasible if used against enemies with weak air detection capabilities.
Light and medium-weight two-seat 4.5th-generation fighter jets (such as the JF-17B and J-10S), if used for this purpose, would have their operational range severely limited by the power generation capacity of their engines. This is not a reasonable option.

Many scientific and technical papers mention that modern advanced fighter jets are increasingly emphasizing their power generation capabilities, with a growing proportion of the engine's energy being allocated to power generation.

I know it sounds fantastical, but so did the JF-17 when there was the J-10 already in development and on offer to the PAF. But we have to observe there is a PFX project, and if the Saudis green light funding, and want it to be a single engine midsized manned platform, and don’t want to purchase the J-35A, then what I am describing seems the optimal way to get it done, and get it done quickly, within 5 years, to a first flight. Probably, 10 years to mass production. I hope you can follow my reasoning.

P.s. I suspect, if the Saudis don’t sign on the PFX design will continue on to use the RD-93 or transition to WS-13. In this era, I suspect a WS-10 would have better sales prospects, and not cut into the sales prospect of the J-35A.

For the fighter jet industry, funding is not the only problem. Sufficient funds allow you to buy fighter jets, but when you want to manufacture them yourself, another issue arises: "industry."

Theoretically, it wouldn't be difficult for Saudi Arabia to provide the funding and Pakistan to obtain a complete fighter jet design based on a mature 5th-generation fighter jet platform from China, with deep customization. Alternatively, there wouldn't be much of a problem if China were to design a 5th-generation fighter jet specifically for Pakistan. Of course, Pakistan can be renamed to whatever name you like.

But, independently manufacturing these fighter jets is a completely different matter.

The fighter jet industry is also an industry. It must follow the most basic logic of industrial development.
The JF-17 project is a China-Pakistani cooperation project. Pakistan possesses all the technology for manufacturing the aircraft's airframe, but has not yet achieved 100% localization of its airframe manufacturing. I haven't even started talking about the more challenging manufacturing work involved in fighter jet subsystems.

Industrial development must follow its fundamental logic, diligently completing each basic task step by step.