JF-17 - Updates, News & Discussion

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

The latest iteration of the Sino-Pak joint fighter, the JF-17 Thunder Block III, represents a significant advancement in technology and capability.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

PAC Block III JF-17C Thunder fighter aircraft, attached to the Pakistan Air Force’ ‘Black Panthers’ squadron returns to PAF Base Minhas following an air defence training sortie in the Northern Air Command AOR.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[Hmmmm]

Sadly, given the broader environment in Pakistan, there is a fair chance that the PFX is, simply, vapourware. Between the J-10CE, J-31, and potentially even L-15, I can't actually see a need to add another platform.

While I do believe the Pakistani armed forces can muster cash (via unaccounted assets within and outside of the country), there's a limit to what they can do.

For example, the JF-17 itself was driven by necessity. If the Peace Gate III/IV F-16s came, the PAF would not have signed on with CAC. Rather, it would have built upon the F-16 as its principal mainstay fighter. Once the multirole requirement was set, the next phase in the PAF's plan was, likely, to acquire a strike fighter, like the JH-7A.

Similarly, the PAF now has access to the ideal multirole platform in J-10CE as well as a potential strike system in the J-31. In addition, it has acquired medium-to-long-range and long-range SAMs from China, and will likely acquire more via domestic means. So, that would help complement the quick-reaction element.

Where would the PFX fit? You could say the lightweight multirole segment, sure, but the JF-17 is already there. Perhaps we can argue that the PFX is an upgrade path for the JF-17, and I truly believe that to be the case. However, as long as the J-10CEs and J-31 can be bought, there's no urgent need to upgrade the JF-17s either.

Ultimately, the "X" is the key indicator. It likely means "experimental" and, potentially, the PFX could be a study of a potential upgrade of the JF-17. It may be something on offer to the export market for a while, but beyond that, I doubt it'll survive.

In fact, I suspect there are voices in the PAF (especially those poised to take over after the current CAS) that are looking in another direction. I think there may be a drive now to walk away from crewed fighters and, instead, pivot to UCAVs.

UCAV tech is likely a shorter climb for Pakistan's technical capabilities, especially small designs like 1,000-ton decoys. The PAF has already found a willing partner (Baykar from Turkiye), the economies-of-scale make more sense (especially for disposable designs) and there's overlap with other areas, like ALCM tech.

1000-ton.............small design?

 

[Hmmmm]

View attachment 64803

Are those PL-10s actually mounted on the wing tips or are they PS'd?

 

[WatchtowerWarrior4Ever]

Our Eastern YouTuber friends are consistently highlighting that why there is no picture or video available in which Thunders are represented with PL-15s?
May be Chinese friends want to show PL-15s only for their J-10C as a effective marketing strategy or there are some other reasons better known to both partners ...

 

[silicon0000]

Our Eastern YouTuber friends are consistently highlighting that why there is no picture or video available in which Thunders are represented with PL-15s?
May be Chinese friends want to show PL-15s only for their J-10C as a effective marketing strategy or there are some other reasons better known to both partners ...

One possible reason for this could be the effective use of PL-15 missiles by the J-10C. The JF-17's radar is less powerful than the J-10C's, and while the PL-15 is integrated into the JF-17, it might not be considered the optimal choice. The J-10C, with its more powerful radar, is better suited to fully exploit the PL-15's capabilities, making it a preferred option for that aircraft.

 

[CombatCorner]

Are those PL-10s actually mounted on the wing tips or are they PS'd?

Seems the glass is half full !!!!

 

[Samurai]

JF-17 showcase on War Thunder Official Channel on Youtube. This video was uploaded yesterday.

JF-17 the Fierce Dragon

 

[TopGun786]

One possible reason for this could be the effective use of PL-15 missiles by the J-10C. The JF-17's radar is less powerful than the J-10C's, and while the PL-15 is integrated into the JF-17, it might not be considered the optimal choice. The J-10C, with its more powerful radar, is better suited to fully exploit the PL-15's capabilities, making it a preferred option for that aircraft.

Another important point which most of members usually miss that there is credible news of Pakistan getting a small batch of PL-15s from PLAAF original stock right after 2019 Bakakote strikes.
Remember there were no J-10CEs back then in PAF, nor even JF-17 Block III.
It gives indication that even JF-17 Block II can be integrated with PL-15 (???).
May be work on that has done a long time ago and it's just a tactic by PAF not to reveal it. Just my two cents.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Another important point which most of members usually miss that there is credible news of Pakistan getting a small batch of PL-15s from PLAAF original stock right after 2019 Bakakote strikes.
Remember there were no J-10CEs back then in PAF, nor even JF-17 Block III.
It gives indication that even JF-17 Block II can be integrated with PL-15 (???).
May be work on that has done a long time ago and it's just a tactic by PAF not to reveal it. Just my two cents.

With much less range to engage the enemy because radar range of block 2 is much less than block 3 135 km (KLJ-7V2) and remember brother any airborne radars has a difficulty to detect and track the target at its max range, so forget the engagement at max range

And also remember brother BVRs are not fired at their max range in combat environments because enemy has a chance to evade BVRs especially in tail-chase scenario , BVRs often fire within NEZ (NO ESCAPE ZONE) so enemy has no chance to evade BVR but this also degrade BVR's range fo 40-60 km

If block 2 is capable to carry PLAAF version of PL15 (range = 200 km) with radar range and NEZ in mind for JF-17 Block II, PL15 fired by JF-17 Block II could have the slightly better range of our AMRAAM C-5 (range = 105 km) maybe 110-115 km range is most probable for PL15 fired by JF-17 Block II, hence JF-17 Block II can't capable to fully exploit the potential range of PLAAF version of PL15 because of limited radar range and NEZ considerations

This is my technical guesstimate I could be wrong here, if somebody finds wrong with this my post please correct me, thanks in advance

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[hussain0216]

With much less range to engage the enemy because radar range of block 2 is much less than block 3 135 km (KLJ-7V2) and remember brother any airborne radars has a difficulty to detect and track the target at its max range, so forget the engagement at max range

And also remember brother BVRs are not fired at their max range in combat environments because enemy has a chance to evade BVRs especially in tail-chase scenario , BVRs often fire within NEZ (NO ESCAPE ZONE) so enemy has no chance to evade BVR but this also degrade BVR's range fo 40-60 km

If block 2 is capable to carry PLAAF version of PL15 (range = 200 km) with radar range and NEZ in mind for JF-17 Block II, PL15 fired by JF-17 Block II could have the slightly better range of our AMRAAM C-5 (range = 105 km) maybe 110-115 km range is most probable for PL15 fired by JF-17 Block II, hence JF-17 Block II can't capable to fully exploit the potential range of PLAAF version of PL15 because of limited radar range and NEZ considerations

This is my technical guesstimate I could be wrong here, if somebody finds wrong with this my post please correct me, thanks in advance

Would SAAB AWACS help?

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Upcoming DEFEST EXPO 2024 in Estonia marks JF-17 Thunder Block 3 as world's one of advanced jets on its official poster.

 

[Oscar]

With much less range to engage the enemy because radar range of block 2 is much less than block 3 135 km (KLJ-7V2) and remember brother any airborne radars has a difficulty to detect and track the target at its max range, so forget the engagement at max range

And also remember brother BVRs are not fired at their max range in combat environments because enemy has a chance to evade BVRs especially in tail-chase scenario , BVRs often fire within NEZ (NO ESCAPE ZONE) so enemy has no chance to evade BVR but this also degrade BVR's range fo 40-60 km

If block 2 is capable to carry PLAAF version of PL15 (range = 200 km) with radar range and NEZ in mind for JF-17 Block II, PL15 fired by JF-17 Block II could have the slightly better range of our AMRAAM C-5 (range = 105 km) maybe 110-115 km range is most probable for PL15 fired by JF-17 Block II, hence JF-17 Block II can't capable to fully exploit the potential range of PLAAF version of PL15 because of limited radar range and NEZ considerations

This is my technical guesstimate I could be wrong here, if somebody finds wrong with this my post please correct me, thanks in advance

PL-15s weren’t really brought in to test with baseline Block-2s - interim Block 2.5s that were test flying with AESA.