JF-17 - Updates, News & Discussion

[FuturePAF]

If the JF-17 is going to field a Turkish ramjet powered missile how was the seeker integrated into the radar? Also, is the radar capable of using the missile out to its max range (against low RCS targets) or is the tactic to employ the missile in its no-escape zone? Perhaps the missile will have a IR secondary seeker and the JF-17 will employ an IRST pod to maximize long range shots.

Obscure 23-Year Old Navy SAM Was So Ahead Of Its Time That It's Still In High Demand Today

The SM-2 Block IIIB's dual-mode guidance system is still unique among the missiles the Navy's fleet uses to defend against aerial threats.

www.twz.com

 

[Oscar]

If the JF-17 is going to field a Turkish ramjet powered missile how was the seeker integrated into the radar? Also, is the radar capable of using the missile out to its max range (against low RCS targets) or is the tactic to employ the missile in its no-escape zone? Perhaps the missile will have a IR secondary seeker and the JF-17 will employ an IRST pod to maximize long range shots.

Obscure 23-Year Old Navy SAM Was So Ahead Of Its Time That It's Still In High Demand Today

The SM-2 Block IIIB's dual-mode guidance system is still unique among the missiles the Navy's fleet uses to defend against aerial threats.

www.twz.com

That all depends on the assumption on the range of the AESA on the JF-17.

We don’t know its exact range even though there is plenty of estimates. After all, if that system is providing range for the PL-15 then perhaps it is capable of providing at range shots for whatever weapon this is.

Although considering the number of projects(Faaz and this) means it’s likely not even meant for the JF-17 but whatever PFX will be and Kaan

 

[Fatman17]

JF-17: KLJ-7 Radar Overview https://flyandwire.com/2024/09/29/jf-17-klj-7-radar-overview/

 

[FuturePAF]

That all depends on the assumption on the range of the AESA on the JF-17.

We don’t know its exact range even though there is plenty of estimates. After all, if that system is providing range for the PL-15 then perhaps it is capable of providing at range shots for whatever weapon this is.

Although considering the number of projects(Faaz and this) means it’s likely not even meant for the JF-17 but whatever PFX will be and Kaan

We need not wait till the PFX or the KAAN, much can be done on JF-17 Block 3 or JF-17s upgraded to the Block 3 standard.

Let’s assume for a 5m^2 target it’s 170 km as per the following tweet with the official manufacturer’s poster. Per the video in my past post, the Turkish ramjet missile has a range of greater than 200 km. If we figure that modern IRST systems like the pirate have a range (in good weather) out to over 100 km and the no-escape zone of the meteor (a similar classed missile; ducted ramjet bvr missile) depending on flight conditions somewhere out to a similar 100 km, with the dual mode seeker, it should still should be able to be employed by the JF-17.

Against threats like the Rafale (with an RCS of lets say 0.3-0.5 m^2, depending on the angle) the KLJ-7A be able to detect it at only 40-50 km (per the radar RCS formula). This is where the IRST and IR seeker are really important, and be able to launch at the max no-escape limit of 100 km or anywhere below that depending on flight conditions.

Rafale’s IR signature is small, but still noticeable, and with advancements in Chinese and Turkish IRST tech, a modern pod of detecting even the Rafale at 100 km (the approx. max NEZ of the new ramjet missile) should be possible.

Sensor fusion of the radar and IRST data, should allow a more likely weapons track, that could be acted upon.

For example, about the Eurofighter’s Pirate IRST, from more than a decade ago, per its Wikipedia article.
“The range of the sensor is a closely guarded secret by the EuroFirst consortium but confirmed to be more than 74 km. The RAND Corporation reports ranges of 50 nm (93 km) to a subsonic target from the front and up to 90 nm (167 km) from the rear of a subsonic target. However, the weather conditions will affect the performance of the infrared-based target search and target tracking significantly. In 2013, the detection range of PIRATE was said to be further increased by software updates.”

The Indians don’t expect their AMCA to be ready in the next 15 years, so, they will rely on the Rafale as their frontline fighter.

Therefore, creating this capability (KLJ-7A, IRST, new AESA seeker Ramjet missile with IR secondary seeker), now, on the JF-17 Block 3 should help the JF-17 be able to have a reasonable chance against even the most advanced IAF planes. Considering a third to half the PAF fleet is JF-17 fighters, having this on our most numerous fighter should be a priority, IMHO. All it takes is a modern IRST pod on the new KLJ-7A equipped JF-17s and making the most out of this new Turkish ramjet missile, by addition of an IR secondary seeker.

We should also remember that with Turkey knowing it could go up against Greek Rafales, its latest Bilgem EW EHPOD could be a good option for the JF-17, and help even the EW picture vis a vi the Rafales.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1618519256181927938

https://twitter.com/x/status/1248274510161338370

https://twitter.com/x/status/1562702751133741064

 

[Michael]

RCS is not some 3D drawing but essentially signal returns - all the physical parameters of the Jf-17 create a return signal and that combines to create the full RCS. If the signal from the vertical tail or pylons is already high enough compared to the signal return from the probe - the moving it internal may not give any useful gain. That also applies to the J-10.

Aerodynamic performance (maneuverability particularly), RCS reduction (but that would only help on a aircraft with everything else optimized for lower RCS), and for the pilot to have greater visibility; not having their view obstructed at all times in that direction.

Any design work is the art of “balance”, or rather, the art of “compromise”.

In the design of fighter aircraft, stealth, maneuverability, maximum range, bomb capacity and other core indicators, they are mutually restrictive. Enlargement of any one of these indicators will severely limit the others. The choice of these indicators depends on the designer's tactical positioning of the fighter. Of course, it is also very closely related to the progress of technology development.

RCS is an important indicator in the design of modern weapon systems, but we cannot overemphasize the RCS indicator.
The F-117 achieved the RCS to the technical limit at that time, but the negative effect was the maneuverability problem. Later, the Jumwalt destroyer also made the RCS of warships to the limit, but it sacrificed too much, resulting in the actual use of the effect is not ideal.

In modern air combat, air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles are the primary means of combat for fighters (please ignore the gun and electronic warfare for now). The essence of stealth design is to sacrifice “kill capability” for “surprise capability”. Pursuing the RCS metric in a technically balanced state means you have to sacrifice other metrics.

Of course, we will certainly consider RCS metrics when designing weapons systems, and we can improve the RCS metrics of already-established weapons systems through technology iteration. But we need to balance the metrics when designing a weapon system.

Please note: radar detection technology is advancing at a rapid pace.