JF-17 - Updates, News & Discussion

[Corax]

There's no reason why a dual rack can't be carried on the belly either, so potentially 6 BVR.

 

[Ali_Baba]

There's no reason why a dual rack can't be carried on the belly either, so potentially 6 BVR.

That capability was recently demonstrated on a J10CE at a Chinese Airshow recently. I am not sure if PAF operates that rack for its own J10CE's or not ( judging by the paint scheme, what was shown looks like a J10CE that will be for the PAF..).




The problem you start running into with the JF17C is weight(though the JF17C has an extra 5Kn of thrust compared to the Block II's i think).

 

[m52k85]

Speaking of loadouts, the IAF has upgraded quite a bit since 2019. This particular case can approach from the sea as well:

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

 

[Ak01]

Speaking of loadouts, the IAF has upgraded quite a bit since 2019. This particular case can approach from the sea as well:

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

astra mk2 not in prod yet and the mig-29's radar cant deploy it fully anyway

 

[Ak01]

That capability was recently demonstrated on a J10CE at a Chinese Airshow recently. I am not sure if PAF operates that rack for its own J10CE's or not ( judging by the paint scheme, what was shown looks like a J10CE that will be for the PAF..).

View attachment 114987

View attachment 114989
The problem you start running into with the JF17C is weight(though the JF17C has an extra 5Kn of thrust compared to the Block II's i think).

thrust is the same, jf-17s all use rd93 regardless of all the claims of MA

 

[Cesur]

View attachment 114978

I had posted this image some time ago in this post (https://defencepk.com/forums/threads/jf-17-updates-news-discussion.90/post-482095) some time pack of a picture taken at Kamra indicating PL15 integration. At the time, we thought it was optimistic/or incorrect. We can see that image was correct of capability. So, the question is, if the PL15 under the belly is also correct ? ie it can carry 5 PL15s, not just 4 ?

And it was carrying a jammer on the new chin-hardpoint as well. So, with the new reveal which matches the above picture, i think we can assume that there is a PL15 on the belly too.

View attachment 114982

(from https://defencepk.com/forums/threads/jf-17-updates-news-discussion.90/post-482979 )

Maybe the Indians realised this image is true and that is what scared away the Indian Navy back to port ?

Maybe but I have a feeling Pakistan tested some sort of hypersonic missile in the Arabian Sea and that probably scared the Indian Navy

 

[Quwa]

thrust is the same, jf-17s all use rd93 regardless of all the claims of MA

Alan Warnes been saying that the Block-3 uses RD-93MA. He said it several times at different points too, so it's not a one-off mistake or anything.

 

[mulj]

It is time for about 3 squadrons of two engine beasts for PAF, that would ensure after qualitative also tactical operational advantage over IAF and provide wider scope for offensive missions, hope chinese will step in with their planes soon.

 

[Ak01]

Alan Warnes been saying that the Block-3 uses RD-93MA. He said it several times at different points too, so it's not a one-off mistake or anything.

But that directly contradicts PAC’s thrust numbers on the data sheet and also the data sheet itself. I have a feeling they’ve told Alan that it’s the MA, but it’s actually still the 93. But who knows

 

[Haji Thanos]

View attachment 114821

Pl-15 test firing. Time stamped as well.

《砺剑》 20221103 长空霹雳

本期节目主要内容： 空空导弹作为当前和未来空战的主要武器，对夺取制空权具有不可替代的作用。一个国家空空导弹的实力，直接影响空战的成败。今天，我们跟着记者走进航空工业空空导弹研究院，看隐姓埋名的军工人，如何铸箭长空，丹心报国。 （《砺剑》 20221103 长空霹雳）

tv.cctv.com

Dass DCS ma bruthaaa

 

[Ali_Baba]

But that directly contradicts PAC’s thrust numbers on the data sheet and also the data sheet itself. I have a feeling they’ve told Alan that it’s the MA, but it’s actually still the 93. But who knows

Both possibilities exist right now. PAC not updating their literature(!) or the RD-93MA not being available yet.

Not sure how/when we can solve for that fully, but i tend to believe Alan Warnes who is knowledgeable enough to know the significance of the change and therefore will have verified it before reporting it.

 

[Ak01]

Both possibilities exist right now. PAC not updating their literature(!) or the RD-93MA not being available yet.

Not sure how/when we can solve for that fully, but i tend to believe Alan Warnes who is knowledgeable enough to know the significance of the change and therefore will have verified it before reporting it.

perhaps, but there really is no external way of verifying. The RD93 and MA are identical. Its purely internal. Plus, the last news of test progress was 5 years ago and there was still tests pending, then ofc lack of funds and invasion probably stalled the project for now

 

[TallGuy]

Both possibilities exist right now. PAC not updating their literature(!) or the RD-93MA not being available yet.

Not sure how/when we can solve for that fully, but i tend to believe Alan Warnes who is knowledgeable enough to know the significance of the change and therefore will have verified it before reporting it.

or JF17 Block III does not use RD93/RD93MA at all they are using Better Engine of chinese origin is it not a possibility?

 

[TallGuy]

There's no reason why a dual rack can't be carried on the belly either, so potentially 6 BVR.

landing gear

only 5

 

[CombatCorner]