JF-17(FC-1) Thunder

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Uloguj se preko Facebooka da bi video sliku:

KLJ-7 Radar specifications.....

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: mareCar
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Napisano: 02 Maj 2012 19:14

nabil05 ::
Now the argument seems to have sifted towards SU-30 BARS vs jf-17 KLJ-7 and R-77 vs SD-10, not expecting this from a Moderator though


ANTIBODY ::jf17 will be a reply to indian mig29/mirage2000/lca etc

a southafrican member proved based on published stats that the jft will see su30mki first [even without help of paf awacs] .. thus would be able to fire the bvr first .. the thread was on defence.pk
...


Dopuna: 02 Maj 2012 19:15

And guys you dont need to paste whole text about some missile. You need only to paste link and to quote from text what you want.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

mean_machine ::Napisano: 02 Maj 2012 19:14

nabil05 ::
Now the argument seems to have sifted towards SU-30 BARS vs jf-17 KLJ-7 and R-77 vs SD-10, not expecting this from a Moderator though


ANTIBODY ::jf17 will be a reply to indian mig29/mirage2000/lca etc

a southafrican member proved based on published stats that the jft will see su30mki first [even without help of paf awacs] .. thus would be able to fire the bvr first .. the thread was on defence.pk
...


Dopuna: 02 Maj 2012 19:15

And guys you dont need to paste whole text about some missile. You need only to paste link and to quote from text what you want.

Fair enough, Will provide link only but the purpose of giving text+link for those who were unable to open the link for some reason.

• 2Ovo se svidja korisnicima: nabil05, mareCar
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Well if someone couldnt open link, we will paste text for him. Quoting part of text is good because of that. You quote what is important for debate and put link. We had earlier similar problems so this is most elegant solution.

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: mareCar
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Uloguj se preko Facebooka da bi video sliku:

ANTIBODY ::
the point that i continously make is how do you jump to so many negative conclusions regarding jft and its bvr without even knowing the actual specs of the radar , sd10, actual rcs of the fighter etc --- and i try to post some data which i find and its convenietly sidelined as i dont have an approval stamp on that info from janes

I tend to disagree!

When you post something like this. . .

Citat:a southafrican member proved based on published stats that the jft will see su30mki first [even without help of paf awacs] .. thus would be able to fire the bvr first ..

. . . it is like you said - it is fact because it is "proven"! Proven by whom? Some forum member?

Than you post something like this. . .

Citat:JFT radar has publicized detection range of 105 km against 5m2 target and Su-30 even if, has RCS of 10m2 with canards , will be detected at around 200-210 kms.

. . .which is totally wrong!



Based on your calculation model, if you take for example IRBIS detection range for 1m2 RCS target (which is approximately 160nm), you could detect 5m2 RCS target at 800nm

Than you speak about max. theoretical range for sd10a missile, but in reality that range is at least three times shorter when you`r shooting at highly maneuverable target, and that is the reason why you should`t claim things like "thus would be able to fire the bvr first", unless you want to waste your missiles?

And I am not saying JF-17 won`t be able to soot first, maybe it will be, but it`s definitely not proven in reality and it doesn't mean it will hit something.

The thing is, no one makes negative conclusions about JF-17. You are the one with very suspicious claims that provoke other members to answer, but in very reasonable fashion

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Uloguj se preko Facebooka da bi video sliku:

sivisoko ::ANTIBODY ::
the point that i continously make is how do you jump to so many negative conclusions regarding jft and its bvr without even knowing the actual specs of the radar , sd10, actual rcs of the fighter etc --- and i try to post some data which i find and its convenietly sidelined as i dont have an approval stamp on that info from janes

I tend to disagree!

When you post something like this. . .

Citat:a southafrican member proved based on published stats that the jft will see su30mki first [even without help of paf awacs] .. thus would be able to fire the bvr first ..

. . . it is like you said - it is fact because it is "proven"! Proven by whom? Some forum member?

Than you post something like this. . .

Citat:JFT radar has publicized detection range of 105 km against 5m2 target and Su-30 even if, has RCS of 10m2 with canards , will be detected at around 200-210 kms.

. . .which is totally wrong!



Based on your calculation model, if you take for example IRBIS detection range for 1m2 RCS target (which is approximately 160nm), you could detect 5m2 RCS target at 800nm

Than you speak about max. theoretical range for sd10a missile, but in reality that range is at least three times shorter when you`r shooting at highly maneuverable target, and that is the reason why you should`t claim things like "thus would be able to fire the bvr first", unless you want to waste your missiles?

And I am not saying JF-17 won`t be able to soot first, maybe it will be, but it`s definitely not proven in reality and it doesn't mean it will hit something.

The thing is, no one makes negative conclusions about JF-17. You are the one with very suspicious claims that provoke other members to answer, but in very reasonable fashion

Instead of blaming him for well researched info on defense products belonging to a country where even a machine gun is bought. made/ sold under the wraps without common people or media knowing about it, his work deserves appreciation. His quest for knowledge is quite remarkable. What he presented, are not his own opinions most of the time, but a result of discussion between various forumers, some well rehearsed ones, others, not so well rehearsed. Bottomline is, he works harder on Pakistan defense related matters than most.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

nabil05 ::
Instead of blaming him for well researched info on defense products belonging to a country where even a machine gun is bought. made/ sold under the wraps without common people or media knowing about it, his work deserves appreciation. His quest for knowledge is quite remarkable. What he presented, are not his own opinions most of the time, but a result of discussion between various forumers, some well rehearsed ones, others, not so well rehearsed. Bottomline is, he works harder on Pakistan defense related matters than most.

You figured it out all wrong.

I appreciate his every effort on the field of aviation and I don`t blame him for anything he said right or wrong, but he accused other members for bashing on JF-17 without any real reason.
I just pointed out the reasons why other members answered the way they did, and they had every reason to do so.

You protect your people, I protect my people, nothing wrong with that

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: nabil05
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Uloguj se preko Facebooka da bi video sliku:

Napisano: 03 May 2012 6:08

the reason why i posted some posts by the southafrican member and used the words 'proved' was mainly because he is not a pakistani , so you guys might acknowlege him as unbiased as opposed to us -- i think tempest is the same person as pngwerume here
[Link mogu videti samo ulogovani korisnici]

secondly whenever i talk of the jft radar , guys talk about the future upgradation of su30's radar ... if thats the case why dont you also take into consideration jfts radar with better specs most notably to be released in 2012?

Dopuna: 03 May 2012 6:29

You figured it out all wrong.

I appreciate his every effort on the field of aviation and I don`t blame him for anything he said right or wrong, but he accused other members for bashing on JF-17 without any real reason.
I just pointed out the reasons why other members answered the way they did, and they had every reason to do so.

You protect your people, I protect my people, nothing wrong with that [/quote]

when i asked the member did he know about klj stats he said 'no' and asked us to post data which ive posted in this thread some time before aswell ------ when i tell him regarding the rcs from the engineers involved in the jft project he does not take it into consideration --- regarding sd10a ,there are not many published data regarding the upgraded version with paf ... however members add kinetic boost , and minus the rcs effects due to 8 bvrs on su30 on one hand and on the other hand dont acknowlege that jft wont be standinding stationary in the air, rather it would also have some boost etc


the reason i link other discussions is that i am actually an active member in over 5 forums and dont have the time and energy to discuss all the points descriptively




what i try to post for the friends here is a nutshell of discussion that occur on varoius pak / chinese fora --- 90% of the posts of mine that you are critisizing is actually not my posts .. rather ive credited /or tried to credits them in most cases

you have no idea how difficult is to collect this much data in pakistan , where the basic news of jft in 90% of the cases doesnt make way in the daily newspaper --- and how people like me jump through hoops of translating chinese content to get some kind of idea regarding jft---- chinese media is itself not very open to detailed specs of systems so thats another roadblock --- so saying that due to the unavailabilty of data the weapon system is automatically inferior is what i call bashing

Dopuna: 03 May 2012 6:40



Citat:
Kanwa had an interview with PAF's General Javaid Ahmed, during which he stated that:
- In 2012, they will be bring out the JF17 Blk 2. The main improvements are the addition of IRF, the development of a twin seat version, adding datalink and development of an export version JF17.
- happy with the performance of the KJL7, so no immediate plans to switch to AESA (KJL7 specs: detection range for fighter sized target 130km; can track 16 targets and engage 2 at the same time; have SAR mapping capability)
- The Chinese indigenous engine is currently undergoing flight testing and may be a while before it is fitted to a JF17
- In 2011 the JF17 test fired: 1 x C802 (hit a seaborne target 90km away, max range 180km); 2 x LS-6 bombs, one is a 500kg GPS guided weapon with 60km range and CEP of 15m, the other was a 250kg laser/IIR+GPS guided weapon with a range of 65km and CEP of 5.3-7.5m; SD10 and other weapons.

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: ANTIBODY
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Guys I think it is okey to end this debate.

ANYBODY do you have info about Klimov proposal for 100kN engine?

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

zar nije srednjeročno i dugoročno ionako nebitno što će klimov napraviti s rd93 kad se sprema ws-13 motor? Ako sada testni primjerci motora lete u Chengduu, tamo negdje do polovice proizvodnje bloka 2 ws13 svakako bi trebao biti posve spreman... A to je objemama stranama u interesu radi izvoza...