JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
I am noticing that you have been asking a lot of simple questions here and in the CDF. People have a tendency to ignore questions with such obvious answers.
The answer to that is probably the PLAAF appears now to have larger requirements, and the FC-1 may not be deemed big enough. Hence the J-10 is the one that appears to be replacing J-7 regiments. Note the JH-7A is replacing Q-5 regiments, and the JH-7A is a much larger plane than the Q-5.
You have another question in the CDF and to answer that briefly, yes the J-8II is being retained and even upgraded in the current time even as J-10s and J-11Bs are being accepted.
I am noticing that you have been asking a lot of simple questions here and in the CDF. People have a tendency to ignore questions with such obvious answers.
The answer to that is probably the PLAAF appears now to have larger requirements, and the FC-1 may not be deemed big enough. Hence the J-10 is the one that appears to be replacing J-7 regiments. Note the JH-7A is replacing Q-5 regiments, and the JH-7A is a much larger plane than the Q-5.
You have another question in the CDF and to answer that briefly, yes the J-8II is being retained and even upgraded in the current time even as J-10s and J-11Bs are being accepted.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
Your first paragraph are you trying to say something comparing to PLAAF with IAF cause it has nothing related to my previous post...(just curious -.-)
Wrong not every nation releases information. Yeah maybe releasing REALLY REALLY obvious information but nothing of its capabilities. J-10 was released ages ago before it was even officially acknowledged in service. And from then to present no information has been released much about it, and all of US request of seeing the J-10 have been denied. Pakistan has been privelaged though.
J-7 replacements J-10 much larger, Q-5 replacements JH-7A much larger. So they're not replacing light fighter with light fighters anymore they want heavier more capable birds now. JF-17 is really light and is less capable then J-10 doing less task.
Hmm great idea with equipping AWACS, radars, weapons and other expensive stuff, but how are the going to PAY for it???? JF-17 is a multi-role fighter...keyword multi-role performs all task....
Your first paragraph are you trying to say something comparing to PLAAF with IAF cause it has nothing related to my previous post...(just curious -.-)
Wrong not every nation releases information. Yeah maybe releasing REALLY REALLY obvious information but nothing of its capabilities. J-10 was released ages ago before it was even officially acknowledged in service. And from then to present no information has been released much about it, and all of US request of seeing the J-10 have been denied. Pakistan has been privelaged though.
J-7 replacements J-10 much larger, Q-5 replacements JH-7A much larger. So they're not replacing light fighter with light fighters anymore they want heavier more capable birds now. JF-17 is really light and is less capable then J-10 doing less task.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
Just because it can do multi role task, it doesn't mean that it can surpass all the requirement of the particuler airforce. For e.g. small airforce about which you are talking about have to encountered likes of F-16,F-15,F/A-18SH, Mig-29, Su-30s equipped with longe range radar, BVR missile, sophisticated Jamming system etc then I don't think JF-17 has much chance unless it is equipped with similar avionics and BVR missiles similar to the one I have mentioned above. But if JF-17 have to equipped with all these avionics like longe range radar, BVR missile, jamming pod etc then don't you think it will also required to shell out good amount of money.
Another thing is that if JF-17 required to strike at a longer range with heavy payload then I don't think it would be able to perform that task with an effectively because of its lower payload of 4000 kg and lower combact range. Yes, tankers can do the task, but atleast according to you even Tankers should be expensive.
I wasn't comparing both airforces rather I was implying to your response of Su-27 and Mig-29 series of fighter planes which according to you don't have the flexibility of configuring themsleves with various foriegn avionics and weapons, radar as JF-17 does.
But we are talking about JF-17 about which information is widely available as far as of its first user that is PAF has an interest of configuring it with foriegn avionics and radar and hence don't you think if PAF configure foriegn equipment on board JF-17 then it would not create much problem for its adverseries to know about their functioning.
Provide the source, I don't US dignity has shrunk to this level.
So does this mean that J-10 has some revolutionery innovation configured in it.
Just because it can do multi role task, it doesn't mean that it can surpass all the requirement of the particuler airforce. For e.g. small airforce about which you are talking about have to encountered likes of F-16,F-15,F/A-18SH, Mig-29, Su-30s equipped with longe range radar, BVR missile, sophisticated Jamming system etc then I don't think JF-17 has much chance unless it is equipped with similar avionics and BVR missiles similar to the one I have mentioned above. But if JF-17 have to equipped with all these avionics like longe range radar, BVR missile, jamming pod etc then don't you think it will also required to shell out good amount of money.
Another thing is that if JF-17 required to strike at a longer range with heavy payload then I don't think it would be able to perform that task with an effectively because of its lower payload of 4000 kg and lower combact range. Yes, tankers can do the task, but atleast according to you even Tankers should be expensive.
I wasn't comparing both airforces rather I was implying to your response of Su-27 and Mig-29 series of fighter planes which according to you don't have the flexibility of configuring themsleves with various foriegn avionics and weapons, radar as JF-17 does.
But we are talking about JF-17 about which information is widely available as far as of its first user that is PAF has an interest of configuring it with foriegn avionics and radar and hence don't you think if PAF configure foriegn equipment on board JF-17 then it would not create much problem for its adverseries to know about their functioning.
Provide the source, I don't US dignity has shrunk to this level.
So does this mean that J-10 has some revolutionery innovation configured in it.
Last edited:
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
I think the reason for this may be that an FC-1 costs not much less than a J-10, but does not have proportionate capabilities. On the other hand, something like a JH-7 is priced more reasonably proportionate to it's performance (and it has a far higher weapon and range capability).
So I think the JH-7, and not FC-1, will finally replace old combat jets in the PLAAF.
If I'm not mistaken, it's been nearly a year since the FC-1 was declared operational and ready for production. So far only 10 (including 3-4 prototypes) FC-1 are delivered to PAF, with PLAAF having placed no orders yet.
I think the reason for this may be that an FC-1 costs not much less than a J-10, but does not have proportionate capabilities. On the other hand, something like a JH-7 is priced more reasonably proportionate to it's performance (and it has a far higher weapon and range capability).
So I think the JH-7, and not FC-1, will finally replace old combat jets in the PLAAF.
Last edited:
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
^ Pakistan is now producing JF-17 for themselves, im sure most of the 250 or so they want would be produced by them.
And JH-7 and JH-7A are stop gap planes themselves that fill the strike role. In future i expect to see J-11B handling most of the strike missions for both PLANAF and PLAAF.
^ Pakistan is now producing JF-17 for themselves, im sure most of the 250 or so they want would be produced by them.
And JH-7 and JH-7A are stop gap planes themselves that fill the strike role. In future i expect to see J-11B handling most of the strike missions for both PLANAF and PLAAF.
Londo Molari
Junior Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- First of all JF-17 comes standard with BVR radar and missile, so don't consider that an expensive add-on.
- Second, JF-17s DO have the bare minimum required for air-defence. After all, F-15 is far superior to F-16 in everything, but does that mean an F16-based airforce like turkey or greece cannot defend itself against F-15s? Does it mean they have no chance? No way.
The reason for that is that air-defence is a defensive role. You don't need long range, or even long-range radar, because awacs and/or ground radar networks help guide you. All you need is air-to-air missiles and adequate enough radar/EW.
- Third, aircraft like F-15 and Su-30 do have long ranges and superior radar and EW, but that is because they are offensive strike aircraft. They need all that to attack other countries far away. Its very difficult to send your own AWACS into enemy territory. So even if both sides have similar AWACS and ground-radar systems, the side with the smaller/weaker aircraft like F-16 or JF-17 can still defend against F-15s and Su-30s.
- When you look at the $15 million price tag of JF-17, thats why its unbeatable. Yes JF-17 will have no chance to do effective deep-penetration strike missions with it. But for air-defense and general bombing it is more than adequate. Even without any expensive upgrades.
- The aircraft is ideal for poor countries who have no ambitions for offensive missions, but want to be able to defend themselves against modern threats for less than $20mill per aircraft.
You're almost there. Let me help.
- First of all JF-17 comes standard with BVR radar and missile, so don't consider that an expensive add-on.
- Second, JF-17s DO have the bare minimum required for air-defence. After all, F-15 is far superior to F-16 in everything, but does that mean an F16-based airforce like turkey or greece cannot defend itself against F-15s? Does it mean they have no chance? No way.
The reason for that is that air-defence is a defensive role. You don't need long range, or even long-range radar, because awacs and/or ground radar networks help guide you. All you need is air-to-air missiles and adequate enough radar/EW.
- Third, aircraft like F-15 and Su-30 do have long ranges and superior radar and EW, but that is because they are offensive strike aircraft. They need all that to attack other countries far away. Its very difficult to send your own AWACS into enemy territory. So even if both sides have similar AWACS and ground-radar systems, the side with the smaller/weaker aircraft like F-16 or JF-17 can still defend against F-15s and Su-30s.
- When you look at the $15 million price tag of JF-17, thats why its unbeatable. Yes JF-17 will have no chance to do effective deep-penetration strike missions with it. But for air-defense and general bombing it is more than adequate. Even without any expensive upgrades.
- The aircraft is ideal for poor countries who have no ambitions for offensive missions, but want to be able to defend themselves against modern threats for less than $20mill per aircraft.
Last edited:
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
Think of the FC-1/JF-17 in terms of F-5E (in its era). It's cheaper and safer to export, including technology transfers, versus more expensive aircraft with sensitive technology.
If a minor country buys used/surplus F-16 and MiG-29's, chances are that they'd import almost all spares and ship the aircraft (or its engine) back for overhaul. Plus the aircraft, although proven through years of service, are used with many hours put on its airframe.
If the country opted to buy FC-1/JF-17's, they'd get brand new aircraft with 0 hours on the airframe. If they can afford to, they can receive the aircraft in knock-down kits and assemble it locally. China (or Pakistan) can assist the country in setting up its aviation industry, facilities, training, manufacturing of spare parts, and ability to perform maintenance and overhaul locally.
Think of the FC-1/JF-17 in terms of F-5E (in its era). It's cheaper and safer to export, including technology transfers, versus more expensive aircraft with sensitive technology.
If a minor country buys used/surplus F-16 and MiG-29's, chances are that they'd import almost all spares and ship the aircraft (or its engine) back for overhaul. Plus the aircraft, although proven through years of service, are used with many hours put on its airframe.
If the country opted to buy FC-1/JF-17's, they'd get brand new aircraft with 0 hours on the airframe. If they can afford to, they can receive the aircraft in knock-down kits and assemble it locally. China (or Pakistan) can assist the country in setting up its aviation industry, facilities, training, manufacturing of spare parts, and ability to perform maintenance and overhaul locally.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
Why not! it does come with standard with BVR radar and missile, but according to the PrOeLiTeZ, smaller airforces have a tight budget and hence they can't afford to opt for large number of BVR.
I didn't said anything like that but those F-16 only have chance if the operator of those airforces are affluent enough to defend itself against F-15. Afterall most of the F-15s are under the operations of affluent airforces.
You always can't rely upon air-defence, you have to leave your own backyard to strike enemies airbases. No airforce in the world can bring significient result in the warfare unless they don't opt for mission comprises of both strike and air defence. Afterall you can even left role of air defence to the SAMs.
Now why do they need awacs because their advanced radars have enough range to track incoming aircraft. Most of all most of the F-15s and Su-30s are equipped with AESA and PESA respectively.
Now how you can expect that both side the will have AWACS and Ground radar system gona resembling to each other?
But it is in its current configuration, but once you would like to equipped with them with AESA and advanced avionics, EW, IRST and all other stuff. Then prices of those airplane would ought to get hike.
As I said earlier you can't rely always upon air defence and bombing missing without resorting to long range strike.
How can you says that as they don't have no ambitions of offensive mission just because they have air defence centeric aircraft?
Do tell me which kind of a avionics and weapons do JF-17 gona equipped themsleves against modern jets?
Why not! it does come with standard with BVR radar and missile, but according to the PrOeLiTeZ, smaller airforces have a tight budget and hence they can't afford to opt for large number of BVR.
I didn't said anything like that but those F-16 only have chance if the operator of those airforces are affluent enough to defend itself against F-15. Afterall most of the F-15s are under the operations of affluent airforces.
You always can't rely upon air-defence, you have to leave your own backyard to strike enemies airbases. No airforce in the world can bring significient result in the warfare unless they don't opt for mission comprises of both strike and air defence. Afterall you can even left role of air defence to the SAMs.
Now why do they need awacs because their advanced radars have enough range to track incoming aircraft. Most of all most of the F-15s and Su-30s are equipped with AESA and PESA respectively.
Now how you can expect that both side the will have AWACS and Ground radar system gona resembling to each other?
But it is in its current configuration, but once you would like to equipped with them with AESA and advanced avionics, EW, IRST and all other stuff. Then prices of those airplane would ought to get hike.
As I said earlier you can't rely always upon air defence and bombing missing without resorting to long range strike.
How can you says that as they don't have no ambitions of offensive mission just because they have air defence centeric aircraft?
Do tell me which kind of a avionics and weapons do JF-17 gona equipped themsleves against modern jets?
- Status