JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

[tphuang]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

they had a picture of Egyptian defense delegation visiting AVIC1 and using JF-17 simulation. It looks like the Egyptians could be close to buying the plane.

 

[mxiong]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Looks like Mubarak couldn't afford any more F-16s due to inflation and recession, thanks to the FED.:nana:

 

[Skywatcher]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Or he wants to put pressure on Washington to give him more by threatening Lockheed Martin's business.

 

[Londo Molari]

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.

Missiles are not add-ons, they are ammunition.

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.

So? If an airforce isn't affluent, then they are dead regardless of aircraft anyway.

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.

I don't know where you're getting that from.

Afterall you can even left role of air defence to the SAMs.

no, SAM's don't have the range, endurance or effectiveness that air-defence fighters do.

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.

Ummm thats exactly what I said. The whole reason those aircraft have AESA and PESA is so that they don't have to use AWACS. Otherwise they will have to fly AWACS into enemy territory where it is vulnerable. Thats the only advantage F-15/Su-30 have against F-16/JF-17 (plus range and payload). But if you are a defensive airforce, then these features become irrelevant.

Now how you can expect that both side the will have AWACS and Ground radar system gona resembling to each other?

When you compare two things, you have to keep all other variables constant. Its a basic rule of statistics. If one side has better AWACS, then we cannot properly discuss which fighter is better.

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.

No, it is $15 million with all that included. You can't add price for AESA, because then you will have to add that price for F-15 and Su-30 too, since most of them don't have AESA right now either.

As I said earlier you can't rely always upon air defence and bombing missing without resorting to long range strike.

You can if you are a purely defensive airforce.

How can you says that as they don't have no ambitions of offensive mission just because they have air defence centeric aircraft?

I don't know what you mean, but thats not what I said. I said it is ideal for those poor countries who do not have any plans for deep strike. Most poor countries want aircraft for self-defence, not for attacking enemies thousands of km away.

Do tell me which kind of a avionics and weapons do JF-17 gona equipped themsleves against modern jets?

Existing avionics can already be used against all modern jets, except maybe F-22. But thats true for all other fighters too.

 

[Scratch]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

no, SAM's don't have the range, endurance or effectiveness that air-defence fighters do.

Actually, one important advantage of Ground Based Air Defence (GBAD) over fighters is the SAM sites' endurance. They can sit there on standby for days, weeks and longer and fire when necessary. A fighter can stay on station only for hours before returning to base.
That is also one thing that makes the SAMs more effective.
What SAMs really lack copared to fighters is mobility / flexibility. Covering all your airspace with SAMs is expensive, cover only parts and move centers of gravity fast is something fighters are good in.

You can if you are a purely defensive airforce.

That's not a good idea to me. If you only defend, you leave your opponent the freedom of action, the decission when and where to fight or not to fight. You only react and stress your forces.
This is where offensive counter air (OCA) and air interdiction (AI) come into play. Attack enemy forces, supplies, infrastructure before they can even affect you.

All that doesn't mean each and every small country need Flankers of course, and I agree that the JF-17 seems to be a good choice for poorer nations that want a capable aircraft. But I think being able to use it for OCA / AI will improve it's worthyness for any AF.

 

[batskcab]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

in past wars, it has been shown SAMs are insufficent at taking down agile enemies with proper ECCM, infact it was often impossible. often the purpose of the SAM was to force the plane to manuver to avoid the missles and lose height until the aircraft is low enough to be hit by AA guns. missile technology has however advanced a great deal since.

 

[noone536]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

i agree one great example of that sam might not work very well is the yum kapur between israil and the arab state

 

[crobato]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

JF-17 and SD-10 alleged test firing. Looks like bunch of different video clips pasted together.

 

[boldkhan]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Well , at wikipedia i was amaze to see that jf-17 is listed as 3.5-4th generation fighter jet and on the contrary Indian LCA is listed as a 4.5 generation jet fighter ,......, can anybody explain me the reality.

 

[RedMercury]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Reality: don't read wikipedia and expect the full truth.