JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Dizasta1

Dizasta1

Senior Member
defenceman said:
Hi can jf17 with present engine capacity & full load could carry CFT with it any learned member can
Please shed some light on it
Thank you
Click to expand...

There is no indication of CFTs for JF-17 Thunders Block-lll. IRST, AESA, HOBS, HMD & Up-rated engines are on the cards for Block-llls. Speculations as to the increase in airframe surface area is also out there. But we will just have to wait and see.
 
asif iqbal

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
If there was a need no question about it JF17 would have it

When you have in flight refuelling no requirement for extra tanks

Pakistan has very little strategic depth and deep strike is job for Pakistan Missile forces not PAF
 
D

defenceman

Junior Member
Registered Member
asif iqbal said:
If there was a need no question about it JF17 would have it

When you have in flight refuelling no requirement for extra tanks

Pakistan has very little strategic depth and deep strike is job for Pakistan Missile forces not PAF
Click to expand...
Hi I agree with your strategic depth but don’t you think navy might need jf17 for deep strike roll and CFT is much
More better then IFR as it might be a risk to use inflight while if you on deep strike
Thx
 
Zahid

Zahid

Junior Member
defenceman said:
Hi I agree with your strategic depth but don’t you think navy might need jf17 for deep strike roll and CFT is much
More better then IFR as it might be a risk to use inflight while if you on deep strike
Thx
Click to expand...
You are right. Pakistan Navy does need a fighter bomber with longer legs than JF-17. Two factors are important in this regard:

1. Pakistan's navy is not a blue-water navy, and apart from submarines, the fleet is not expected to take the fight to the enemy. JF-17 would not be providing air-cover to any long-range mission.

2. Pakistan's land borders are much longer than the sea shore line. It seems the risk from land outweighs risk from sea. Navy gets the third priority after Army & Airforce.

CFTs would be good to have and would since they would free up 2 hard-points. But I am not sure what Cost-Benefit analysis looks from Airforce's perspective. CFTs would likely not happen in Block -III, just my guess.
 
D

defenceman

Junior Member
Registered Member
Zahid said:
You are right. Pakistan Navy does need a fighter bomber with longer legs than JF-17. Two factors are important in this regard:

1. Pakistan's navy is not a blue-water navy, and apart from submarines, the fleet is not expected to take the fight to the enemy. JF-17 would not be providing air-cover to any long-range mission.

2. Pakistan's land borders are much longer than the sea shore line. It seems the risk from land outweighs risk from sea. Navy gets the third priority after Army & Airforce.

CFTs would be good to have and would since they would free up 2 hard-points. But I am not sure what Cost-Benefit analysis looks from Airforce's perspective. CFTs would likely not happen in Block -III, just my guess.
Click to expand...
Thx for your detailed reply
 
M

MastanKhan

Junior Member
defenceman said:
Hi I agree with your strategic depth but don’t you think navy might need jf17 for deep strike roll and CFT is much
More better then IFR as it might be a risk to use inflight while if you on deep strike
Thx
Click to expand...

Hi,

Just because you don't have strategic depth---does not mean that the enemy does not have strategic depth.

Weapons of death and destruction are always procured / developed to fight the enemy's best.

Naval strike options make the enemy totally vulnerable because of the choice of strike points.

CFT + drop tanks will give the JF17 deep strike options.
 
asif iqbal

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
17-236 with refuelling probe nice

Rumours suggesting that Azerbaijan is close to signing on the dotted line for 24 x JF17

Indonesia’s order is larger at 36 aircraft

That’s 60 units at full production at PAC that would take 2 years or more to clear putting back deliverys for PAF and even Block 3

If PAC builds 30 keeps 16 for itself and 14 for export still take over 4 years to fulfill order

Either way 2018 is going to be another bumper year for JF17

Let’s hope we see more details on JF17 Block 3
 
timepass

timepass

Brigadier
asif iqbal said:
17-236 with refuelling probe nice

Rumours suggesting that Azerbaijan is close to signing on the dotted line for 24 x JF17

Indonesia’s order is larger at 36 aircraft

That’s 60 units at full production at PAC that would take 2 years or more to clear putting back deliverys for PAF and even Block 3

If PAC builds 30 keeps 16 for itself and 14 for export still take over 4 years to fulfill order

Either way 2018 is going to be another bumper year for JF17

Let’s hope we see more details on JF17 Block 3
Click to expand...

Or open a parallel production line to fulfill the export orders....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top