JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

[plawolf]

Chinese drones can also hit moving targets, and their sensor turrets seem to have comparable if not smaller overall internal volume compared to many targeting pods. As such, there should be no technical barrier to Chinese targeting pods being able to hit moving targets as well.

I think the primary issue is demand.

China faces opponents with world class air defences, as such it’s preferred strike capabilities are long range stand-off focused.

Targeting pods are very much a low priority item for the PLAAF and PLANAF since they do not see many scenarios where such short range weapons would be operationally viable in their likely operating environments.

Without demand from the PLA, Chinese defence companies have little incentive to invest much into targeting pods as it is very unlikely they would secure enough international orders to make those pods price competitive internationally, especially in a mature market with many established international competitors. It’s just not a good business investment decision.

 

[Blitzo]

Chinese drones can also hit moving targets, and their sensor turrets seem to have comparable if not smaller overall internal volume compared to many targeting pods. As such, there should be no technical barrier to Chinese targeting pods being able to hit moving targets as well.

I think the primary issue is demand.

China faces opponents with world class air defences, as such it’s preferred strike capabilities are long range stand-off focused.

Targeting pods are very much a low priority item for the PLAAF and PLANAF since they do not see many scenarios where such short range weapons would be operationally viable in their likely operating environments.

Without demand from the PLA, Chinese defence companies have little incentive to invest much into targeting pods as it is very unlikely they would secure enough international orders to make those pods price competitive internationally, especially in a mature market with many established international competitors. It’s just not a good business investment decision.

Yes, hitting moving targets is a relatively primitive capability that most aircraft with laser guided PGMs or missiles can achieve, it's not like that's some sort of capability which only new targeting pods can achieve.


The PLA does seem to have some targeting pods issued routinely to certain strike and multirole fighter types. We've seen the KJDC01/A types in service with JH-7s and J-10 variants over the years on more than a few occasions. However the PLA until recently probably didn't have a demand for higher end targeting pods.

I'm sure the relevant aerospace institutes continued doing development for targeting pods, but absent PLA demand they wouldn't have been able to robustly develop, test, produce and achieve economies of scale of newer generation targeting pods.


I do wonder if that may change with the J-16, as it seems like they have tested a new type of targeting pod for the aircraft and we've also seen what looks to be a pylon with inbuilt forward looking FLIR that is consistent with set ups seen in other targeting pods around the world.


In any case, the overall reason why JF-17 is using Aselpod rather than a Chinese pod can simply be explained as China likely not having a pod that was as competitive as Aselpod on the export market; with competitiveness not being defined only in terms of capability or technology but also in terms of things like maturity, efficiencies of scale, familiarity of use functions with the target customer etc (both Turkey and Pakistan of course have lots of experience using western targeting pods).

 

[Deleted member 13312]

Yes, hitting moving targets is a relatively primitive capability that most aircraft with laser guided PGMs or missiles can achieve, it's not like that's some sort of capability which only new targeting pods can achieve.


The PLA does seem to have some targeting pods issued routinely to certain strike and multirole fighter types. We've seen the KJDC01/A types in service with JH-7s and J-10 variants over the years on more than a few occasions. However the PLA until recently probably didn't have a demand for higher end targeting pods.

I'm sure the relevant aerospace institutes continued doing development for targeting pods, but absent PLA demand they wouldn't have been able to robustly develop, test, produce and achieve economies of scale of newer generation targeting pods.


I do wonder if that may change with the J-16, as it seems like they have tested a new type of targeting pod for the aircraft and we've also seen what looks to be a pylon with inbuilt forward looking FLIR that is consistent with set ups seen in other targeting pods around the world.


In any case, the overall reason why JF-17 is using Aselpod rather than a Chinese pod can simply be explained as China likely not having a pod that was as competitive as Aselpod on the export market; with competitiveness not being defined only in terms of capability or technology but also in terms of things like maturity, efficiencies of scale, familiarity of use functions with the target customer etc (both Turkey and Pakistan of course have lots of experience using western targeting pods).

Or Pakistan is simply wanting to keep it's options open regarding military hardware. After all the F-16 freeze had taught Islambad what can happen if one is too overly dependent on a single supplier regardless of how diverse the offerings are.

 

[ougoah]

Pakistan is also interested in TF-X program. Cementing military and procurement relations involves installing promising and proven systems into PAF's structure. What are the available Chinese pods for export? Compare those with Aselpod. We will find that either it/they are not as overall effective as Aselpod and/or not significantly more so to justify Pakistan to forgo an opportunity in playing politics. Now that Turkey is almost surely going to not be receiving F-35, their option for 5th gen is developing their TF-X to completion or purchase Su-57 exports or licensed production variants. PAF has three potential 5th gens to choose from with Su-57 being the most matured out of those options followed by whatever the FC-31 ever becomes, if anything. Relations with China and Turkey are both solid but military purchases come far more from China. Cooperation with Turkey will only increase. Aselpod is but one of those and since Pakistan seems to be demanding of their procurements, we can be sure the Aselpod works well for their needs. What more is there to read into?

 

[asif iqbal]

Ok let’s turn this into a positive thing

Just shows the JF17 is a broad platform which can be integrated with systems outside China

This will also help exports

 

[Dizasta1]

I think a lot of people are missing the point here regarding Pakistan Air Force opting for turkish targeting pods on the Thunders. It is a selling point, as countries looking to buy fighter-jets, are looking to diversify their procurement options on the big ticket items like fighter-jets. Russia and Su-30MKs are the best example at hand giving a diverse set of options of countries integrated on to the platform. Malaysia, Indonesia, Algeria and India took full advantage of this. Similarly, having diversity of options on JF-17 Thunders for RWR, EWS, IRST, targeting-pods, engines etc is a plus for prospective Thunder customers. Having selected aselpods doesn't make Chinese pods less capable, rather that Pakistan may be correct in anticipating prospective client states wanting diversity in options for Thunders.

 

[MastanKhan]

In any case, the overall reason why JF-17 is using Aselpod rather than a Chinese pod can simply be explained as China likely not having a pod that was as competitive as Aselpod on the export market; with competitiveness not being defined only in terms of capability or technology but also in terms of things like maturity, efficiencies of scale, familiarity of use functions with the target customer etc (both Turkey and Pakistan of course have lots of experience using western targeting pods).

Hi,

That was the obvious reason Paf went for the Aselpod---.

 

[Brumby]

My original question relating to a non Chinese pod was more to do with ECM than targeting. Modern avionics are particularly concern with integration and especially between the ECM suite and radar due to the density of EM. Given that Block 3 will most likely incorporate a Chinese AESA radar, it will be much easier to integrate to an ECM suite if it was also a Chinese system rather than with the Indra ECM. AESA radars are complex systems driven primarily by software and attempting to integrate with a foreign system is not going to be easy.

For example, the F-18E was known to have integration issues between the APG-79 radar with the ALR-214(V) 5 jammer due to interference in emissions when both were operating in the same frequency band.

 

[Blitzo]

My original question relating to a non Chinese pod was more to do with ECM than targeting. Modern avionics are particularly concern with integration and especially between the ECM suite and radar due to the density of EM. Given that Block 3 will most likely incorporate a Chinese AESA radar, it will be much easier to integrate to an ECM suite if it was also a Chinese system rather than with the Indra ECM. AESA radars are complex systems driven primarily by software and attempting to integrate with a foreign system is not going to be easy.

For example, the F-18E was known to have integration issues between the APG-79 radar with the ALR-214(V) 5 jammer due to interference in emissions when both were operating in the same frequency band.

The integration of different RF systems like jamming pods and radars can be problematic, certainly, but I'm not sure if the modern technology of AESAs make integration of jamming pods more difficult than older radar types in a broad basis.

The origin of a nation's systems could effect ease of integration as well, but given the way in which many EW pods are designed for a variety of different fighters from a variety of different nations, I suspect the effort to integrate a new pod from a different nation is probably a relatively small hurdle compared to if the pod fulfills one's criteria better than other pods that are available on the export market.

 

[Brumby]

The integration of different RF systems like jamming pods and radars can be problematic, certainly, but I'm not sure if the modern technology of AESAs make integration of jamming pods more difficult than older radar types in a broad basis.

The origin of a nation's systems could effect ease of integration as well, but given the way in which many EW pods are designed for a variety of different fighters from a variety of different nations, I suspect the effort to integrate a new pod from a different nation is probably a relatively small hurdle compared to if the pod fulfills one's criteria better than other pods that are available on the export market.

I think people generally underestimate the complexity involved with modern avionics. In the case of the F-22, 90 % of its 1.7 million lines of code is associated with its sensors and radar There is a big divide between AESA and older radars. The strength of the F-35 is not in its stealth but in its sensors - the type that requires 8 million lines of code. Even the Typhoon tranche 1 needed 1.5 million lines of code.