JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter johnqh
- Start date
·
I saw a lot of JF-17Bs today at AMF’s flight test station. One with air to air refuelling probe. 14 more two seaters will be delivered this year, adding to the eight handed over in late Dec. Production of the extremely capable Block 3 with AESAradar starts next year.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Alan Warnes is too lucky
I would love to visit PAC
I would love to visit PAC
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
There's a new QUWA article suggesting that IRST has been removed from the Block III's pipeline. Anyone have any intel on this? I would think that since the specs have not been released (we don't even know what AESA it has selected) perhaps it's a little early to assume it will not have dedicated IRST.
It does seem clear though that it won't be integrated into the airframe, but I would think/hope that a dedicated IRST pod will be integrated.
It does seem clear though that it won't be integrated into the airframe, but I would think/hope that a dedicated IRST pod will be integrated.
The S740 IIR MAWS (also installed J-10C) was found to be an excellent system and with 360 degree coverage, can in fact provide "x-ray" imagery of the threat. That thing can also be used as a passive detection system, hence we might not see a dedicated IRST in blk 3 after all.
Chinese engineering is making big strides lately.
IR systems can't provide "X-ray imagery," that's on the other side of the EM spectrum.
And the J-20 has the best MAWS in China, and it still uses a dedicated IRST.
I highly doubt any current MAWS can double as an effective IRST.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
The idea of using MAWS to substitute for IRST makes no sense, that’s like suggesting using burglar alarms as spotting scopes. The systems are designed for very different purposes with hugely different operating ranges, resolution and pretty much every other performance metric. I would say that if another aircraft is close enough to register on your MAWS, it is also well within MK1 eyeball detection range.
The decision to forgot IRST is, like all such decisions, a calculated compromise.
I am guessing that the PAF is:
- balancing in favour of networked capabilities rather than single platform capability.
- being disciplined with weight to maintain kinetic performance
- being budget focused and probably already shifting increasing amount of funds towards next gen options
- with PAKFA DOA and India going for Rafales, the need and justification for fleet wide IRST is somewhat diminished, especially with the AESA of the BLK3 potentially already covering the intended role of IRST with its LPI mode.
Is it a perfect solution? Obviously not since PLAAF J10Cs have similar if not better MAWS and AESA but also IRST. But the J10 is a much bigger aircraft, and the PLAAF has much deeper pockets.
From PAF’s specific POV, when fighting a defensive war over its own airspace, with both friendly AWACS and ground based radars networked in, and racing an adversary flying primarily Flankers with their huge RCS and other none LO conventional fighters, they may feel that they are unlikely to miss any IAF assets coming in, and the whole battle space would be so active that everyone RWR will probably all be screaming nonstop from the get go, as such it’s just not worth the performance, and more importantly, the budget sacrifices to get IRST.
Personally, I feel that is a mistake, but I can see why they would make they choice.
The decision to forgot IRST is, like all such decisions, a calculated compromise.
I am guessing that the PAF is:
- balancing in favour of networked capabilities rather than single platform capability.
- being disciplined with weight to maintain kinetic performance
- being budget focused and probably already shifting increasing amount of funds towards next gen options
- with PAKFA DOA and India going for Rafales, the need and justification for fleet wide IRST is somewhat diminished, especially with the AESA of the BLK3 potentially already covering the intended role of IRST with its LPI mode.
Is it a perfect solution? Obviously not since PLAAF J10Cs have similar if not better MAWS and AESA but also IRST. But the J10 is a much bigger aircraft, and the PLAAF has much deeper pockets.
From PAF’s specific POV, when fighting a defensive war over its own airspace, with both friendly AWACS and ground based radars networked in, and racing an adversary flying primarily Flankers with their huge RCS and other none LO conventional fighters, they may feel that they are unlikely to miss any IAF assets coming in, and the whole battle space would be so active that everyone RWR will probably all be screaming nonstop from the get go, as such it’s just not worth the performance, and more importantly, the budget sacrifices to get IRST.
Personally, I feel that is a mistake, but I can see why they would make they choice.