Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder

Discussion in 'South Asia & SAARC' started by Agent_47, May 10, 2017.

  1. ranadd

    ranadd 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    323
    Country Flag:
    India
    Janab boy. F16 is a battle proven equipment developed through decades of research by some people who defined what is aeronautics.

    JF is good for conflict&debt ridden nations. It’s doing much much much better there.
     
  2. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,002
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Country Flag:
    India
    For what should I have to share the facts and substance.
    You can completely different out the internet, still you will fail to find anything (video) supporting the weapon test of so called thunder.
    You can only find drop tests of dumb bombs and unguided rockets..

    For example:
    If you want me to believe on JFT claims for successful integration of all Weapons and Munitions than you and this pakistani guy have to believe that we also have all Integrated LCA (Which is actually not correct)

    For example
    Some of comparable photo op are: (it's not about a jet, its about the process)
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Please neglect the LCA but process of integration, testing and certification is very common for all jets.
    The main issue is that FC-1 Development, Weapon integration, testing and certification lacks the transparency. You know everything about Tejas process because ADA/HAL maintaininn a reasonable level of transparency.

    Rest you can understand as you're quite smart..
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  3. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    I purposly left out the word you used in my quote.

    Exactly, so why follow the same way? That's why I keep urging to stick to topic and not fall into comparisons or unfounded claims.
     
  4. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    And there is your problem, you see and still don't believe it, because you don't want to.
    I purposely showed the chart of weapon capabilities and pics that confirms the use or integration of these weapons, not just a display on an airshow, but that's still not enough for you.

    No it's not, because that's dependent on the customer requirements. Most fighters starts with A2A weapons and integration to related sensors. JF17 afaik had a focus on A2G at the beginning, because it replaced A2G fighters first.
    Also the fact that they had an aim on anti ship missiles early, was aimed on the fact that they based squads along their coast lines. That however is often put far behind for other fighters.

    There is not 1 right way to do it, but a right way for each customer, depending on their needs.

    Here again, you claim something is wrong, because you don't know enough, not because you actually have proof for it.
    We hardly have infos on Chinese fighters and their operations, which makes it so hard to determine too, but that doesn't mean you outright deny everything they say. Look at their carrier and stealth fighter developments, where nobody took it seriously and claimed Indian superiority because of experience and that there is no way they can produce or operate multiple carriers. We now know that the reports were right!

    So be cautions with infos, nothing wrong with that, but don't just deny them for no real reason.
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  5. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,002
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Country Flag:
    India
    Oh! I was expecting something better from you.
    These so called charts didn't verify that all the Weapons, gun and other Munitions are successfully Integrated on fighter jet. Fighter jets are intended to fire all its prescribed Weapons but it seems that some of us are happy to see them in photo ops and flying displays instead of live fire drills.
    Do you ever seen a so called Thunder firing its gsh-23 cannon or even LGB dropping.

    [​IMG]
    This chart also have complete set of missiles and Munitions including its gun. I can assure you that some of them are not tested and certified including Gsh-23 cannon.

    I don't know how can you believe on those so called charts and decent photo ops...

    Rest , be happy with your Blunder...

    Good Day
     
  6. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    And I expect you to read the whole sentence, not just the first few words, otherwise how will you be able to understand the point?

    Except of Mar1 ARM and rocket pods, I was able to show all other weapons of the chart, at least in flight testing, if not the integration. Not to mention that I used an official chart, so we know which weapons are suppose to be integrated on which harpoints and we have seen most of them confirmed in real configuration too. I even added 1 with asymmetric loads, that wasn't on the chart, to show an important config too, but you are to bound on denying everything, instead of understanding first.
     
  7. Zarvan

    Zarvan 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2014
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    135
    Country Flag:
    Pakistan
    Yes but still JF-17 is better than F-16 Blocks except for BLOCK 52 and BLOCK 60 and the Viper with AESA. But BLOCK III will match these ones. And F-16 is one of the best Fighter Jets ever made no doubt about it
     
  8. Zarvan

    Zarvan 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2014
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    135
    Country Flag:
    Pakistan
    JF-17 which has a aspect ratio even better than F-16. And aspect ratio matters a lot... Its kind of quantitative measure how effective wings you have.
     
  9. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,002
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Country Flag:
    India
    Again, I want to share same thing that have proposed Weapon chart & fixing them to hardpoints doesn't mean that everything is integrated, tested and certified.

    I'm sharing a few Official/Non-official Weapon charts for different fighter jet programs round the globe. And for all we know that they are not test and certified with the air frame.

    1. Sukhoi su-57
    [​IMG]

    2. Gripen-E (fighter that made its first flight recently)
    [​IMG]

    Apart from these both , two are J-20 (which operational) and J-31. I'll share the prescribed weapon charts if you want.
     
  10. Sathya

    Sathya Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2016
    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    828
    Country Flag:
    India

    Hi, he will be convinced if you put up photo/video of flying jet with weapons attached.
     
    X_Killer likes this.
  11. lca-fan

    lca-fan Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,375
    Likes Received:
    4,766
    Country Flag:
    India
    Yup! That's the reason we are opposing it. :biggthumpup:

    F-16 failed to impress IAF and was a total failure in MMRCA evaluation.............

    India is trolling US a big time delaying F-16 deal (latest SE deal to be signed by 2022 and could go on till 2025) until it is dead horse out of production and Lockheed offers F-35 in lieu of F-16 which are now linked with F-16 buy, once F-16 production ceases Lockheed won't have anything to offer but F-35 and IAF will lap it up. :devil::devil:
     
  12. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    When they are on the ground not, when they are integrated for flight testing and launches during exercise, it means something, which is exactly why I chose those pics. But you simply can't admit that and ignore that roughly 90% of that chart was visible in the pics too.
     
  13. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    I don't need convincing, because I'm not in denial, but contrary to @X_Killer you understood that the pics of the weapons on operational fighters are the important part and not the chart!
    These pics show us which weapons were tested or integrated and not just on offer on paper.
     
  14. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,002
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Country Flag:
    India
    This is what I want to see that is "launches during test/drills/exercises"

    Ground detached and attached displays as well as attached Munition aerial display won't allow them to use Weapons accurately.

    Like we can fly our Su-30MKI with brahmos doesn't mean that we will have bullseye without testing. Accurate testing will lead to certification. You already know this fact..

    We already fired python-5 CCM from LCA but it doesn't mean that its a 100% success because we know there are vibration issues.
    We integrated IFR to LCA but it doesn't mean that it will get sure success in its first attempt. This also applies to aerial cannon firing and other Weapons..
     
    zebra7 and Sathya like this.
  15. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    Which is exactly what I avoided, because they only show what weapons could be offered, while flight tests shows, which weapons are up for integration. But you are simply in denial, because you don't want to "believe" that it has these capabilities.

    Which are two separate matters, the one is the integration of the weapon to the fighter and when we see it flying with it, we KNOW that integration has at least started. If it hits the target, is dependent on the weapon, not on the fighter!

    So even in your own example, you show what it means to see the fighter with these weapons, but you fail to acknowledge it, just because it's JF17 or, as you said yourself, because of the lack of infos.
     

Share This Page