Azerbaijan's JF-17 Thunder Acquisition: Updates & Discussions

[denel]

Hi,

you are one smart cookie---. What would we do if you left this board---!

indeed he aspires tunnel vision; hence the state of affairs he projects shows the malais at play; lone ranger yet the cross pollination of ideas or expertise is not welcome in his line of sight.

 

[araz]

indeed he aspires tunnel vision; hence the state of affairs he projects shows the malais at play; lone ranger yet the cross pollination of ideas or expertise is not welcome in his line of sight.

OK PEOPLE. Enough said can we move on. Agree to disagree.. However @denel I strongly disagree with your assertions about the utility of JH7s for PAF. I understand the logic by which the need has been stated but barring situations where thers has been no other choice PAF has avoided one trick Ponies. The discussion is now mute as the JH7 assembly line has been wound up and PLAAF has moved on to J11 series. The JH 7 was evaluated and was gound lacking by PAF nearly 3 decades ago. The main bugbear the engine has hardly been upgraded so the platform is incapable of living upto its potential.
A

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

3 decades ago we did not have smart standoff weapons---that you could launch from far beyond the reach of enemy radar.

today---we have standoff weapons from air to surface---with 100's of miles of reach---and to top that off---we have standoff weapons against moving ships that can target the item 100's of miles away as well.

Then to top it off---we also have cruise missile that we can have the air launch version---which gives the military of a totally unique launch capability that was NEVER EVER IMAGINABLE---.

And for that very reason---the number one fighting force of the world---the USAF decided to modernize their 50 plus years old B52 bombers for thios very task---.

For a modern strike aircraft---horse power is not everything---it basically is nothing---it is the EW suite package---and the standoff weapons delivery system that is the bone crusher/back breaker---.

People giving 30 years old test examples are clueless as to where the technology has gone---.

See---this is a NO U TURN mentality---once said no---now you have to stick to a NO---regardless of what happens---because it has become a matter of ego---.

 

[wulff]

lets just say people like us who r into Strategic studies and International Relations decide that.

I mean, i got to quote this gem to preserve it for the sake of future generations

 

[aliyusuf]

Sir as always, you are spot on.

But I have a confusion about this part of your post …

… today---we have standoff weapons from air to surface---with 100's of miles of reach---and to top that off---we have standoff weapons against moving ships that can target the item 100's of miles away as well.

I understand the firing of SOWs from hundreds of miles away on static ground targets … because you know where your target is and you don't need to track its location to keep a lock on.

How does a SOW launch from hundreds of miles away work on a moving target?

The launching platform is a plane whose onboard radar cannot see that far away (100s of miles or the range of a long range anti-ship missile) in Air to Surface mode?

How does the launching plane know the target's current location and when to fire even, if the target is beyond the radar range of the fighter's on board radar? How does the Plane even know where the target is leave alone begin tracking it?

This part has always been bugging me. Would really appreciate if you could help me understand this.

 

[Ultima Thule]

The launching platform is a plane whose onboard radar cannot see that far away (100s of miles or the range of a cruise missile) in Air to Surface mode?

How does the launching plane know the target's current location and when to fire even if the target is beyond the radar range of the fighter's on board radar? How does the Plane even know where the target is leave alone begin tracking it?

This part has always been bugging me. Would really appreciate if you could help me understand this.

3rd party data-link update like AWACS and other ISR plate-forms, and remember bro current 4.5th fighter jets radars have range excess of 100 miles (F-16 block 52 has a radar range of more than 300 km, F-15 radar range of 400 km) @aliyusuf

 

[khanasifm]

3rd party data-link update like AWACS and other ISR plate-forms, and remember bro current 4.5th fighter jets radars have range excess of 100 miles (F-16 block 52 has a radar range of more than 300 km, F-15 radar range of 400 km) @aliyusuf

That range is max for a large target such as airliner then there is detection/tracking range for standard size target such as 5 or 3 meter sqr target etc

Good example su30 Mki bars radar has fighter size detection range of 130-140 km but max detection range in ~300 which means nothing

So I will not go by the max marketing ranges

 

[Ultima Thule]

That range is max for a large target such as airliner then there is detection/tracking range for standard size target such as 5 or 3 meter sqr target etc

Good example su30 Mki bars radar has fighter size detection range of 130-140 km but max detection range in ~300 which means nothing

So I will not go by the max marketing ranges

We are taking about anti ship mission and ships have huge RCS @khanasifm

 

[ziaulislam]

Sir as always, you are spot on.

But I have a confusion about this part of your post …



I understand the firing of SOWs from hundreds of miles away on static ground targets … because you know where your target is and you don't need to track its location to keep a lock on.

How does a SOW launch from hundreds of miles away work on a moving target?

The launching platform is a plane whose onboard radar cannot see that far away (100s of miles or the range of a long range anti-ship missile) in Air to Surface mode?

How does the launching plane know the target's current location and when to fire even, if the target is beyond the radar range of the fighter's on board radar? How does the Plane even know where the target is leave alone begin tracking it?

This part has always been bugging me. Would really appreciate if you could help me understand this.

Gps , inerial, radio/tv guided or cruise missle surface topographic tracking

 

[Darth Vader]

One thing i find weird is every time pdf members promote Thunder they say here you go sanction free bird you will have no interferences from us its plug and play design buy systems from east or west no problem china or Pakistan will have no problem.
You guys have to understand that thunder is really good bird for its price and that makes it attractive option to upgrade according to your needs for decent price.

Israel has already helped pakistan couple of times already if you dont know thats another story just like turkey and states , israel does make really good systems it will just increase thunders capability and option for buyers to add more weapons

 

[MastanKhan]

We are taking about anti ship mission and ships have huge RCS @khanasifm

Hi,

That was the old ships---. The new warships are stealthier.

 

[denel]

One thing i find weird is every time pdf members promote Thunder they say here you go sanction free bird you will have no interferences from us its plug and play design buy systems from east or west no problem china or Pakistan will have no problem.
You guys have to understand that thunder is really good bird for its price and that makes it attractive option to upgrade according to your needs for decent price.

Israel has already helped pakistan couple of times already if you dont know thats another story just like turkey and states , israel does make really good systems it will just increase thunders capability and option for buyers to add more weapons

Correction. There are various companies in Isreal that make extremely good and innovative products and many are not government owned; there is a very stiff competition between these players.

 

[wulff]

One thing i find weird is every time pdf members promote Thunder they say here you go sanction free bird you will have no interferences from us its plug and play design buy systems from east or west no problem china or Pakistan will have no problem.
You guys have to understand that thunder is really good bird for its price and that makes it attractive option to upgrade according to your needs for decent price.

Israel has already helped pakistan couple of times already if you dont know thats another story just like turkey and states , israel does make really good systems it will just increase thunders capability and option for buyers to add more weapons

I would like to know when and how exactly Israel "helped" Pakistan? Are you talking about the time they sent aircrew to India to assist in a particular air operation or when they had aircraft ready to strike Pakistan's nuclear facilities from Indian soil? I'm not sure if I would classify all that as "helping" Pakistan.

On the other hand, if you are talking about the component they supply lockheed martin for the F-16 Block 52s, then you should understand that they are contractually bound to supply the said part(s) for Block 52s, regardless of which country is the customer for Lockheed. If Iran would have bought those Block 52s instead, the Israelis would have had to supply parts for the Iranians as well.

 

[Darth Vader]

I would like to know when and how exactly Israel "helped" Pakistan? Are you talking about the time they sent aircrew to India to assist in a particular air operation or when they had aircraft ready to strike Pakistan's nuclear facilities from Indian soil? I'm not sure if I would classify all that as "helping" Pakistan.

On the other hand, if you are talking about the component they supply lockheed martin for the F-16 Block 52s, then you should understand that they are contractually bound to supply the said part(s) for Block 52s, regardless of which country is the customer for Lockheed. If Iran would have bought those Block 52s instead, the Israelis would have had to supply parts for the Iranians as well.

War against soviets many of the weapons came from Israel
2007 Earthquake
2013 there was a leak many of international news agencies reported about israel selling weapons to M.E countries as well as Pakistan

 

[wulff]

War against soviets many of the weapons came from Israel
2007 Earthquake
2013 there was a leak many of international news agencies reported about israel selling weapons to M.E countries as well as Pakistan

That's absolutely incorrect. Israel was one of the countries where the americans bought captured soviet weapons, during the cold war the americans were literally shopping all around the world for soviet small arms and supplying those to various militias in south america, east asia and in afghanistan. As far as Israel was concerned, it didnt matter where these were sold, as long as they didn't end up in the hands of palestinians or lebanese.

The rest of what you say is just untrue.