JF-17 Thunder Discussions

[shagrat]

I have a question regarding the sounds of this module. The engine sounds are great from what I have heard so far, internally and externally, which is arguably the most important part. However, in the real JF-17, especially during startup, does one not hear anything at all from inverters, cooling fans or the ECS etc.? Are all these things completely silent?

 

I'd imagine that you hear some humming from the electronics at least, like in EDs F/A-18C for example, or the A-10, or the Mi-8, the Huey etc.

 

In Jabbers Video, everything is silent until the engine start, you can't even hear any clicks from the switches. Perhaps his sound levels were too low for the purpose of the video but in the case that they weren't, are the sounds final or will we see additional sounds and improvements after release?

In the new sound settings you can adjust the button clicks. In combination with cockpit volume and hear like in helmet you can now create a very realistic sound.

[Terrorban]

That really isn't the point. Yes they can take out light and medium armor. Yes they can overwhelm active defenses. Yes a single lucky hit could kill an MBT. It just doesn't make sense though that a weapon of this size could reliably one hit kill a modern MBT whether its American, Russian, German, Chinese, or Israeli. And no one is doubting the performance of the SD-10 either, just that the Aim-120 is known to under perform. Other missiles were as well to the same degree but now we will have one accurate missile in a sea of inaccurate ones. In any case can we agree to disagree and move past this argument and just be hyped about what looks like will be an awesome module?

 

 

Mate, what you are saying is what I have been saying all this time as well. It is totally fine that the rockets are not affective against MBTs, but people are argueing that these have no AP capability and should not be effective against armor just based on how APKWS perform.

[Matchstick]

The point is when you lase from above and fire from a 35° dive at maximum range it will likely hit the top armor... aka higher probability for a good hit.

 

And with precision guidance you can potentially track a specific point on the top even as the tank moves.

[MAXsenna]

In the new sound settings you can adjust the button clicks. In combination with cockpit volume and hear like in helmet you can now create a very realistic sound.

Thank you! Failed to notice that one!

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Jester986]

Mate, what you are saying is what I have been saying all this time as well. It is totally fine that the rockets are not affective against MBTs, but people are argueing that these have no AP capability and should not be effective against armor just based on how APKWS perform.

 

In that case, oops.:doh:

[Ramsay]

Seems like these guys will only believe the words straight from the chinese military's official statement. Since this will never happen, they will continue to compare it with american weapons and then say that it should underperform by giving some random unrelated statistics.

 

It is not about american/french weapons, rather it is about weapon design and physics i.e. you can't have your cake AND eat it.

 

There are AFAIK two approaches to adding a laser guidance kit to conventional unguided rockets.

 

APKWS

 

Adds a mid. body conversion kit with sensors, control fins, battery, etc. this allows the use of existing warheads at the expense of increased length and mass - kinetic range (i.e. lofting) is reduced but accuracy increased so the effective pk range is increased.

 

Thales/TDA ILGR

 

Fits a special laser guided warhead with sensor, control fins, battery, etc. the rocket remains the same length and mass but carries less explosive as much of the warhead is replaced by the laser sensor and electronics, pk remains the same due to increased accuracy and risk to troops in contact is reduced.

 

The size and mass of the BRM1 looks to be similar to the unguided variant, therefore I'm guessing it's similar to the Thales/TDA design and carries a smaller warhead.

 

It is totally fine that the rockets are not affective against MBTs, but people are argueing that these have no AP capability and should not be effective against armor just based on how APKWS perform.

 

I don't know why you think the APKWS is not effective against armour, AFAIK it's just not normally used with that type of warhead.

 

AFAIK the APKWS can take a M247 HEPD warhead, which is equivalent to a M72 HEAT round i.e. has ~300 mm armour penetration.

 

However IMHO you'd have to be extremely lucky to take out a MBT with a single shot.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Ramsay

[Terrorban]

It is not about american/french weapons, rather it is about weapon design and physics i.e. you can't have your cake AND eat it.

 

There are AFAIK two approaches to adding a laser guidance kit to conventional unguided rockets.

 

APKWS

 

Adds a mid. body conversion kit with sensors, control fins, battery, etc. this allows the use of existing warheads at the expense of increased length and mass - kinetic range (i.e. lofting) is reduced but accuracy increased so the effective pk range is increased.

 

Thales/TDA ILGR

 

Fits a special laser guided warhead with sensor, control fins, battery, etc. the rocket remains the same length and mass but carries less explosive as much of the warhead is replaced by the laser sensor and electronics, pk remains the same due to increased accuracy and risk to troops in contact is reduced.

 

The size and mass of the BRM1 looks to be similar to the unguided variant, therefore I'm guessing it's similar to the Thales/TDA design and carries a smaller warhead.

 

 

 

I don't know why you think the APKWS is not effective against armour, AFAIK it's just not normally used with that type of warhead.

 

AFAIK the APKWS can take a M247 HEPD warhead, which is equivalent to a M72 HEAT round i.e. has ~300 mm armour penetration.

 

However IMHO you'd have to be extremely lucky to take out a MBT with a single shot.

 

 

I appreciate you giving out your opinions regarding how you understand other weapons work. I on the other hand did not claim anything. I was just stating what conclusions people are coming up with besed on how they believe a similar but different weapon performs.

[AeriaGloria]

Yea it would be nice to choose between block 1 and block 2 variants.

 

I would think so, as they have gone to the effort to model block one oxygen systems and panel as well as block one landing light. I can’t imagine them just throwing that away for the block two landing lights and OBOGS

 

Almost looks like LED to me

 

EDIT: guess it’s more complicated, found early block two with the original landing light

Edited December 3, 2019 by AeriaGloria

[shagrat]

It is not about american/french weapons, rather it is about weapon design and physics i.e. you can't have your cake AND eat it.

 

There are AFAIK two approaches to adding a laser guidance kit to conventional unguided rockets.

 

APKWS

 

Adds a mid. body conversion kit with sensors, control fins, battery, etc. this allows the use of existing warheads at the expense of increased length and mass - kinetic range (i.e. lofting) is reduced but accuracy increased so the effective pk range is increased.

 

Thales/TDA ILGR

 

Fits a special laser guided warhead with sensor, control fins, battery, etc. the rocket remains the same length and mass but carries less explosive as much of the warhead is replaced by the laser sensor and electronics, pk remains the same due to increased accuracy and risk to troops in contact is reduced.

 

The size and mass of the BRM1 looks to be similar to the unguided variant, therefore I'm guessing it's similar to the Thales/TDA design and carries a smaller warhead.

 

 

 

I don't know why you think the APKWS is not effective against armour, AFAIK it's just not normally used with that type of warhead.

 

AFAIK the APKWS can take a M247 HEPD warhead, which is equivalent to a M72 HEAT round i.e. has ~300 mm armour penetration.

 

However IMHO you'd have to be extremely lucky to take out a MBT with a single shot.

That's basically what everybody is saying. Lucky shot maybe, as AP HEAT rounds CAN penetrate weak spots, but not a one shot, one kill against modern MBTs for each rocket fired. HEAT or not.

[shaHeen-1]

I also want the two blocks two be separate planes if possible. sometimes its nice to fly without the fuel probe in your face all the time like Mirage.

[Zergburger]

m247 warhead is old, APKWS uses m282, a warhead designed with the express purpose of armor penetration; and video evidence of it penetrating straight though armor.

 

This is all with a 70mm rocket.....BRM-1 is a 90mm rocket.

Lets take a look at well known weapons that are closer in size....

the PG7-VL from the RPG-7 is 93mm (<500mm RHAe

the Mk 6 Mod 0 from the SMAW is 83.5mm (600mm RHAe)

the AT-4 HEAT(round designation unknown) is 84mm (500mm RHAe)

 

and those are just the single stage warheads.....

 

I am unable to find info on construction of the HEAT warhead in the BRM-1; but if, for instance, it has a tandem warhead....shit gets much worse for the armor.

 

if we are talking about tandem warhead analogues in the 90mm range, the RPG-29 has VERIFIABLY hit and penetrated multiple Abrams' side armor. It has also hit and penetrated lower glacis of a challenger 2.

 

In each of the above instances of the rpg-29 penetrating these, crew members were killed.

 

also the PG7-VR tandem from the rpg-7 that has pentrated an abrams, luckily the fuel tank dissipated the jet and they only had a tank flooded with JP-8 instead of a dead tanker(s)

[Hook47]

I want to make something known to those debating the guided rockets ability to take out a MBT. It's very possible. I've worked with the U.S. Army's Armor for a good many years of my career, and I can certainly tell you that even with many of the modern features such as reactive armor, a hit from a weapon like that will almost certainly injure crew, damage tracks, destroy sensors and mission kill the tank. DCS doesn't have a way of representing that yet, but make no mistake- even the mighty Abrams simply isn't able to stand up to solid hits from shaped charges like that. Too many things can and will break, and the tank will be out of the fight. I can attest to that first hand, having seen real battle damage from weapons such as RPG-7s up to more potent systems such as the already mentioned RPG-29. Yes, the front armor and gun mantlet are seriously tough, but other places as much, and a tank doesn't have to be destroyed to be out of the game.

 

Also on a side note- I don't think the Abrams in DCS has a reactive armor kit but maybe there are tanks that do. In either case- that s### ain't full proof, I can also tell you that first hand!

 

I don't really care either way if Deka chooses to allow those guided rockets to take out MBTs or at least seriously damage them. Tanks are generally overpowered in DCS due to the sort of basic damage model (that I think EDs plans on upgrading).

 

Aside from the usual pre release debates, I'm seriously stoked for the module! Congrats and thanks Deka!

 

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

Edited December 4, 2019 by Hook47

[shaHeen-1]

Let's be honest here. Im here just to keep myself busy in intense circular arguments with foundations of RD93 smoke because I don't know how to pass the time until release. I know I'm not the only one.

[MAXsenna]

Let's be honest here. Im here just to keep myself busy in intense circular arguments with foundations of RD93 smoke because I don't know how to pass the time until release. I know I'm not the only one.

As a spectator I'm having a joy and laugh. Learning too, the knowledge you guys possess!

Keep at it please!

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Fried Rice]

Release is just round the corner, and I’m almost ready to buy the 17. but I have one last question. Can i load all 3 targeting pods at once, run them on each of the MFDs, set different laser codes for each, and then become a buddylazeing hub for my whole team?

[Ramsay]

I am unable to find info on construction of the HEAT warhead in the BRM-1

 

Please link a source were the the BRM-1 is said to have a HEAT warhead.

 

More Detail / Speculation

 

BRM-1 sound similar to the (beam riding ?) Sky Arrow 90, unfortunately the only source I have is Wiki, but it tells a similar story.

 

The maximum range is increased from the original 7 km of the unguided Type 90-1 to 8 km of Sky Arrow 90. Without the significant increase in size and weight due to the additional guidance and flight control system, the increased range would mean the decrease in the size of warhead installed. However, in comparison to unguided Type 90-1 rockets, dozens of which would be needed to take out a target, taking out the same target would only require two to three Sky Arrow 90, so the combat effective has actually increased and the smaller warhead is thus not a problem.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_UAV_employed_missiles#Sky_Arrow_90

 

The fact it likely takes a salvo of BRM-1 to take out a MBT is turned to an advantage in the BRM-1's marketing as Advanced Active Protection Systems (think CIWS for tanks) are designed to destroy or prematurely detonate incoming missiles (particularly manportable RPG/ATGM), but are likely to be overwhelmed by a simultaneous rocket salvo aimed at weak top armour.

 

Launched in a salvo of seven rockets, the BRM1 could even overwhelm a tank's Active Protection System, like the Israeli Trophy, to hit the weak turret top armor.

 

https://www.popsci.com/missiles-zhuhai-china-displays-new-strike-arsenal/

[shaHeen-1]

Release is just round the corner, and I’m almost ready to buy the 17. but I have one last question. Can i load all 3 targeting pods at once, run them on each of the MFDs, set different laser codes for each, and then become a buddylazeing hub for my whole team?

 

Never go full r***** - Tropic Thunder XD

[L0op8ack]

Release is just round the corner, and I’m almost ready to buy the 17. but I have one last question. Can i load all 3 targeting pods at once, run them on each of the MFDs, set different laser codes for each, and then become a buddylazeing hub for my whole team?

 

 

Good idea and I do respect your spirit of utter devotion, you are my wingman now.

 

Sorry, we support only 1 active WMD7 so far.

 

 

And, I think you can take 3 SPJ pods, play the EA-18G role. :)

[VDV]

Is that module ready for download now?

[razo+r]

Is that module ready for download now?

 

Not now. Come back later.

[shaHeen-1]

Are we there yet? XD

[shaHeen-1]

Good idea and I do respect your spirit of utter devotion, you are my wingman now.

 

Sorry, we support only 1 active WMD7 so far.

 

 

And, I think you can take 3 SPJ pods, play the EA-18G role. :)

 

Pls make a video on this and how it can be used.

[MrDieing]

I.. dont think it can be used exactly like the Growler, its more just that it looks like one but still the pods retain their function of a single pod..

[Knock-Knock]

Hey. Just dropping in to wish you all at Deka Ironwork a smooth and successful release :thumbup:

[[VFA-106] Glacier]

Are we there yet? XD

 

I WILL TURN THIS CAR AROUND YOUNG MAN!!!