SD-10

[Terrorban]

I’m sorry. I guess I got too carried away in here.

[falcon_120]

No, Chengdu FC1/JF-17 is design to be the backbone of PAF.

Block II is already better than f-16 in some areas, but block III/PL-15 will be superior in all aspects.

PAF need fighters to be able to compete with rafale/su-30, f-16 can't.

F-16 block 52 will be dedicate for secondary tasks.

As far as I know PAF is plannimg to buy block 70 f16 as his main fighter.

 

And what do you mean by superior in ALL aspects..., i can already tell you more than 3 main aspects of a fighter in which the jf17 cannot be superior no matter how good the weapons and electronics are, even electromics are limited by its size (ej. Radar aperture and kw)

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[Terrorban]

I would love to see and hear about that kind discussion. I'm sure you will all get to a middle ground.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

I would rather they come to a factual conclusion and not barter with each other for a middle ground.

 

Please don’t take it as a negative response to your original comment. :)

[falcon_120]

I would rather they come to a factual conclusion and not barter with each other for a middle ground.

 

Please don’t take it as a negative response to your original comment. :)

 

Not at all, you are right, it should be a very scientific and factual discussion rather than a political one, poor wording on my part.

[sylkhan]

As far as I know PAF is plannimg to buy block 70 f16 as his main fighter.

 

NO, all is subject to change :), are you aware of "end-user restrictions from the US" for Pakistan.

And F-16 block 70 is a very expensive fighter for Pakistan then chances are very low to non existant

 

And what do you mean by superior in ALL aspects..., i can already tell you more than 3 main aspects of a fighter in which the jf17 cannot be superior no matter how good the weapons and electronics are, even electromics are limited by its size (ej. Radar aperture and kw)

 

From a retired PAF Officer "Air Commodore Kaiser Tufail "

 

“With AESA radar, the JF-17 should be able to resist enemy jamming [via its] many small transmit-receive modules (TRM), making it a much more survivable platform. The aircraft’s BVR capability is also expected to be greatly enhanced, especially in an environment increasingly beset with EW advances. Assuming the AESA radar works as expected, the JF-17 would have a more advanced radar than that of the F-16, thus becoming the PAF’s preferred platform in the air-to-air role.”

[falcon_120]

NO, all is subject to change :), are you aware of "end-user restrictions from the US" for Pakistan.

 

And F-16 block 70 is a very expensive fighter for Pakistan then chances are very low to non existant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From a retired PAF Officer "Air Commodore Kaiser Tufail "

 

 

 

“With AESA radar, the JF-17 should be able to resist enemy jamming [via its] many small transmit-receive modules (TRM), making it a much more survivable platform. The aircraft’s BVR capability is also expected to be greatly enhanced, especially in an environment increasingly beset with EW advances. Assuming the AESA radar works as expected, the JF-17 would have a more advanced radar than that of the F-16, thus becoming the PAF’s preferred platform in the air-to-air role.”

Ok so you are comparing it to the current f16 version of the PAF. I say this because a block 70 f16 is an AESA equipped fighter.

 

But even though take into account that Jf17 being so light it comes with many operational limitatios, specially range and weapon payload, which would not be the case in a block 70 f16.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[Jester2138]

If the nato community keep acting like this, they will cannibalise their own hobby. After seeing all the drama that is kicking out over this, which other 3rd party will be willing so spend years making a jet and doing lots of research because in the end if it outperforms the nato ones, it will be an unwelcome addition.

 

I don't see the NATO crowd kicking up a fuss over this at all. If anything, I think the JF-17 has been extremely well-received by the DCS community in general because it was delivered so complete, as compared to the ED F-16. Many of my (American) friends have bought the JF-17 instead of the F-16 for this reason. I am one of them!

 

Current ED practices also show favour towards nato side with their updates and development priorities.

 

How so? The AMRAAM, NATO's most important missile, has been left woefully under-performing for years. How is this a pro-NATO bias?

 

Moreover, it is not a surprise to anyone that a brand-new fighter compares favorably with a 40-year-old fighter. Do you really think "NATO fanboys" are bothered by this? The only thing I've seen anyone get upset over was the lack of realism in the AMRAAM.

 

NATO has moved on to aircraft like the F-22 and F-35; nobody's got a chip on their shoulder regarding a lightweight, non-stealthy, short-ranged Chinese export fighter except you, apparently.

Edited December 22, 2019 by Jester2138

[Terrorban]

I don't see the NATO crowd kicking up a fuss over this at all. If anything, I think the JF-17 has been extremely well-received by the DCS community in general because it was delivered so complete, as compared to the ED F-16. Many of my (American) friends have bought the JF-17 instead of the F-16 for this reason. I am one of them!

 

 

 

How so? The AMRAAM, NATO's most important missile, has been left woefully under-performing for years. How is this a pro-NATO bias?

 

Moreover, it is not a surprise to anyone that a brand-new fighter compares favorably with a 40-year-old fighter. Do you really think "NATO fanboys" are bothered by this? The only thing I've seen anyone get upset over was the lack of realism in the AMRAAM.

 

NATO has moved on to aircraft like the F-22 and F-35; nobody's got a chip on their shoulder regarding a lightweight, non-stealthy, short-ranged Chinese export fighter except you, apparently.

 

You are even insulting the jet while saying nobody talks negative about it. So far ED has only buffed nato weapons and released nato jets. Even the Russian community is upset about that.

 

Just calling people wrong on this forum is all what you seem to be doing lately.

[Jester2138]

You are even insulting the jet while saying nobody talks negative about it.

 

Where did I insult it? You're proving my point about that chip on your shoulder.

 

So far ED has only buffed nato weapons and released nato jets.

 

There was no "buff"; it was a correction to make it more accurate to real-life, and it was about a decade overdue.

 

The preponderance of NATO jets has to do with the Russian government, not "NATO fanboys". I hope Deka is able to make many Chinese jets.

Edited December 22, 2019 by Jester2138

[Terrorban]

Alright, you are just going to reword my statements and just deny certain comments.

 

You clearly got upset over me mentioning the nato fanboys.

 

I stand by what I said and you just saying it’s not true doesn’t change the fact what people had been saying about the jet when it was released. Just look at the old SD-10 posts here. Look at the comments on the pre release videos.

 

This is off topic talk now so I will not be doing this discussion any further unless you have something regarding the SD-10.

 

Or just continue to cherry pick what I said and reply to it in multiple quotes.

[Chiron]

actually if u look at Russian missiles they are nearly useless compare to most missiles in this game maybe u can relay on ET and R-77 and the most important missile R27ER in BVR near to be like unguided missile until now in honest way the support come to full fudality planes no more less and for a long time ago we requested russian fighter to the red team and it seem impossible job so we are relaying on DEKA with Chines planes and they are doing awesome work so far and i hope they continue this great performance

[shaHeen-1]

Try saying JF-17 quickly without saying Jeff. if you can't then stop commenting on this useless thread.

 

All the Pakistanis are too busy flying the jet rather than wasting time on forums crying about who talked smack about the jet. I suggest everyone here do the same. Try out the BRM-1s they're really nice.

 

Imagine you're hitting Jeff haters every time you get a strike if it helps.

 

Only reason I'm on this forum is cuz my hotas is out of commission and im waiting for a replacement.

[Harlikwin]

I don't see the NATO crowd kicking up a fuss over this at all. If anything, I think the JF-17 has been extremely well-received by the DCS community in general because it was delivered so complete, as compared to the ED F-16. Many of my (American) friends have bought the JF-17 instead of the F-16 for this reason. I am one of them!

 

 

 

How so? The AMRAAM, NATO's most important missile, has been left woefully under-performing for years. How is this a pro-NATO bias?

 

Moreover, it is not a surprise to anyone that a brand-new fighter compares favorably with a 40-year-old fighter. Do you really think "NATO fanboys" are bothered by this? The only thing I've seen anyone get upset over was the lack of realism in the AMRAAM.

 

NATO has moved on to aircraft like the F-22 and F-35; nobody's got a chip on their shoulder regarding a lightweight, non-stealthy, short-ranged Chinese export fighter except you, apparently.

 

Honestly I don't really see this pro-nato thing much. Yes there are always whiners online in the "competitive" community when a new missile or plane is released that doesn't match their pre-concieved notions. But IMO, the JF17 is not some uber fighter as they make it out. But at least its something modern that is reasonably matched against bluefor.

 

The JF17 can't carry the payload of the hornet, or F16 really. IT has no HOBS capable missile, and coupled with the smoky motor, its has a hard time vs any Blue fighter. BVR, the SD10 is basically an AMMRAM at this point, or at least close one way or the other. I laugh at all this hypothetical Tacview hand wringing. It almost never happens like that online competitively, you are almost always firing at closer ranges against notching and maneuvering targets, and yes the SD10 might have a bit better kinematics, but the JF17 can only guide 2 in TWS mode as opposed to 4 for the western fighters. And it can only carry 4 SD10's vs like 6 for the viper and 12? for the F18. Not to mention that the Link16 is working better online than link17 at the moment so they have far better SA.

 

The other thing about ED making NATO fighters is its easier for them to do so and more profitable so they will continue to do it. Fewer documentation issues, and the blue guys want to buy blue jets, its that simple.

[shaHeen-1]

For my two cents, you can buy three JF-17s for the price of 1 F-16 so technically you're carrying much more load for the same price. Even the US is looking for cheap aircraft swarms that can wreck face before adversaries knows what hit em.

[BIGNEWY]

Hi all

 

Please keep the topic on the SD-10 in this thread, if we continue going off topic or squabbling I will just close it down.

 

thanks

[almullao]

Well, whatever everyone talking about here is some Wikipedia advertisements that may be a propaganda, this is a simulator, in simulation advertisements are not considered a factor. Stop that whining and let the guys do their job, they're doing a great job, actually DEKA really did great work and ED recently been pushing things forward and releasing many updates and revisions.

 

On the other hand, if you want to complain complain about the Phoenix that can pull whatever g it needs to intercept a target, anybody can go and test that, it even hit an empty mig29 doing perfectly timed over 10gs turn towards the missile when it was traveling at nearly 4 mach, that means the missile had to do nearly 50gs to do the intercept. But regardless, they said they'll fix it, just let them do their job and enjoy what you have.

[FoxTrotAlpha691]

@almullao, very well said and point taken, I like the JF-17 and I will take your advice and enjoy what I have. Salute to you sir!

[Tiger-II]

None of us have any actual data to support our assertions, so we're all just guessing.

 

I've seen the various videos analyzing the missile, and nothing seems off about it.

 

So it has a higher peak velocity? It's not unreasonable.

 

I think it is worth reminding people that China is not a backwards 3rd world country. It has technology more advanced than the USA, and this is a fact.

 

Why not enable a moderate fighter to carry a particularly good weapon for AA? It was designed only recently, and it is designed to be for the "here and now" in a modern AF against a bigger rival (PAKAF vs. India). Given the inventory of India, it's not sci-fi to think they want something that can go up against them.

 

The development history of the JF-17 is unique, but that doesn't mean rubbish. To me, it looks like an attempt at cost reduction while picking the best of each aircraft it borrows parts from. Don't forget that it is a whole new aircraft, even if the ideas are not.

Edited December 26, 2019 by Tiger-II

[veenee]

"I think it is worth reminding people that China is not a backwards 3rd world country. It has technology more advanced than the USA, and this is a fact."

 

I'd say it is not.

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[shaHeen-1]

maybe in some very specific domains China may be doing better or catching up fast due to prioritization but other than that its hard to even imagine the vast ocean of capital and infrastructure (some of it old and decaying, i concede, like plumbing) that is the USA. question is is SD10 one of these areas? answer: who knows? no real info available.

[falcon_120]

Just as a side note maybe worth considering:

The SD10 is an export variant of the Pl12. I really have a hard time imagining an export weapon as capable as it chinese counterpart (either in electronics, engine or whatever area they decided to tune down).

 

As a similar example US only export its latest variants of the AIM120 to tier 1 allies (UK, Germany...) or not even that.

 

Although maybe this is not the case and the SD10 is just as good as the PL12, i don't know. I am just trying to apply weapon export "general" practices, here.

 

Btw do we have any official confirmation of what C amraam are we seeing in DCS (C2/C3/C5...)?

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[Harlikwin]

C5 aamram iirc