Why, JF17 of course --- It has DSI!
which is better and in terms of what?
Why, JF17 of course --- It has DSI!
Last edited by JSLLL4; 17th March 2012 at 00:11.
Can Gripen carry anti-ship cruise missiles like JF-17 which is armed with YJ-83 missiles that have a range of over 255+ km?
Last edited by JSLLL4; 17th March 2012 at 00:19.
What does Gripen's composites do? JF-17 has a thrust to weight ratio of 0.95 while Gripen has a thrust to weight ratio of 0.97.
Last edited by JSLLL4; 17th March 2012 at 01:21.
But its pointless anyway to compare JF-17 to Gripen. Since the former has DSI, it is superior in every way. You really should compare JF-17 to F-22. Maybe the Raptor stands a chance even though it doesn't have the mighty DSI.
How can less be more? It's impossible. More is more.
excellent thread. the JF-17 is clearly superior to the F-22, as proven by this youtube video.
bottomline : one shouldn't insult the JF-17 by comparing it with clearly inferior aircraft like the Gripen.
HAL - one step ahead of IBM
You get what you pay for? (Cept the F-35)
Don't forget that the integration of Mach 7 PL-12D Ramjet shooting out to 350 km capable of engaging 15 G LO targets is going on as we speak. Plus the fact that thousands of JF-17 can be manufactured per month which other companies like LM (with BAe, Northrop Grumman, Cassidian, etc) are struggling to make 2000 across 5 years.
Airforces worldwide cower in fear at the thought of a Generation Zwei JF-17. Thunder Indeed.
Last edited by WinterStars; 17th March 2012 at 07:41.
I think this thread is being derailed simply because some specific individuals, often of a particular national persuasion think its okay to troll around on a thread that has nothing to do with them.
Despite the attempted sarcasm, the JF-17 and the Gripen are very comparable planes. I would rank the Gripen higher than the JF-17, but I think that the JF-17 has more potential in future developments than the Gripen does.
Some interesting similarities:
1. Very closely matched thrust and weight
2. STOL performance, ability to operate off roads
3. Both projects pioneered by smaller nations (in the case of Pakistan and the JF-17 is more vital to Pakistan than China thus...)
4. Are to be armed with similar weapons (MAA-1B Pirhana for SA and PAK)
5. A central attempt from the start to focus on ease of maintenance and simplicity in production over raw performance
6. Both envisioned as multirole platforms from the start
Between, the JF-17 does use composites, but to a lower percentage than the Gripen. The JF-17 Block II is slated to have even greater composite use. JF-17's TWR is believed to be greater than 1, thanks to some tweaking (as stated if I recall correctly from some info out of the Zuhai airshow)
Nobody is presenting anything new.
The OP would disagree with you that the JF-17 and the Gripen are comparable. JF-17 with DSI clearly ...
Last edited by WinterStars; 17th March 2012 at 09:19.
Most advance aircraft ever! it does not even need DVI and is composite head to toe! nearly 80% composite usage.
Last edited by matt; 17th March 2012 at 10:02.
Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle
If you don't mind a steeper maintanence curve then JF-17 might suit your needs. But if man-hours matter then Gripen may be the better choice for you.
Not a bad suggestion. F-22 still uses the same air intake technology as Q-5 does, the latter being a 1960s plane.You really should compare JF-17 to F-22. Maybe the Raptor stands a chance even though it doesn't have the mighty DSI.
Last edited by JSLLL4; 17th March 2012 at 14:10.
Isn't the JF-17 basically just a warmed over MiG-21? In other words, has it got anything more to offer compared to the Indian air force MiG-21 Bison, avionics etc?
JF-17 or former Super 7 is a joint design of the late 80s from CATIC and Grumman as a replacement for the J-7. Forced to an end by the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square massacre in 1989. To keep it alive for Pakistan in an urgent need as a F-7 replacement the avaibility of the Russian RD-93 allowed to continue that program without further US cooperation. The present JF-17 does not differ much from the Gripen A in flight performance with the edge for the Gripen by a lower wing-load at least.
On the other hand JF-17 has rather limited capabilities, no advanced targeting pod, and no BVR missile. Hard to say if it has anything like modern, interested ECM system - like ASPIS from advanced F-16s or Spectra from Rafale.
Remember that MiG-21bison in India is the solution to fill the gap and eventually all Bisons will be replaced by MMRCA (the Rafale). On the other hand JF-17 for Pakistan is the future platform for like next 30 years.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)