Skip to content Skip to footer

First JF-17 will undergo major overhaul at AVIC

China Aviation News (CAN) reports that the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) received a Pakistan Air Force (PAF) JF-17 Thunder multi-role fighter at its Aircraft Maintenance Factory in Chengfei for major overhaul on November 07.

The specific fighter has been in service with the PAF since 2007. According to CAN, this will be a joint pilot program between China and Pakistan, and will support the Chinese aviation industry’s wider transition to supporting current generation Chinese-made export fighters from previous generation models. According to Sina News, a separate major overhaul facility will be built at Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC).

The Chengfei facility has long been undertaking maintenance work for Chengdu J-7/F-7 and J-10 fighters for overseas and domestic users, respectively. The JF-17 is the first of AVIC’s new generation fighters to require major overhaul, making this an important project for AVIC as it continues marketing the Thunder as well as its contemporaries, i.e. the FC-20 and L-15.

Notes & Comments:

The JF-17 is a mainstay fighter of the PAF. As of September 2017, PAC had rolled out 90 JF-17 Block-I and Block-II fighters, which are in use by four fighter squadrons and a training unit with the Sargodha-based Combat Commanders School (CCS). Being a multi-role platform, the JF-17 has been tasked with air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-sea roles. The fleet logged 19,000 cumulative flight hours by April 2016.

Briefly, major aircraft overhaul would involve disassembling the entire aircraft down to its individual parts, after which each part is closely inspected for damage or anomalies. These parts will either be repaired or replaced entirely with brand new components. During the overhaul process the depot would also examine the aircraft’s wiring as well as hydraulic and fuel pipes, which may necessitate repair or replacing. The aircraft is re-assembled and put through tests before returning to use.

The PAF’s Block-I fighters will require major overhaul work through the 2020s. Although PAC is slated to establish its own facility, it will be interesting to see if this requires expansion at PAC or if it will subsume the existing maintenance site of the Chengdu F-7P, which the JF-17 has mostly supplanted, with the No. 18 operational conversion unit (OCU) being the sole F-7P and FT-7P operator in the PAF.

It should also be noted that in June of this year, PAC ordered a Damage Tolerance Analysis and Structural Health Management (DTA/SHM) System from Critical Materials in Portugal. PAC could pair the DTA/SHM system to its entire maintenance system before initiating the major overhaul process by continuously monitoring the health and airframe integrity of each aircraft, be it the JF-17 or other platforms.

With domestic support being a critical aspect of the JF-17 program, PAC had also looked to establish a maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) facility for the JF-17’s powerplant, the Klimov RD-93 (IHS Jane’s).

Like airframe MRO, engine MRO typically involves stripping the engine down to individual parts for inspection and thorough cleaning, and conducting non-destructive inspections (NDI) to identify defects and other anomalies. In the case of PAC’s ATAR-09C MRO, the ability to manufacture specific new components is also in place. Such a capability enables PAC to effectively lengthen each ATAR-09C’s lifespan.

Substantive movement in this area should begin in the near-term, if not already, considering that the pervasiveness of the RD-93 in the PAF fleet. Thanks to the ATAR-09C MRO base, PAC already possesses a suite of systems to undertake the engine MRO process, it is a matter of having Klimov provide the means and expertise to connect the RD-93 to that wider system.

Show CommentsClose Comments


  • by Jack More
    Posted November 13, 2017 2:59 am 0Likes

    couldn’t they set up an overhaul facility in 10 years.Interesting for a manufacturer org.

  • by Faisal Jawaid
    Posted November 13, 2017 3:16 am 0Likes

    MRO facility for Rd-93 is very critical. What is the current situation of Rd-93 overhaul considering its short life span?

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 13, 2017 3:29 am 0Likes

    Worth remembering that a lot of programs got hit very hard in 2009-2013 due to the Financial Crisis, austerity cuts, IMF, peak COIN operations in FATA (Rah-e-Rast, Rah-e-Nijat, etc). Not many will endorse PPP governance in that period either. There’s lack of experience and capability to be sure, but if you lack funding, then you can’t even take a proper stab at doing it yourself earlier on.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 13, 2017 3:47 am 0Likes

    Not known, but seeing where they are in terms of airframe overhauling of the JF-17, they might still be at the engagement phase with Russia on this issue.

  • by John John Slade
    Posted November 13, 2017 4:03 am 0Likes

    JF-17 may be not advanced as other western counterpart but at least both PAC and AVIC made impossible. I just hope that JF-17 Block III will be equal to weatern and Russian advanced fighter jet.

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 13, 2017 4:06 am 0Likes

    Well it’s time for Pak to setup the overhauling facility so it can be less time consuming & cheaper. We should also ask Russian if they can start producing the engine in Pakistan or if Chinese have developed a new engine then it’s ok. Maybe Pak should look for a Mach 1.8 engine for block 3.

  • by Warraich
    Posted November 13, 2017 6:28 am 0Likes

    Will the overhaul involve upgrade to Blk II standards?

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 6:50 am 0Likes

    China has been testing JF-17 block 3 with WS-13E engine, but that is mostly so JF-17 can compete with Russia on export market. Obviously JF-17 can’t compete with Russian aircraft with a Russian engine because Russia might refuse to supply the engine if JF-17 is competition, which has been a major hurdle for exporting JF-17.

    But it seems Pakistan would stick to RD-93 for own use, most likely because of cost. This is a quite old engine so that is the only reason I could think of. Does anyone know if there are other reasons?

  • by Syed Arbab Shah
    Posted November 13, 2017 7:54 am 0Likes

    Why is PAF not going for RD 33 MK engines?

  • by ali amanat
    Posted November 13, 2017 8:59 am 0Likes

    Indeed a good and appropriate question but i think its just an overhauling but not upgrading to the level of blk 2 .

  • by ali amanat
    Posted November 13, 2017 9:05 am 0Likes

    Astonishing is china testing or under development jf17 blk 3 ? Please shed some light or any authenticeted source of information or a flying or static pic?

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 13, 2017 1:43 pm 0Likes

    Of course it will be as PAC would install Helmet Mounted Display system, AESA Radar & long range targeting pods. Plus there’s a dual seat version. All these improvements will make it much more advanced.

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 13, 2017 1:48 pm 0Likes

    Yes I’ve heard about WS-13 & maybe it’s MACH 1.8 but anyway even if Russia cannot produce a new engine for our aircraft then it can at least produce the current engine in our country that is installed on JF-17. It would become cheaper & will consume less time. Remember that Russia agreed to directly supply the RD-93 engine to us. I don’t think JF-17 can compete with Russian air crafts as Russians manufacture twin engine air crafts while JF-17 can only be a substitute for F-16 & Mirage 2000 or SAAB gripen.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 4:20 pm 0Likes

    Nothing concrete I am afraid. I have been hearing from various sources including wikipedia of JF-17, that China has been testing JF-17 with WS13E. WS-13E only came out around the past year and unlikely to have anything to do with block 1 & 2, also probably not dual-seat JF-17B either, so I am guessing most likely block 3.

    Regardless the progress, JF-17 block 3 almost certainly will have the WS-13E option for export purposes.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 4:22 pm 0Likes

    F-16 is equivalent of MiG-29 or even MiG-35, so JF-17 is a potential competitor for Fulcrum variants.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 5:23 pm 0Likes

    Surprisingly Tejas is unlikely competing with JF-17. According to: IAF made a presentation to the government to explain why Tejas lags behind Sweden-made JAS 39 and US F-16.

    According to IAF the “endurance” of Tejas in combat is just about 59 minutes as against 3 hours of Gripen and nearly 4 fours for the F-16.

    Also, Tejas can carry a pay-load of about three tons against nearly six tons and seven tons by the Gripen and F-16 respectively.

    The IAF has also said Tejas needs 20 hours of serving for every hour of flying as against six hours for Gripen and 3.5 hours for F-16.

    Also, both the F-16 and Gripen has a life-span of 40 years against just 20 of Tejas. And, in some areas the vintage Russian made Mig-21 is better than Tejas, the IAF is understood to have told the government.

    Gripen and F-16 can’t not fly for that many hours with just internal fuel, so Tejas probably can only fly for an hour even with external fuel tanks and after that it needs 20 hours of service to fly again.

    Before reading this I was thinking Tejas as underwhelming and subpar, but after reading this the words like “shocking” and “white elephant” are coming to mind. HAL better hiring some experienced foreign consulting firms to improve the Tejas design for Mark 2. And I no longer think AMCA has any chance at all without a foreign partner.

    It looks like the internal fight between IAF and HAL are intensifying since FGFA with all the leaking to press. But anyway Tejas unlikely attracts any foreign customers with current performance.

  • by Navid Butt
    Posted November 13, 2017 6:30 pm 0Likes

    I suspect there is a tacit agreement between the two countries, that export version jf-17 will only be with WS-13E/M Engine.Chinese will not let The Russian take advantage of China/Pakistan hard work.

  • by Navid Butt
    Posted November 13, 2017 6:40 pm 0Likes

    PAFare well aware of the equipment and capabilities her adversaries has.I am sure PAF will come up with a machine which could stand and fight ie Sukhoies,Migs,Mirage and above all AESA equipped Rfale.

  • by TheSchwantzPhenom
    Posted November 13, 2017 6:52 pm 0Likes

    First things First. Right now getting a MRO facility sanctioned with Russian permission should be the first, second and third most important priority for Pakistan. Because the talks of establishing a MRO facility for RD-93 engines have been going on since the fall of 2015 and even after 2 years no headway has been made. And this is regarding the setting up of just the “MRO” facility, let alone local production of RD-93 engines from scratch.
    Second, coming to the localised production of RD-93, you should keep in mind the fact that Russia currently doesn’t supply the RD-93 engines directly to Pakistan. But it is sourced to AVIC of China for its FC-1 (JF-17) platform which then is transferred to Pakistan.Therefore, the bulk of effort needs to focus on encouraging the Russians to sell their engines directly to Pakistan before asking them for “local production” of Russian jet technology under full transfer of technology.
    Third, you might have noticed that India at 38% and China at 11% (compared to Pakistan at 0.45%) are the two largest buyers of Russian arms in the world. India by far being the biggest as per the SIPRI 2017 report. When both India and China, who have traditionally been some of the largest operators of Russian jets in the world are not even close to manufacturing a Russian jet engine from scratch even after decades of close ties with Russia, i doubt Pakistan with its current geo-political situation (vis-a-vis india) would be able to convince the Russians to transfer the tech of a whole jet engine for local production.
    Bottom line is no country in the past (including the US and Russia) has ever transferred the tech of military engines even to some of its closest allies for local production under complete transfer of tech. I doubt Russia will ever agree to produce the RD-93 engines locally for a jet which is not even Russian to begin with.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 7:18 pm 0Likes

    From what I know Pakistan sources through AVIC only initially, now it directly buys engines from Russia.

    I am quite surprised too Pakistan did not locally produce RD-93 even though Pakistan has been buying hundreds of it. Maybe India played a role in this.

    From what I understand no engine technology transfer ever covers turbine blades and super alloy. Even AL-31F locally produced by China uses Russian made turbine blades. I don’t know if new Chinese single crystal turbine blade production capability would change that.

  • by TheSchwantzPhenom
    Posted November 13, 2017 7:41 pm 0Likes

    Could be due to Russians denying the sale of RD-33 MK engines to Pakistan. After all RD-33 MK is the latest and most advanced in RD series of engines manufactured by Klimov. These engines currently power the MiG-35 and the recently upgraded MiG-29 KUB in service with the Indian Navy. Having said that i doubt Russians would allow the use of its latest engine on a platform (JF-17) which is not even of Russian origin to begin with. After all, the sale of such latest engine could be tied to the purchase of Russian jets (MiG-35) in meaningful quantity. That would make sense in terms of business and profits earned by Russian companies. However, back in april 2016, it was widely reported in the media (as well as Quwa) that Pakistan could go for either the Chinese WS-13 or the Russian RD-33 MK for the future upgrades of its current JF-17 fleet. Going by those reports, some could argue that Pakistan could not have evinced interest in RD 33 MK engines without the Russian willingness to sell the engine to Pakistan. But before jumping to conclusions consider this. Going with the same analogy, the same could be said about the Pakistani interest in Russian platforms like Su-35. Why hasn’t Russia sold any Su-35s to pakistan so far if they were so willing to sell it to Pakistan in 2015? Of course and without a doubt, money is not an issue for Pakistan. When Pakistan could spend a $1.2 billion USD on the Turkish T-129 choppers and when Indonesia with a smaller defense budget than Pakistan could buy 12 Su-35s in a barter agreement (worth over a billion dollars), i don’t see why Pakistan couldn’t also make the payment for the Russian Su-35. The reasons behind both RD-33 MK and Su-35 could be geo-political and possibly a third party interference.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 13, 2017 8:10 pm 0Likes

    Russian willingness notwithstanding, switching engines would push JF-17 development by 12-18 months, at least. If an engine switch is on the cards, it isn’t a factor for the JF-17 Block-III. Maybe later, but that’s assuming the PAF intends to stretch its acquisition plans from 150 to 200-250+.

  • by TheSchwantzPhenom
    Posted November 13, 2017 9:02 pm 0Likes

    Surprisingly you are bringing the topic of Tejas in a thread discussing JF-17 upgrades,even when no one has so far has raised the issue of competition between Tejas and JF-17 on this thread. Nice bait for another round of vitriolic and hatred filled comments from either side.
    By the way, it is interesting how you are trusting some journalists who don’t even have a modicum of knowledge in military aviation, distort the facts and present to the public. If only you could have done a bit more research you would have come across a post of a veteran defense analyst known as Bharat Karnad who has specifically debunked the recent article published in the Times of India. He has written that the facts presented in TOI could not be further from truth and from the one presented by the IAF officials in their presentation. Both the data in terms of range, payload capacity and the maintenance man hour per flight hours for Tejas, F-16 and Saab Gripen were different and misinterpreted from the one actually reported by the IAF officials. Also if IAF was indeed so sad about Tejas’ performance as the folks from across the border would want to believe, then why the IAF has ordered 124 tejas jets from HAL should hardly make any sense.
    But who am i to refute these conspiracy theories. If ludicrous articles such as these pumps the ego and give false assurances to a nation of 300 million then i can’t help but stop feeling amused. After all stopping it from happening would be like working against the interests of my country.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 9:25 pm 0Likes

    I have to no reason to doubt Indian press on something like this (It would be different if it is Pakistan press). At least I think IAF is more credible than a defense analyst.

    I actually found the article you mentioned and it seems even Bharat Karnad didn’t deny the existence of IAF document, but insisting that IAF is campaigning against Tejas.

    And I don’t think IAF willingly purchased Tejas, seeing what they think of Tejas, it is quite obvious.

    But that is between IAF and Bharat Karnad (and HAL), and I doubt if IAF don’t know the real performance of Tejas. But it is up to you to decide who you are going to believe.

  • by TheSchwantzPhenom
    Posted November 13, 2017 10:19 pm 0Likes

    “I think IAF is more credible than a defense analyst.”
    You sound as if IAF has publicly issued an official report on the shortcomings of the Tejas? Do note that the aforementioned briefing between NSA Ajit Doval and the IAF officials is highly classified and took place behind closed doors. Its not just TOI but anyone with any vested interest could speculate and come up with wild theories regarding something which happened under secrecy… the exact details of which probably would never be made public.
    Secondly, it is intriguing how the journos at TOI came up with the exact figures of maintenance hours for the Gripen-NG platform when in fact the Gripen NG platform has not been mass produced, is not in service by any air force and a prototype of Gripen NG for the first time has flown in June this year. Official Saab source:
    To me that was the final nail in the coffin when i saw TOI officials reporting the exact figures pertaining to the Gripen NG platform.
    Moreover the TOI report cites an “IAF official source” confirming the same without naming the person specifically. The question is why would IAF or any of its officials, even under anonymity, would ever disclose the capabilities of a foreign platform. That carries massive repercussions and has the potential of derailing the single engine fighter program, with the foreign OEMs suing the IAF for breaching the terms of confidentiality and making the sensitive data of their platforms public.
    If the TOI report is true then it massively decreased the chances of Saab selling its Gripen-NG fighters to other countries, especially over competitor like the F-16 Block 70. That wont sit well with either Saab or Sweden, but so far no official statement has come from them.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 10:41 pm 0Likes

    I don’t know what happens in Indian politics but in Australia it is quite common for people in government leaking things like this to press to make themselves look good and embarrass their political adversaries. It is a very common practice and majority of the times most of the democratic governments leak like sieves, are you saying Indian government is any different?

    Information of Gripen is no doubt provided to IAF since it is one of the procurement candidates, and that information is hardly secret. And leaking is quite different from disclosure.

    Suing for what? Almost no government leak investigation has ever yielded any results.

    Then again it is not surprising to me that people would choose to believe what they want to believe instead what is likely the truth.

  • by TheSchwantzPhenom
    Posted November 13, 2017 11:04 pm 0Likes

    1.) Believing something by saying is the truth, when infact it really suits your belief process and 2.) at the same time accusing others of “choosing to believe what they want” are not much different form each other, i am afraid Joseph.
    When you dont know what happens in Indian Politics then what made you believe or dis-believe something originating in Indian politics. Moreover, this isn’t politics or anyway related to any politician or political party in India. Again stop bringing ludicrous theories to justify something. This was purely based on India’s defense needs and requirements involving India’s National Security Advisor and IAF officials.
    Moreover the IAF official which the TOI cites as the source is not affiliated to any political party. Thinking, that by making such a statement he would be furthering an agenda of a political party is absurd. Moreover if politics was indeed a motive behind this as per Professor Joseph’s theory, it itself raises a lot of questions as to the credibility and accuracy of this report. Because not only in Australia or India, it is a norm world over that people go to extreme lengths to malign their political rivals, including telling lies and distorting facts.
    Go and ask Israelis or the british about the exact details of the F-35 even though they operate it and they will take you for a gullible civilian. Try asking the Russians (or even the chinese) about the exact capabilities (in hard figures such as the sustained turn rate or instantaneous turn rate) of their latest Su-35s and they will laugh you out. IAF even though doesn’t operate the Gripen E, has no right to make its capabilities public even though it might have access to some of its sensitive data. The same goes with US Block 70 and its APG-83 AESA radar including its range, azimuth angle etc. Thats common sense and no country does that.
    “Suing for what? Almost no government leak investigation has ever yielded any results.”
    Your comments are seriously misinformed. Have you ever heard about the data leak on the scorpene submarine which Indian Navy is making with France under Project -75? Legal proceedings have already been initiated since it compromised India’s strategic security. It also seriously jeopardised DCNS’ chances of securing further orders with the Indian navy under Project 75I. Do read a bit more news on Indian defense and politics before jumping to conclusions.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 13, 2017 11:19 pm 0Likes

    Being hacked and being leaked are quite different things. But it is quite clear that you are not interested in the truth because people interested in the truth would at least open to explore instead of just flat denial.

    So I will stop wasting my time with you.

  • by Guna Sekaran
    Posted November 14, 2017 12:04 am 0Likes

    Why compare tejas with f16? Compare tejas with the jf17. Even tejas mk2 wud be far better than f16 bcoz tejas is a light combat aircraft. F16 was medium multirole combat. Better Agility, hmd locking range longer, lighter weight, and closer turning radius gives tejas upper hand over even f16. Further tejas was to protect airspace and provide air support to troops. That tejas would satisfy great. Mk2 wud even have stealthier features

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 14, 2017 12:28 am 0Likes

    From I hear Indian government was pushing IAF to buy more Tejas, but IAF wanted to buy F-16 and Gripen instead, thus the comparison.

    There are suspicions that IAF wanted to buy F-16 and Gripen because they are taking foreign bribery, which is quite easy for people to believe in India, so I think IAF leaked the comparison to show there are good reasons for wanting to buy foreign aircraft.

    From what I know JF-17 has endurance of 3 hours with external fuel tanks and weapon load of 4.3 ton and life span of 25 years for block 1 & 2. But JF-17 is a cheaper aircraft (about half the price of Gripen) with an inferior engine comparing to Gripen and Tejas. So if what IAF was saying is true then JF-17 is actually a better aircraft than Tejas.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 14, 2017 3:37 am 0Likes

    Based on the PAF CAS’ previous detailed interview (Bol Narratives), he described the JF-17 as the core or mainstay of the PAF fleet, but clearly hinted that another platform was necessary to compensate for the JF-17’s inherent gaps (e.g. range, endurance etc). That is certainly something the 5th-gen fighter will have to provide (esp. as it’ll likely begin replacing the F-16s), but something sooner wouldn’t hurt.

    //But we have developed the JF-17 Thunder. We cannot call it parity, but we have a core structure, which doesn’t prevent us from launching an air campaign. It is all about your asset deployment.

    However, in future – in the next 10 years down the line – if we don’t induct fifth-generation aircraft, then the disparity will increase. Indians are working on a fifth-generation aircraft.

    Pakistan definitely has to induct new aircraft. We have both Chinese and Russian options.

    While that happened, we kept looking at other options. I think we have some of the leading options both in China and Russia. We are also collaborating with Turkey for developing a next generation aircraft.//

  • by Syed Arbab Shah
    Posted November 14, 2017 5:54 am 0Likes

    India is already familiar with Russian fighter aircrafts. Any sale of such equipment that could change the balance of power in Pakistan’s favor, would naturally be opposed by India and we might end up with a down graded version of Su 35 at best.

    Q. What exactly are you referring to when you say we have “Russian” options?

    Ofcourse you know more

  • by Abdul Rashid
    Posted November 14, 2017 6:08 am 0Likes

    Bilal is quoting PAF CAS, Sohail Aman.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 14, 2017 6:10 am 0Likes

    As Abdul Rashid stated, those are the exact words of the PAF CAS ACM Sohail Aman. You can find that and more in the link.

  • by ali amanat
    Posted November 14, 2017 7:27 am 0Likes

    Brother , indians are not realistic you are quite right ,and well said .

  • by ali amanat
    Posted November 14, 2017 7:32 am 0Likes

    Thanks brother.

  • by Headstrong
    Posted November 14, 2017 9:38 am 0Likes

    One can always rely on a few trolls here itching to get into a Tejas vs JF-17 debate – even when the topic is about something else.
    Aussie, hey?

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:40 am 0Likes

    Well, I bet if it were about the inferiority of JF-17 you wouldn’t be calling people trolls, right? Let’s face it I am not the one calling people names.

    At the moment like this, it is quite easy to tell who the Indians are.

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:46 am 0Likes

    Well he is actually telling you what the IAF has told to the Government of India & he is correct.

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:47 am 0Likes

    You are right. The Indian Air Force has highlighted these facts to their government. Well anyway they are trying to equip Tejas with an air to airvrefuelling probe and are looking for AESA Radar for Tejas.

  • by Headstrong
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:49 am 0Likes

    Oh, I’ve never hidden my nationality. Unlike some others here 🙂
    And let’s also face this – there is one, and only one, type of commentator who would want to bring in Tejas into this issue. I think I called it right

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:53 am 0Likes

    Light combat air craft is just a name decided by Indians. The manoeuvreability of F-16 is unmatched. BTW the block 2 is not stealth but it might just be equipped with AESA Radar, HMD & Air to Air refuelling probe.

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:55 am 0Likes

    Chinese have developed a new engine for J-31 air craft so it doesn’t matter if Russians do not manufacture RD-93 in Pakistan. The new Chinese engine does not produce black smoke & is Mach 1.8

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 14, 2017 11:56 am 0Likes

    In my opinion the new Chinese engine which Chinese have developed for J-31 would be much better as it doesn’t create black smoke & is Mach 1.8

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 14, 2017 1:41 pm 0Likes

    I think that is WS-13E as well, though from what I hear that is a temporary solution, later it will be replaced with more advanced WS-19, which is supposed to have stealth nozzle and 3D thrust vectoring, but there is very little information on WS-19’s progress.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 14, 2017 3:13 pm 0Likes

    I have seen plenty of Tejas vs JF-17 debates on this forum, mostly from proud Indians announcing how advanced Tejas is comparing to JF-17, and I noticed you did not say anything then, so don’t be a hypocrite now.

    Anyway I am here to discuss military technologies not wasting my time on this kind of talk.

  • by Headstrong
    Posted November 15, 2017 12:13 am 0Likes

    As an ‘Aussie’, your interpretation of hypocrisy is funny, ‘Joseph’. Maybe applying the term to yourself is more appropriate, ‘Joseph’ 😄

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 15, 2017 12:52 am 0Likes


    Seems you’re trying to provoke Joseph by going after him. This is not allowed under our Policy Guidelines, any further provocation against a specific member will be blocked/deleted. Thanks.

  • by MT
    Posted November 15, 2017 6:00 am 0Likes

    When did IAf even mention jf17.
    They are comparing it with top block of F16 and Gripen.

  • by MT
    Posted November 15, 2017 6:01 am 0Likes

    IFR probe is already tested and aesa work is undergoing.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 15, 2017 6:16 am 0Likes

    It didn’t. I mentioned Tejas here as whether it can compete with JF-17 on export market or not. Also the fact it was quite a shocking article that left me with an impression and I want to see what Indians think of it.

  • by MT
    Posted November 15, 2017 8:45 am 0Likes

    Pak airforce is producing jf17(while IAF is the only end user) and most of info on jf17 lacks citations. Jf 17 uses RD93 which guzzles fuel as compared to ge404 . jf17 have less fuel capacity than Tejas so it’s not hard to compare their combat radius even after discounting delta wing issue’s.
    Tejas is pretty much high end with HMD, avionics, composites, BVR ,radar quality over jf17 .
    Moreover HAL can only manufacture 8tejas in 2017 inadequate to meet local needs so it ll take few yrs before export clearance is issued

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 15, 2017 4:20 pm 0Likes

    It is surprising to me that not even one Indian came out saying something like maybe we should do something about HAL. Is current HAL development model sustainable? Maybe IAF should have more influence in this process? Is there something wrong with it’s management structure, or the current public enterprise development model has it’s limits and is beyond fixing? Should Indian give more indigenous development tasks to private sector, or even privatise HAL?

    Those insights would have been appreciated.

  • by MT
    Posted November 16, 2017 1:33 am 0Likes

    70% of Indian work at HAL is already outsourced to private sector. HAL work share now is limited to integration of final assembly of big subsystems.
    Quote:85 private companies will be supporting the Tejas supply chain, with the
    leading firms being Dynamic Technologies Ltd. for the front fuselage;
    VEM Technologies for the centre fuselage; Alpha Tocol for the rear
    fuselage; Larsen and Toubro for the wings; and National Aerospace
    Laboratory and Tata Advanced Materials Limited for the tail fin and

    If we let IAF decide then they would only want the most potent western aircraft. IAF is not concerned about Indian indigenous development.

    Sustained development of Tejas is very good omen for creation of public private ecosystem in India. Indian pvt sector has good experience in precision engineering.

    The rumor mongers and hit job lobby is too lame to compare Tejas aircraft with Gripen and F16 block 60+. Tejas was designed to be point defense fighter as substitute for Mig 21, Mig27 so why at all compare it with aircraft which cost 4-6 more than it

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 16, 2017 1:50 am 0Likes

    I don’t think the problem of Tejas is the subsystems. Tejas is using some of the world class subsystems, a lot of them are even top foreign brands, their qualities are not in question. The problem is using the best ingredients creating a substandard final product. The question now is about the airframe and of course the integration of these subsystems. That is exactly the responsibility of HAL.

    Do you really think HAL even did a OK job? If say, HAL lacks experience then foreign consultants should have been brought in. To be honest it is not too late to bring them in now.

    If I were HAL I would probably move Tejas into a canard wing configuration for mark 2, let’s face it nobody uses pure delta wings anymore, there must be a reason for that.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 16, 2017 3:27 am 0Likes

    It is hard to accuse IAF only wants foreign aircrafts when their performance is that much different. You have to admit the current conflict between IAF and HAL is hardly healthy or productive.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 16, 2017 4:16 am 0Likes

    No real mystery re: the MiG-29. There were many countries through the 1980s and 1990s that couldn’t afford and/or access the F-16 and Mirage 2000/-5. Moreover, there weren’t any other modern fighters of that class following the cancellation of the Israeli Lavi, Yugoslavian Novi Avion, South African Carver. The Gripen became a serious factor in the 2000s, by which point Russia had sold hundreds of MiG-29 in the developing world markets. I think the French might have erred slightly by not funding the Mirage F-1 for further development, e.g. with the M53 turbofan engine and M2K’s radar, avionics and weapons. That would have partly limited the MiG-29’s penetration.

  • by Joseph
    Posted November 16, 2017 4:27 am 0Likes

    But why not pay a bit more to get Flanker instead, they are available about the same time. Isn’t Flanker a better deal?

  • by MT
    Posted November 16, 2017 5:00 am 0Likes

    HAL have always availed foreign consultancy for critical work where they have lacked desired experience.
    The program delay is primarily bcoz of HAL inability to invest its resources until the IAF committed any significant orders for it.
    HAL as of now is assembling/producing 4 fighter aircraft.
    1. Su30MKI
    2. Mig29 upgrade
    3. Jaguar Darin upgrade with Elta AESA radar
    4. Tejas

    Su30MKI assembly line is closing and some of those resources were diverted to Tejas assembly after IAF placed orders for 106 tejas(including MK1A)HAL have invested 1000 crore on new assembly line and integration plant;outsourced most of it work and focus on MK1A development.
    The AESA integration of MK1A is undergoing while HAL is ramping up production of Tejas MK1 from 8 to 16 in a year or so.

    Tejas is compounded delta wing similar to Mirage 2000 which provides it with low wing-loading, and high rates of roll and pitch

    It does bleed little bit more in STR on low mach speed.

  • by Aliph
    Posted November 16, 2017 2:54 pm 0Likes

    There is simply No comparison between a JF-17 and Tejas. Therr are close to 100 JF-17S flying and also being operationally deployed.

    Not even 07 Tejas have been deployed and even they are not combat ready. I have been hearing how super duper it WILL be since my high school days and I have now three children and the darn thing is still not ready and people still claiming how super duper it is.

    Abay…. pehlay bana to lo…

Leave a comment