Quality of Jf-17?

I compared Jeff to the Viper (BMS) and the Jeff seems to have a slight edge with comparable load-outs.

 

The Jeff is capable.

Viper is much larger than Jeff.

Viper can load 4 AMRAAM at any A2G loadout(which Jeff will only left with 2*PL5 in most case), its 3/7 hardpoints already enough for many heavy wpns, its internal fuel can sustain quite a long time, its TGP/HTS does not need additional hardpoints.

But again, Jeff can do its own job quite well, and have some nice handy wpn such like the BRM-1, LD10, etc. It's a very good light multi-role fighter.:smilewink:

Jeff isn't really an F16 competitor though. That would be the j-10.

For PAF it replaces Mirages, A-5C, and F-7 currently, while when more are built Im sure the plan is to have them replace F-7PG. None of these are F-16, which it is built to complement not replace in PAF service.

They have a very small but beloved F-16 fleet, JF-17 is essentially the low in a their planned hi/low mix.

J-10 is the perfect plane to compare how light and small the JF-17 is, it is even by the same designer. I believe for Myanmar it is also replacing F-6 for them, it seems they still have small A-5 and F-7 fleets, I guess replacing those depends on how many more JF-17 they buy. Of note I think there last F-6 was the trainer version, so their purchase of a coulple JF-17B is significant for them in greatly expanding the combat capability of their two seater. For Nigeria the intent i believe is to take the load off their 9 F-7M, they also have alpha jets which I assume if they buy more then three JF-17 could also be taken up by the Thunder.

An interesting thing is that for competitions, like Malaysia fighter competition for purchase, the JF-17 often competes with LIFT planes.

Just food for though, easy to compare it with F-16 and there is a lot of similarities, here is a picture of the competitors for the Malaysia fighter competition

SD10 use current version of missile API, so even U loft the missile, at the end of loft there will be a hard turn that lose lots of speed, and when the seeker lock onto a target, the missile will make another hard turn to lose speed again.:lol: No match with the new loft trajectory.

 

Just wait the 120 finish the test and the new API can be used on all AAMs.:pilotfly:

Do you know what "new" things will be possible with the new API that currently are not?

I guess lofting behavior? (though the phoenix lofted even with the old API)

Guidance?

Better drag modeling?

Multi-impulse motors?

I think the API is separate from drag modeling, but if we take the thing required for AIM-120 and AIM-54 its a husky mode, MPRF, HPRF, I’m hoping jamming have an effect on reducing lock range/time unless switching to HOJ, Mid course updates, autopilot like new AIM-7, commanded active time and SARH mode for Phoenix. Those are just my personal assumptions/expectations.

SD-10 is unique with its two stages, hopefully that will also be possible. As for lofting its pretty unpredictable what might happen for SD-10, who knows how the real thing lofts.

Now I would think the moving control surfaces are a separate thing entirely but those are also nice:)

ill take anything as long as its more than just to make 120s master race.

two stages? does it relight mid flight? lol that will throw ppl off. like they're looking at a PL5 launch.

Yeah it chooses when to fire second stage. For a shorter shot may fire more like now or for longer shot might delay firing second stage until terminal for longer range

I think the API is separate from drag modeling, but if we take the thing required for AIM-120 and AIM-54 its a husky mode, MPRF, HPRF, I’m hoping jamming have an effect on reducing lock range/time unless switching to HOJ, Mid course updates, autopilot like new AIM-7, commanded active time and SARH mode for Phoenix. Those are just my personal assumptions/expectations.

 

SD-10 is unique with its two stages, hopefully that will also be possible. As for lofting its pretty unpredictable what might happen for SD-10, who knows how the real thing lofts.

 

Now I would think the moving control surfaces are a separate thing entirely but those are also nice:)

The from what I read phoenix also has a similar dual impulse motor, and I wouldn't be surprised if the 120C did too.

I'm not an experten aerodynamics guy, but you get alot of drag off the base/end of the missile, much like bullets and artillery shells (hey I do about aeroballistics tho), so a part of the reasoning for having the dual impulse motor running reduces that base drag like base-bleed arty shells which helps keep more E for the missile.

Personally I'm much more interested in guidance/ECM/ECCM stuff.

Dual thrust motor does NOT equal to a Dual impulse motor. Most missiles in Dcs time frame are dual thrust (boost-sustain) motors, which can not be fired for a second time.

Do you know what "new" things will be possible with the new API that currently are not?

 

I guess lofting behavior? (though the phoenix lofted even with the old API)

 

Guidance?

 

Better drag modeling?

 

Multi-impulse motors?

From what we can see from the video, there are 2 main improvements:

1.Missile can now fly a ballistic trajectory, much like the way in BMS, no more straight line plus hard turn.

2.The way missile exiting loft and entering self guidance is much improved ,missile do not pull hard turns and fly straight line to the target, it can maintain on the ballistic trajectory.

These 2 can preserve more than 500-1000km/h terminal speed, thus improve the missile range for more than 20-30% even if no other things are changed.

Dual thrust motor does NOT equal to a Dual impulse motor. Most missiles in Dcs time frame are dual thrust (boost-sustain) motors, which can not be fired for a second time.

So the SD10 has second light-able motor for end game engagment?

So the SD10 has second light-able motor for end game engagment?

SD10 in DCS is using a boost-sustain dual thrust motor. Dual impulse is a much newer technology I'm afraid it is beyond the time frame.

I have been telling everyone the real SD-10 can seperately fire it’s sustain stage based off this post, https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4136793&postcount=177, with the hope it will be possible with new API, is that incorrect?

"beyond the timeframe". RIP

"beyond the timeframe". RIP

If you look at the post I linked by LJQNC101 there might still be hope:) Unless I understand it wrong. As LJQNC101 says this all up to the missile team

IRL the second-stage boost will not happen immediately after the first-stage. It acts as terminal activate phase boost. Maybe we'll see improvement on the missile API that enables simulation of such aspect.

 

It is the missile team's decision so I can just talk about it.

If you look at the post I linked by LJQNC101 there might still be hope:) Unless I understand it wrong. As LJQNC101 says this all up to the missile team

Like the AIM120, PL12/SD10 has a growing family, AIM120 already have A B C D versions, the PL12/SD10 is also under continue upgrade and development.

What does "beyond the time-frame" mean?

That we need to settle for a continuing inaccuracy in missile modeling, despite the fact this API is totally new and they know this missile exists?

That is complete ***********.

What does "beyond the time-frame" mean?

 

That we need to settle for a continuing inaccuracy in missile modeling, despite the fact this API is totally new and they know this missile exists?

 

That is complete ***********.

If you are simulating a 2012 production JF17 then it won't have 2020 era SD10's.

Its the same thing for other planes in DCS. The F18C can carry aim120D's for example, but since we have 2007 era hornet, it doesn't because it didn't carry aim120D's.

imo the F-14 raised the bar for launches, and Jiff raised it even more, its was basically feature complete at launch, few bugs, but nothing super serious. Especially in this era of no IFF, no damage model launches lol.

But the jiff is pretty much a complete aircraft, couple little bugs here and there, but nothing that breaks it, just little annoyances.

imo the F-14 raised the bar for launches, and Jiff raised it even more, its was basically feature complete at launch, few bugs, but nothing super serious. Especially in this era of no IFF, no damage model launches lol.

But the jiff is pretty much a complete aircraft, couple little bugs here and there, but nothing that breaks it, just little annoyances.

Yeah, I honestly have been ultra impressed with Deka. Not only was the Jeff basically good-to-go feature wise. Basically every update is filled with various small bug fixes and improvements. I'm pretty much gonna buy whatever they decide to do next, I just hope its a plane I like :smilewink:.

Yeah, I honestly have been ultra impressed with Deka. Not only was the Jeff basically good-to-go feature wise. Basically every update is filled with various small bug fixes and improvements. I'm pretty much gonna buy whatever they decide to do next, I just hope its a plane I like :smilewink:.

+1 they've earned my trust

I bought the Jeff. So far it is the Best High Fidelity Model of the Gen 4 Jets. Almost as good as the A10C. I am very pleased with it. I bought the F16 also but that plane in its current state is a super let down. But the Jeff is Top Notch.