Henry240:

Can you show evidence that the JF-17 cannot be refuelled and rearmed in 10 minutes?

That is the problem, I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any public report on its capabilities. There is no evidence to say it can or it can't, but in the case of the Gripen, we can all agree it takes under 10 minutes to refuel and rearm. I count that as a plus for the Gripen.

EVarn:
That is the problem, I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any public report on its capabilities. There is no evidence to say it can or it can't, but in the case of the Gripen, we can all agree it takes under 10 minutes to refuel and rearm. I count that as a plus for the Gripen.

If you don't have evidence to compare one against the other, why propagate the claim?

Henry240:

It clearly says the engine is outsourced.

The JF-17 is a Chinese fighter jet.

Outsourced?, nope. What we have in the Gripen is a Volvo variant of the GE F404-GE-400

EVarn:
Come on boss, this is something that is on public domain. It has even been discussed exhaustively on this thread. The Gripen has one of the best data-link system in the world. Something we can't say for the JF17, most of the info we have about the JF17 is speculative and sometimes exaggerated.

Speculative, exaggerated......... But you have no evidence.

I'm bored with your ramblings. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Henry240:

Yeah, where's the evidence?

I know you know. So why are you being difficult?. If you don't know that the Gripen data link system is probably the best in the world for a 4+gen fighter jet, then you know nothing about the aircraft.

GabrielYulaw:


Guys please enough. Let it ride. It's simply not worth it. We are all here to learn from each other.

What are you learning? Are you a military guy or BH? Sorry, na laff I dey o.

Henry240:
For educational purposes, here's a side by side comparison between the JF-17 Block II and the Gripen.

The information is gotten from open-sources.

It makes you wonder why anyone can comfortably claim the Gripen C/D is superior to the JF-17 Block II.

Firstly the max speed of the Gripen is mach 2 not mach 1.8 secondly the Gripen also has better Maneuverability,Climb rate,payload,G-load,wing-loading,RCS,takeoff distance,hard-points,HMD,HMI and Radar.

Henry240:

If you don't have evidence to compare one against the other, why propagate the claim?

I did not propagate anything, I am not a farmer. What I am saying is, we have reliable information on one aircraft while the capabilities of the other is largely unknown. So of course it is only rational to conclude that the one we can vouch for is the better option. The little we know about the JF-17 doesn't even suggest that it surpasses the Gripen in any way. If the JF17 were so good, how come the Chinese are not ordering it in any significant quantity?.

jln115:
Firstly the max speed of the Gripen is mach 2 not mach 1.8 secondly the Gripen also has better Maneuverability,Climb rate,payload,G-load,wing-loading,RCS,takeoff distance,hard-points,HMD,HMI and Radar.

Just one quick question, how did you determine the RCS of the Gripen?

Henry240:

Just one quick question, how did you determine the RCS of the Gripen?

I sucked it out my thumb....

on a serious note, we've had this same debate since i joined nairaland 4 years ago, and i've posted numerous verified sources with regards to the Gripens RCS.

nemesis8u:
The pics have wrong info's and moreover the infos r ambiguous.

Eg
obogs not present ,
also AFAIK till date no operational Chinese fighters have obogs installed. Gripen d has obogs , c does not not have (not sure though)

Also ambiguity of info is a factor eg reference to maritime strike and then its comparison.

All fighters can conduct mission over the sea perse and hence can claim to be maritime strike capable

but capabilities like disorientation Recovery Function (DRF) to fight pilot disorientation in the high seas ( a common cause for crash at sea ) , auto low-speed recovery (ALSR) incase of impending stall during wave top flight pre / post attack missions , ruggedized airframes/systems etc resistant to sea corrosion etc etc is what makes a fighter truly a maritime strike aircraft in the real sense.

Such capabilities r not default but present in select few aircrafts.

Hence pitfalls r many in such comparisons , when one starts dissecting the same

Thanks for your marine corrosion resistance info-always! I know I should know but WTF are obogs!??

kikuyu1:


Thanks for your marine corrosion resistance info-always! I know I should know but WTF are obogs!??

Onboard Oxygen Generation System

Geronimoe:

What are you learning? Are you a military guy or BH? Sorry, na laff I dey o.

I am not military. But I do have a passion for military-related stuff. I'm here to learn from like-minded fellows and rub minds.

nemesis8u:
The pics have wrong info's and moreover the infos r ambiguous.

Eg
obogs not present ,
also AFAIK till date no operational Chinese fighters have obogs installed. Gripen d has obogs , c does not not have (not sure though)

Also ambiguity of info is a factor eg reference to maritime strike and then its comparison.

All fighters can conduct mission over the sea perse and hence can claim to be maritime strike capable

but capabilities like disorientation Recovery Function (DRF) to fight pilot disorientation in the high seas ( a common cause for crash at sea ) , auto low-speed recovery (ALSR) incase of impending stall during wave top flight pre / post attack missions , ruggedized airframes/systems etc resistant to sea corrosion etc etc is what makes a fighter truly a maritime strike aircraft in the real sense.

Such capabilities r not default but present in select few aircrafts.

Hence pitfalls r many in such comparisons , when one starts dissecting the same

[reading this post]
“Fvcking plane nerds”

10/10 post - learnt lots

I

nemesis8u:
The pics have wrong info's and moreover the infos r ambiguous.

Eg
obogs not present ,
also AFAIK till date no operational Chinese fighters have obogs installed. Gripen d has obogs , c does not not have (not sure though)

Also ambiguity of info is a factor eg reference to maritime strike and then its comparison.

All fighters can conduct mission over the sea perse and hence can claim to be maritime strike capable

but capabilities like disorientation Recovery Function (DRF) to fight pilot disorientation in the high seas ( a common cause for crash at sea ) , auto low-speed recovery (ALSR) incase of impending stall during wave top flight pre / post attack missions , ruggedized airframes/systems etc resistant to sea corrosion etc etc is what makes a fighter truly a maritime strike aircraft in the real sense.

Such capabilities r not default but present in select few aircrafts.

Hence pitfalls r many in such comparisons , when one starts dissecting the same

Both C and D have OBOGS

Cameroon BIR

Terrible roads in the English speaking part of Cameroun.

What a nice way to armour the Mercedes Benz lorry. Reminds me of Ukraine and the Philippines.

SternProphet:


Pls add up all outlays for JF17 from the 2015 or 2016 budget to 2018. If you get N60bn to N65bn in total, Nigeria is getting three if they add up to N130bn then it's six units.
I think we have paid up for only three units.

Like i said, I believe we're getting 6 x units of JF-17 Block II. The budget for the Nigerian Air Force says so.

Look at the 2018 and 2019 Budgets.

You'll see that we have in 2018 , JF-17 (new)
In the 2019 for the same line item, JF-17 (Ongoing)

So 6 confirmed units of JF-17.

Picture 1 - 2018
Picture 2 - 2019

Soldiers really have terrible jobs yo, that spot right there is a prime spot for deadly ambush, bugged down, nowhere to go. I respect those brave enough for this sh!t

Henry240:
Cameroon BIR

Terrible roads in the English speaking part of Cameroun.

French Special Forces and Niger troops patrolling in Niger

.

Henry240:
Cameroon BIR

Terrible roads in the English speaking part of Cameroun.

What a nice way to armour the Mercedes Benz lorry. Reminds me of Ukraine and the Philippines.

SORRY TO QUOTE YOU BUT THOSE ARE NOT CAMEROONIAN BIRs but BTAP. BTAP(AIRBORNE BATTALION) is a regiment in the CAMEROONIAN ARMY BASED KOUTABA IN THE EASTERN REGION OF THE COUNTRY.THAT ROAD LEADS TO A REMOTE AREA OF THE NORTHWEST REGION OF CAMEROON SO YOU DON'T EXPECT IT TO BE IN GOOD CODITION IN THE RAINY SEASON.THE REGION HAS GOOD ROADS AND I ONCE WORKED THERE SO I KNOW THE AREA.

Henry240:

Like i said, I believe we're getting 6 x units of JF-17 Block II. The budget for the Nigerian Air Force says so.

Look at the 2018 and 2019 Budgets.

You'll see that we have in 2018 , JF-17 (new)
In the 2019 for the same line item, JF-17 (Ongoing)

So 6 confirmed units of JF-17.

Picture 1 - 2018
Picture 2 - 2019

Is it the same Aw101 that had a mishap at TAC undergoing maintainance or has it been written off , and I have not been seeing our super puma's in the front lines lately.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nheamuGkt9c

Tunisia

EVarn:
I know you know. So why are you being difficult?...

Come now EVarn, you've been around long enough. You know his affliction!

RECONGUY:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nheamuGkt9c

NA should treat these guys well na, how do you expect people to fight on empty stomach?, see grown men fainting out of hunger, na wa o.

Henry240:
Cameroon BIR

Terrible roads in the English speaking part of Cameroun.

What a nice way to armour the Mercedes Benz lorry. Reminds me of Ukraine and the Philippines.

Or Syria

Henry240:

Until we can improve our defence budget, the Tucano and JF-17s are the most suitable aircrafts we can get.

The cost of running a twin engine aircraft is very, the cost per flight hour and maintenance costs are huge.

However, apart from strategic bombing, i don't see much practical use we have for the SU-34.

The current method with which the Nigerian Air Force conducts operations is impeccable. We don't need to change how we operate, what we need are more aircrafts to be on-station for round the clock operations.

The SU-34 is not necessarily a CAS in the mould of the Tucano. Fast jets such as the JF-17 can provide CAS while we await the Tucano which has an amazing loiter time.

The idea of buying solely from the US is strange to me, we initially placed an order for 3x Tucanos from Brazil, it seems like NAF has shelved that idea.

What the Nigerian Air Force needs are light weight multi-role fighter jets in proper numbers. A minimum of 24 JF-17s. We could add 12 units of SU-34 for strategic bombing, however such a purchase would never happen for the Nigerian Air Force. The service has never purchased a twin engine fighter or fighter-bomber.

Isnt jaguar a twin engine aircraft

Yak 130 . algerian AF

EVarn:
NA should treat these guys well na, how do you expect people to fight on empty stomach?, see grown men fainting out of hunger, na wa o.

Its quite old now

Algerian1:
Yak 130 . algerian AF

fearsome machine, not the kite we are buying.