What's new

JF-17 Block-3 -- Updates, News & Discussion

Dreamer.

FULL MEMBER
Apr 1, 2018
583
0
561
Country
Pakistan
Location
Saudi Arabia
It is not an issue of readability or making it hard for you, but to stress the point that publications spend a lot of resources to do these types of stories that are revenant to readers. Majority of publications are in the red, especially publications focused on targeted audiences such as defense. These publications depend on membership subscriptions to generate such stories. By posting their materials on the open web, we are not only cheating out subscribers who pay monthly membership fees but also undermine future stories of relevancy to this forum.

Please don’t take it personal or anything towards you. I hope you understand where I am coming from.
Yeah I do understand where you're coming from. However your sense of humour matches that of the moderators here.
 

The Eagle

SENIOR MODERATOR
Oct 15, 2015
23,882
190
46,231
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Yeah I do understand where you're coming from. However your sense of humour matches that of the moderators here.

You are not getting it all and continuously noting.it like some humor. This platform respects the copyrights and without putting into any other sense. Please abide by the rules and so the moral obligations.

Regards,
 

Dreamer.

FULL MEMBER
Apr 1, 2018
583
0
561
Country
Pakistan
Location
Saudi Arabia
You are not getting it all and continuously noting.it like some humor. This platform respects the copyrights and without putting into any other sense. Please abide by the rules and so the moral obligations.

Regards,
Did I violate any copyrights?

Issuing a thread ban on the other JF-17 thread for a harmless joke, then you talk about rules and moral obligations. I have never violated either.

I did not want to say this , which is why I didn't use the name before. But if the "platform" really respects copy rights it would delete post at first sight rather than first giving it 'like' , then deleting it after reminded by another member. Hope you don't take it personally.
 

The Eagle

SENIOR MODERATOR
Oct 15, 2015
23,882
190
46,231
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Did I violate any copyrights?

Issuing a thread ban on the other JF-17 thread for a harmless joke, then you talk about rules and moral obligations. I have never violated either.

This is how someone thinks being of righteous everytime. AFM is paid content and sharing.such pics publicly is a copyright.

Thread ban for unnecessarily derailing and making fun of serious warning.

Regards,
 

luciferdd

FULL MEMBER
Sep 25, 2013
318
0
734
That would be 247.5km.
IMO,250KM is hard to reach.We can see the air-cooled LKF601E's Rated power is ≤11KW,it means each TR modular will reach 10w~12w in air-cooled mode and a Similar TR modular will rise to higher(maybe 14W~15W) in liquid-cooled mode,but old RD-93 engine will hard to supply such electric power to it and maybe even new RD-93MA can't make it too.
 
Last edited:

aliyusuf

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2010
1,385
6
2,182
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
IMO,250KM is hard to reach.We can see the air-cooled LKF601E's Rated power is ≤11KW,it means each TR modular will reach 10w~12w in air-cooled mode and a Similar TR modular will rise to higher(maybe 14W~15W) in liquid-cooled mode,but old RD-93 engine will hard to supply such electric power to it and maybe even new RD-93MA can't make it too.
PAF finds RD-93 adequate for now. Both for flight performance and supporting a 1000+ TRM's AESA.
 

FuturePAF

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 17, 2014
7,013
20
8,135
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Are Block III JF-17s getting the “Have Glass V” Treatment? With just the use of RAM paint, an F-16’s RCS was reduced 76%, so if the same can be done for the JF-17, it could presumably make a nearly equal significant difference depending on the properties of RAM paint available to the PAF.


Reference for 76% figure (12:45-13:40)
 

Jf-17 block 3

BANNED
Sep 10, 2020
1,215
2
2,396
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Are Block III JF-17s getting the “Have Glass V” Treatment? With just the use of RAM paint, an F-16’s RCS was reduced 76%, so if the same can be done for the JF-17, it could presumably make a nearly equal significant difference depending on the properties of RAM paint available to the PAF.


Reference for 76% figure (12:45-13:40)
AFM mentioned it’s going to add RAM to Jf-17s
 

applesauce

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 9, 2009
3,459
2
2,605
Country
China
Location
United States
so KLJ7A has at least 1000 TRMs? I've heard upwards of 1200TRMs similar to the J10Cs.

how is a smaller radar set going to have the same number of TRM as a larger set? and how it is going to be powered by a smaller engine if it did?
not like they're from different countries or at different tech levels.
 

aliyusuf

FULL MEMBER
May 2, 2010
1,385
6
2,182
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
so KLJ7A has at least 1000 TRMs? I've heard upwards of 1200TRMs similar to the J10Cs.
The bulkiest part of the AESA radar is the TRM housing dish/antenna. If that many TRMs could be housed inside the nosecone of the Thunder then wouldn't it have been easier to just use the J-10C radar with a few modifications? Why did we go through such a long arduous process finding the best possible AESA solution? A new AESA radar was made as per the suitability of operation within the power and space parameters available on the Thunder.
 

Danish Moazzam

FULL MEMBER
Dec 26, 2015
158
0
226
Country
Pakistan
Location
Bahrain
I have one observation that everyone i feel is missing out.

We are constantly debating that RD-93 will not be able to power the Aesa at full capacity but we overlook the fact that it is an Aesa radar which can switch the number of modules required and can also regulate the power requirement.

Please understand the scenario below:

Jet 1 is in scanning mode looking for threat in the airspace will it be on full military power with after burners? no it will be on a much lower power demand. we are talking about the time that the radar will be using maximum power. SO yes the Engine will have lots to spare for the radar.

it will be a formation flight and not solo so only one jet or a part of the package will be looking for long range threats and relaying info to the other planes. that is when they will not be in AEWAC cover

when the threat is nearer to the jet it can reduce the power to aesa radar and use elsewhere because then the long range power requirement will not be critical.

So an engine that the airforce has trust on and has been reliable so far with good turnaround time, it will not be disregarded easily
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom