Hi,
You teaching me basics---? I have been teaching you kids for the last 15 years now and here you are talking about the basics---.
It is easier to say than show that stability can be maintained by trimming and auto pilot.
You kids like to talk without any PRINCIPAALS OF PHYSICS behind your claims. JF17 is a very small aircraft with a small wing area. Any shift in HEAVY weight closer to the fuselage---but away from it---or a sudden lack of weight on one side would put the aircraft in a non recoverable roll and dive and spin.
The delay is the death sentence---the moment the heavy missile is released on one side---the aircraft goes out of control instantly.
Son,
I have been teaching this forum about weapons for the past 15 years plus by now---. Don't give me flimsy excuses that you have overheard---.
Fuel management system does nothing in this case---the loss / shift of weight is too high.
Fuel management systems work when they have ample time to make the correction---and a large wing area. Over here there are only seconds and that is not enough and the wing is too small.
Hi mastan my love, you use a combination of trimming and the stick, alongside that, FBW should account for it. Beyond this, such a loadout is not actually designed to be launched long times after one another. You will usually drop one, then drop another within a matter of seconds, fortunately due to the advent of guidance, you don't need to point your aircraft towards two individual targets, therefore you can launch both in salvo very quickly, allowing for you to not to meet your maker in an unrecoverable stall. What i can assure you is that the engineer's at PAC and CAC are working hard, they also know what they are doing. Fortunately, a chimpanzee could probably realise that removing mass off of one side of a scale will cause an imbalance. Therefore i assure you, our engineers, who are probably smart humans, idk, maybe there's a few monkeys in there too, who knows, understand the whole mass/drag imbalance and realise, that you need to launch in some sort of salvo. A good example of this is when A7s would go on mining missions. They carried a massive draggy mine under each wing, there are numerous examples of pilots fighting with the stick until they dropped the second, however, mines were not guided therefore had to be dropped in the area they wanted, unlike the CM400AKG which can be dropped, then guided to where it needs to go, therefore that concern being a non issue. However, i am sure the engineers at PAC and CAC appreciate your posts on PDF, helping them correct the glaring issues of their bad design. Without you, the Chinese would be unable to innovate and AZM would not be a possibility. Maybe you can throw some posts about AZM so then the engineers at PAC can use your design advice for inspiration. Thank you grand wizard mastan.
P.S As part of weapons integration, asymmetric loads testing is a massive step before weapons are certified. If an aircraft cannot fly with an asymmetric load, the munition is not certified.
Source: Ask anybody who works on this.