Bid to block Pakistan F-16 sale fails in U.S. Senate

[Quwa]

Hi,

I think that would be too late---I think that it should be before 2020. The NG type upgrade does not require too many modifications---.

I believe that it is a one year project---six months to a year in testing and production after a total of two years---.

I'm looking at the MiG-29 to MiG-29M/M2 to MiG-35 evolution. The airframe ought to be enlarged and lightened, ideally with sizable composite material use. Not sure if RD-93MA will be around by Block-III, but it definitely needs to be available for Block-IV/NG; if not, a new powerplant line must be considered. This Thunder NG would be right up there with the 4.5+ gen fighters such as the MiG-35 and Gripen NG, and easily serve alongside the FC-31.

@Tank131 @MastanKhan

 

[MastanKhan]

I'm looking at the MiG-29 to MiG-29M/M2 to MiG-35 evolution. The airframe ought to be enlarged and lightened, ideally with sizable composite material use. Not sure if RD-93MA will be around by Block-III, but it definitely needs to be available for Block-IV/NG; if not, a new powerplant line must be considered. This Thunder NG would be right up there with the 4.5+ gen fighters such as the MiG-35 and Gripen NG, and easily serve alongside the FC-31.

@Tank131 @MastanKhan

Hi,

The BLK 3 must get the upgraded engine and the BLK 4 must get the NG type upgrades---a little larger wing and frame---bigger engine---more hard points and weight carrying capacity around 6000 + KG

It would nice if the blk 3 has the ability to carry 6 BVR missiles

 

[Tank131]

Hi,

The BLK 3 must get the upgraded engine and the BLK 4 must get the NG type upgrades---a little larger wing and frame---bigger engine---more hard points and weight carrying capacity around 6000 + KG

It would nice if the blk 3 has the ability to carry 6 BVR missiles

Agreed, but from what I have seen, there doesn't seem to be any momentum on a new engine for Block 3. My guess is IF it gets a new engine, it will be RD-93MA, but in everyone's short sightedness, no EJ200 will even be considered let alone another engine. However an enlarged JF-17 that @Quwa refers to would be in line for a larger more powerful engine, RD-93 would not be appropriate. The Target engine for any enlarged JF-17 should be around AL-31 or AL-41.

 

[airmarshal]

Agree with @MastanKhan. The "NG" variant needs to be in the block 4 era (size wise) but electronics of the block 3 should ve near NG level. The upgraded block 52+ would number ~36 and could serve until 2035 but beyond that, 18 would already be 20+ yrs old and should be being phased out by local jf-17 fighters and new 5th gen fighters

We are still on JF-17 Block 1and people here are talking about NG version! JF-17 is still in evolutionary stage. Block 2 is slated to inflight refueling. May be Block 3 will have AESA. The speed with which Pakistan is capable to develop these versions depend on our intellectual and financial capacity. So lets not fool ourselves. JF-17 is a great platform, no doubt but its far from being mature yet.

 

[MastanKhan]

We are still on JF-17 Block 1and people here are talking about NG version! JF-17 is still in evolutionary stage. Block 2 is slated to inflight refueling. May be Block 3 will have AESA. The speed with which Pakistan is capable to develop these versions depend on our intellectual and financial capacity. So lets not fool ourselves. JF-17 is a great platform, no doubt but its far from being mature yet.

Hi,

They are all BLK2's now----.

NG version is not a massive structural change but a rather less strenuous----. Wheels moved outwards---a slightly larger tunnel for the engine---which might not be needed if the chinese engine comes out good---or EJ200---or the RD93MA---.

Rest is electrnoics---.

There is no reason for the BLK 3 not to have aesa---. That was one of the reason for turning down the J10.

The finances are there----that is why the focus is on the BLK3.

Agreed, but from what I have seen, there doesn't seem to be any momentum on a new engine for Block 3. My guess is IF it gets a new engine, it will be RD-93MA, but in everyone's short sightedness, no EJ200 will even be considered let alone another engine. However an enlarged JF-17 that @Quwa refers to would be in line for a larger more powerful engine, RD-93 would not be appropriate. The Target engine for any enlarged JF-17 should be around AL-31 or AL-41.

Hi,

I personally would like to see two versions of the JF17---One like the japanese F2---ie---slightly larger than the F16---more powerfull engine----more hardpoints---so that you have a weight carrying capability of around 6000---8000 kg and the other similar size to the current JF17---similar to the NG for air superiority.