What's new

Cancelled Russian LFI Project Now JF-17 Fighter

Status
Not open for further replies.
Taimi Bhai.. Taking lessons from China on censorship.. :azn:


Jokes apart.. Does it matter if it is based on another plane or not.. Whats important is the potency of the platform and not whether it was created from scratch or was based on another platform.. ??

Why are Indian members so keen to prove it is based on Mig 33 and Pakistani members keen on proving otherwise...??

Surprisingly .. Hardly any comments from Chinese members considering it was China who made the plane... :azn:

Well that you have to tell your friends, as we have already said whether its a copy or not, or whether we have contributed just one screw in its development, its up and running and is flying and operational and is one hell of a fighter compared to the fleet we already have.

And why Indian members so keen, well ask them, as they come up with many like these absurd claims, JF-17, AK MBT, S2S ballistic missiles etc etc etc.

And Pakistani members hit back in retaliation to the Indian members claims, natural.

And yeah I am gonna ban whoever says this again :) Did a lot of digging for the above info and pictures, so to satisfy my time put in, banning those who say this again will be rewarding for me :rofl::rofl:
 
All you need to know about the Thunder by those who make it:
Google Image Result for http://www.pac.org.pk/amfsite-final/images/sp-1.gif

Great Thunder shots:
JF_17_Thunder_17661.jpg


JF-17_Thunder1.jpg


JF-17_landing.jpg


thunders4ee3.jpg


FC-1_04a.jpg
 
Well that you have to tell your friends, as we have already said whether its a copy or not, or whether we have contributed just one screw in its development, its up and running and is flying and operational and is one hell of a fighter compared to the fleet we already have.

And why Indian members so keen, well ask them, as they come up with many like these absurd claims, JF-17, AK MBT, S2S ballistic missiles etc etc etc.

And Pakistani members hit back in retaliation to the Indian members claims, natural.

And yeah I am gonna ban whoever says this again :) Did a lot of digging for the above info and pictures, so to satisfy my time put in, banning those who say this again will be rewarding for me :rofl::rofl:

The ban applies to comparisons with Mig 33 only ... right..?? Other kind of JF 17 bashing allowed I hope???:cheesy:
 
Thunder Diagram:

greyjf17tg8.jpg


Thunder preparing for night flying:

imgres


Thunder Patch:

Thunder%20patch-01.jpg


Sino-Pak Thunder Patch:

Thunder%20patch-03.jpg


Thunder Shoulder Patch:

Thunder%20patch-02.jpg
 
So what is the moral of this story/thread? People in the glass houses shouldn't throw stones. When it comes to designing and development of the fighter airplanes, helicopters, MBTs or APCs etc., neither Pakistan nor India is fully capable to take up these tasks on their own. In fact, the technology is developing so rapidly that it is no longer feasible for any one country to invest fully on any one project hence we see the concept of consortiums. There is nothing wrong in importing the technology from whichever the source so long it is affordable and serves the purpose. Wrong are the dependency and the habit of relying solely on imported technology while not gaining insight into that. Pakistan is pretty much a newcomer in the arena of military hardware development or production or assembly. Whatever we have gained in past 35 or so years is not impressive at all, but if compared with India (which developed its first fighter Jet, HAL Marut back in 1960), our progress has not been that bad. Following is something interesting from Vijainder Thakur’s blog and I believe, for any sensible member (Indian or Pakistani), there is much to learn from this write-up.

“July 14, 2009, (Sawf News) - Transfer of technology has been a buzz phrase in India for defense acquisitions since decades. So far India has little to show for all the technology transfers and license production that have taken place.

I have heard the phrase being bandied by politicians, bureaucrats and technocrats, since my school days, nearly 40 years ago.

India has been manufacturing MiG-21 variants since the 70s. Let alone developing a new aircraft based on the MiG-21, HAL was never able to even improve the aircraft in any way - Adding a dorsal fuel tank, for example, as in the MiG-21 Bis.

India designed and developed the Marut HF-24 in the late 1960's with assistance from German designer Dr. Kurt Tank and a lot of British help. HAL could never come up with a follow up.

We license produced the Jaguar? What good did that do? Where did the technology that was transferred go?

Whether transfer of technology works or not is linked to the technology base that a country has developed. Talk to any DRDO official and they tell you the Russian never transfer technology.
At Aero India 2009 the DRDO chief publically termed Russian TOT as a farce.

What DRDO officials mean is that the Russians don't tell us how to build their products from scratch. The question is not only - Should they be telling you how to do so? - but also - Can they effectively tell how to do - considering that we do not have a technological base matching theirs?

A large amount of metal alloys and composites goes into an aircraft. The alloys used differ from each aircraft component. The strength of the metal varies with the manufacturing process used to produce it. When transferring technology should the manufacturer tell from where to source the metal or how to manufacture it? If your country hasn't mastered the manufacturing processes what good would that do?

Recently someone referred to the possible French and Swedish readiness to part with source code for their AESA radars. (I am not aware this is true.)

While getting the source code along with the radar helps, it cannot be construed as transfer of technology.

Anyone who has worked with software knows the complexities of imbibing code.

Any code is based on thousands and thousands of lines of library code. Is the library source also being offered? Even if it is being, you will need to spend months, possibly years, to understand its flow and logic.

How generic is the code? How much generic can it be? Hardware specific code tends to be less generic to facilitate faster development and processing. Reuse of code is also limited by continuous improvements in hardware and software.

Code that took 100 person years to develop cannot be mastered within one or two months, even if you deploy 2,000 people for hacking it, assuming the cost of deploying 2,000 top notch software professionals on the project makes economic sense.

The example, is applicable to most electronic components fitted on a fighter aircraft, each of which uses software.

No transfer of technology allows you to copy manufacture. You can only license produce the quantity negotiated. So the vendors hold back a lot of data, like wind tunnel and flight testing data that would make it easy to modify the aircraft.

Broadly speaking, with a TOT agreement in place, the manufacturer will share with you just enough information to allow sourcing non critical components from the domestic market, or certain acceptable foreign markets.

If we buy the Rafale, the French are not going to teach us how to build a fifth generation version of the Rafale.

Talking about French friendliness, here is a detail that I have mentioned elsewhere on this site. When they supplied us the Durandal runway denial bombs for use on the Jaguars, they missed out on a small detail that prevented the Jaguar from dropping it.
The IAF discovered the flaw years after acquiring the bombs, when Jaguars attempted to test fire them on a target runway in Pokharan for the first time.

Pre acquisition trials were conducted in France and since the bomb was so expensive IAF waited for the life of the first lot of bombs to nearly expire before testing them. Three Jaguars unsuccessfully attempted to release the bombs in front of the Defense minister, COAS and other top officials.

There were a lot of red faces that day, not just in the squadron tasked with the trials but right up the chain of command.
The software patch, when it arrived from France, took minutes.
Oh! Did I mention the squadron tasked was flying HAL manufactured Jaguars.
”

Source: Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?
 
Last edited:
I can't see the pictures posted by me, can anyone else see them ?
Yes we can see them but why are you posting these old pictures that have already been posted on several different threads? Please post the pictures in the relevant threads.
 
I don't see them...

think the end of this thread all trouble makers ran away after hearing ban..
 
Just for the heck of it......................hope you don't mind...........And I think it's pretty relevant since this is a thread relating to thunder....
Please do not post just for the heck of something. If your post is not adding to the knowledge of others, than its useless. Besides, images take up lots of space and bandwidth, and if the images are not new, its unnecessary burden on the forum's resources.
 
Please do not post just for the heck of something. If your post is not adding to the knowledge of others, than its useless. Besides, images take up lots of space and bandwidth, and if the images are not new, its unnecessary burden on the forum's resources.

I'll keep that in mind sir, but this thread was rapidly approaching it's end, I just wanted to give it a pleasant one.....................so i guessed, a picture is worth a thousand words..........................
 
Last edited:
OMG...10 pages on a non issue. I just wanna say one thing Be it a copied mig 33 design or not. JF 17 is being inducted in numbers while LCA is not...so period.
 
Please do not post just for the heck of something. If your post is not adding to the knowledge of others, than its useless. Besides, images take up lots of space and bandwidth, and if the images are not new, its unnecessary burden on the forum's resources.

Sorry for being off topic, but the images he posted weren't uploaded on this forum's server :no: They were uploaded on a free image hosting server. Thus taking no resources of def.pk :angel:
 
Sorry for being off topic, but the images he posted weren't uploaded on this forum's server :no: They were uploaded on a free image hosting server. Thus taking no resources of def.pk :angel:

That's some million dollar info right there, thx.........................
 
After the threat of ban by Taimibhai, everything seems to be coooooooooooool.
Where r indian members ????????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom