Capabilities of PAF Dassault MIRAGE-III/V.

[araz]

We should try to make this place a forum of mature and educated people. Who do not attack the person but discuss ideas. Perhaps you can write more than "don't be silly" and "learn more" otherwise the level of discussion in this forum will go to the level of 5th grade students.

Changing a JFT with delta wings will alter its whole balance and COG, flight characteristics amongst other things. This would then require redesigning and testing.
PAF had the experience to ask for a delta fighter. However they opted for a hassle free approach and went for the JFT current design. They would not want to reinvent the wheel.
We certainly do not have the money and capacity to run 2 programmes side by side so do we shut down the current JFT setup and redesignate and test the fighter as a delta fighter? We will open a whole Pandora's box which we can ill afford at the moment.
So if we want a delta best to get an off the shelf product from somewhere.
A

 

[Armchair]

Changing a JFT with delta wings will alter its whole balance and COG, flight characteristics amongst other things. This would then require redesigning and testing.
PAF had the experience to ask for a delta fighter. However they opted for a hassle free approach and went for the JFT current design. They would not want to reinvent the wheel.
We certainly do not have the money and capacity to run 2 programmes side by side so do we shut down the current JFT setup and redesignate and test the fighter as a delta fighter? We will open a whole Pandora's box which we can ill afford at the moment.
So if we want a delta best to get an off the shelf product from somewhere.
A

I was quite surprised with the development of the JFT-B version. It basically had to go through 80% of the testing because a lot changed, from the materials to the aerodynamics to the CoG (Center of Gravity). Yet, they went through with it.

A delta wing would allow the JFT to be a plane that can be the best strike aircraft for PAF. It would save the PAF from having to buy something like the JH-7A or another new platform, which would not only be expensive foreign exchange wise, but also require a whole new set of maintenance and other sustainment investments.

A delta-winged JFT would require none of this. With large conformal fuel tanks and the new more powerful engines, they would easily be able to cover the strike range requirements of PAF. Large delta wings would allow a heavy weapons load, along with more fuel. Basically, it would be like what an Su-34 is to a FLANKER.

 

[Humble Analyst]

I was quite surprised with the development of the JFT-B version. It basically had to go through 80% of the testing because a lot changed, from the materials to the aerodynamics to the CoG (Center of Gravity). Yet, they went through with it.

A delta wing would allow the JFT to be a plane that can be the best strike aircraft for PAF. It would save the PAF from having to buy something like the JH-7A or another new platform, which would not only be expensive foreign exchange wise, but also require a whole new set of maintenance and other sustainment investments.

A delta-winged JFT would require none of this. With large conformal fuel tanks and the new more powerful engines, they would easily be able to cover the strike range requirements of PAF. Large delta wings would allow a heavy weapons load, along with more fuel. Basically, it would be like what an Su-34 is to a FLANKER.

I agree and discussing ideas is good. This is called brain storming and the idea can be absurd. The reason behind American innovation is no ideas is bad and they see if it works or improves and if they have resources it flies. We should not have closed minds, practicality should be considered.

 

[araz]

I was quite surprised with the development of the JFT-B version. It basically had to go through 80% of the testing because a lot changed, from the materials to the aerodynamics to the CoG (Center of Gravity). Yet, they went through with it.

A delta wing would allow the JFT to be a plane that can be the best strike aircraft for PAF. It would save the PAF from having to buy something like the JH-7A or another new platform, which would not only be expensive foreign exchange wise, but also require a whole new set of maintenance and other sustainment investments.

A delta-winged JFT would require none of this. With large conformal fuel tanks and the new more powerful engines, they would easily be able to cover the strike range requirements of PAF. Large delta wings would allow a heavy weapons load, along with more fuel. Basically, it would be like what an Su-34 is to a FLANKER.

Which is what a J10 is!!! So why would you think the Chinese would produce a competitor for their own product themselves?. Secondly whio is going to pay the development cost?
The JFTB was a demand and sales were affected due to the lack of this fighter. Therefore PAF footed the bill. The Chinese also felt there was a need AND MOST IMPORTANTLY there was no conflict, so complied. Why would they do so for a limited demand of 60-80 fighters??. What woiuld the cost of such a venture be?. The Lockmart tried the 16XL and tested it but then abandoned it? Why?. Perhaps lack of demand!!.
Delta with canards is a much better idea as compared to delta alone which is why I think PAF if it wants to will go for J10s
A

 

[Khafee]

Which is what a J10 is!!! So why would you think the Chinese would produce a competitor for their own product themselves?. Secondly whio is going to pay the development cost?
The JFTB was a demand and sales were affected due to the lack of this fighter. Therefore PAF footed the bill. The Chinese also felt there was a need AND MOST IMPORTANTLY there was no conflict, so complied. Why would they do so for a limited demand of 60-80 fighters??. What woiuld the cost of such a venture be?. The Lockmart tried the 16XL and tested it but then abandoned it? Why?. Perhaps lack of demand!!.
Delta with canards is a much better idea as compared to delta alone which is why I think PAF if it wants to will go for J10s
A

I sincerely hope they go for J15 / J16, or a mix of J10 & J15/J16. But his is just my wishful thinking. PAF is leaning towards J10.

It is high time, twin engine heavies are inducted into PAF.

 

[Armchair]

The Lockmart tried the 16XL and tested it but then abandoned it? Why?. Perhaps lack of demand!!.

This happened because of the F-15 lobby, which didn't allow the XL to go forward, as it would have taken over a lot of missions of the F-15s.

If PAF wants a delta wing for a strike variant, it can be made to happen. PAF already makes many components of the wings for the Mirages in house - that technology can only help.

I would rather have a JFT with delta wings than the J10 for the simple reason that it would keep maintenance and upkeep cost effective, and not need to set up a new overhauling facility for the J-10s highly maintenance intensive engines.

Think also of the export potential for such a strike aircraft. There are no cheap strike aircraft left in the world! Even JH-7As are out of production. Rafale's cost an arm and a leg. F-16s come with a price tag and political baggage.

J-10s aren't designed for strike but for air superiority. All deltas aren't born the same...

 

[Khafee]

This happened because of the F-15 lobby, which didn't allow the XL to go forward, as it would have taken over a lot of missions of the F-15s.

If PAF wants a delta wing for a strike variant, it can be made to happen. PAF already makes many components of the wings for the Mirages in house - that technology can only help.

I would rather have a JFT with delta wings than the J10 for the simple reason that it would keep maintenance and upkeep cost effective, and not need to set up a new overhauling facility for the J-10s highly maintenance intensive engines.

Very valid points. Unfortunately, R&D costs time and money.

J-10s aren't designed for strike but for air superiority. All deltas aren't born the same...

My friend, each air force, uses the same platform differently. I 'm telling you this from experience.

 

[Armchair]

Very valid points. Unfortunately, R&D costs time and money.

True, would be an interesting chimera if it did happen. Would be a bit like the Jaguar development, from a program point of view.

My friend, each air force, uses the same platform differently. I 'm telling you this from experience.

I understand, and highly value your expert opinion. I was talking about it from an aerodynamic viewpoint. The airfoil, the chord, the disruptive air flow from the canards, the low intake.

If I were designing a low level striker, one of the things I'd look at would be how airflow would be disrupted over the wings, as stability is critical for low level flight. In this regard, the pure delta of the Mirage-3/5 and M-2000 is superior to that of the J-10 by a long mile. And this is not even considering the NACA airfoil types optimized for low level strike. Or the engines... or the... (so many variables).

When you design an aircraft specifically for low level strike, your set of choices are very different from when you sit down and design an aircraft for high altitude high speed intercept, and BVR combat. The J-10 is the latter, not the former. Perhaps @MastanKhan has something to add to about this.

Watch this for fun:

An example is sometimes worth a book - for low level flight you can use thick airfoils, which are more efficient in low level flight and carry a ton of fuel. Thinner airfoils become more optimal the higher the altitude you want your aircraft to be optimized for.

 

[Khafee]

Watch this for fun:

.

Don't rub salt on my wounds. I always wanted PAF to get M2K's.

 

[MastanKhan]

I was quite surprised with the development of the JFT-B version. It basically had to go through 80% of the testing because a lot changed, from the materials to the aerodynamics to the CoG (Center of Gravity). Yet, they went through with it.

A delta wing would allow the JFT to be a plane that can be the best strike aircraft for PAF. It would save the PAF from having to buy something like the JH-7A or another new platform, which would not only be expensive foreign exchange wise, but also require a whole new set of maintenance and other sustainment investments.

A delta-winged JFT would require none of this. With large conformal fuel tanks and the new more powerful engines, they would easily be able to cover the strike range requirements of PAF. Large delta wings would allow a heavy weapons load, along with more fuel. Basically, it would be like what an Su-34 is to a FLANKER.

Hi,

JF17 would not be able to fill the shoes of the JH7A's---.

Young pakistani need to learn this---.

When you make an enemy to fight against---your primary goal is not what the maintenance costs are for the weapons---but what the weapon can do to the enemy for you---.

You need to understand what the JH7A is---.

There was a Bangladeshi poster here---an air force pilot---he wrote a nice complimentary piece on it---.

A young and silly pakistani Administrator / Moderator got pi-ssed off at him and banned him for some comments---not understanding what a great asset he was to the board---.

Naval strike missions have different flight parameters---the JH7A was uniquely designed to meet those parameters---the aircraft and the engine---.

 

[araz]

I sincerely hope they go for J15 / J16, or a mix of J10 & J15/J16. But his is just my wishful thinking. PAF is leaning towards J10.

It is high time, twin engine heavies are inducted into PAF.

During the last Pak China execrcises @bilal khan777 had said that these could well be the future two aircrafts of PAF. We have been debating the need for 2-3 suadrons of twin engine beasts placed centrally for area wide and sea coverage. PAF obviously is constrained by our finances.
A

Don't rub salt on my wounds. I always wanted PAF to get M2K's.

The M2K was just one of those things that did not materialize in spite of three goes from PAF. It was not meant to happen.
A

 

[Khafee]

If I were designing a low level striker, one of the things I'd look at would be how airflow would be disrupted over the wings, as stability is critical for low level flight. In this regard, the pure delta of the Mirage-3/5 and M-2000 is superior to that of the J-10 by a long mile. And this is not even considering the NACA airfoil types optimized for low level strike. Or the engines... or the... (so many variables).

When you design an aircraft specifically for low level strike, your set of choices are very different from when you sit down and design an aircraft for high altitude high speed intercept, and BVR combat. The J-10 is the latter, not the former.

An example is sometimes worth a book - for low level flight you can use thick airfoils, which are more efficient in low level flight and carry a ton of fuel. Thinner airfoils become more optimal the higher the altitude you want your aircraft to be optimized for.

I'm no expert on aerodynamics. But taking the following into account, where does the J10 stand..?

The Rafale’s all-moving canards—a second set of small wings near the nose—give the Rafale excellent lift and low-altitude speed and performance, as you can see in this majestic airshow display.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/just-how-stealthy-are-frances-rafales-f42s-66727

 

[MastanKhan]

I'm no expert on aerodynamics. But taking the following into account, where does the J10 stand..?

The Rafale’s all-moving canards—a second set of small wings near the nose—give the Rafale excellent lift and low-altitude speed and performance, as you can see in this majestic airshow display.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/just-how-stealthy-are-frances-rafales-f42s-66727

Hi,

Yessir indeed---. Why would you know---hehehehehe---.

 

[Armchair]

I'm no expert on aerodynamics. But taking the following into account, where does the J10 stand..?

The Rafale’s all-moving canards—a second set of small wings near the nose—give the Rafale excellent lift and low-altitude speed and performance, as you can see in this majestic airshow display.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/just-how-stealthy-are-frances-rafales-f42s-66727

The Rafale was designed with four separate missions in mind - air superiority, low level strike were only two of those requirements. If the Rafale had been designed just for low level strike alone, it would not have been a canard delta but a pure delta. No doubt, the quality of the Rafale and the engineering is of par excellence, but it is still a compromise of multiple requirements.

In the naval realm we have large, expensive frigates and destroyers that can attempt to do everything. But when you come to corvettes, you need the corvette to specialize in something. Of course an F-15 or Su-30 can be made to do all kinds of missions. But the David in the battle, who has one specialization and does it well - still often trumps the others.

A JFT Delta designed for strike would be the only low cost specialized strike aircraft currently available in the market. Its nearest competitor would be an F-16, and nothing else.

Hi,

JF17 would not be able to fill the shoes of the JH7A's---.

Young pakistani need to learn this---.

When you make an enemy to fight against---your primary goal is not what the maintenance costs are for the weapons---but what the weapon can do to the enemy for you---.

You need to understand what the JH7A is---.

There was a Bangladeshi poster here---an air force pilot---he wrote a nice complimentary piece on it---.

A young and silly pakistani Administrator / Moderator got pi-ssed off at him and banned him for some comments---not understanding what a great asset he was to the board---.

Naval strike missions have different flight parameters---the JH7A was uniquely designed to meet those parameters---the aircraft and the engine---.

of course, the JH-7A has engines that were designed from the get-go based on low level strike. If I recall the Blackburn Buccaneer was the archetype to this. However, I do think that a JFT with delta wings, reconfigured DSI, would be an excellent aircraft designed for strike.

 

[aliaselin]

How many Mirage III/V does Pakistan have now？ 6 squadron , ie ,around 108?