What's new

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

The greenish primer is applied with zinc coating to area where fuel cells found

B model has this new area coloured so this area in B model has additional fuel cells ? [emoji618]️

This is also the case in block 3 but not so for block 1/2 single seater

??
Adjustments.JPG
 
Stealth said:
From the beginning when you poorly design anything and just to justify that blender saying... oh if the aircraft can shoot down, it serves the purpose lol what kind of logic is that?

No one saying to make aircraft like F22 (in terms of look and feel), the point is there is a reason why the modern aircraft having completely different aesthetics and aerodynamic design.

You can modify Honda Civic up to 1000HP... you can modify Supra up to 1000HP... there is a huge difference btw both.... One is specifically designed for racing and another one is actually modified (wanna be sport car). Both cars having a similar hp, performance (again avionics and all) perhaps the design of the Supra giving extra edge (the shape matters) which you call it "Aesthetics". The aerodynamics of the Supra provides a greater edge as compared to the honda civic. The body of the car, the way engineers designed from the beginning is actually accommodating the future modifications.. you don't need to change the design of V STAB (spoiler) of the Supra to counter its weight... You can though change the spoilers which don't even affect the car performance because of its overall design.

I am not an expert in designing the aircraft nor you're expert in ANYTHING related to the aircraft I'm 100% sure like many on this forum. If I ask this what is the JHMCS and what was the history of its development from where they've got the idea of? trust me except the basics and common general information, nobody knows what was the background and which kind of tech had been utilized initially and how many changes have been done to develop that thingy. Did you know that what is multi-model interaction background which was later implemented in the US Aircraft flight deck? I am a Certified HCI expert from MIT-CSAIL, Certified in Experience Design from NYU, Visual Interface expert from CALARTS with 14 years of experience and here kids are telling about what is the fucking "AESTHETICS" and what is the difference btw Aesthetics, Aerodynamics and all? Its obvious you won't become an expert in every category of the design but you got "COMMON SENSE" of aesthetics which is not just aesthetics after spending 15 years in the industry. The design of anything always designed based on the requirement of the system. Here the requirement was not SELLING this aircraft or might that was not initial intention or lack of vision.. it is not an int contender... avionics is not the only thing in today's world... anyone can grab and integrate from anywhere...
Click to expand...
Dear Sir,
I utterly respect your opinion let alone credentials, expertise or common sense and I know mine. It is not for this man to be able to express enough and apologies for any offense felt.
"JF17... A drowning man clutches at the straw".
"JF17... Form follows function for efficiency and effectiveness in perspective of any and all resource conservation".
"JF17... It stands true to the theory which is tested through time and a safe option more importantly (not good or bad that is too subjective) as the man is drowning as per my opinion and knowledge.
I hope it sheds light on what and why I said what I said. Hands down thank you for the bundle of Knowledge, Know-how and perspectives you shared.

Post Script,
Apologies if its not directly related to the topic at hand but rather generally...
To all the respected learned fellows on the thread and forum I hope WE (my/all-self included) find peace contentment hidden in the following... Regards.
Opinion n Perspective.jpg
 
Xeson said:
Dear Sir,
I utterly respect your opinion let alone credentials, expertise or common sense and I know mine. It is not for this man to be able to express enough and apologies for any offense felt.
"JF17... A drowning man clutches at the straw".
"JF17... Form follows function for efficiency and effectiveness in perspective of any and all resource conservation".
"JF17... It stands true to the theory which is tested through time and a safe option more importantly (not good or bad that is too subjective) as the man is drowning as per my opinion and knowledge.
I hope it sheds light on what and why I said what I said. Hands down thank you for the bundle of Knowledge, Know-how and perspectives you shared.

Post Script,
Apologies if its not directly related to the topic at hand but rather generally...
To all the respected learned fellows on the thread and forum I hope WE (my/all-self included) find peace contentment hidden in the following... Regards.
View attachment 596706
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, 90% of the member on this forum don't even know "WHAT IS OPINION". They can't even accept criticisms nor they have the patience to listen to others... even though who doesn't even know ABCD of any of the military hardware or basic understanding of designs or even engineering immediately jump into every single debate and trying to malign, bash, abuse others to justify their fucking ******. I won't spare these kids on this or any other forum. Their last lifeline of debate is to go low... even senior members did that many times. One of that did exactly a similar thing. If you wanna read his comment I will tag you on his BS post.
 
Stealth said:
Unfortunately, 90% of the member on this forum don't even know "WHAT IS OPINION". They can't even accept criticisms nor they have the patience to listen to others... even though who doesn't even know ABCD of any of the military hardware or basic understanding of designs or even engineering immediately jump into every single debate and trying to malign, bash, abuse others to justify their fucking ******. I won't spare these kids on this or any other forum. Their last lifeline of debate is to go low... even senior members did that many times. One of that did exactly a similar thing. If you wanna read his comment I will tag you on his BS post.
Click to expand...
And why you so emotional too much and what don't you like in block-3 or as a whole JF-17 if you clarify us whats wrong about in B or in block-3
 
Stealth said:
Unfortunately, 90% of the member on this forum don't even know "WHAT IS OPINION". They can't even accept criticisms nor they have the patience to listen to others... even though who doesn't even know ABCD of any of the military hardware or basic understanding of designs or even engineering immediately jump into every single debate and trying to malign, bash, abuse others to justify their fucking ******. I won't spare these kids on this or any other forum. Their last lifeline of debate is to go low... even senior members did that many times. One of that did exactly a similar thing. If you wanna read his comment I will tag you on his BS post.
Click to expand...
I concur that. Acceptance and tolerance have gone far rare. I can only speak for myself. My cup of taking or giving BS is already broken. I take your word for that as I have seen many of the sort. Best of Luck and Regards.
 
seven0seven said:
And why you so emotional too much and what don't you like in block-3 or as a whole JF-17 if you clarify us whats wrong about in B or in block-3
Click to expand...

I have already mentioned several times.

None of the aircraft ever changed its aerodynamics, wings, vertical stabilizer once their final prototype and official version have launched in the market. Hereafter almost decade in service, we are still playing with the designs and aerodynamics of the aircraft.

The situation is exactly similar to when the team of developers doesn't even understand the importance of design and design trends. Without best and futuristic design (which you can see every single today's modern fighter) design, look and feel shape or you can say aesthetics are completely different from the JF17. There is a reason for that. It is not just aesthetics that members on this forum doesn't even understand. For them, I (he) is talking about the design which doesn't matter in this case. The aircraft is an aircraft, if JF shoot, kill, have better avionics, that's all for the aircraft.

For instance, if your aircraft having best avionics, engine, performance everything but the interface of HUD, Cockpit is too complex for the end-user, for the end customer, you product is redundant for them if it takes time for the end-user to understand the panels, gauges, touch, sensitivity of the touch system, WIMP, information available in the cockpit which helps user to play around at the time of intense battle. Here everyone asks me, hey are you, aero engineer. In front of them, I'm making my arguments based on shape/look lol. I guess for them, Russian, Americans and French are IDIOT who've spent millions and billions of dollars on the design industry to shape up these machines.

I responded to one question with two different images of JF17 V stab. In response to my question to him, what do you think if I'm an idiot and don't even know anything according to you... what do you think about this difference? why PAF has changed the design of Vertical stabilizer of dual seater? and why after the launch of version B, why again PAF re-do the shape and design of vertical stabilizer? he and many others running out of arguments, one says okay this issue which has to be answered by an expert we don't know why.

If you want to look into the answer to "WHY" you will easily get an idea of what "FLAW(s)" I'm talking about.

Does anyone have the answer? NO... one comes up with the funniest logic. They've changed the v-stab just to maintain the balance (weight) of the aircraft. He is not even sure why they've changed LOL.

If that's the case, give me an example of any other aircraft in the world whether light, dark, heavy, pink, blue which has two different versions and the engineering dept have changed the V-stab design of dual seater and the single-seater... F18? F16? F15? Mig? any?

BIG NO!
 
Last edited:
Main focus should be on nose cone do you guys spot any difference?
 
Stealth said:
I have already mentioned several times.

None of the aircraft ever changed its aerodynamics, wings, vertical stabilizer once their final prototype and official version have launched in the market. Hereafter almost decade in service, we are still playing with the designs and aerodynamics of the aircraft.

The situation is exactly similar to when the team of developers doesn't even understand the importance of design and design trends. Without best and futuristic design (which you can see every single today's modern fighter design, look and feel, shape or aesthetics are completely different from JF17). There is a reason of that. It is not just aesthetics which member on this forum don't even understand. For them, I (he) is talking about the design which doesn't matter in this case. The aircraft is an aircraft, if JF shoot, kill, have better avionics, that's all. Debate with this kind of mentality is a wastage of time if others doesn't even understand what is "DESIGN".

For instance, if your aircraft having best avionics, engine, performance everything but its the interface of HUD, Cockpit is too complex for the end-user, for the end customer, you product is redundant for them if it takes time for the end-user to understand the panels, gauges, touch, sensitivity of the touch system, WIMP, information available in the cockpit which helps user to play around at the time of intense battle. Here everyone asks me, hey are you aero engineer LOL. In front of them, I'm making my arguments based on shape lol. I guess for them, Russian, Americans and French are IDIOT who've spent millions and billions of dollars on the design industry to shape up these machines.

I responded to one question with two different images of JF17 V stab. In response to my question to him, what do you think if I'm an idiot and don't even know anything according to you... what do you think about this difference? why PAF has changed the design of Vertical stabilizer of dual seater? and why after the launch of version B, why again PAF re-do the shape and design of vertical stabilizer? he and many others running out of arguments, one says okay this issue which has to be answered by an expert we don't know why.

If you want to look into the answer to "WHY" you will easily get an idea of what "FLAW(s)" I'm talking about.

Does anyone have the answer? NO... one comes up with the funniest logic. They've changed the v-stab just to maintain the balance (weight) of the aircraft. H thasne is not even sure why they've changed LOL.

If that's the case, give me an example of any other aircraft in the world whether light, dark, heavy, pink, blue which has two different versions and the engineering dept have changed the V-stab design of dual seater and the single-seater... F18? F16? F15? Mig? any?

BIG NO!
Click to expand...
Sir with due respect we have not vast and mature aviation industries like USA/Russia/China/EU and not billions of $$$ at it disposal and our JF-17 project so i think we are experimenting in B version of JF-17 and B version is little longer than single seater and heavier than single seater because of extra avionics of second seat that's why we have swept back tail on B for better weight distribution/management but i could be wrong, please correct me, thanks you sir
 
seven0seven said:
Sir with due respect we have not vast and mature aviation industries like USA/Russia/China/EU and not billions of $$$ at it disposal and our JF-17 project so i think we are experimenting in B version of JF-17 and B version is little longer than single seater and heavier than single seater because of extra avionics of second seat that's why we have swept back tail on B for better weight distribution/management but i could be wrong, please correct me, thanks you sir
Click to expand...

I don't think so they've changed the v-stab just to countering weight issue. Second, seems like PAF doesn't even involve in the aerodynamic, design.
 
Must read translation from chines news about jf17blk3.. it is wounderful jet..i believe one of the best with new systems
Dragon fighter Block3 prototype makes its first flight with advanced avionics but no radar Near the end of the year, AVIC sent a New Year gift to Pakistani: in mid-December, the first JF-17 Block 3 "Nine Dragon Block 3" fighter prototype numbered "3000" was in Chengdu First flight at an airport. This prototype is equipped with a large number of AVIC's shelf products, including the wide-angle diffractive holographic display, integrated cockpit display and advanced missile warning device used by the J-20 fighter aircraft, but no radar is installed. The JF-17 Block 3 fighter is the first major improvement of the JF-17 series of fighters. It is planned to install more advanced avionics systems and active phased array radars to meet the threat of India's next-generation fighters. The Pakistan Air Force plans to produce 50 JF-17 Block 3s after 2020. Source: Weibo In mid-December, the first JF-17 Block 3 "Nine Dragon Block 3" fighter prototype numbered "3000" successfully made its first flight at an airport in Chengdu. This marked the development of the "Baolong Block 3" fighter aircraft into the test flight phase. According to the pictures released on the scene, this JF-17 Block 3 prototype uses a large number of AVIC's shelf products, and some technologies have been applied to our military's own J-10C and J-20 fighters. From the figure, the most obvious improvement of the JF-17 Block 3 is the replacement of a larger polygon full-frame diffraction head-up display (HUD) and an integrated cockpit display, similar to the J-20 fighter screen display. In addition, the Nine Dragons Block 3 is also equipped with an advanced omnidirectional infrared missile warning system. At present, three new fighter aircrafts of the J-10C, J-16 and J-20 are equipped with this advanced infrared warning system. Comparison of JF-17 Block 3 prototype and JF-17 block2 Source: social media Omnidirectional infrared missile warning and polygon full-frame diffraction display are both shelf products of AVIC. Source: social media According to previous reports from AVIC, the Nine Dragons Block 3 will install Active Phased Array Radar (AESA) according to Pakistan ’s requirements. However, the prototype 3000 did not have a radar, only an aluminum metal cover and counterweight, and a nose radar. The size of the hood did not change significantly. This may mean that JF-17 Block 3's active phased array radar is still in the bidding process and has not been finalized. At present, two domestic companies are bidding for the radar project of JF-17 Block 3, one is AVIC Thunder and Lightning Institute (607), and the other is China Electric Power Division 14. 14 plans to install a liquid-cooled KLJ-7A active phased array radar for Nine Dragons, while 607 plans to install a new type of air-cooled phased array radar, both of which were displayed at the Zhuhai Air Show. KLJ-7A radar has large power and relatively mature technology, but it needs to redesign the head space; 607 air-cooled phased array radars have low power but low power consumption, and have successfully solved that the equipped PD radar fighter cannot be directly replaced in place. Problems with active phased array radar. Air-cooled active phased array radar (upper, middle) of AVIC Thunder and Lightning Institute (No. 607) installed in the liquid-cooled KLJ-7A active phased array radar of the 14th China Electric Power Division of Yun-7 test machine The JF-17 Block 3 fighter is the first major improvement of the JF-17 series. It was jointly developed by the Pakistan Aviation Industry Consortium (PAC) and China Aviation Industry Corporation (AVIC). Fighter ". The JF-17Block 3 project was launched in mid-2015. In October 2017, AVIC Chengfei completed the "preliminary design stage" of the JF-17 Block 3 fighter. In March 2018, the Pakistan Air Force announced the completion of the Block-3 design. In mid-December 2019, a JF-17Block 3 prototype was tested. From the start of the project to the test flight of the prototype, the Chinese aviation industry only took 4 and a half years. In the project requirements, the Pakistani military requires the installation of more advanced avionics systems and active phased array radars to be compatible with advanced air-to-air missiles including PL-15 and PL-10E to respond to the threat of India's next-generation fighter aircraft. Pakistan has currently manufactured more than 100 JF-17 fighters in six squadrons, and more than half of them are Block 2 with aerial refueling capabilities. The Pakistani Air Force plans to produce 50 JF-17 Block 3s after 2020 to replace older second-generation aircraft such as the J-7 and Mirage 3. "Dragon Dragon" with PL-15 rendering (top) The following is the PL-10E at the air show Source: Social Media
 

Similar threads

H
  • Article
Modernizing the Skies: Upcoming Innovations in the Pakistan Air Force
Replies
0
Views
537
HamzaWaseem
H
Windjammer
JF-17 Thunder Rages in Africa !
Replies
0
Views
1K
Windjammer
Windjammer
H
  • Article
Pakistan Air Force Museum in Karachi
Replies
0
Views
448
HamzaWaseem
H
JohnWick
Pakistan Eyes More J-10C Fighters
Replies
1
Views
2K
AbdulQadir7
A
Windjammer
JF-17 Block-3 Induction Imminent
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
77
Views
15K
Trango Towers
Trango Towers

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom