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

[Ultima Thule]

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.

may be you're right sir but remember sir JF-17 project is for experimental By China lots of new technologies introduce in Prototypes , did you remember when first prototype appears in 2003 it was without DSI and 3rd prototype included DSI intakes, and sir can i ask you what could be the most PROBABLE reasons that they change vertical stab on B version by your understanding

 

[El Observer]

Hi,

Do you see any difference in the height of the aircraft at the rear wheels---?

A minor difference, maybe.

 

[Maxpane]

you are late buddy. already discussed in jf 17 block 3 thread

 

[Ultima Thule]

why so many threads on same topic
@The Eagle @waz please either merge or delete this thread thanks

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

someone---please check the clearance l height from the ground to the bottom of the aircraft at the rear wheels of the blk 3 to blk2---.

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!

Hi,

You have brought up a very interesting observation about the tail---.

If there is a change in the exterior of the aircraft---the angle of the tail will be adjusted accordingly---.

If there is internal re-distribution of weight---that is---a change in the center of gravity--the angle of the tail would be re-adjusted---.

The chinese lost a new awac with a full crew of engineers because they used they kept the tail of the original aircraft without compensating for the massive dish that they put on the aircraft---almost a decade ago---.

 

[MastanKhan]

you are late buddy. already discussed in jf 17 block 3 thread

Link me to that page please if you can---.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Link me to that page please if you can---.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/jf-17-block-3-updates-news-discussion.594030/page-275#post-11974211

 

[jupiter2007]

One part you saying they did not offer other part you saying they ejected becouse of hight cost?? Look budy pakistan got experience to built jet..pak is one country where its airforce is manufacturing its own jets..means very cheap labour and lots of newyoung labour geting in to learning process.. other hand private manufactures can not afford this....reason why we already have good number of jf in service in very short time..even we did not had this experience 20 years back..i am impressed..just look teja 40 years..if we start buying expensive jet we couldn't be able to manufacture jf...most important point...dont think what we have today. Think what we will have after 20 years as nation.i belive we will be among some best jet manufacturers in 20 years...

I am saying that Chinese never offered joint production of J-10 to Pakistan.
Pakistan rejected J-10 (off the shelf) offered because of huge cost Chinese was asking.

 

[Rank]

Hi,

someone---please check the clearance l height from the ground to the bottom of the aircraft at the rear wheels of the blk 3 to blk2---.



Hi,

You have brought up a very interesting observation about the tail---.

If there is a change in the exterior of the aircraft---the angle of the tail will be adjusted accordingly---.

If there is internal re-distribution of weight---that is---a change in the center of gravity--the angle of the tail would be re-adjusted---.

The chinese lost a new awac with a full crew of engineers because they used they kept the tail of the original aircraft without compensating for the massive dish that they put on the aircraft---almost a decade ago---.

Technical response. Still, I wanna dig into that. I will tell you some more design changes in the B which were re-do for any technical reasons. Seems like the Chinese are playing with the aircraft to learn something different which might our engineers are not aware. I gotta cent that since day one our team wasn't involved in designing part. That's obvious because our people never ever design an aircraft in the history rather modifying, upgrade and restore again playing with the internal components and configurations. Nor we have any established R&D institute like Boeing, Lockheed, Sukoi, Dassult etc.

If there is a change in the exterior of the aircraft---the angle of the tail will be adjusted accordingly---.

I have a different perspective on this. Again, I've never seen any aircraft manufacturer changes the design of the V-Stab or wings for its different version like single and dual.

 

[MastanKhan]

Technical response. Still, I wanna dig into that. I will tell you some more design changes in the B which were re-do for any technical reasons. Seems like the Chinese are playing with the aircraft to learn something different which might our engineers are not aware. I gotta cent that since day one our team wasn't involved in designing part. That's obvious because our people never ever design an aircraft in the history rather modifying, upgrade and restore again playing with the internal components and configurations. Nor we have any established R&D institute like Boeing, Lockheed, Sukoi, Dassult etc.

If there is a change in the exterior of the aircraft---the angle of the tail will be adjusted accordingly---.

I have a different perspective on this. Again, I've never seen any aircraft manufacturer changes the design of the V-Stab or wings for its different version like single and dual.

Hi,

Check out the width of the rudder in the BLK3 and compare it to the width of the blk2 rudder---.
All other fighter aircraft manufacturers have a century of experience building aircraft---. They can shut their eyes and design and aircraft---.

China had no experience building a modern day aircraft---. They were fortunate that they both found each other---china wanted to produce one and Paf wanted certain specs.

If you look at the original J10 A---that was an extremely rough built aircraft---.

 

[jedijedi]

This may not matter in the long scheme of things. However, coming to the point ... I had a conversation with an officer who has in the past worked on JF17 project. I came out with the impression that a test flight did take place around the same time the news came out. I did not explicitly ask them about specifics because the setting did not allow for it and I did not want to be unnecessarily pokey in a matter of national security.

That is to be expected.
Very realistic. A source also told me changes in Block 3 structure are supposed to not only save weight but also strengthen the structure further. I will not delve into details as I do not want to quote something wrong as I am not an aeronautical engineer and this discussion took place a long time back so my memory is a bit shaky at this age.
I would have doubted this seriously but this doesn't seem too far fetched now as a reliable source has given me reason to believe that at least the formal maiden flight has taken place.

Now that the person who I had a conversation with has been proven right, I figured I'd barge in again with my 3.75 cents. I notice some cliché posters/posts daily on this thread.

1- The over zealous mujahid: JF17 is an invincible super machine at par with the best world has to offer and will beat the **** out of Rafales, Su30s and what not. Whoever criticizes JF17 is not a good Pakistani.
2- The angry super geek: JF17 is s**t, obsolete and unoriginal.
3- The realist: JF17 is our child, pretty or ugly, now that we have it, we have to love it and teach it ways and skills needed to survive in a harsh world.

- For 1, I appreciate your 'jazba' but I would rather stay in touch with reality and keep working hard/er.
- For 2, ignore their condescending tone, we need detractors in-house to keep us on our toes. I'd rather my brother at home tell me I am wearing a shirt upside down than the interviewer at a job that I will never get if I shout at my brother to hush any criticism.
- I probably fall in this (block 3), I wish those at PAC working on JF17 are also mature and realists. It is important to not lose sight of our eventual goal, meeting and beating the challenges around us. We should be mature enough to know that the angry super geek means well and harsh words are only meant to serve as motivation for future improvement. The over zealous mujahid may sound sweet, but he's only going to make us weak, slow, complacent and lethargic.

Q1: Will JF17 improve if we just listen to the over zealous mujahids of this forum? I think no.
Q2: Will JF17 improve if we think, re think, go back to our drawing boards and always stay on our toes because the super geek always has a flaw to point out. I think so.

For a nation where we've let our procrastination and pot belly always hungry for $$ loans almost sink us, where most university grads present FYP and theses someone could muster in an hour or two of Googling, where Govt officers bar a few heroes and sheroes are all there to drink tea, read newspapers, make assets (often illicit) to pass on to their boat load of children that they will send abroad to settle them there perpetually, I think JF17 is a great achievement. It heartens me to see the majority on PDF is so eager, loves Pakistan, is hungry for success and has its eyes set on lofty goals with the desire to work hard for it. Bless you all!

 

[PakFactor]

All this shit over a fucking V-Stabilizer.

 

[sohail.ishaque]

All this shit over a fucking V-Stabilizer.

Yep. True. I last 5, 10 pages that i have gone through, the only criticism i have seen is about V-Stabilizer.

And the only problem is that there was no such example before this, where 2 different models of same jet have 2 different kind of stablizer. So this is a sh1t plane as we can't find any example of a jet with different stablizers in different models.

Good radar, not useful becoz of the V-S
Good avionics, missile system, 3 FBW, everything thrown out of the window becoz there is not any example of a jet having different stablizers in different models.

Sorry. no offence to anyone but i just don't buy this logic. But then i am a nobody.

 

[StormBreaker]

So why you unsatisfied with a appearance of block-3

Just try to find where i said i am unsatisfying

 

[Maarkhoor]

Main focus should be on nose cone do you guys spot any difference?