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

[Rank]

True.

HMD/pods/weapons are supplementary systems which can be integrated later. However, the main challenge with Block 3 was additional thrust and 3 axis FBW which required reevaluation of the aerodynamics from the ground up.

Everything else will come along eventually.

Don't talk about "Aerodynamics" its a shitty subject here on this forum... only internal components matter... oh yeah the logic here is, if JF can shoot, it serves the purpose (according to the majority on this forum). Oh man you're talking about AESTHETICS changes again lol

 

[airomerix]

If that's the only reason (heard from every single) stop pushing it into the market. Surprised which idiot who has the option to get fully loaded state of the art capable aircraft in such price ignoring just because of "International Politics" lol.

Unfortunately, there are alot of idiots like that.

Infact the reason India signed up for Rafale goes back to weapons, avionics and EW suite package which was to be sourced from France for Block I JF-17. India did intervene and assured the french that Rafale will win MRCA if they do not sign JF-17 deal with Pakistan.

It was a hard time for us. Otherwise AESA was planned for Block II initially.

 

[Foxtrot Delta]

Block 3 is supposed to be taller to carry Raad cruise missiles.

 

[airomerix]

Don't talk about "Aerodynamics" its a shitty subject here on this forum... only internal components matter... oh yeah the logic here is, if JF can shoot, it serves the purpose (according to the majority on this forum). Oh man you're talking about AESTHETICS changes again lol

It's true that the subject of aerodynamics requires a bit of basics in physics to understand the context and to further the argument. And majority of the forum either doesn't remember it or didn't get a chance to study it. It is not their fault either. It is not everyone's cup of tea and speaking from experience, it is dry and not very attractive. So lets keep this forum interesting shall we.

 

[Rank]

Unfortunately, there are alot of idiots like that.

Infact the reason India signed up for Rafale goes back to weapons, avionics and EW suite package which was to be sourced from France for Block I JF-17. India did intervene and assured the french that Rafale will win MRCA if they do not sign JF-17 deal with Pakistan.

It was a hard time for us. Otherwise AESA was planned for Block II initially.

Not because of politics, that's because of the "BIG MARKET". Put yourself in France shoes and let me know... which customer you're interested to deal with? Does a small one whos economy run on the foreign IMF loans or the one who has full pockets? who is capable to push the number of orders..... which customer creates more jobs for your countrymen if you'll get the contract. Its an ECONOMIC issue rather political.. What I believe, if your product is capable, the buyer will consider it despite big players and their politics...

 

[airomerix]

Who is he and what are his credentials?

He is just a poor guy who knew since Feb 27 that 221 sqn of IAF has lost an su 30.

A poor guy who introduced the concept of AMRAAM lofting on PDF despite heavy opposition of some members (a mod included).

A poor guy who tries so hard to clean up the misinformation which sometimes comes through intentional or unintentional means.

Professionally, i hold a masters degree is something i cant tell and that i have practically worked very closely on JF-17s and some other systems.

I hope it is good enough.

 

[crankthatskunk]

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.

I have a very simple answer to your post. Some people based on their posts count take themselves way too seriously. I just laugh it off.
In the scheme of things, what difference a stabiliser's shape makes, when you are getting all other goodies for us to compete with the Bhindians expensive import of "Rapahell" !! No different, zilch.

Therefore, the focus should be on, what are we getting for our paltry investment to compete and fight with Bhindians!!
A lot actually. So, why should I or someone BS about stabiliser's shape!! Because it is not done by any other Aircraft designers!

I will ask those who are debating it, please care to tell us R & D costs of those manufacturers mentioned!!

Bring us those dollars and see the results, otherwise, whats it to you!!

In the end "Aam gino aam".

 

[[--Leo--]]

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

?? View attachment 596704

what is green thing in air frame

 

[Tempest II]

I hate constant baseless speculation unless when it is mine. So apologies in advance. Here I go

The shallower angle of the intake as viewed in the few photos available could indeed confirm a wider intake as demonstrated by my poor sketch showing narrow intake (red) vs wider intake (blue).

 

[Deino]

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

...

No it is not or do you really think the whole cockpit area is a fuel tub?

 

[Deino]

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

Only the typical prototype metal nose with the longer and bigger pitot, as on all pevious maiden flights.

 

[Thorough Pro]

front landing gear re-designed

https://www.guancha.cn/military-affairs/2019_12_30_529936.shtml

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

He is just a poor guy who knew since Feb 27 that 221 sqn of IAF has lost an su 30.

A poor guy who introduced the concept of AMRAAM lofting on PDF despite heavy opposition of some members (a mod included).

A poor guy who tries so hard to clean up the misinformation which sometimes comes through intentional or unintentional means.

Professionally, i hold a masters degree is something i cant tell and that i have practically worked very closely on JF-17s and some other systems.

I hope it is good enough.

Sure. If what he's saying is true then he is goof enough to be trusted on these matters. But he must understand that there are many wanna be experts on such forums and they pretend to be insiders when they are not. They pass on 'inside' information with much confidence and then it discussed on death here and then that info turns out to be hot air.

So we have to question everyone who claims to know certain confidential stuff with such confidence. It's nothing personal. And if we judge you by the resume you just presented, then you are certainly the most credible guy to talk about Jf17 blk 3 and its specs at the moment. I hope you keep on bringing good news and your info about lack of HMD turns out to be a misunderstanding.

 

[NA71]

He is just a poor guy who knew since Feb 27 that 221 sqn of IAF has lost an su 30.

A poor guy who introduced the concept of AMRAAM lofting on PDF despite heavy opposition of some members (a mod included).

A poor guy who tries so hard to clean up the misinformation which sometimes comes through intentional or unintentional means.

Professionally, i hold a masters degree is something i cant tell and that i have practically worked very closely on JF-17s and some other systems.

I hope it is good enough.

Salute....we need many such "poor guys"

 

[aliyusuf]

I hate constant baseless speculation unless when it is mine. So apologies in advance. Here I go

The shallower angle of the intake as viewed in the few photos available could indeed confirm a wider intake as demonstrated by my poor sketch showing narrow intake (red) vs wider intake (blue).
View attachment 596754 View attachment 596755

The angles of the pic are slightly different for both pics. The B3 PT is slightly more from the front and that from the previous block is slightly more from the side. Hence wrong comparative measurements will be made.