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

[Aesterix]

My research showed that the colors are visual cues which can have different meaning. For example, a separate color can be used to signify different handling of a part. So the color by itself is no indication, but the words of the engineer are authentic. Even then, people need to use their brain. The green panels on the sides of the cockpit have no space - it's just thin metal. Also, it would be difficult pumping fuel from the front to the engine in the aft section. At most, some of these panels might house fuel cells for electric power.

Having fuel in the places Marked green on JF-17 is authentic, and many PAC Kamra documentaries said so.
You have to dig up those sections from the hundreds of various Pakistani channels documentaries on the matter

 

[iLION12345_1]

Could be the Bravo not Blk III?

Already answered above, the Tail on that aircraft indicates it’s an A Variant and not a B variant.

 

[Deino]

Already answered above, the Tail on that aircraft indicates it’s an A Variant and not a B variant.

BY the way, wouldn't be JF-17C a more appropriate designation?

 

[iLION12345_1]

BY the way, wouldn't be JF-17C a more appropriate designation?

All A variants are single seat and All B variants are dual seat, there are block 2 A and B and now there will be block 3 A and B. Unless you’re considering a different reason for naming it that?

 

[arjunk]

BY the way, wouldn't be JF-17C a more appropriate designation?

All A variants are single seat and All B variants are dual seat, there are block 2 A and B and now there will be block 3 A and B. Unless you’re considering a different reason for naming it that?

Unless they make a carrier version I don't think it'll be designated as "C." A JF-17 Growler might be called EF-17A/B or JF-17E.

 

[Shan234]

Could be the Bravo not Blk III?

Tail is vertical so its block 3. Bravo has inclined tail.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Tail is vertical so its block 3. Bravo has inclined tail.View attachment 775163

Not just that; tail on B is green. On A it’s yellow.

Unless they make a carrier version I don't think it'll be designated as "C." A JF-17 Growler might be called EF-17A/B or JF-17E.

Growler version of JF is not really that realistic IMO.

And not to nitpick or anything, but we should start referring to them as “EW variants” and not “Growlers”
Growler is the name of a specific aircraft, the EA-18G. it wasn’t even the first of its type, that would be the EA6B Prowler before it And the EF-111A Raven.

 

[abdulbarijan]

Not just that; tail on B is green. On A it’s yellow.

Growler version of JF is not really that realistic IMO.

And not to nitpick or anything, but we should start referring to them as “EW variants” and not “Growlers”
Growler is the name of a specific aircraft, the EA-18G. it wasn’t even the first of its type, that would be the EA6B Prowler before it And the EF-111A Raven.

While many upgrades have already been mentioned regarding the block-III, it would be quite interesting to see the PL-10 & HMD combo aboard the BLK-III and its effectiveness in close, considering how PAF wasn't able to get the AIM-9X with the JHMCS on the block-52's. Add to that the more powerful RD-93MA and it would be very interesting to see the results.

 

[Akh1112]

Not just that; tail on B is green. On A it’s yellow.

Growler version of JF is not really that realistic IMO.

And not to nitpick or anything, but we should start referring to them as “EW variants” and not “Growlers”
Growler is the name of a specific aircraft, the EA-18G. it wasn’t even the first of its type, that would be the EA6B Prowler before it And the EF-111A Raven.

People seem to forget the whole point of the growler is carrier based jamming whereas we can employ larger aircraft from stand off ranges to do the same thing.

 

[arjunk]

People seem to forget the whole point of the growler is carrier based jamming whereas we can employ larger aircraft from stand off ranges to do the same thing.

In case runways are destroyed (which will likely happen within a few weeks of war owing to Pakistan's thin depth), JF-17 EW variants could utilise motorways/highways to take off and maintain PAF's EW capabilities.

 

[Akh1112]

In case runways are destroyed (which will likely happen within a few weeks of war owing to Pakistan's thin depth), JF-17 EW variants could utilise motorways/highways to take off and maintain PAF's EW capabilities.

How would they get to the motorways

 

[Blacklight]

How would they get to the motorways

Tejas style?

*just kidding*

 

[Deino]

All A variants are single seat and All B variants are dual seat, there are block 2 A and B and now there will be block 3 A and B. Unless you’re considering a different reason for naming it that?

Yes I have a different reason: In China, usually a new major redesigned or improved variant gets a new letter similar to the US standard or an additional designation in Russia. Since the A is the standard single seater and the B the standard Block 2 twin-seater I see at least no reason why an improved variant should not be called JF-17C in the same way to the US F-16 development line from F-16A, B, C ... and the J-10A and C.

Unless they make a carrier version I don't think it'll be designated as "C." A JF-17 Growler might be called EF-17A/B or JF-17E.

Why should the letter C be reserved for a carrier version only? The J-10C is not a carrier variant, the F-16C as the improved single seater is also not a carrier variant.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Yes I have a different reason: In China, usually a new major redesigned or improved variant gets a new letter similar to the US standard or an additional designation in Russia. Since the A is the standard single seater and the B the standard Block 2 twin-seater I see at least no reason why an improved variant should not be called JF-17C in the same way to the US F-16 development line from F-16A, B, C ... and the J-10A and C.



Why should the letter C be reserved for a carrier version only? The J-10C is not a carrier variant, the F-16C as the improved single seater is also not a carrier variant.

Ah I see, well that does make sense if we look at it according to Chinese naming system, But think for the PAFs usage it will remain A and B and the block number will be used to differentiate.
Maybe Chinese internal designations might change Differently?

Also the block 2 Bs will all be upgraded to block 3, yet they will remain B variants, now they’ll be block 3 Bs. While the newly ordered ones will be block 3As. That Is until a follow up order of either block 3 A or B is placed. Though nothing has suggested otherwise so far, it may be that PAF comes out with a new designation when the aircraft is inducted.

 

[Aesterix]

In case runways are destroyed (which will likely happen within a few weeks of war owing to Pakistan's thin depth)

I used to believe it until before 27th February 2019.
I don't anymore, looking at the effective plans and strategies PAF already has in place.