What's new

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

So here is the question I can not get an answer, if this is all about having an AESA, HUD, HMD, bunch of new sensors, integration of latest weapons, why did PAC/CAC needed to do a full blown prototype, flight tests, etc. There is more to it than what we are observing, I guess people would have been a bit more excited if there was a coat of RAM on skin.
Lets look for the non-obvious ones.
 
We have three difference authentic places where you can verify whether the aircraft really involved in the scene or not (involved doesn't mean that the aircraft was not taking part. I am sure IL78, AWACS and many other aircraft were involved) the point is who was on the lead role? ... now at the moment, we've options to verify the first one is the monument, no name of JF17 thr mainly which aircraft shot down the enemy migs and the second is your PAF museum where you have full details about operation Op swift... now what source you have?


View attachment 596463 View attachment 596464 View attachment 596465 View attachment 596466
And do you not believed on firs day DGISPR press conference that said JF-17s are along Mirages for escort
 
So here is the question I can not get an answer, if this is all about having an AESA, HUD, HMD, bunch of new sensors, integration of latest weapons, why did PAC/CAC needed to do a full blown prototype, flight tests, etc. There is more to it than what we are observing, I guess people would have been a bit more excited if there was a coat of RAM on skin.
Lets look for the non-obvious ones.
IMO for this prototype, they're probably starting out with testing the new flight control system and engine tune-ups (as per info of changes via @airomerix), and they'll start adding the other subsystems in the subsequent months.
 
And do you not believed on firs day DGISPR press conference that said JF-17s are along Mirages for escort

So you're saying PAF doesn't know which aircraft they were used but DG ISPR who actually not even in the AF TT or planing knows which aircraft were used? oh comeon! PAF MUSEUM Op Swift details and the MONUMENT is AUTHENTIC. Developed & built by PAF...
 
Brother in today's world, quality matters over quantity. Look at the construction of the aircraft. Trust me, no one buys this. I met one of the USAF officers last year. He told me that he thoroughly inspects with his clan. He told me exactly the same thing that boy quality always matters when you go International in today's world. The aircraft has many issues, third-party engine including some aerodynamics (which was interesting), despite all, though the aircraft seems somehow competent again "Somehow" capable to defend the skies against the 3.5 Gen fighters but if you're expecting that your aircraft gonna get order (order doesn't someone rent it out or put order of 2 3 aircraft i.e, Nigeria, Myanmar etc), you have to be very careful in terms of construction quality. The one built-in "China" has better quality as compare to this one (UAE Air show) which is built-in Pakistan. There are many complications because of global power politics, aircraft quality & capability, engine performance and the top of it, military hardware and marketing is indeed a tough job in today's competitive market. This aircraft might take 2+ more decades or even more to get some reasonable older else seems like your airforce core focus was to accommodate replacements (Trust me he doesn't even know that the aircraft was an actual replacement of our 70% of AF fleet (A5/f7). One of my relatives who is working in the Boeing Germany told me exactly the same thing (design flaws, aircraft construction, name of few).

We must understand that the aircraft is POORLY designed (I have heard the similar kind of vibe from even our airforce officers including those who went to the US on different programs and also participated in Red Flag exercises).

Its a general perspective. Now why I don't like, these are some of the points which enhancing my hate for this aircraft but one thing which I believe, not every aircraft become Lockheed F16 and Mig29. These two aircraft designs are a MAJOR factor of its selling point and still rule among all from the past 5 decades. JF17 is pathetically, poorly designed aircraft seems like 70s look and feel and rest the last nail in the coffin "built quality". Not everything is avionics, the US has spent billions of dollars on the designs program of F22, B52, B2, etc same did by the Russians.

The counter-argument against my perspective is pure bullshit and trust me I never respond nor interested if the person doesn't understand the importance of "DESIGN". Usually the counter-response on my criticism on JF17 "If the aircraft serve the purpose......." that's enough for us. We are stuck in this kind of mind-set the reason we are FAILED to sell this aircraft even though there is NO SUCH COMPETITOR at this time of JF17 in the market at this price.

Look at the B version. More like a trainee aircraft (pregnant). No one uses such kind of bulky dual seater shit against the 4.5 5 Gen in the combat theater. The aircraft looks like someone modifying old vintage shit dinky. Imagine, you're extended Suzuki Dabba just to make something like limouse, eek din bas hojani hey ismay 2 X kay baad 4 X ka missile rack laga kar akar kitna modify karlengay isko? lol.

I knew since DAY ONE that DG ISPR lying with the public. Actually he intentionally did that. We are desperate to sell this aircraft that was the core reason of his lies. Guess what, we slowly gradually changed our stance from JF17 to F16 story (a reference to 27 Feb event). You hardly see any prominent information or ref of Jf17 even in the PAF museum about Op Swift. Anyway, the point I'm making is, we have to show and built something which serves the FUTURE. This construction quality and the design won't work in the modern world. You can integrate avionics but aerodynamics, shape, built quality, frame matters a lot.

@MastanKhan
Pardon me if I'm wrong about you but I think by 'design' you actually mean 'aesthetics' which would imply that you dont have an idea about engineering design and only unhappy because the aircraft doesn't look beautiful and 'pregnant' and ugly as you said. Beauty is very relative and I agree that JF17 doesnt have the most appealing of aesthetics. But why are you questioning design? Can you mention some engineering design blunders in the Jeff?

Secondly, you mention 'poor build quality'. Again, not sure what you mean by that. Is it just that you dont see that shine and surface finish on the final product or are you talking about non compliamce to international standards, good engineeeing practices etc?

The terms 'design' and 'build quality' have very different meanings for a laymen and an engineer.
 
IMO for this prototype, they're probably starting out with testing the new flight control system and radar tune-ups (as per @airomerix), and they'll start adding the other subsystems in the subsequent months.

I am speculating that aerodynamic and structural updates were done to get max performance out of the air frame, we might never know about these improvements with an exception to the tidbits people get from pilots.
 
So you're saying PAF doesn't know which aircraft they were used but DG ISPR who actually not even in the AF TT or planing knows which aircraft were used? oh comeon! PAF MUSEUM Op Swift details and the MONUMENT is AUTHENTIC. Developed & built by PAF...
ok sir you know more then me i might be wrong but just hinted that first DGISPR hinted that we used JF-17 in strike package, and DGISPR talking on behalf of PAF and armed forces of Pakistan
 
Pardon me if I'm wrong about you but I think by 'design' you actually mean 'aesthetics' which would imply that you dont have an idea about engineering design and only unhappy because the aircraft doesn't look beautiful and 'pregnant' and ugly as you said. Beauty is very relative and I agree that JF17 doesnt have the most appealing of aesthetics. But why are you questioning design? Can you mention some engineering design blunders in the Jeff?

Secondly, you mention 'poor build quality'. Again, not sure what you mean by that. Is it just that you dont see that shine and surface finish on the final product or are you talking about non compliamce to international standards, good engineeeing practices etc?

The terms 'design' and 'build quality' have very different meanings for a laymen and an engineer.

Enjoy the built quality... this masterpiece you're going to present @ international market. And exactly next to this aircraft, Gripen, Rafale and many other aircraft usually stands....

81323860_10157863116474660_2005530731144544256_n.jpg
 
E/O satellite how its possible, AWACS most probable, human intelligence least probability, and may be third party guideness, like Soviet/Russian philosophy of firing long range anti ship cruise missiles from subsurface and guided by maritime aircraft like TU-42

E/O Satellites in a similar manner to how a cruise missile strike would take place, except in the terminal phase it switches on its active seeker. It may not be best for mobile systems, but for known positions of enemy SAM batteries, it may be an option.

Also, its the Dual pulse motor of the PL-15 that would be the element to integrate; other wise it would be a whole new missile akin to the US AARGM-ER ("The AGM-88E AARGM is powered by an AGM-88 rocket motor using a Thiokol dual-thrust solid propellant." source: https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/agm-88e-advanced-anti-radiation-guided-missile-aargm/)

Not looking to divert this topic, so i will keep this brief, but this American project is definitely something the PAF can study to counter the S-400 (and other air defense systems) and other elements of the Integrated Indian Air Defense Network.

https://www.defence24.com/aargm-er-anti-radiation-missile-for-the-5th-generation-fighter-aircraft
https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/AARGM/Pages/default.aspx
https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/AARGM/Documents/AARGM-ER_FactSheet.pdf
 
Enjoy the built quality... this masterpiece you're going to present @ international market. And exactly next to this aircraft, Gripen, Rafale and many other aircraft usually stands....

View attachment 596467
What is bad in this image if you try to tell me and JF-17 is not for to compete RAFALE/EF-2000/Grippen/F-16 etc etc
 
Pardon me if I'm wrong about you but I think by 'design' you actually mean 'aesthetics' which would imply that you dont have an idea about engineering design and only unhappy because the aircraft doesn't look beautiful and 'pregnant' and ugly as you said. Beauty is very relative and I agree that JF17 doesnt have the most appealing of aesthetics. But why are you questioning design? Can you mention some engineering design blunders in the Jeff?

Secondly, you mention 'poor build quality'. Again, not sure what you mean by that. Is it just that you dont see that shine and surface finish on the final product or are you talking about non compliamce to international standards, good engineeeing practices etc?

The terms 'design' and 'build quality' have very different meanings for a laymen and an engineer.

Now tell me what do you think about vertical stab? which one is good in terms of Aerodynamic?

78059716_143868813685916_1909119010385952768_n.jpg
80886239_2526361164308450_79846878006476800_n.jpg
 
What is bad in this image if you try to tell me and JF-17 is not for to compete RAFALE/EF-2000/Grippen/F-16 etc etc

LOL thats what you guys are trying .... convincing that the shit is better than any aircraft whether in terms of avionics to aesthetics to design to whatever. Now suddenly you did U-turn and says we are not comparing JF17 with RAfale EF or any other .... lol

I am not convincing anyone... I have my own perspective and which is simply, the aircraft is not competing @ int mrkt.. it just serve our needs... though I am not underestimating, but it seems too hard to sell cuz of many reasons which I've already mentioned... I am an expert in the design stuff again agreed with @Alpha ... more into the aesthetic side but again... I am sharing my exp what I've heard from different pilots including our... who have expertise in this field. You can't convince me nor I can to anyone...
 
If the aircraft is soo competent, why not PAF put them on a lead role @ 27 feb hollywood scenario? the aircraft not even in the scene.... though Delta + F16s did the job... lol you don't want to take a risk with the machine you're not sure about ..

== replacement only and always fill the gape of replacement spot ==
you can't put them on a lead role... we will see... the time is not far away when we gonna H2H with IAF again...

Hi,

It is a little too late for you to complain now---. You should have started 15 years ago with the intensity that you are showing today---.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom