What's new

JF-17 C Arrives To Participate In Dubai Airshow!

.
It’s 100% Chinese designed, developed and manufactured aircraft. Even now, all major components are imported from China and assembled by you guys.
Another Indian fellow pitching same narrative which was adopted by his old relatives on PDF back in 2007. Such things are discussed here to death already but our Eastern neighbors have endless supply of clueless warriors which are eager to surface only re invent the wheel again with their Vedic logics.

. We have been doing this much and more than that, for SU-30 and few other aircraft.
So HAL happily exported Su MKI as MKK to our Chinese friends back in 90s i guess......Just like PAC supplying Thunders to other countries.... :coffee::coffee:
 
Last edited:
.
So HAL happily exported Su MKI as MKK to our Chinese friends back in 90s i
Nope. We didn’t have any false sense of illusion unlike you all.
We considered SU-30 to be an import and had no desire to put a stamp of JOINT word over it.

So no sense of grandeur or illusion this side.
 
.
Nope. We didn’t have any false sense of illusion unlike you all.
We considered SU-30 to be an import and had no desire to put a stamp of JOINT word over it.

So no sense of grandeur or illusion this side.
Oh dude jf17 is design and develop to PAF specifications by China and our engineers were involved in the project if jf17 project is 100% Chinese than why we have 50% profit shares in this project? Think sensible and use a common sense
 
.
This thread is about an aircraft
Good. Time for you to back off.

Chinese than why we have 50% profit shares in this project?
Source?
Since, you didn’t get in trolling, let me accept that JF was a well managed project and met the PAF requirements very well. The timelines and approach of incremental improvement are also praiseworthy. Since, PAF wanted the aircraft they must have done close collaboration too in which they lay down the QRs. PAF May have been involved a little more due to close ties with China.
However, claiming this coordination and involvement into naming it JOINT, isn’t what joint means. There should be capability to convert ideas and paper knowledge to hardware and validate them is the actual capability.
So, it is not a joint fighter.
 
Last edited:
. .
Good. Time for you to back off.


Source?
Since, you didn’t get in trolling, let me accept that JF was a well managed project and met the PAF requirements very well. The timelines and approach of incremental improvement are also praiseworthy. Since, PAF wanted the aircraft they must have done close collaboration too in which they lay down the QRs. PAF May have been involved a little more due to close ties with China.
However, claiming this coordination and involvement into naming it JOINT, isn’t what joint means. There should be capability to convert ideas and paper knowledge to hardware and validate them is the actual capability.
So, it is not a joint fighter.
Time for you to learn something instead of habitual nasty habit of ...discharge, feces, pants down, butt kissing.

 
.
So what if the army started the incursion---war happened---the Paf air chief had NO AUTHORITY to stand back---. It is a TREASON OFFENCE---.

Air force is sub servient to the army on the ground attack targets and any attack on army personal in action---. It has to obey their orders to the best of their abilities---.
Musharraf kept the whole operation secret from even other Army Generals and pretended it was done by "Mujahideen."
 
.
A good %age of components of PAF JF 17s are made locally. Over several iterations Pakistan has continued to localise production of components in Pakistan.

The JF 17 are being built in PAC at Kamra.

The Blocks IIIs are coming out now. Of course critical components are foreign but PAF is getting there.
 
.
So, it is not a joint fighter.

It is Joint fighter by all means, if you think rationally without any bias. "Joint fighter" does not mean an equal technical participation. It could be at any level of technical, or at level of project ownership, or at level of financials.

Pakistan initiated this project with a chinese aviation firm (PAC and CATIC). Pakistan paid for the R&D, Pakistan is the co-owner of the project. That's all more than enough to call it a joint-fighter, even if you don't count the teams of engineers, pilots, local parts or whatever. We don't shy to accept that Pakistan imports engine and several parts of it but that doesn't mean we don't own it.

India also import several of Tejas components, including most critical component of any aircraft its engine, and several israeli / french / british components. Does that mean Tejas is not indian? India financed it, india owns it, so that's enough. Keep same principle on judging all aircrafts.


I see some insane arguments sometimes considering JF-17 project same as liscenced production of SU-30s. India never owns SU-30, that aircraft is ownership of Russia, SU-30 was already designed and developed before india opts in for liscence production, india never paid for its initial concept, never founded the su-30 project, never paid for its R&D. You are just a liscence producer. Incase of JF-17 try to grasp the concept of ownership, Pakistan owns and is part when the aircraft was just a concept, there is jointness at every step. Hope you understand now and got the idea.
 
.
Time for you to learn something instead of habitual nasty habit of ...discharge, feces, pants down, butt kissing.
Don’t try to project your dreams and ideas on others. It is you who has been creating threads that include all these headings.

Don’t need education from an idiot like you.
All the aspects of LCA are known to everyone and its issues etc are also well documented.
But, today it is in its own league.
 
.
Don’t try to project your dreams and ideas on others. It is you who has been creating threads that include all these headings.

Don’t need education from an idiot like you.
All the aspects of LCA are known to everyone and its issues etc are also well documented.
But, today it is in its own league.
so much farting from an endiot is not unexpected, from now on we will call you teju bhai fart wala.:omghaha::omghaha:
 
.
Good. Time for you to back off.


Source?
Since, you didn’t get in trolling, let me accept that JF was a well managed project and met the PAF requirements very well. The timelines and approach of incremental improvement are also praiseworthy. Since, PAF wanted the aircraft they must have done close collaboration too in which they lay down the QRs. PAF May have been involved a little more due to close ties with China.
However, claiming this coordination and involvement into naming it JOINT, isn’t what joint means. There should be capability to convert ideas and paper knowledge to hardware and validate them is the actual capability.
So, it is not a joint fighter.
Do you think the whole of F35 is made in the USA? Teju has an American engine, Israeli avionics, British and French components. The percentage of foreign components is same or even higher as that of JF17, so you can take your argument and put it up where sun never shines and F off!
 
.
Do you think the whole of F35 is made in the USA? Teju has an American engine, Israeli avionics, British and French components. The percentage of foreign components is same or even higher as that of JF17, so you can take your argument and put it up where sun never shines and F off!
Yes, but the coconut they smash on it is 100% Indian.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom