JF-17 Thunder - Information Pool

[HRK]

Yes.

thnx .....
could u plz explain a little bit to establish basic understanding ....

 

[messiach]

thnx .....
could u plz explain a little bit to establish basic understanding ....

I don't have the details of this program. Its being investigated for Jian fighters.

 

[CriticalThought]

I don't have the details of this program. Its being investigated for Jian fighters.

There has been a waterfall effect of technology trickling down between JF-17 and Jian series: J-20 -> J-10 -> JF-17. Whatever latest and greatest we find on Jian series, it will trickle down to Thunder at some point. And because the R&D cycle on J-20 is huge, some technologies may be tested out first on Thunder and J-10. I see no reason why some sort of stealth design may not be considered for Thunder. It all comes down to production cost, because precision engineering and hi-tech alloys would be needed.

 

[messiach]

Not all techbed reach maturation. Many are rejected or better alternatives become available. I don't have firsthand info on current ongoing CATiC programs. @Dieno

There has been a waterfall effect of technology trickling down between JF-17 and Jian series: J-20 -> J-10 -> JF-17. Whatever latest and greatest we find on Jian series, it will trickle down to Thunder at some point. And because the R&D cycle on J-20 is huge, some technologies may be tested out first on Thunder and J-10. I see no reason why some sort of stealth design may not be considered for Thunder. It all comes down to production cost, because precision engineering and hi-tech alloys would be needed.

 

[araz]

You did not answered the question , I know it is complicated ………. I am sure F-15 was also not designed ,,,, to keep that thing in mind,,,,, but R&D and they changed it, they made it work...……
My question is simple ……. Can RAM work ? and How much will it help ?????????

If I may the 15s have a huge RCS. Painting some leading surfaces and adding a stealthy areawhich holds its armaments helps in reducing this RCS.
In the case of JFT it is a light plane and RAM wont do much for its RCS. Youcould make an argument for having a stealthy compartment for concealed weapons but the load out and wing sheer needs to be taken into account. We have a desperate need for fighters so we cannot afford the delays and cash for the requisite research. This is my view so feel free to disagree.
A

 

[CHACHA"G"]

If I may the 15s have a huge RCS. Painting some leading surfaces and adding a stealthy areawhich holds its armaments helps in reducing this RCS.
In the case of JFT it is a light plane and RAM wont do much for its RCS. Youcould make an argument for having a stealthy compartment for concealed weapons but the load out and wing sheer needs to be taken into account. We have a desperate need for fighters so we cannot afford the delays and cash for the requisite research. This is my view so feel free to disagree.
A

You have very solid points sir ,,,,,, My point was , PAF will buy 250+ JF-17 (initial report) So we may and will say block IV and V ,, so why not for block V …….. But I agree we need birds ASAP...……. Delays will hurt ….
May be in future , may be after 10+ years...…..
Thanks a lot for answering my post..

 

[araz]

You have very solid points sir ,,,,,, My point was , PAF will buy 250+ JF-17 (initial report) So we may and will say block IV and V ,, so why not for block V …….. But I agree we need birds ASAP...……. Delays will hurt ….
May be in future , may be after 10+ years...…..
Thanks a lot for answering my post..

We cannot say this has not been considered. The talk is Block 4 will be the NG version and there you may notice a lot of changes including CFTs. Concearled weapons will make this machine even more difficult to detect. So let us wait to see what is being planned for the future.

 

[wulff]

We cannot say this has not been considered. The talk is Block 4 will be the NG version and there you may notice a lot of changes including CFTs. Concearled weapons will make this machine even more difficult to detect. So let us wait to see what is being planned for the future.

I believe that it was a mistake that the design of JF-17 was not updated in the past 20 years. Consider the difference between China's technological level of the 90s and where they are today: back then they were trying hard to get a Mirage 2000 level aircraft like J-10 to fly, and today they have reached F-22 level with the J-20... it is a 2 generations leap. The JF-17 would be a very different aircraft today had the people at the helm of affairs in the program given Chengdu the opportunity to use its precious experience gained in the last two decades for turning the JF-17 into a truly outstanding aircraft.

The path for such a design update would have been similar to the jump from Gripen A/B to Gripen E/F, J-10A to J-10C, Su-27 to Su-30MKI, F-14A to F-14D or a more ambitious update like F-18 Hornet to Super Hornet. In all these aircraft, they went back to the drawing board and redesigned the original aircraft to turn it from a run-of-the-mill to an outstanding aircraft.

Instead, PAC was fixated on a mantra called 'AESA' as if it were the cure to every problem and nothing else mattered to them. There has been a serious lack of vision in terms of technology and as a result what we are now going to see with the Block 3 is the same old frame with a new radar and a long over due 5th Gen wvraam, some new weapons and a hardpoint or two and possibly a HMD. That it has taken them this long to add this stuff, and that the Block 3 is nowhere near as big a jump as any of the above named aircraft is proof of their lack of vision.

The result of all this is that despite China's aerospace industry being far ahead of Sweden's today, the JF-17s in service are still inferior to the Gripen C/Ds in almost every parameter, and the Block 3 from what we have heard will still be inferior to the Gripen E.

 

[LKJ86]

I believe that it was a mistake that the design of JF-17 was not updated in the past 20 years. Consider the difference between China's technological level of the 90s and where they are today: back then they were trying hard to get a Mirage 2000 level aircraft like J-10 to fly, and today they have reached F-22 level with the J-20... it is a 2 generations leap. The JF-17 would be a very different aircraft today had the people at the helm of affairs in the program given Chengdu the opportunity to use its precious experience gained in the last two decades for turning the JF-17 into a truly outstanding aircraft.

The path for such a design update would have been similar to the jump from Gripen A/B to Gripen E/F, J-10A to J-10C, Su-27 to Su-30MKI, F-14A to F-14D or a more ambitious update like F-18 Hornet to Super Hornet. In all these aircraft, they went back to the drawing board and redesigned the original aircraft to turn it from a run-of-the-mill to an outstanding aircraft.

Instead, PAC was fixated on a mantra called 'AESA' as if it were the cure to every problem and nothing else mattered to them. There has been a serious lack of vision in terms of technology and as a result what we are now going to see with the Block 3 is the same old frame with a new radar and a long over due 5th Gen wvraam, some new weapons and a hardpoint or two and possibly a HMD. That it has taken them this long to add this stuff, and that the Block 3 is nowhere near as big a jump as any of the above named aircraft is proof of their lack of vision.

The result of all this is that despite China's aerospace industry being far ahead of Sweden's today, the JF-17s in service are still inferior to the Gripen C/Ds in almost every parameter, and the Block 3 from what we have heard will still be inferior to the Gripen E.

JF-17 was hoped to be a high cost performance lightweight fighter aircraft from the beginning.

 

[araz]

I believe that it was a mistake that the design of JF-17 was not updated in the past 20 years. Consider the difference between China's technological level of the 90s and where they are today: back then they were trying hard to get a Mirage 2000 level aircraft like J-10 to fly, and today they have reached F-22 level with the J-20... it is a 2 generations leap. The JF-17 would be a very different aircraft today had the people at the helm of affairs in the program given Chengdu the opportunity to use its precious experience gained in the last two decades for turning the JF-17 into a truly outstanding aircraft.

The path for such a design update would have been similar to the jump from Gripen A/B to Gripen E/F, J-10A to J-10C, Su-27 to Su-30MKI, F-14A to F-14D or a more ambitious update like F-18 Hornet to Super Hornet. In all these aircraft, they went back to the drawing board and redesigned the original aircraft to turn it from a run-of-the-mill to an outstanding aircraft.

Instead, PAC was fixated on a mantra called 'AESA' as if it were the cure to every problem and nothing else mattered to them. There has been a serious lack of vision in terms of technology and as a result what we are now going to see with the Block 3 is the same old frame with a new radar and a long over due 5th Gen wvraam, some new weapons and a hardpoint or two and possibly a HMD. That it has taken them this long to add this stuff, and that the Block 3 is nowhere near as big a jump as any of the above named aircraft is proof of their lack of vision.

The result of all this is that despite China's aerospace industry being far ahead of Sweden's today, the JF-17s in service are still inferior to the Gripen C/Ds in almost every parameter, and the Block 3 from what we have heard will still be inferior to the Gripen E.

The JFT was designed as a fighter with a modular structure, easy to play around with design and a low risk venture. Look at the PAF of the 90s and see what it had to replace. We were still flying F5s. we relied on the Chinese and if you look at the Chinese development cycle it was no where near where it is today. However, everything trickles downstream and PAF has adopted a policy of integrating whatever it could get from any vendor to get us where we are today. I think the philiosophy has been risk averse. Within the parameters we have done better than even we could have imagined.
You have inferred that we shuld have gone the NG route. However try and develop an NG version on the hsoe string budget of PAF!!! Take into account the replacements they have to make, and see what is it being replaced with and you will realize we have done very well given our financial constraints. For instance the E/F version has taken the Swedes 8 years to develop. So where would you be if your block 3 came out in 2025 at an over all cost of a couple of Billion dollars and a unit cost of 60 to 70 million per copy.
I think we should base criticism taking into account the financial and technological constraints and not compare our nascent infantile industry with the Technical Giants.
A

 

[MastanKhan]

I believe that it was a mistake that the design of JF-17 was not updated in the past 20 years. Consider the difference between China's technological level of the 90s and where they are today: back then they were trying hard to get a Mirage 2000 level aircraft like J-10 to fly, and today they have reached F-22 level with the J-20... it is a 2 generations leap. The JF-17 would be a very different aircraft today had the people at the helm of affairs in the program given Chengdu the opportunity to use its precious experience gained in the last two decades for turning the JF-17 into a truly outstanding aircraft.

The path for such a design update would have been similar to the jump from Gripen A/B to Gripen E/F, J-10A to J-10C, Su-27 to Su-30MKI, F-14A to F-14D or a more ambitious update like F-18 Hornet to Super Hornet. In all these aircraft, they went back to the drawing board and redesigned the original aircraft to turn it from a run-of-the-mill to an outstanding aircraft.

Instead, PAC was fixated on a mantra called 'AESA' as if it were the cure to every problem and nothing else mattered to them. There has been a serious lack of vision in terms of technology and as a result what we are now going to see with the Block 3 is the same old frame with a new radar and a long over due 5th Gen wvraam, some new weapons and a hardpoint or two and possibly a HMD. That it has taken them this long to add this stuff, and that the Block 3 is nowhere near as big a jump as any of the above named aircraft is proof of their lack of vision.

The result of all this is that despite China's aerospace industry being far ahead of Sweden's today, the JF-17s in service are still inferior to the Gripen C/Ds in almost every parameter, and the Block 3 from what we have heard will still be inferior to the Gripen E.

Hi,

The JF17 has already taken the Grippen NG route---. Technically---the JF17 is ahead of the Grippen in making the changes in upgrading the aircraft---.

As much hype as the Gripen created for its aircraft---it has fallen short of the target---the JF17 has drawn the first blood against the enemy---.

The Grippen has only proven itself in the 'for sale' commercials so far---. Its expensive cost of operation---the expensive spare parts have forced the south african air force to ground its aircraft.

A change in design from Grippen to Grippen NG has made the older aircraft sort of obsolete---and the customers stuck with the older version feeling bad and dissatisfied with the experience---about it.

Grippen had its first flight in 1988---and the JF17---first flight in 2003---.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

You have very solid points sir ,,,,,, My point was , PAF will buy 250+ JF-17 (initial report) So we may and will say block IV and V ,, so why not for block V …….. But I agree we need birds ASAP...……. Delays will hurt ….
May be in future , may be after 10+ years...…..
Thanks a lot for answering my post..

the figure of 250 JF-17 can be completed without block IV or V.
50 block I upgraded to blockII
60 Block II
100 Block III
30-40 Block II B

 

[CHACHA"G"]

the figure of 250 JF-17 can be completed without block IV or V.
50 block I upgraded to blockII
60 Block II
100 Block III
30-40 Block II B

Yes it can be and it cannot on the same time...….. Only time will tell. All the best for the JF-17 program .

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

it cannot on the same time

Please elaborate on this?

 

[CHACHA"G"]

Please elaborate on this?

I don't have any inside info , but if we look at different news about JF-17 , different interviews of ACMs this all point out in one direction We might see more then 3 blocks …. Just look at JF-17-B , is that not another block
(people talking about JF-17 glower) .. Rest time will tell .