JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 3]

[notorious_eagle]

It has not been tested against F16. It has just cleared the trials and completed the operational clearance. Its first squadron is not even complete.

Goodness me Sardar Ji, have you even bothered to read the entire thread. The first squadron has been raised and is complete. Before the High Mark Excercise it had completed 500 sorties. It has been tested against the F16 several times, not one but several members have disclosed this. I have personally talked to a PAF squadron leader who told me this. So far the results have been in favour of JF17 in dogfights, the pilots have found it to be more maneuverable and has a better turning ratio but the F16 is more agile. Keep in mind the Block 15 is the most manuverable and agile out of the entire F16 Series. For A2G, it was put through the grind during High Mark and also has seen action in Orkazai and Waziristan. I dont know why do you make up your own facts, its better to research before writing horse sh**.

Only an exercise or a war would be a true test of its capabilities.

High Mark 2010 and Bombings Runs in Waziristan/Orkazai

F-16 is still the top dog and it reflects when PAF is buying more F-16s despite the fear of sanctions. JF-17 is good as a replacement of older Mirages but can not be compared to F-16.

Indeed F16 is a beautiful aircraft, simply of the best aircrafts ever designed and built. PAF loves and adores this aircraft and that is why the numbers for this aircraft speak for themselves. It can definitely not be compared to the Block 52 but its certinely better than our Block 15. JF17's avionics can be compared to the avionics of Block 40.

It is being assembled in Kamra and not being manufactured. The engine is bought as it is from China, which bought it from Russia. Even the avionics package is completely manufactured in China, just assembled in Kamra. Missiles and countermeasures too are bought.
So in case something goes wrong with the engine, it will need to be sent to China. Even other parts would be serviced by China.

Right now the bulk of manufacturing is done in China but slowly it will be moved to Pakistan. As far as the engines are concerned, PAF technicians will be trained to deal with the RD93. Has PAF been sending the PW's to the US for the past 30 years, NO they have the capacity to overhaul it in Kamra.

As you see, all these things are basic avionics with some fancy names. Nothing earth shattering.

These are not basic avionics, they can only been seen in Aircrafts belonging to the 4th Generation and not 3rd. The A5's, F7's and Non Rose Mirages dont have these capabilities and JF17 will be replacing these aircrafts. So overall, this Aircraft will be a huge leap forward for PAF.

AESA is not coming at least in the next 15 years, since PAF is looking for a PESA first.
IFR and IRST too would require structural changes unless they are deployed on an external pod.

AESA; well the Italians have offered it and the Chinese are also in the final stages of testing, 15 years does not sounds like an accurate number.
IRST wouldnt be much of a problem, JF17 is designed in such a way to easily accomodate changes.

None of them are fake sir. Just that they are a little in accurate.
People tend to hype things up and these rumors confuse more people about the true aircraft.

Inaccurate How

JF-17 will get an upgraded radar soon, it will then be eligible to be called a 4th gen. For a 4.5 gen aircraft a whole lot more needs to be done, which unfortunately can not be done on this aircraft, at least not now. But I am sure PAF has found the F-16 more than enough for now, and yes, even F16 block 52 is a 4th gen fighter and not a 4.5 gen

With all the Avionics, Radar and Munitions that the JF17 features you still think its not a 4th Generation Aircraft . The radar for JF17 is an upgraded KLJ 7 which is a Pulse Doppler, Multi Mode Fire Control Radar with a reported range of around 150 km. Murad Sahab disclosed quite a while ago that JF17 will not be using the basic KLJ 7 radar. Seems to me Sardar Jii your Nationalistic Pride is getting the best of your judgement .

What is exactly a 4.5th Generation Aircraft, do you want to go with the defintion of Wikipedia. "aircraft that have AESA radar, high capacity data-link, enhanced avionics and the ability to deploy reasonably forseeable future weapons."

Besides the SuperHornet and Desert Falcon; there is no Operational aircraft in this world that has this capability, not even the BIG BAD SU30MKI and thats a fact Sardar Ji not something i made up

 

[sancho]

Why are we talking about LCA here uff ?

Actually it is a more interesting comparison than the JF 17 vs MKI on the pages before. However, the key for a good comparison are equal cornerstones like taking actual versions and actual available arms and techs to consideration, not things that could come in future with block 2/MK 2 upgrades. Even more important is an unbiased point of view of both fighters (from Pakistani and Indian members) and to provide sources and not simple claims.

Jagjitnatt might not did that all in his post in the other forum, but that does not mean he was completely wrong. If we only take the official available specs of JF 17 and LCA, one must at least agree with him, that the LCA has a better thrust to weight ratio and most likely a lower RCS!

Engine: The RD 93 in JF 17 provides a thrust of 49.4kN dry and 84.4kN with after burner.

The GE 404 in LCA provides a thrust of 56.2kN dry and 84.4kN with after burner.

Emptyweight: JF 17 - 6411Kg / LCA - 5680kg


Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Dc2Wx4jR9F8/S36pQgBKyyI/AAAAAAAABOk/iYPLfQ-UkfE/s1600/CIMG2779.JPG


Maybe somebody can add the exact numbers and a calculation with these figures.

Tamikhan also confirmed here earlier, that the JF 17 block 1 does not use composite materials and so does the PAC Kamra site:

Strength and Fatigue Life

* JF-17 airframe is made of semi-monologue structure
* High strength steel and Titanium alloy adopted partially at some critical places.

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....


LCA instead:

AIRFRAME & ALL-weather capability

Advanced composites constitute more than 40% of the LCA airframe...

lca

So he is also not wrong to believe that LCA MK1 will have a lower RCS than the JF 17 block 1.

More debatable are points like radar, or weapons because both haven't inducted them yet and are only in testing, or integration stage. Not to forget that it might be difficult to get reliable specs and sources.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Jagjit,

Problem with you and other Indians is that you guys look at JF-17 as an Indian, not some neutral or as an aviation expert. Even whatever good is there about JF-17, you guys can see it, rather try your best to point out the pessimist view points. And whatever your knowledge is from reading internet and then after passing through the Indian mindset, you guys pick the only negative things filtering our the positive.

JF-17 is a 4th gen aircraft, which has a radar which has a range of 120+KM range, can fire BVR missiles, fully multirole system with either Chinese or Western systems and its quality of getting an upgrade at later stages has another plus point, engine may be Russian, but we are gonna have overhauling and servicing setup right here in Kamra if we have sufficient planes with these engines.

It has data link facility, fully glass cockpit, can fire any type of PGMs, has avionics including radar based on Western MIL standards, weapon stores and management system also on western MIL standards and can fully capable to integrate western weapon systems even with Chinese radar provided source codes are available. Pakistan may not have manufactured it or made it, but it is still one hell of a pride moment to have it ToT to pakistan and start its own manufacturing process.

Its has gone up against the 80s PAF F-16s and performed better except in all fields except for weapon payload capacity and engine performance and do remember 80s F-16s are the most maneuverable blocks in the whole line of F-16s variants.

The reason of getting Blk 52s is, numbers and their superiority compared to the JF-17s and for now JF-17 is to replace the 3rd Gen PAF aircraft, let the future variant of JF-17 come, then you guys will know what it is and what it can do.

JF-17 has all the attributes that a 4th Gen aircraft can have.


And JF-17 is much better compared to your LCA no matter what. JF-17 is operational and getting inducted and by the time you guys get your first Sqd, JF-17 will be in 3 Sqd strength. And still you guys are gonna induct lesser number of the MK1, which speaks a lot about the confidence in this plane by the IAF. I believe enough has been said about LCA and what it is. Don't come here and give us the Indian patriotic BS about it. Facts and figures speak different.

JF-17 may be a all metal plane with Chinese avionics, but its better then the all composite Martian technology LCA which is not yet even operational even though in development for more then 3 decades.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Can you please explain why you deleted my post, although it was only a comparison with official sources of both sides and on the other hand you post this? As a mod, can you really say you statement is not biased?

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/21301-jf-17-has-edge-over-lca-pak-officials-10.html

Here, go through this thread. This topic has been discussed quite deeply, lets keep this thread clean.

 

[sancho]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/21301-jf-17-has-edge-over-lca-pak-officials-10.html

Here, go through this thread. This topic has been discussed quite deeply, lets keep this thread clean.

No need to, it's just kind of interesting that a mod delete a post that does not had biased, offensive, or wrong points about the JF 17, but keeps the last post of jagjitnatt, that was full of it. I did not support all his claims, but provided sources for those parts which was correct.
My intention was not to downgrade the JF 17, but there are points like the t/w ratio, or the lack of composite materials, where the it lacks behind. So can we post only good points about it in this thread, or can we discuss also its downsides too?

 

[Dazzler]

Sancho,

He can do a lot more than just delete your post so a little care will not hurt. This is a JF-17 Thread, not a JF-17 vs. LCA comparison thread so stick to it.

 

[Dazzler]

@jagjitnatt,

So much detail has been given in this very thread that you might not find else where on the internet apart of a select few websites. Yet, it amazes me that people still come up with same old routine questions regarding thunder developments, its so called "inferior" Chinese avionics, Russian engine, limited payload, "harmless" weapon arsenal, Pakistani contribution and what not.......

I have in the past tried to answer these queries up to the best of my ability but somehow people (Indian friends) tend to forget things rather quickly. It is a request to please go through the entire thread before repeating the same lot of decade old questions again and again.

Thanks a lot

 

[OTTOMAN]

Nabil stop answering the repeated questions, specially when it is evident that intentions are just trolling.
Your contributions have been very valued to the enthusists and we respect you for that and please don't get discouraged when ever you have some thing to share plaese put it up for people like us.

I thank all those members who have been clearing up inquiries and sharing development news of JF-17.

 

[SomeGuy]

jagittnat says.....
Let compare them fairly.
JF-17
Engine:
The engine used in JF-17 is RD93, a modification of RD33, the same engine used in older Mig29. The engine though powerful enough is known to be lazy and not good at acceleration. Also the engine is very old and newer Migs use a newer variant RD33MK of the engine.

The thrust provided by the engine is around 49.4KN without the use of afterburners. With the afterburners, the thrust is 84.4KN. Also its worth mentioning here that this old Russian engine like its counterparts is known to have problems sustaining its afterburner for longer duration of time, which suggests that most of the time the aircraft would be flying without its afterburners on. So the important thrust specification here is the 49.4KN, which by today's standards and the weight of the aircraft is quite low.

The thrust to weight ration comes out to be 0.78 for an empty aircraft and 0.55 for a loaded aircraft which is a SERIOUS drawback. Its the biggest problem with the current batch of JF-17 aircraft. Even with the afterburners on the aircraft fails to exceed a ratio of 0.94 for a loaded aircraft, which is poor to say the least.

Airframe:
The airframe of the aircraft seems to be good enough. The stabilizers are good enough and shaped perfectly. The nose is also carved nicely to direct air to enter the engines. The intakes are also nicely shaped to hide engine blades from radar waves. The airframe is good enough and nothing seems wrong with it.

The only problem with the airframe is the material. The airframe is made completely from metal and a little use of some alloys. There has been no use of composites at all. This increases the weight as well as the rcs of the plane.

Avionics:
This is another field JF-17 is lacking in. The chinese avionics are just not enough. Although PAF is negotiating with France and now even Italy for an avionics upgrade, nothing is surfacing as of yet. The radar in use now is KLJ-7 which is a scaled down version of the KLJ-10 radar used in the J-10 of Chinese Air Force.

The range of the radar is 75 kms in look-up mode and 35 km for look-down mode for a target of rcs 3 square meters. Also the radar can monitor upto 10 targets in TWS(Track While Scan) mode and engage two in BVR mode.

The radar is obsolete by today's standards and it would need serious backing by AWACS in order to put up a fight. Also the missile that the plane will use for its BVR engagements would be SD-10 which is a chinese missile with a range of 90-100 kms. But as the radar is limited to 75 km for 3 square meter rcs target, the extra range of the missile won't come in handy.

The newer aircraft coming up have rcs of 1 square meter or below. The KLJ-7 would not be able to detect these targets at ranges beyond 30-40 km. In combat with these aircraft, the JF-17 would be shot down even before it can detect what hit it.

It is only after an avionics upgrade that we can analyze the true capabilities of the aircraft.

Weapons:
The only BVR missile compatible with JF-17 for now is the SD-10 missile. As of now, not much information is available about the missile. Even the range is speculative at best. Wouldn't want to comment on it.

LCA - Tejas

Engine:
The engine in use for the first batch of aircraft will be GE F404IN, which is a modified F404 engine, being used on F18. The engine has a max thrust of 85KN with afterburners on and 50-55 KN without afterburners. The engine is not powerful enough to allow Tejas to carry out combat maneuvers with its full load. This is the reason a new engine is being evaluated for Tejas. The new engine will have a thrust of 100KN with afterburner and 60KN without afterburner.

That would make it powerful enough and would increase the thrust to weight ratio from 0.95 with afterburner at full load to 1.07 with afterburner at full load and 0.64 at full load without afterburners.

Add to that an unstable delta wing configuration and that makes Tejas a really good maneuverable machine. The fly by wire does a great job at making it agile at high speeds. Speaking of speeds, the new engine might also enable supercruise for LCA. Also TVC can be seen if EJ200 is selected.

Airframe:
The LCA has a delta wing configuration without horizontal stabilizers which makes its configuration unstable. This means that it would require powerful computers and fly by wire controls to make it stable in its flight. Without these computers, it would be impossible to control the plane.
The airframe is inspired from Mirage 2000 and is a proven one. The huge wing span will add to the maneuverability. The Y-shaped intakes guarantee reduced rcs and there is nothing spectacularly contributing to the rcs of the plane.

The LCA uses a lot of composites to reduce the weight and radar detection of the plane. The size of the plane is another factor that contributes to its low rcs. This leads me to believe the rcs of LCA would be a lot less than that of JF-17.

Avionics:
The radar in use for the first batch will be a PESA multi mode radar ELTA EL/2032 radar. The air to air mode of 2032 radar has a range of upto 150 km for 5 square meter rcs and in air to sea mode has a range of 300 kms.
The missiles that this radar support are currently R77 and R73. The R77 has a range of upto 90 kms and it believed to be extremely maneuverable.

Also Astra Missile can be supported with the ELTA radar. DRDO believes its indigenous radar would be ready in a couple of years and its supposed to be better than 2032 radar.

So all in all, its Tejas which is more advanced and capable, but its not ready yet. In future, if JF-17 wants to match up to Tejas, an avionics upgrade is desperately required.

I have a few criticisms of this comparison

1) You say that an engine with 100kN thrust will be used for future LCA planes (with possibly supercruise and Thrust vectoring) but make no mention of planned engine upgrades to JF-17 such as a 100kN WS-13.

Remember RD-93 will only power the first batch of 50 JF-17.

2) You keep mentioning what is going to be on LCA in the future, but seem to ignore possible future developments on JF-17, such as use of composite materials to decrease weight and RCS.

3) About the radar, I think it has already been explained earlier in this thread that the first batch of JF-17s are for ground support and don't require long range radar.

Furthermore, you fail to mention that the longer range KLJ-10 radar (which is used in the J-10A) has already been fitted to small batch production JF-17s for evaluation. Also the Vixen 500E AESA radar has already been offered to PAF.

So all in all, its Tejas which is more advanced and capable, but its not ready yet.

Maybe you should wait until Tejas is ready then compare capability with latest block JF-17s.
Comparing a plane that is not even ready to a plane that is already flying and used in war is pointless.

 

[k7x]

What are the various sub systems being developed in Pakistan for future batches . I mean futuristic sub systems being developed in house.

we are hearing so many options like, Italian, french and Chinese weapons and sensors.. is there any major subsystem on which Pak scientists are currently working on.

 

[MastanKhan]

Sier... If Jf-17 is the subject matter than we are informed that it has been duly tested against much integrated F-16 and results were in favor of JF-17!
It is a reason to be optimistic and in the PAF ranks who know things in and out have put their trust on it, more than F-16.
I don't understand, why the maintenece of JF-17 should be an issue while it is being manufactured and designed in Kamra!
Going back to basics this A/C integrates most advance technologies i.e. LERX, DSI, FBW, HOTAS, HUD, MFD, DAS, RWR, MAW, smaller RCS, DayNight laser targeting pod, FLIR, data link, DEEC, modular engine design, modular AC design and future it will get an AESA radar, IFR, IRST, improved engine etc. etc..
Please, tell me if any of those specs. i mentioned are fake?
I even heard much more specs. are kept secret, as many insiders kept claiming on very same thread!

Hardly any regional airforce have A/C matchin gabove specs. and in generation classification it is 4.5 generation....

This A/C has potential to take on any A/C with matching specs.

My Boy,

Thankyou---at least you have the courage to fight---you see when you manufacture a new battle system, a new weapons system, a new killing machine---you really really have to put it through its hoops----you really have to tear it up to pieces---once you do that---then you put the pieces back together and start all over again and again till you can't tear it up any more---. That is the first step.

The next step is the creation of first sqdrn---now instead of the high end technicians you will have field grade technicians---the first batch of technicians will be well qualified but not of the same level and category as the factory---as the numbers increase---the number of field techs will increase as well---will the quality of their workmanship stay the same---normally it goes down---.

Once in the field---the plane will be exposed to time and environment---start ups and shut downs---weather---heat---cold---dirt and dust and sand---.

You mentioned about the F 16---my boy---has it gotten that bad that you want to compete with something that is 30 plus years old----. Does it really really make you proud to be better than a system close to 35 years old---.

It is just like you saying to me " Mastan Khan---I can run faster than you---I can climb a higher mountain---I can do so many MANLY things better than you---YES YOU CAN---YOU AT 20 YEARS OF AGE---ME AT 53---I personally will be embarrassed with this comparison---but if you feel dignified and proud about it, that is your prerogative---.

Some of you people are living in fools paradise and making big thing of this aircraft now---it is an excellent plane in its own framework---BUT IT IS NOT AN SU 30 KILLER.

If we didnot have the threat of the su 30 from next door, I would say okay---maybe we got something.

But you people are forgetting something else---the news just came out that this bird is just a SCAVENGER BY DESIGN---AND NOT AN EAGLE THAT YOU THOUGHT OF---yessir---it is not a point defence fighter that everyone was desperately waiting for but rather a ground attack plane---.

In my whole life it would be one of the very very few occassions that I have sen a bigger bubble burst---other than the american economy.

Wake up gentlemen and start e-maling you AIR CHIEF MARSHALL and tell him that you as a nation have been deceived.


AND WHERE IS OUR GREAT RETIRED WARRIOR PSHAMIM. A prudent airforce---somebody just shoot me and end my misery---once for all.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Actually it is a more interesting comparison than the JF 17 vs MKI on the pages before. However, the key for a good comparison are equal cornerstones like taking actual versions and actual available arms and techs to consideration, not things that could come in future with block 2/MK 2 upgrades. Even more important is an unbiased point of view of both fighters (from Pakistani and Indian members) and to provide sources and not simple claims.

Jagjitnatt might not did that all in his post in the other forum, but that does not mean he was completely wrong. If we only take the official available specs of JF 17 and LCA, one must at least agree with him, that the LCA has a better thrust to weight ratio and most likely a lower RCS!

Engine: The RD 93 in JF 17 provides a thrust of 49.4kN dry and 84.4kN with after burner.

The GE 404 in LCA provides a thrust of 56.2kN dry and 84.4kN with after burner.

Emptyweight: JF 17 - 6411Kg / LCA - 5680kg


Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Dc2Wx4jR9F8/S36pQgBKyyI/AAAAAAAABOk/iYPLfQ-UkfE/s1600/CIMG2779.JPG


Maybe somebody can add the exact numbers and a calculation with these figures.

Tamikhan also confirmed here earlier, that the JF 17 block 1 does not use composite materials and so does the PAC Kamra site:



Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....


LCA instead:



lca

So he is also not wrong to believe that LCA MK1 will have a lower RCS than the JF 17 block 1.

More debatable are points like radar, or weapons because both haven't inducted them yet and are only in testing, or integration stage. Not to forget that it might be difficult to get reliable specs and sources.

The figures and facts that your are presenting are very old. These are the specifications of the JF-17 till the Pt-03 stage, the Pt-04 saw a lot of changes, weight reductions, DSI inlets, more bigger LERX and currently JF-17 structure does have composites, but how much and where are not known for now, but composites have been started to be used, the all metal structure was the old one.

The Pt-04 saw internal fuel capacity being increased, overall weight reductions, DSI inlets thus helping in reduction of RCS as the intake is now "S" shaped.

And even then engine has not the specifications originally told. The after burning thrust is different compared to the figure told here.

 

[farhan_9909]

After First 50 jf-17's the other Jf-17's will have greater use of Composite material
and it wil make the aircraft empty weight low and hence it wil carry more payload even with the current rd-93 engine

with 100Kn ws-13 i am sure jf-17 will carry about 5 ton payload

 

[jagjitnatt]

Goodness me Sardar Ji, have you even bothered to read the entire thread. The first squadron has been raised and is complete. Before the High Mark Excercise it had completed 500 sorties. It has been tested against the F16 several times, not one but several members have disclosed this. I have personally talked to a PAF squadron leader who told me this. So far the results have been in favour of JF17 in dogfights, the pilots have found it to be more maneuverable and has a better turning ratio but the F16 is more agile. Keep in mind the Block 15 is the most manuverable and agile out of the entire F16 Series. For A2G, it was put through the grind during High Mark and also has seen action in Orkazai and Waziristan. I dont know why do you make up your own facts, its better to research before writing horse sh**.



High Mark 2010 and Bombings Runs in Waziristan/Orkazai



Indeed F16 is a beautiful aircraft, simply of the best aircrafts ever designed and built. PAF loves and adores this aircraft and that is why the numbers for this aircraft speak for themselves. It can definitely not be compared to the Block 52 but its certinely better than our Block 15. JF17's avionics can be compared to the avionics of Block 40.



Right now the bulk of manufacturing is done in China but slowly it will be moved to Pakistan. As far as the engines are concerned, PAF technicians will be trained to deal with the RD93. Has PAF been sending the PW's to the US for the past 30 years, NO they have the capacity to overhaul it in Kamra.



These are not basic avionics, they can only been seen in Aircrafts belonging to the 4th Generation and not 3rd. The A5's, F7's and Non Rose Mirages dont have these capabilities and JF17 will be replacing these aircrafts. So overall, this Aircraft will be a huge leap forward for PAF.



AESA; well the Italians have offered it and the Chinese are also in the final stages of testing, 15 years does not sounds like an accurate number.
IRST wouldnt be much of a problem, JF17 is designed in such a way to easily accomodate changes.



Inaccurate How



With all the Avionics, Radar and Munitions that the JF17 features you still think its not a 4th Generation Aircraft . The radar for JF17 is an upgraded KLJ 7 which is a Pulse Doppler, Multi Mode Fire Control Radar with a reported range of around 150 km. Murad Sahab disclosed quite a while ago that JF17 will not be using the basic KLJ 7 radar. Seems to me Sardar Jii your Nationalistic Pride is getting the best of your judgement .

What is exactly a 4.5th Generation Aircraft, do you want to go with the defintion of Wikipedia. "aircraft that have AESA radar, high capacity data-link, enhanced avionics and the ability to deploy reasonably forseeable future weapons."

Besides the SuperHornet and Desert Falcon; there is no Operational aircraft in this world that has this capability, not even the BIG BAD SU30MKI and thats a fact Sardar Ji not something i made up

All built up BS stories.
Not a single credible link or source to back you up
Someone said this ,and some one said that, so its true?
JF is modular you can do whatever to it, by that logic why don't you slap on a AWACS radar on to it along with a howitzer?

Your post is full of BS and nothing else.

Give me links or facts to refute my claims. Till then you're just believing a fanboy wishlist.

 

[jagjitnatt]

After First 50 jf-17's the other Jf-17's will have greater use of Composite material
and it wil make the aircraft empty weight low and hence it wil carry more payload even with the current rd-93 engine

with 100Kn ws-13 i am sure jf-17 will carry about 5 ton payload

how do you know about the composites thing?
It would require huge structural changes. Almost a complete redesign. Since the density of composites is different the whole center of gravity would shift. In order to maintain optimum balance, structural changes would be required.
Also composites can not be installed like metal parts. The manufacturing facility for composites is entirely different.

If composites were ever in mind of PAF designers, they would have done it much earlier in design phase, not now when the product is rolling on production lines. This would be an economical and logistical disaster.

China bought 100 RD33 engines in 2005 to install on FC-1/JF-17 aircraft. So the first 100 JF-17 will use that engine.

BTW, WS-13 has a max thrust of just 86KN, just a little more than the current engine.

The improved WS-13 is still under development. It will take a year or two to develop and then testing and trials would take another year. So no new WS-13 before 3 years. If you want a new engine before 3 years you'll have to go with the regular WS-13 but it doesn't provide a huge difference in thrust.