JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Whats the big deal about duel seat -

 

[untitled]

Whats the big deal about duel seat -

It simplifies training

 

[Bratva]

Another spoonful of honey for taste buds.

From Chinese Military Aviation:



This is a old article, possibly of late 2010 early 2011 which I found.

Another piece from same source:

already debunked many times , these updates were whitesmoke and none of these things will appear in block 2!

 

[Last Hope]

already debunked many times , these updates were whitesmoke and none of these things will appear in block 2!

Yeah, exactly. This was just a post.
I believe block II will carry KLJ-07 radar, but with some minor upgrades in it.

 

[SBD-3]

Yeah, exactly. This was just a post.
I believe block II will carry KLJ-07 radar, but with some minor upgrades in it.

I think people were discussing that KLJ-7(V2?) will operate at 30% more power enhacing its range by 10-15%.

 

[Bratva]

I think people were discussing that KLJ-7(V2?) will operate at 30% more power enhacing its range by 10-15%.

people tend to forget can RD-93 support these updates as well and will these updates effect the performance of RD-93. I'm saying this because of the rumour rd-93 is underpower engine and as pshamim saab said similar thing in pakdef too.

 

[Last Hope]

people tend to forget can RD-93 support these updates as well and will these updates effect the performance of RD-93. I'm saying this because of the rumour rd-93 is underpower engine and as pshamim saab said similar thing in pakdef too.

RD-93 is a strong engine and hence was opted by PAF for the JFT.
It is very vulnerable to quick changes during flight, and gives a quick response.
The black smoke it emits, is quite a good sign of it's performance, which is ofcourse it's ability to meet the changes input, taking example to accelerate to maximum.

 

[Bratva]

RD-93 is a strong engine and hence was opted by PAF for the JFT.
It is very vulnerable to quick changes during flight, and gives a quick response.
The black smoke it emits, is quite a good sign of it's performance, which is ofcourse it's ability to meet the changes input, taking example to accelerate to maximum.

You didn't understand the context of what i'm saying, Can RD-93 support a Powerful Radar, IRST, AESA, AN IFR at the same timeand extra hard point ? The answer was no, it will degrade the RD-93 performance and TWR also

 

[Last Hope]

You didn't understand the context of what i'm saying, Can RD-93 support a Powerful Radar, IRST, AESA, AN IFR at the same timeand extra hard point ? The answer was no, it will degrade the RD-93 performance and TWR also

I understood your point quite well, I was adding a few more details in favor of RD-93.

 

[SBD-3]

You didn't understand the context of what i'm saying, Can RD-93 support a Powerful Radar, IRST, AESA, AN IFR at the same timeand extra hard point ? The answer was no, it will degrade the RD-93 performance and TWR also

This would have made an effect if the extra weight were added to radar, if the power settings of a radar are changed,it doesn't necessarily mean that significant extra weight would be added. I always argued that a new engine was necessary before AESA making its way in JFT since it would add significant weight, thus needing either compensating the added weight by redesign (a relatively difficult approach) or addition of new and more potent engine(more realistic). Since none of these two things happened, there only a remote chance that we would see any AESA on JFT. IRST is not as heavy as radar.

 

[ziaulislam]

use of more composites can help to reduce weights if all other measures fail..
but PAF should seriously look into IRST along with IFR

 

[SBD-3]

use of more composites can help to reduce weights if all other measures fail..
but PAF should seriously look into IRST along with IFR

You cant use composits everywhere as different parts of aircraft face different levels of drag and fatigue. Thus there is a limit of weight reduction by using composits.

 

[razgriz19]

and arent composite surfaces hard to repair?

 

[ANG]

and arent composite surfaces hard to repair?

Hi, composites are hard and expensive to maintain. If an aluminum or metal part of the airframe skin is damaged, it can be welded, or a peice cut out and a new one reattached. Composites parts cannot be that easily fixed, special glues have to be used, or the entire part replaced. Composites might be lighter, but much more expensive to maintain. Remember composites parts are basically heat pressed sheets of composite material. If the part gets a crack, most of the time you have to replace it.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

and arent composite surfaces hard to repair?

They are and expensive too boot. Aircraft using greater amounts of composites increase their cost of manufacture and maintenance quite exponentially.