JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[syedali73]

How do you assume it would loading honda on mehran it could be developed according to the size i think such Weapons POD can be developed to carry 2-3 BVR or WVR but the airframe needs to be strengthen. Next I think only Block IV could have such possibilities so it is clearly remotely not an option for now because than perhaps the airframe needs to lengthened, powerful engine among other things would be like Gripen NG/E, F-18 super hornet from C/D TO E/F.

I want to point out here that JF-17 will not remain a cost effective aircraft down the road when Block III and later Blocks are introduced the costs will rise in any case you can't introduce new blocks with new technologies and keep the cost 20m-25m forever that is not possible, if PAF want to make something out of JF-17 they'll have to go the road of Swedish Gripen evolution and Boeing's F-18E/F to learn.

It certainly is not an option for now. Development of such EWP itself will take some time. If the work is started today, it will probably get ready around the time Blk IV will be rolling out. I totally agree with you that with every improved blk, the cost will continue to go up and there is nothing wrong with that. A smaller force with higher survivability is better than a large force serving as flying practice target for the enemy fighters.

 

[Munir]

under construction......

I do not think there is much difference to see on the outside. Probably even zero if they remove the IFR. Everything is done inside and software.

stealthy pod take time to develop (no one uses them now...) and you do need more thrust (medium weight dual engine). What would you add in JF17? Two bvr? And then removing fueltanks? Personally I do not see any chance.

 

[SQ8]

Having an enclosed weapon bay (EWB) is like loading a Honda Civic on Suzuki Mehran? A single EWB will not be larger or bulkier than two C-802, which JF-17 is cleared to carry one under each wing.

There is no point to the Enclosed weapons bay if the Total RCS of the clean aircraft exceeds that of the weapons. Think of it like this, the Silent eagle pulls off what it does by reducing the RCS of the aircraft to the extent that the RCS of the weapons on it EXCEEDS that of the airframe. Again, RCS is a sum game and not essentially an individual component. So if the SUM of the RCS of the weapons is more than the RCS of the Airframe, then it makes sense to put the weapons in a bay to hide them.

 

[syedali73]

There is no point to the Enclosed weapons bay if the Total RCS of the clean aircraft exceeds that of the weapons. Think of it like this, the Silent eagle pulls off what it does by reducing the RCS of the aircraft to the extent that the RCS of the weapons on it EXCEEDS that of the airframe. Again, RCS is a sum game and not essentially an individual component. So if the SUM of the RCS of the weapons is more than the RCS of the Airframe, then it makes sense to put the weapons in a bay to hide them.

Got it, thanks. If I may ask however, does the total RCS of clean JF-17 exceed that of the weapons i.e. Two WVR and two BVR AAMS?

 

[SQ8]

Got it, thanks. If I may ask however, does the total RCS of clean JF-17 exceed that of the weapons i.e. Two WVR and two BVR AAMS?

Only by a slight bit. Not worth all the fantasy efforts here.

 

[Talha Mateen]

Will it going to be sold to any other country????

 

[Bilal.]

Only by a slight bit. Not worth all the fantasy efforts here.

So in other words stealthy nose/reducing frontal RCS would make sense.

 

[SQ8]

So in other words stealthy nose/reducing frontal RCS would make sense.

No, because it would mean a redesign that would need reverification of aerodynamic parameters, structural parameters which essentially translates to a cost increase that would undermine the basic design philosophy of JF.

 

[Bilal.]

No, because it would mean a redesign that would need reverification of aerodynamic parameters, structural parameters which essentially translates to a cost increase that would undermine the basic design philosophy of JF.

But design philosophy is supposed to evolve with the threat perception. A design philosophy that was valid in late 90's does not hold true today.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Got it, thanks. If I may ask however, does the total RCS of clean JF-17 exceed that of the weapons i.e. Two WVR and two BVR AAMS?

No one can tell. No one will tell.

 

[araz]

under construction......

Sir Jee plaster ho gaya hai deewaroon pe ya abhi kuch waqt aur hai. Hum koochi liyay hoey tayyar hain Chunna lagane ko.
Hope you enjoyed it.
Araz

 

[Viper0011.]

So in other words stealthy nose/reducing frontal RCS would make sense.

Frankly speaking, it makes all the sense in the world. It is R&D and can be used on a live platform. Nothing better than that. Once the knowledge and capability expands, you could come up with a modified airframe for Block III or IIII. No country would say no to a few hundred Stealthy jets if they can afford it.

However, you guys don't have the $$$$ so that's where the issue is. If this system is allowed to continue, you can get additional $$$$ in the next 2-3 years. But it is Pakistan and as always, the system will be derailed. So no $$$$ for R&D in the foreseeable future.

 

[Bilal.]

Frankly speaking, it makes all the sense in the world. It is R&D and can be used on a live platform. Nothing better than that. Once the knowledge and capability expands, you could come up with a modified airframe for Block III or IIII. No country would say no to a few hundred Stealthy jets if they can afford it.

However, you guys don't have the $$$$ so that's where the issue is. If this system is allowed to continue, you can get additional $$$$ in the next 2-3 years. But it is Pakistan and as always, the system will be derailed. So no $$$$ for R&D in the foreseeable future.

You and I both are speculating in the absence for hard data. Neither of us know how much of an effort and cost is involved in any such development but it definitely is or was on table.

Many countries express interest in JF-17 Thunder|China|chinadaily.com.cn

Yang's team will join hands with their Pakistani counterparts to develop future versions of the JF-17, gradually providing the aircraft with partial stealth and aerial refueling capabilities, he said.

 

[naseebkhanniazi]

jf 17 is light weight aircraft and also low cost i read alot about it moste of respectable member express there feeling on dream fighter. i think it is best sloution for gap and finance problem like pakistan not front line fighter or offensive fighter

 

[My-Analogous]

JF-17 Thunder aircraft, Pakistan and China began preparing for Block II | International News Bureau