JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 6]

[syedali73]

@Oscar What is the load clearance of wing tips? Are they capable of withstanding SD10?

 

[Sulman Badshah]

@Oscar What is the load clearance of wing tips? Are they capable of withstanding SD10?

wingtip are meant for WVRAAM only ... SD10 can be launch through HP under wing

 

[syedali73]

wingtip are meant for WVRAAM only ... SD10 can be launch through HP under wing

This is not a rule. F-16s and Gripen do carry BVRAAMs on their wingtip rails.

 

[Arsalan]

Two more hard points were initially tried and then discarded by PAF for reasons unclear. I think the likelihood is that we will only see a chin mounted hard point for pods. Additional hard point on wings might not be hapenning anytime soon. However a dual rail launcher is in the works and we should be seeing one soon. However one thing does intrigue me and that is why PAF have not considered CFT for JFTs. Slim out the chubby boy and put some love handles on the sides. Is it too much to ask of a little baby or is it again related to finances.

Well i guess as you writ in your post, it IS too much to ask for,,, we don't see many planes flying with CFT so there must be some reason, structural strength, the design of the plane and placement of wings, something!!

Regarding the hard point, both points you mentioned are same as i did sir, same as we have all be hearing for quite sometime now, a dedicated frontal fuselage hard point for POD and dual rack for SD-10. Now the problem is we haven't seen or official hint of this change, specially the extra one hard point for POD (SD-10 dual rack do come up time and time again thanks to J-10)
I don't think we will get CFT on JF-17, IFR (i wish a retractable one) if coming and that will be pretty much it, may well see the dual racks for SD-10 as well but for now the extra hard point seem to be a mere wish of us fans. lets see!!

 

[IrbiS]

This is not a rule. F-16s and Gripen do carry BVRAAMs on their wingtip rails.

SD-10 is too heavy for JF-17's wingtips at around 200kg. But if something like R-Darter is procured which weighs similar as AMRAAM, then it's possible along with composites used in wings. That's what I said earlier and it's necessary too, carrying BVR on wingtips for strike configured ones as they would be defenseless without BVRs when carrying ground munitions on under-wing pylons.

BVRs on wingtips and them being guided by Karakoram Eagles is what I would like too see very much

 

[VCheng]

SD-10 is too heavy for JF-17's wingtips at around 200kg. But if something like R-Darter is procured which weighs similar as AMRAAM, then it's possible along with composites used in wings. That's what I said earlier and it's necessary too, carrying BVR on wingtips for strike configured ones as they would be defenseless without BVRs when carrying ground munitions on under-wing pylons.

One plane does not have to carry everything. A mission can be planned with a few planes configured to provide air cover to the rest going in for a ground attack.

 

[Arsalan]

the fuselage has just one hard point, that makes me wonder..i get it that it has the gun under one air input, but why not a pod hardpoint under the other one..Tejas for example has one pod hard point there.

we are talking about that very same hard point brother, one under the cockpit just beside the air intake. That will carry special mission POD, EW equipment leaving the main 7 points vacant to be armed with offensive weaponry.

 

[IrbiS]

One plane does not have to carry everything. A mission can be planned with a few planes configured to provide air cover to the rest going in for a ground attack.

It's a must have thing and customers with small numbers would like it too

 

[VCheng]

It's a must have thing and customers with small numbers would like it too

I would consider it a desirable feature, not a must have, as there are perfectly valid workarounds to achieve the same effectiveness. Remember, the JF-17 offers a lot of ability at its price point, but it cannot be everything to all people.

 

[ziaulislam]

we are talking about that very same hard point brother, one under the cockpit just beside the air intake. That will carry special mission POD, EW equipment leaving the main 7 points vacant to be armed with offensive weaponry.

i am wondering why not in block 1/2? what could have been the reason?

than there is some talk about chin mounted hard point?

 

[Arsalan]

i am wondering why not in block 1/2? what could have been the reason?

than there is some talk about chin mounted hard point?

there are rumors about Chin mounted or frontal fuselage hard point for mission POD. that will be for Block 3 onwards. Will the block 1 and 2 will be upgraded to incorporate remains to be seen. For know, we know that Block 2 is getting a IFR probe and all Blk-1 will also get these.
The extra hard point is not part of Blk 2. May see it in Blk 3, also there have been talks about on board IRST but again, these are just rumors as of now. We have yet to see official Blk 3 details, which, PAC maintains is in advance development stages. Nonetheless, the future is bright for Jf-17

 

[Tempest II]

A bit of homework for those keen on detail and curiosity. From here
http://www.pac.org.pk/assets/files/it_for_0226_p-3_open_tender.doc are some pylon designations for the baby. We have the Gdj-ii19 as the twin rack for 250kg class.

Let's detail the rest

Intended use

1.JF-17’s Alternate Mission Equipment Test Station (JAMETS) and associated accessories/ support equipment are intended for functional, reliability and safety testing/inspections, and handling of AME. The level of maintenance work is to be performed at an Intermediate-level (I-level) maintenance work center supporting the operations. The equipment developed under this project will be used for following Alternate Mission Equipment used for carrying the Weapons and Fuel tanks (AME details at appendix ‘B’ and ‘C’):-

2.Universal Pylon GDJ-II18. Pylon at hard point 2/6.

3.GDJ-III 12A 3/5 Point Special Pylon at hard point 3/5.

4.3/5 Point Universal Carrier GDJ-III25A.

5.Belly Universal Carrier GDJ—III11 -Pylon at hard point 4.

6.GDJ-II 19 Parallel pylon, installed at under GDJ-II-18

7.Ejector Rack GDJ-II-12A (to be noted for future extension and provision for the interconnect unit will be provided).

8.Adapter-65

9.Composite Ejector Release Unit GDG-503.

10.Bomb Rack Unit GDG-601 for fuel tanks.

11.Ejector Release Unit (ERU) GDG-I12A.

12.Ejecting rack GDG-II-15A.

 

[IrbiS]

I would consider it a desirable feature, not a must have, as there are perfectly valid workarounds to achieve the same effectiveness. Remember, the JF-17 offers a lot of ability at its price point, but it cannot be everything to all people.

It's not like I want them to go ahead and sling sd-10 right now cuz it's really heavy. But when something like darter is available and feasible, then we must go for it

 

[VCheng]

It's not like I want them to go ahead and sling sd-10 right now cuz it's really heavy. But when something like darter is available and feasible, then we must go for it

I am sure that if needed, and feasible, it will be done. After all, it is still early days in the development of the platform, and maturity will come only gradually.

 

[55100864]

pylon on the wingtips would compromise the performance in supersonic condition，Typhoon and J10 also have no wingtip pylons.