JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 6]

[Moon]

No worries.



But also remember that a delta wing design will bleed more energy going into angular plane against the thrust axis. So every time you pitch your nose your airframe will have less energy.





that depends on how your initial planiform was optimized and the requirement of Wing loading, Now higher Wing loading also means that reaction force on wing surface, flexural strength requirements on the roots and the stress concentration (both static and dynamic) are way higher on the fuselage.



true



Not necessarily. Prime example is Mig29,Which can hit a higher AoA of limiter is overridden.
Here are few more aspects of Wing design.

http://faculty.dwc.edu/sadraey/Chapter 5. Wing Design.pdf

Here are a few threads on aircraft projects by @Manticore which you might find interesting

Combat Aircraft Projects & Designs - Index in 2nd post

Design characteristics of canard & non canard fighters

Is it true delta winged planes have a shorter combat radius?.

 

[MilSpec]

Is it true delta winged planes have a shorter combat radius?.

depends, on the size of the aircraft, fuel carries, Engine thrust and efficiency. If you assume same size, engine, for a delta vs a cropped swept, it would be roughly equal as a delta might carry more fuel.

 

[Moon]

depends, on the size of the aircraft, fuel carries, Engine thrust and efficiency. If you assume same size, engine, for a delta vs a cropped swept, it would be roughly equal as a delta might carry more fuel.

Please don't take this as a India Pakistan thing, but I read somewhere that Tejas has a smaller combat radius compared to the Thunder, despite the fact that both planes have nearly the same dimensions.... Has it got to do with the Delta wing issue or just inaccurate reporting?.

 

[araz]

I would like to Apologize Sir for my comment. Actually before talking with you I have been to FB, to a Indian held group. Rest you can understand better, what would have had happened. I took out that frustration here, I again Apologize for that. Agree with other senior members that knowledge should be given respect and it deserve respect.



Bro due to following Reasons I pitched up this point of Replacing Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s with a Delta Wing.
1. With a large enough angle of rearward sweep, the wing’s leading edge will not contact the shock wave boundary formed at the nose of the fuselage as the speed of the aircraft approaches and exceeds transonic to supersonic speed.
2. The delta plan form gives the largest total wing area (generating useful lift) for the wing shape, with very low wing per-unit loading, permitting high maneuverability in the airframe.
3. Delta will be stronger than a similar swept wing, as well as having much more internal volume for fuel and other storage.
4. Angle of attack increases, the leading edge of the wing generates a vortex which energizes the flow, giving the delta a very high stall angle.
About J-10: Why to go for J-10 when we can work it out with our almost about to retire fleet of Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s. Reverse Engineering and extracting out the inner details and Mapping/enhancing it with modern tech. Chinese can help out as they have experience of J-10 as well as J-20, they can also help is in integrating Canards or LEVCON. DSI and Avionics we can follow the same Pattern of Thunder on it just changing the Aerodynamics and Airframe. I don't know why but to me it doesn't appears any hard and fast science as we have been use Delta Wings from 65s. Till Date we would have got some knowledge about it. And if we have, why not utilize it to create something beneficial out of it.
About J-31, hmm J-31 should be proceeded in top priority but in order to take local aircraft building industry to the next level, its beneficial to have another aircraft prior to enter 5th Gen Era.

OK. Lets get down to business. When you design a plane you keep all the options in front of you and choose what qualities you want in your plane and what drawbacks that design could possibly have. You then choose the best available option and manufacture your plane.
JFT design was chosen for its simplicity ease of induction due to availability of off the shelf item and a risk averse approach. This was in keeping with the nascent aviation industry that we had and the necessity of absorbing the technology that we are given. Cost consideration was also a big factor in determining the design and the rapidity with which the platform was developed. Now that the design has matured and proven to be a success the last thing one wants to do is to change it.
Now the M3/M5 series is pretty old technology. The supply chain has long since gone and PAF has gone all over the world procuring older platforms with a view to keeping the fleet going. Changes to a platform of such vintage when most of the aircrafts are already obsolete is not the done thing as it is both cost and time prohibitive . When designs have been finalisied it will take a lot of man hours to identify and implement the changes and at the end of the day the benefit would probably be minimal. Also remember that delta design has its own limitation in that on the climb it bleeds energy much faster. PAF mad3 a decision based on its requirement to adopt this design and it will stick with it and the plane will develop more as more technological milestones are reached

 

[CHI RULES]

Can the speed of JF17 be improved to Mach 2+ with service ceiling up to 60.000 FT or not?

 

[My-Analogous]

I would like to Apologize Sir for my comment. Actually before talking with you I have been to FB, to a Indian held group. Rest you can understand better, what would have had happened. I took out that frustration here, I again Apologize for that. Agree with other senior members that knowledge should be given respect and it deserve respect.



Bro due to following Reasons I pitched up this point of Replacing Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s with a Delta Wing.
1. With a large enough angle of rearward sweep, the wing’s leading edge will not contact the shock wave boundary formed at the nose of the fuselage as the speed of the aircraft approaches and exceeds transonic to supersonic speed.
2. The delta plan form gives the largest total wing area (generating useful lift) for the wing shape, with very low wing per-unit loading, permitting high maneuverability in the airframe.
3. Delta will be stronger than a similar swept wing, as well as having much more internal volume for fuel and other storage.
4. Angle of attack increases, the leading edge of the wing generates a vortex which energizes the flow, giving the delta a very high stall angle.
About J-10: Why to go for J-10 when we can work it out with our almost about to retire fleet of Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s. Reverse Engineering and extracting out the inner details and Mapping/enhancing it with modern tech. Chinese can help out as they have experience of J-10 as well as J-20, they can also help us in integrating Canards or LEVCON. DSI and Avionics we can follow the same Pattern of Thunder on it just changing the Aerodynamics and Airframe. I don't know why but to me it doesn't appears any hard and fast science as we have been using Delta Wings from 65s. Till Date we would have got some knowledge about it. And if we have, why not utilize it to create something beneficial out of it.
About J-31, hmm J-31 should be proceeded in top priority but in order to take local aircraft building industry to the next level, its beneficial to have another aircraft prior to enter 5th Gen Era.

Good to see that and i really appreciate that. Welcome to PDF

 

[Saifullah]

Can the speed of JF17 be improved to Mach 2+ with service ceiling up to 60.000 FT or not?

Red = Will be done.
Other = Can be done, if PAF needs it to be done.

 

[My-Analogous]

Red = Will be done.
Other = Can be done, if PAF needs it to be done.

They already achieved Mark 2 and need some more composite material or engine to get 2+

 

[MilSpec]

Please don't take this as a India Pakistan thing, but I read somewhere that Tejas has a smaller combat radius compared to the Thunder, despite the fact that both planes have nearly the same dimensions.... Has it got to do with the Delta wing issue or just inaccurate reporting?.

Different evaluation and testing standards, different useful loads, different fuel capacity, different max takeoff weights, but we can discuss that in an appropriate thread, lets just stick to JF17 on this thread.

 

[Saifullah]

They already achieved Mark 2 and need some more composite material or engine to get 2+

As i said will be done
Sustained speed will be lower though.

 

[Thunder.Storm]

What would look like block III means shape, design

 

[Moon]

What would look like block III means shape, design

Probably remain the same, it's unfeasible to make any physical changes in the craft. Probably Aerial Refueling Probe, CFTs (doubtful) and a new engine at the very best.

 

[45'22']

Probably remain the same, it's unfeasible to make any physical changes in the craft. Probably Aerial Refueling Probe, CFTs (doubtful) and a new engine at the very best.

No AESA radar?

 

[Areesh]

No AESA radar?

AESA radar would be part of block 3 upgrades

 

[Moon]

No AESA radar?

Physical description.... But yes a high chance of AESA.