JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[MastanKhan]

Primarily, what i wrote here:

Hi,

Those days of scramble and engage the enemy are outdated---. Nowadays---you have to be in the air to counter the enemy---because the enemy would also be targeting the air base with ASM's.

For that reason---you need a longer loiter time---.

If you are on the ground---you are done and dusted---.

 

[Shabi1]

please share dimensions for both since i can only find difference is range

Dimensions not available but if you just look at the pictures can see there is some difference. Raad 2 looks slightly more slender. In fact even dimensions of Raad 1 not available the person who did the analysis did a intelligent guess using clever pixelation mapping but its not a exact confirmation of the dimension.
For JF-17 I think Raad will be carried on inner wing stations where it carries fuel tanks and not on center point. Similar to this where single Raad will be carried instead of the AshM. Raad tail would definitely extend behind the landing gear so it should not be an issue. Because of FBW the JF-17 can carry dissimilar loads on wings and the below configuration looks very suitable for anti ship role.

 

[帅的一匹]

Dimensions not available but if you just look at the pictures can see there is some difference. Raad 2 looks slightly more slender. In fact even dimensions of Raad 1 not available the person who did the analysis did a intelligent guess using clever pixelation mapping but its not a exact confirmation of the dimension.
For JF-17 I think Raad will be carried on inner wing stations where it carries fuel tanks and not on center point. Similar to this where single Raad will be carried instead of the AshM. Raad tail would definitely extend behind the landing gear so it should not be an issue. Because of FBW the JF-17 can carry dissimilar loads on wings and the below configuration looks very suitable for anti ship role.
View attachment 469372

It's not a problem for JF17b, cause it has 3 axis 4 redundancy FBW.

And not a problem for BLkIII as well.

 

[MastanKhan]

Dimensions not available but if you just look at the pictures can see there is some difference. Raad 2 looks slightly more slender. In fact even dimensions of Raad 1 not available the person who did the analysis did a intelligent guess using clever pixelation mapping but its not a exact confirmation of the dimension.
For JF-17 I think Raad will be carried on inner wing stations where it carries fuel tanks and not on center point. Similar to this where single Raad will be carried instead of the AshM. Raad tail would definitely extend behind the landing gear so it should not be an issue. Because of FBW the JF-17 can carry dissimilar loads on wings and the below configuration looks very suitable for anti ship role.
View attachment 469372

Hi,

The FBW on the JF17 is not a magic bullet---. JF17 is still a very small aircraft.

It cannot mount a 1100 KG missile on inner or outer pylon---but only the center pylon---and that was made very clear by the vice ACM a couple of years ago and discussed quite a bit on this JF17 thread---.

Well it can---but after the launch of one ALCM---the aircraft would roll over---.

Now---it may carry heavy fuel tanks on inner pylons---but then both fuel tanks are jettisoned at the same time---. So it does effect the weight shift---.

You guys have not studied physics in college---? Or have no experience with weight displacements on a structure---???

 

[帅的一匹]

Hi,

The FBW on the JF17 is not a magic bullet---. JF17 is still a very small aircraft.

It cannot mount a 1100 KG missile on inner or outer pylon---but only the center pylon---and that was made very clear by the vice ACM a couple of years ago and discussed quite a bit on this JF17 thread---.

Well it can---but after the launch of one ALCM---the aircraft would roll over---.

Now---it may carry heavy fuel tanks on inner pylons---but then both fuel tanks are jettisoned at the same time---. So it does effect the weight shift---.

You guys have not studied physics in college---? Or have no experience with weight displacements on a structure---???

Su30Mki can only carry one Brahmos at the center pylon under the belly. AKG400 is good enough to deal with the threat.

the Barak 8 on P15b only has 70 Km range and Max interception speed at 2 Mach, while AKG400 has 260KM range and Max speed at 4 Mach. It's over kill.

j17 is a light weight multi-role combat aircraft, you can't expect too much on it.

 

[Shabi1]

Hi,

The FBW on the JF17 is not a magic bullet---. JF17 is still a very small aircraft.

It cannot mount a 1100 KG missile on inner or outer pylon---but only the center pylon---and that was made very clear by the vice ACM a couple of years ago and discussed quite a bit on this JF17 thread---.

Well it can---but after the launch of one ALCM---the aircraft would roll over---.

Now---it may carry heavy fuel tanks on inner pylons---but then both fuel tanks are jettisoned at the same time---. So it does effect the weight shift---.

You guys have not studied physics in college---? Or have no experience with weight displacements on a structure---???

Even on a commercial aircraft the fuel management system can be used to balance out both wings of an aircraft. I've used the system in a flight simulator in which there was a simulated fuel leakage in a Airbus aircraft, in order to land the aircraft had to keep pumping fuel from one wing to the other one so the aircraft could be leveled for a smooth landing.
On the bottom of the left MFD of the JF-17 it's showing two gauges which depict Left/Right side fuel status. Had a identical display on the Airbus simulator for balancing the wing loads and could toggle a pump to distribute fuel weight.

Since most modern aircraft are designed unstable, its the job of the FBW to continuously manage the aircraft without pilot input in order to fly it straight. Look at the picture below. One wing has a C-802 which is ~750KG, on the other wing it is carrying a 800litre fuel tank to balance it out. The aircraft fuel management system and FBW will have to work together. If missile not fired the aircraft computer will manage fuel via pumps so that the the opposite wing has similar weight. Once missile fired, the fuel management system will pump out fuel from the wing with the tank and balance rest of the aircraft.
Same goes for if they want to carry a single Raad which is 1100Kg, JF-17 loadout options show it can carry a 1100litre fuel tank on opposite wing corresponding hard point.

Then again these are loading options. If the Raad-2 is sleeker than Raad-1 as I've observed from pictures than the JF-17 can simply carry it on the center pylon without worry of landing gear clearance and this complicated mechanism can be avoided. However the JF-17 being a advanced aircraft this whole system is likely normally automated to reduce pilot load.

 

[volatile]

Dimensions not available but if you just look at the pictures can see there is some difference. Raad 2 looks slightly more slender. In fact even dimensions of Raad 1 not available the person who did the analysis did a intelligent guess using clever pixelation mapping but its not a exact confirmation of the dimension.

Sir your analysis are not correct ,the analysis are done based on the data available with out data its just talk,

 

[gambit]

Since most modern aircraft are designed unstable, its the job of the FBW to continuously manage the aircraft without pilot input in order to fly it straight. Look at the picture below. One wing has a C-802 which is ~750KG, on the other wing it is carrying a 800litre fuel tank to balance it out. The aircraft fuel management system and FBW will have to work together. If missile not fired the aircraft computer will manage fuel via pumps so that the the opposite wing has similar weight. Once missile fired, the fuel management system will pump out fuel from the wing with the tank and balance rest of the aircraft.

There are many things you said that is at best questionable, if not outright wrong. I would like to see some reputable sources on the J-17's fuel management system to support your post. If none available, I will explain to the forum where you are wrong.

 

[Shabi1]

Sir your analysis are not correct ,the analysis are done based on the data available with out data its just talk,

View attachment 469453

Thanks for the link. But want to clarify my words were "it's not an exact confirmation of dimensions."
They could be close to reality but it's just an estimation, as they are not confirmed. The point I wanted to make is I think there could be dimension differences between Raad 1 & 2 from pictures but its just an opinion as exact dimensions for both unknown.

Wikipedia shows this link as its source.
https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/hatf-8/
And it quotes that the dimensions are an estimation at Janes. Janes is a reputable source and pretty accurate but they have relied on guess work to obtain the figures.

 

[帅的一匹]

There are many things you said that is at best questionable, if not outright wrong. I would like to see some reputable sources on the J-17's fuel management system to support your post. If none available, I will explain to the forum where you are wrong.

Either Chinese engineers are idiots or you are genius.

 

[gambit]

Either Chinese engineers are idiots or you are genius.

Kid, I have explained fighter aircraft fuel storage and management on this forum YRS ago.

Which is more difficult to design regarding fuel storage and management, an airliner or a much smaller fighter aircraft?

It is not a trick question. If you cannot answer -- STFU.

 

[帅的一匹]

Kid, I have explained fighter aircraft fuel storage and management on this forum YRS ago.

Which is more difficult to design regarding fuel storage and management, an airliner or a much smaller fighter aircraft?

It is not a trick question. If you cannot answer -- STFU.

As long as those Chinese engineers are not allowed to post here for security concern, you can keep pretending you are an expert.

 

[Shabi1]

There are many things you said that is at best questionable, if not outright wrong. I would like to see some reputable sources on the J-17's fuel management system to support your post. If none available, I will explain to the forum where you are wrong.

You have the right to your own opinion. However I deduced it from my own knowledge of aircraft and the MFD layout screen on JF-17, you can disagree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_fuel_system
"Many aircraft have the left tank and right tank selections available to the pilot. Some Cessna airplanes feed only from both tanks; and many have the option to feed from left, right, or both tanks. The reason to have left only and right only options is to allow pilots to balance fuel load to reduce the banking moment. In some aircraft, the shut-off function is a different valve located after the fuel selector valve."


and
http://ilot.edu.pl/prace_ilot/public/PDF/spis_zeszytow/183_2005/05.Goraj.pdf
"CONCLUSION Fuel systems are essential for aircraft operation and highly influence on safety. They must be reliable, redundant and easy to maintain. Very often they may be used to move fuel around the aircraft to keep the center of gravity within acceptable limits, to maintain pitch and lateral balance and stability. Fuel system also can be used to optimize the wing span load distribution during flight."

 

[帅的一匹]

The dumbest Chinese engineer will be smarter than you, that's for sure.

 

[gambit]

As long as those Chinese engineers are not allowed to post here for security concern, you can keep pretending you are an expert.

By the time I am done, you can take my post to the J-17's engineering staff and they would offer me a job.

But am going to give Mr. Shabi some time to gather technical support.