JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Correct it wont be single platform but jf-17 with multiple variants will be the core force. For JF-17, we would see something like JF-17 NG if Chengdu crowd keeps their thinking hats on; for now Blk 3 / B models would be the dominant build for next 3-4 years. For NG, there would definitely have to be soul searching and most likely review Gripen NG to learn. Could we see canard configuration? better engine and more use of composites? Just some thoughts. There is a long long way to go and i see a lot of potential.

I don't think the PAF will want to re-open the JF-17 design for such extensive work.

For all intents and purposes, the Gripen E/F (NG) is a different fighter from the Gripen C/D. Be it the new engine, the revised airframe (to space for additional fuel as well as a bigger engine and more electronics) or its greatly expanded range and payload, the E/F took some 7-10 years of development.

Personally, I believe the PAF would love to get Gripen E/F-type range and payload from its mainstay fighter, but I don't think that would come through the JF-17.

If you're going to basically invest in a new aircraft development program (which is what a Gripen NG-like JF-17 would require), then you might as well go all the way with a clean-sheet fifth-gen fighter (FGF) design that fetches you the E/F's range, payload and - ideally - supercruise with an internal payload, reduced RCS, etc.

In other words, the next mainstay jet will be Project Azm's FGF.

 

[Windjammer]

 

[MastanKhan]

I don't think the PAF will want to re-open the JF-17 design for such extensive work.

For all intents and purposes, the Gripen E/F (NG) is a different fighter from the Gripen C/D. Be it the new engine, the revised airframe (to space for additional fuel as well as a bigger engine and more electronics) or its greatly expanded range and payload, the E/F took some 7-10 years of development.

Personally, I believe the PAF would love to get Gripen E/F-type range and payload from its mainstay fighter, but I don't think that would come through the JF-17.

If you're going to basically invest in a new aircraft development program (which is what a Gripen NG-like JF-17 would require), then you might as well go all the way with a clean-sheet fifth-gen fighter (FGF) design that fetches you the E/F's range, payload and - ideally - supercruise with an internal payload, reduced RCS, etc.

In other words, the next mainstay jet will be Project Azm's FGF.

Hi,

Grippen NG is still a Grippen---. It was not a massive modification but a moderate modification---.

Such a modification which could have been done 5 years ago for around 50 million dollars would be around 100 million dollars now---. It is the easiest modification that one can put it on the design table when you already have an example in front of you of a similar category aircraft---.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Hi,

Grippen NG is still a Grippen---. It was not a massive modification but a moderate modification---.

Such a modification which could have been done 5 years ago for around 50 million dollars would be around 100 million dollars now---. It is the easiest modification that one can put it on the design table when you already have an example in front of you of a similar category aircraft---.

I disagree. Saab basically said the E/F has 'Gripen DNA' but it's a different aircraft. You can't remanufacture C/Ds into E/Fs nor can you take out 10 years of design and development work. Even if the PAF pushes the JF-17 to Block-IV or Block-V, we won't see the 1.5x range and payload improvement the Gripen E/F brings to the Gripen, most of the PAF's changes will likely remain in the electronics.

 

[Maarkhoor]

I disagree. Saab basically said the E/F has 'Gripen DNA' but it's a different aircraft. You can't remanufacture C/Ds into E/Fs nor can you take out 10 years of design and development work. Even if the PAF pushes the JF-17 to Block-IV or Block-V, we won't see the 1.5x range and payload improvement the Gripen E/F brings to the Gripen, most of the PAF's changes will likely remain in the electronics.

When manufacturers of Grippen can pull out new aircraft from Grippen why don't you think PAF can replicate the same on JF-17?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

When manufacturers of Grippen can pull out new aircraft from Grippen why don't you think PAF can replicate the same on JF-17?

It's not an issue of can't, but why would they when the development time - and potentially cost - is relatively high?

It has now taken Saab 10 years to get the Gripen E/F to the stage it is at today and it's still undergoing tests.

If we take the exact same template (let's delete 3 years for design) we're looking at a JF-17 NG in 2027 along with the cost of re-tooling for an essentially different fighter. It's just not worth it when you for an additional 35% in the funding and time you could move further to a clean sheet, next-gen fighter.

In fact, I prefer if we stick to the JF-17 as-is and max out its electronics and adaptability without re-opening the design. Consider as Project Azm comes into play, re-building the existing JF-17 Block-I and Block-II into a potent ground attack fighter for supporting the Pakistan Army's armour operations.

 

[Maarkhoor]

It's not an issue of can't, but why would they when the development time - and potentially cost - is relatively high?

It has now taken Saab 10 years to get the Gripen E/F to the stage it is at today and it's still undergoing tests.

If we take the exact same template (let's delete 3 years for design) we're looking at a JF-17 NG in 2027 along with the cost of re-tooling for an essentially different fighter. It's just not worth it when you for an additional 35% in the funding and time you could move further to a clean sheet, next-gen fighter.

In fact, I prefer if we stick to the JF-17 as-is and max out its electronics and adaptability without re-opening the design. Consider as Project Azm comes into play, re-building the existing JF-17 Block-I and Block-II into a potent ground attack fighter for supporting the Pakistan Army's armour operations.

What I believe project azm either based on J-31 or JF-17 since transition from one gen of aircraft to another is much easier and cost effective.

View attachment 490248

I miss many antennas...

 

[CHI RULES]

Considering

It's not an issue of can't, but why would they when the development time - and potentially cost - is relatively high?

It has now taken Saab 10 years to get the Gripen E/F to the stage it is at today and it's still undergoing tests.

If we take the exact same template (let's delete 3 years for design) we're looking at a JF-17 NG in 2027 along with the cost of re-tooling for an essentially different fighter. It's just not worth it when you for an additional 35% in the funding and time you could move further to a clean sheet, next-gen fighter.

In fact, I prefer if we stick to the JF-17 as-is and max out its electronics and adaptability without re-opening the design. Consider as Project Azm comes into play, re-building the existing JF-17 Block-I and Block-II into a potent ground attack fighter for supporting the Pakistan Army's armour operations.

Respected member don't you think that need for 5th gen jet is quite there for PAF considering the continuous development of IAF jets. The Su 30's operational issues are being sorted out so their percentage of operational readiness has and shall improve in near future. From 2019 the Rafael is started to be inducted meanwhile Jaguars are even being upgraded with AESA, the potential induction an additional fighter or increase in numbers of the existing 4.5 th gen jets. Every plan is for short to medium term at most. Meanwhile so far only potent platform expected to be inducted in PAF is JF17 block III, meanwhile no upgrades for F16s.

Even SAM/Radar coverage of India is much better and may prove to be serious threat for PAF. Now two latest SAMs are on cards for India i.e S400 and NASAMS. Such a potent threat can be faced only through latest tech.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Considering


Respected member don't you think that need for 5th gen jet is quite there for PAF considering the continuous development of IAF jets. The Su 30's operational issues are being sorted out so their percentage of operational readiness has and shall improve in near future. From 2019 the Rafael is started to be inducted meanwhile Jaguars are even being upgraded with AESA, the potential induction an additional fighter or increase in numbers of the existing 4.5 th gen jets. Every plan is for short to medium term at most. Meanwhile so far only potent platform expected to be inducted in PAF is JF17 block III, meanwhile no upgrades for F16s.

Even SAM/Radar coverage of India is much better and may prove to be serious threat for PAF. Now two latest SAMs are on cards for India i.e S400 and NASAMS. Such a potent threat can be faced only through latest tech.

Yep. Approach Project Azm from the view of countering every IAF threat, properly. When ACM Sohail Aman said his goal was to make Pakistan independent of foreign OEMs, i think that (making a very good fighter) was the idea.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

What I believe project azm either based on J-31 or JF-17 since transition from one gen of aircraft to another is much easier and cost effective.


I miss many antennas...

130th plane?

 

[Clairvoyant]

B-2 engine is already carrying failure detection, surge protection detector, the TER, so technically compatible to series 33.

But still the engine doesnt have FADEC.

 

[khanasifm]

Do any one have clean cut way drawing of jf-17

One can deduce a lot from it like strengthening of wing structure etc

The above two not so clear but one can tell outer wing is reinforced ??

Unless they are two different views

 

[HRK]

Do any one have clean cut way drawing of jf-17

View attachment 490282

View attachment 490283

One can deduce a lot from it like strengthening of wing structure etc

The above two not so clear but one can tell outer wing is reinforced ??

Unless they are two different views

first one is the picture of JF-17 prototype cutaway diagram, second one is JF-17 dual seat cutaway

JF-17 prototype cutaway diagram

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

130th plane?

30th Block I

 

[MastanKhan]

I disagree. Saab basically said the E/F has 'Gripen DNA' but it's a different aircraft. You can't remanufacture C/Ds into E/Fs nor can you take out 10 years of design and development work. Even if the PAF pushes the JF-17 to Block-IV or Block-V, we won't see the 1.5x range and payload improvement the Gripen E/F brings to the Gripen, most of the PAF's changes will likely remain in the electronics.

Hi,

This claim by saab that it is a different aircraft came as an after thought by saab---because the original aircraft Grippen had took a nose dive in sales---.

It was done to disengage its name from the older aircraft---just a marketing stunt---.

Otherwise---a little stretch here---a little stretch there were basically design "upgrades" that got corrected after the production when the manufacturer realized after operating the aircraft for a few years that these mods would bring a big change in the utility of the aircraft---.

Is the F16 BLK52 / BLK60 the same aircraft as the F16 A/B---!!!

It's not an issue of can't, but why would they when the development time - and potentially cost - is relatively high?

It has now taken Saab 10 years to get the Gripen E/F to the stage it is at today and it's still undergoing tests.

If we take the exact same template (let's delete 3 years for design) we're looking at a JF-17 NG in 2027 along with the cost of re-tooling for an essentially different fighter. It's just not worth it when you for an additional 35% in the funding and time you could move further to a clean sheet, next-gen fighter.

In fact, I prefer if we stick to the JF-17 as-is and max out its electronics and adaptability without re-opening the design. Consider as Project Azm comes into play, re-building the existing JF-17 Block-I and Block-II into a potent ground attack fighter for supporting the Pakistan Army's armour operations.

Hi,

If average engineers were doing it to the JF17---then it would take 10 years to do the modification or upgrade---.

But if it has already been done---and the example is in front of us---then it is a mere 2 years project for the upgrade---.