JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[Ultima Thule]

View attachment 563107

View attachment 563108

Dual seater and block 3 with extra 1 meter wingspan, best options is to strengthen outer wing and add additional under wing station just for sd-10 class weapon
Even existing block have enough clearance it’s just strengthening outer wing to add new pylon

With two more under intake this will being jf-17 to f-16 comparable number of stations and configuration

Otherwise in air to ground mode jf-17 can only carry short range aam unless you loose underwing droptanks and only carry under fuselage drop tank which means less range

Last option just upgrade outer wing to strengthen it so jf can carry sd-10 on wingtip

Remember paf original option was to go for mica a 110 kg aam vs 200 kg sd-10 which could be handled on wingtip

Food for thoughts let’s see what is final confirm of block 3

What are your source as far as i know both JF-17B and up coning block-3 have a same wing span as block-2 only wing area increases @khanasifm

 

[khanasifm]

Go look at Catac website and fc-1 and dual seater specs plus current acm interview in Janes

 

[khanasifm]

http://www.avic.com/en/forbusiness/militaryaviationanddefense/fighters/394351.shtml

8.5 vs 9.46 meter wingspan
Without wingtip aam, with aam the fins of pl5 aam counted in the span it goes up

Per interview

Having first flown in April 2017, the JF-17B was not only intended as the twin-seat training variant of the JF-17, but it was also the basis of the JF-17 Block-III. It introduced a new three-axis fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system (replacing the hybrid FBW of prior variants) and purportedly longer wingspan.

 

[khanasifm]

 

[GriffinsRule]

View attachment 563117

View attachment 563118

You know that the 8.5m figure is incorrect right? I posted a link earlier already of PACs own website that clearly states the wingspan of the Block 1/2 single seaters at 9.48m

 

[air marshal]

https://falcons.pk/photo/JF-17-Thunder/1851

 

[air marshal]

http://falcons.pk/photo/JF-17-Thunder/1852

 

[khanasifm]

You know that the 8.5m figure is incorrect right? I posted a link earlier already of PACs own website that clearly states the wingspan of the Block 1/2 single seaters at 9.48m

That means catic and pac and air chief recent interview are wrong ?

Possible but quoted multiple times and repeatedly since dual seater flew ??

 

[GriffinsRule]

That means catic and pac and air chief recent interview are wrong ?

Possible but quoted multiple times and repeatedly since dual seater flew ??

Did the Air Chief state the wingspan numbers?
Here is a placard with JF-17 stats from 10 years ago or so...the wingspan listed in 9.45ms. I am guessing the one you have that lists it as 8.5 is a typo, nothing else.
http://i31.tinypic.com/34xgswi.jpg
Another from 2011 has the same number ...
https://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af75/w0880/izmir_2.jpg

 

[khanasifm]

It’s part of multiple interview including current chief one and since jf-17b came out and also on catac website

End of story i am going by what’s been reported in Janes

But perhaps it’s including wingtip missile ?? Not sure but reported again in Janes

Old specs but including wingtip missile fins

 

[khanasifm]

https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/pakistan-stands-up-new-fighter-squadron/


In comparison to the single-seat JF-17, the JF-17B variant features a dorsal fin that contains an additional fuel tank,” I reported in May 2017. The aircraft prototype also has a slightly larger wingspan and a marginally modified nose section and features a larger swept-back vertical stabilizer housing a new three-axis fly-by-wire system.

Bottom line there is enough wing span to add third under wing pylon provided outer wing is strengthen similar to f-16
And JL-10

View attachment 563217

View attachment 563218

 

[khanasifm]

 

[khanasifm]

 

[khanasifm]

 

[GriffinsRule]

It’s part of multiple interview including current chief one and since jf-17b came out and also on catac website

End of story i am going by what’s been reported in Janes

But perhaps it’s including wingtip missile ?? Not sure but reported again in Janes

View attachment 563215

Old specs but including wingtip missile fins

Do you have the Janes article or is it a third source quoting Janes?

View attachment 563220

View attachment 563221

View attachment 563222

The drawing is just fan art. Nothing to be taken seriously