JF-17B Updates, News & Discussion

[aliyusuf]

We have them, yeah. But I think the term 'induction' means that its officially attached/part of a Squadron.

So far, all of 'em have the Flag & Serial Number giving the impression that they're still undergoing Tests.

Question is, will they all be assigned to (just) one Squadron, or be spread out...?

If they are to be utilized for specialized strike missions as well, then they are more likely to be assigned special squadrons with strike and OCU responsibilities.
That is just my own opinion.

 

[Trailer23]

If they are to be utilized for specialized strike missions as well, then they are more likely to be assigned special squadrons with strike and OCU responsibilities.

Now I don't know anything about 'specialized strike missions', but them being used for EW (Growler-type) was ruled out during the DxB Air Show.

 

[Dreamer.]

Now I don't know anything about 'specialized strike missions', but them being used for EW (Growler-type) was ruled out during the DxB Air Show.

who ruled it out?

 

[Windjammer]

 

[Trailer23]

who ruled it out?

A certain STARed PAF Official whom I had a few Q&A's on behalf of some PDF Members.

 

[HRK]

Note how the leading edge flap is bifurcated/ truncated on the dual seat as opposed to the single seat version. Click the thumbnail below.
View attachment 575842View attachment 575843

its not new all blk-I & II have this bifurcated leading edge flaps
blk-I

blk-II

during flight

17-601

 

[messiach]

Baackup HMtr have been removed for slat actuators, leaving reliance on 1x EMtrs. Compare the slats.

its not new all blk-I & II have this bifurcated leading edge flaps
blk-I
View attachment 592575

blk-II
View attachment 592572

during flight
View attachment 592578

 

[Dazzler]

Baackup HMtr have been removed for slat actuators, leaving reliance on 1x EMtrs.

Stability augmentation is no more.

 

[The Eagle]

its not new all blk-I & II have this bifurcated leading edge flaps
blk-I
View attachment 592575

blk-II
View attachment 592572

during flight
View attachment 592578

17-601
View attachment 592585

I think & as far as I can understand @messiach , we have moved on with extended equipment into flaps which will support stability/maintaining height in low regime/slow speed alpha.

 

[HRK]

I think & as far as I can understand @messiach , we have moved on with extended equipment into flaps which will support stability/maintaining height in low regime/slow speed alpha.

it was not related to Ms. Messiach post but specifically addressing the @Shane post in which he mistakenly assumed that LEF is different in dual seat then JF-17 blk-I and II, other then this @GriffinsRule also posted about the change I was only specifically addressing this point that the basic design of LEF of JF-17 is not changed in any of the block and in twin seat version

Griffin's post is quoted here just as reference

So it has gone from using F-16 style LE flaps to F-18 type =P

As far as my understanding about the point which @messiach is making is that its hydraulic motors actuators are now changed to Electric actuators due to change from hydraulic controls to FBL .....

 

[messiach]

The two Slats are two generations apart. Entirely different. The movement profile of new powered slats is entirely different maintaining stagnation point under high AoA. Look at the movement profile of slats during early FC1 demonstration flights. @The Eagle

As far as my understanding about the point which @messiach is making is that its hydraulic motors actuators are now changed to Electric actuators due to change from hydraulic controls to FBL .....

Did'nt get it? What is it?

Stability augmentation is no more.

 

[Dazzler]

Did'nt get it? What is it?

The backup stability augmentation system is removed. The late model block 2s and Bs all have digital triplex redundant FBW.

The two Slats are two generations apart. Entirely different. The movement profile of new powered slats is entirely different maintaining stagnation point under high AoA. Look at the movement profile of slats during early FC1 demonstration flights.

Slat profile indeed looks different

[/user]

 

[JamD]

I am usually not the kind of person that grasps at straws but I have been wondering why the Bs have serial numbers starting in 6. We know that number is reserved for block in single seater. Pure speculation follows:

PAF envisions the single-seater going up (at the absolute most) to block 5, which is the reason twin-seaters start at 6. This might also imply block 3Bs might have serials starting in 7.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Dazzler

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I am usually not the kind of person that grasps at straws but I have been wondering why the Bs have serial numbers starting in 6. We know that number is reserved for block in single seater. Pure speculation follows:

PAF envisions the single-seater going up (at the absolute most) to block 5, which is the reason twin-seaters start at 6. This might also imply block 3Bs might have serials starting in 7.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Dazzler

If they cap it at Block-5, then I'm guessing they'd roll out at least another 100 JF-17s through the 2020s (assuming there are no other aircraft inductions). Moreover, if there's nothing past Block-5, then either the JF-17 is going to be totally supplanted (production-wise) by the FGFA, or they'll have a JF-17 NG, but call it something else?

 

[ziaulislam]

If they cap it at Block-5, then I'm guessing they'd roll out at least another 100 JF-17s through the 2020s (assuming there are no other aircraft inductions). Moreover, if there's nothing past Block-5, then either the JF-17 is going to be totally supplanted (production-wise) by the FGFA, or they'll have a JF-17 NG, but call it something else?

PAF previous chief clearly stated that they would like to maintain 400 fighter jets
i see no other way to do that other than building at least 250 thunders, given F16s arent coming

The backup stability augmentation system is removed. The late model block 2s and Bs all have digital triplex redundant FBW.



Slat profile indeed looks different

View attachment 592844[/user]

where is this photo from?