What's new

JF-17's various initial design phases & design resemblances

We have reverse engineered it with our modifications---. The only error in judgement was the size when we went to a 20% smaller size than the actual----
i knew it
so sir can we expect a different engine in blk 3?
will it be F414 duplicatee or some other?
 
.
no its not. this bird came from the original super 7 its basically has the dna of a mig 21. the jf-17 was worked on in the usa with help of russia. where as the jl-9 isn't. if the usa and russia did not help pakistan/china this is what the jf-17 would look like.
china will very likely reject this bird and choose the l-15 since its a clean sheet design and has features of that similar to western and russain trainers. the jl-9 is a botched bird and is a mig-21 under the skin.
you should know just besauce it looks the same does not mean it is.

What rubbish are you talking about? JF-17 has no USA input and is basically a pure Chinese effort. The Russia besides providing the engine has also no input on the design of JF-17.

As for JL-9, it has mass equipped PLAAF already. If you are not knowledgeable on Chinese military topic. I suggest you keep silent instead of spreading nonsense. JL-9 may not be as advance as JL-15 but its development phase is much shorter and simple to produce. Both JL-9 and JL-15 will serve PLAAF.

JL-9.jpg
 
.
What rubbish are you talking about? JF-17 has no USA input and is basically a pure Chinese effort. The Russia besides providing the engine has also no input on the design of JF-17.

As for JL-9, it has mass equipped PLAAF already. If you are not knowledgeable on Chinese military topic. I suggest you keep silent instead of spreading nonsense. JL-9 may not be as advance as JL-15 but its development phase is much shorter and simple to produce. Both JL-9 and JL-15 will serve PLAAF.

View attachment 323319
what ever makes you sleep at night. so china and grumman did not work on a clean sheet design where grumman pulled out due to 1989 protests where after mikoyan stepped? or did china do it in a one man band?

i would have imagined you would have rejected the jl-9 due to its old design. i really checked upon the jl-9 till today. the newer ones do have a dsi. i still dont know why they went for them the l-15 is way better. probably to keep skilled people employed
 
.
what ever makes you sleep at night. so china and grumman did not work on a clean sheet design where grumman pulled out due to 1989 protests where after mikoyan stepped? or did china do it in a one man band?

i would have imagined you would have rejected the jl-9 due to its old design. i really checked upon the jl-9 till today. the newer ones do have a dsi. i still dont know why they went for them the l-15 is way better. probably to keep skilled people employed
The grumman input was for Super 7 project. I am not sure to what extent that translated into the JFT. However the Mig corporation did have input into the design phase with their Mig 33 project. It is an unfair assesment to say that the JFT is a clean design by the chinese. On the other hand it is totally unfair to say that it is entirely a copy of this or that Plane. What is probably fair and much in keeping with Chinese Philiosophy is that it has borrowed elements from many designs and Western input provided via PAF experience of testing various air crafts. This is borne out by the rapidity with which design turned into prototype inspite of various changes which PAF asked for mid design which annoyed the Chinese designers a lot.
An interesting tid bit in the conundrum is that the US at one time offered a single engined version of F18 to PAF. I am assuming that PAF might have had a look at the prototype at least. Some senior member in the know may well be able to elaborate furhter. The project did not progress and PAF opted for the F16 instead.I think in retrospect it was a very wise decision but for the fickleness of the US policy making and its use of armament supplies as a tool of its foreign policy implementation.
A
 
.
The grumman input was for Super 7 project. I am not sure to what extent that translated into the JFT. However the Mig corporation did have input into the design phase with their Mig 33 project. It is an unfair assesment to say that the JFT is a clean design by the chinese. On the other hand it is totally unfair to say that it is entirely a copy of this or that Plane. What is probably fair and much in keeping with Chinese Philiosophy is that it has borrowed elements from many designs and Western input provided via PAF experience of testing various air crafts. This is borne out by the rapidity with which design turned into prototype inspite of various changes which PAF asked for mid design which annoyed the Chinese designers a lot.
An interesting tid bit in the conundrum is that the US at one time offered a single engined version of F18 to PAF. I am assuming that PAF might have had a look at the prototype at least. Some senior member in the know may well be able to elaborate furhter. The project did not progress and PAF opted for the F16 instead.I think in retrospect it was a very wise decision but for the fickleness of the US policy making and its use of armament supplies as a tool of its foreign policy implementation.
A
the thunder does havee a similar wing layout to that of the hornets true so which is where the "western influence" would have come from
the single engined f16 was very similar to the f16 so its not worth investing in this were you can go for something tried and tested
NorthropP-61002_zpsce4d88ca.jpg
 
.
.
Other than LERX there's not much they have in common.

JFT resembles the F-16 and the F-18 from some angles.
 
. .
That will make USA extremely dangerous. Not only they have your plane design but also either a very detail precognition :eek: or worse a TIME MACHINE :help:!

Is it just you or all of you that do not understand sarcasm.
 
. . .
is it only me or f/a 18 and Jf-17 are a little look alikes
JFT looks like a single engine version of f/a 18
just a funny observation


images
images

images
images


just saying no need to play expert-expert here
@MastanKhan @django @long_ @PARIKRAMA @PaklovesTurkiye @war&peace @Mugwop @Moonlight @Zibago @Horus
US engine will have many strings attached e.g Sanctions, perhaps cost as well, they may not be willing to share some technical know-how etc etc........ but i was only curious if any JF-17 ever flew with a US engine?
They have legal restrictions to share any technology with China and company
 
. . .
what ever makes you sleep at night. so china and grumman did not work on a clean sheet design where grumman pulled out due to 1989 protests where after mikoyan stepped? or did china do it in a one man band?

i would have imagined you would have rejected the jl-9 due to its old design. i really checked upon the jl-9 till today. the newer ones do have a dsi. i still dont know why they went for them the l-15 is way better. probably to keep skilled people employed
There is an article I saw recently but I think from 2010. The FC-1 project came/evolved from the Super-7 project but the FC-1 fighter did not come/evolve from the Super-7.

I hope that is clear enough
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom