What's new

JF17 BLK4-----Major Upgrade & Replacement For F16's

Hi,

Yeah--the emails they have listed----come back as cannot be delivered--and I am copying and pasting the address from the ispr web site---.

Maybe no access from outside of pakistan---I do not know.
Well I can assure, they don't work even if you sitting on a PC in the next room. They are stuck with paper-based documentation and communication (may be it is good from secrecy point of view :) )
 
.
Question, what makes you say that? Genuinely curious.

From what I know, even with an air frame change, the cost should go down in the long run anyway. As long as major upgrades are spaced out in an economical time frame, the costs shouldn't increase by that much. If the thunder is going to remain Pakistan's workhorse for the next 40 years, it's going to need air frame changes, much like the F-16 did.
Could you elaborate a bit on what changes are needed/possible and realistically achievable. We could possibly then look at those and discuss.
A
 
.
Could you elaborate a bit on what changes are needed/possible and realistically achievable. We could possibly then look at those and discuss.
A
In the near term? Change in radar, increase in the number of compatible weapon systems, small things. In the long term? We may see some major air frame changes, similar to what happened to the F-16; From conformable fuel tanks, to better material used to build the air frame, we may even see a more powerful engine (which has been heavily hinted at for block IV).
 
.
In the near term? Change in radar, increase in the number of compatible weapon systems, small things. In the long term? We may see some major air frame changes, similar to what happened to the F-16; From conformable fuel tanks, to better material used to build the air frame, we may even see a more powerful engine (which has been heavily hinted at for block IV).


Hi,

As the paf has followed the line of the Gripen in the size design and weapons in the development of the JF17---the logical upgrade would be to follow the line of the NG---.

The NG has moved the wheels out strengthened the frame and wings---where the wheels were---that place is used to store more fuel---a slightly larger tunnel for the engine---and from 800 km combat radius--it gone gone upto 1350 km.

The modifications of the fuel tanks is a major design change as well---mounted closer to the body---the streamline squarish tanks carry more fuel than the round ones---a simple engineering change----it was in front of all of us but nobody thought about it---.
 
.
The NG has moved the wheels out strengthened the frame and wings---where the wheels were---that place is used to store more fuel---a slightly larger tunnel for the engine---and from 800 km combat radius--it gone gone upto 1350 km.
Like this one :pop:

Gripen-vs-F-16 - Copy.jpg


In Block 4, by moving landing gears to wings we can increase Fuel capacity by 30-40% just like in Gripen NG case. Also use of CFT and IFR probe will further increase its range and loiter time............
But its not so simple. We need to re adjust the hard points and also the balance of aircraft. Moreover if total number of hard points will increase then we will have to adjust them in short space on wings. But instead of one, we can have three Hard points under the fuselage and three hard points on each wing.
But more fuel capacity and hard points mean ability to carry more weight. We will need a much better engine for NG version if we are really considering such block to develop.
Or how about introducing On Board Oxygen Generation system? It will increase performance of even current version of RD93 to higher levels.
Plus use of composite material in body frame will make aircraft more light weight.

JF17 Thunder package 2.jpg
 
.
Like this one :pop:

View attachment 299516

In Block 4, by moving landing gears to wings we can increase Fuel capacity by 30-40% just like in Gripen NG case. Also use of CFT and IFR probe will further increase its range and loiter time............
But its not so simple. We need to re adjust the hard points and also the balance of aircraft. Moreover if total number of hard points will increase then we will have to adjust them in short space on wings. But instead of one, we can have three Hard points under the fuselage and three hard points on each wing.
But more fuel capacity and hard points mean ability to carry more weight. We will need a much better engine for NG version if we are really considering such block to develop.
Or how about introducing On Board Oxygen Generation system? It will increase performance of even current version of RD93 to higher levels.
Plus use of composite material in body frame will make aircraft more light weight.

View attachment 299517


Hi,

This is the simplest of upgrades---. The chinese WS 13 would be ready by then---and has enough oooomph.

Thanks for the picture---.
 
.
Smarter........????? Well this word don't suit on them for a past few years our strategy makers have taken some foolish decisions........Don't they......??????
Dear i received the same answer from MastanKhan as well, i want the details of the "Stupid" and "Foolish" decisions you think they made in the given financial and political scenarios.
 
.
Hi,

As the paf has followed the line of the Gripen in the size design and weapons in the development of the JF17---the logical upgrade would be to follow the line of the NG---.

The NG has moved the wheels out strengthened the frame and wings---where the wheels were---that place is used to store more fuel---a slightly larger tunnel for the engine---and from 800 km combat radius--it gone gone upto 1350 km.

The modifications of the fuel tanks is a major design change as well---mounted closer to the body---the streamline squarish tanks carry more fuel than the round ones---a simple engineering change----it was in front of all of us but nobody thought about it---.
If PAF can pull this off i.e. modify JF-17 structure to get 9/10 hard points, 7000-8000 kg payload with combat radius of around 1500km then we have a homegrown medium weight class fighter.
If we look at the force composition of PAF then it comes around 400-450 fighters. lets say we have 150 JF-17 after block 3, around 100 F-16 and future acquisition of 5th Gen plane around 50, then we have a total of 300 aircraft (This is after considering retiring all F-7 and M-3/5).
Still there is room for at least around 100 aircraft which can be filled by this modified JF-17.
 
.
Dear i received the same answer from MastanKhan as well, i want the details of the "Stupid" and "Foolish" decisions you think they made in the given financial and political scenarios.

Youngman,

I have been writing about this for the last 10 years over here---and for every new member---I have to start anew---.

Please look at the older threads and posts and you will find the answers. Thanks.
 
.
Hi,
I would have loved to have had the J10B in paf colors 4 years ago---it would have given the paf enough time to adjust the aircraft to their needs.
I think they GAMBLED---and started playing CUTESY with the americans---.
But as they have not inducted the J10---then what other option is there for a single engine---.
My option for a BLK4 JF 17 is not a new aircraft---it is in the same parameters---similar structure and lsight bit larger---Gripen has done it---they are not calling it a new aircraft--the south africans did it with the Mirage to Cheetah---they did not call it new aircraft---enough though the mirage was a major modification---.
I don't see any reason why this aircraft cannot be modified around 50 million dollars---.
Mastan Bhai

1. Even I do feel PAF should have gone to J-10 B, because not only it a superb single engine fighter plane, but also give the ample space and better range, and weapon load than the JF-17. But don't you think that PAF doctrine and budget justify JF-17.

2. So you want the development of the JF-17 Block 4 on the Grippen footprint but here is a simple twist, the development or in this case new development is not done in a Gut Feeling, but with proper analysis, calculations and requirement, and offcourse money/budget. First JF-17 development was made for the export in mind, and with the low cost factor.


Lets take your Road map similar to the Grippen NG.

1... first is the Engine, because you need more thrust in case of Grippen the engine chosen was F-414 replacing F-404. Both the engine have same dimension and same weight. Do you have any other engine in mind -- Russian r-d 33K ++, Chinese , French M-88 v 9, GE 414 or Pakistan is ready to invest for the uprated variant of the existing engne.


2. Since you change the Engine, you need to design the Air Intake to catter the pressure inflow change.

3. Since you change the Engine, and landing Gears, and various LRU's the CG also gets changed, that would need the whole set of aerodynamic tests and certification. Also since you change the airframe, and Engine, the Piping, wiring, hydraulic, actuators, internal LRUs positions have to be changed, designed and modified.


4. You want Sniper Pod, IRST (unknown), AESA Radar (Unknown), that means the whole EW suite, and flight control have to programmed again, and weapons needed to be mated.


5. In short almost the whole new design with all tests again.
Big Question is Does Pakistan's any OEM have IPR's of all the Subsystems for that. Say for example, if the DSI have been desinged by the Chinese OEM, do you have all the flight data, extensive rights to modify it.

@Manticore Sir, when we talk about a subsystem, the right to license manufacture is one thing, but to modify it you need to have permission from the related OEMs and in this various chinese OEMs, not only Caltic , can Kamra or any other Pakistani agency could modify them, as Mastan Bhai is asking.



Mastan Bhai -- My question is very simple, you are asking for an exclusive, JF-17 variant with superior features, but lets say the number projected is 50 units. And Chinese Caltic are interested in JF-17 old variant to marketed in the global market. So if you want that exclusive JF-17 block 4, but Chinese thinks that there won't be any market in the Globaly, why would they invest on it, in short, then Pakistan would be the alone customer, and he has to bear all the modification costs and since the number would be limited, the average cost would be significantly higher.



Thanks
 
.
I agree with @Zebra we should have gone for J10B back in 2005/2006 as at the moment we were thinking about AESA integration into this but engine was always the problem for J10-b induction into PAF not reliable ,PAF should have worked on 2 projects simultaneosuly JF17 for low/med tech ,J10b for med/high tech and F16 MLU`s .So it was force to reckon with as by 2020 we would have 50 + J10B ,150 + JF17 and F16 100 + ,Rest some mirages for Navy
 
. .
By moving the landing gears to wings you get surplus space in internal fuselage to house bigger internal fuel tank.

b7Pvo.jpg
 
.
Youngman,

I have been writing about this for the last 10 years over here---and for every new member---I have to start anew---.

Please look at the older threads and posts and you will find the answers. Thanks.

Kindly provide the exact links so that i can go through. or write a summary line.
 
.
I think we should keep the things to Blk-3. After that thought should be given to FC-31 kind of platform with either double engine option or a single engine more powerful option. In 5-10 years time frame hopefully chinese engine tech would have improved much more and they would be producing reliable engines.

Instead of wasting resources, time & money on Blk 4, start thinking about a new platform like FC-31s.

Dear Sir,

It is my belief that JF17 is not result of just few years, rather it is continuity PAF efforts in the field of aeronautics which started with development of expertise in rebuild of Mirrages, production of trainers like Mushak/super Mashak & K8p. Now these efforts have beared fruit in the shape of JF17 (block 1/2). Shapping up to come in Block 3 version. Similarly PAF officials have given some statements about 5th Gen Fighter development. PAF so far perhaps have little or no capabilities in the field of stealth which they are supposed to get in near future.
Yes we have vital chances to get FC31 but we shall require either 5th gen or near to 5th gen fighter to compensate it and Inshallah Kamra shall be developed into true manufacturing plant for next gen jets.

Even now if PAF is able to get AESA,IRST and next gen EW suit in JF17 block 3 at cost of 35-40 Million it is great achievement as no other alternate is available in this cost.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom