My vision for JFT Block 3

[CriticalThought]

View attachment 520122

Let alone the question of limitations, yet another concept i.e Strike Thunder.

I am against a dedicated strike platform. This is reminiscent in functionality to our erstwhile strike platform the A-5 Fantan. I support fighter bombers like Su-35 over dedicated strike role aircraft. Especially this design which takes a fighter and converts it into a bomb truck. Might as well go for the JH-7 as @MastanKhan keeps arguing.

 

[Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA]

JF-17 needs more fuel capacity to reach a decent distance as well as extra hard points.

will that add much more costs per unit?!

 

[Signalian]

will that add much more costs per unit?!

capability enhancement vs price...

 

[LKJ86]

View attachment 518545 View attachment 517776

Suggested modifications in
- LERX with LEVCONs
- Bigger wings i.e. bigger flaps and control surfaces
- Modified Aerilons

View attachment 520122

Let alone the question of limitations, yet another concept i.e Strike Thunder.

If so, it is a completely different aircraft already, which should not be called JF-17/FC-1 again, and why not develop a new 4.5th-generation fighter directly?

 

[Kompromat]

None of this is possible without a new engine and an additional 5m dollars per plane.

 

[Tariq Anwar]

If so, it is a completely different aircraft already, which should not be called JF-17/FC-1 again, and why not develop a new 4.5th-generation fighter directly?

Out rightly going for a 4.5th Gen Aircraft at our own would not be possible, we will have to gradually move forward while capitalizing our experiences both in terms of design and technologies.

My point is that, given the expertise and capabilities we have, we should have our own design, no matter how humble, and should gradually build on that platform.

None of this is possible without a new engine and an additional 5m dollars per plane.

That is absolutely correct, and plan has to be a medium role plat form.

 

[LKJ86]

Out rightly going for a 4.5th Gen Aircraft at our own would not be possible, we will have to gradually move forward while capitalizing our experiences both in terms of design and technologies.

My point is that, given the expertise and capabilities we have, we should have our own design, no matter how humble, and should gradually build on that platform.

You can consider the evolution of F-15, F-16, Su-27, and J-10.

 

[Tariq Anwar]

I am against a dedicated strike platform. This is reminiscent in functionality to our erstwhile strike platform the A-5 Fantan. I support fighter bombers like Su-35 over dedicated strike role aircraft. Especially this design which takes a fighter and converts it into a bomb truck. Might as well go for the JH-7 as @MastanKhan keeps arguing.

Not necessarily a dedicated platform, there are so many multi-role "Deltas". Design is said be easier in construction besides being low cast. There are certain add-on in terms of performance. I believe we can go beyond JFT's limitations in terms of payload, speed and range, considering the experiences of our peers.

 

[Kompromat]

The A/C has tonnes of potential. The problem is the money. Right now a BAE Hawk AJT costs more than a JF-17.

Out rightly going for a 4.5th Gen Aircraft at our own would not be possible, we will have to gradually move forward while capitalizing our experiences both in terms of design and technologies.

My point is that, given the expertise and capabilities we have, we should have our own design, no matter how humble, and should gradually build on that platform.



That is absolutely correct, and plan has to be a medium role plat form.

 

[Tariq Anwar]

You can consider the evolution of F-15, F-16, Su-27, and J-10.

All of them had a very strong technological & industrial base besides decades of experience which resulted in evolution of these a/cs but we are lacking in every aspect.

 

[LKJ86]

All of them had a very strong technological & industrial base besides decades of experience which resulted in evolution of these a/cs but we are lacking in every aspect.

What about the evolution of Mig-21/J-7 in China?
China also was lacking in every aspect at that time.

 

[Tariq Anwar]

What about the evolution of Mig-21/J-7 in China?
China also was lacking in every aspect at that time.

Mig 21 succeeded Mig 15, 17 & 19 whereas J 7 was based on the initial Mig 21s, not an original Chinese design.

 

[LKJ86]

Mig 21 succeeded Mig 15, 17 & 19 whereas J 7 was based on the initial Mig 21s, not an original Chinese design.

You misunderstand what I mean.

 

[Tariq Anwar]

You misunderstand what I mean.

Apologies

 

[LKJ86]

Apologies

The "new version" of J-7 is FTC-2000G.
SAC, CAC and so on had learned a lot from the evolution of J-7.