PAF at Zhuhai Airshow 2018

[Falcon26]

K-8 assembly line in Pakistan has shut down since all resources diverted for JF-17 manufacture. PAF was evaluating LIFT aircraft when JF-17B was not intended but since there was a need from some prospective clients it was eventually developed and the JF-17B can meet the lift role for PAF, no need for another platform. China will prefer marketing JL-9 because of F-7 commonality and aircraft carrier training capability whereas JL-15 is good for training of future generation aircraft pilots.

Isn’t this an opportunity to bring in the private sector and divert manufacturing of K-8 to them while PAC concentrated on JF-17 & Project AZM? @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

K-8 assembly line in Pakistan has shut down since all resources diverted for JF-17 manufacture. PAF was evaluating LIFT aircraft when JF-17B was not intended but since there was a need from some prospective clients it was eventually developed and the JF-17B can meet the lift role for PAF, no need for another platform. China will prefer marketing JL-9 because of F-7 commonality and aircraft carrier training capability whereas JL-15 is good for training of future generation aircraft pilots.

Alan Warnes said the PAF doesn't want to use JF-17B as LIFT (though the previous CAS looked at it, the current one wants a LIFT-first aircraft).

 

[mingle]

What r potential candidates for lift role? Yaks, Hawks or L159 ??

 

[Thorough Pro]

Assuming you have the required funds, would you invest in the project with max 30/40 samples sold to PAF (besides paying kickbacks to decision makers) in a decade? if you said yes, then probably there some fools with looted money who might agree to do that, no one with their hard-earned money will ever invest in a limited scope project.

Isn’t this an opportunity to bring in the private sector and divert manufacturing of K-8 to them while PAC concentrated on JF-17 & Project AZM? @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[Quwa]

Assuming you have the required funds, would you invest in the project with max 30/40 samples sold to PAF (besides paying kickbacks to decision makers) in a decade? if you said yes, then probably there some fools with looted money who might agree to do that, no one with their hard-earned money will ever invest in a limited scope project.

IMO investors would be interested in the JF-17 and, to a greater degree, Project Azm. With those two (esp. the latter) you have the prospect of securing business for 100+ fighters over a 10-15 year period plus support and maintenance. The issue with that is if our stakeholders are comfortable letting the private sector see sensitive or proprietary technology. There's already a trust deficit between the armed forces and private sector. Ideally, we'd have someone come up and propose their own AAM, AGM, etc designs to the PAF.

 

[Thorough Pro]

What is your opinion based on? a feasibility of investment vs. returns or just a gut feel

IMO investors would be interested in the JF-17 and, to a greater degree, Project Azm. With those two (esp. the latter) you have the prospect of securing business for 100+ fighters over a 10-15 year period plus support and maintenance. The issue with that is if our stakeholders are comfortable letting the private sector see sensitive or proprietary technology. There's already a trust deficit between the armed forces and private sector. Ideally, we'd have someone come up and propose their own AAM, AGM, etc designs to the PAF.

 

[ghazi52]

 

[serenity]

Does no smoke from engine in this year's Zhuhai show of JF-17 mean that it is using a different engine? RD-93 is very smoky and even the improvement of that one is still quite smoky. Could it be using a Chinese modified RD-93 or WS-13? Which is basically RD-33 based copy. I believe the WS-13 have solved the smoke problem from rumors a long time ago. Definitely WS-19 is not ready so it is either RD-93 further improvement or WS-13.

 

[LKJ86]

Does no smoke from engine in this year's Zhuhai show of JF-17 mean that it is using a different engine? RD-93 is very smoky and even the improvement of that one is still quite smoky. Could it be using a Chinese modified RD-93 or WS-13? Which is basically RD-33 based copy. I believe the WS-13 have solved the smoke problem from rumors a long time ago. Definitely WS-19 is not ready so it is either RD-93 further improvement or WS-13.

https://m.weibo.cn/2288735533/4308349035782912

 

[GriffinsRule]

Does no smoke from engine in this year's Zhuhai show of JF-17 mean that it is using a different engine? RD-93 is very smoky and even the improvement of that one is still quite smoky. Could it be using a Chinese modified RD-93 or WS-13? Which is basically RD-33 based copy. I believe the WS-13 have solved the smoke problem from rumors a long time ago. Definitely WS-19 is not ready so it is either RD-93 further improvement or WS-13.

No it does not mean any of that. Its been already answered in threads a couple of times. Different fuel mix, same Russian engine.

 

[khanasifm]

Even f-16 at certain time show such smoke one good example last pic of 4 block 52, one of the Ac not all had smoke issue and it’s posted on this forum

All the time keep hearing from paper tigers smoke and power while paf is more than satisfied with current rd-93

It’s does not mean they will not go for better version like with full fdacs and better consumption or thrust

 

[Windjammer]

 

[MastanKhan]

Does no smoke from engine in this year's Zhuhai show of JF-17 mean that it is using a different engine? RD-93 is very smoky and even the improvement of that one is still quite smoky. Could it be using a Chinese modified RD-93 or WS-13? Which is basically RD-33 based copy. I believe the WS-13 have solved the smoke problem from rumors a long time ago. Definitely WS-19 is not ready so it is either RD-93 further improvement or WS-13.

Hi,

Would you be kind enough to explain what is the disadvantage of visible smoke---.

 

[serenity]

Hi,

Would you be kind enough to explain what is the disadvantage of visible smoke---.

Much more visible. Pilots can see for maybe 30km far if sky is clear. My question isn't insulting to JF-17. It is just theorizing whether another engine other than RD-93 is used. Other members showed it is also smoky in performance in other shots and it should be same engine. There are many drawbacks with smoky engine. Main one is visibility. Of course this depends how smoky it is. This level is definitely acceptable in most cases because normal long range fight means cruising and no smoke and only close range fight will have engine going incomplete combustion and cause some smoke occasionally which is okay since already close range.

 

[MastanKhan]

Much more visible. Pilots can see for maybe 30km far if sky is clear. My question isn't insulting to JF-17. It is just theorizing whether another engine other than RD-93 is used. Other members showed it is also smoky in performance in other shots and it should be same engine. There are many drawbacks with smoky engine. Main one is visibility. Of course this depends how smoky it is. This level is definitely acceptable in most cases because normal long range fight means cruising and no smoke and only close range fight will have engine going incomplete combustion and cause some smoke occasionally which is okay since already close range.

Hi,

Pilots cannot see diddley sh-it ( smoke trail) travelling at 500 knots---.

You want to fight an air war and you want to wait for a clear day to see the smoke---.

Your post is getting from silly to stupid---. You are talking absolutely clueless---. The pilot is busy looking at his instruments---he has his dark shades on---how can he distinguish between thin clouds and smoke.

You kids really don't think and just post brainless comments---.