帅的一匹
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2012
- Messages
- 12,820
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
When it comes to the design of JF17b, it must pertain to the PAF's budget. if china can produce something like J20, it must can design a wholly reinvented cool JF17b. Cost, cost,cost and cost.if PAF says we want a longer JF17b dual seater with WS10 engine, we also can make it as long as enough money. Also if they insist on a canopy open backward fancy like F16 we also can do it, refer to J10s. This craft is fruit of Pakistan airforce input, per their requirement. So for that reason, no more bash is necessary.Hi,
You are correct about the lack of dual seater design at the time of conception.
It was of utmost idiocy---when the Paf did not have a dual seater to begin with---.
That is why I keep saying---there is no one to really challenge the decision of the heirarchy---no one has the courage to speak up.
This aircraft should have been produced along with the single seater to begin with---. Now it is a catching up game---and making many a COMPROMISES.
I wrote one time---that the JF17 in itself has a compromising design due to a short wheel strut---it gives little clearance for a Ra'ad ALCM---and someone mentioned that the F16 has a similar clearance.
To that gentleman---at the time F16 was designed---there were no ALCM's to be launched by an aircraft like the F16---so the clearance was never in question---.
It's a trainer jet, not a dedicated bomb fighter.
I will choose to concentrate on BLK3.