What's new

Featured Project Azm: Pakistan's Ambitious Quest to Develop 5th Generation Military Technologies.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) in regards to the new article on flight control systems,

Does that mean the air force should avoid a relatively ambitious design (Canards, V-tail, concealed engines) in which case the plane will need 100 computers just to stay in the air, and play it safe with a design that get's us the flight performance equal to an F-16 (but still a stealth fighter). Or is it the same thing either way?

I don't think PAC should shy away from these design choices. These aren't as "advanced" or difficult to design an FCS for in this day and age. If you can design a full flight control system for a "conventional" aircraft you've already mastered a lot of the difficulties already. It is gaining the ability to design the entire FCS that has a steep learning curve.

I also think it is not one of those technologies you can import and integrate (like engines or radars) as it forms the brain of the aircraft. The FCS is very closely linked with the design (obviously).
 
.
@Bilal Khan (Quwa) in regards to the new article on flight control systems,

Does that mean the air force should avoid a relatively ambitious design (Canards, V-tail, concealed engines) in which case the plane will need 100 computers just to stay in the air, and play it safe with a design that get's us the flight performance equal to an F-16 (but still a stealth fighter). Or is it the same thing either way?
I think for the PAF the foremost challenge is developing a flight control system that will manage an unstable design in general. Yes, all those features would make development more complicated, but the issue right now is that as far as we can see, there's no such program.

If there is a flight control system program, then they'll make decisions based on time and budget, and priorities. But the sense that I am getting is that AZM is a high-performance fighter program, so they might be ambitious with the design, it's just that they need a proper flight control development program full-stop.
 
.
I think for the PAF the foremost challenge is developing a flight control system that will manage an unstable design in general. Yes, all those features would make development more complicated, but the issue right now is that as far as we can see, there's no such program.

If there is a flight control system program, then they'll make decisions based on time and budget, and priorities. But the sense that I am getting is that AZM is a high-performance fighter program, so they might be ambitious with the design, it's just that they need a proper flight control development program full-stop.

After much thought, going full speed into Project AZM Instead of redesigning the JF-17 is probably the best way for PAF to acquire all the FCS and design experience in one go.

Considering China has extensive R&D experience data and experience from the J-10 and J-20, and now that the WS-15 may soon be available for the J-20, perhaps now is the time for Pakistan to look to develop a single engine J-20 variant along the lines of the SAAB FS2020 Design under Project AZM. (SAAB also wanted to implement a DSI inlet, which China already has a lot of experience with)

If powered by the WS-15 it would be a direct competitor with the F-35 for foreign sales, and with a better weapons bay layout it could carry 4 BVR and 2-4 WVR missiles while still retaining a less bulbous cross-section; better lifting body design (although this is just by amateur opinion) therefore balancing maneuverability with stealth.

Going for the WS-15 engine will also address the size limitation issue we have seen with the JF-17 and RD-93, limiting what weapons we can carry under the wings due to low ground clearance and weight limitations.

This could also be a design that the PLAAF could really get behind and be willing to buy, in numbers, as it uses only one high-end engine, and allow it to keep up with F-35 numbers being procured by its neighbors and US forces in the Region, as the US shifts towards confronting China.

The best part is, most of the R&D work and sub-system development has already be done by China on the J-20 and the Single Engine J-10. with the exception of the Pelican tail, a design like this should be able to be built in only a few years. (https://www.researchgate.net/profil...l-concept-featuring-the-skewed-hinge-line.ppm)

If the PLAAF and/or PLANAF accept and acquire this design, it would allow the PAF to have a design that is world class, for decades to come, and if done as a joint project like the JF-17, Pakistan will be able to build a lot of the jet; creating room for potentially $ billions of international sales annually, sort of similar to international partners for the F-35 work sharing agreements.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/swedish-stealth-fighter-concept-fs-2020.118265/

nVtBC.jpg

49724-6e6568ffedeb3033a2cb0180364b9dbc.jpg

8pxuZT45JMRsoZsBMuaQeWeMbRUCFB7lOfFcEly5IBtjWnuySaLyauEQxPppEJB4FqbQAC6be5EinIH8i7d9v4ZpmHgNHLIGl--NC8PxmzDl2snuUNrM5QsprklYI1QIuemX7g



P.S. this design could also be adapted (removing the forward weapons bay to add a lift fan) to allows the PLANAF to have a vertical lift stealth fighter akin to the F-35B for the new Chinese Type 075 LHD ships.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/j-18.htm

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nDErpRFOO_Y/U7iceGNvF7I/AAAAAAAAAzA/AUABjjebS4I/s1600/J+18+Red+Eagle++STOVL+Stealth+Fighter++%281%29.jpg

https://images.app.goo.gl/88fhJagJa5YtmZfJ6

2nd P.S.
This design is also in line with one possible project AZM design we saw some time ago, except this design would be a single engine design; but also sharing the pelican tail design. the single engine design maybe a more affordable option, which could be acquired in large numbers as compared to a heavier twin engine design.

upload_2020-4-24_8-38-50.jpeg


3rd P.S. the pelican tail and DSI inlet is also planned on the future Dassault/European stealth design

 
Last edited:
.
I would also like to add that 70% of the PAEC administration just sits all day at office to scroll Facebook. The officers wait restlessly for the 12 o'clock tea break and lunch time. They go back to their offices 3 hours after the lunch to get their brief cases so they can go back to their home in the Suzuki Cultus given to them by the PAEC.
The PAEC keeps on inducting people with no plan of keeping them busy.

I personally know at least 4 employees of PAEC who went abroad for a PhD and never came back. All this happened in a period of 7 years. They were not working on classified projects, so their families were not harassed or done away with, but you can imagine how fed up they were from the system.

There are thousand upon thousands of technicians and lab engineers who gossip all day about politics, sitting inside empty laboratories. They do this for years upon years, so they can get financial security later in life in the form of pensions.

Mismanagement has taken hold of all Pakistani institutions. There just seems to be no way out. Where ever you see, there is a disappointing story waiting to unfold.

I still dont get how threads on PDF of an indigenous fifth generation fighter can get so elaborate. Maybe I'm a pessimist or ,I think, ......too close to reality.

Sir never like to comment on efficiency or inefficiency but one thing is at least there in sensitive Govt organizations and that is facilitation to employees. As you already have said that few employees went for PHD and never came back. That is dilemma of our country as highly educated people with sound scientific back ground join most sensitive organisations they usually belong to middle class and when they get high paid job offers from abroad many can't resist.
However there are many people who come back and serve nation. It is truly the decision of individual on other hand what feedback I have got is many engineers are working in such organisations as technicians/lower grades, many do not get opportunities to progress due to politics.
 
.
I think for the PAF the foremost challenge is developing a flight control system that will manage an unstable design in general. Yes, all those features would make development more complicated, but the issue right now is that as far as we can see, there's no such program.

If there is a flight control system program, then they'll make decisions based on time and budget, and priorities. But the sense that I am getting is that AZM is a high-performance fighter program, so they might be ambitious with the design, it's just that they need a proper flight control development program full-stop.

Bilal I think the Block 3 is an unstable design. I'm sure someday this will be confirmed but it can only be guessed with full quadruplex FBW.

The big challenge here is to create a plane ideally suited to fight at 30,000 feet to 40,000 feet. The F-16 starts to lose to Eurofighters beyond 20,000 feet.

A higher flying fighter raining BVR down gets the advantage in the BVR game. High-high profile - high speed and high altitude.

This is possible only with a delta design or something like the PAKFA.

Without a strong engine, this will be hard. I'm guessing the base has to be something like a twin RD-93 equivalent.

To achieve this I don't think internal weapons bays are going to be possible unless they are for a very small and limited number of BVRAAMs.

I think PAF has experience both with the FBW of the JF-17 and with the Mirage controls. The safer path is to go with a conventional layout mimicing the control authority of the JFT but the delta and delta canard designs would give a 20% improvement in efficiency.
 
.
ehh... Guys, I don't know Chinese, but this vid was recently uploaded on sina.

Link to video: https://k.sina.cn/article_5941687237_m16226f3c503300ri9v.html

Translation: "Sea Four Generations" finally appeared! FC-31 is a positive result ...

<-------------------------------------------------------->

FC-31 will soon become a carrier-based aircraft?
The fuselage usher in major changes, painted in navy gray!

All along, the debate about who is the fourth generation of stealth carrier aircraft in China between the F-20 and FC31 is enduring. However, recently the FC31 Falcon verification machine suddenly appeared in a new coat. Could it be that China stealth carrier aircraft The battle finally came to fruition?

Judging from the photos exposed this time, there is still a considerable gap between the current FC31 Falcon Eagle verification machine and the true carrier-based aircraft standard. When the Falcon Eagle debuted, people found that the front landing gear of this verification machine used a two-wheel structure. This design can allow the fighter to withstand more descent rates, and it is indeed convenient for the ship to transform.

1000

But if you want to become a carrier-based aircraft, you don't just need to modify the landing gear. Take the wing, for example, due to the limited hangar and deck space of the aircraft carrier, the fighter wing needs to have a folding function to save space. The exposure of the Falcon verification machine can be clearly seen. Segment flaps are not two-stage flaps designed to facilitate folding.

The second is the wing area. If you want to put the fighter on board, there is an indicator that is very important, that is, the landing speed, or the stability of low altitude and low speed. Due to the limited length of the aircraft carrier deck, the distance that can be left for the carrier aircraft to decelerate is very short. They all rely on the blocking cable to force the carrier aircraft to slow down.

However, the pulling force that the blocking cable and the carrier aircraft can withstand is also limited. As we all know, the higher the speed, the greater the kinetic energy carried by the object. This requires that the landing speed of the carrier aircraft cannot be too fast, otherwise the blocking cable will be broken. Or the body of the carrier aircraft itself.

And if the stability at low altitude and low speed is good, it is more convenient for the pilot to control the landing of the aircraft more smoothly.

The most critical point for slowing down the landing speed of the fighter is to increase the lift. At present, there are two methods. For the conventional layout carrier aircraft such as Falcon, it is to increase the wing area. The other is the use of duck wing aircraft, fighters with duck wings have better innate low-speed performance. For example, the prototype of China's J-15 fighter, Su 33, is Su 27 to add a pair of winglets to increase the lift of the head to reduce the landing speed.

Taking the US F35 fighter as an example, the US Navy increased the wing area of the basic model F35A fighter from 42.7 square meters to 57.6 square meters in order to allow the F35 fighter to board the ship, which is 30% more. This is the US Navy ’s F35c fighter. .

Another point lies in the side magazine. Currently, the Falcon verification machine that is publicly disclosed generally does not have a side magazine design, which means that it cannot be hung on short-range air-to-air missiles. The US Navy F35c carrier aircraft also does not have a side magazine. This leads to F35c if you want to mount AIM9x fighting bullets, you must use an external rack, which is extremely inconvenient and not to mention, it will also destroy stealth performance.

The Falcon itself, as a twin-engine medium engine, takes up too much space on its two engines, and its belly magazine capacity is limited. If there is no side magazine, the weapons that it can mount will be greatly reduced. At the same time, the engine is also a big problem. If the Falcon verification machine can meet the above conditions for becoming a carrier-based aircraft, it will inevitably have a consequence that the weight of the fighter will increase significantly.

Taking the US F35 as an example, the empty weight of its basic model F35A is only about 13.1 tons, while the empty weight of the F35c fighter as a carrier aircraft suddenly increased to 15.6 tons, which is more than 2.5 tons! According to public information, the Falcon Verifier has an empty weight of 12.5 tons. If the above improvements are made, the weight may not be lower than F35c.

But the problem is that the Falcon Eagle currently uses the Russian RD93 engine, and the single thrust is only about 8.3 tons, while the F35c fighter ’s F135 engine has a single thrust of more than 18 tons, which means that the thrust of the two Falcon eagle engines together It ’s no match for the F35c. Now the mobility of the F35 series of fighters has been questioned. Unless the Falcon replaces the engine with a higher thrust, its mobility will only be worse than that of the F35c.

In fact, judging from these conditions, the J-20 is indeed more suitable for boarding than the Falcon. Its changes are also the smallest. The J-20 magazine is large enough, the fuel tank is large enough, and the low-altitude and low-speed performance is also very good. Improvements in landing gear and corrosion protection are required.

In general, Brother Hu believes that if you want to transform the current Falcon verification machine into a qualified carrier-based aircraft, one needs to increase the wing area while allowing the wings to fold, and the other is to need a larger For the magazine, the third is to replace the engine with greater thrust. Taking into account the range problem, it is even necessary to enlarge the structure of the fuselage to ensure sufficient internal oil space.

However, after such an improvement, I am afraid that Falcon will bid farewell to the positioning of the mid-size aircraft. This is the case with the F35c fighter opposite the ocean. Although it is a single release, its maximum take-off weight has reached 31.8 tons, which is almost the same as the J-15. There is nothing wrong with the heavy machine. So the question is, after such a big change, can Falcon Eagle be called Falcon Eagle? (Shun)

https://new.qq.com/omn/20200422/20200422A05UJG00.html?pc
 
.
This could also be a design that the PLAAF could really get behind and be willing to buy, in numbers, as it uses only one high-end engine, and allow it to keep up with F-35 numbers being procured by its neighbors and US forces in the Region, as the US shifts towards confronting China.

If the PLAAF and/or PLANAF accept and acquire this design, it would allow the PAF to have a design that is world class, for decades to come,
In China's 4th-generation fighters, SAC products heavyweight J-11/15/16, and CAC products mediumweight J-10.
In China's 5th-generation fighters, CAC products heavyweight J-20, and SAC products mediumweight J-XX based on FC-31.

So, PLAAF and PLAN won't consider other choices.
 
.
For those related to Project AMZ, I would like to strongly recommend something which I hope has already been adopted but IF NOT, then the Managers of this project seriously need to consider adding this aspect to this Project. It is the inclusion of 3D Printing. Before you dismiss this, Specially within Aerospace, 3D Printing has revolutionise the manufacturing process by collapsing the time between design and production, giving designers the ability to create radical new products with less waste and at a fraction of the cost. Hence inclusion of 3D has the ability to reduce the project time of AZM to produce a quality 5G Fighter. This is not fiction but the reality where Leading aerospace companies has adopted 3D.

Below is a link to one of the leaders in 3D.

https://www.stratasys.com/
you are on the spot. I agree that this 3d technology can help in putting concept into physucal reality for testing.
.
we wont get any access from the West so china is our best bet
chinese have some experience in that field so we can seek that
 
.
In China's 4th-generation fighters, SAC products heavyweight J-11/15/16, and CAC products mediumweight J-10.
In China's 5th-generation fighters, CAC products heavyweight J-20, and SAC products mediumweight J-XX based on FC-31.

So, PLAAF and PLAN won't consider other choices.

Currently

Perhaps not at present, but if PLAAF or PLANAF reject the FC-31, there will be a need for a medium weight 5th gen fighter to be procured in numbers. The commonality of the WS-15 engine and a similar design will make pilot training and maintaince a lot easier, for what would be essentially a single engine J-20.
 
. . .
you are on the spot. I agree that this 3d technology can help in putting concept into physucal reality for testing.
.
we wont get any access from the West so china is our best bet
chinese have some experience in that field so we can seek that
A MUCH more serious bottleneck is expertise in flight dynamics and flight control systems.
https://quwa.org/2020/04/19/why-pac-needs-in-house-development-of-flight-control-systems-2/

I've heard some not so great stories from people directly involved with Azm.
 
.
please clarify
Do you mean the PLAAF and/or the PLANAF have accepted or rejected the FC-31?
PLAAF and PLAN would choose J-XX based on FC-31, and there are no other options already.

BTW, the FC-31 V1 and V2 that we have seen are just technology demonstrators, not prototypes.
 
.
.
What are some main issues those individuals pointed out working on the Azm? If this project is ground up and running into hurdles can't they just take the FC-31 V2 and imporve upon it?

Briefly:
We have little or no human resource and infrastructure to absorb (let alone design) flight control systems at PAC. PAC is lagging behind places even like AWC right now . This has some dangerous consequences:
1. Development of "new" systems (including FGFA, high-speed target drones, MALE UAV) will be "safe" and old school (70s era designs) that didn't need flight control systems.
2. Slow, failure prone development cycles that will run into cost overruns.
3. PAF will lose faith in PAC and just buy off the shelf solutions (kind of like what happened with LCA in India).
4. Some dangerous consequences for the JF-17 program in terms of freedom to integrate (the less said the better).
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom