JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

[scorpioking]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

Sorry for the way I used, I just try to show how strong the confidence is in China forums for the engines issue, it really is a joke in those forums. The number of fighters is various depending on from what sources. we will see it by the end of the year.

 

[SteelBird]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

I noticed the photo above, there is no smoke tail which used to be another big concern of the JF-17 beside the engine issue. Is the photo PSed or they have solved that problem?

 

[maglomanic]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

I noticed the photo above, there is no smoke tail which used to be another big concern of the JF-17 beside the engine issue. Is the photo PSed or they have solved that problem?

The photo is from ISPR.

Look behind the gray aircraft, it does have that long smoke tail

 

[Kilo636]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

The photo is from ISPR.

Look behind the gray aircraft, it does have that long smoke tail

Almost invisible. By the way,the colorful one has no smoke and they are flying at same speed. Does that means it is both using different engines(WS-13 and RD-93)?

 

[coolieno99]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

... With the J-10, do you still think the PLAAF wants this aircraft? They might be forced to buy it for political reasons....

The JF-17 has a smaller RCS(smaller frontal area and DSI intake) than the J-10, and it can launched the SD-10 BVR missile, giving it the same punch as a heavy fighter. Actually at BVR range, the JF-17 would probably have advantage over the larger fighter.

 

[kursed]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

FC-1/JF-17 over Pakistan..Bear with the fly past of F-16s, Mirages, F-7Ps and A-5s. It's towards the end of the video.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[crobato]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

Why would I have something against the JF-17? Its a good low cost aircraft. It just that its development is contigent upon Russian foreign policy. This is a similar problem with multi-national weapons development. You can't satisfy every body. Look at the Horizon Frigate and Eurofighter, at least one nation dropped out. With the J-10, do you still think the PLAAF wants this aircraft? They might be forced to buy it for political reasons. Those just highlights the problems with joint developments. The JF-17 has those problems, and is further complicated by the fact that it uses Russian engines. Russian Engines are contingent upon Russian foreign policy.

You need to calm down.

True but the J-10 is also contigent with Russian policy till it gets the domestic engine. But that only puts it in the same boat as the future JF-17 which may also get a domestic engine of its own.

I'm pretty sure 101 and 102 are not PT 04 and 06. They are brand new aircraft. On the other hand, I'm not that convinced they're completely past the prototype stage considering 101 and 102 have an entirely new radar from the previous prototypes, with very little airborne testing to go along with it. Everytime you have a new set of radar, you need a new set of testing to go along with it, while junking the previous data done with the former radar. Since Pakistan is still evaluating Western radar sets, even though Thales RC400 and Grifo S7 proposals have kicked the bucket, it is by no means final, and you need finality before you declare a true serial production standard.

I have a feeling that the planes still have to go back to China for further testing on the radar, along with weapons integration. In the meantime, the new plant may probably begin an early run to try to produce some planes.

To be honest, the decision for a late, sudden change of radar is quite a surprise. I'm still waiting for more news and insights to this, whether this is an overall change---for both PLAAF and PAF JF-17s, or just confined to PAF alone with the the PLAAF using a different radar set. Although there is no such thing in the world, not the Russians or the US, when an export jet uses a radar from a different manufacturer from the domestic version.

 

[maglomanic]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

Crobato,
Just one thing to add regarding serial production. I guess they are pretty sure it's gonna be a chinese radar for the first run of 50. They will probably try to switch to Standard-II from their onwards.

P.S did you check the clip of flypast?Smoke is still there. It did a bunch of turns and kinda pulling up towards the end of the clip.would like your comments

 

[crobato]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

I don't really see the smoke so much, and I don't think it smokes enough to be an issue. My guess if they are able to incorporate a FADEC in future planes, they could eliminate even those tiny wisp.

Even if it's a Chinese radar on the first 50 planes, its still a brand new, very little tested radar on 101 and 102, since the testing on PT04 and 06 no longer counts.

 

[Pointblank]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread

I don't really see the smoke so much, and I don't think it smokes enough to be an issue. My guess if they are able to incorporate a FADEC in future planes, they could eliminate even those tiny wisp.

Even if it's a Chinese radar on the first 50 planes, its still a brand new, very little tested radar on 101 and 102, since the testing on PT04 and 06 no longer counts.

A smoking gas turbine engine indicates an issue with the engine's fuel rate control or lubrication oil is leaking into the combustion chamber, or poor air flow, or a poorly designed combustion chamber in general, or a combination of these issues.

Unfortunately, the Klimov RD-33 engine (of which the RD-93 engine is developed from) is much maligned for a poor thrust to weight ratio and being in general, a smokey engine. This is something the Russians will have to work on, as it indicates an problem with clean combustion of fuel in the combustion chamber of the engine.