IMO the PAF should take it what it is ... a vast improvement over the venerable types it should replace esp. the A-5C, but nothing more.
Deino
Correct. Paying peanuts and expect so much. Sounds too ridiculous.
IMO the PAF should take it what it is ... a vast improvement over the venerable types it should replace esp. the A-5C, but nothing more.
Deino
Sorry if You misunderstood my post; I meant how long would it take to certify the JF-17 with a new engine, esp. when a new European one (which is out of question like tphuang described) would require a mayor redesign for the aft fuselage ?
It wasn't meant to start a new flame war ... esp. since I know the JF-17 is just reaching operational service.
IMO the PAF should take it what it is ... a vast improvement over the venerable types it should replace esp. the A-5C, but nothing more.
Deino
Correct. Paying peanuts and expect so much. Sounds too ridiculous.
Its not ridiculous, it is the proven 62 year successful history of PAF. They always get the most for the least, its the responsible thing to do for a poor country's armed forces.Correct. Paying peanuts and expect so much. Sounds too ridiculous.
Pak already cancelling the purchase of J-10. After seeing the Pak-AF maiden flight, it feels J-10 cannot counter that.
After all J-10 still a 3 gen fighter even thought its better than FC-1. So, PAK might as well save the money for the J-XX.
Although PAK R&D infrastrcuture not as advance as China but PAK engineers understand better english and able to undrstand the Western spec and communicate better.. Somtimes, Chinese Engineering team in a funk and in a too much close door environment.
So, if PAk can get a hand on some tier 2 engine development that would be helpful.
I think you are mistaking RD-93 for earlier variants of RD-33. If you can show some proof that smoke is a big problem with RD-93, then that's a different story.Sir, i myself am not in favor of an engine change, as we can keep getting spare parts easily through China or from Russia, compared to Western ones. But PAF may not like its whole fleet with only one engine, that also Russian one due to the obvious reasons, but yeah if a Chinese alternate comes up, then may be mixture of both. PAF is for now more then happy with this engine as thrust is fine for its class, but the Russian factor makes PAF nervous, but western ones have the same problem. So we need a good Chinese option to supplement it.
PAF has no complains about this engine and it is a vast improvement compared to the turbo jet engines we had for all the types except F-16s.
As I said, JF-17 has been made a modular structure, thus the other engines of its class have been thought about when this airframe was being designed, so i don;t think much testing would be required or a change in the airframe would be required to make western engine compatible with JF-17. Yeah, do update me plzzz if am wrong.
If next batch of RD-93s come with 90KN+ thrust, and smoke emitting problem solved the way its been done in the RD-33MK series, this would be the perfect choice as, only F-414 series engine would be better.
I am not a big fan of western ones, but we have seen many problems arisen in the russian engines being used by some other air forces of the world.
Plus, i did not started the thread that western engines be used in JF-17. I just gave my opinion, that western ones can be used and in some factors would be superior then russian ones.
you can say that about many air forces out there. It doesn't change the fact that the law of economics applies to everyone.Its not ridiculous, it is the proven 62 year successful history of PAF. They always get the most for the least, its the responsible thing to do for a poor country's armed forces.