JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

[Semi-Lobster]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

I'll have to adopt a harsh tone for the remainder of this post : something I've never done on sinodefenceforum before.


If you know how to read and write and use a scroll bar, then you should've seen by now that I maintain that FC-1 belongs to the F-7 lineage, the MiG-21 / F-7 family. It is the last of the J-7 descendants.

It has the J-7's canopy and fuselage (sideways). It has the F-16's flaperon wings and tail. Chengdu added side-intakes just as it did to the J-8 II, which also is from the J-7 family. I still call it the hybrid of a Russian and a US fighter jet.

It's not a boast, but I've posted more about the JF-17's history on this forum than all Pakistanis here have ever had. They don't know that PAF tried to freeze it's avionics back in 1995; it wanted western ones. Just a year before that in 1994, Chengdu company had approached India to collaborate on the LCA but the plan fell through. India and China went on their separate ways.

After 2003, the FC-1 added a DSI bump and LERX --- not to improve agility but because the FC-1 was unable to meet the bare basic requirements of maneuverability.

Have you asked yourself why it has 2 names ? Why does China call it China's First fighter (FC-1), but only Pakistan insists that it is a Joint-Fighter (JF - ) ? It's because it is a Chinese fighter from nose to tail, while Pakistan is only a financier and a lender of F-16 schematics. Have you asked yourself why it is never flown at airshows in China ? Because PLAAF is not inducting it. Why is it continuing tests in Pakistan instead of China ? Why did it complete tests in a record 3 years flat in China ? Because Chengdu did bare basic tests and handed it over to PAF on an "as-is" basis (after all, it's not the J-10 they're developing for the PLAAF).

Now PAF chief Tavner Mahmood said he doesn't like RD-93 and wants a western engine beyond 50 units. No radar has been integrated into it, there is no news of weapons testing, and Mr. Mahmood wants western avionics after the first 50 are deivered.

From all of the above do you even realize the mess the JF-17 is in ?



I maintain that it is a fine aircraft. Indian Air Force's Chief himself praised it (a very frank and honest man). But you have to admit it's current situation --- and it's history also.

I'm not wading into this little debate but just to clarify its called the FC-1 as in 'Fighter China 1', just as the JH-7 is the FBC-1 which stands for 'Fighter/Bomber China 1' anf the JL-9 is the FTC-2000 'Fighter Trainer China 2000'

 

[Indianfighter]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

Then why doesn't Pakistan accept that it is Fighter China -1, or in other terms, why doesn't China agree that it is a Joint - Fighter (JF -) ?

And please don't believe that after all the avionics packages, and an imported engine into it, it still costs a measly $15 mn. These estimates are 8 years old. That's the price IAF is paying for MiG-29 and Mirage-2000 upgrades. $15 mn is the "discounted" price that PLAAF will pay; it's market price is actually closer to $25 mn.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

Then why doesn't Pakistan accept that it is Fighter China -1, or in other terms, why doesn't China agree that it is a Joint - Fighter (JF -) ?

And please don't believe that after all the avionics packages, and an imported engine into it, it still costs a measly $15 mn. These estimates are 8 years old. That's the price IAF is paying for MiG-29 and Mirage-2000 upgrades. $15 mn is the "discounted" price that PLAAF will pay; it's market price is actually closer to $25 mn.

Like I said I'm not getting into this one and I don't remember saying anything at all about the price of the aircraft, I'm just pointing out you said that the FC-1 designation means 'China's First fighter (FC-1)' but it just means 'Fighter China 1' as an export designation.

 

[crobato]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

J-7's canopy? Ridiculous. Even the J-7's canopy changed completely over its various iterations, and even the MiG-21's canopy changed in all its versions. As a matter of fact, the canopy between the latest J-7 and the last MiG-21 has no relationship at all, and both has no relationship with the canopy of the original MiG-21F.

There is also no relationship between the fuselage of the J-7 and the FC-1. The FC-1's fuselage structure has a much wider diameter because it has to contain a turbofan which has a much wider diameter than a turbojet with different airflow characteristics. Not only that, this turbofan is also much heavier, and to retain a certain balance in the plane, components have to be rearranged. The wings are also different, and if you understand the structural relationship between wing and fuselage, the wing roots are stress bearing points, and the fuselage has to be built around the wing roots. The wing roots of the J-7 is much longer than the FC-1, which means the FC-1 has to structurally compensate for the shorter stress bearing point.


The J-8II from the J-7 family? The only thing it shares from the J-7 is the engine, just like the F-16 shares the same engine as the F-15. There is nothing more different structurally with a single engined fighter than a twin engined fighter. A single engined fighter is literally designed around the engine. You can't say that with a twin engine where the airframe has to support the two engines, not form around it. Even the J-8I with the "single" intake has no relationship with the J-7 other than its superficial appearance. That round intake actually has to split into two engine tunnels that has to supply two engines, and building an airframe around those tunnels is such an encompassing affair the airframe has to be completely different.

 

[Baibar of Jalat]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

I'll have to adopt a harsh tone for the remainder of this post : something I've never done on sinodefenceforum before.


If you know how to read and write and use a scroll bar, then you should've seen by now that I maintain that FC-1 belongs to the F-7 lineage, the MiG-21 / F-7 family. It is the last of the J-7 descendants.

It has the J-7's canopy and fuselage (sideways). It has the F-16's flaperon wings and tail. Chengdu added side-intakes just as it did to the J-8 II, which also is from the J-7 family. I still call it the hybrid of a Russian and a US fighter jet.

It's not a boast, but I've posted more about the JF-17's history on this forum than all Pakistanis here have ever had. They don't know that PAF tried to freeze it's avionics back in 1995; it wanted western ones. Just a year before that in 1994, Chengdu company had approached India to collaborate on the LCA but the plan fell through. India and China went on their separate ways.

After 2003, the FC-1 added a DSI bump and LERX --- not to improve agility but because the FC-1 was unable to meet the bare basic requirements of maneuverability.

Have you asked yourself why it has 2 names ? Why does China call it China's First fighter (FC-1), but only Pakistan insists that it is a Joint-Fighter (JF - ) ? It's because it is a Chinese fighter from nose to tail, while Pakistan is only a financier and a lender of F-16 schematics. Have you asked yourself why it is never flown at airshows in China ? Because PLAAF is not inducting it. Why is it continuing tests in Pakistan instead of China ? Why did it complete tests in a record 3 years flat in China ? Because Chengdu did bare basic tests and handed it over to PAF on an "as-is" basis (after all, it's not the J-10 they're developing for the PLAAF).

Now PAF chief Tavner Mahmood said he doesn't like RD-93 and wants a western engine beyond 50 units. No radar has been integrated into it, there is no news of weapons testing, and Mr. Mahmood wants western avionics after the first 50 are deivered.

From all of the above do you even realize the mess the JF-17 is in ?



I maintain that it is a fine aircraft. Indian Air Force's Chief himself praised it (a very frank and honest man). But you have to admit it's current situation --- and it's history also.

JF 17 is in production, right now all Pakistani newspapers have reported. Unless you believe they gonna make fifty, without radars, then put westen radars on later. I not sure what you trying to say there? It has been said everywhere Chinese radar is installed.

I mentioned this before, militaries are traditionally secretive organisations, PAF and PLAAF have a history of secrecy. That could be a reason why no weapon testing was widely advertised. PLAAF, precurement inregards JF 17 has been discussed previously and widely accepted amongst commentators, they are going for J-10.

JF 17

Everything is different; avionics, wings, tail planes, front of plane, above view of plane, engine, canopy, only slight similiarity the fuselage to J-7, but measurements are different. Ofcourse Chengu have learnt from j-7 plane and have used that knowledge in mind but to say its decendent or hybrid is not accurate. I am not pretending to be expert on JF 17 or any other plane, but the evidence speaks volumes. Please note what Crobato says too.

 

[SteelBird]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

I can feel that this thread is getting hotter. I remember it was closed once or twice sometime ago. And it seems like it is going to be closed again soon.

I've just found this pix of a Mig-29 taking off. Holy smoke! That's why PAF don't like a RD-93 which is a derivative of the RD-33 which installed on the Mig-29.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[mean_bird]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

I stand by the fact that the FC-1 is a direct and the final descendant of the F-7 line of aircraft. Others in this lineage include J-8 and J-8 II.

Your comment that just the idea remained after the demise of the Super-7 programme is not true. The basic J-7 frame continued to be taken as a template even in the FC-1 and my observation is that it's remanants are still visible in the form of the canopy, and the distinct fuselage shape from the side.
Whatever, the fact remains that only the name of the Super-7 changed to FC-1 : the task of converting the F-7 frame continued even after the change in nomenclature.

The rest of the history is well known. Also, PAF was looking for western avionics of the FC-1 back in 1995. An article pertaining to this was posted in KeyPub.

lol..so you are going to continue believing that even with a single proof? Good for you...as someone said, there is no point debating if your stance is based on your personal liking rather than some arguments.

Anyway, what I said, as I mentioned, was confirmed to me by Someone directly working for on this project.

As Crobato also mentioned, the design of a single-engine fighter is centered around the engine. So its quite possible the fuselage of the JF-17 has similarity with that of the Mikoyan Concept of a single engine Mig-29. As you can see, both use the same engine. The wings/tail are heavily borrowed from the F-16 because of PAF's liking of its maneuverability. Btw, the connection with the Mikoyan project is not that much of a secret anymore...its also mentioned on the PAC website as "believed to be".

And I stand by the fact that the moon is made of cheese.

No, no.. the moon is a descendant of Cheese and the final derivative of the cheese

DSI intake is not an electronic or metallurgical advancement. Its just a design feature, like canards. Some planes benefit from it, others don't need it. Its not difficult to make for China or anyone else. Its just a bump.

Correct, but its not "just a bump". That bump requires some complex mathematics and computation to figure our its right size, shape, location, etc.

I'll have to adopt a harsh tone for the remainder of this post : something I've never done on sinodefenceforum before.

If you know how to read and write and use a scroll bar, then you should've seen by now that I maintain that FC-1 belongs to the F-7 lineage, the MiG-21 / F-7 family. It is the last of the J-7 descendants.

It has the J-7's canopy and fuselage (sideways). It has the F-16's flaperon wings and tail. Chengdu added side-intakes just as it did to the J-8 II, which also is from the J-7 family. I still call it the hybrid of a Russian and a US fighter jet.

Since when does a canopy become part of basic aircraft design? Shows how much (or little ) you know about aircraft design. Thats not to say that the FC-1/JF-17 has the same canopy with the J-7. Crobato explains it very well, so I don't need to go further.

And maybe you should look at the engine before comparing the fuselage.. both use different engines with different dimensions, so your resemblance of fuselage is totally false.

It's not a boast, but I've posted more about the JF-17's history on this forum than all Pakistanis here have ever had. They don't know that PAF tried to freeze it's avionics back in 1995; it wanted western ones. Just a year before that in 1994, Chengdu company had approached India to collaborate on the LCA but the plan fell through. India and China went on their separate ways.

I dont want to talk about the LCA because we know what have happened to previous threads, but by your logic, is the LCA also a descendant of the Mig 21?

Talks have been going between Chengdu and PAF since 1992/3 as I mentioned...its no secret. But PAF joined this project only in 1998/99.

After 2003, the FC-1 added a DSI bump and LERX --- not to improve agility but because the FC-1 was unable to meet the bare basic requirements of maneuverability.

Seems you have some issues with the JF-17. They designed a prototype, had some problems then resolved it...so whats the point? what are prototypes for? to test whether you on-paper design works in practice or not.

Btw, DSI was added because of poor airflow to engines causing smoke and sub-optimal utilization of engine. And to to make it clear, after the DSI the max speed increased from mach 1.6 to mach 1.8.

Have you asked yourself why it has 2 names ? Why does China call it China's First fighter (FC-1), but only Pakistan insists that it is a Joint-Fighter (JF - ) ? It's because it is a Chinese fighter from nose to tail, while Pakistan is only a financier and a lender of F-16 schematics.

Both Pakistan and China like to have their own nomenclature for anything they assemble/design/ or even put their mere specific personalized requirements. For example,

- JL-8 in china and K-8 in pakistan
- FC-1 in china and JF-17 in pakistan
- J-10 in China and FC-20 in pakistan
- Su-27 in Russia and J-11 in China
- KJ-2000 in China and ZDK-03 in Pakistan

Have you asked yourself why it is never flown at airshows in China ? Because PLAAF is not inducting it.

Because it was still not fully functional as yet. Talk to me it doesn't during the next airshow once serial production starts.

PLAAF induction has been causing much problem in previous threads, I do not want this thread to end up closed...so no comments except wait for WS-13 to mature and see if PLAAF decides for an alternative fighter of the same category or this one. Until that time, no more comments. Besides, China knows what its requirements are; whether they want a light-fighter at all or not. They have the money to afford and maintain heavy fighters so its going to be their tactical decision.

Why is it continuing tests in Pakistan instead of China ?

And why not?

PAF is the primary customer to it matters the most what it thinks and feels about it. PAF also has a good flight testing facility and pilots that will fly it when it gets into service. Besides, weapons integration is to be done in Pakistan using weapons in the PAF warehouse.

Why did it complete tests in a record 3 years flat in China ? Because Chengdu did bare basic tests and handed it over to PAF on an "as-is" basis (after all, it's not the J-10 they're developing for the PLAAF).

Do you want this project to hang over 2 and a half decade too similar to ahem....you know what...project in another country?

First flight - 2003
IOC and serial prodcution - 2009

6 years is a good enough time.

Now PAF chief Tavner Mahmood said he doesn't like RD-93 and wants a western engine beyond 50 units. No radar has been integrated into it, there is no news of weapons testing, and Mr. Mahmood wants western avionics after the first 50 are deivered.
From all of the above do you even realize the mess the JF-17 is in ?

RD-93 is slightly underpowered but most importantly Pakistan doesn't want an Engine that has Russian influence.

False statement, JF-17 uses the KLJ-7 radar.

Weapons testing has already been done and is complete... where have you been living?

PAF wants to go for AESA and radar/ECM /etc are things you can change at will according to customer requirement and availability.

Btw, what does all of this name, radar, testing, etc have to do with your claim of its similarity with J-7? Just trying to show it down?

 

[Indianfighter]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

J-7's canopy? Ridiculous. Even the J-7's canopy changed completely over its various iterations, and even the MiG-21's canopy changed in all its versions. As a matter of fact, the canopy between the latest J-7 and the last MiG-21 has no relationship at all, and both has no relationship with the canopy of the original MiG-21F.

I said that that's my own observation, while you may differ. Compare the image of a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I think they are much similar.

There is also no relationship between the fuselage of the J-7 and the FC-1. The FC-1's fuselage structure has a much wider diameter because it has to contain a turbofan which has a much wider diameter than a turbojet with different airflow characteristics. Not only that, this turbofan is also much heavier, and to retain a certain balance in the plane, components have to be rearranged.

Oh, I'm not talking of exact diameter, but the shape. The shapes are remarkably similar, just as it's wings appear to be detached straight from an F-16.

Similarity is the subject not congruence.

You can't say that with a twin engine where the airframe has to support the two engines, not form around it. Even the J-8I with the "single" intake has no relationship with the J-7 other than its superficial appearance.

The "superficial appearance" is what I'm talking of, or whatever you want to call it like "resemblance" or "look-alike". The J-8 II is a J-8 with side intakes, and this expertise was used extensively in the FC-1.

lol..so you are going to continue believing that even with a single proof? Good for you...as someone said, there is no point debating if your stance is based on your personal liking rather than some arguments.

At least you are no longer claiming that the FC-1 is not an upgrade of J-7.

Correct, but its not "just a bump". That bump requires some complex mathematics and computation to figure our its right size, shape, location, etc.

No one denied that, otherwise J-10, J-11, LCA, Rafale and Gripen would have all featured DSI instead of conventional splitters.

Btw, DSI was added because of poor airflow to engines causing smoke and sub-optimal utilization of engine. And to to make it clear, after the DSI the max speed increased from mach 1.6 to mach 1.8.

There is no clear confirmation of JF-17's top speed. In this forum itself I've pointed out that PAC Kamra's website has 2 different figures for top speed viz. M 16 and M 1.8. Don't give the argument that those are for different versions : PAC Kamra's page doesn't mention the versions.

Even sinodefence is not sure : it says M 1.6 ~ 1.8.

Both Pakistan and China like to have their own nomenclature for anything they assemble/design/ or even put their mere specific personalized requirements. For example,

- JL-8 in china and K-8 in pakistan
- FC-1 in china and JF-17 in pakistan
- J-10 in China and FC-20 in pakistan
- Su-27 in Russia and J-11 in China
- KJ-2000 in China and ZDK-03 in Pakistan

All these are licensed or unlicensed copies. J-11 (or J-11 B ?) was the subject
of a diplomatic row between Russia and China over intellectual property. J-7 was also an unlicensed copy of the MiG-21; a mere name change does not make it Chinese or Pakistani.

RD-93 is slightly underpowered but most importantly Pakistan doesn't want an Engine that has Russian influence.

No. Mahmood said the engine performance is inadequate. You can search out the news report in which he said that.

False statement, JF-17 uses the KLJ-7 radar.

It is supposed to use it. Has it actually ?

Weapons testing has already been done and is complete... where have you been living?

Your own compatriot Munir (who is also on PakDef) has said in this very thread that weapons testing is way behind. No news articles too have appeared that makes this claim.

PAF wants to go for AESA and radar/ECM /etc are things you can change at will according to customer requirement and availability.

Yeah, we've been hearing that since 2007, Selex AESA et. al. That time even I was surprised at PAF's bold moves, but turned out they remained only on paper.

 

[Indianfighter]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

Let's stop debating the J-7 shape and JF-17's shapes. Sinodefence.com says that FC-1 was an upgrade of the J-7, that's all I repeated here.

In addition to that, I feel the canopy and side fuselage shapes are similar. Others disagree, fine now let's halt right here.

 

[PrOeLiTeZ]

Re: JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread 2009

Sinodefence.com itself says that Chengdu continued the Super-7 programme under just another name called FC-1. The objective remained the same, which was upgrading the basic J-7 radically : changing the nose and adding side intakes.

People who disagree can further argue with sinodefence.com. I just said what it says.

if its such a radically designed variant of J-7, then it would be considered a new fighter then if its radically improved. J-7 uses turbojet engines, lacks BVR capabilities, nose air inlets. JF-17/FC-1 uses DSI, turbofan, BVR, multi function capabilities. if your saying that this aircraft is from J-7 but using F-16/F-18 design fused together then from this kind of thinking. The F-22 is an F-15 but redesigned, which is a Su-27, which is a P-51 which is a hot airballoon, cause it can fly. aircrafts only have several significant designs. airintakes on side, nose or belly. only 3 options, wing designs are also limited. nose design are also limited choices. if you havent noticed all fighter jets are influenced from one another and look striking simular. its only emphasised on this aircraft cause its chinese and pakistan origin.