RedMercury
Junior Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
Not very nice to precondition your R&D partners.
Not very nice to precondition your R&D partners.
JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
Thats true, also the PAF had a requirement that the plane should be flexible enough to accomadate foreign avionics and weapons. Nonetheless, we havn't seen anything that suggest China even offered any S/MRAAM at all, and definitely nothing saying that the PAF was interested in Chinese missles. Which strikes me as strange because the JF-17 is all about low cost, and Chinese missles (although downgraded for export) would be cheaper than advanced European missles, yet be approaching in capability.
Thats true, also the PAF had a requirement that the plane should be flexible enough to accomadate foreign avionics and weapons. Nonetheless, we havn't seen anything that suggest China even offered any S/MRAAM at all, and definitely nothing saying that the PAF was interested in Chinese missles. Which strikes me as strange because the JF-17 is all about low cost, and Chinese missles (although downgraded for export) would be cheaper than advanced European missles, yet be approaching in capability.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
huh? It was always talked about using SD-10 and PL-9C as the missiles for JF-17. Frankly, this article says nothing we don't already know, which is PAF is exploring Western options.
huh? It was always talked about using SD-10 and PL-9C as the missiles for JF-17. Frankly, this article says nothing we don't already know, which is PAF is exploring Western options.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
1st of all, 4 the billionth time there has been no ToT with the F-16. General Dynamics & later Lockheed-Martin teams kept on visiting the F-16s in Pakistan. They used to go through even the broken ones. They still visit the fighters.
2ndly, China can't force Pakistan to go for Chinese technology, even if it can it won't. Thats one of the good features of Pak-China friendship - "Understanding" of each other's situations, requirements etc (& also not to interfere in each other's internal matters). That is why Chinese President said China is not against PAF buying F-16s, we know their requirement.
This is just my guess but the purchase of western-avionics is only for PAF JF-17s. As for the export JF-17s PAC would produce will use Chinese avionics, unless someone really insists on having high cost advance JF-17s. On the other hand I also believe that some PAF JF-17s would be equipped with Chinese avionics & weapons.
Another reason for PAF looking into western & especially French avionics in to equip JF-17 with maritime-strike avionics to replace the Mirage-V series, which happens to be a French product.
1st of all, 4 the billionth time there has been no ToT with the F-16. General Dynamics & later Lockheed-Martin teams kept on visiting the F-16s in Pakistan. They used to go through even the broken ones. They still visit the fighters.
2ndly, China can't force Pakistan to go for Chinese technology, even if it can it won't. Thats one of the good features of Pak-China friendship - "Understanding" of each other's situations, requirements etc (& also not to interfere in each other's internal matters). That is why Chinese President said China is not against PAF buying F-16s, we know their requirement.
This is just my guess but the purchase of western-avionics is only for PAF JF-17s. As for the export JF-17s PAC would produce will use Chinese avionics, unless someone really insists on having high cost advance JF-17s. On the other hand I also believe that some PAF JF-17s would be equipped with Chinese avionics & weapons.
Another reason for PAF looking into western & especially French avionics in to equip JF-17 with maritime-strike avionics to replace the Mirage-V series, which happens to be a French product.
asif iqbal
Banned Idiot
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
You guys are getting me wrong. I wasn't suggesting it would be a good idea for China to try to squeeze money out of pakistan. Now, after doing some research, I found out some of the material I posted was incorrect or based off of incorrect info, and I apologize. I understand export model SD-10 was out there, I just never read up on it being offered to Pakistan (until now).
As for the stuff about the F-16, SABRE is right, China did not obtain one. But thats not to exclude Chinese engineers also "visiting" the aircraft. As for the French missiles, Id expect preventing the Chinese from getting to them would be much harder. I mean, how are you gonna prove that this certain missile was given to China and not test fired?
You guys are getting me wrong. I wasn't suggesting it would be a good idea for China to try to squeeze money out of pakistan. Now, after doing some research, I found out some of the material I posted was incorrect or based off of incorrect info, and I apologize. I understand export model SD-10 was out there, I just never read up on it being offered to Pakistan (until now).
As for the stuff about the F-16, SABRE is right, China did not obtain one. But thats not to exclude Chinese engineers also "visiting" the aircraft. As for the French missiles, Id expect preventing the Chinese from getting to them would be much harder. I mean, how are you gonna prove that this certain missile was given to China and not test fired?
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
SD-10 has been on the offer to Pakistan for a quite time, in fact some reports suggest that Pakistan has a share in the missile - I would rather say China offered Pakistan or Pakistan asked China for ToT of SD-10. I am quite sure that some PAF JF-17s would be equipped with Chinese Radar & Missiles, at least the early versions would be - & those early versions would stay equipped with Chinese avionics & weapons, hence PAF will be going for SD-10.
Chinese would require an F-16 or its blue prints to be available to them as a subject of study at all times, if they have to copy anything from it. The J-10 is not derived from F-16 but Israeli Levi (which itself was derived from F-16). But J-10 is not entirely Levi. As for JF-17 being Pak-China version of F-16, well 1st I don't think thats the case even though F-16 may have been the inspiration. For what flowed from F-16 into JF-17 project was because of the PAC engineers knowledge of F-16. They have it around all the time (at least 4 broken down F-16s). So when they worked on JF-17 with CAC there was no doubt that they would carry their experience with Mirage-III, Mirage-V & F-16 into the project.
SD-10 has been on the offer to Pakistan for a quite time, in fact some reports suggest that Pakistan has a share in the missile - I would rather say China offered Pakistan or Pakistan asked China for ToT of SD-10. I am quite sure that some PAF JF-17s would be equipped with Chinese Radar & Missiles, at least the early versions would be - & those early versions would stay equipped with Chinese avionics & weapons, hence PAF will be going for SD-10.
Chinese would require an F-16 or its blue prints to be available to them as a subject of study at all times, if they have to copy anything from it. The J-10 is not derived from F-16 but Israeli Levi (which itself was derived from F-16). But J-10 is not entirely Levi. As for JF-17 being Pak-China version of F-16, well 1st I don't think thats the case even though F-16 may have been the inspiration. For what flowed from F-16 into JF-17 project was because of the PAC engineers knowledge of F-16. They have it around all the time (at least 4 broken down F-16s). So when they worked on JF-17 with CAC there was no doubt that they would carry their experience with Mirage-III, Mirage-V & F-16 into the project.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
Oh come on, now your putting words in my mouth. I wasn't trying to say at all that either J-10 or JF-17 was copied or derived from F-16. I was simply stating that Chinese engineers may have been able to study working or broken F-16s in Pakistan. I didn't even say that they were trying copy anything. As an entirely hypothetical scenario, pretend that Chinese engineers were having difficulties controlling the heating of the WS-10A. While studying an F-16, they noticed a small box attachment on the jet's engine that uses a special fluid to control heat. The Chinese engineers then investigate the box and report all they found out to Woshan. Woshan then tries to implement something similar. Thats it. No copying, no Tot. Besides, Pakistan's F-16s are A/B's from the 80's and are behind modern chinese aerospace technology. (Although they may have been of help if they were studied on the late 80's/early 90s)
In addtion, some of the F-16 knowledge surely was passed on with the cooperation of the JF-17 project.
Oh come on, now your putting words in my mouth. I wasn't trying to say at all that either J-10 or JF-17 was copied or derived from F-16. I was simply stating that Chinese engineers may have been able to study working or broken F-16s in Pakistan. I didn't even say that they were trying copy anything. As an entirely hypothetical scenario, pretend that Chinese engineers were having difficulties controlling the heating of the WS-10A. While studying an F-16, they noticed a small box attachment on the jet's engine that uses a special fluid to control heat. The Chinese engineers then investigate the box and report all they found out to Woshan. Woshan then tries to implement something similar. Thats it. No copying, no Tot. Besides, Pakistan's F-16s are A/B's from the 80's and are behind modern chinese aerospace technology. (Although they may have been of help if they were studied on the late 80's/early 90s)
In addtion, some of the F-16 knowledge surely was passed on with the cooperation of the JF-17 project.
Violet Oboe
Junior Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
Of course China's aerospace industry got all information about F-16 it considered necessary quite some time ago but singling out Pakistan as the main ´culprit´(...from US view) would be probably incorrect.
Indeed Sabre noted China's cooperation with Israel nevertheless China has also excellent politico-military relations with Egypt and Turkey. Both of their airforces have large fleets of F-16 (...some of TAF's were even built in Turkey!); ... so figure out!:coffee:
Of course China's aerospace industry got all information about F-16 it considered necessary quite some time ago but singling out Pakistan as the main ´culprit´(...from US view) would be probably incorrect.
Indeed Sabre noted China's cooperation with Israel nevertheless China has also excellent politico-military relations with Egypt and Turkey. Both of their airforces have large fleets of F-16 (...some of TAF's were even built in Turkey!); ... so figure out!:coffee:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
All this talk that the J-10 and/or the FC-1 are copies of the F-16 or Lavi is wishful thinking. For the one thing especially for the J-10 is that it's bigger and nothing inside is anything like the F-16 or Lavi. It may look similar, but nothing inside is the same. What did China learn for the construction of the J-10 from this supposed access to F-16s in another country when nothing inside is like an F-16. The shape? They didn't need to visit another country with F-16s to do that. They just could've gone and bought a book with pictures of the F-16. So is that a copy when it's bigger and nothing inside is like an F-16?
The reason why the US thinks China stole the design plans of the W-88 nuclear warhead was because a guy for some strange unknown reason walked into the US embassy in Beijing and just dropped off a simple drawing of it at a desk and then left never to be seen from again. Not a copy of blue prints. Just a drawing. Pictures of the W-88 warhead are out in the public. How hard is it to draw a copy of it to scale in exact dimensions?
All this talk that the J-10 and/or the FC-1 are copies of the F-16 or Lavi is wishful thinking. For the one thing especially for the J-10 is that it's bigger and nothing inside is anything like the F-16 or Lavi. It may look similar, but nothing inside is the same. What did China learn for the construction of the J-10 from this supposed access to F-16s in another country when nothing inside is like an F-16. The shape? They didn't need to visit another country with F-16s to do that. They just could've gone and bought a book with pictures of the F-16. So is that a copy when it's bigger and nothing inside is like an F-16?
The reason why the US thinks China stole the design plans of the W-88 nuclear warhead was because a guy for some strange unknown reason walked into the US embassy in Beijing and just dropped off a simple drawing of it at a desk and then left never to be seen from again. Not a copy of blue prints. Just a drawing. Pictures of the W-88 warhead are out in the public. How hard is it to draw a copy of it to scale in exact dimensions?
- Status