JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Jeff Head said:
Dizast, they already have...and they did so when it wasn't free.

And through 2014 they continued to spend to get more and upgrade the F-16s they have. They are very capable, relevant, dangerous aircraft to this day...and Pakistan has quite a few of them.

Last year Turkey delivered the last four upgrades they were doing for Pakistan. Also last year Pakistan took delivery of a squadron of F-16s from Jordan.

The 76 F-16s that Pakistan has and has upgraded represent their existing front line, modern force.

Now, the Thunders are going to substantially compliment this force...but they are not meant to supplant the Falcons. They are replacing other older Chinese and French aircraft.
Click to expand...
Mainly many Mirage III/V and the more old J/F-7 to replace about 300...
 
thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
Franklin said:
I thought the block II upgrades were quite substantial with upgrades on the software, avionics, radar, EW suites, refueling probe and many other things. I was hoping that the block II would be using the more powerful RD-93MA engines but that didn't happen. So that was a disappointment for me.
Click to expand...

Forgive me, but I'm a bit old fashioned :D For me block upgrades mean you going to change hardware , not just software . Because to change software you don't need to reorganize production in factory, you just apply them on existing computers .
As for avionics, as far as I know radar remained the same , don't know much about EW suite (it's classified ) , IRST is still not integrated (internally) ... I don't know , somehow I expected more . Personal opinion, of course .
 
F

Franklin

Captain
thunderchief said:
Forgive me, but I'm a bit old fashioned :D For me block upgrades mean you going to change hardware , not just software . Because to change software you don't need to reorganize production in factory, you just apply them on existing computers .
As for avionics, as far as I know radar remained the same , don't know much about EW suite (it's classified ) , IRST is still not integrated (internally) ... I don't know , somehow I expected more . Personal opinion, of course .
Click to expand...
But there is a new radar the KLJ-7v2 and you add to that things like a datalink system that it didn't have before, refueling probe, extra hardpoint, better EW package and some say more composite material in its airframe. All of these are hardware upgrades.
 
thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
Franklin said:
But there is a new radar the KLJ-7v2 and you add to that things like a datalink system that it didn't have before, refueling probe, extra hardpoint, better EW package and some say more composite material in its airframe. All of these are hardware upgrades.
Click to expand...

I'm not entirely certain about KLJ-7 V1 and V2 . According to some sources V2 is already installed in Block 1 . According to others it is still in development . Of course, manufactures add to the confusion by avoiding to give basic specifications (usual Chinese policy of secrecy )

EW and supposed increased percentage of composite materials I would not comment, because we don't have anything tangible on that . Refueling probe will be added, but in second half of Block 2 .

As for extra hardpoint , I didn't hear about that . Probably my mistake, but where it supposed to be ?
 
Ultra

Ultra

Junior Member
thunderchief said:
Hard to tell. Personally for me, Block 2 was a bit of disappointment . It arrived much latter then expected, with very few improvements. Even air-refueling probe is to be added latter . Now they announce AESA radar with accompanying problems of higher power consumption , which would most likely require something more powerful then existing RD-93 . But on the other side, both RD-93MA and WS-13 are far from being operational . So I'm not very optimistic . Let's first wait and see what would happen with Block 2 production run .
Click to expand...

Dizasta1 said:
Heard through the rumor mill that JF-17 Thunders will be getting RD-93MA for its Block-IIIs. Dunno if that would enough to juice up an AESA. But it sure as hell would improve Thunder's speed and agility. And I wonder whether the Chinese would actually get that WS-13 uprated engine out anytime soon. Either way, with the French option off the table, its only natural to go for the Russian or the Chinese options. Heck there is no way in hell that Pakistan Air Force would go for an American option, even if it were free!
Click to expand...

It sounds like RD-33 (RD-93) series are not able to give Thunder the juice it needs.
So, I will just throw this crazy idea out there... why not fit Thunder with the very powerful AL-31F? Like the J-10?

I know they are completely different engine, but the size is quite "similar" :


RD-33
  • Length: 4,229 mm (166.50 in)
  • Diameter: 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
  • Dry weight: 1,055 kg (2,326 lb)

AL-31F
  • Length: 4,990 millimetres (196 in)
  • Diameter: 905 millimetres (35.6 in) inlet; 1,280 millimetres (50 in) maximum external
  • Dry weight: 1,570 kilograms (3,460 lb)


Basically, the difference is 76.1 cm in length, and 24 cm in diameter.

It would probably be quite a major modification to the airframe to fit the AL-31F (plus the weight and aerodynamics needs to be recalibrated), but since each block of JF-17 will require airframe modification, so why not?

AL-31F should have no problem to provide enough power to juice the AESA radar for Thunder since J-10B is already getting an AESA so it shouldn't be a problem. And AL-31F should also give Thunder significant speed boost, and combat capability.
 
Ultra

Ultra

Junior Member
If modifying the airframe is proving too much, other western jet engines could also be considered with comparable dimensions that should fit the Thunder (I excluded the Volvo RM12 and Snecma M88 because of their inferior performance to the RD-33) :

General Electric F414
  • Length: 3910 mm (154 in)
  • Diameter: 890 mm (35 in)
  • Dry weight: 2,445 lb (1,110 kg) max weight

Eurojet EJ200
  • Length: 4000 mm (160 in)
  • Diameter: 700 mm (28 in)
  • Dry weight: 990 kg (2,180 lb)


 
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Ultra said:
It sounds like RD-33 (RD-93) series are not able to give Thunder the juice it needs.
So, I will just throw this crazy idea out there... why not fit Thunder with the very powerful AL-31F? Like the J-10?

I know they are completely different engine, but the size is quite "similar" :

RD-33
  • Length: 4,229 mm (166.50 in)
  • Diameter: 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
  • Dry weight: 1,055 kg (2,326 lb)
AL-31F
  • Length: 4,990 millimetres (196 in)
  • Diameter: 905 millimetres (35.6 in) inlet; 1,280 millimetres (50 in) maximum external
  • Dry weight: 1,570 kilograms (3,460 lb)
Basically, the difference is 76.1 cm in length, and 24 cm in diameter.

It would probably be quite a major modification to the airframe to fit the AL-31F (plus the weight and aerodynamics needs to be recalibrated), but since each block of JF-17 will require airframe modification, so why not?

AL-31F should have no problem to provide enough power to juice the AESA radar for Thunder since J-10B is already getting an AESA so it shouldn't be a problem. And AL-31F should also give Thunder significant speed boost, and combat capability.
Click to expand...

Dear Ultra ... simply forget it ! ... and we already discussed that to death.

Yes it would, surely it would ... in the end it would be a type very similar if nor equal in performance to the J-10, it would de facto be an in-house competitor and as such simply not worth all efforts.

To admit You say it is only a 24cm increase in diameter ... but You omit the length and therefore center of gravity .. in the end it would require a new intake system, a new wing, new fuselage + gear ... nearly everything and for what.

So, please leave the JF-17 like it is ... and all others who want an AL-31FN powered fighter should simply buy the J-10.

Deino
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top