Dizasta1
Senior Member
Is there any further details as to why the JF-17 Thunders do not have a fully digital FBW? Was it the cost, or the size of the aircraft?
JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter johnqh
- Start date
Is there any further details as to why the JF-17 Thunders do not have a fully digital FBW? Was it the cost, or the size of the aircraft?
Cost, risk, schedule, and the aerodynamic does not need it.
Even if the aerodynamic is stable, a full digital flight control need to be fully tested to exercise the code -- which, unlike hardware, does not have inherent limitation. This is tremendously expensive and time consuming, not to mention risky. This is one of the reason that Tejas is so late and is only limited to 6G on IOC, despite an airframe that is capable of 9G.
From what I've heard, FC-1 is actually flyable without digital flight control. The addition of the DFC, I suspect, is to fulfill PAF's requirement for dogfight performance (ability to point nose quickly for a quick shot). This is not entirely bad as this make the plane tolerant of battle damage.
Dizasta1
Senior Member
So in actual air combat, a JF-17 would be at a disadvantage in fighting against an aircraft that can pull 9Gs?
What are the possibilities that Block-II JF-17s would incorporate Fully Digital FBW systems? As being able to pull 9Gs in an actual dogfight, could possibly be the difference between victory and defeat.
Pakistan and hindustan, have no geographical distance or barrier between them. Which means that, when at war, Air Warfare would most definitely see WVR combat. 9Gs is WVR combat, is crucial, wouldn't you say?
Well, you cannot do entire dogfight in 9G -- the pilot's body won't stand for it. G rating is for sustained turn performance. Nowadays with HMS and full aspect missiles, instantaneous turn rate may be more important -- you only need to point your nose for a quick shot instead of having to position behind the enemy aircraft. But G rating is still important for evading missiles. So yes, FC-1 would be at a disadvantage, but it's not a sure thing.
G rating has more to do with the structural integrity of the airframe. To achieve that, you need to strengthen and/or lighten the airframe. And for a well behaved aerodynamic, fully digital FBW does not buy you much.
Nowadays, BVR combat is becoming more and more important, so aircraft maneuverability is becoming less important. This is one of the reason air forces prefers larger fighter -- to carry more BVR missiles. So trading marginal gain for cheaper aircraft may be worth it.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
really? have u seen the turn rate of the JF17? in close quaters JF17 can match F16 if not exceed it
there are videos of JF17 pulling vertical climbs, only reason it lags behind is because of engine power not to do with fighter capability
Dizasta1
Senior Member
Hey Asif, leave the guy be. There is no arguing that JF-17/FC-1 is an awesome fighter which would give Pakistan the best capabilities in Air Combat.
But, lemme ask you, what's the deal with PDF, its been off-line for the past three days now!! When is it due to be back on again?
And on a separate note, is there any news on the 2nd (50) batch deliveries? I haven't heard anything so far, or the fact that what changes would there be in the second batch.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
yeah PDF is down, u know what Webby is like, it says 24-36 hours could be more like 24-36 days!!
as far as i know 2nd batch of JF17 is now on the production line, there are 5 confirmed upgrades with the highlights being datalink, air-to-air refueling, IRST and improved ECM
other opitions like AESA, composites, WS13 and conformal fuel tanks are either rumours or planned for Block 3
vesicles
Colonel
but why did the Chinese pick J-10 over JF-17? they designed both of them and had all the opportunity to evaluate both... At least they could have both of them in the PLAAF. Instead, they only wanted J-10. Also, why is China not selling J-10 to PAF if J-10 and JF-17 are comparable?
Last edited:
Dizasta1
Senior Member
Yeah brother, I know ........ but given the amount of time its taken, perhaps Webby is introducing some major upgrades to PDF.
Anyways, I am really interested in what type of IFR Probe is planned for the Thunders. I hope they're retractable, embedded within the air-frame's outline, like in the Gripen.
Also, you've mentioned that there are 5 confirmed upgrades. You've mentioned 4, what's the 5th?
Lastly, when does Pakistan Air Force expect to field SD-10 BVR missiles, aboard the JF-17s?
---------- Post added at 01:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:01 AM ----------
Vesicles, PLAAF chose J-10s because it has a heavier payload, more weapon's stations, greater endurance and longer range. That doesn't necessarily mean that the JF-17s don't have a good payload capacity, stations, endurance or range. It only means that China's requirement is greater, as China is area wise, a much larger country than Pakistan.
Same reason why PLAAF has invested a lot of its time and resources in the development of J-11s.
Also, China is selling Pakistan the J-10s. It's only that Pakistan Air Force has certain requirements which warrants certain changes on the J-10s. Pakistan and China are close allies, and China has been of tremendous help in support and supplies of military hardware, financial aid and economic cooperation. We Pakistanis have always appreciated and honored our great ally for this.
My greater concern is that Pakistan needs to focus on stabilizing itself internally. Stability in the social and political landscape of Pakistan would not only allow growth in Pakistan's economy, but also be beneficial to China. Every great Super Power requires strong allies and Pakistan ought to be a strong ally to China.