JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

[asif iqbal]

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

I don't quite agree. F-22 and F-35 seem to be modern exceptions against the norm. The JF-17 is supposed to be a frontline fighter of the PAF that is fast retiring its old J7s and Mirages. Most of its pilots (including fresh ones passing out every year) will fly it. A trainer ought to have been readied along with its induction.

Was pilot error the reason of the JF-17 crash ?

cleary you dont know the history of the project and its training and the joint collaboration between Sino-Pak

JF17 fighter pilots are taken from 7 Sqn Rose 1 Mirage III EAs and No. 9 Sqn F16s, as a result they are the best of the best and represent the elite pilots of the PAF

when PT-03 made its maiden flight on April 9th 2004, the very next day 2 PAF pilots Sqn Leader Mohammed Ehsan and Sqn Ldr Rashid Hibib made thier first flights on the JF17, this was at the Chengdu flight test centre in China

Pakistan pilots were trained at the Chinese test pilots institute and PAF pilots remained at the Test and evalution centre

this has resulted in pilots like the Wg Cdr Hakim Raza who is the most experienced JF17 aviator, he has clocked more than 350 hours on the JF17 and has 5 pilots working with him, 2 are from Empire Test Pilot School at Boscombe Down and 3 from Chinese Test Pilot School

the aviators of the JF17 are tasked to carry out missions which will be given the highest priority, using world class technologys such as datalink AWACS and Mid air refueling, they do not come from grad school flying trainers, so on that note Plawolf is 100% correct

on the subject PAF is already taking delivery of K-8P, (12 K-8s + 80 K-8Ps) of which 48 have been delivered and 32 remain

Was pilot error the reason of the JF-17 crash ?

No.

 

[plawolf]

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

I don't quite agree. F-22 and F-35 seem to be modern exceptions against the norm. The JF-17 is supposed to be a frontline fighter of the PAF that is fast retiring its old J7s and Mirages. Most of its pilots (including fresh ones passing out every year) will fly it. A trainer ought to have been readied along with its induction.

So the F35 is not supposed to be a frontline fighter, with most pilots of the USAF flying it including fresh ones?

The F22 and F35 are not so much as exceptions to the norm as the beginning of a new pattern, and that is being driven by technological advancement. Those key technological advancements are being implemented by everyone, and not just the USAF, so I see this being a trend that may well become the new norm in the years and decades ahead, if it is not already happening.

In the past, before the introduction and maturation of FBW and advanced FCS, pilots had to do all the hard work of manipulating the plane into doing what he/she wants. Any many a plane had particular handling quirks that their pilots had to know and manually adjust for. That is a hell of a lot of work and you often needed hands on experience to know what the signs are that you are entering a dangerous flight regime, and it is very risky to put new pilots into those kinds of situations by themselves, as they may easily go too far and loose control if doing it for the first time solo.

With modern FBW and advanced FCS, the plane pretty much flies itself now, all a pilot needs to do is turn his stick, and the computer tells all the control surfaces to behave in the necessary manner to move in the direction desired. There is also the 'safety net' of artificial limits, so pilots could not stall their planes even if they wanted to (well, they still could, but they would need to turn off the limiter to do so or try really really hard or fly into a really unlucky set of external conditions etc). This means that there is far less risk to letting new pilots loose on planes solo earlier.

The other major advancement is also linked into FBW and FCS, but these are the ones installed on modern advanced trainers. These trainers can mimic the handling characteristics and traits of other frontline fighters. The trainers will only be able to cover part of the envelope of high performance fighters, but that should be more than enough to allow new pilots to get familiar enough with the new planes to be safely let loose solo on the actual things.

Even today, it is very rare for there to be a dedicated trainer version of a new modern fighter, because of the reasons listed above, and also because of how expensive modern fighters are getting. Most two seaters are more of a dedicated striker version as opposed to a trainer.

 

[Indianfighter]

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

So the F35 is not supposed to be a frontline fighter, with most pilots of the USAF flying it including fresh ones?

Is the JF-17 a 5th generation fighter ? All 'conventional' combat planes like MiGs, Gripen, EF and even your J-10 have trainer versions. Now isn't the PLAAF inducting J-10 in large numbers or is it an elitist fighter meant for only a few pilots ?

Besides, all these have full FBW systems but JF-17 has actually only partial FBW. So, by your own reasoning doesn't JF-17 need a trainer even more than these full FBW types ?

The F22 and F35 are not so much as exceptions to the norm as the beginning of a new pattern, and that is being driven by technological advancement. Those key technological advancements are being implemented by everyone, and not just the USAF, so I see this being a trend that may well become the new norm in the years and decades ahead, if it is not already happening.

This reasoning is wrong, because PAK-FA will have a dedicated trainer version in addition to the twin-seater being developed for the IAF. But I really don't know the reason for JSF and F-22 not having trainers.

 

[asif iqbal]

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

Is the JF-17 a 5th generation fighter ? All 'conventional' combat planes like MiGs, Gripen, EF and even your J-10 have trainer versions. Now isn't the PLAAF inducting J-10 in large numbers or is it an elitist fighter meant for only a few pilots ?

Besides, all these have full FBW systems but JF-17 has actually only partial FBW. So, by your own reasoning doesn't JF-17 need a trainer even more than these full FBW types ?


This reasoning is wrong, because PAK-FA will have a dedicated trainer version in addition to the twin-seater being developed for the IAF. But I really don't know the reason for JSF and F-22 not having trainers.

its pretty clear now you have started trolling, if u know so much about trainers and fighter pilots please give us IAF attrition rates, i guess they are not worth sharing right?

 

[Dizasta1]

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

I don't quite agree. F-22 and F-35 seem to be modern exceptions against the norm. The JF-17 is supposed to be a frontline fighter of the PAF that is fast retiring its old J7s and Mirages. Most of its pilots (including fresh ones passing out every year) will fly it. A trainer ought to have been readied along with its induction.

Was pilot error the reason of the JF-17 crash ?

Pakistani Fighter Pilots have a long history of training on a single seat fighter before the two-seater was ready for induction.

When A-5C Fantans were inducted into Pakistan Air Force, there wasn't any indication of a two-seater version in Pakistan Air Force's procurement plan. In fact, Pakistan Air Force did not ever procure a two seater version of A-5C and instead used the F-6 two-seater version for training pilots for the A-5Cs.

Similarly, when the F-6 Farmers were inducted into Pakistan Air Force, the initial years were 'two-seaterless' for Pakistani Fighter Pilots. During this time, Pakistani Fighter Pilots trained on and flew the F-6s in combat missions. It was only after the 1971 war, that the two-seater version of the F-6s began delivery to Pakistan Air Force.

Today, with the JF-17 Thunder, the same sort of pattern is appearing when it comes to two-seater version of the aircraft. It is no wonder that PAC-PAF weren't in any hurry to get the two-seater version before the single-seat went the through the paces of tests and evaluation. And as time passes by, there is a strong indication that JF-17Bs would be on the horizon, soon.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:29 PM ----------

its pretty clear now you have started trolling, if u know so much about trainers and fighter pilots please give us IAF attrition rates, i guess they are not worth sharing right?

Since 2009, in three years, the indian air force has lost 39 aircraft, with 17 pilots killed in these accidents. That is an attrition rate of 13 aircraft per year and fatalities at 5 pilots killed per year.

---------- Post added at 02:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------

Back to the topic!

I believe, that in the coming months, JF-17 Thunder Block-II's would see considerable improvements. From things like Data-Links, IFR Probes, to EW Suites, to BVR Missiles and IRST System. Ideally, these are the things that should be incorporated and introduced in the Block-II Thunders.

 

[Speeder]

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

self-delete (I think it's offtopic)

 

[escobar]

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

 

[duskylim]

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

Impressive climb out with no smoke.... is that due to the RD-93's or the DSI's (or both?)

 

[Dizasta1]

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

Guys, is there any update on the WS-13 Taishan engines, which were being test-flown on the JF-17 Thunder/FC-1 Xiaolong?

 

[Dizasta1]

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

Are there any updates on the WS-13 Taishan engines? Also, whether it would be WS-13 (100KN) or the (85KN) engine that will enter mass production? And would the new batch of (50) FC-1 Xiaolongs/JF-17 Thunders, be incorporating the new WS-13 Tiashan engine?

Could someone please be kind enough to answer these questions.

Thanks in advance!

Mujahid Achakzai