JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

[shabi1]

IAF Chief: "...LCA is well ahead of JF-17"

... cool story bro

I remember 10yrs ago they kept boasting it was better than Mirage 2000. The JF-17 on the other hand once labeled a Mig-21 variant (because of confusion with Super-7 project) and compared with Mig-21Bison is now a foe to the SU-30 in AA.

Tejas's greatest illusion is the product doesnt match it's on paper specs.

 

[Atomicfrog]

I remember 10yrs ago they kept boasting it was better than Mirage 2000. The JF-17 on the other hand once labeled a Mig-21 variant (because of confusion with Super-7 project) and compared with Mig-21Bison is now a foe to the SU-30 in AA.

Tejas's greatest illusion is the product doesnt match it's on paper specs.

At least they got the Tejas flying and it's good for them to make their manufacturing and engineering departments working. JF-17 have been blessed by the need to field it rapidly and a clear idea of what the end product would be. They implemented some upgrades like the DSI inlets but they stick mostly to their initial design. JF-17 is a no-fuss straight forward design and it's what make him great, a nice workhorse with expanding capabilities.

 

[plawolf]

Any guesses what that plate on top of the nose is, its a new addition. Could it be a cooling plate for the AESA, J-10 has cooling plates on the sides. F-16 has IFF antennas on same same locations but that's because they are a bolt on upgrade. too small for a IRST mount but still a possibility.
View attachment 67716

View attachment 67717

That’s not a cooling plate on the J10, they are low light formation lights, also found on the tail.

 

[kentchang]

I remember 10yrs ago they kept boasting it was better than Mirage 2000. The JF-17 on the other hand once labeled a Mig-21 variant (because of confusion with Super-7 project) and compared with Mig-21Bison is now a foe to the SU-30 in AA.

Tejas's greatest illusion is the product doesnt match it's on paper specs.

Last time I read, all the Tejas are based in Tamil Nadu guarding against a Sri Lankan invasion. Tejas is also unquestionably far superior to anything the Maldives Air Force have.

 

[timepass]

Nice animation .....

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=4060238743995343

 

[badger16]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Does RD-93MA have FADEC, like -33MK, or is still 'semi-analog' like original RD-93?

 

[shabi1]

Does RD-93MA have FADEC, like -33MK, or is still 'semi-analog' like original RD-93?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"According to UEC, the RD-93MA offers a range of improvements over the RD-93. These include “increased thermodynamic parameters” as well as improved fan design and automatic powerplant control system. It also improved the RD-93MA’s safety features – such as the addition of an emergency engine start mode – a necessity because the engine is meant for single-engine aircraft.

UEC was reportedly developing the RD-93MA since at least 2012, if not earlier.[2] In fact, UEC stated that it had gotten a request to develop the RD-93MA from a “foreign customer.” The RD-93MA was intended to offer a thrust of 9,300 kgf, a noticeable improvement over the RD-93’s 8,600 kgf.[3]

In addition, one could assume that the RD-93MA will also contain improvements from the RD-33MK (i.e., the improved variant of the RD-33), such as a full authority digital engine control (FADEC) system, longer time-between-overhaul (TBO), and a longer engine lifespan."

 

[Atomicfrog]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"According to UEC, the RD-93MA offers a range of improvements over the RD-93. These include “increased thermodynamic parameters” as well as improved fan design and automatic powerplant control system. It also improved the RD-93MA’s safety features – such as the addition of an emergency engine start mode – a necessity because the engine is meant for single-engine aircraft.

UEC was reportedly developing the RD-93MA since at least 2012, if not earlier.[2] In fact, UEC stated that it had gotten a request to develop the RD-93MA from a “foreign customer.” The RD-93MA was intended to offer a thrust of 9,300 kgf, a noticeable improvement over the RD-93’s 8,600 kgf.[3]

In addition, one could assume that the RD-93MA will also contain improvements from the RD-33MK (i.e., the improved variant of the RD-33), such as a full authority digital engine control (FADEC) system, longer time-between-overhaul (TBO), and a longer engine lifespan."

Would be interesting to know the Thrust-to-weight ratio of the upgraded engine. Don't know if it loss some weight too.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Would be interesting to know the Thrust-to-weight ratio of the upgraded engine. Don't know if it loss some weight too.

Considering the avionics upgrade it’ll be lucky if the weight didn’t increase.

 

[badger16]

Weight increase plus bigger power requirement for all the new avionics. And likely more fuel burn, though FADEC might compensate for that.
Still it should be a significant improvement.