JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

S

sndef888

Captain
Registered Member
I thought the J-10 was a pretty high end fighter like the Rafale or Eurofighter, seems like I've been mislead because of its nice curves and kind of low numbers.
 
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
silentlurker said:
Doubt it, seems unlikely the JF-17 would be much cheaper than the J-10. Another rumor I heard was JF-17 was planned on being at least some part of PLAAF, but PAF wanted too many specific features it became PAF exclusive.
Click to expand...


Forget it, the JF-17 eventually once had its chance but there is today no place for it in PLAAF inventory.

And the reasons are simply: It is offers nothing that the J-10 not already provides. It would add an unnecessary additional maintenance asset of an engine, no other types uses and overall for maybe a bit less cost less range, less weapons load.

Forget it.
 
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
sndef888 said:
I thought the J-10 was a pretty high end fighter like the Rafale or Eurofighter, seems like I've been mislead because of its nice curves and kind of low numbers.
Click to expand...
Hi and low end are not absolute terms but in relative terms to cost and other platforms of the country. China has the J-20 and the Flanker series which are larger, more expensive and with longer legs than the J-10 making the J-10 the low end of China's modern aircraft because it has the shortest range and lowest cost (as a medium weight single engine fighter). It doesn't mean anything in comparison to foreign fighters.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
silentlurker said:
Doubt it, seems unlikely the JF-17 would be much cheaper than the J-10. Another rumor I heard was JF-17 was planned on being at least some part of PLAAF, but PAF wanted too many specific features it became PAF exclusive.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t just a rumour, one of the clauses in the initial PAF JF17 contract was that China would buy a similar number for its own forces.

That was basically an insurance clause to make sure the plane actually got built and wasn’t a total lemon, since if the PLAAF was also buying hundreds of it, they would make sure CAC delivered the goods.

That was the FC1. But then came the renegotiation and re-design.

The PLAAF wanted something like the FC1 that was cheap and had parts commonality with the J7 so they can make use of their existing investments in parts, tools and training. The PAF wanted something more western and capable.

It was not reported, but personally I think the design differences were so great that it was impossible to make a single plane to met the requirements of both the PAF and PLAAF, so, after sufficient assurances were given to the PAF, the project was split.

You have the JF17, which was completely tailored to the PAF’s wants and desires without any compromises and probably decades of continued CAC design support for upgrades and mods; and you have the JL9, which is essentially an JF17 front bolted to a J7.
 
S

sndef888

Captain
Registered Member
plawolf said:
It wasn’t just a rumour, one of the clauses in the initial PAF JF17 contract was that China would buy a similar number for its own forces.

That was basically an insurance clause to make sure the plane actually got built and wasn’t a total lemon, since if the PLAAF was also buying hundreds of it, they would make sure CAC delivered the goods.

That was the FC1. But then came the renegotiation and re-design.

The PLAAF wanted something like the FC1 that was cheap and had parts commonality with the J7 so they can make use of their existing investments in parts, tools and training. The PAF wanted something more western and capable.

It was not reported, but personally I think the design differences were so great that it was impossible to make a single plane to met the requirements of both the PAF and PLAAF, so, after sufficient assurances were given to the PAF, the project was split.

You have the JF17, which was completely tailored to the PAF’s wants and desires without any compromises and probably decades of continued CAC design support for upgrades and mods; and you have the JL9, which is essentially an JF17 front bolted to a J7.
Click to expand...
Is the JL-9 in service with the PLAAF? Seems I can only find sources about the naval version.

And wow the JL-9 really looks like a cheap and simple fighter, it's a surprise it isn't more popular in ex-soviet/african states
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top