JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 News, Discussion & Media

Re: JF-17: New Pics

Black jack said:

Thanks for the reply. Your right, the J-10 i believe will become a "eurofighter" of some sort once it matures, but that is quite some time away. For now, it's still more of an F-16, a capable one at that. The JF-17 a less capable. But it's design is what will keep it as an "F-16" whereas like you said the J-10 design has kickass potential and i can evolve into a eurofighter calibre machine. And in terms of having a 4th generation plane with 5th generation planes around is not smart. But then again, the J-10 is hovering around the fourth generation aswell, and is also at risk.

The main threat will be Taiwan maybe US, JF-17's and J-10/11's against Taiwan = cool. Again US = not so cool. It's going to take time like i said before.

Click to expand...

JF17 is no F16. It will NEVER be an F16 because of it's thrust range, and payload.

JF17 was meant to be 80% capable of the original F16A. Compared to the latest versions of the F16, JF17 can't compare, even with the DSI.

The best comparison to the JF17 is Taiwan's F1CK, which is a light weight adapation of the F16.

The J10 is a better comparison to the F16. They have similiar engine thrust, and payload capacity.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

Skyhawk, there are different classes of aircraft which exist. jf-17's role is primary role is an air-superiority fighter, while the f-16 is a multirole combat aircraft. That is why there is a devition in payload.

The jf-17 is also a lighter aircraft than the f-16, accounting for the deviation in thrust. As long as an aircraft can fly and is manuverable, thrust is relatively minor factor.

The f-16A's avionics probably arnt as good as the jf-17s. But then again, they are seperate classes.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

Mods- can you delete this post? I misread some information in the above posts.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

Black jack said:

As for being as capable, CAC will say that about any plane they make. What assertions? It's logic.

Click to expand...

No they won't, I suggest you read up on some of the interviews on Yang Wei that I translated. If you look at some of the comparisons between mf and jf-17, the only major improvement in jf-17 is that it uses turbofan engine. Again, that just raises the cost of the fighter, so you have a tradeoff.

So your point about them learning nothing was wrong. Your too much into J-10 dude.

Click to expand...

my point is that they could have done that whether or not jf-17 existed. They have been testing these technologies out with different planes in store. Do you realize how many j-7 testbeds they have?

Whats the scale of production of the J-10 got to do with the JF-17 not being good enough for China? You talk like the J-10 is on par with the bloody F-22. Sorry to burst your bubble but it's more like an F-16 remember. So it's not like China is going to be a huge threat to the world with the J-10 seen as most countries are around a generation ahead. So in light of this, when your inducting planes of the calibre of the J-10, the JF-17 is good enough...especially when you have hundreds of F7's waiting to be phased out. You got money to replace them with J-10...but you ain't got that much. Don't get me wrong however, I have plenty of respect for China and am enjoying seeing it become stronger in every way. It's going in the right direction.

Click to expand...

j-10 getting produced a lot means that j-7 will mostly replaced by j-10, so jf-17 is not needed to replace it. Get a grip. Read some of the stuff I write in the past, I'm pretty clear on what level J-10 is at. I suggest you read it before making up stuff like me comparing J-10 with F-22. oh yeah, since we are on this subject, which countries have a plane that is going to be a generation ahead of J-10 other than US? How much money do you think China has? How much do you think a J-10 cost? Do you have any idea? As I said, mass production of J-10 means it will be the one doing all the replacing of J-7s.

Again, you point has nothing to do with what we're discussing. I don't care if who i am working with is incompetant...you just have to put your foot down.

Click to expand...

putting your foot down? what position do you think Pakistan is in? I'm saying CAC can create imaginary costs if it feels like it.

Since you are so convinced Pakistan will get "half" of the profit for JF-17, let me ask you something. China often makes heavily subsidized sales to countries like Bangladesh and such. It claims that it looses money in its sales. Is Pakistan willing to fork over half of loses? Another thing, since Al-khalid is a combined Chinese-Pakistani and Ukrainian project, your logic would imply that China and Ukraine are both getting a 1/3 of the profit for the Al-Khalid tank, right?

In terms of making money with the JF-17, I agree it is for making money,partly. But that doesn't mean it ain't good enough to induct. When your making stuff on the level of Rafale/Eurofighter (i won't even say F-22/35), then you can tell me it isn't good enough. Until then, keep your feet firmly on the ground. :coffee:

Click to expand...

see, this is what amazes me. Certain posters talk about JF-17 as if it's at or close to J-10's level. Let's put it this way, JF-17 probably costs 1/3 of J-10, yet plaaf still doesn't want it. What does that tell you? Let's put it this way, many people in China don't even think JF-17 is as good as J-8F. When JF-17 is out in 2009, you will see what level J-10 is at. As I mentionned in the past JF-17 is called "make a fortune" in China. That should tell you what it's purpose is. If you are interested, I will list the ways that CAC plans to make money with this thing.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

FriedRiceNSpice said:

Are you sure about that? Based on what? Do you have any facts to back up that statement? What does the JF-17 have that is better than AESA? If you cant back it up, then dont post BS. I'm surprised with the 23+ hours you spend on the internet daily that you still resort to posting such nonsense. I would ask you to spend more time researching, but there are only so many hours in a day.

Click to expand...

It comes as news to me that the F-16A has AESA. All of the F-16A/Bs up to block 20, as far as I know, carry pulse-doppler radars.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

FriedRiceNSpice said:

Are you sure about that? Based on what? Do you have any facts to back up that statement? What does the JF-17 have that is better than AESA? If you cant back it up, then dont post BS. I'm surprised with the 23+ hours you spend on the internet daily that you still resort to posting such nonsense. I would ask you to spend more time researching, but there are only so many hours in a day.

Click to expand...

Saying F-16As have AESA is completely nonsense! I don't want to post oneliner, but I really have nothing more to say! :coffee:

Re: JF-17: New Pics

SteelBird said:

Saying F-16As have AESA is completely nonsense! I don't want to post oneliner, but I really have nothing more to say! :coffee:

Click to expand...

Oh my god I so did not see that... that makes a huge difference then, doesn't it? I merely had thought he said F-16s in general, did not see that little A.

However, I'd like to point out that the FC-1 is in fact a multirole fighter, not an air superiority fighter. Even sinodefence states so:

The FC-1 (Fighter China-1) Xiaolong, initially known as Super-7, is the single-seat, single-engine, multirole fighter aircraft developed by Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAC) for export market.

FC-1 and F-16 are of the same class- both are light-weight air superiority fighters. Just the FC-1 is lighter and its ground-attack capabilities may not be as developed. But that does not mean the aircraft is not of the same class- I am sure the FC-1 developers did not intend for low payload and poor ground-attack capabilities. They tried to make something in the same class of the F-16, had to keep the costs low, and as a result designed a lighter and less capable machine.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

Here's a Pakistani media clip of the flight that just took place. This one's a longer clip than the other first flight test I linked previously but not much flying seen here. Mostly dignitary shots. The FC-1 04 here is gray/blue.



Sorry the link apparently doesn't work now.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

tphuang said:

j-10 getting produced a lot means that j-7 will mostly replaced by j-10, so jf-17 is not needed to replace it.

Click to expand...

No. The J-10 is being produced in large quanities because China also needs medium-penetration strike capabilities. The FC-1 shall also be produced in quantities as large as the J-10, because it shall be used for defence of the Chinese mainland, whereas the J-10 will be used to fight F-18s over Taiwan or Su-30 MKIs along the border with India.

As an example, India shall have 190 MKIs + option of 50 for deep-strike capabilities and the L** to replace the 250 MiG-21s for defence of the Indian airspace.

Since you are so convinced Pakistan will get "half" of the profit for JF-17, let me ask you something. China often makes heavily subsidized sales to countries like Bangladesh and such. It claims that it looses money in its sales. Is Pakistan willing to fork over half of loses?

Click to expand...

Pakistan will get half the profit, but if China gives subsidies to nations then Pakistan is not obliged to cover half of China's subsidy. China's subsidies are its internal matter; if it wants to sell at a reduced price then it can do so--but without forcing Pakistan to do so. Pakistan can only be persuaded diplomatically.

Another thing, since Al-khalid is a combined Chinese-Pakistani and Ukrainian project, your logic would imply that China and Ukraine are both getting a 1/3 of the profit for the Al-Khalid tank, right?

Click to expand...

No. China and Ukraine were paid the development costs by Pakistan. So further sales of the Al-Khalid shall be credited to Pakistan only.

Certain posters talk about JF-17 as if it's at or close to J-10's level.

Click to expand...

I admit that I too do not understand the difference between the J-10 and JF-17.

Both are nearly the same size as an F-16. Members of Pakdef posted a news report according to which a Pakistani delegation is in the UK to negotiate the sale of advanced avionics and possibly the selex AESA radar.
If they manage to get that, it is likely that the FC-1 is likely to surpass the avionics of the J-10, as J-10 still doesnt have AESA radar and it is unlikely that UK avionics shall be inferior in anyway to the avionics of the J-10.

The only drawback of the FC-1 is that its weapons load is 3,600 kg as compared to the 4500 kg "useful load" of the J-10.

The J-10, I believe does not deserve the artificial secrecy convened to it by China at all. Maybe some Sun-Tzu philosophy says so or more practically, it has developed an aircraft with less weapons load (FC-1) to export while keeping one with more weapons load for itself and Pakistan. Otherwise prospective buyers might pressurize China to sell the J-10 instead and so its money invested on the Super-7 (and later the FC-1) may all go waste.

Rest assured, I believe that that the J-10 is a 4.5 generation fighter (between Block 52 and Block 60 F-16), but nothing that nations like Taiwan, USA, Japan or India dont have a match against.

Re: JF-17: New Pics

MiGleader said:

Skyhawk, there are different classes of aircraft which exist. jf-17's role is primary role is an air-superiority fighter, while the f-16 is a multirole combat aircraft. That is why there is a devition in payload.

The jf-17 is also a lighter aircraft than the f-16, accounting for the deviation in thrust. As long as an aircraft can fly and is manuverable, thrust is relatively minor factor.

Click to expand...

No my son, Thrust isent a MINOR factor considering the moderns jet fighters, its the essential. Thrust is the factor that determs all the performance of the fighter, its playload (and there by the range and operational flexibility), speed, turnrates, climing...all...Making of these small jets like FC-1, Griben, LCA and similar unbuild concepts like the MiG-33, FX, Novi Avion is due the fact that relatively high trust engines mented to use in paired in bigger planes...M88, RD33, spey and offcourse the F404 are in the markets....They wont offer similar performance that bigger F-100/M-53 caliper engines does, but still enough that packed whit lates avionics and computers these birds comes handy to smaller air forces that seek bargain....No 'big' nation whit advanced aviation industry has build them, as the cost benefits arent that major compared to producing high caliber fighters. But nations whit young aviation industry (india, Spain, yugoslavia) or tigth budget (sweden) have chosen them as they are far better to start whit than producing bigger and more sophisticated planes...and still, majority of these projects have died or hang in near of extincion....

So JF-17 is good export item, but there is certainly no idea of making it an operational plane in PLAAF. China allready has the J-10 coming up and good licence bargain whit another 'mature' fighter, Su-27 and pursuing whit them is the ritgh path for china. If there is a change to do it rigth, its absolute maddness for china to revial the policy of producing and manufacturing of obsolete machine's like it has done in the past.