Arsalan
THINK TANK CHAIRMAN
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 18,178
- Reaction score
- 65
- Country
- Location
Nice man nice that you dint . And by the way I think terms of life span of jf17 has changed due to some wired reason ( to find a buyer?) I still remember the days when debate was focused on this very issues . But am sure the involvement of composite materials are too low to achieve 25 years of fatigue and replacement of bad section means replacement of major or entire airframe for jf17 . Do u agree with it ? If no then we all call it a day and go with OEM If yes then our common sense prevailed
Well i guess you missed the key point, as mentioned, it is not ALL about composites. Understand that and we can say that common sense prevailed! Also please stick to one figure, jumping from 16 years to 25 now? As an Indian member here stated, the aircraft life span in more about flight hours so discussing that in years do not tells us much about the plane in the first place. Also can you please tell us why are you so desperately trying to draw a comparison between tejas and JF-17? I don't think IAF is worried at all about Tejas life span, specially the way it travels these day
Sir, not being defensive. Just trying to talk some sense but yeah i guess you are right. It do not seems to be working much. The ambitions are clear and nothing will really help now.Hi,
Why are you Pakistani guys going on the defensive on the life span of the JF 17---. You cannot even discuss your potent front line aircraft---you guys have no clue how to work the discussion to your advantage---.