JF-17 Block-3 -- Updates, News & Discussion

[MastanKhan]

Wrong, F-16 is proven platform. Even F-16 block 60 can beat JF-7 block 2 and 3.

Hi,

You sure---?

 

[denel]

Hi,

I agree with you whole heartedly---. You know that the the JF17 design was under extreme duress---the twin seater was a later addition due to customer demand---. Otherwise the Paf was happy with a single seater---.

The engine played a very large part in the design of the aircraft---.

If as suggested the original design was 25% larger than the current design and due to the lack of the 'right' power plant available---it got compressed---and possibly that is where the bulkiness is coming from---.

In due time people will learn how good this design is---with the side intakes and bumps----it is so different than what shows on the market in general---but most of those aircraft except for the stealth models---were not build persay for a low low RCS--.

All the conventional Twin tails were right in your face kind of designs---no care about the RCS---. The single engine were more sleek and slender---. With the availability of modern alloys that were lighter thinner and stronger and power plants that were slimmer and lighter but more powerful---the west was able and capable of producing more aesthetically pleasing aircraft---.

Now it was all well and good if the USAF had not turned around and refurbished an old B52 to a modern strike platform---. Now who could call the b52 an ugly aircraft---almost everyone---but if you look into its capabilities---it would out do many strike aircraft growler type aircrafts and air superiority fighter---why---because of the 21st century technology installed in it with 21st century weapons---.

The modern fighter aircraft has just become a conduit of delivery of a 21st century weapon helped thru 21st century electronic gadgets---and its shape is subservient to the mindset of the designing team.

Now for issues with quality of the end product---that is a different item---that is about quality control---.



Hi,

Damn---I wish I could think like you young people and use metaphors like---"grit & Grind"---" "a true gunfighter of the old west "---.

Indeed---" just good weapons & tactics---"---remember these words of your ---. Paf has added a new paragraph to fighter aircraft building---. Looks will only take you so far---it is what is inside of you that will make you carry the day---.

Remember that gold saying---" Drive is for show Putting is for dough "---.




Hi,

Indeed china has many an aesa radars---and many have glitches that you may not know of and I don't want to elaborate---. Plus they are larger and no issues with cooling space and power supply---.

JF17 otoh---needs a smaller radar with cooling ability and using lesser power---and functioning 100%---100% of the time---. Not an easy task---.

Let me add a saying we used at Atlas....'Fitment to Purpose'.

 

[Danish Moazzam]

@Stealth,

You were going on about design, have you bothered to see what Boieng offered for JSF competition, One ugly hideous looking frog shaped X-32. But all design and pregnancy terms aside it was a competitor. Boieng did not win the order but it does not mean that you cannot make a fat Plane. JF-17 is way better looking than that.

On the other hand the black widow F-23 was a way more better designed aircraft compared to f-22 but it still did not get the green light and F-22 got the go ahead.

I will agree to you statement as to why do we have two different vertical tail design that might need some answering but still you have been saying that there are many design flaws as per your friend in Boieng.

Care to list them down. Design flaws only not the workmanship.

The workmanship will improve but please if you cannot compare a medium weigh and light weight aircraft then there is no way you can compare a 25million $ plane with a 75million $ plane. It is like you are comparing the fit and finish of a corolla to a mercedes or BMW those differences will remain.

You are in the design side and I am on the controls side, the design of the IC/MicroProcessor has not been asthetic but they have been immensely powerful in recent times and the added option of optimizing the software and control process to get the best out of the hardware you have does make a lot of difference.

 

[MastanKhan]

Let me add a saying we used at Atlas....'Fitment to Purpose'.

Hi,

'Fitment for purpose'---that explains it all.

If it does the designated job---the shape don't matter---.

 

[JohnWick]

Do you think the nose of JF-17 is as big as that of J-10C?

But what matters is that air cooled Superman AESA Radar not damn nose?

 

[denel]

But what matters is that air cooled Superman AESA Radar not damn nose?

friend, size matters - you just dont put a large size into a smaller aircraft; there are several considerations - power utilisation, RF footprint etc not to mention protection of the cockpit and other RF sensitive modules.

 

[Mentee]

My very dear YoungPak,

You always delight me!

Even when you take the opposite line... you do!

Much obliged

See I don't go Mola jutt (could have used Rambo but it's indeginous) over people and situations, no one should also. Always try to diagnose the cause first and then come up with solution/s on how it could get fixed PRACTICALLY.

 

[JohnWick]

friend, size matters - you just dont put a large size into a smaller aircraft; there are several considerations - power utilisation, RF footprint etc not to mention protection of the cockpit and other RF sensitive modules.

Actually what matters is money.$$$$

 

[Rank]

@Stealth,

You were going on about design, have you bothered to see what Boieng offered for JSF competition, One ugly hideous looking frog shaped X-32. But all design and pregnancy terms aside it was a competitor. Boieng did not win the order but it does not mean that you cannot make a fat Plane. JF-17 is way better looking than that.

The ugly frog-shaped never launched until mature. Whereas JF17 is already in service from last many years and we're still playing with its design/aesthetics/aerodynamics.

@Stealth,The workmanship will improve but please if you cannot compare a medium weigh and light weight aircraft then there is no way you can compare a 25million $ plane with a 75million $ plane. It is like you are comparing the fit and finish of a corolla to a mercedes or BMW those differences will remain.

Sometimes the price tag of the product has nothing to do with the capability and performance. It just because of the established "Brand" name.

 

[Dil_Pakistan]

Does below site posts reliable news? Anyways posting its article here, it has some tidbits wrt block-3:
-----------------------------------------

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...f-17-block-3-next-generation-fighter-unveiled

First Images of Sino-Pakistani JF-17 Block 3 Next Generation Fighter Released

The first images of the JF-17 Block 3 ‘4+ generation’ fighter were unveiled on December 28th, with a prototype shown taxiing on a factory runway in China before taking its first flight. The fighter represents the fourth variant of the JF-17, a fighter jointly developed by China and Pakistan from the early 2000s which saw its first flight in august 2003. The JF-17 was designed exclusively for export and does not serve in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, although over 100 of the older JF-17 Block 1 and Block 2 variants are currently in service in the Pakistani Air Force with smaller numbers having been sold to Myanmar and Nigeria. There has been considerable speculation among analysts regarding the Block 3 variant’s capabilities, with the design balancing the need to maintain low production and operational costs with the importance of maximising performance by integrating next generation technologies - many of which are extremely costly. The new fighter's most outstanding feature appears to be its elongated nose, which is intended to house an active electronically scanned array radar that is not only more sophisticated but also considerably larger than the radars on prior JF-17 variants. AESA radars are not only considerably more powerful than the passive radars on older JF-17 variants, but they also leave a lower radar signature and are less prone to jamming. The fighters are expected to deploy a number of newer munition types including PL-15 air to air missiles, which a large and powerful AESA radar is critical to guiding against faraway targets. The PL-15 was developed to equip China's own AESA radar equipped next generation fighters, including the J-10C, J-16 and J-20. The next generation missile retains an engagement range of up to 200km, allowing it to comfortably outrange missiles such as the R-77 and MICA used by Indian MiG-29 and Rafale fighters.

JF-17 Block 3 Prototype Takes First Flight



The JF-17 Block 3 is expected to be considerably more costly than prior variants, but its next generation capabilities have the potential to make it far more successful on the export market. Other than a new radar and next generation avionics and electronic warfare systems, other features of the JF-17 Block 3 design such as its rumoured infra red tracking system, new engine and high composite airframe all have yet to be confirmed. The fighter's new air inlets, however, indicate that a new engine has been installed - possibly an enhanced derivative of the RD-33MK which powers the Russian MiG-35. The Sino-Pakistani fighter is expected to improve on the already considerable range of its predecessor, and may also be compatible with new classes of cruise missile to replace the YJ-12. Paired with its considerable range, this could make the JF-17 Block 3 a formidable maritime strike fighter. The evolution of the JF-17 Block 3 program, and the date of its expected entry into service, remain uncertain, as does the scale of production in both China and Pakistan.

 

[Mrc]

Cockpit lay out shud look like this. ... Caz this is the one that goes with 3 d holographic HUD

Single split LCD display

 

[MastanKhan]

If the aircraft is soo competent, why not PAF put them on a lead role @ 27 feb hollywood scenario? the aircraft not even in the scene.... though Delta + F16s did the job... lol you don't want to take a risk with the machine you're not sure about ..

== replacement only and always fill the gape of replacement spot ==
you can't put them on a lead role... we will see... the time is not far away when we gonna H2H with IAF again...

Hi,

Now they wish they had put it in the lead role---.

 

[StormBreaker]

View attachment 596616



Cockpit lay out shud look like this. ... Caz this is the one that goes with 3 d holographic HUD

Single split LCD display

That’s not the same hud and secondly as per @Tipu7 , Single Wide MFD plans were abandoned...

 

[Mrc]

That’s not the same hud and secondly as per @Tipu7 , Single Wide MFD plans were abandoned...

No insider here has any knowledge

This is what the same hud looks like on j 20

I m not saying its will be same or similar layout .. .
Lets wait n see

 

[TNT]

about your this post, I guess only Pakistani engineer knows design / weight,... if that's the case then the V stab of F18 F16 and every aircraft having two diff versions (single and dual) would be different.. I have never seen any aircraft in the world like this shit masterpiece which has two different types of vertical stabilizers for countering weight LOL whata BS logic!

Why act smart and criticise just for the sake of it and make urself look like a fool? U know nothing and calling this plane shit? U dnt even know what design means let alone explaining aerodynamics and weight balancing. U compare mid weight and light weight n then talk about design lolz. Go study aerodynamics and the role of vertical stabalizers and what kind of drag it can produce on each weight and speed category. Also try n find how jf17 is among few fighters using DSI, along with F35. Or simply just do western pooja and criticise us n show off as enlightened.