If we are seriously considering WS-13E then it is undeniable that we will have atleast one more hp underside !!!
Even in DCS environment the clear limitation of jf17 is its fuel...getting more hard points is useless for its size. Work is needed and squeezing more thrust and freeing more space for fuel than anything else
well? the prototypes of the block 3 are powered by RD93s, don't know why isn't the RD93 being ditched for the more powerful and matured WS13E...maybe its a hush hush thing to misguide the enemy and keep 'em guessing? export versions of the block 3 would be exported with 7 hardpoints powered by RD93s while the ones used by Pakistan would be 9 hardpoints powered by WS13E? who knows...
doesn't that dictate even more of a reason to switch to the WS13 line of engines? they are supposedly more powerful AND more effecient that the RD93s, no?
We all knew you know "something"..it was pretty much obvious ..just dont let out more than what you are cleared to..
I dont know honestly but what i do know that gripen c and LCA major issues were fuel..and gripen went on to do NG with 40% increase and LCA is going to that route too
Agreed. Having said that...the initial pictures of the prototype block 3 DO show it taking off without any afterburners. hint hint? But then again, don't know if its a taking off picture or a landing picture. If it was a landing picture, I would assume that the airbreaks would be open but they are not.
Could be the reason you have got the engine but that seems just stupid as engines are not someone wants to guess. I believe, they are waiting for WS-19 to come out
Bro that was landing...
Untill PAF discloses official specs in some airshow all we can do is speculate
well, it can carry 4 BVRs (SD10s, not PL15s) on dual racks even with the RD93.
could be...I'm still not fully convinced albeit, gettin' there.
Hopefully, they have embedded some sensors into the composite materials to take the game to the next level...
Ya Allah !!!well, it can carry 4 BVRs (SD10s, not PL15s) on dual racks even with the RD93.
could be...I'm still not fully convinced albeit, gettin' there.
they have, MAWS is already visible...may have more sensors on the spine as well as some members pointed out.
air brakes on passenger airliners and air brakes on fighters are worlds apart dude...Thunder's air brakes look like this.
I am sure they have got the Bs and the block 3s mixed up. As to 250 fighters we have been saying this all along. It looks like 28Bs and then 50 block 3s.
Why do we need the 2 wing HPs? PAF has openly stated its A2A interdiction platforms will carry 4 plus 2 AAMs. If we have DERs this need is adequately filled. The whole idea is to travel light, off load weapons RTB, reload and hit again. The emphasis will be on serviceability of platforms. All ideas of bomb trucks go down the drain when you have 2 adversaries with BVRs on their platform. You cannot carry more as once AAMs are fired the adversary will jetison load and head for home. Any adventurism will result with a rear end penetration by an AAM.
Oh bhai this is a breaking chute which is deployed after landing for slow down, this can't be deployed in air, becuase its destabilized aircraft if deploy in air
Its a drag/breaking chute casing that's opens up, it is not an air brakes bro
