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

[notorious_eagle]

It was something (possibly Archer) they tested back in the mid-2000s, but they didn't go ahead with it. I think had the Thales deal for Block-I/II gone through, we would've gotten TopOwl-F with it. That aside, there's basically only the Elbit Targos-line, and that's a non-starter. So, we're waiting for someone to develop an alternative.

I know that China is working on a few solutions for HMD, considering how much money they have sunk into R&D for their Aviation Sector. If its a top priority, i am sure PAF must be working on this right now.

 

[GeraltofRivia]

I know Rhode and Shwartz too well; they are not the top EW provider; may be in Europe. I can tell you I worked on most latest chinese equipment 3 years back; it was no way good. Bogus specs all over the place.

May I ask what "latest Chinese equipment" you have worked on are specifically? Not aware any cutting edge Chinese equipment has been exported. The avionics on B3 is the most advanced equipment that China has shared with its partner.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

HMDS is not a difficult technology just one that needs a lot of sweat to develop. The earliest Soviet HMS was quite simply a round wire. Putting a display is child's play and a question of what info you want on it.
Also HMD is to an extent an alternative to the HUD. Its best not to have too much clutter on the visor and the HUD otherwise the pilot loses info not gaining it.

To develop the right combo and info on the HUD and HMD one has to have close specialised knowledge about modern warfare. This means its best to actually develop this in house.
Huawei would be a great partner for PAF to shrink the bulky Chinese HMD and to make it more use able.

Absolutely sir it's now more about head neck and thorax of our pilots rather than the technology.

 

[GeraltofRivia]

the helmet and a PAF pilot he is pointing in the video is actually mentioned in the link provided by @LKJ86 in his previous post, link below:

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/rv6Ht-_qgT9rVq7z_yYkcg

Yes, he suggests that the helmet looks like HGU-55 used in PAF so likely that it was flew by Pakistani test pilot, indicating PAF is closely involved in block3 project.

 

[The Eagle]

Be calm but keep discussing for HMDs options as there is in-fact a surprise. Did we forget that even Block-II EW package done really well against IAF on 27th Feb? Ref: ACM Quote in regard to JF-17 Thunder performance against IAF's package. However, not everything is made public and shall never be for many reasons.

 

[LKJ86]

May I ask what "latest Chinese equipment" you have worked on are specifically? Not aware any cutting edge Chinese equipment has been exported

I'm also curious about what it was.

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

I believe the way things are being put together for the JF-17 is not the same way most other Chinese products are put together. The primary difference here is the end-user requirements are driving the solution and not the other way around (i.e. PAF take what the Chinese offer them).

From an end-user standpoint, not only is the PAF exposed to pretty significant advancements on its own F-16s, but also due to the exposure the PAF has been getting while operating with/against NATO air forces in MNExs and also with so many friendly countries operating quite advanced platforms with the latest in EW technologies.

When it comes to Chinese, based on PAF's ASRs, the latter will know clearly what it is that Chinese can deliver on and what they cannot. But PAF will not take a solution which does not meet its requirements. This was the sole point of having a joint platform, otherwise PAF could have just gone along with J-10 with off the shelf equipment.

Wasn't the initial impetus for joint venture a little bit of self reliance and maintain numbers of modern aircraft? I think it's still the same and PAF doesn't dictate requirements to the Chinese. At the end of the day, they know that the world doesn't sell us many critical technologies and a lot of time we simply cant afford them.
And in these circumstances, compromise definitely occurs at some stage tough it's totally unintentional.

 

[crankthatskunk]

what is green thing in air frame

Green indicate "composite parts". This would bring the weight of the aircraft down and increase weight to thrust ratio.

 

[The Eagle]

Green indicate "composite parts". This would bring the weight of the aircraft down and increase weight to thrust ratio.

Fuel Cells are highlighted as green.

 

[Bilal.]

Fuel Cells are highlighted as green.

Does the B model store fuel in its vertical tail?

 

[The Eagle]

Does the B model store fuel in its vertical tail?

As the green panel highlights the fuel cell area, I am certain for what you said.

 

[Armchair]

The cockpit also has green panels, does that also mean fuel is stored there?
Would be dumb if that was the case.

 

[M.AsfandYar]

The cockpit also has green panels, does that also mean fuel is stored there?
Would be dumb if that was the case.

There are fuel tanks under Green, except the ones on Cockpit sides

 

[The Eagle]

The cockpit also has green panels, does that also mean fuel is stored there?
Would be dumb if that was the case.

Empty cell area to accommodate any commodity and highlighting the part under cockpit may be referred to AESA instruments as well. But, not the composite if I am not wrong. However, if it is the case as I stated earlier or not; dumb is not the expectation at all.

 

[Dil Pakistan]

the helmet and a PAF pilot he is pointing in the video is actually mentioned in the link provided by @LKJ86 in his previous post, link below:

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/rv6Ht-_qgT9rVq7z_yYkcg

cheenee mein post hay bhai - kahan say parhein