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

[CIA Mole]

Want to compete... for edited pictures.... But, this place will be turned into something to dump all the internet garbage by so-called analysts and future tellers.

View attachment 708625



View attachment 708628

View attachment 708630
But I call this a masterpiece back then...
View attachment 708629

however, even the fans presented nice models during a ceremony in AirChina Show 2018 (I think) which were quoted as some leaks and it took almost a month for us to contain the spread of such rumor on this forum alone.

View attachment 708631

View attachment 708634

View attachment 708633

But, I like this one from the past.....

View attachment 708635

Any chance of these designed being realized?

 

[FuturePAF]

At the cost of payload. Those pylons need weapons and missiles for the mission profile. Tankers and AWAECs can have escort.

The way you put it, in a conflict, our AWAECs will be useless thanks to BVRS like R-77/37, Meteors, ASTRA etc. Maybe that is why Indian hasn't invested heavily in AWACs cause they know we are gonna shoot it down by firing BVRs at them.

In such case, we need to make preparations to keep our net-centric capability intact and even if AWACs which play a vital role, is taken out of picture, we can perform the operations successfully.

Tankers and Awacs need better self protection suites; soft and hard kill options, physical and EW. Escorts are also needed just in case, but that is not the only sacrifice. Time spent meeting up with a tanker, tanking, and returning to the fight can be crucial time the enemy can catch us in vulnerable positions.

Awacs are just so much more capable then fighter radars that there isn’t an alternative. But tankers (or at least large tankers) don’t have to be used if alternatives can be found. Btw how many tankers does Sweden operate? They seem to use their c-130 as light tankers and focus on sortie rate generation through road basing. We should consider doing the same. A few smaller tankers that can land on motorways and hide from the enemy as best they can. The JF-17 also needs to focus on sortie rate generation and road base operations, because on day one, the enemy would do their darnest to knock out as many regular installations as possible.

 

[Dazzler]

Which RCS are you saying is wrong?

The one I know off, thunder.

 

[ziaulislam]

If the JF-17 is to true evolve to meet those requirements, it would require a redesign. It would be a totally new block, and probably something too much to take on just yet. PAF will see how Block III pans out before considering a Block IV.

The first factor would be to make the plane larger, so more fuel is carried internally, but the key to this will be engine development. If the engine thrust improves 15-25% over those shown for the RD-93MA, then you can expect them to give serious consideration to a new variant (JF-17 is after all the backbone of the PAF fleet), but short of that it wouldn’t justify the development costs when the PAF could just go for the J-10 now.

Considering the J-31/35 looks like it maybe picked up as the future PLANAF carrier fighter, expect a lot attention will go to WS-13/WS-19 engine development.

Doesnt need a redesign just an engine upgrade /rd93ma

There are plenty of examples of aircrafts undergoing minor engine upgrade

 

[araz]

what the PAF really needs to do is proliferate air refueling tankers so that we get to the point where every JF17 that is loaded with 3 fuel tanks and BVR missiles or AGMs can take off, go refuel and then go to the mission, whatever that may be. With full load including 3 fuel tanks, it consumes probably a quarter of its internal fuel just during take off. this isn't an uncommon practice. usaf's f15s and f16s do this all the time, take off with a full load, go up there and air refuel and then proceed towards the mission. there are youtube videos available from the pov of the refueler where a fully laden f15/f16/f18 is refueling.

Currently for 130JFTS and 30-40M3/5s, we have 4 tankers. Whatever we do currently we cannot refuel the/16s. 4 tankers for 160 fighters seems appropriate. It maybe worthwhile checking the US plane to tanker ratio to see what it should be but I suspect you will find this to be satisfactory.
A

 

[The Eagle]

Any chance of these designed being realized?

Nothing heard then after. These models were presented for Pak-China friendship JF-17 Thunder in an Air Show if I remember correctly... souvenir.

 

[Riz]

Nothing heard then after. These models were presented for Pak-China friendship JF-17 Thunder in an Air Show if I remember correctly... souvenir.

Imagine A small single engine jet like JF-17 with stealth features armed with PL-10,PL-15 would be a nightmare for our adversaries next door...love to see one of these model based home made jet by pak private sector

 

[The Eagle]

Imagine A small single engine jet like JF-17 with stealth features armed with PL-10,PL-15 would be a nightmare for our adversaries next door...love to see one of these model based home made jet by pak private sector

There was an active discussion on PDF alone about a low observable Jf-17 Block-X prior to FGF/NGF or call it an NGF in class of 4.95 gen (lol). I laughed on my on opinion though.

 

[FuturePAF]

Doesnt need a redesign just an engine upgrade /rd93ma

There are plenty of examples of aircrafts undergoing minor engine upgrade

Preferable a more fuel efficient engine will help with the range problem, but a redesign that increases fuel capacity and minimizes drag along with an engine upgrade when next available would all be needed if the plane if to have a considerable increase in range. The new engine alone in the current design will definitely be an improvement, but is it enough?

Isn’t the WS-19’s goal to match the F414 engine in as many parameters as possible? The RD-93MA is a step in the right direction but hopefully when the WS-19 is mature enough, and if it meets its goals, we will see what options the PAF will have and if they consider a redesign like Saab did with the Gripen or something even more ambitious.

 

[TNT]

Sometimes I don't know why I bother! .... ....

please watch the designer presenting the plane and giving the above details. He say radius of action is 1,400km for air to air mode. This is at 5:26

View attachment 709258

So its not 500 km as some people here claim.

 

[khanasifm]

1 block 3 8th under intake pylon attachment POint is visible in the pic
2 Ws-13 pic released back 6/7 years ago being testing on jf-17 initially shows the engine nozzle petals on brownish color plus size is also different or larger then rd-93 blue ish color petals
3 newer rd-93MA also has same engine nozzle Color scheme plus size as rd-93

4 based on it it should be easy to do distinguish of block 3is carrying RD or WS engine

lastly HUD is visible change 8th pylons point externally is visible change , engine could be of WS is selected ( unlikely for paf )but possible or more so for international or plaaf orders

 

[The SC]

https://fighterjetsworld.com/air/he...al-pictures-of-jf-17-thunder-block-iii/24319/

 

[PakShaheen79]

Desperately waiting for cockpit images of Block-IIIs.

 

[Salman Baig]

Does blk3 or earlier blocks has ground collision avoidance system? Since all code for thunder avionics integration is written by Pakistanis so being a programmer myself it don't look to be a complex system to integrate especially when blk3 is going to be fly by wire on all 3 axis.
With that system train could be fed to jets and could help pilots to take full advantage of geographical features without worrying much to manually control it. The viper accident which happened last year fir 23rd March rehearsals could be avoided by it in case of thunders.
And with it pilots could manoeuvres under bridges and between building too. Something like what we have in cruise missile but within G limit of fighter jets.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Does blk3 or earlier blocks has ground collision avoidance system? Since all code for thunder avionics integration is written by Pakistanis so being a programmer myself it don't look to be a complex system to integrate especially when blk3 is going to be fly by wire on all 3 axis.
With that system train could be fed to jets and could help pilots to take full advantage of geographical features without worrying much to manually control it. The viper accident which happened last year fir 23rd March rehearsals could be avoided by it in case of thunders.
And with it pilots could manoeuvres under bridges and between building too. Something like what we have in cruise missile but within G limit of fighter jets.

why you think it not have ground collision avoidance system, it's a modern 4 gen fighter jet???