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

[messiach]

@Dazzler thankyou.

Extractive changes are more significant. Removal of mechanical backups has defined more space in mid fuselage and rootlets -- Perhaps for fuel / internal bay?. Posterior fuselage has undergone redesign -- not sure why? to accommodate more than one type of fan?? Wings are definitely recrafted, it looks canted at a slightly dihedral angle creating a non 0 angle of sidestep -- this may be providing greater clearance.

Need higher zoom photographs to look at fine changes.

Thanks!

I did some pixel counting to compare this pic with that of B2 (attached). The screenshot of Excel file summarizes my findings:

1. B3 wing span is more.
2. B3 total height is more.
3. There is certainly a difference in Landing Gear configuration, with slight difference of height probable.
4. B3 inlet may be slightly larger, though the difference indicated could be due to measurement error (which is ~2%).

The differences are small, but significant enough to be noted. @messiach is probably right after all, though one might have expected greater difference.

 

[Chak Bamu]

View attachment 772438

OK. I am not talking specifically about the grey area. I am focusing on the slight protrusion at the edge. See the two pics for comparison. I am not sure that this is for static discharge, since all that takes is a sharp pin & not necessarily a tube.

 

[musaji]

I’m not entirely sure, but it looks like a new image of a Block 3 prototype.

(Image via @Oneninety from Weibo)

View attachment 771548

so no drag shoot on block 3?

 

[Dazzler]

OK. I am not talking specifically about the grey area. I am focusing on the slight protrusion at the edge. See the two pics for comparison. I am not sure that this is for static discharge, since all that takes is a sharp pin & not necessarily a tube.

Housing for ew sensors. Both horizontal wings have those. Blk 2s lack those but Bravos have them. Blk 3 has a comprehensive ew management system unlike ew suite of previous blocks. Similar in capability to j10C.

so no drag shoot on block 3?

It's there since the housing is there. Maybe not deployed?

 

[khanasifm]

 

[Shah_Deu]

Honestly I seriously doubt there would be any changes in the body structure, for the simple reason that in case of even small changes in the structure, the jigs and fixtures need an extensive rework, from stamping to assembly processes. And the rework is only cost effective if it is a significant one. Even in the minor model change of cars they usually don't touch the stamped body.

This even doesn't take into consideration that the aerodynamics need a re-validation if the original model is changed, from windtunnel testing to simulated CFD testing, depending on how big the change is.

In short, any rumoured changes in the physical structure is just not cost effective. And least to say that PAF has now many more avenues where extensive money inputs are needed especially in R&D of AZM, MALE UAV etc etc.

 

[Aesterix]

View attachment 772532

Is that your YouTube channel?
I am a subscriber of this channel.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Housing for ew sensors. Both horizontal wings have those. Blk 2s lack those but Bravos have them. Blk 3 has a comprehensive ew management system unlike ew suite of previous blocks. Similar in capability to j10C.

Thanks. That is what I had thought. It would be interesting to compare this with Bravo. Also, any speculation what it's purpose might be? Situational awareness perhaps?

Honestly I seriously doubt there would be any changes in the body structure, for the simple reason that in case of even small changes in the structure, the jigs and fixtures need an extensive rework, from stamping to assembly processes. And the rework is only cost effective if it is a significant one. Even in the minor model change of cars they usually don't touch the stamped body.

This even doesn't take into consideration that the aerodynamics need a re-validation if the original model is changed, from windtunnel testing to simulated CFD testing, depending on how big the change is.

In short, any rumoured changes in the physical structure is just not cost effective. And least to say that PAF has now many more avenues where extensive money inputs are needed especially in R&D of AZM, MALE UAV etc etc.

We already know that Bravo has some changes, especially in the wings. We have also seen the enlarged spine in Block-3 as compared to earlier single seaters. I would not be surprised to find some more differences. Its not like Block-3 is a whole new aircraft. Changes are expected as the program evolves. Reworking jigs can not be a reason to stop its evolution. Every major change has involved reconsideration, testing, & validation of all the relevant parameters.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Thanks. That is what I had thought. It would be interesting to compare this with Bravo. Also, any speculation what it's purpose might be? Situational awareness perhaps?

We already know that Bravo has some changes, especially in the wings. We have also seen the enlarged spine in Block-3 as compared to earlier single seaters. I would not be surprised to find some more differences. Its not like Block-3 is a whole new aircraft. Changes are expected as the program evolves. Reworking jigs can not be a reason to stop its evolution. Every major change has involved reconsideration, testing, & validation of all the relevant parameters.

perhaps these changes are a reason for prolonged testing of block 3.
and we haven't seen a finished block 3odel clear for production yet.

 

[Bossman]

Is the picture from Chengdu or Kamra

 

[Deino]

Is the picture from Chengdu or Kamra

Allegedly from CAC (via Huitong)

 

[Shabi1]

You can't simply add longer landing gear without having to redesign the landing gear retracting mechanism, not to mention the housing within the airframe and the wheel wells. There's no indication the landing gear has changed. Astonishing what people are willing to see that isn't there.

Yes you are right. However the JF-17 Blk-3 is exactly that, its a major internal redesign so possibilities of changes exist.

In this case,
The aircraft is touching down so the gear might seem longer as the shocks havnt taken the full weight of the aircraft. Can't say anything else at the moment as details are very scarce, its a secretive bird.

 

[The Raven]

OK. I am not talking specifically about the grey area. I am focusing on the slight protrusion at the edge. See the two pics for comparison. I am not sure that this is for static discharge, since all that takes is a sharp pin & not necessarily a tube.

Seems too small to be an ECM fairing. If it is something as integral as part of the ECM system, you'd expect it to be in previous Block III prototypes? Is that the case? Would genuinely like to know. Also notice how those two pics are very difficult to compare on a like-for-like bases, look how much of the hardpoint and drop tank is showing in the Block II pick, and that it is taking off, with the tailplane in the opposite orientation as the Block III landing.

Thanks!

I did some pixel counting to compare this pic with that of B2 (attached). The screenshot of Excel file summarizes my findings:

1. B3 wing span is more.
2. B3 total height is more.
3. There is certainly a difference in Landing Gear configuration, with slight difference of height probable.
4. B3 inlet may be slightly larger, though the difference indicated could be due to measurement error (which is ~2%).

The differences are small, but significant enough to be noted. @messiach is probably right after all, though one might have expected greater difference.

All you've done here is measure the difference in aspect angle between two photos. Unless you know that the aspect angle of the two photos is identical (which you can't) it's not a like-for-like comparison.

 

[araz]

View attachment 772438

Block 2 B had a lot of changes which were subsequently integrated on to Block 3. Since you have presented a picture of Block 2 B I wonder whether this is something that has shifted on to Block 3 and was not there on Block 2As. answer appreciated in advance.
A

 

[Akh1112]

Block 2 B had a lot of changes which were subsequently integrated on to Block 3. Since you have presented a picture of Block 2 B I wonder whether this is something that has shifted on to Block 3 and was not there on Block 2As. answer appreciated in advance.
A

some things are new, like the three axis fbw and new landing lights, that’s about all I can say judging off of the exterior.

with regards to the stabilisers, the silver is present on them too on b2a