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

[CriticalThought]

The future of jf17 View attachment 773401View attachment 773402View attachment 773403

A very simple rule for aircraft design. Wherever you see a discontinuity on the aircraft surface, it is a point that can contribute to radar signature and cause problems in supersonic airflow. That flanker design with side inlets tacked on is not that great. Consider both JF-17 and F-35 and how the inlet opening is a smooth continuation of the body. That is what you are looking for.

 

[Mr.Cringeworth]

Hmm .... the JF-17 Thunder Block-3 looks like it has visible structural

Dear @messiach and just as a pretext to this post, I would like to note that I don't want to offend you in any way, I admire your knowledge, I'm more than glad you are back but during the last few weeks, I have some serious issues and this post is a prime-example!

Please explain, where you see a "higher aspect ratio - for lift and maintained endurance" on the wings or any of these details that allegedly "have been optimised to reduce drag which induces an apparent change in wing clearance" and even more changes on the "mid fuselage is smaller as rootlets expanded ... posterior fuselage looks a bit smaller in a diff"! Please show it by comparison with other suitable images of regular Block 2 JF-17s or at least mark it on an image so that we can check for our-self.

In fact - and I'm quite sure several other members here too - see NOTHING, I see no major new wing with wider span, a different and especially not higher aspect ratio or greater ground-clearance, I see no major changes on the fuselage, which would allow a conclusion towards a different engine, higher mass-flow or whatever. Please don't interpret this as ignorance or arrogance or bias, maybe it is a lack of technical understanding, lack of eye-sight or whatever or indeed your knowledge, but PLEASE explain it since at least I truly want to see and believe it, most of all since such major changes at least IMO make no sense. A new wing, a different, redesigned fuselage, a taller gear and so on are no minor changes like an added RWR ow MAWS and as noted I neither see any visible changes nor a reason for such a major redesign, since it would require additional time consuming tests and certification.

Again, please don't take this post as an offence or critic, but only as a desperate request for more information and proof since I want to lean, otherwise any such claim will still remain as mysterious and unbelievable for some here like claims the PAF will get J-15, J-16 and J-20.

Kind regards,
Deino


Sorry, this is exactly the result I feared! There is NOTHING that proves any of these mentioned major changes, yes, these new sensors, pylon attachment and HUD, but points 1-4 are IMO pure speculation and wishful thinking.

@Akh1112

Most Pakistanis on pdf are upto disappointment if they believe any major structural changes are coming to thunder because they're not, i don't see any difference in LG, wing span or fuselage nor were they ever considered on the block 3 agenda shared by past chiefs. I don't know how easily these people's judgment can be clouded by wishful thinking let them believe what they want they're up for a rude awakening.
@Akh1112

 

[araz]

I wont be surpised if some members claim that PAC engnrs on camera are lying..
We have seen PAC engnrs on camera saying that green tiles are are fuel areas..now you can twist it and say it may not always be true but to completely laugh it away..you have to be no less then working in PAC

Ithink what other posters are saying is that while that is true, it just signifies composites use. Some/most of it might signify areas carrying fuel but others might not. Sometimes statements are made without realizing that they wl cause confusion. So perhaps the engineer was asked about AN AREA in green colour and said" it is for fuel". This has now been interpreted as all areas in green are fuel cells.
This is a possible explanation of the confusion.
I dont think it is a matter to fight over. Open fora are for people to express opinions on. If you do not agree, counterargue but do so/with respect for each other. If you disagree after the response move on. I dont see why people have to argue over issues. Debating is disagreeing with respect for each other.
Regards

 

[Deino]

All the observations are consequent deduction of higher AsR. The change in wing clearance is a apparent masquerading effect. Videos would make the point clear.

Pardon, but that's all?? No image to prove, no explanation? Only a short sentence? ... so well, so disappointing.

 

[araz]

The US is not going to sell you top of the line AESA technology. Forget about it. Which means, it no longer makes sense to upgrade existing aircraft or buy new ones. My suggestion is to invest in a larger JF-17 NG that comes in two variants: delta wings and regular. Make this a platform for testing new avionics for Azm. Introduce limited LO features so our pilots can get first hand experience and provide feedback. That is how you advance your own industry.

WhilI agree with you on the possibility of getting US hardware, 2 avenues remain open. Older frames for MLU and upgrades, and procuring from non US sources.
Regarding modifications to JFT these are likely to be minor and mostly internal. Design modifications fail the cost vs benefit analysis. For instance if the modifications take 10 years and 2 billion dollars which is a fairly modest assessment and you still end up with a light weight fighter, is it not better to procure another fighter, with the characteristics that you quote for 2/2.5 billion and it will land on your base in 3 years and be inducted and people trained in 5 yrs. When resources are meagre and experienced manpower limited pragmatic decisions will have to be taken. The decision to buy 30 may have had something to do with the 26 Bs that were acquired or may have been a financial decision. Pak economy has been bad of late and an9ther pragmatic decision based on buying power might have been made.
A

 

[Ghessan]

Ithink what other posters are saying is that while that is true, it just signifies composites use. Some/most of it might signify areas carrying fuel but others might not. Sometimes statements are made without realizing that they wl cause confusion. So perhaps the engineer was asked about AN AREA in green colour and said" it is for fuel". This has now been interpreted as all areas in green are fuel cells.
This is a possible explanation of the confusion.
I dont think it is a matter to fight over. Open fora are for people to express opinions on. If you do not agree, counterargue but do so/with respect for each other. If you disagree after the response move on. I dont see why people have to argue over issues. Debating is disagreeing with respect for each other.
Regards

very true,
since our reporters are not at professional level, the respective field was a no go area for this reporter too.
hence the engineer to be precise to that very kid like question (limited in concept), answer very easily with no give away of further details.
hence it does not define all areas in green are fuel cells but it also does not mean that we, with no knowledge about B3, decide how and where have they managed fuel in it.

 

[CriticalThought]

WhilI agree with you on the possibility of getting US hardware, 2 avenues remain open. Older frames for MLU and upgrades, and procuring from non US sources.
Regarding modifications to JFT these are likely to be minor and mostly internal. Design modifications fail the cost vs benefit analysis. For instance if the modifications take 10 years and 2 billion dollars which is a fairly modest assessment and you still end up with a light weight fighter, is it not better to procure another fighter, with the characteristics that you quote for 2/2.5 billion and it will land on your base in 3 years and be inducted and people trained in 5 yrs. When resources are meagre and experienced manpower limited pragmatic decisions will have to be taken. The decision to buy 30 may have had something to do with the 26 Bs that were acquired or may have been a financial decision. Pak economy has been bad of late and an9ther pragmatic decision based on buying power might have been made.
A

Well, there is a false economy at play here. No one is challenging the Azm project, which means everyone wants to see a 5th gen plane designed and produced by PAC. And yet, nobody is willing to answer the question 'How can PAC design and develop such a plane as the very first one that it ever produces on its own?' People conveniently bring in J-31 or the Turk initiative into the discussion. This is just mental slavery.

Who says it takes 10 years to perform design modifications? Who said it takes 2 billion dollars? And even if it takes 2 billion dollars, much of that money will go towards setting up infrastructure such as wind tunnels and computing which will continue to give dividends in the future. That money shouldn't be included in the cost of the fighter. Also, I am proposing NG to be a medium weight fighter with a larger frame.

Another aspect is that an airforce cannot sustain only fifth gen assets. You need mix of high end and low end aircrafts to fulfill all mission needs. This means you need a sizeable number of light and medium fighters moving into the future. So you are telling me, that PAF will keep relying on foreign fighters indefinitely for the medium weight role? This makes no sense at all.

Finally, your own medium weight fighter will bring export benefits as well. Why should we pay the money to others when we can money ourselves? I'll tell you what the problem is. The problem is that people's minds cannot see a world where PAC produces a medium weight fighter cost effectively and in reasonable time. And this is a problem with people's intelligence.

 

[alee92nawaz]

Why are you guys so fixed on visible structural changes? We all know that there weren't supposed to be many of those. Most avionics radar, missiles etc were supposed to be upgraded?. My question is that can JF-17 now fire raad/raad2 ?

 

[Dazzler]

Moving forward..
Entire software code for block 3 is written by PAF engineers. Sensor fusion is enabled. Avionics comply with Mil 1773 optic databus.

 

[Eagle_Nest]

Moving forward..
Entire software code for block 3 is written by PAF engineers. Sensor fusion is enabled. Avionics comply with Mil 1773 optic databus.

Now thats a good news if true.

 

[Falcon26]

Just a reminder everyone:

There’s no harm in saying you don’t know what you don’t know. There’s no need to claim information that you aren’t privy to. And there’s no need to spew hubris and false information in an attempt to look cool.

This is a discussion forum and we are all here to discuss and learn from one another. No one expects anyone to know everything but what’s expected is integrity and honesty.

PDF titles aren’t a substitute for evidence. When one makes a brazenly untrue claims, members have every right to challenge them.

 

[NA71]

Now thats a good news if true.

actually hired programmers ....on top of the team

 

[Sinnerman108]

Gentlemen

The quantity of fuel doesn't remain constant during the flight;
As the aircraft burns fuel, the weight decreases.

Which should automatically tell you, that fuel can only be stored in areas where
the CG can be kept constant or be compensated easily by control surfaces.

The clever bit would be, if fuel was stored towards the nose of the aircraft,
that tank would be used first (Take off ), thus as soon as the aircraft is high enough,
the weight dynamics would be right. @messiach

 

[Dazzler]

Gentlemen

The quantity of fuel doesn't remain constant during the flight;
As the aircraft burns fuel, the weight decreases.

Which should automatically tell you, that fuel can only be stored in areas where
the CG can be kept constant or be compensated easily by control surfaces.

The clever bit would be, if fuel was stored towards the nose of the aircraft,
that tank would be used first (Take off ), thus as soon as the aircraft is high enough,
the weight dynamics would be right. @messiach

Internal fuel compartments are connected through pipes for this reason I assume?

 

[Sinnerman108]

Internal fuel compartments are connected through pipes for this reason I assume?

I know what you are saying,
I was after something else ...