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

[GumNaam]

Obviously the nose mounted sensor boom will go as that's for prototypes only.
What else you expecting?

Pic of the boom please?

 

[Shabi1]

Oh that's a new one...so WS13 is reverse engineered RD93MA?

WS-13 is a reverse engineered RD-93 with slight mods, google it up.

However from a poster in sinodefence, there is two way flow of expertise between the Russians and Chinese. The RD-93MA/WS-13E is a combination of efforts from both sides.

 

[Safriz]

Pic of the boom please?

 

[Sinnerman108]

View attachment 618038 If ws-13e is indeed more of a power house over rd-93 as rumored than it indeed might come in with the block 3.


That is if it gives significantly more power than rd-93

One can tweak the compressor stage(s) for more air and more compression.
But when you do that, it has to reflect on flight characteristics.
Stalling the compressor, specially an aggressive compressor is easier than you may think.

The question of thrust is answered not so much in the compressor stage, but in the turbine stage.

that is where the limitations are, and that is what principally defines the MTBR.

 

[Dazzler]

@LKJ86

Interesting times, Huitong just updated the page,,,about time.

The latest rumor (March 2020) suggested that the indigenous WS-13 engine is finally ready for mass production.

View attachment 618295

News has it that the nose may become more eliptical, ala j-10B/C

 

[Silicon0000]

Dont take my word for it but,

Overhaul facility -(If PAF had to change into the WS-13 type than why Dedicate commitment to a temporary cause)
Reliable jet engine with good performance
No as such problems or Issues with the Jet engine
PAC fixed the Smoke Issue-- (If they wanted WS-13 than they would have not fixed the smoke)

Rd93 is here to stay Making adjustments to an engine, establishing technical depots and training personnel comes with a heavy price tag. Also the Pilots would have to re train their brain and revise training.

In pashto we say "LAAS LANDI" which translates to "under the hand" and that is what the Rd-93 means for PAF.

jf-17 and the rd93 is the CD-70 Of PAF.

With current thrust configuration the service Life is beautiful, PAC can increase the thrust but it will come at the cost of higher serviceability and lower Life cycle.

No matter how logical you post, Fanboys will only see what they want. Useless to debate them.

 

[Ultima Thule]

No matter how logical you post, Fanboys will only see what they want. Useless to debate them.

We are not fanboys there is a rumors that WS-13E especially built for block-3, and how to compensate excess weights of fuel/ avionics/AESA, ASEA (KLJ-7A) need more power, thats why block-3 needs higher thrust engine

 

[Silicon0000]

We are not fanboys there is a rumors that WS-13E especially built for block-3, and how to compensate excess weights of fuel/ avionics/AESA, ASEA (KLJ-7A) need more power, thats why block-3 needs higher thrust engine

Ok.

 

[Nomad40]

We are not fanboys there is a rumors that WS-13E especially built for block-3, and how to compensate excess weights of fuel/ avionics/AESA, ASEA (KLJ-7A) need more power, thats why block-3 needs higher thrust engine

You need to understand electricity (Imma explain it to you cave man novice style)

Watts is si unit of power

I Dont have experience with fighters and Radars so I can be very wrong!

AESA and much of the other Radars have the ability to Operate at different Power setting AESA don't require a lot of power all the time.

Radars are adjusted to scan a certain area on certain degree angles and distances

Radar transmition power also depends on the distance and height of the target

1.34hp=1Kw, watts= Ampere x Volts.

I dont know the amps used for different electronics in the JF-17 or any fighter

Cessna 172 alternator produces 28v to run the electrics and also to charge the 24v battery G-1000 are easly run by the lycoming-o 360 which in standard config will give you 150-160 hp = 145kW

Battery on C-172 with G-1000 are mostly 24V there are also 12V battery around 40 amp generator and a 60+- ammeter and a max load meter of 60 amps

but rarely the instrument go over 1.8 and auto pilot over 5 amps

The f-22 AESA requires 20 kW at Peak performance (radars can be and are adjusted to different power setting)

Rd-93 has around 19200 hp + generator.

sab 2000 have around 8000+ hp and they run a pretty big AESA battle station EW suite etc and fly, also look at the DA20 much weakr than the saab in terms of power.

 

[Ultima Thule]

You need to understand electricity (Imma explain it to you cave man novice style)

Watts is si unit of power

I Dont have experience with fighters and Radars so I can be very wrong!

AESA and much of the other Radars have the ability to Operate at different Power setting AESA don't require a lot of power all the time.

Radars are adjusted to scan a certain area on certain degree angles and distances

Radar transmition power also depends on the distance and height of the target

1.34hp=1Kw, watts= Ampere x Volts.

I dont know the amps used for different electronics in the JF-17 or any fighter

Cessna 172 alternator produces 28v to run the electrics and also to charge the 24v battery G-1000 are easly run by the lycoming-o 360 which in standard config will give you 150-160 hp = 145kW

Battery on C-172 with G-1000 are mostly 24V there are also 12V battery around 40 amp generator and a 60+- ammeter and a max load meter of 60 amps

but rarely the instrument go over 1.8 and auto pilot over 5 amps

The f-22 AESA requires 20 kW at Peak performance (radars can be and are adjusted to different power setting)

Rd-93 has around 19200 hp + generator.

sab 2000 have around 8000+ hp and they run a pretty big AESA battle station EW suite etc and fly, also look at the DA20 much weakr than the saab in terms of power.

Excess weight from additional avionics/ fuel how we compensate that with old RD-93 in Block-3??

 

[Nomad40]

Excess weight from additional avionics/ fuel how we compensate that with old RD-93 in Block-3??

We dont know if it will carry any extra fuel in the belly. Belly drop tank with wing drop tanks would be a good addition to squeeze the utmost range of the light fighter

Avionics are not that heavy it is a fighter jet, 100 kilos extra is no problem

Maybe composite are used to bring a little weight down (seems like it)

light material paint scheme would be help full.

Upgrade to the MA version ? who dosnt like the extra thrust but the JF-17 in no way or form is as agile as the F-16 so it is not a Dog fighter. you would need significant upgrade in engine and change of wing design to get better control in tight and slow turns.

But the way it looks like PAF will not change.

 

[Ultima Thule]

We dont know if it will carry any extra fuel in the belly. Belly drop tank with wing drop tanks would be a good addition to squeeze the utmost range of the light fighter

Avionics are not that heavy it is a fighter jet, 100 kilos extra is no problem

Maybe composite are used to bring a little weight down (seems like it)

light material paint scheme would be help full.

Upgrade to the MA version ? who dosnt like the extra thrust but the JF-17 in no way or form is as agile as the F-16 so it is not a Dog fighter. you would need significant upgrade in engine and change of wing design to get better control in tight and slow turns.

But the way it looks like PAF will not change.

Huitong blog post saying for production of Block-3 WS-13E will be ready, and look at pics of first flight of block its ECM equipment on the top of the tail/behind intakes and its HUD weighs more 100 kg and its spine is also slightly enlarge may be for more equipment or for fuel, and JF-17 still good dog fighter, especially at low altitudes its better then F-16, and dog fight era is almost getting over future wars will fight in BVR arena, short range AAMs and canons will be the last ditch weapons

 

[NA71]

 

[Deino]

View attachment 618428

On what detail are they identified as Block 3?

 

[Maxpane]

On what detail are they identified as Block 3?

none just pic sir. i think its just a guess