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

[Ghessan]

Beauty and the Beast

View attachment 793163

beast has all his eyes on em.

 

[Tamiyah]

 

[Bilal.]

View attachment 793452View attachment 793452

RD93MA confirmed? 9.5 tons of thrust.

Edit: wrong conversion, it was US ton. So it’s the same thrust as before.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @HRK

 

[RealNapster]

RD93MA confirmed? 9.5 tons of thrust

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @HRK

10500 lb Armament load capability mean almost 4700 kg. Mashallah

 

[iLION12345_1]

View attachment 793452View attachment 793452

So this confirms the engine is the same, unlike claimed by some others.
maximum payload is increased, upto 4800 KG from 4200, that’s pretty significant, but with the same engine, I worry how much it will effect the flight characteristics, infact the Empty weight, MTOW and Payload capacity are all increased but with the same engine.

 

[Bilal.]

So this confirms the engine is the same, unlike claimed by some others.
MTOW and maximum payload is increased, upto 4800 KG from 4200, that’s pretty significant, but with the same engine, I worry how much it will effect the flight characteristics.

A bit disappointed that it’s not RD93MA.

 

[iLION12345_1]

A bit disappointed that it’s not RD93MA.

Disappointing yes, but RD93MA was unrealistic given how little we’ve heard of this development. I’m 100% certain PAC/PAF has been doing something In regards to RD93MA, I’ve seen the proof.
but what exactly they’re doing and how realistic it’s chances are of ending up on a JF-17, I really can’t say.

 

[Bilal.]

Disappointing yes, but RD93MA was unrealistic given how little we’ve heard of this development. I’m 100% certain PAC/PAF has been doing something In regards to RD93MA, I’ve seen the proof.
but what exactly they’re doing and how realistic it’s chances are of ending up on a JF-17, I really can’t say.

Yes the timelines were a bit off. But I was hoping to be surprised.

 

[RealNapster]

Disappointing yes, but RD93MA was unrealistic given how little we’ve heard of this development. I’m 100% certain PAC/PAF has been doing something In regards to RD93MA, I’ve seen the proof.
but what exactly they’re doing and how realistic it’s chances are of ending up on a JF-17, I really can’t say.

So a Block 4 with almost same characteristics and avionics, 5000 kg Payload and Rd-93MA possible ? I mean it won't take hundreds of millions and more than 2 years to come up with first prototype. What do you think ?

 

[iLION12345_1]

View attachment 793452View attachment 793452

Also to note, height and wingspan of the aircraft is exactly the same as block 1, lends more credence to the fact that it’s externally the same. Length seems to be a typo, 7 feet lol. Shorter than a normal car.

So a Block 4 with almost same characteristics and avionics, 5000 kg Payload and Rd-93MA possible ? I mean it won't take hundreds of millions and more than 2 years to come up with first prototype. What do you think ?

it’s too early to say where the plane goes form here, even block 3 isn’t ready yet, but imo it really does need a new engine, it’s the last weak-spot left on the aircraft for me, significantly increased weight but with the same engine and thrust, not good for the maneuverability.

Though one possibility could be that the RD93MA is delayed, maybe they planned to use it for the block 3 and it isn’t ready yet, and we will see it on block 3 later down the line, but that’s just wishful thinking.

Also to note, height and wingspan of the aircraft is exactly the same as block 1, lends more credence to the fact that it’s externally the same. Length seems to be a typo, 7 feet lol. Shorter than a normal car.

it’s too early to say where the plane goes form here, even block 3 isn’t ready yet, but imo it really does need a new engine, it’s the last weak-spot left on the aircraft for me, significantly increased weight but with the same engine and thrust, not good for the maneuverability.

Though one possibility could be that the RD93MA is delayed, maybe they planned to use it for the block 3 and it isn’t ready yet, and we will see it on block 3 later down the line, but that’s just wishful thinking.

JF-17 according to the brochure

 

[Sal12]

Speed is also same as it was before.

 

[iLION12345_1]

In other news, GE confirmed that The Tejas’ engine has 84Kn thrust, exactly the same as that of JF-17s engine, and not 90KN like Indians have been claiming for years.

Combine that with the Delta-wing design of the Tejas, which while likely giving it more payload capacity than the Thunder (5300KG claimed but I haven’t seen a concrete source for that) and making it good for A2G roles, will significantly hamper its performance in A2A roles where it will experience a lot more drag and energy loss. So what advantages does the Tejas have left over the JF-17 Thunder exactly, and what else have the Indians been lying about in regards to its performance?

Source:https://www.geaviation.com/sites/default/files/datasheet-F404-Family.pdf

 

[Windjammer]

Number of hard points increased to 8 from 6.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Number of hard points increased to 8 from 6.

From 7, that’s the new one under the fuselage.

 

[luciferdd]

B3 still use old engine...i think that‘s the reason why PAF order some J10C.