Would you like to discuss the article?
You said: "
The basic design of the airframe is a further development from the remains of the joint Sabre 2 project between Chengdu Aircraft Industries of China and Grumman Aerospace Corporation "
Here is about the Sabre II project: " Under Project Sabre II, considered a replacement of the abandoned Super-7 project by the Chinese,
the F-7 airframe was redesigned with angled air intakes on the sides of the fuselage replacing the nose intake. The nose intake was replaced by a solid nose radome to house the avionics from the F-20 Tigershark. The Chinese WP-7 turbojet engine was planned to be replaced with a modern turbofan engine, either the GE F404 or PW1120, to improve performance.
The resulting aircraft, designated F-7M Sabre-II, would have looked much like the Guizhou JL-9 (or FTC-2000) jet trainer / fighter aircraft.
Now, had the Sabre II project gone on, this below pic can give you an idea what it would have been looked like:
and now compare it to the JL-9 / FTC 2000:
and here is the JF-17:
So, now plz enlighten us, which part of JF-17 seems to be a modification or further designed part of the Sabre II project, which part of JF-17 has anything in similar with Sabre II project or the F-7 ?? Wings ? Tail & rudder ? Stabilizers ? nose ? LERX ? Intakes ? even the front and rear landing gear of JF-17 have nothing in common with the landing gear of F-7s. So now which part of JF-17 suggests it is made on a modified design of F-7 or Sabre II project. Plz point out just one single similarity between both the designs. Just one single design which is there in both planes.
-------------------------------------------
You said: "
The powerplant currently is a Chinese version of the Soviet Klimov RD-33/93 turbofan engine. "
Chinese version of the Soviet turbo fan engine ?? What the hell are you writing about ?? How it can be a Chinese version when it is being built and imported from Russia, while only installation is being done in China, Chinese did not built this engine nor they have been provided the technology to make it locally under licence. For God sake, do this correction.
-----------------------------------------
You said: "
The Kamra Avionics and Radar Factory (KARF) portion of the PAC has used its previous experience with integrating western avionics into Chinese aircraft to attempt to integrate the Italian Grifo-7 radar into the PAF JF-17s using equipment provided by the US company APS Novastar for production and assembly of circuit boards."
Grifo-7 lost the competition when it was brought in comparison with KLJ-7 radar, that is why we are using the KLJ-7 not because we have not been able to do the integration.
And the APS Novastar equipment would be used to make circuit boards and stuff for whatever avionics they can be used for, not just Grifo-7 radar. Plus, the Grifo-7 radar tech is Italian, thus had we gone for Grifo radars for JF-17s, we would have gotten the tech from the Italians to manufacture radars locally, just like the earlier version of Grifo radars being assembled and made locally at Kamra.
------------------------------------------------------------
JF-17 has small percentage of composites in its airframe currently, which will increase with the passage of time, so its not just one tin can as you suggested.
---------------------------------------------------------------
You said: "
It is not a state-of-the art airplane by any means "
Care to elaborate, what do you suggest state of the are airplane with respect to the current fighters in our inventory, plus compared to other state of the art fighters deployed.
What is your criteria of state of the art airplane.
What is in JF-17, which makes it having nothing state of the art.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plus, don't come up with this I have inside source thingy, as the above blunders in your article clearly suggest, you have no idea about the JF-17 and you just copy pasted the stuff, some which you understood, some which you have no idea about.
We have more real insider sources on this forum, who have provided quiet credible, authentic information regarding the JF-17 and its capabilities.
So waiting for the explanation of your above blunders, with sources, facts and figures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And by the way, what is the hype about JF-17 ?? What has been so much hyped about it ?? Care to tell, as your copy pasted article had nothing to tell anything hyped about JF-17, its just a normal fighter project, but compared to the fighters we have, its generations ahead of them, minus the Blk 52s. So what is so hyped about it ?? Did anyone said its a 6th generation fighter which can't be seen to naked eyes ??