JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[fatman17]

Fatman17, coming from you; this response is both amazing and disappointing.

Where is the relevance to Tejas, that you had to drag that into this thread?
The issue being discussed was the MTBO and service life of the Klimov RD-33/93 engines which happens to power the JF-17 just as it happens to power the IAF MiG-29s. The problems/shortcomings with these engines is well documented in the public domain and has found reference here. You would be well advised to refer to the literature available on the net to confirm that.

If the PAF (or anybody else for that matter) is comfortable with that factor, then so be it. About the abysmally low service life of the F-6 engines, even that is common knowledge just as the fact that humongous numbers of engines had to be kept available just to keep the aircraft serviceable. But that was a different time and age. Now will any AF be comfortable with trying to maintain a similar logistical chain, esp. if the engines come from a Third-Party supplier?

I sincerely hope that you will consider all factors before penning a response, that may IMVHO be considered to be 'half-c0cked'?

my dear sir you are entitled to your opinion. as far as the PAF being comfortable, yes they are and are fully cognizant of these facts as we are -hence the US$3.5 bill investment over the 4-5 year period of this project, 3rd party or not - the point is we will have to wait and see and all this previous discussion, IMVHO is going no where.

if you want to discuss the shortcomings of the MiG-29, kindly consider to do it elsewhere. as far as the Tejas goes, well ok, i shouldnt have broached that subject here. have a nice day/night!

 

[farhan_9909]

can we overhaul rd93 and the future variant rd93MA at home?

 

[DARKY]

The German Luftwaffe MiG-29 Experience:

Fighter Aicraft, MiG-29/4

By making modifications to the turbine section to reduce operating temperatures in peacetime (equates to reduced thrust for the pilots) the Luftwaffe hoped to extend the life of the engines, reduce their support costs, as well as increase the overhaul interval from their original 350 hour prediction to 700-750 hours, depending on engine age. This innovation did not address combat demands upon the engine. Consequently, one may infer that a combat engine setting will be incorporated in the engine modification kit to facilitate higher performance under wartime conditions. For peacetime training, this lower thrust setting was be used, but it still gave the Fulcrum respectable performance.

You can certainly certainly do that... and make it a passenger airliner.

Not only would such thing significantly reduce the thrust and load carrying capabilities but also compromise with the pilot training methods and quality.

 

[DARKY]

my dear sir you are entitled to your opinion. as far as the PAF being comfortable, yes they are and are fully cognizant of these facts as we are -hence the US$3.5 bill investment over the 4-5 year period of this project, 3rd party or not - the point is we will have to wait and see and all this previous discussion, IMVHO is going no where.

if you want to discuss the shortcomings of the MiG-29, kindly consider to do it elsewhere. as far as the Tejas goes, well ok, i shouldnt have broached that subject here. have a nice day/night!

We have not been talking of what PAF is comfortable with.. they have been given the equipment they have to use it... they didn't have any other choice either.. as discussed about a hundred times here and thousand times in the forum... they being happy or sad is none of our concern on this thread where JF-17 is being discussed.

As for the posts regarding RD-33 is considered RD-93 the engine used on JF-17 is derived from the RD-33-2... its performance on Mig29 is an estimated measure of what the engine can showup... as we don't have any data on what it has showed uptill now.. neither has the load and duty on JF-17 increased to full combat levels uptill now to demand the real combat and proper training requirement from RD-93 engine... in future that will happen and them we would see how comfortable the users are... with importing the whole engine from Russia in an An-124.

We must not forget that PAF has been operating F-16 whose engines have excellent MTBO... and doesn't require frequent overhauls(which I presume they do right there in Pakistan with the support of some American staff)... and please don't compare a main combat aircraft like JF-17(for PAF) with old 2nd gen. plane like F-6... there is a lot of difference in servicing of a bi-cycle and a car.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

my dear sir you are entitled to your opinion. as far as the PAF being comfortable, yes they are and are fully cognizant of these facts as we are -hence the US$3.5 bill investment over the 4-5 year period of this project, 3rd party or not - the point is we will have to wait and see and all this previous discussion, IMVHO is going no where.

if you want to discuss the shortcomings of the MiG-29, kindly consider to do it elsewhere. as far as the Tejas goes, well ok, i shouldnt have broached that subject here. have a nice day/night!

No, I was not discussing the shortcomings of the MiG-29 (since this thread is about JF-17) at all, I was just discussing the Klimov RD-93/33 engines which gets used in that airframe, apart from others viz. Jf-17.

About any AFs use of the engines notwithstanding; there must be good reasons to do so! Just as IAF has used and lived with the engine.

About the underlined part, I do agree with you whole-heartedly. Thank you.

 

[Safriz]

Balkans.com Business News : Six global supersonic jet manufacturers present their planes to the Serbian Air Force

Jf-17 demo presened to serbians

 

[Capt.Popeye]

there is a measurable difference between the two cousins of the same powerplant family
The Rd-93 has demonstrated better MTBO times than the ones put forward as comparisons(although not as good as advertised by Klimov). It has however, surprised most PAF logistical planners with its metalurgical reliability as compared to the Chinese engines in operations with other PAF fighters.
Infact... the PAF has declined the Chinese engine specifically because it does not meet its reliability quota.
The Rd-93 is destined to power all versions of the JF-17.

Oscar, I agree with your contentions about the improvements in the RD family of engines as well as the marked difference wrt Chinese equivalents. But there is still a gap with Western equivalents. Which is a factor in any AF determing AOG tolerance limits.

Engine life has not been the strong point of Russian manufacturers. And that was even partly by design! In the Soviet era, conscript manpower was a-plenty (and cheap besides) in their forces. So 'low life-cycle replacement' was built into their operating philosophy. Plus their head-long rush to keep abreast of the Americans sometimes resulted in some-what abbreviated development of some of their equipment as well as to control costs.
This was the experience in the Tumansky family of aircraft engines as well which powered the MiG-21s.

This philosophy had permeated the Soviet Warship designs too. The IN took a long time to adapt to that; used as they were to Western (esp British) mores. On the plus side of course, it helped to foster forward planning for inventory management as well as Planned Maintenance Scheduling.

 

[Tempest II]

You can certainly certainly do that... and make it a passenger airliner.

Not only would such thing significantly reduce the thrust and load carrying capabilities but also compromise with the pilot training methods and quality.

This is interesting and in some discussions THE REVERSE PROCESS has been given as an explanation for the >1 TWR mentioned on the JFT. i.e. that China and Pakistan would have "over-clocked" the engines for high thrust. While this shortens life, but in a war situation, it improves the FC-1 performance. In a war, do-or-die situation, it makes sense as all plugs are pulled and gloves are off. All resources are focused to winning the war.

 

[DARKY]

I don't think the Russians would allow Chinese messing up with their engine as they are in competition of selling the equivalent of RD-93/33.
And as most of the members here have been saying that the engine come directly from Russia.. It aren't possible.
Besides the T/W of JF-17 isn't >1.. if it were one you would've seen it taking off almost vertically at full thrust as the Mig29 does it.

 

[SQ8]

I don't think the Russians would allow Chinese messing up with their engine as they are in competition of selling the equivalent of RD-93/33.
And as most of the members here have been saying that the engine come directly from Russia.. It aren't possible.
Besides the T/W of JF-17 isn't >1.. if it were one you would've seen it taking off almost vertically at full thrust as the Mig29 does it.

Yes it does.. just no video of it made if that is the criteria for judging it.
You are very welcome to come and have a look outside the Runway at either Peshawar or Kamra ..
Ive seen a JF go straight up right after takeoff from Kamra.. in what is referred to as a viking takeoff.
HOWEVER..
This is only true for clean JF's , not those fitted out operationally and this T/W is LESS than the F-16's.

 

[abdulbarijan]

I don't think the Russians would allow Chinese messing up with their engine as they are in competition of selling the equivalent of RD-93/33.
And as most of the members here have been saying that the engine come directly from Russia.. It aren't possible.
Besides the T/W of JF-17 isn't >1.. if it were one you would've seen it taking off almost vertically at full thrust as the Mig29 does it.

watch after 6:20

 

[DARKY]

Yes it does.. just no video of it made if that is the criteria for judging it.
You are very welcome to come and have a look outside the Runway at either Peshawar or Kamra ..
Ive seen a JF go straight up right after takeoff from Kamra.. in what is referred to as a viking takeoff.
HOWEVER..
This is only true for clean JF's , not those fitted out operationally and this T/W is LESS than the F-16's.

And half fuel.. yes could be possible.

watch after 6:20

That's while in Mid air... I was talking of take offs.

 

[Tempest II]

I don't think the Russians would allow Chinese messing up with their engine ... ...

Did you just post a quote saying

By making modifications to the turbine section to reduce operating temperatures in peacetime (equates to reduced thrust for the pilots) the Luftwaffe

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-...ltirole-fighter-thread-4-a.html#ixzz25FxGmgjm

You are ok the Russians letting the Luthwaffe modify the engines but not the Chinese? ... .... In fact at Farnborough 2010 the Chinese were offering to help the Russia on how to improves their engines although I believe it is the AL-31FN that was being discussed

 

[TaimiKhan]

@Darky, JF-17 is comparable to a propeller driven aircraft and it was designed to take on propeller driven aircraft.

I think that is enough to satisfy you guys.

Now can you plz stop derailing the thread by bringing in something which has been talked about many many times.

 

[Manticore]

jf-17 is comparable to this hitech stuff without the need of an engine -- happy

OK guys , ahem... lets be ontopic once more