JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[BATMAN]

Please compare that performance with what is possible with a true better than unity T:W ratio:

I will happily change my opinion if you can show me a video where a JF-17 pulls into a vertical climb straight after take-off like the F-16 does in the video above from 00:35 to about 1:00 (and later as well). It cannot do that with its present engine, hence my comment about lack of power. (We can talk about roll rates, high AoA maneuvers and the rest later if need be.)

For some reason, i cannot watch the video... but going straight up in the sky is not required out of JFT. Hence i decline your challenge but you are free to compare it with XYZ.

However, PAF is tuning RD-93 different for peacetime and war time scenario, but again talking about is like going in circles.

Again, the take off displayed by JFT at farnborough, with 3 full drop tanks clear all doubts about engine power.

 

[BATMAN]

Russians have alot of experience in engine technology , unlike the Chinese. It would take come time for the Chinese to figure out and solve the problems in WS-13. So when WS-13 is fully ready and operational for JF-17 , PAF will surely deploy this engine in the aircraft that will form the backbone of entire airforce in coming decades.

As far we estimate, there are no issues with the prototype WS-13.
Chinese are not putting there engines to mass production for some other reason.
Apparently, they do not want to mass produce what Russia is already doing for them... i clearly see Chinese are working on further technology development.
Afterall, Russians engines are doing fine and Russia is also going along fine.
The amount of engines covered in frame agreements with Russia, buys a comfortable time to China to ignore any risk factor involving shortage of engines in near future.

 

[VCheng]

For some reason, i cannot watch the video... but going straight up in the sky is not required out of JFT. Hence i decline your challenge but you are free to compare it with XYZ.

However, PAF is tuning RD-93 different for peacetime and war time scenario, but again talking about is like going in circles.

Again, the take off displayed by JFT at farnborough, with 3 full drop tanks clear all doubts about engine power.

Saying "going straight up in the sky is not required out of the JFT" may be correct, but it is a simple and effective demonstration of any fighter that claims a 1:1 T:W ratio. That is the reason I mentioned it.

I do agree with you that the JF-17 is pretty good for what it is designed to be, but I am also correct in saying that a better engine will make it's performance shine even more.

The take-off display is not all that impressive as a demonstration of thrust as one can only assume the tanks are full. A vertical climb straight after lift-off is better.

 

[Windjammer]

Please compare that performance with what is possible with a true better than unity T:W ratio:


I will happily change my opinion if you can show me a video where a JF-17 pulls into a vertical climb straight after take-off like the F-16 does in the video above from 00:35 to about 1:00 (and later as well). It cannot do that with its present engine, hence my comment about lack of power. (We can talk about roll rates, high AoA maneuvers and the rest later if need be.)

You are comparing an aircraft that has matured over the last 40 years to the one that first flew in 2003.
F-16's dry thrust is almost as JFT in full throttle. Albeit no video may exist of JFT going vertical but that doesn't mean it's not capable of such.

JF-17 Vertical Climb - YouTube

 

[VCheng]

You are comparing an aircraft that has matured over the last 40 years to the one that first flew in 2003.
F-16's dry thrust is almost as JFT in full throttle. Albeit no video may exist of JFT going vertical but that doesn't mean it's not capable of such.

JF-17 Vertical Climb - YouTube

Carrying speed into a vertical climb has been done for decades, even an F-6 could manage that semblance. A vertical climb right after take-off is all raw power. And I am comparing how to best see the effect of T:W ratios on performance, not maturity of platforms.

Look, I do admire the JF-17 for what it represents: a great step forward in developing indigenous capabilities. I respect that. And it is only because I want to see it even better that I makes the comment about it needing a better engine. I am sure at some point in the future it will surely get one too. That would simply be marvelous.

 

[BATMAN]

Saying "going straight up in the sky is not required out of the JFT" may be correct, but it is a simple and effective demonstration of any fighter that claims a 1:1 T:W ratio. That is the reason I mentioned it.

I do agree with you that the JF-17 is pretty good for what it is designed to be, but I am also correct in saying that a better engine will make it's performance shine even more.

The take-off display is not all that impressive as a demonstration of thrust as one can only assume the tanks are full. A vertical climb straight after lift-off is better.

We can only assume, that fuel tanks were full if JFT landed any short of...... across the Atlantic.
If a short take of a loaded plane was not a good demo. than you need to redefine the standards.
Once vertical climb of F-16 is no parameter to consider while doing design calculations.
Whatever, you have posted may be a display for fanboys, no technical gains.. i see.
JFT has different airframe, which may excel in other parameter as compared to F-16 and may be more crucial/preferred in over all design.
More power is good.... but IMO any thing more than 110kn will never be required by current airframe of JFT.
In earlier post, i have already laid out parameters which are forcing the upgraded engine. You can't exceed those from a certain limit, hence no requirement of the type of the engine you specified.. to begin with.

 

[graphican]

A Short video of JFT doing it's stuff at Zhouhi 2012.


[video]http://www.cannews.com.cn/v/html/news/201211/1254.html[/video]

Sir that was good. If video is playing at standard frame-rate then this is pretty impressive performance.

 

[andyfisher]

Wat did I say wrong that I got a warning, esp when I solely talked abt the JF17 and implications of operating it?

come on..lets have a proper and honest discussion abt the topic at hand

 

[SQ8]

Nawaz is round pebble, policy less and passive. Allah tala ke fazl-o-karam aor ISI ki enayat se do bar wazeer-e-azam reh chukne ke bawajood khote ka khota. Phew.. PPP ka patwari, H&*RMI! Abhi bhi dil nahi thunda hua but enogh for now I guess

Coming back to Nawaz in JFT, in what capacity is he given this demonstration? He is not elected member of National or Provincial assembly neither he has any government position. He shouldn't access to military hardware at all.

He is an ex-PM and was cleared to receive briefings on most classified stuff.
Even ex-US presidents are allowed to get classified briefings even after they leave office.

Carrying speed into a vertical climb has been done for decades, even an F-6 could manage that semblance. A vertical climb right after take-off is all raw power. And I am comparing how to best see the effect of T:W ratios on performance, not maturity of platforms.

Look, I do admire the JF-17 for what it represents: a great step forward in developing indigenous capabilities. I respect that. And it is only because I want to see it even better that I makes the comment about it needing a better engine. I am sure at some point in the future it will surely get one too. That would simply be marvelous.

Well.. all we can do is hope for the next batch to be powered by the RD-93MA which would be some improvement..
and then have the performance gain retrofitted into the previous batch.. much like the F-16 with the PW-100.

 

[VCheng]

H............
Well.. all we can do is hope for the next batch to be powered by the RD-93MA which would be some improvement..
and then have the performance gain retrofitted into the previous batch.. much like the F-16 with the PW-100.

As Pakistan hopefully develops more design and manufacturing expertise, incorporating a suitably more powerful engine can always be done as a retrofit to the older units, along with with the newer planes.

 

[Rajput_Pakistani]

I don't know but in all air show appearances i have felt that JF-17 did not perform to its maximum potential. May be its because of some restrictions or safety issues. God knows. You can see the difference here (sorry the video is not of high quality).

 

[MastanKhan]

Please compare that performance with what is possible with a true better than unity T:W ratio:

I will happily change my opinion if you can show me a video where a JF-17 pulls into a vertical climb straight after take-off like the F-16 does in the video above from 00:35 to about 1:00 (and later as well). It cannot do that with its present engine, hence my comment about lack of power. (We can talk about roll rates, high AoA maneuvers and the rest later if need be.)

Hi Vcheng,

I saw F16's doing that @ Hill AFB in the 80's all the time---but the Phantoms could not---and the F14 could not and neither could the first F18's----neither could the harriers---so were all they inferior aircraft---not so---vertical climb is just one part of the performance---and with a full load---what would be the use of it---because it won't make that climb.

This 90 deg take off is mostly for show---for that we have the F16's---2 outboard WVR missiles for a quick intercept---gain the altitude---is all that it is good for---.

Actually I just saw the video after the post----it is a total BS---I have seen F16's climbing straight up off Hill AFB going straight up and disappearing from the eyesight---not one time but many---you could pull off on the street south side of the runway and park on the side-----the F16 would take off and sometimes 2/3rd of the runway and is gone up straight into oblivion.

 

[unicorn]

'PAC Kamra capable of exporting JF-17 Thunder jets'
November 11, 2012

Pakistan has the capacity to export indigenously manufactured JF-17 Thunder fighter jet after meeting PAF requirements, Chairman of Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC), Kamra, Air Marshal Sohail Gul said on Saturday. In an interview on Saturday, Air Marshal Sohail Gul said that 60 percent of the fighter aircraft's airframe would be manufactured in Pakistan by next year.

He said that so far, PAF had been supplied 47 JF-17 Thunders, adding that three more would be handed over to the air force by the end of this year. Air Marshal Sohail Gul said the current manufacturing/ assembly capacity was 16 per year, which could be enhanced to 25 or 26, depending on demand. He said several countries had shown interest in acquiring these aircraft, adding that he was confident that JF-17 would soon be seen flying in the Middle East and Far East.

http://www.brecorder.com/general-news/172/1257224/

 

[MastanKhan]

I don't know but in all air show appearances i have felt that JF-17 did not perform to its maximum potential. May be its because of some restrictions or safety issues. God knows. You can see the difference here (sorry the video is not of high quality).

Hi,

You are right---so many times---it has taken the JF17 to pull its wheels in too late---like if the pilot has forgotten about it in excitement---that would be another reason why the plane would not go up straighter sooner.

 

[Rajput_Pakistani]

^^ Agreed Sir,

Found another video just. Watch from 00:37-00:43 seconds. It lift straight up but the pilot just turn left at same moment. I think JF-17 can pull up straight (still it can't be sexier like F-16 A/B )