JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[unicorn]

^^^
Just think about the ease from maintenance point of view.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Lol Stealth version of JF17 with Internal bay and twin engine, looks like some one is day dreaming.... Do you have any idea how much work it needed to bring up your dream machine.

It will be total new plane, You have to start from design phase, It won't be JF17 Block N, but entirely new plane...

It is possible to make it stealthier and LO.
as stealthy as other 5th gen , is close to impossible without having internal weapons bays, which would require a whole new airframe.

But we will be reducing the RCS, making it stealthier.

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

i thought the fat body of jf-17 has some thing stuffed in there

what ever is roun isnt FAT mate

 

[graphican]

Oh yes.. it is surely a lot more easy to maintain than F-16s. I agree.

 

[Najam Khan]

I am amazed by the 'professionalism' of members here, two weeks ago posters were debating at Izmir air show thread about poor performance(height to be specific) of PAF, just on he basis of video(s) and now we are comparing maintenance of two a/c just on basis of two pictures...arent these a/c have other modules instead of landing gears box? don't we count avionics repair in maintenance too?

Routine day performance, maintenance write-ups,Code one flights are debatable topic not pictures.

 

[SQ8]

More over..
The fact that the structure uses less parts.. probably makes it a lot more efficient ..
escapes some fans here.

 

[alimobin memon]

http://library.kiwix.org:4201/A/JF_17.html#Helmet_Mounted_Sight_.28HMS.29
guys this links indicates some new things well dont't whether are true or not but
says prototype pt-01to6 and fc-1 , fc-2, fc-3 and also indicates that paf requirement is 350!!

 

[SQ8]

http://library.kiwix.org:4201/A/JF_17.html#Helmet_Mounted_Sight_.28HMS.29
guys this links indicates some new things well dont't whether are true or not but
says prototype pt-01to6 and fc-1 , fc-2, fc-3 and also indicates that paf requirement is 350!!

Seems like a lost wikipedia page..

Best open source for info on the JF.. generally clean of speculations... and some cynical trolling..
Is this forum's info section.

 

[Last Hope]

JF-17 test flown by several countries from Middle East & Africa | JF-17 Thunder

JF-17 Thunder has been test flown by several countries.



CATIC President Ma Zhiping speaking from the Paris Air show has said several countries have test flown JF-17 fighter plane. African and Middle Eastern countries have shown strong interest in the aircraft. Sales outside Pakistan are likely in next two-three years.

Mr. Ma also said "We've entertained customers from Africa, the Middle East and Asia. On the first day we had meetings with 10 customers. They were interested in all of our aircraft, including the JF-17."

Jf-17 thunder is a low cost multi-role fighter jet jointly developed by Pakistan and China. It is currently operated by Pakistan Airforce. Currently, two squadrons have been deployed. Pakistan is expected to have over 90 thunders by the end of 2011. Pakistan is also co-producing the aircraft in its developing aviation industry.

Pakistan and China have also signed Memorandum of Understanding to develop stealthy version of air combat plane.

 

[air marshal]

Aviation Art by Waqar Ahmad: Pakistan Air Force (PAF) JF-17 Thunder at Farnborough Airshow, UK.

 

[Dazzler]

wow, its a hell lot of difference, the inside of JFt looks empty

The attitude of some members keeps me in amazement as how easily they compare the two aircraft having a vast difference of history, technological expertise and price. This pic shows the landing gear area of both, what is visible here is a reality just how technologically advancecd the Americans actually are! Also, the f-16 has one most the most mechanically complex landing gear among all fighter aircraft even fourth generation ones. It also highlights the fact that surfaced a few years ago that JFT has a rather simple yet rugged landing gear and this is due to a requirement by PAF, yet it is able to land on rugged landing strips, highways, so no point in investing in a landing gear/ complex mechanism costing $50000 when we can get a simpler, rugged system fulfilling the same role. This is the whole point of this project. However, if any of you has had an opportunity to look at JFT on an assemble line, you will be amazed that its fuselage is so stuffed with goodies, especially the nose region housing many comm, navigation antennae, equipment, sensors, behind the cockpit there virtually a stream of piping, web of wires, avionic circuitry, fly by wire wires, sensors, EW equipment, comms and what not. I cannot say it has an empty shell by any means...

 

[nightcrawler]

^^
Amerikans love to make things complex not because they can't make things simple but because the defence companies can earn an extra buck from congress...Look at the soviet machinery; look at their modern BMPs & the US equivalent namely Bradley...

 

[gambit]

^^
Amerikans love to make things complex not because they can't make things simple but because the defence companies can earn an extra buck from congress...Look at the soviet machinery; look at their modern BMPs & the US equivalent namely Bradley...

Sorry...But it is not that difficult to make simple things. In fact, from an economic standpoint, the more simple the things, the more manpower required to operate those things and therefore the larger the contract. The reason why we make 'complex' things is because we want the machines to do as much repetitive activities as possible to leave the human operator be what we want him to be: a killer.

 

[razgriz19]

Sorry...But it is not that difficult to make simple things. In fact, from an economic standpoint, the more simple the things, the more manpower required to operate those things and therefore the larger the contract. The reason why we make 'complex' things is because we want the machines to do as much repetitive activities as possible to leave the human operator be what we want him to be: a killer.

but another aspect people should undertand is that man power in pakistan is much cheaper than US. two month salary of an aircraft maintenance engineer in US is equivelant to a whole year salary of an AME in pakistan.
so man power is not much of a big deal for pakistan..

 

[wind]

PAF choose a plane which would meet their requirements rather than their ego. No one should bother about JF 17 as long as the airforce is happy