JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[Rajput_Pakistani]

Hi,

It is about time that you realized that you have no clue and understanding of what you are saying and what you want to be done---talking sharp and talking smart does not do any good untill and unless you are familiar with the fundamentals of engine building.

---india has walked away from building that diesel engine for its tank and similiarly the jet engine for teja---it has enjoyed the experience but found out that is easier and better to have better relations with countries who have experience of building them for 100 years.

People don't understrand or intentionally don't want to comprehend the significance of thew= difficulties in manufacturing the engine----india had all the blue prints purhased from germany and all the techincal support at its disposal and still the motor was 1000 HP less than the target-----.

Even a manufacturer like CHRYSLER----just came out with a new car Dodge Dart----could not afford to manufacture a new engine for its car on its own---bought it thru I believe alfa romeo---and existing engine---there is new categor of engines--called world engines---small engine used in different makes of cars.

Look Dear, I have not got the habit of "debate just for the sake of debate". Your above post has no objectivity and hence i am not convinced at all. In all of my posts i have not mentioned even a single time that we could/should develop an engine similar to the lights of Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100, Lyulka AL-31FP or even RD-93. I just said that Pakistan should start R & D for its own jet engine, and if we end up developing even a sub-sonic engine after 10 years, it will be a great achievement. I am quite knowledgeable to technical difficulties and time lines for such engineering projects, so you don't need to highlight again and again that i have no knowledge as such.

Now, this debate is closed. Continue with JF-17 discussion please.

 

[Viper0011.]

Orangzaib,

Now calm down and think again what you have written---you have totally lost yourself in what you wanted to say---. Just like the poster with 5 posts wanted to wing it---you a very intelligent and articulate poster want to do the same.
Read your post again and see what you have written---it does not meet your standards. But if you insist---I can further dwell on it in spare time.

I have reread my post more than a few times. I don't see anything wrong with what I wrote as explanation of my disagreement. Sorry if you felt my response was inappropriate but I just said what was right based on the facts.

Piston engines to Jets to Nucs.....these are very different technologies with regards to the relevance of the topic within your post. As far as if India built something and it turned out to produce lower thrust....I get that. R&D doesn't always produce the best results. But, they've learned the engineering, components and how to run a program that big. Next time, they can actually enhance the engine or produce a new one as they know have the knowledge base that they didn't before. Plus, GE, LM, Elta and many others want to do business with India so they'll have top of the line help. It's a matter of time when they actually produce the required thrust. Once you know how to build a car's engine and chases, you can shape it in anyway you want to. If you know how to build a V4 engine....going to V6 and V8 is just enhancing the baseline model.

 

[Windjammer]

Rolling Thunder

夜拍æž*龙战机试飞开åŠ*力耀眼夺目 - 军迷掌兵 - 新闻论坛

 

[Safriz]

Rolling Thunder

Whats that??

 

[mjnaushad]

^^^ upload it some other site...link not working.

 

[Windjammer]

^^^ upload it some other site...link not working.

Check it out now.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Rolling Thunder

夜拍æž*龙战机试飞开åŠ*力耀眼夺目 - 军迷掌兵 - 新闻论坛

Google transalatin of original post with pics.

The friends recently photographed Xiaolong fighter nighttime flight, when empty pull out the eddy and afterburner. Open afterburner fighter will take in order to get a strong thrust to allow the engine to high-load operation, although the fuel consumption of a large economy but let fighters reduce takeoff roll distance and increase energy gain time to handle unexpected time .

 

[Thorough Pro]

We are just living on pics for some time now, thrid squadron announcement is much "overdue" now,though I believe it will only be an announcement for thepublic, as the actual work would already be in process.

 

[Arsalan]

possible configs

I guess it is appropriate to mention that these are all Graphic Representations, more of a wallpaper.
This is not a official confirmation that all these weapons have been successfully integrated with Jf-17 Thunder, there haven't been any such confirmation and we are waiting for it.

regards!

 

[mylovepakistan]

 

[ziaulislam]

lots of questions still unswered like whether SD-10 can be used on wing tips
and whether the range will be effective enough in some of these modes without fuel tanks..but anyway we may never get those confirmations officially

 

[sancho]

lots of questions still unswered like whether SD-10 can be used on wing tips
and whether the range will be effective enough in some of these modes without fuel tanks..but anyway we may never get those confirmations officially

That depends on what targets you aim on and which weapons are available!

For close to mid distance targets in the border region, MAR 1, LS6, H4 and Raad would offer good strike ranges between 60 and 350Km, used even within Pakistan airspace. The limitation of a single small fuel tank only and no IFR capability then would not have too much importance, like it has with the F16s. They can't do IFRs either, but don't offer long range strike weapons too, so PAF would have to enter Indian airspace to do strikes and would have to carry enough fuel to get to the target and back. It should be obvious that this is the riskier solution, which makes it very likely that the JF 17 will get these weapons in any case.

Another problem is the lack of enough hardpoints, in any strike mission when you have to carry 2 fuel tanks at the wing stations + 2 x strike weapons, the JF 17 will be limited 2 x WVR missiles only. That means you will need additional fighters in A2A config to escort them.
We saw this during the Libyan war, when French Mirage 2000-5s or Rafales (in multi role config) escorted French Mirage 2000-D and Super Etendard strike packages, because they have limited selfdefence capability too:

That's where the F16 will score again, with it's dedicated pod stations and enough hardpoints for fuel, 2 + 2 WVR/BVR missiles and LGB/PGMs.

 

[Mitro]

I think PAF will use JF-17 Mostly for defence and Naval role and for less hardpoint is concern multiple ejector racks will take care of it.

That depends on what targets you aim on and which weapons are available!
For close to mid distance targets in the border region, MAR 1, LS6, H4 and Raad would offer good strike ranges between 60 and 350Km, used even within Pakistan airspace. The limitation of a single small fuel tank only and no IFR capability then would not have too much importance, like it has with the F16s. They can't do IFRs either, but don't offer long range strike weapons too, so PAF would have to enter Indian airspace to do strikes and would have to carry enough fuel to get to the target and back. It should be obvious that this is the riskier solution, which makes it very likely that the JF 17 will get these weapons in any case.

Another problem is the lack of enough hardpoints, in any strike mission when you have to carry 2 fuel tanks at the wing stations + 2 x strike weapons, the JF 17 will be limited 2 x WVR missiles only. That means you will need additional fighters in A2A config to escort them.
We saw this during the Libyan war, when French Mirage 2000-5s or Rafales (in multi role config) escorted French Mirage 2000-D and Super Etendard strike packages, because they have limited selfdefence capability too:

That's where the F16 will score again, with it's dedicated pod stations and enough hardpoints for fuel, 2 + 2 WVR/BVR missiles and LGB/PGMs.

 

[MastanKhan]

Better know about Kaveri jet engine which failed to deliver required thrust but still was success. Work is still going on but now with French help, Snecma. It will be used in UAV. So over all it was not a complete failure.

Another thing to keep in mind is that not many countries produce their own jet engines. So India did manage to achieve engines for UAV atleast.

Outlook bleak for India

Hi,

I don't know about the drone---but I know that the indian navy will use it in their frigates---. I am surprised pakistani navy could not afford to put the jet engine in their ships---.

 

[MastanKhan]

Look Dear, I have not got the habit of "debate just for the sake of debate". Your above post has no objectivity and hence i am not convinced at all. In all of my posts i have not mentioned even a single time that we could/should develop an engine similar to the lights of Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100, Lyulka AL-31FP or even RD-93. I just said that Pakistan should start R & D for its own jet engine, and if we end up developing even a sub-sonic engine after 10 years, it will be a great achievement. I am quite knowledgeable to technical difficulties and time lines for such engineering projects, so you don't need to highlight again and again that i have no knowledge as such.

Now, this debate is closed. Continue with JF-17 discussion please.

Sir,

I think you again missed the point---we are not debating here---atleast not me---I am here sharing my real experience with you---you need to learn to understand why pak millitary consortium has been successful in the projects it takes and why the ndian millitary consortium has failed more often---the reason being---pak millitary takes on those projects that have been within its reach and limitations.

Your comment about developing a sub sonic engine in 10 years mean that you are clueless to techincal aspects of a jet engines production---you have to ask what would be the purpose of that engine and what would be the applications---where could it be used and how you will get the money back spent into the project---. Application---application---application---

Orangzaib----V4---V6---V8---now where did that V4 engine come from---name one car that is in mass production that uses a V4---maybe 1

That depends on what targets you aim on and which weapons are available!

For close to mid distance targets in the border region, MAR 1, LS6, H4 and Raad would offer good strike ranges between 60 and 350Km, used even within Pakistan airspace. The limitation of a single small fuel tank only and no IFR capability then would not have too much importance, like it has with the F16s. They can't do IFRs either, but don't offer long range strike weapons too, so PAF would have to enter Indian airspace to do strikes and would have to carry enough fuel to get to the target and back. It should be obvious that this is the riskier solution, which makes it very likely that the JF 17 will get these weapons in any case.

Another problem is the lack of enough hardpoints, in any strike mission when you have to carry 2 fuel tanks at the wing stations + 2 x strike weapons, the JF 17 will be limited 2 x WVR missiles only. That means you will need additional fighters in A2A config to escort them.
We saw this during the Libyan war, when French Mirage 2000-5s or Rafales (in multi role config) escorted French Mirage 2000-D and Super Etendard strike packages, because they have limited selfdefence capability too:

That's where the F16 will score again, with it's dedicated pod stations and enough hardpoints for fuel, 2 + 2 WVR/BVR missiles and LGB/PGMs.

Hi,

Sir, that is not a good analysis---seems like another ignorant assessment of the situation.