JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5]

[ziaulislam]

uptill now the verdict was that jf-17 dual seater will not be developed..so it seems from models that they will be working on it.
also in previous thread people mentioned that jf-17 is already FBW in all axis?

 

[Salman Ahmad]

For twin seat version jf need a more powerful engine ri8 now rd 93 is serving well enough for single seat. wat china lacking is a good reliable home made fighter jet engines once this issue is resolved we will surely c boost up in export of jf 17

 

[Manticore]

 

[Beast]

The problem is dual seat JF-17 still exist only in model only.... It will take the fastest 4 years(without hiccups) for it to be fully operational.

 

[Thunder_Rider]

The latest image indicated that a tandem-seat trainer version (JF-17B?) was unveiled at the 2013 Paris Airshow, which has the electronic compartment removed from top of the vertial tailfin.

- Last Updated 6/16/13

Any Idea why it is removed sir ? New system expected onboard ?

 

[Nishan_101]

air refulling probee missing

This would surely be not the 100% real machine. But I am sure everything will be present.

 

[swati]

So basically the JF-17 uses 1960's avionics that they cant fit in a similar sized space?

i suggest you look at these and then decided whether it holds just the avionics or the fuel it ate too.

You cannot tell the Internal Fuel tanks from the cutaway (P.S Rudder and Stabilizer are also Cutaway).

 

[swati]

First off all am not an F-16 Avionics expert. If you know what those "undisclosed" avionics are, then I would appreciate if you put some light on them. Regarding CFT's..... that was my personal guess, however it does seems they get a little bit support from the Dorsal Spine (my thoughts). As for Dual Seat, it's obvious that avionics are there for the Dual Seat factor

My point was that the absence of dorsal spine in C model is due to the fact that you have space behind the front cockpit to house avionics. In D model because you took up that space (for the seat) therefore you have to put the avionics somewhere else.

And there is No support for CFT from Dorsal spine because Dorsal spine is absent in C model but C model does have CFT.

 

[swati]

WS-13 100KN with 3D TVC

Plane having +8.5g limit not possible to handle TVC nozzle body cant bear such stress

TVC can reduce the stall speed and have other benefits as well. (I am not sure if F-35 utilizes Thrust vectoring other than for landing and takeoff. However it was having some issues with airframe not able to withstand the required sustained turn rates)

But as far as the Engine mounts are considered you are right they may not be designed for loads of Thrust Vectoring. (The direction of forces will change if you change direction of thrust).

 

[swati]

soo whats the point??
we all know such upgrades are not done in seconds and big structural changes are required……

ok. so for two extra hardpoints..You will need to change:

1. Wing
2. Fuselage Bulkheads
3. Fuselage Longerons
4. Engine
5. Horizontal Stabilizer ( Because now it will have to bear more load in pitch up)
6. Vertical Stabilizer (Because it was designed for the original wing only)

 

[slapshot]

Delays Delays Delays.....

Delay in jft blk-2 , delay in twin seater jft ( as it will be operatinal in 3-4 years ) , delay in FC-20.......!!!!

Wts going on here..!!!

Jaib khali hui pari hay yara delays tu honay he hin Thori see economy behtar ho jai sab theek ho jai ga

 

[SQ8]

You cannot tell the Internal Fuel tanks from the cutaway (P.S Rudder and Stabilizer are also Cutaway).

You cannot tell avionics either.. which is why I am not convinced that the Hump houses ONLY the Avionics.. If it does.. then there has been a percentage of sacrifice in range as the aircraft does not hold as much fuel as before.
The F-16B with its 1980's avionics needs a small hump to house those avionics that have been displaced.. it also eats into the fuel which is why it has reduced range as compared to the A.

The Gripen stores its fuel between the intakes behind the cockpit..

So Where would this fuel go?

 

[Pinnacle]

Jaib khali hui pari hay yara delays tu honay he hin Thori see economy behtar ho jai sab theek ho jai ga

Govt agar kuch karnay ki koshish krti hay to opposition aur dusray log shor machanay lagtay hain..
My Prayers for Pakistan and for its economy.....

 

[swati]

You cannot tell avionics either.. which is why I am not convinced that the Hump houses ONLY the Avionics.. If it does.. then there has been a percentage of sacrifice in range as the aircraft does not hold as much fuel as before.
The F-16B with its 1980's avionics needs a small hump to house those avionics that have been displaced.. it also eats into the fuel which is why it has reduced range as compared to the A.

The Gripen stores its fuel between the intakes behind the cockpit..

So Where would this fuel go?

F-16 B initially had 70s avionics not 80s but they kept on upgrading it (Remember MLU).
Yes you are right in saying that range of dual seat is less than single seat model. (But only if it takes up the internal fuel tank's place. If the designer wants to save his fuel tank then he will have to put those avionics somewhere else. That's where the Dorsal fairing comes into play).
And Lastly please see this topic

f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-4137.html

 

[SQ8]

F-16 B initially had 70s avionics not 80s but they kept on upgrading it (Remember MLU).
Yes you are right in saying that range of dual seat is less than single seat model. (But only if it takes up the internal fuel tank's place. If the designer wants to save his fuel tank then he will have to put those avionics somewhere else. That's where the Dorsal fairing comes into play).
And Lastly please see this topic

f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-4137.html

I already know of the topic..
I am basing my fuel idea on the Mig-21U.. which too has a dorsal spine that houses fuel.