What's new

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 6]

Status
Not open for further replies.
.
Thanks ... ... but then you somehow need to be able to determine the direction of the plane at that instant. Like in the photo where the approx nose pitch of 85 degrees from the horizontal, the trajectory of the plane at that instant might actually be 40 degrees from the horizontal, giving an AoA of 45 degrees. .... ... Its that instantaneous trajectory that difficult.

Anyone with software and skills to produce something like this as the plane leaves the tarmac and pitches up? I am assuming the tangent at any point and the nose direction gives us the AoA. Hopefully find a much a side single clip as possible.

trajectory.jpg
 
.
Do u guys think current RD93 can handle the extra load as mentioned above... Like weight of extra person&avonics+ejection seat.. & electical load of AESA and other stuff.. ..
dont u guys think we should work on introduction of composit stuff to support this engine until we get ws13
 
.
wrong plane, you are looking at lateral (side) angle which is meaning less, you should be looking at the angle between the plain's underside and the runway


when you use reporters based on geographical location of posting to report on everything that happens in that location from financial to medical to military instead of subject experts and I seriously doubt any media channel in the country has any subject experts all they ire are "journalists" which I honestly believe is the field chosen by people who don't have any other options left to advance their careers.

Instead of hiring 50 reporters to be posted in 50 cities to do this kind of shitty reporting they should hire 5/6 subject experts and post them in the HO.

wrong plane, you are looking at lateral (side) angle which is meaning less, you should be looking at the angle between the plain's underside and the runway
I haven't seen such lame and ignorant portrayal in long time.. even a newbie on pdf can explain 1000 times better than what this gentleman has done...Pakistani media these days is on a mission to make fool out of themselves and to spread ignorance among public...


 
. .
You forgot about the new engine and possibility of increase in size.
I don't think Paf would like to change engine without it getting mature enough. And what is wrong in rd93 engine it is a good engine used in mig29 and its very reliable engine with good thrust, cheap, and most important it can be imported from russia directly. Block 3 where more composite will be used will automatically increase the weapon load. My two percent. I may be wrong but twin seater is more important even than block 3 right now. It is the export order which will make this plane really success. The exports order will bring the advancement automatically. I consider JF17 as the true replacement for the mig21 presently. That will be the success of the JF17 PROJECT. I really hope DRDO and IAF should think of the Tejas Project, which i think is getting on track.
 
.
I don't think Paf would like to change engine without it getting mature enough. And what is wrong in rd93 engine it is a good engine used in mig29 and its very reliable engine with good thrust, cheap, and most important it can be imported from russia directly. Block 3 where more composite will be used will automatically increase the weapon load. My two percent. I may be wrong but twin seater is more important even than block 3 right now. It is the export order which will make this plane really success. The exports order will bring the advancement automatically. I consider JF17 as the true replacement for the mig21 presently. That will be the success of the JF17 PROJECT. I really hope DRDO and IAF should think of the Tejas Project, which i think is getting on track.

Agreed and, reportedly, that is the way the PAF is also looking to go. The new engine that they are interested in is the upgraded RD-93MA, which will bring all the maturity and, just as importantly, all the commonality with the existing fleet along with the better performance of a 'newer' engine. At least for now, the PAF is not looking towards the WS-13.
 
. .
I have 1 *'Masumana'* Question :rolleyes: :crazy:.
Why PAF doesn't build a new variant of Thunder in Delta Wing Configuration ?
Means it will be ideal if we replace Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s with a Delta Wing. Secondly PAC/PAF has alot of experience related to Re-building of Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s. They would have knowledge about delta wing configuration and may be they have Reverse Engineered those Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s. If not, they can Reverse Engineered it now. Get the inner details through Reverse Engineering of Mirages, Modify and Build up new delta wing design based on that. It will have multiple Advantages.
1. Cost will be minimal because it will not require R&D from 'Ground 0'.
2. Work can be done faster as we can take help from China.
3. As we have Thunder as a Baseline Project, we can modify the Airframe and its Aerodynamics, resulting in a Variant with Delta Wing configuration. Avionics and EW of Thunder we can use as it is on This 'imagined' Variant.
Further Modifications PAF/PAC can do in Shape of adding Canard or Levcons for Low Altitude performance enhancements.
I know its not as simple as it is in speaking. But it can be done. :agree:
And if PAF can do it. it would be great and the Combo of Delta and Non Delta will remain their for PAF.
I would be grateful if discussion on this particular domain is also done by our respected members. :pakistan: :china:
 
.
I have 1 *'Masumana'* Question :rolleyes: :crazy:.
Why PAF doesn't build a new variant of Thunder in Delta Wing Configuration ?
Most likely because it doesn't need to, JF17 is more than capable to take over all the roles of MirageIII/5 previously employed for.
Means it will be ideal if we replace Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s with a Delta Wing. Secondly PAC/PAF has alot of experience related to Re-building of Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s.
Has no relevence at all, as all sub systems, are different.

They would have knowledge about delta wing configuration and may be they have Reverse Engineered those Mirage 3s and Mirage 5s. If not, they can Reverse Engineered it now. Get the inner details through Reverse Engineering of Mirages, Modify and Build up new delta wing design based on that. It will have multiple Advantages.
Doesn't work that way, just because you have rebuild factory that overhauls aforementioned aircraft, doesn't mean that they can re-engineer the systems. If that was true, then PAC Kamra could have build Mirage III ground up.

1. Cost will be minimal because it will not require R&D from 'Ground 0'.
It wont be, It will be a completely different beast, with completely different flight characteristics, with different flight control laws, which in turn will mandate different actuators, servos, control scheme HMI, Hydraulic system, Wing main spars, Aft spars, which would result into full scale testing for static and dynamic failures of structural systems. Not to mention completely different sets of CNC profilers, new die sets for stamping, new CMM fixtures, completely different BOM set, two different overhaul lines, spares, supports, training etc. As good as adding another platform all together.

2. Work can be done faster as we can take help from China.
Such scale of work can only be done by CAC factory 17, as they are the original designer of the aircraft with input from PAF consultants, not the other way around.

3. As we have Thunder as a Baseline Project, we can modify the Airframe and its Aerodynamics, resulting in a Variant with Delta Wing configuration. Avionics and EW of Thunder we can use as it is on This 'imagined' Variant.
Further Modifications PAF/PAC can do in Shape of adding Canard or Levcons for Low Altitude performance enhancements.
result will be horridly expensive for very little advantage, instead customizing their J31 for PAF requirement will yield much better results.
 
.
Didn't asked from Irrelevant persons. Anyways thanks for your reply but its not your domain to comment on !
Have a good day.
sure thing,
fyi - I might have more aeronautical manufacturing experience from most here.
 
.
Most likely because it doesn't need to, JF17 is more than capable to take over all the roles of MirageIII/5 previously employed for.

Has no relevence at all, as all sub systems, are different.


Doesn't work that way, just because you have rebuild factory that overhauls aforementioned aircraft, doesn't mean that they can re-engineer the systems. If that was true, then PAC Kamra could have build Mirage III ground up.


It wont be, It will be a completely different beast, with completely different flight characteristics, with different flight control laws, which in turn will mandate different actuators, servos, control scheme HMI, Hydraulic system, Wing main spars, Aft spars, which would result into full scale testing for static and dynamic failures of structural systems. Not to mention completely different sets of CNC profilers, new die sets for stamping, new CMM fixtures, completely different BOM set, two different overhaul lines, spares, supports, training etc. As good as adding another platform all together.


Such scale of work can only be done by CAC factory 17, as they are the original designer of the aircraft with input from PAF consultants, not the other way around.


result will be horridly expensive for very little advantage, instead customizing their J31 for PAF requirement will yield much better results.

This would end up into another mirage variant with DSI.
 
.
sure thing,
fyi - I might have more aeronautical manufacturing experience from most here.
Good for you Sir. Obviously how much possible unbiased Opinion you can give, when you know that it will be pitched against you if any adventure happens :)
No disrespect and offense but I would Prefer Opinion of Chinese and Pakistani Members on this issue :)
 
. .
MilSpec is correct it would be better to raise the delta wing plane from the ground.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom