fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
I think the Burma will get their 14-20 JF-17s Block-II directly from China and most probably in just 2 years time
Yup as FC1
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think the Burma will get their 14-20 JF-17s Block-II directly from China and most probably in just 2 years time
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.
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.almost same design
1 additional HP for pods
AESA radar
HMD
IRST possible
better weapon capability
New EW suit
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.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.
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.I have 1 *'Masumana'* Question .
Why PAF doesn't build a new variant of Thunder in Delta Wing Configuration ?
Has no relevence at all, as all sub systems, are different.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.
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.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.
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.1. Cost will be minimal because it will not require R&D from 'Ground 0'.
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.2. Work can be done faster as we can take help from China.
result will be horridly expensive for very little advantage, instead customizing their J31 for PAF requirement will yield much better results.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.
sure thing,Didn't asked from Irrelevant persons. Anyways thanks for your reply but its not your domain to comment on !
Have a good day.
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.
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 happenssure thing,
fyi - I might have more aeronautical manufacturing experience from most here.
Didn't asked from Irrelevant persons. Anyways thanks for your reply but its not your domain to comment on !
Have a good day.