JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[messiach]

Percision is the keyword. We are moving into the next generation. This subject is highly specialised.

Why an existing JF-17 would need wire EDM .....?? if I am not wrong this technique is mostly used to cut or make tools and complex structure which require ultra precision
plz elaborate in detail (if possible)

I have not been directly involved with block50+. Every new generation is a new fighter. Updating is never that easy & overall cost-inefficient. Thats why i emphasise on in-house fab tech backbone. Simplest of all solutions.

Hi,
Is it possible to make the F16 A/B into an F16 BLK52---?

 

[Shabi1]

then why did our JF-17 went to china for overhauling

It was sent there to be taken apart and extensive testing of parts for fatigue/ wear & tear testing. So that could be studied and determined if the aircraft components will last as per design and amount of work for future overhauls determined.

PAC can establish overhaul SOPs according to these results.

 

[HRK]

additional JF-17 blk-II are under production

 

[aziqbal]

Good news to you JF17 buffs

Confirms 50+12

Check this

2P-53

2P-52

2P-55

 

[GriffinsRule]

Probably the most informative and least bombastic review of the JF-17 manufacturing process. I did find it funny that the guy in the build-up shop wanted to skip over the middle and rear fuselages built in China.
If we are to be successful in future manufacturing of AZM related aircraft, we will need to master the manufacturing of the entire airframe. We have the easier to absorb tech already down after nearly 10 years of this.

 

[aziqbal]

Here is the 4 at structural build up

5th unit is FC10255 or 2P-55

6th or 2P-56

7th

8th or 2P-58

So overall 58 x Block II identified so far

That’s 108 units of JF17 I and II

Plus 3 x JF17B so 111 overall

 

[Trailer23]

For those, like myself who are not familiar with the dimensions of the Engines currently being used on the JF-17 (Thunder).
I do know that JF-17 is powered by a single Russian RD-93 and/or WS-13 turbofan engine.

Q. With the development of the WS-15 for the J-20, can IT be retrofitted on a JF-17 as well?

 

[Beethoven]

For those, like myself who are not familiar with the dimensions of the Engines currently being used on the JF-17 (Thunder).
I do know that JF-17 is powered by a single Russian RD-93 and/or WS-13 turbofan engine.

Q. With the development of the WS-15 for the J-20, can IT be retrofitted on a JF-17 as well?

No....its a large engine and its diameter exceeds that of the RD 93 currently being used by the Thunders...WS 13 is more suited for the thunder but it wont be used...PAF probably will go for the Russian upgrade of the RD 93

 

[Silicon0000]

What about ws19? It is rumoured to have better TWR and more power with same size. Can someone have any info?

For those, like myself who are not familiar with the dimensions of the Engines currently being used on the JF-17 (Thunder).
I do know that JF-17 is powered by a single Russian RD-93 and/or WS-13 turbofan engine.

Q. With the development of the WS-15 for the J-20, can IT be retrofitted on a JF-17 as well?

No....its a large engine and its diameter exceeds that of the RD 93 currently being used by the Thunders...WS 13 is more suited for the thunder but it wont be used...PAF probably will go for the Russian upgrade of the RD 93

 

[LKJ86]

 

[The SC]

If I am not wrong service life of JF-17 was extended in Blk-II

Dec-2013 issue of Air International magazine

Yes, composite materials were added to the airframe in the Block -II.. the payload was also increased to 5000 kg..

 

[ziaulislam]

That's true, but in the case of the JF-17, the development overhead is substantially smaller and scale (by virtue of lower cost of materials, labour, etc) is much easier to achieve. It's basically the 'eastern method' stemming all the way back to the MiG-21 (around which time the West branched off to develop high-quality airframes, some of which are still flying today, e.g. Mirage III/5). I think if China was to amp up the R&D spending for a high-quality airframe with 8,000+ flight hours, it would get there, but at the commensurate cost.

i thought f-16 and other European fighters had 4000 hours not 8000 hours until it goes through full life extension kit..?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

i thought f-16 and other European fighters had 4000 hours not 8000 hours until it goes through full life extension kit..?

Yep standard for the F-16 is 4,000 hours, but existing SLEPs can take it to 8,000 hours. However, for that to work the critical sub-assemblies still need integrity, otherwise there's little point in adding new or restored parts to it.

 

[ziaulislam]

Yep standard for the F-16 is 4,000 hours, but existing SLEPs can take it to 8,000 hours. However, for that to work the critical sub-assemblies still need integrity, otherwise there's little point in adding new or restored parts to it.

essentially which comapre jf-17 3000 hrs with f16 4000 hr

Whether upgrading /refurbishment will be economical or not beyond 3000 hrs is an interesting question ..as building new ones might be cheaper ..this is what americans did with most of their f16s

 

[khanasifm]

essentially which comapre jf-17 3000 hrs with f16 4000 hr

Whether upgrading /refurbishment will be economical or not beyond 3000 hrs is an interesting question ..as building new ones might be cheaper ..this is what americans did with most of their f16s

Cost of labor in US vs country such as PAK difference so building new or rebuilding is same but not in third world country