JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[Silicon0000]

Hi,

If you don't know if it can be done or not---then why write such a long post that it cannot be done and then in the end be doubtful about your post---.

Bt the way---a company called Saab just did it to their aircraft called Grippen---.

Can we increase the size of the fighter aircraft---this question has been asked times and again---and even though we have answers staring back at us right in front of our faces---we draw blank stares and act confused---.

The first and foremost example in front of us are civilian aircraft----passenger aircrafts---.

Take one---Boeing 737---has been extended and enlarged so many times---. They were all good modifications---till Boeing got carried away---started believing in its own sh-it and came up with the 737 Max---.

In fighter---the japanese decided that their primary aircraft must be able to carry 2 AShM weighing 1000 Kg each---. They came up with a modified copy of the F16 in the form of an F2.

Then recently Saab decided to come up with a slightly larger and more functional version of the Grippen and they did the NG or Grippen E.

A design of a functional aircraft is not restricted to the change in its size---. A larger version of the interceptor aircraft may not be as efficient in that form---but would perfectly well for a strike role---.

The aerodynamics of the aircraft are already determined---its flight pattern shows what it can do---.

To increase it shape and size is not rocket science per say---. It is the function of manufacturing engineering that would allow you to increase the structure within a certain percentage size increase with out effecting the overall performance of the flight pattern of the machine in question---.

Not an expert so can't comment but would like to know that conversion of JF17 to strike platform with Delta wing ....... I think it cannot be said percentage increase or similar type conversion like F-16 to F2. Or maybe I understand wrongly what you said ......

 

[MastanKhan]

Not an expert so can't comment but would like to know that conversion of JF17 to strike platform with Delta wing ....... I think it cannot be said percentage increase or similar type conversion like F-16 to F2. Or maybe I understand wrongly what you said ......

Hi,

I am talking as is design---but everything a bit larger like the F2 to the F16

 

[Army research]

Hi,

I am talking as is design---but everything a bit larger like the F2 to the F16

View attachment 555985

The thing is instead of enlargining the FC1, they're already exists something of the exact parameters , the J10C, getting that would mean no cost for the redesign of fc1, no cost for accommodating New manufacturing process , no testing or FOC testing for a year required , already present customer makes it cheaper due to volume produced hence enlarging the jf17 would be pointless , rather buy J10c s ,

 

[Ultima Thule]

Hi,

I am talking as is design---but everything a bit larger like the F2 to the F16

View attachment 555985

Go to your work (car selling) defense is not your field sir @MastanKhan

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

The thing is instead of enlargining the FC1, they're already exists something of the exact parameters , the J10C, getting that would mean no cost for the redesign of fc1, no cost for accommodating New manufacturing process , no testing or FOC testing for a year required , already present customer makes it cheaper due to volume produced hence enlarging the jf17 would be pointless , rather buy J10c s ,

Yes but it won't be Pakistani. Besides, what's the hurry?

 

[messiach]

Aerodynamically smaller is better.

Hi,

I am talking as is design---but everything a bit larger like the F2 to the F16

View attachment 555985

 

[MastanKhan]

Aerodynamically smaller is better.

Hi,

Yes---but then you cannot carry 2 ---1000KG AShM's on it---.

And if smaller was better---the americans would not be spending billion plus on re-furbishing the B52's---.

Small is only better under given circumstances---.

Go to your work (car selling) defense is not your field sir @MastanKhan

Hi,

Okay----thank you.

 

[jupiter2007]

Hi,

I am talking as is design---but everything a bit larger like the F2 to the F16

View attachment 555985

Are you talking about modified frame?

 

[Mrc]

B52's

B is a bomber F is a fighter cant compare peoples carrier and a tractor.... May b an analogy u will know.... Both have their own utility... But i guess u guys are not into tractors

 

[MastanKhan]

B is a bomber F is a fighter cant compare peoples carrier and a tractor.... May b an analogy u will know.... Both have their own utility... But i guess u guys are not into tractors

Hi,

That comment was on a different tangent---.

If little was the best---then USAF would be satisfied with the F16---. There was no need for F15---F18---A10---.

There is a term---" horses for courses ".

Are you talking about modified frame?
View attachment 556002

Hi,

Pretty much---. The condition would be for it to do the same as the F2---8000KG load carrying capacity---. Ability to carry 2 heavy AShM of at least a 1000Kg each---.

Why I say F2---.

The Japs are in a similar situation as us---pretty close---. Larger enemy with large navy---.

If you look at russian naval strike aircraft---they will also be carrying 2 heavy AShM's---.

Against modern defences---you cannot depend on 1 missile to hit---.

To get a chance to break thru the enemy's---get in to strike---and you find out that the 1 missile on the JF17 has developed a short or gone haywire---.

Missiles do that---.

 

[LKJ86]

Hi,

I am talking as is design---but everything a bit larger like the F2 to the F16

View attachment 555985

1. The cost of enlarging JF-17 is close to that of developing a completely new fighter. If so, PAF can have better choices.

2. Enlarged JF-17 will be on the same level as F-16, and become more expensive. It is not a good news for its mass production and export.

 

[MastanKhan]

1. The cost of enlarging JF-17 is close to that of developing a completely new fighter. If so, PAF can have better choices.

2. Enlarged JF-17 will be on the same level as F-16, and become more expensive. It is not a good news for its mass production and export.

Hi,

You are talking like an accountant---I am talking like someone who wants to have crushing power against the enemy---.

Your and my perspective is not the same---.

I do not know why I have not made this statement before against other posters---.

I want a conventional power that would crush the enemy---.

 

[LKJ86]

Hi,

You are talking like an accountant---I am talking like someone who wants to have crushing power against the enemy---.

Your and my perspective is not the same---.

I do not know why I have not made this statement before against other posters---.

I want a conventional power that would crush the enemy---.

You can't escape from reality, and live in day dream.

Just like that, it is the best for China to use J-20 and Type 055 DDG to replace all her fighters and warships, but it is impossible in reality.

 

[jupiter2007]

If we had a better relationship with Japan, we could ask them for assistance with designing a new Medium size fight jet...but then I wonder why would they help us. they are making tons of money selling us old Toyota crap. They never transfer any tech to us and we are still assembling their expense cars.

 

[alphibeti]

Go to your work (car selling) defense is not your field sir @MastanKhan

Having a difference of opinion is your right but insulting others is certainly not. Please keep that in mind.