JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[ziaulislam]

According to Messiach, (check her posts) CFTs are no big deal and have already been designed some actually built. They are to be integrated on the block 3s.

interesting..why block 3 only..CFTs have one requirement htough..a better engine..wonder what version of rd 93 will the block 3 use

 

[Talon]

Repost from Facebook

 

[Deino]

According to Messiach, (check her posts) CFTs are no big deal and have already been designed some actually built. They are to be integrated on the block 3s.

Again I'm playing devil's advocate ... I'm indeed not entirely sure on her exact saying but as far as I understood her post it was an option studied and nothing confirmed, especially not as you again claim "already built".

@messiach could you please clarify? I would be happy if I'm wrong.

 

[Trango Towers]

Repost from Facebook

View attachment 644360

This is not correct. Nit a chance the engine is that smokey

 

[sohail.ishaque]

I have a naive question, if someone wants to answer it.
There was an F16 design called F16XL, it has more hardpoints and long range, So is it possible we can get that kind of version in JF17 thuners also for some bombing roles etc. I mean that way it would b the same jet with same engines and all the stuff, making it an easy option to maintain and allowing a replacement for bomber role jets giving more range and paylod ???

 

[Armchair]

I have a naive question, if someone wants to answer it.
There was an F16 design called F16XL, it has more hardpoints and long range, So is it possible we can get that kind of version in JF17 thuners also for some bombing roles etc. I mean that way it would b the same jet with same engines and all the stuff, making it an easy option to maintain and allowing a replacement for bomber role jets giving more range and paylod ???

No, not possible due to costs, resources and time for development vs benefit. In addition, the aircraft doesn't have a powerful enough engine, which would be needed given that such a change will increase the weight.

What we can do is build an Azm which has that kind of engine if PAF so chose.

 

[Deino]

I have a naive question, if someone wants to answer it.
There was an F16 design called F16XL, it has more hardpoints and long range, So is it possible we can get that kind of version in JF17 thuners also for some bombing roles etc. I mean that way it would b the same jet with same engines and all the stuff, making it an easy option to maintain and allowing a replacement for bomber role jets giving more range and paylod ???

Pardon to say so; indeed a naive question. Technically doable but it would result in a de facto new aircraft and as such much to expensive for thee PAF alone. Also the question remains, what type of powerplant will then be used since even an uprated RD-93MA - which is still not confirmed even for the Block 3 - would be too week for such a dramatically larger and heaver plane ... and even further any new different engine would result in even more changes away from the regular JF-17.

As such technically surely doable but at what cost? and who shall pay for it? ... surely not China since it would be a waste of resources.

 

[Akh1112]

This is not correct. Nit a chance the engine is that smokey

it is a VERY smokey engine. It just looks worse because of the colouring in the post. However yes, it is an absurdly smokey powerplant.

Pardon to say so; indeed a naive question. Technically doable but it would result in a de facto new aircraft and as such much to expensive for thee PAF alone. Also the question remains, what type of powerplant will then be used since even an uprated RD-93MA - which is still not confirmed even for the Block 3 - would be too week for such a dramatically larger and heaver plane ... and even further any new different engine would result in even more changes away from the regular JF-17.

As such technically surely doable but at what cost? and who shall pay for it? ... surely not China since it would be a waste of resources.

This is COMPLETELY irrelevant to this thread but is there any way i could contact you privately? I have something that may be of interest to you. I dont really know how to PM on the forum however so maybe if you could PM me first?

 

[Deino]

...
This is COMPLETELY irrelevant to this thread but is there any way i could contact you privately? I have something that may be of interest to you. I dont really know how to PM on the forum however so maybe if you could PM me first?

Just sent

 

[Nomad40]

https://falcons.pk/photo/JF-17-Thunder-Block-2/2725

Look's really beautiful 10 years already she is pretty.

 

[Armchair]

interesting..why block 3 only..CFTs have one requirement htough..a better engine..wonder what version of rd 93 will the block 3 use

I have no idea but you can just use the search function on the top right. Put CFT and for member write messiach you'll get virtually every single post messiach is talking about CFTs.

I use the search function often, no magic to it.

Some variations you could use on the search - CFT, CFTs, conformal, etc.

 

[waqasmwi]

Can JF 17 be painted with radar absorbent paint? Can radar absorbent material be used in JF 17 to make it stealthier?

 

[air marshal]

https://falcons.pk/photo/JF-17-Thunder/2276

 

[SD 10]

https://falcons.pk/photo/JF-17-Thunder/2276

kj600?

 

[GriffinsRule]

Can JF 17 be painted with radar absorbent paint? Can radar absorbent material be used in JF 17 to make it stealthier?

Yes but cost benefit is not there. There are so many features of JF-17 that make it a terrible low observable aircraft that merely coating it with an expensive radar absorbent material is not worth the effort.