JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[Moon]

Do you really think French's will give meteor to Pakistan, why they want to make angry there milking cow (india)

I mean if MBDA (folks who make meteor) let's Pakistan purchase CAMM-ER missiles, why would they not allow us to purchase Meteor?
I think they only thing preventing such a thing from happening is Europe's recent tilt against the Chinese.

 

[air marshal]

 

[Big_bud]

buddy its a design based Russian/Soviet rejected project 33 which was similar in design that of F-16 its center of gravity and pressure just like F-16 or Mig-29, so most probably its a relax stability design
View attachment 753949

A lot has been said from unofficial sources about origins of JF's design. You will hear different things from who you ask. Westerners & Indians would like to believe its a Russian design because they don't like to think China with inputs from Pakistan can make its own design. Pakistani air force on the other hand has frequently mentioned F16 as benchmark and inspiration for the JF (but then again this does not mean a copy of F16).

But nothing can be said with certainty. JF project started with a collaboration between Grumen and China as Super 7. Grumen later left, but were the blueprints already ready on the paper by then? Who knows? Later Pakistan joined in. Russia provided engines, that's all that we know for sure. Weather Russia helped China design it or not has no proof. The allegedly rejected project of MiG33 has its air intake under its cockpit, not the sides. A raised cockpit with air intake beneath would have been very much like the F16/J10 and may very well be a relaxed stability design. However if you see the fuselage of JF, its pretty much straight. Plus there are several differences here and there in dimensions as compared to MiG33 design. To me JF can be as much close to F16, as it is to MiG33 or they just looked at both and designed their own! Who knows? We can't be sure if its relaxed stability or not, unless PAF or CATIC clarify this. Personally I also do think China did have capability to fully design a fighter jet on its own back then too.

Either both PAF & CATIC has a real need and agreement for maintaining secrecy or they have extremely poor marketing/PR departments or there's nothing much fancy about this jet anyways so they'd rather hide it? But I can't understand the sheer amount of confusion and guess work related to this jet! When Lockheed or any other manufacturer designs a jet they market it. They flaunt it. But CATIC and PAF has everything left to imagination.

Having said that, as @The Raven & @JamD pointed out, relaxed stability is not necessary to get desired performance output from a 4th Gen fighter. However if in block 3 G-limits are increased to +9/-3 then it might really be a relaxed stability fighter? If switch to full FBW brings in real change in G forces exerted, it can mean that now full potential of RSS design is being utilised by the 3-axis FBW. However, if it stays the same then who knows?

So far we do know that instantaneous turn rate of JF is better than F16, F16 has a better sustained turn rate than JF. Maximum angle of attack is the same. However the advantage of F16's better sustained rate can be due to its much more powerful engine. If JF gets a better engine it may match or beat F16 in sustained turn rate too. JF also bleeds its energy and slows down much more after extreme manoeuvres than the higher end & expensive 4th gen jets due to its weaker engine.

Nothing has confirmed yet that Block3 is coming with RD93MA or not? And what sort of engine it turns out to be we don't know. Personally I believe PAF should stick with Russian engines than switching to the Chinese. Reliability of Chinese ones are really untested as of now.

 

[khanasifm]

A lot has been said from unofficial sources about origins of JF's design. You will hear different things from who you ask. Westerners & Indians would like to believe its a Russian design because they don't like to think China with inputs from Pakistan can make its own design. Pakistani air force on the other hand has frequently mentioned F16 as benchmark and inspiration for the JF (but then again this does not mean a copy of F16).

But nothing can be said with certainty. JF project started with a collaboration between Grumen and China as Super 7. Grumen later left, but were the blueprints already ready on the paper by then? Who knows? Later Pakistan joined in. Russia provided engines, that's all that we know for sure. Weather Russia helped China design it or not has no proof. The allegedly rejected project of MiG33 has its air intake under its cockpit, not the sides. A raised cockpit with air intake beneath would have been very much like the F16/J10 and may very well be a relaxed stability design. However if you see the fuselage of JF, its pretty much straight. Plus there are several differences here and there in dimensions as compared to MiG33 design. To me JF can be as much close to F16, as it is to MiG33 or they just looked at both and designed their own! Who knows? We can't be sure if its relaxed stability or not, unless PAF or CATIC clarify this. Personally I also do think China did have capability to fully design a fighter jet on its own back then too.

Either both PAF & CATIC has a real need and agreement for maintaining secrecy or they have extremely poor marketing/PR departments or there's nothing much fancy about this jet anyways so they'd rather hide it? But I can't understand the sheer amount of confusion and guess work related to this jet! When Lockheed or any other manufacturer designs a jet they market it. They flaunt it. But CATIC and PAF has everything left to imagination.

Having said that, as @The Raven & @JamD pointed out, relaxed stability is not necessary to get desired performance output from a 4th Gen fighter. However if in block 3 G-limits are increased to +9/-3 then it might really be a relaxed stability fighter? If switch to full FBW brings in real change in G forces exerted, it can mean that now full potential of RSS design is being utilised by the 3-axis FBW. However, if it stays the same then who knows?

So far we do know that instantaneous turn rate of JF is better than F16, F16 has a better sustained turn rate than JF. Maximum angle of attack is the same. However the advantage of F16's better sustained rate can be due to its much more powerful engine. If JF gets a better engine it may match or beat F16 in sustained turn rate too. JF also bleeds its energy and slows down much more after extreme manoeuvres than the higher end & expensive 4th gen jets due to its weaker engine.

Nothing has confirmed yet that Block3 is coming with RD93MA or not? And what sort of engine it turns out to be we don't know. Personally I believe PAF should stick with Russian engines than switching to the Chinese. Reliability of Chinese ones are really untested as of now.

100’engines on order per one news why would Russian work on it if they have no customer the option for Russian and Chinese may exist for any customer to choose from

 

[GriffinsRule]

Yes , JFT is the relaxed stability design, its design inspired by F-16 design, if this design is not relaxed stability design than tell me why its using fly by wire system (first hybrid 1x fly by wire and 2x mechanical system) for JF-17 block-1 and 2, and now for block-3 this will have be 3x digital fly by wire system, that's means JF-17 is relax static stability design

may be J-17 can super cruise on clean configurations ( without any weapons) but with weapons it can't be super cruise i think, and not needed to have a super cruise capability

Jf-17 is a unstable/relax stable design inspired by F-16

Why is the latest version of F-15 using FBW when the original A/B/C/D or E variants did not? Reasons already explained by posts above yours.

 

[krash]

A lot has been said from unofficial sources about origins of JF's design. You will hear different things from who you ask. Westerners & Indians would like to believe its a Russian design because they don't like to think China with inputs from Pakistan can make its own design. Pakistani air force on the other hand has frequently mentioned F16 as benchmark and inspiration for the JF (but then again this does not mean a copy of F16).

But nothing can be said with certainty. JF project started with a collaboration between Grumen and China as Super 7. Grumen later left, but were the blueprints already ready on the paper by then? Who knows? Later Pakistan joined in. Russia provided engines, that's all that we know for sure.

It started with the Sabre II project, building on the F-7M design which was built on the Mig-21 F-13 design. It was Pakistan who initiated the project and then brought Grumman in. The Grumman's Sabre II model had PAF markings on it. Blue prints were submitted, models were made, and wind tunnel testing was done by Grumman. The design then kept evolving, even after Grumman had left.

The tots on our side and across the border can make whatever fantastical stories they want. The JF-17 is built upon the Mig-21 design aiming at an 'F-16' of our own. The fact that it has evolved into something leaps and bounds beyond the Mig-21 has no bearing on it. I don't know how many more times will this need to be repeated.

We can't be sure if its relaxed stability or not, unless PAF or CATIC clarify this. Personally I also do think China did have capability to fully design a fighter jet on its own back then too.Either both PAF & CATIC has a real need and agreement for maintaining secrecy or they have extremely poor marketing/PR departments or there's nothing much fancy about this jet anyways so they'd rather hide it? But I can't understand the sheer amount of confusion and guess work related to this jet! When Lockheed or any other manufacturer designs a jet they market it. They flaunt it. But CATIC and PAF has everything left to imagination.

It is a stable design, that is no secret. Announcers at different airshows have stated it from PAC provided scripts plenty of times.

 

[Nomad40]

This is still a CG only!

A many similar instances have been observed through my time in PDF and I always wonder, when will fan boys have a perception of thought...I guess we will never know!

Cheers Deino.

 

[The Raven]

It started with the Sabre II project, building on the Mig-21F-13 design. It was Pakistan which initiated the project and then brought Grumman into the mix. The Grumman Sabre II model had PAF markings on it. Blue prints were submitted, models were made, and wind tunnel testing was done by Grumman. The design then kept evolving, even after Grumman had left.

The infants on our side and across the border can make whatever fantastical stories they want. The JF-17 is built upon the Mig-21 design aiming at an 'F-16' of our own. The fact that it has evolved into something completely different has no bearing on it.



View attachment 754326
View attachment 754328
View attachment 754327



It is a stable design, that is no secret. Announcers at different airshows have stated it from PAC provided scripts plenty of times.

The Super 7/Sabre II project was completely different to the FC-1/JF-17 project. The Super 7/Sabre II was superceded by an all new agreement signed in the mid 90s between the Sharif administration and Chengdu/CATIC to design an all new design, not one based on a modified Mig-21F13 airframe. This was when Mikoyan was brought in as a consultant to provide assistance based on the data from the Mig-33 project, which later evolved into the FC-1/JF-17. There's Flight global news articles reporting this back in the 90s which I still remember reading.

The original article is archived somewhere on the internet, but the headline is as shown below from an article dated in 1995.

Mikoyan joins Chengdu on fighter

CHENGDU AIRCRAFT (CAC) has teamed with Mikoyan MAPO to design and produce a new single-engine fighter to replace China's now defunct Super-7 project The FC-1 is being developed as a private venture funded by CAC, China National Aero-Technology Import and Export (CATIC) and Pakistan. The...

www.flightglobal.com

"CHENGDU AIRCRAFT (CAC) has teamed with Mikoyan MAPO to design and produce a new single-engine fighter to replace China's now defunct Super-7 project"


Ironically, the Super 7/Sabre II design essentially lived on in the form of the FTC-2000/JL-9 trainer.

And yes, the JF-17 is a statically neutral design, as I've mentioned before.

 

[Dil Pakistan]

JF-17 blocked-II being pitched against Qatar Rafael in Anatolian Eagle 2021

 

[MastanKhan]

It started with the Sabre II project, building on the F-7M design which was built on the Mig-21 F-13 design. It was Pakistan who initiated the project and then brought Grumman in. The Grumman's Sabre II model had PAF markings on it. Blue prints were submitted, models were made, and wind tunnel testing was done by Grumman. The design then kept evolving, even after Grumman had left.

The tots on our side and across the border can make whatever fantastical stories they want. The JF-17 is built upon the Mig-21 design aiming at an 'F-16' of our own. The fact that it has evolved into something leaps and bounds beyond the Mig-21 has no bearing on it. I don't know how many more times will this need to be repeated.



View attachment 754326
View attachment 754328
View attachment 754327



It is a stable design, that is no secret. Announcers at different airshows have stated it from PAC provided scripts plenty of times.

Hi,

Your knowledge about aircraft design is very poor.

There is an inherent flaw in 3rd gen aircraft design that prevents it from becoming a 4th gen airframe.

 

[GumNaam]

Hi,

Your knowledge about aircraft design is very poor.

There is an inherent flaw in 3rd gen aircraft design that prevents it from becoming a 4th gen airframe.

and that flaw is???

 

[ghazi52]

PAF JF-17 Thunder arrive at Konya AFB in Turkey for Anatolian Eagle 2021. The exercise begin in 4 days and will last from 21 June to 2 July.

 

[Windjammer]

Impressive load out variety.

 

[Scorpiooo]

Ironically, the Super 7/Sabre II design essentially lived on in the form of the FTC-2000/JL-9 trainer.

Do Guizhou purchase Sabre ll blueprints for FTC2000 ?

 

[Akh1112]

I mean if MBDA (folks who make meteor) let's Pakistan purchase CAMM-ER missiles, why would they not allow us to purchase Meteor?
I think they only thing preventing such a thing from happening is Europe's recent tilt against the Chinese.

I dont think you get how MBDA works.

Anyway,

The CAMM-ER is an ITALIAN project, not an MBDA project as a whole, its an ITALIAN(MBDA IT) Development of a British Italian missile. Meteor is a JV between NUMEROUS countries requiring clearance from them ALL for re-export of controlled components, French workshare in the meteor is also greater than it is in CAMM-ER(nonexistent).

and that flaw is???

mastan has a habit of talking out of his posterior, dont mind him.