What's new

JF-17 You Beauty !!!!

20746303_1309405495824510_7061540918453168670_o.jpg

So no one has hd/high res version ??
 
. .
They are called Air-brakes, every aircraft has them in a different location....some like the Typhoon or F-15 Eagle have one massive on the spine.
AirForces+Monthly+JF-17+Thunder++FC-1+Xiaolong+SD-10%252C+MICA+LS-6+C-802+AESA.jpg

f-16_atlis_arrows.jpg



1494552.jpg

Too many alerts.
These r like spoilers on civilian jets except these brakes are installed on non-lifting surfaces, increases effective linear drag, does'nt affect lift except at critically low speeds.

Some technical questions by a layman, prelude first; looking at JF17's air brakes, I used to think that since they look even smaller than our deltas wing mounted air brakes so they may not be as effective as say the large ones on F16 or even larger dorsal one on SU27 etc. Then I saw the performance of jf17 at 23rd March earlier this year, it was breath taking that the pilot exercised so much control using engine throttle and what must be the air brakes that the aircraft seem to break speed suddenly yet smoothly in mid air and seem to glide into position for its slow pass maneuver. Let me repeat myself, it was simply awesome...breath taking control and masterful execution. Then I saw it again on the first day of rehearsals for Independence day air show, it was the first of the two thunders that performed on the 10th.

My question is; is the position of the air brakes on air crafts like F16 and Mirrage family, precisely located one on each side, top and bottom, a factor that contributes to smoothly controlling the speed of the aircraft by creating equal drag on all sides?

The ingeniously designed F16 air brakes open up to reveal 2 on each side 4 air brakes, and unlike one large one on the dorsal spine that must create a downward drag as well as slowing the air craft.

If so then can we say that the air brakes on JF17 work on a similar principle that is better than other dorsal spine air brake designs in general, specially at critically low speeds?
 
. .
Upon research this is what I have found out; PAF has 50 Block I's which are in the process of being upgraded to Block II's. PAF is also inducting a total of 50 Block II's which will later be upgraded to Block III specs. PAF plans to have about 250 JF-17's total.
To date we have lost 2 JF-17's in crashes.

I don't think the Block-2's would be upgradable to Block-3 standard. This is because the Block-3 has a number of mechanical, structural and design changes. As an example, the Block-3 will support a fly-by-wire control system to support the hybrid mechanical/fly-by-wire control system of the Block-2. The Block-3 is also rumored to have a much larger percentage of composites as compared to the Block-2, and of course if the JF-17B is anything to go by, the Block-3 will have design changes such as a much larger wing. However, the Block-2 aircraft can be upgraded with latest avionics to keep them effective in battlefields.

In spite of all this, they have succeeded in their initial objective, which was to replace the legacy platforms with a cost effective modern fighter. By inducting the JF-17 in Block-1 and Block-2 configurations, the PAF could retire the older fighter jets with a modern jet which also allowed them to gain experience on the JF-17, build its infrastructure, train staff and use their experience to evolve the Block-3. But the story ends here for the Block-2 planes.
 
. . .
I don't think the Block-2's would be upgradable to Block-3 standard. This is because the Block-3 has a number of mechanical, structural and design changes. As an example, the Block-3 will support a fly-by-wire control system to support the hybrid mechanical/fly-by-wire control system of the Block-2. The Block-3 is also rumored to have a much larger percentage of composites as compared to the Block-2, and of course if the JF-17B is anything to go by, the Block-3 will have design changes such as a much larger wing. However, the Block-2 aircraft can be upgraded with latest avionics to keep them effective in battlefields.

In spite of all this, they have succeeded in their initial objective, which was to replace the legacy platforms with a cost effective modern fighter. By inducting the JF-17 in Block-1 and Block-2 configurations, the PAF could retire the older fighter jets with a modern jet which also allowed them to gain experience on the JF-17, build its infrastructure, train staff and use their experience to evolve the Block-3. But the story ends here for the Block-2 planes.
JF-17 Block I and II don't have fly by wire?
 
. .
Per my conversation with jf engineer (2008 long time ago when first Few delivered ) range wise jf is better then mirage and f7 because turbojet vs turbofan older engines are not fuel efficient compared to turbofan plus( most of the flight profile) jf carry far more fuel than f7 and same amount As mirage iii mirage 5 carry more fuel ( internal fuel) but range wise on internal fuel jf is better again same reason cft are speculated on block 3 time will tell
 
Last edited:
. . . . . .
Back
Top Bottom