JF17:---More Hard Points Bigger Engine---Why!!!!!

[CodeforFood]

I guess you are pointing the entire air defence system the ground and airborne support


yea all that cobra Maneuver" of SU30 in airshows is worth as much as the SU30 wreckage across the LOC after PAF splashed it

in case of PAF was not any way far ahead of IAF in technology but what it has it employed it well along with the training and deflated Modi's chest as the IAF crafts turned into fireballs and came crashing on the ground

the proof of your ending commentary is how Indians are reduced to complaining about lack of more modern jets on one hand and complaining over PAF use of Swedish AWACS and American F-16s and Sri Lankan "tea" on the other

All these points are valid and fair and I concur with both you sirs(Mastan and Irfan). However if without too much effort if we can further optimize or increase power in the power plant it is not a bad thing. It will help the plane to climb faster, escape faster, get into the position faster...

 

[Irfan Baloch]

All these points are valid and fair and I concur with both you sirs(Mastan and Irfan). However if without too much effort if we can further optimize or increase power in the power plant it is not a bad thing. It will help the plane to climb faster, escape faster, get into the position faster...

Valid

Its going to be a trade off
Speed power weight frame cost RnD limitations
Just get best mix. Better access to technology will help
My view is f16 jf17 and mirages are distinct planes if jf17 is to replace both
It should pick up and retain all features needed or incorporate in special variants or look for a new platform if performance goals are periority and resources are not limiting factor

 

[Shabi1]

Im against a 25% increase in JF-17. This would be stupid and converting it into a medium fighter will kill it's advantages in terms of low fuel usage, near 1:1 TWR, excellent handling and ease of maintainability.

JF-17 is a light fighter and should remain as that, once advances in engine technology will allow for modifications on air frame to be enlarged but only as far as it retains the near 1:1 thrust to weight ratio. Blk-3 could have larger wings but in essence perhaps upto 10-12% increment in size permitted there is matching increase in thrust. This is what we can expect as the RD-93MA will have higher thrust.

For the medium role with heavier weapon load capability we should look at J-10 or Project Azm.

 

[The Eagle]

Plug&play doesnt work with turbines. We will continue with this topic post sept.

This September is awaited since long. Engine replacement is indeed not an easy thing but on other hand, expected up-gradation (Block-III) might need more power to serve AESA plus a jamming pod configuration. However, if is continuing with existing power plant then many will be disappointed that existing Engine is enough. I remember most of lost minds were off the opinion that current RD-93 is not good enough to support future AESA, EW POD(in-case) etc. Should I read it that we are heading towards "solution not restricted to the supplier", an independent solution like JV or non-Russian?

 

[araz]

You can't compare a single surprise and bait mission with an extended war. The amount of payload and thrust matter a lot in extended conflict zones, specially when achieving air superiority ain't gonna happen quick enough.
Having an extra pair of SD-10 or PL-15 can make the difference between killing 2 SU-MKI's or 4 - 5 of them from a range out of their reach, in one go with a single jet.

You are right. In my view people in their glee at the victory of PAF have failed to see quite a few things which will impact any engagement.
Before I come to that I would like to make a comment on the JFT and its current engine. It is a standard modus operandi of any aviation project by a country that it would not do anything tocjeoperdise its own market. For the Chinese that market is the J10. They have a project which has taken them nearly 15 years to bring to fruition and another 10 to mature. Why would they jeoperdise it by building a contemporary product? So this talk of JFT being 25%larger would not have made any sense as the Chinese already had a competitor in the market.
Secondly PAF had another issue, lack of a cheap supplier of suitable reliable engine. For reasons which I am uncertain of(although the Indians would say it was pressure from them that AL31 FN was not approved) the Russians did not clear AL31 series engine and I suspect the Chinese did not push either. The EU and US offerings were sanction prone and expensive. So wheee would you procure engines from? After much tooing and froing the Russians approved the sale of RD93 AND THAT IS WHAT YOU WENT WITH.
So this whole debate in my view is futile in that there was no contemporary engine available.
On the events which transpired on the 27th one critical factor is being missed out. PAF was the planner and executor of this event. It is therefore assumed that it had planned this venture in advance and placed its assets in accordance. IAF were intercepting. It was bad planning or oversight or sheer stupidity that IAF walked into the trap set by PAF. IT may have been that the EW envoironment was such that IAF lost situational awareness. Now in the reverse scenario, PAF chose to abandon chase into IOK on the 26th quite wisely.
However in a war scenario with multiple engagements both on home soil and enemy play ground would the results always be the same? Obviously Not. However the over all result will go in favour of the side that is more aware situationally. I would love to say that PAF will come out on top but not being a sooth sayer I would think the advantage may lie with PAF but it would get mauled as much as IAF.
CURRENTLY PAF modus operandi is to detect fire BVR nad disengage and leave the rest for the second tem while going for a refill. I dont think that carrying more than 4 BVRs plus 2 WVRs would be beneficial for this strategy. I dont think I need to explain this. If that is the case in my view the most emphasis ahould be on AESA radar and HMDS for HOBS. Once this situation arises in WVR what we can achieve is destruction of both platforms offensive and defending.
So in my humble opinion the benefit is in AESA, DERS(-for 2 SD10A/B) and HMDS with HOBS.
A

 

[Falgrine]

Hi,

It is not the US that is a problem---it is the congress and senate that is a problem---. Pakistan must not trust them---.

Then shan't it be considered a big failure of the Pak foriegn policy which resulted in an extremely antagonized US congress and the senate?

 

[MastanKhan]

Then shan't it be considered a big failure of the Pak foriegn policy which resulted in extremely antagonized US congress and senate?

Hi,

Yes it is a failure---. When you don't stand up to protect your rights and tell your side of the story---that is what happens---.

Pakistanis don't know how to talk to the americans---.

Americans are very direct and straight forward---pakistanis on the average are very deceitful---deceptive and kiss ar-se---

 

[messiach]

RD-93 is the same turbine-fan as RD-33. We are getting 20+:1 OPR wth marginally reduced BPR with RD-93. Trust us its as good as GE. We just gave you a demonstration on Feb, 27th.

This September is awaited since long. Engine replacement is indeed not an easy thing but on other hand, expected up-gradation (Block-III) might need more power to serve AESA plus a jamming pod configuration. However, if is continuing with existing power plant then many will be disappointed that existing Engine is enough. I remember most of lost minds were off the opinion that current RD-93 is not good enough to support future AESA, EW POD(in-case) etc. Should I read it that we are heading towards "solution not restricted to the supplier", an independent solution like JV or non-Russian?

 

[Falgrine]

Hi,

Yes it is a failure---. When you don't stand up to protect your rights and tell your side of the story---that is what happens---.

Pakistanis don't know how to talk to the americans---.

Americans are very direct and straight forward---pakistanis on the average are very deceitful---deceptive and kiss ar-se---

What about Pak deep state letting the FO run by expats? Surely, they know much better how both worlds operate.

 

[MastanKhan]

Im against a 25% increase in JF-17. This would be stupid and converting it into a medium fighter will kill it's advantages in terms of low fuel usage, near 1:1 TWR, excellent handling and ease of maintainability.

JF-17 is a light fighter and should remain as that, once advances in engine technology will allow for modifications on air frame to be enlarged but only as far as it retains the near 1:1 thrust to weight ratio. Blk-3 could have larger wings but in essence perhaps upto 10-12% increment in size permitted there is matching increase in thrust. This is what we can expect as the RD-93MA will have higher thrust.

For the medium role with heavier weapon load capability we should look at J-10 or Project Azm.

Hi,

The size increase would put the aircraft into a different class by itself---with an expanded utility.

The first one will not disappear---. If we get 150 of them---they will be lasting us for another 15-20 years---.

Our primary strike need is an anti shipping platform---. For that platform---to carry one type CM400AKG type AShM is not enough.

One missile can fail to engage after launch when the enemy is in the cross hairs---and that is not acceptable. The second is a guarantee---.

Now if both of them fail to engage---then it means that the god is against you---and you cannot do anything---and it was not meant to happen.

For that very reason---big game hunters used double barrel rifles or smooth bore guns---if you missed with one---you have another to back you.

What about Pak deep state letting the FO run by expats? They surely know much better how both worlds operate.

Hi,

The ENEMY CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTAN killed our support---.

RD-93 is the same turbine-fan as RD-33. We are getting 20+:1 OPR wth marginally reduced BPR with RD-93. Trust us its as good as GE. We just gave you a demonstration on Feb, 27th.

Hi,

Thank you.

 

[The Eagle]

RD-93 is the same turbine-fan as RD-33. We are getting 20+:1 OPR wth marginally reduced BPR with RD-93. Trust us its as good as GE. We just gave you a demonstration on Feb, 27th.

Thank you for the post. So I hope many will understand that RD-93 was appraised by PAF for reasons and the choice was not just to fulfill in short terms rather in long terms. My statement was based upon opinions from past that RD-93 can serve for the time being but not in long term.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Nice article on the whole.
As u know i generally have fun on this forum and not take things seriously. As a stress engineer who has worked for companies like British aerospace and so on i can say one little comment.
I am not for changing the engine as some members want. I think the jf17 engine is just fine. I am not sure if you realise how the aircraft structures are over designed beyond the stress envelope encountered. Although you state correctly that life cycle may be reduced if stress is increased.

Sir there is a thing called short endurance dash which sometimes save lives

 

[khanmubashir]

Military aviation and airforces of the world ( depending on their country's relations with Pakistan) are either grudgingly acknowledging PAF surprise triumph (india complains lack of Rafale for its doubtful air strike & PAF cheating by usung F16s) or in total admiration for its daring raid and air victories American aviators who have dealt with PAF and other veterns are asking their leadership to rethink its policy towards a cold war ally that stood up to Soviets and beat them too
Turks and Arabian posters on web are terming PAF win as their own.

PAF seems to have got that secret mix of minimum deterance (due to limited resources) maximum efficiency and outrageous tenacity of taking on bigger foes (soviets and Indians)
This is like a killer app we call PAF (like tony stark and his suit)
Let the mix of ground and airborne support do heavy lifting of surveillance situational awareness and let the medium size jets do the dance
Shooting down 1 or 2 jets will be enough in an encounter as it Has such dramatic effect
so no more hardpoints needed for the heck of it

I would like to move the discussion to what about mirage replacement?
Their design and capability has made them useful for a specific purpose
A specific variant of jf 17 might be needed to fulfil that

We should focus over limited resources for project azm
As for jf17 its future upgrades be sourced from azm too as much as possible this would reduce over all cost of both systems
If we can get good orders for jf17 derived platforms more variants of it like those f16 super viper and canceled vista delta variant as competition for strike eagle f15 can be developed.

But for now we should make due with the current frame and engine and focus on sensor and ammo improvement in jf17 if Chinese come up with better engine for j31 we can use em in jf17 too

 

[Kabotar]

This September is awaited since long. Engine replacement is indeed not an easy thing but on other hand, expected up-gradation (Block-III) might need more power to serve AESA plus a jamming pod configuration. However, if is continuing with existing power plant then many will be disappointed that existing Engine is enough. I remember most of lost minds were off the opinion that current RD-93 is not good enough to support future AESA, EW POD(in-case) etc. Should I read it that we are heading towards "solution not restricted to the supplier", an independent solution like JV or non-Russian?

What is happening in September?

 

[Fawadqasim1]

If your radars get comprehensively jammed, your fighters will be blown up on the ground. Sit back, and take a moment to ponder on that.

Hence the aesa in block iii sir