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

[The Eagle]

View attachment 596286
I think these empty spaces should be used

this is the thread I referred.

 

[khanasifm]

The question is both under intake has pylons points so jammer and ldp will move there?

As far as wings I Think to strength outer wing and extend fuel tank all the way to the wingtip plus adding another hp but it will require redesign of the wing outer wing in current configuration is just aluminum alloy light structure which carry aim9 type loads

At min making wingtip to carry sd-10 type load will be nice And may require less change

Let’s see what block 3 brings

 

[The Eagle]

View attachment 596327

The question is both under intake has pylons points so jammer and ldp will move there?

As far as wings I Think to strength outer wing and extend fuel tank all the way to the wingtip plus adding another hp but it will require redesign of the wing outer wing in current configuration is just aluminum alloy light structure which carry aim9 type loads

At min making wingtip to carry sd-10 type load will be nice And may require less change

Let’s see what block 3 brings

View attachment 596328View attachment 596329
View attachment 596330

Help us in less of scattered information; by posting relevant stuff here in this thread. That will be really appreciated.

Regards,

 

[MastanKhan]

That’s not how it fares against the viper in DACT. Woh kia kehte hain, F16 becharay JF17 ko kha pe jata hai. Thunder is especially not good above a certain altitude in turning dogfights. Not to mention the issues with its radar. The one saving grace for the existing lot is the RWR.

Hi

That is why they say always fight from a position of your strength and not the enemy strength.

The fighter aircraft are designed to either fight at a higher altitude in a dogfight or they excel at a lower altitude I don’t know if there is any fighter aircraft that would excel at both.

F86 was a high altitude fighter. Gnat was a low altitude fighter.

The jf17 design is seemingly based on low altitude fighter in a wvr combat.

But bvr combat has changed all that. Add to it off bore sight missiles and the playing field is even.

 

[khanasifm]

 

[MastanKhan]

People,

Here is an excellent article on the JF17 by "Renier Human".

Very well balanced. I thank the writer for being straight forward---.



What is the reason behind the popularity of JF Thunder 17?


Renier Human, SOF Military Advisor (ADF) at Military (2016-present)
Updated May 31


The JF-17 Thunder has become a popular platform due to the successful development milestones it has achieved under the leadership of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) who is actually the main driving force behind the aircraft’s continuous research and development as a result of operational necessity. We should in fact not look at the JF-17 Thunder as a Chinese product, but rather look at it as a Product of Pakistan. China views the JF-17 (or better known in China as the CAC FC-1 Xiaolong) as a ‘low-end’ export fighter to Pakistan, but it is Pakistan who is actually developing the JF-17 platform into a very formidable 4th generation + fighter. Does it compare to the SAAB JAS 39 Gripen C/D? From a quality over lifetime perspective, no, but from a missions capability perspective, yes (referring to the JF-17 Thunder Block III). But, it was never designed to directly compete against Western platforms for it was designed from the onset as a ‘lower end market alternative’ to offer emerging- and/or arms restricted economies some form of modern fighter capability at a fraction of the cost of purchasing modern Western fighters. Looking back at the original PAF requirements (if they had their way), they would have purchased the latest F-16V Block 70 from the US to complement their existing F-16 fleet, but with the ongoing US Congress restrictions blocking arms sales to Pakistan due to Pakistan’s continuation of their nuclear weapons program (as countermeasure for the Indian nuclear weapons program), Pakistan had to seriously look at alternatives to counter future threats of (for instance) India possibly operating F-16V Block 70 on their doorstep. This led to the hastily commissioned JF-17 Thunder fighter program as a joint venture with China, who was the only feasible development partner to design and build a new 4th generation fighter in as short a time possible, while keeping program development costs to the absolute minimum (around US$ 500 million, which is extremely low compared to the development costs involving Western aircraft development).

Looking at the JF-17 Thunder since its first introduction into the PAF as the JF-17 Block I, it has had some mixed results. Again, we need to understand the development approach followed by the Pakistan Air Force trying to keep development costs low, and at the same time meeting critical operational performance requirements. To understand this from a development context, the JF-17 Block I is what would be referred to as the XDM (Experimental Development Model). The JF-17 Block II is the upgraded version of the Block I, which would be referred to as the ADM (Advanced Development Model), and the JF-17 Block III is the approved production model (the final product conforming to initial design requirements). What is referred to now as the JF-17 Block III is what the PAF originally wanted from the onset but knowing how long the development timeline can take, along with constantly increasing costs (based on lessons learnt from the PAF Mirage III ROSE upgrades), the PAF decided on combining the JF-17 development phases with operational frontline use. Where a traditional development approach entails developing different versions subject to various ‘testing’ regimes over a project’s lifetime until the perfect production version is achieved, the PAF just went all in and combined the whole development phase with operational use, testing each platform version under real operational conditions while at the same time enabling ground crews to acquire the technical capabilities to support these platforms. To date (what really makes this platform fascinating), is that it has already accumulated around 20,000 hours flying operational sorties within the War in North-West Pakistan combatting Islamic extremist groups, using Block I and Block II platforms. Based on limited data, there are also sufficient reasons to believe that two IAF aircraft (1 x Mig 21, 1 x Su-30MKI) were shot down by two PAF JF-17 Block II fighters on 27 Feb 2019. Now, this can be considered quite remarkable for an aircraft that is still technically under development. Looking at the future, when the first Block III platforms enter operational service, the whole induction process will be extremely simple and less time consuming, allowing for gradual withdrawal of Block I platforms for upgrading to the Block III standard (followed by Block II).

One of the design limitations of the JF-17 is its current choice of powerplant. The decision to use the RD-93 on Block I + II was just a safeguard to ensure the program did not fail as a result of an engine still under development (the Chinese developed WS-13). Luckily due to the simple modular design of the JF-17 platform, upgrading to another engine (such as WS-13 or alternatively the RD-33MKM) will be much simpler than with many other aircraft. Looking at the whole JF-17 Thunder development program, it is actually quite ingenious, and I think that Pakistan can be congratulated on a job well done, and I think Western militaries can learn quite a lot from the Pakistan approach to complex arms development, and how to keep development costs down to the bare minimum. The main lesson we can learn from this is that the JF-17 program is successful because the Pakistan government was 100% committed from the onset to achieve success as a matter of necessity. Also, the JF-17 Thunder program was directly managed by the PAF with no private involvement. Initially I was somewhat ignorant about the JF-17 Thunder during the initial stages of the program, and it was only after a few ‘coffee table discussions’ with a few outstanding individuals involved with the Pakistan Armed Forces, that I truly realised the growing capabilities of the JF-17, especially the PAF thinking behind the program. I was initially more impressed with the Mirage III ROSE program, and what Pakistan achieved with extending the life-span of their ageing Mirage III fleet (currently still the back-bone of the PAF). However, the ROSE program is as far as you can go with the Mirage III, and it has become too costly to continue operating the Mirage III. The PAF is not the only country facing the dilemma of replacing ageing fighter fleets with a modern design solution, and I have come to believe the JF-17 Thunder (as supplied via Pakistan), is a suitable platform for many Air Forces around the world being excluded in some way from purchasing modern hardware without operational use restrictions. The JF-17 is an affordable solution for many MENA, African and South American Air Forces seeking budget friendly options, and current Chinese armaments and avionics have proved very capable, with improved long-term support.

To end my discussion around the JF-17, I quote the words of a Pakistani official involved with the program: “We know the present version JF-17 does not compete one-on-one with the latest F-16V Block 70, but for the price of one F-16V Block 70 we can purchase multiple JF-17 Thunder Block IIIs. With the correct armament, two JF-17 Block III against one F-16V turns the odds against the F-16 in battle”. Based on the last 19 x F-16V Block 70 sale to Bahrain in September 2017, the total package unit price for the F-16V Block 70 came down to around US$ 146 million each, whereas the average unit price for a JF-17 Block III is estimated to be between US$ 35 - 45 million each. In light of these costs, the PAF approach to the F-16V threat dilemma from a JF-17 perspective makes totally sense, while having an aircraft in inventory that is built, supported and upgraded domestically, already well established within the PAF frontline structures, with little to no operational use restrictions from major component suppliers.

Now, looking at the WS-13E engine, within its current phase of development (as publicly advertised – China being quite good at intentionally spreading misinformation to the point where you cannot believe a word they say), it has a shorter lifespan than the Russian RD-93/RD-33 range of engines. However, I do believe that it is not long before China will actually achieve the point where that engine will equal, and maybe improve, on current RD-93 performance. Also, there is a rumour within Chinese defence circles that they have already resolved most of the performance issues pertaining the WS-13E, but they are holding back until they have ridden themselves of all current RD-93 stock which currently stands at less than 150 units remaining (None of the current PLAAF aircraft are equipped with the RD-93, therefore the reason why there is no PLAAF demand for it). China also does not plan on purchasing more RD-93 engines but intends to phase in the WS-13E after the last RD-93 is sold off. Current performance projections indicate that the WS-13E would push the payload for the JF-17 Block III beyond 5 tons due to an increase in thrust. But, looking at a WS-13E engine with even reduced lifespan (as claimed), in many a developing country a guaranteed supply of cheaper ‘reduced lifespan engines’ is better than a ‘time expired engine which cannot be repaired or replaced’ as applicable to engines originating from Europe and especially the US (you know the old saying: ‘In the land of the blind, one eye is king’). South Africa, for example, has learnt that lesson many times during the era of sanctions with the French SNECMA, and it was also because of the US Pratt and Whitney turbofan engine in the original Israeli Lavi why South Africa was eventually excluded from that program due to US enforced restrictions (Israel eventually killing off the Lavi program in favour of the F-16I as a result of political influence). Russian engines are available, but at a very high premium. For many African air forces with limited budgets, flying moderate hours over lifetime to limit cost of operation, the WS-13E will suffice. Based on experiences in Africa, a characteristic of Chinese arms sales is that they will sell anything to anyone, but sometimes you have to acknowledge the opportunities and associated advantages relating to their manner of doing business in terms of guaranteeing sustainable supplies when traditional friends become your greatest limitation (looking at the current state of world affairs and rising global economic uncertainty).

 

[notorious_eagle]

That’s not how it fares against the viper in DACT. Woh kia kehte hain, F16 becharay JF17 ko kha pe jata hai. Thunder is especially not good above a certain altitude in turning dogfights. Not to mention the issues with its radar. The one saving grace for the existing lot is the RWR.

That's not what i heard from F16 pilots. From their own mouths, JF17 had quite a bit of success against the F16's in DACT exercises.

While i agree the Radar leaves a lot more to be desired for, but you forget the JF17's biggest advantage is its ability to data-link to PAF's extensive C4I network. It can receive live feeds from the AWACS and Ground Radars that can look far and deep.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

People still don't understand the change in air combat---. This change has already happened---.

The fighter pilots are trained to fight from a position of their strength---day in and day out---in the morning---in the afternoon---in the evening---at dusk or at dawn---and at night time too---fight from a position of your strength---entrap the enemy---confuse him and make him go to HIS weak position---get the job done and bug out---.

WVR combat is a 50/50 shot---why should a pilot take that risk---and go against his training---.

 

[Kabotar]

Awesome read made all of sense.

People,

Here is an excellent article on the JF17 by "Renier Human".

Very well balanced. I thank the writer for being straight forward---.



What is the reason behind the popularity of JF Thunder 17?


Renier Human, SOF Military Advisor (ADF) at Military (2016-present)
Updated May 31


The JF-17 Thunder has become a popular platform due to the successful development milestones it has achieved under the leadership of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) who is actually the main driving force behind the aircraft’s continuous research and development as a result of operational necessity. We should in fact not look at the JF-17 Thunder as a Chinese product, but rather look at it as a Product of Pakistan. China views the JF-17 (or better known in China as the CAC FC-1 Xiaolong) as a ‘low-end’ export fighter to Pakistan, but it is Pakistan who is actually developing the JF-17 platform into a very formidable 4th generation + fighter. Does it compare to the SAAB JAS 39 Gripen C/D? From a quality over lifetime perspective, no, but from a missions capability perspective, yes (referring to the JF-17 Thunder Block III). But, it was never designed to directly compete against Western platforms for it was designed from the onset as a ‘lower end market alternative’ to offer emerging- and/or arms restricted economies some form of modern fighter capability at a fraction of the cost of purchasing modern Western fighters. Looking back at the original PAF requirements (if they had their way), they would have purchased the latest F-16V Block 70 from the US to complement their existing F-16 fleet, but with the ongoing US Congress restrictions blocking arms sales to Pakistan due to Pakistan’s continuation of their nuclear weapons program (as countermeasure for the Indian nuclear weapons program), Pakistan had to seriously look at alternatives to counter future threats of (for instance) India possibly operating F-16V Block 70 on their doorstep. This led to the hastily commissioned JF-17 Thunder fighter program as a joint venture with China, who was the only feasible development partner to design and build a new 4th generation fighter in as short a time possible, while keeping program development costs to the absolute minimum (around US$ 500 million, which is extremely low compared to the development costs involving Western aircraft development).

Looking at the JF-17 Thunder since its first introduction into the PAF as the JF-17 Block I, it has had some mixed results. Again, we need to understand the development approach followed by the Pakistan Air Force trying to keep development costs low, and at the same time meeting critical operational performance requirements. To understand this from a development context, the JF-17 Block I is what would be referred to as the XDM (Experimental Development Model). The JF-17 Block II is the upgraded version of the Block I, which would be referred to as the ADM (Advanced Development Model), and the JF-17 Block III is the approved production model (the final product conforming to initial design requirements). What is referred to now as the JF-17 Block III is what the PAF originally wanted from the onset but knowing how long the development timeline can take, along with constantly increasing costs (based on lessons learnt from the PAF Mirage III ROSE upgrades), the PAF decided on combining the JF-17 development phases with operational frontline use. Where a traditional development approach entails developing different versions subject to various ‘testing’ regimes over a project’s lifetime until the perfect production version is achieved, the PAF just went all in and combined the whole development phase with operational use, testing each platform version under real operational conditions while at the same time enabling ground crews to acquire the technical capabilities to support these platforms. To date (what really makes this platform fascinating), is that it has already accumulated around 20,000 hours flying operational sorties within the War in North-West Pakistan combatting Islamic extremist groups, using Block I and Block II platforms. Based on limited data, there are also sufficient reasons to believe that two IAF aircraft (1 x Mig 21, 1 x Su-30MKI) were shot down by two PAF JF-17 Block II fighters on 27 Feb 2019. Now, this can be considered quite remarkable for an aircraft that is still technically under development. Looking at the future, when the first Block III platforms enter operational service, the whole induction process will be extremely simple and less time consuming, allowing for gradual withdrawal of Block I platforms for upgrading to the Block III standard (followed by Block II).

One of the design limitations of the JF-17 is its current choice of powerplant. The decision to use the RD-93 on Block I + II was just a safeguard to ensure the program did not fail as a result of an engine still under development (the Chinese developed WS-13). Luckily due to the simple modular design of the JF-17 platform, upgrading to another engine (such as WS-13 or alternatively the RD-33MKM) will be much simpler than with many other aircraft. Looking at the whole JF-17 Thunder development program, it is actually quite ingenious, and I think that Pakistan can be congratulated on a job well done, and I think Western militaries can learn quite a lot from the Pakistan approach to complex arms development, and how to keep development costs down to the bare minimum. The main lesson we can learn from this is that the JF-17 program is successful because the Pakistan government was 100% committed from the onset to achieve success as a matter of necessity. Also, the JF-17 Thunder program was directly managed by the PAF with no private involvement. Initially I was somewhat ignorant about the JF-17 Thunder during the initial stages of the program, and it was only after a few ‘coffee table discussions’ with a few outstanding individuals involved with the Pakistan Armed Forces, that I truly realised the growing capabilities of the JF-17, especially the PAF thinking behind the program. I was initially more impressed with the Mirage III ROSE program, and what Pakistan achieved with extending the life-span of their ageing Mirage III fleet (currently still the back-bone of the PAF). However, the ROSE program is as far as you can go with the Mirage III, and it has become too costly to continue operating the Mirage III. The PAF is not the only country facing the dilemma of replacing ageing fighter fleets with a modern design solution, and I have come to believe the JF-17 Thunder (as supplied via Pakistan), is a suitable platform for many Air Forces around the world being excluded in some way from purchasing modern hardware without operational use restrictions. The JF-17 is an affordable solution for many MENA, African and South American Air Forces seeking budget friendly options, and current Chinese armaments and avionics have proved very capable, with improved long-term support.

To end my discussion around the JF-17, I quote the words of a Pakistani official involved with the program: “We know the present version JF-17 does not compete one-on-one with the latest F-16V Block 70, but for the price of one F-16V Block 70 we can purchase multiple JF-17 Thunder Block IIIs. With the correct armament, two JF-17 Block III against one F-16V turns the odds against the F-16 in battle”. Based on the last 19 x F-16V Block 70 sale to Bahrain in September 2017, the total package unit price for the F-16V Block 70 came down to around US$ 146 million each, whereas the average unit price for a JF-17 Block III is estimated to be between US$ 35 - 45 million each. In light of these costs, the PAF approach to the F-16V threat dilemma from a JF-17 perspective makes totally sense, while having an aircraft in inventory that is built, supported and upgraded domestically, already well established within the PAF frontline structures, with little to no operational use restrictions from major component suppliers.

Now, looking at the WS-13E engine, within its current phase of development (as publicly advertised – China being quite good at intentionally spreading misinformation to the point where you cannot believe a word they say), it has a shorter lifespan than the Russian RD-93/RD-33 range of engines. However, I do believe that it is not long before China will actually achieve the point where that engine will equal, and maybe improve, on current RD-93 performance. Also, there is a rumour within Chinese defence circles that they have already resolved most of the performance issues pertaining the WS-13E, but they are holding back until they have ridden themselves of all current RD-93 stock which currently stands at less than 150 units remaining (None of the current PLAAF aircraft are equipped with the RD-93, therefore the reason why there is no PLAAF demand for it). China also does not plan on purchasing more RD-93 engines but intends to phase in the WS-13E after the last RD-93 is sold off. Current performance projections indicate that the WS-13E would push the payload for the JF-17 Block III beyond 5 tons due to an increase in thrust. But, looking at a WS-13E engine with even reduced lifespan (as claimed), in many a developing country a guaranteed supply of cheaper ‘reduced lifespan engines’ is better than a ‘time expired engine which cannot be repaired or replaced’ as applicable to engines originating from Europe and especially the US (you know the old saying: ‘In the land of the blind, one eye is king’). South Africa, for example, has learnt that lesson many times during the era of sanctions with the French SNECMA, and it was also because of the US Pratt and Whitney turbofan engine in the original Israeli Lavi why South Africa was eventually excluded from that program due to US enforced restrictions (Israel eventually killing off the Lavi program in favour of the F-16I as a result of political influence). Russian engines are available, but at a very high premium. For many African air forces with limited budgets, flying moderate hours over lifetime to limit cost of operation, the WS-13E will suffice. Based on experiences in Africa, a characteristic of Chinese arms sales is that they will sell anything to anyone, but sometimes you have to acknowledge the opportunities and associated advantages relating to their manner of doing business in terms of guaranteeing sustainable supplies when traditional friends become your greatest limitation (looking at the current state of world affairs and rising global economic uncertainty).

 

[MastanKhan]

@Stealth,

Here is what I would like you to do---.

I would like you to take the twin tails off the F35---and create an F35 with a single tail---and show us the true face of that Fat Obese Pig---.

It would be really interesting to see that picture and then compare it to the JF17 picture---and then compare those two fat babies side by side---.

If anyone else reading this post can do that---please go ahead and do so---and post the results here---.

 

[Rank]

@Stealth,

Here is what I would like you to do---.

I would like you to take the twin tails off the F35---and create an F35 with a single tail---and show us the true face of that Fat Obese Pig---.

It would be really interesting to see that picture and then compare it to the JF17 picture---and then compare those two fat babies side by side---.

If anyone else reading this post can do that---please go ahead and do so---and post the results here---.

I guess you've taken my perspective completely different. I never wish to make JF17 like F35. There is no comparison btw both. The design, shape, aerodynamics of both are way too different because of their role and generation. For me, JSF is literally a BEAST whether you like or not from avionics to its design aspects. The aircraft specifically designed to penetrate the enemy air barrier and enforce air domination in the combat theater whereas JF is a good replacement of an older fleet and makes Pakistan airforce independent to do whatever they want without any string attached. For PAF, the role of the aircraft is to shoot down the enemy tangos and that's what any aircraft can do, and that's what reflects from the mind-set of our people (the aircraft supposed to be a machine who can shoot down the opponent aircraft. If JF 17 is capable to do this then we don't care about anything).

I respect this opinion even though I totally disagree with this. You can't sell stuff which you've designed for accommodating your requirements not what the int customer is looking for. Let's assume, JF is best of the best against any light aircraft available in the market, perhaps you can't force air dominance with JF17 esp against the power-packed AD. In today's world when every nation is struggling economically when forces having budget constraints they're looking for a multi-task platform not very specific. Aircraft which has a good price tag, max integration options, avionics, airframe upgrades and the top of it the aircraft must capable of handling different roles (defense & dominance) -- jack of all trades you can say.

My POV is we should make something which is the requirement of the int market rather pushing non-int market product(s). That's the reason F22 and J20 are for local, the alternative wasn't the same aircraft (nor modified version) rather completely a diff aircraft like F35 and FC31 (For export).

For me, JF17 won't replace F16 as a front line role in the PAF for the next 10 - 15 years. Quite frankly whatever you call it or make it. The aircraft will remain 3.5Gen. My perspective was and will remain, for the int customer (POV) with all ods (including global politics BS excuse), the aircraft is not a perfect contender. Whether you can integrate or install RR side mirrors lol or even incorporate F22 HUD. I don't know how you come to that conclusion that I was expecting the airframe changes.

By the way, I will definitely entertain your request because the request coming from the senior.

 

[ARMalik]

All this rubbish here continues by this guy cause in his own words he "hates this aircraft for may reasons since from the beginning". Personal hatred - fantastic. Let's see where this garbage will end. But the best thing is that for those in the positions of power in PAF, people like him don't even register on a rector scale. It is like an annoying housefly on the wall which either gets ignored or sprayed on using an insecticide.

 

[Rank]

All this rubbish here continues by this guy cause in his own words he "hates this aircraft for may reasons since from the beginning". Personal hatred - fantastic. Let's see where this garbage will end. But the best thing is that for those in the positions of power in PAF, people like him don't even register on a rector scale. It is like an annoying housefly on the wall which either gets ignored or sprayed on using an insecticide.

So why you're responding? just because someone criticizes something which you like? don't tell me about the airforce who failed to properly evaluate its own requirement btw 85 - 2000. After dumping massive amounts of money and resources in evaluation, it later ends up with the JF17 program (admitted by one of the founders of JF17 program AM Shahid Latif). A country which has neighbor like India with a massive fleet, that country's airforce still struggling to integrate AESA into its fleet in 2020. The airforce actually got hands on the BVR after 2 decades of its opponent ... enough or need more? next time don't give me a reference of PAF and its position holders.

 

[ARMalik]

So why you're responding? just because someone criticizes something which you like? don't tell me about the airforce who failed to properly evaluate its own requirement btw 85 - 2000. After dumping massive amounts of money and resources in evaluation, it later ends up with the JF17 program (admitted by one of the founders of JF17 program AM Shahid Latif). A country which has neighbor like India with a massive fleet, that country's airforce still struggling to integrate AESA into its fleet in 2020. The airforce actually got hands-on the BVR after 2 decades of its opponent ... enough or need more? next time don't give me a reference to PAF and its position holders.

Sorry dude but if you had such fantastic qualifications, expertise, technical insights, work experience, and genius than you would not be here venting your anger on a public forum but you would be somewhere where it would have made a difference. But you are NOT; meaning your opinion is not important. You are NOT the right person for organisations like PAF otherwise they would have considered approaching you. PAF have access to plenty of fantastic experts in a variety of fields whose opinions and inputs they really value. Now you can suck on it all your life knowing that no one gives a damn about all your tantrums here or anywhere.

 

[Rank]

Sorry dude but if you had such fantastic qualifications, expertise, technical insights, work experience, and genius than you would not be here venting your anger on a public forum but you would be somewhere where it would have made a difference. But you are NOT; meaning your opinion is not important. You are NOT the right person for organisations like PAF otherwise they would have considered approaching you. PAF have access to plenty of fantastic experts in a variety of fields whose opinions and inputs they really value. Now you can suck on it all your life knowing that no one gives a damn about all your tantrums here or anywhere.

No one gives a damn about your nonsense! you dun even matter... I have already worked on diff projs of your beloved PAF, PA, and HQ where ever they needed me... you don't even know shit about anything...