Pakistan will launch a two-seater version of JF-17 - Induction of JF-17B in 2017

[Dazzler]

No I mean pilot feedback after flying it.

It barely made its first flight, patience.

 

[WarFariX]

Dunno about longer but does look wider

 

[Rank]

It probably is the trainer. 2 seater with same engine would mean big trade off on weapons.

Become a part of shitty look and feel + pregant aircrafts.... shittest aero features... canopy is tooo way big ... matlab may kise motay say jisam pe patha sa face lagadoon yaan phir pathlay say jisam pe mooota sa moo fit kardon.. man there is HUGE Designers and Experts engineering... the people who work on the features of look and feel as well as aero features are SENSELESS and I stand on my words. Look what American made... years of years spends on design just to make weapon aggressive, superb aerodynamic features as well as everything is 100% balance.

Aircraft design is more about fulfilling requirements than moving booty on the ramp. The B model is clearly influenced by PAF's approach of squeezing maximum out of everything. The side mounted canopy shouts "save some space" all too loud. The bulkier spine is to add as much fuel and avionics as possible. Trim down the spine and youll lose range. Comparing it with the f-16 is not justified, as the falcon already enjoys more range, and CFTs only help its cause. In blk 52, the spine is solely meant to add more avionics and EW equipment, thats it.

See this baby?

it is easily the ugliest thing in the sky, but it is the first to enter and last to leave the battlefield and can wreak havoc on enemy assets, radars and other infrastructure and serves as a crucial asset in US Naval Aviation's arsenal.

your example more like

usnay bhi tu doo katal kiye thay agar mainay eek karlya tu kya huwa lol man designing is complete profession. The above aircraft design is 60s league. Secondly JF is not technically designed for dual seater. Also no need to tell us that the design of dual seater was initiated and requirements made by PAF. We can easily speculate this pregnant aircraft design was DEFINITELY initiated by.... AHO!

 

[CrusherChamp]

Is has gained some weight but still its not that bad. I thik its looking goox

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Become a part of shitty look and feel + pregant aircrafts.... shittest aero features... canopy is tooo way big ... matlab may kise motay say jisam pe patha sa face lagadoon yaan phir pathlay say jisam pe mooota sa moo fit kardon.. man there is HUGE Designers and Experts engineering... the people who work on the features of look and feel as well as aero features are SENSELESS and I stand on my words. Look what American made... years of years spends on design just to make weapon aggressive, superb aerodynamic features as well as everything is 100% balance.



your example more like

usnay bhi tu doo katal kiye thay agar mainay eek karlya tu kya huwa lol man designing is complete profession. The above aircraft design is 60s league. Secondly JF is not technically designed for dual seater. Also no need to tell us that the design of dual seater was initiated and requirements made by PAF. We can easily speculate this pregnant aircraft design was DEFINITELY initiated by.... AHO!

Yeah but as a trainer the jet is probably ok man. It needs to operate in a more restricted flight envelope and the 'puffiness' is probably the additional equipment for training.

But if this is a 2 seater attack version.....yep that would be a disaster. This probably won't be even reasonably agile for the role.

 

[Rank]

Yeah but as a trainer the jet is probably ok man. It needs to operate in a more restricted flight envelope and the 'puffiness' is probably the additional equipment for training.

But if this is a 2 seater attack version.....yep that would be a disaster. This probably won't be even reasonably agile for the role.

On technical grounds, this aircraft is no where near agility, aerodynamics as well as tooo bulky to hold many things in a small airframe.

 

[CriticalThought]

On technical grounds, this aircraft is no where near agility, aerodynamics as well as tooo bulky to hold many things in a small airframe.

Can you kindly provide sources for these claims? Already I can see you are making potshots in the air because you are calling the it bulky, whereas it has composite materials that actually make it lighter. Furthermore, in the absence of information on the engine, how can you even predict the overall performance?

The canopy which everyone is calling bulky is actually a lot more sleeker than Block 1/2 and follows the curvature of the nose even more smoothly.

I don't think you know what you are talking about.

 

[Arsalan]

On technical grounds, this aircraft is no where near agility, aerodynamics as well as tooo bulky to hold many things in a small airframe.

Bro we were not tooooooo excited about aerodynamics and agility when we first saw JF17A either. Now we have seen it perform at airshows and parade!!
I hope this will meet the requirement, whatever it is made for!! Looks were never the preference as we all know.

BTW, i asked you a question regarding that turn rate comparison of JFT and F16. I hope you can reply to that in that thread?

 

[SHAH820]

JF-17 Thunder jet fighter was the fruit of Pakistan-China collaboration in the aviation segment. Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and China Air Force (CAF) made joint efforts to develop the original JF-17. Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) and Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) jointly collaborated on behalf of their respective countries to make the JF-17 fighter plane a reality.
Today, the jet fighter’s dual seat variant, JF-17B, has successfully undertaken its first test flight in China. It is expected to significantly bolster the training capabilities for the JF-17 series of jet fighters. The 2-seater version is also expected to attract more attention internationally.

Both air forces have been working on JF-17B’s prototype since April 2016. PAF had initially planned to induct the new JF-17B into its fleet within one year.

However, due to delays in production, the aircraft’s testing phase has only just begun. According to aviation journalist, Alan Warnes, three JF-17B are already under production. Two of these are expected to join PAF soon.

The new JF-17B comes with three axis fly-by-wire flight control system and active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar

Besides the additional seat, the upgraded JF-17B comes with major design changes like a dorsal spine. Experts suggest that the dorsal spine is actually added to accommodate fuel since the second seat is taking additional space in the interior.

JF-17B also received a modified vertical stabilizer. According to Warnes, JF-17B’s swept tail houses equipment for a new three axis fly-by-wire flight control system. The nose also gets a size increase to accommodate an active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar which will be core subsystem for the upcoming JF-17 Block-III – the biggest update to the JF-17 since its launch.

Built for Combat and Training
The new JF-17B variant has been developed to meet international demands of prospective buyers who called for in-flight evaluation and conversion training. At the moment, PAF uses simulators for conversion training.

Previously, the PAF leadership did hint that a dual seater Thunder could be launched as a lead-in-fighter-trainer (LIFT) platform within its current fleet.

To top it all off, JF-17B comes with commercially available Electronic Warfare (EW) jamming pods and advanced targeting pods. These could potentially be used for strikes or stand-off EW platform.

Back in February, PAF inducted the fifth JF-17 Block-II variant into its fleet. It was capable of inflight refuelling. Last month, it was announced that PAF has successfully integrated a stand-off weapon system into the JF-17.

Pakistan Air Force currently has over 70 JF-17 jet fighters including Block-I and Block-II variants. Our air force is expected to order 50 Block-III units later this year. Amongst lined up buyers for the JF-17, Myanmar and Nigeria have already secured orders from Pakistan and China.

 

[Dazzler]

Become a part of shitty look and feel + pregant aircrafts.... shittest aero features... canopy is tooo way big ... matlab may kise motay say jisam pe patha sa face lagadoon yaan phir pathlay say jisam pe mooota sa moo fit kardon.. man there is HUGE Designers and Experts engineering... the people who work on the features of look and feel as well as aero features are SENSELESS and I stand on my words. Look what American made... years of years spends on design just to make weapon aggressive, superb aerodynamic features as well as everything is 100% balance.



your example more like

usnay bhi tu doo katal kiye thay agar mainay eek karlya tu kya huwa lol man designing is complete profession. The above aircraft design is 60s league. Secondly JF is not technically designed for dual seater. Also no need to tell us that the design of dual seater was initiated and requirements made by PAF. We can easily speculate this pregnant aircraft design was DEFINITELY initiated by.... AHO!

Your logic is deeply flawed. Read on aircraft design philosophies to understand important aspects of aircraft design. And please, stop competing it with other systems that were designed to fulfill different roles by their respective developers.

On a sidenote, people claiming it being less agile need to awake and smell the coffee, as the canopy design itself will not add additional drag during different flight regimes. The triplex fly by wire should actually improve its maneuverability.

Now, examples of Draggy canopies:

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Looks really great.

 

[Rank]

Bro we were not tooooooo excited about aerodynamics and agility when we first saw JF17A either. Now we have seen it perform at airshows and parade!!
I hope this will meet the requirement, whatever it is made for!! Looks were never the preference as we all know.

BTW, i asked you a question regarding that turn rate comparison of JFT and F16. I hope you can reply to that in that thread?

Man I am not much technical in this aspect (turn etc) but i can tell you, I've seen both aircraft many many times and their max turns. I don't know how people comparing Max-Turn of both. If you ask me is that same ? or even 70%... big NO. The way F16 turns especially maintaining speed, JF start shaking up lol Whatever you can call this i dont know in technicall terms but in punjab (phat phut jaadi hey JF ke turn pe jesay F16 karta hey) Smooth, Neat, maintaining speed as well as sound of engine boost -- everything SMOOTH as comparetively JF17 brum brum brum. I always maintain my remarks for both. F16 whatso ever old or new but JF17 nowhere near to F16 in ANYTHING!

PS: I knew the design philosophies

 

[BRAVO_]

for the time being PAC has a plan to built only three dual seaters, their main target is to start the production of Block III rather than keep investing the resources for just 3 dual seaters

 

[volatile]

Hi Problem i feel is that on ground shots of Thunder are disastrous e.g

Thunder on ground

Thunder in Air

In Comparison to Mirage

Ground clearance is very low in thunder .

Some more ugly/fat shots

Now coming to the point is this debatable ? surely for some reasons more recently there was a thread here on defence.pk for ALCM and its feasibility on launching from JF17

By look wise we were hoping for this

and infact we got this

From Aesthetic point of view the ground pictures are disastrous but as soon as the baby takes off its all together new ball game ,some improvement in higher ground clearance can make above photo like this
PS

For performance related im glad and thankful to Chinese as 2 seat provides critical aspects to PAF

1. LIFT at the moment world is moving to these types of trainers for their pilots e.g

It will be important to understand that what role is assigned to JF17B as i understand it won't be used as dedicated ground attack .some important aspect for this are

1. Marketing push and complete product line with dual seater .
2. Cater to customer demands for dual seater (Obviously that was a dumb idea not to launch dual seater assuming we dont need it so no one else need it )
3. Opens up a new market for trainers ,as currently it is estimated to be next big thing since the introduction of 5/6 th Gen
4. Provides PAF the necessary boost and reliance as our future usage and product will revolve around CHinese systems so it provides an opportunity .

I hope this answers the criticism but i still believes "if it looks good probably it's good enough ."

Probably the best pic till date

 

[WarFariX]

Your logic is deeply flawed. Read on aircraft design philosophies to understand important aspects of aircraft design. And please, stop competing it with other systems that were designed to fulfill different roles by their respective developers.

On a sidenote, people claiming it being less agile need to awake and smell the coffee, as the canopy design itself will not add additional drag during different flight regimes. The triplex fly by wire should actually improve its maneuverability.

Now, examples of Draggy canopies:

the tail inclination will add maneuverablity