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

[Deino]

@khanasifm
What about better engine with more fuel efficiency which will free the 3 HPs we usually see occupied by Fuel tanks???

I think there is simply no such engine available that could provide a so much reduced fuel consumption, that a fighter in the class of the JF-17 would reach the same range without tanks.

 

[MastanKhan]

I think there is simply no such engine available that could provide a so much reduced fuel consumption, that a fighter in the class of the JF-17 would reach the same range without tanks.

Hi,

How about a HYBRID---can we put a battery pack in there---?

 

[PakFactor]

I think there is simply no such engine available that could provide a so much reduced fuel consumption, that a fighter in the class of the JF-17 would reach the same range without tanks.

Don't know why we didn't develop Conformal Fuel Tanks for JF-17 - that alone would have freed up 3 Hard Points; unless we can do it later on?

I still believe some poor planning went into this, yes we have a fighter but should have been thought out a little bit more considering we had a good work house in the form of F-16 to see how we could make something comparable.

 

[Deino]

Hi,

How about a HYBRID---can we put a battery pack in there---?

 

[Shah_Deu]

Don't know why we didn't develop Conformal Fuel Tanks for JF-17 - that alone would have freed up 3 Hard Points; unless we can do it later on?

I still believe some poor planning went into this, yes we have a fighter but should have been thought out a little bit more considering we had a good work house in the form of F-16 to see how we could make something comparable.

Its not a mule that you keep loading it here and there. With RD-93 there is not much what we can achieve further without degrading the power to weight ratio. One possibilty is to use as much carbon fiber and lightweight alloys as possible which itself is easier said than done. For surfaces and fasteners, holding their integrity at +8g/+9g aint no fun.

 

[ziaulislam]

Don't know why we didn't develop Conformal Fuel Tanks for JF-17 - that alone would have freed up 3 Hard Points; unless we can do it later on?

I still believe some poor planning went into this, yes we have a fighter but should have been thought out a little bit more considering we had a good work house in the form of F-16 to see how we could make something comparable.

Its smaller than thunder. They developed the CFTs but didn't bring it to production ..wonder why..

I think its fuel and range that is primary contention, the payload of 4 tones and 8 hard points, assuming the pod point will make it (9 if you include the gun) are already more than enough for fighter of its size

CFTs if feasible in this small bird seems a solution to an ordinary amateur

 

[khanasifm]

 

[ziaulislam]

Jf17

what options were available at the time? PAF was always quite interested in both BVR and AWACS during the 1990s and even earlier but lacked suppliers.



SOM from Turkey is always an option. But for that to happen PAF needs to be creative and stop fixating on the Ra’ad. SOM is a stealthy next generation cruise missile that can prove useful against Indian AD systems.

Price...
A solution which is cheaper is needed
A home grown solution ..
Unless the turks are ready for ToT and chesper licsence production

 

[FuturePAF]

Any Chance the JF-17 Block III will get an export approved RCS reducing RAM Coating? This was one of the 3 factors the F-16 Block 70/72 offered per @Trailer23 interview at Dubai 2019 (the other two being improved avionics and an AESA radar).

If the Jf-17 Block III emerges with a more "smoother" air frame, and sport the light gray on the J-31V2, it might also help attract more sales. The old adage; it is looks right it flies right, can really be hammered home, if it "resembles" a mini F-35, even if it is purely a 4th generation fighter.

 

[MastanKhan]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cant-f-35-could-pakistans-210000134.html

https://news.yahoo.com/cant-f-35-could-pakistans-210000134.html



Sebastien Roblin
,
The National Interest•November 23, 2019

Key point: The JF-17 lacks stealth.

In the 2019 Paris Air Show, Pakistan its lightweight JF-17 Thunder jet fighter it began building a decade ago in conjunction with China. You can see the seven-ton fighter performing maneuvers in this video.

Just a few months earlier, Pakistan dispatched what it claimed to be twenty-five JF-17s to launch a lightning strike across the Line of Control on targets in Kashmir, in retaliation for an Indian air raid on a JeM terrorist training camp.

The PAF claimed its JF-17s had shot down two Indian fighters pursuing strike planes into Pakistani airspace. However, while the loss of one upgraded Indian MiG-21 Bison was confirmed and its pilot captured, India subsequently displayed fragments of American-made AIM-120 missiles only compatible with Pakistan’s F-16s, casting some doubt on whether the PAF’s Thunders were responsible for the kill.

Pakistan currently operate around 100 Thunders in five operational squadrons, plus a testing and training unit. The first Thunders entered squadron service in 2010 and saw action bombing insurgents in Waziristan. Islamabad also confirmed in 2018 a $184 million deal to sell three JF-17s to the Nigerian Air Force in 2018 (which currently operates J-7s and Alpha Jets), and has delivered at least six out of an order of eighteen JF-17Ms to Myanmar.

The PAF now plans to procure fifty more JF-17s of an improved Block III standard by 2024—with airframes produced jointly by Pakistan and China in a 58/42 percent split—as well as procure 26 two-seat JF-17Bs with additional fuel stored in a dorsal fin and enhanced application to training and possibly strike missions. Extant JF-17s may also be upgraded to the Block III variant, which should make its first flight later in 2019.

 

[Ali_Baba]

If the Jf-17 Block III emerges with a more "smoother" air frame, and sport the light gray on the J-31V2, it might also help attract more sales. The old adage; it is looks right it flies right, can really be hammered home, if it "resembles" a mini F-35, even if it is purely a 4th generation fighter.

I doubt Block III will sport a smoother airframe, if you look at the 5 odd cockpit hinges you will realise, that fit and finish is not always on the top of the minds of chinese aircraft designers.. I mean, it is 2019, who the f--- except China thinks it is acceptable to have that kind of design feature on aircraft ?

JF17B is the basis of Block III, where Block III will have more advanced avionics and systems.

 

[khanasifm]

?

May be not sure [emoji848]

 

[Deino]

?

May be not sure [emoji848]

View attachment 592032

No

 

[GriffinsRule]

No

Easier to integrate dual-rack for BVR than messing with the wing to add another hardpoint.

 

[ziaulislam]

No