D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
I am curious, are you really that desperate to cherry pick any minute points you can get your hands on? What source my country procures it's fighter jets have absolutely 0 impact on the matter at hand.
JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter johnqh
- Start date
Geez mate you literally said this without provocation:Naturally I was asking a harmless question out of curiosity. You can simply say no I don't wish to reveal my nationality and that would be fine.
No need to follow with something like
You are the only one trying to turn it into a nationalistic thing. I was curious because you said your country buys US planes. You assumed there was sinister nationalism coming. That's on you and your own personal standards and expectations. Revealing more of yourself. How can you possibly know for sure what I'm trying to get out of asking you? You're the one who started with the whole "well my country buys from the US". You don't need to respond to that other post. He was not addressing you. He was addressing the haters of JF-17 who are nationalistic. This isn't you so no need to feel like you needed to respond with "my country buys from the US". So you are the one mentioning something that has 0 impact on this thread.
MastanKhan
Junior Member
Hi,
Okay---about being petty minded---.
But talk about what design parameters that are important are taken from the mig 21----when the manufacturing partner has access to F16---F18---F5---M2K's---Grippen---Mirage F1---why would a lesser aircraft be considered---.
Base your answer on an engineering example and other precedence in weapons manufacturing---. Tell us---that if you have access to superior weapons---what would make one copy an inferior weapon---.
When you disagree on an ENGINEERING issue---then you have to back it up with an engineering example---.
So---what flight and design parameters are taken from the mig21 when other more superior examples were available to pakistan air force---?
Dizasta1
Senior Member
Alright guys quit it. Seriously!!
News from "Aviation Defense News" (unsure how credible this is), as reported by Raza Rizvi (haven't heard of the fella), that Pakistan Air Force shall induct 63 Thunders, Blocks lls & llls. By 2022, Pakistan Air Force shall have 35 Block-lls and 28 Block-llls. But what is more interesting about this report is that it confirms IRST, AESA, Adv-EW Suite and (here is the most important bit) Mach-2 speed. Which in other words means that Thunders will finally be getting more powerful engines. Block-l & Block-ll both have top speed of Mach 1.6 whereas Block-llls will have Mach-2. If true, it means one of two things ...
1. Klimov has uprated RD-93MK and Pakistan Air Force is going for it.
2. WS-13 will power Block-lll Thunder.
Let's see whether this news report has any credibility to it or not.
News from "Aviation Defense News" (unsure how credible this is), as reported by Raza Rizvi (haven't heard of the fella), that Pakistan Air Force shall induct 63 Thunders, Blocks lls & llls. By 2022, Pakistan Air Force shall have 35 Block-lls and 28 Block-llls. But what is more interesting about this report is that it confirms IRST, AESA, Adv-EW Suite and (here is the most important bit) Mach-2 speed. Which in other words means that Thunders will finally be getting more powerful engines. Block-l & Block-ll both have top speed of Mach 1.6 whereas Block-llls will have Mach-2. If true, it means one of two things ...
1. Klimov has uprated RD-93MK and Pakistan Air Force is going for it.
2. WS-13 will power Block-lll Thunder.
Let's see whether this news report has any credibility to it or not.
But does it really confirm or just report - again as so often before based on other forums discussions, guesswork and wishfull thinking??
When SCMP "confirms" that the WS-15 is already operational, the J-15 is already flying with WS-10H off the Liaoning ... I think we are all more carefully!
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Sounds very dubious. Wasn't the original PAF plan to have 100+ JF-17s with options for substantially more? Producing merely 28 Block IIIs will do little to keep down its price, which in turn might harm its export prospects.
As for engine options, there is nothing stopping the JF-17 from using an interim WS-13E or RD-33K before transitioning to the WS-19.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Furthermore, it is the DSI intake that limits top speed rather than engine.
So if for argument sake we accept M2 claim, that does not necessarily mean engine upgrade, as a different DSI design could theoretically also help push up top speed if DSI rather than engine power was the previous bottleneck.
So if for argument sake we accept M2 claim, that does not necessarily mean engine upgrade, as a different DSI design could theoretically also help push up top speed if DSI rather than engine power was the previous bottleneck.
Zahid
Junior Member
Let us wait for JF-17 Thunder's first flight. I would be pleasantly surprised about inclusion of IRST if it does happen. It would be a worthwhile addition and very much worth the wait / delay in Block-III.
Dizasta1
Senior Member
Hmm ... if that can possibly be the case for the Mach-2 claim, it would support my argument that there might be some structural changes to Block-llls. My argument was that since the first two blocks were 50 aircraft each (unless that has changed). That Block-lll would most likely have structural changes which would go along the lines of F/A-18Cs to F/A-18Es. Greater wing surface area (more hard points) and redesigned DSI (Mach-2 speed). Considering that Block-llls will be produced to the tune of 100-150 aircraft. Then such a structural design change is justifiable.
But that's just my view and I can be wrong. I thank Zahid, Plaworlf, Deino and Sinosoldier for your analysis. Much appreciated, guys.