JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
According to Jane's report, ACM Tanvir says production of 20 JF-17 yearly in Pakistan.
Number of JF-17s to be acquired goes up from 150 to 200-250
Number of PAF purchase of F-10s has creeped up to 40 from 36.
New facilities to be added in Kamra for JF-17 production.
No problem in acquisition of RD-93 Engine as far as PAF is concerned
Chinese AWACS will be procured after some improvements
According to Jane's report, ACM Tanvir says production of 20 JF-17 yearly in Pakistan.
Number of JF-17s to be acquired goes up from 150 to 200-250
Number of PAF purchase of F-10s has creeped up to 40 from 36.
New facilities to be added in Kamra for JF-17 production.
No problem in acquisition of RD-93 Engine as far as PAF is concerned
Chinese AWACS will be procured after some improvements
Last edited:
Diving Falcon
Junior Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
From the above article it seems the PAF wants to at least improve the Y-8 or use the AWACS on another aircraft. There are reports that PAF ordered 4 IL-78s from Uzbekistan, is it possible that the Chinese AWACS system will be used on IL-76?
From the above article it seems the PAF wants to at least improve the Y-8 or use the AWACS on another aircraft. There are reports that PAF ordered 4 IL-78s from Uzbekistan, is it possible that the Chinese AWACS system will be used on IL-76?
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
If the PAF is seriously considering J-10s, then WS-10A integration on the J-10 should be well on its way. I kind of doubt that the PAF would want a repeat of the RD-93 issue hanging over their heads. Once is enough. Unless Salut wants part of the action too.
20 aircraft a year would barely support PAF's needs, much less reexport them back to China. CAC would still have its hands full making J-10s and J-7s for both domestic and export consumption. Some new facilities would still have to be added for both sides.
If the PAF is seriously considering J-10s, then WS-10A integration on the J-10 should be well on its way. I kind of doubt that the PAF would want a repeat of the RD-93 issue hanging over their heads. Once is enough. Unless Salut wants part of the action too.
20 aircraft a year would barely support PAF's needs, much less reexport them back to China. CAC would still have its hands full making J-10s and J-7s for both domestic and export consumption. Some new facilities would still have to be added for both sides.
keysersoze
New Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
The IL-76's will be used as Air to Air re-fuelers so It will not be that platform. It was stated in another interview with the ACM.
The IL-76's will be used as Air to Air re-fuelers so It will not be that platform. It was stated in another interview with the ACM.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
Some guy posted the scanned HAL's in-house magazine obtained at the Aero India 2007, it mentioned the LCA test status:
The envelope covered till now:
15 km altitude
20 deg. angle of attack
5.4g
1.4 Mach
I think LCA is no longer a rival of FC-1. It's not an achievement for this after the 6 years debut of the bird. BTW, I always suspect LCA's design concept, that huge delta wings...Now it's proved, "20 deg. angle of attack" and "5.4g".
Some guy posted the scanned HAL's in-house magazine obtained at the Aero India 2007, it mentioned the LCA test status:
The envelope covered till now:
15 km altitude
20 deg. angle of attack
5.4g
1.4 Mach
I think LCA is no longer a rival of FC-1. It's not an achievement for this after the 6 years debut of the bird. BTW, I always suspect LCA's design concept, that huge delta wings...Now it's proved, "20 deg. angle of attack" and "5.4g".
PLAAF and PLAN Paint Schemes
Hello all,
as far as the PLAAF and PLAN Flankers go, I like their colors. While the various low tone and dark tone greys may not be very pleasing on the eyes, the various tones of grey work well in a number of environments. It has been proven. The shades of paint can vary with terrain an aircraft may be found in. In the west, grey has become popular. If I remember correctly, the US Navy and Marine Corps began using the lighter shades of grey in the 1980s replacing a number of whites, two tone greys and other high viz colors. The A7Es and F-4N/S aircraft provide the best examples of the changes. The F-14As and later models also changed. The Hornets only briefly had more color and then arrived in the standard Tactical Paint Scheme. On the USAF side, the A-10s were the last tactical birds to go grey, starting in the early 1990s. We had a grey A-10 that for the longest time was "The Grey One" while all the other aircraft in the wing were the two tone Green/Dark Green. The F-15Es sport a very dark grey opposed to the two tone greys of F-15C/Ds.
The schemes I have seen for the PLAAF/PLAN Flankers would fit excellent in comflict at sea as well as medium altitudes. They would also work well in poor weather and visibility conditions. Some nations adopt similar approaches to aircraft, other operate on thier own. The various F-16s of the world have adopted lighter shades of grey. Maylasia has a really nice looking and dark scheme for their Hornets, as does the Royal Canadian Air Force.
As far as black aircraft paint, it has been tried. For a time, USN A6s,A7s and F4s sported black nose cones. This was usually done for anti-glare purposes. But as someone mentioned above, the aircraft sticks out at great distance. Similar effects occur in having dark painted engine intakes. The PLAN and PLAAF Flankers look great in their dark tones.
Raven
Hello all,
as far as the PLAAF and PLAN Flankers go, I like their colors. While the various low tone and dark tone greys may not be very pleasing on the eyes, the various tones of grey work well in a number of environments. It has been proven. The shades of paint can vary with terrain an aircraft may be found in. In the west, grey has become popular. If I remember correctly, the US Navy and Marine Corps began using the lighter shades of grey in the 1980s replacing a number of whites, two tone greys and other high viz colors. The A7Es and F-4N/S aircraft provide the best examples of the changes. The F-14As and later models also changed. The Hornets only briefly had more color and then arrived in the standard Tactical Paint Scheme. On the USAF side, the A-10s were the last tactical birds to go grey, starting in the early 1990s. We had a grey A-10 that for the longest time was "The Grey One" while all the other aircraft in the wing were the two tone Green/Dark Green. The F-15Es sport a very dark grey opposed to the two tone greys of F-15C/Ds.
The schemes I have seen for the PLAAF/PLAN Flankers would fit excellent in comflict at sea as well as medium altitudes. They would also work well in poor weather and visibility conditions. Some nations adopt similar approaches to aircraft, other operate on thier own. The various F-16s of the world have adopted lighter shades of grey. Maylasia has a really nice looking and dark scheme for their Hornets, as does the Royal Canadian Air Force.
As far as black aircraft paint, it has been tried. For a time, USN A6s,A7s and F4s sported black nose cones. This was usually done for anti-glare purposes. But as someone mentioned above, the aircraft sticks out at great distance. Similar effects occur in having dark painted engine intakes. The PLAN and PLAAF Flankers look great in their dark tones.
Raven
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
That is a ceiling of only 49,000 feet-very low. Speed and low Gs point to a low performance aircraft.
That is a ceiling of only 49,000 feet-very low. Speed and low Gs point to a low performance aircraft.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
I wouldn't discount LCA. Conceptually speaking, you can argue that it is even more modern than J-10 with its tailless delta and 45% composite usage. And I'm sure that the number mentionned there will improve as they do more tests. This is pretty much their first major fighter project, so it's not surprising that they haven't been able to deliver it online.
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 thread
If you look through the surface and understand Indian design background, you wouldn't say that.
India didn't choose that "tailless delta" design due to its "modern" concept, simply it's because that design has the min control surface number so the FBW is easy to implement. Besides Indian didn't have accumulated aerodynamic test data, they didn't have the model, so they're not sure how more complicated control surfaces would interact each other.
Big delta wing is the abandoned idea, but Indian thought its drawback can be compensated by FBW. The reality is that's not easy, FBW has its limitation. With 6 years effort and 20 deg of attack angle, they achieved passenger airplane's flight control.
They didn't add aerodynamic knowledge to human beings, but proved some. Let's wait another 6 years to see if it can do 40 deg, that's still not a match to FC-1.
If you look through the surface and understand Indian design background, you wouldn't say that.
India didn't choose that "tailless delta" design due to its "modern" concept, simply it's because that design has the min control surface number so the FBW is easy to implement. Besides Indian didn't have accumulated aerodynamic test data, they didn't have the model, so they're not sure how more complicated control surfaces would interact each other.
Big delta wing is the abandoned idea, but Indian thought its drawback can be compensated by FBW. The reality is that's not easy, FBW has its limitation. With 6 years effort and 20 deg of attack angle, they achieved passenger airplane's flight control.
They didn't add aerodynamic knowledge to human beings, but proved some. Let's wait another 6 years to see if it can do 40 deg, that's still not a match to FC-1.
- Status