JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

[Defcon 1]

49 delivered, one more to go.

Coming back to your senses now? Anyways does Rd93 comes with FADEC? Do you have a source for that? Thanks.

 

[sayareakd]

you guys have started making 60% air frame of junk fighter ??

 

[Dazzler]

Coming back to your senses now? Anyways does Rd93 comes with FADEC? Do you have a source for that? Thanks.

you can ask questions without getting personal, RD-93 has DEEC, not FADEC.

 

[p2prada]

apparently no, all blk 1 aircrafts are distributed in 2 sqdrns, 16th and 26th, almost 24-25 pieces respectively. But one more sqdrn may be raised by reducing both current ones later.

Some at Kamra are used for FTE (flight test and evaluation), modificaion/ integration purposes for future batches too.

Even the 8 LSPs are in squadron service?

 

[Dazzler]

Even the 8 LSPs are in squadron service?

6 LSPS part of FTE at Kamra

 

[Dazzler]

Indira ALR-400 RWR...

Indra ALR-400 RWR (equipped on jf-17, F/A-18, EA-18G, Tiger attack heli, A-400M, CH-53 Stallion, NH-90 heli to name a few..)


ALR-400 incorporates proven leading edge wide band digital reception. High speed digitization techniques and sophisticated
parallel process algorithms addressing both real time and frequency domains allow for precise minimal false alarm ALR-400 can be supported with Indra ground support test, post flight analysis, and threat library management systems.

Indra’s electronic warfare ground support systems provide end testing, complete Through a reduced parts count and
an intensive use of COTS, including programmable processors, combined with a rapid COTS insertion approach, ALR-400 has an improved reliability, low life cycle costs and enhanced supportability.

An open architecture provides for modular isolated standard interfaces, such as MIL-STD- 1553B, communications serial port, USB, ARINC-429 and 100BaseT fast ethernet. The radar warner processor can host the defence aid computer (DAC) function enabling control and integration, pulse to pulse parameter measurements. The high processing throughput ensures
performances in high pulse densities as well as keeping a low latency for rapid response and thus effectively supporting
countermeasures. This technology results in a simpler architecture, providing outstanding performances and maximising the probability of intercept while giving away the need for any collaborative narrow band receivers or dedicated devices.


Features..

* Effective early warning in modern scenarios
* Wide band digital reception and processing technology
* Pulse to pulse frequency measurement, including intra-pulse modulation characteristics
* Multi continuous wave scenarios and LPI radar detection capabilities
* Reduced part count and intensive use of COTS
* Improved reliability, low life cycle costs and enhanced supportability
* Open architecture with modular isolated standard interfaces
* Control and integration of a full selfprotection suite
* Emitter library, mission file and flight stored data upload and download
* Full equipment sovereignty, allowing end users to independently operate, maintain and upgrade

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&r...AyUGJgslw6T-0dr_nCQtuBA&bvm=bv.49784469,d.Yms

 

[Dazzler]

JDAM made in house

 

[Defcon 1]

you can ask questions without getting personal, RD-93 has DEEC, not FADEC.

Just needed to remind you to about the claim you were making some days back. Thanks for the reply anyways.

 

[Dazzler]

Just needed to remind you to about the claim you were making some days back. Thanks for the reply anyways.

The engine is proving to be better than expected, maximum quoted MTBO given by Kilmov was 2000 hours, already flown for 7000 hours without the first major overhaul !

 

[Defcon 1]

The engine is proving to be better than expected, maximum quoted MTBO given by Kilmov was 2000 hours, already flown for 7000 hours without the first major overhaul !

You are talking about 7000 hrs in 6 years, thats over a thousand hrs per annum. These figures are incredulous. Normal flight hrs clocked are 150-200 per annum. Even an airframe would be done for in 7000 hrs. He is probably talking about all engines combined rather than a single engine. Whole engine won't last 7000 hrs.

 

[Dazzler]

You are talking about 7000 hrs in 6 years, thats over a thousand hrs per annum. These figures are incredulous. Normal flight hrs clocked are 150-200 per annum. Even an airframe would be done for in 7000 hrs. He is probably talking about all engines combined rather than a single engine. Whole engine won't last 7000 hrs.

Why on earth will he give the engine life of entire fleet?? Think about it man, makes no sense

figures are for one engine, not whole fleet,

i.e. 7000/49=142 hours per aircraft in 6 years? Considering how rigoursly they have been testing it since 2008, Not a chance.

 

[Defcon 1]

Why on earth will he give the engine life of entire fleet?? Think about it man, makes no sense

figures are for one engine, not whole fleet,

i.e. 7000/49=142 hours per aircraft in 6 years? Considering how rigoursly they have been testing it since 2008, Not a chance.

That arithmetic calculation is baseless since all 49 have joined the fleet one by one.

Since you are claiming that a single engine has flown 7000 hrs in six years, maybe you mean that the airframe life of JF17 airframe is 35000 hrs taking service life of 30 years. Is it?

 

[Dazzler]

That arithmetic calculation is baseless since all 49 have joined the fleet one by one.

Since you are claiming that a single engine has flown 7000 hrs in six years, maybe you mean that the airframe of JF17 airframe is 35000 hrs taking service life of 30 years. Is it?

you have a valid point here, hece, i agree (y)

 

[p2prada]

The engine is proving to be better than expected, maximum quoted MTBO given by Kilmov was 2000 hours, already flown for 7000 hours without the first major overhaul !

The article states that the engine was flown for 7000 hours without problems, nothing about overhaul.

Anyway it isn't one engine, but many engines. JF-17 crossed 10000 combined fleet hours only recently.

RD-93 does not have a 2000 hour MTBO. Even if it did, it will be more around the region of 1200 hours. It's 1200 hours as advertised for the Mig-29K's Sea Wasp engine.

 

[Dazzler]

The article states that the engine was flown for 7000 hours without problems, nothing about overhaul.

Anyway it isn't one engine, but many engines. JF-17 crossed 10000 combined fleet hours only recently.

RD-93 does not have a 2000 hour MTBO. Even if it did, it will be more around the region of 1200 hours. It's 1200 hours as advertised for the Mig-29K's Sea Wasp engine.

PAC sources mention a MTBO of 2000 hours, Sea Wasp has a service life of 4000 hours

http://www.klimov.ru/en/production/aircraft/RD-33MK/

 

[p2prada]

PAC sources mention a MTBO of 2000 hours,

Of course. Don't believe it.

EDIT: Only Series 3 engines have been upgraded to that level. But I doubt even Series 3 would achieve 2000 hour MTBO figures. We will know eventually.

Sea Wasp has a service life of 4000 hours

Yes, but MTBO is advertised as 1200 hours.

 

[Dazzler]

pt-04 with ws-13, pt-06 with rd-93MA

At the same time with the full-rate production in Moscow, Klimov JSC in St. Petersburg continues to refine the RD-33MK and RD-93. According to Klimov, the company's jet engine priorities are the development of the modified RD-93MA with the thrust enhanced to 9,300 kgf for a foreign customer and the development of the upgraded RD-33MKM with a thrust of 9,500 kgf for the MiG corporation

Take-off Magazine : RD-33: output on the rise

 

[shiphone]

RD93 on JF17(FC-1)....we might have to think about the lifetime like this

400 hours between overhauls, normally two overhauls are arranged in an engine's lifetime ,but most engines could have extra 1 or 2 overhauls which makes the lifetime extended to 1600 or 2000 hours for those 'carefully used' ones after being carefully checked and calculated...but we have to say the 1200 hours lifetime on the Russian Technical Docs although the extra allowance is there.

----------------------------
PAF got JF17s year by year

4 in 2007
4 in 2008
4 in 2009
16(?) in 2010
6(?) in 2011
6(?) in 2012
10 in 2013

i.e. 7000/49=142 hours per aircraft in 6 years? Considering how rigoursly they have been testing it since 2008, Not a chance.

so it's not a suitable caltulation...
----------------------------------------

the airframe life of JF17 airframe might be more reasonable for a data of 4000 hours/ 20-25 calendar years

 

[Dazzler]

first block completed, block 2 manufacturing commenced.....

here is one with IFR probe....... and SD-10s

 

[Dazzler]

block 2 begins.....

blk 1, 50th...

Mirage IFR seems a bit different....