JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

BunBunCake

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
405
Likes
75
B-2s Radar is already known (APQ-181 radar). And nobody gives you RCS in public. What is there in open source in not always true but one can get ball-park RCS based on an Aircrafts design characteristics.
1. Yes, I said again. the Name is known. Information about is NOT.
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/apq181/
Where does it mention specs?
Can you give me it's weight, and it's range.---So far, the B-2's still seems useless to me as i'm following your "Show me the picture, or it doesn't exist".

And no, i asked for the listing about it's RCS, don't tell me you can speculate. That's not released information, and there's no proof. Also, you cannot speculate it's RCS since many angles and parts of the B-2 aren't released also.

The Jf-17's radar is based on the KLJ-710 for the J-10.
http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/KLJ-710-Fire-Control-Radar-FCR-China.html
Does that prove anything? (no)


The problem with JF-17 is that it is still not known that what Radar, weapons system, avionics will go into it in the future (if you know give me the links). There is a difference between not knowing specifications of already existing bell and whistles and not knowing what bells and whistles are present or going to be present.
Actually, no there is no difference, because who knows about the capabilities of the F-22, and the B-2. F-22 is intended to never be seen. Go to lockheedmartin.com and find me the RCS, no you won't find it. Find me how it was made stealthy. It will tell you, we made the airframe stealthy, we added composite materials. PERIOD.

You are changing your words from what you said first. Rudely, I only got "Give me the picture, otherwise it doesn't exist."

We don't know the B-2's radar, weapons system, and avionics also.
(btw, the Jf-17 is done with development.. it's in production phase. So I don't know what you mean by in the "future". The Super Jf-17 crap is a rumor (deleted from Wikipedia now).
 
Last edited:

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,616
Likes
5,748
1. Yes, I said again. the Name is known. Information about is NOT.
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/apq181/
Where does it mention specs?
Can you give me it's weight, and it's range.---So far, the B-2's still seems useless to me as i'm following your "Show me the picture, or it doesn't exist".
Since you asked for B-2 radars specs and weight. Here you go

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/AN-APQ-181-United-States.html

And no, i asked for the listing about it's RCS, don't tell me you can speculate. That's not released information, and there's no proof. Also, you cannot speculate it's RCS since many angles and parts of the B-2 aren't released also.
No body in right mind will give out RCS of any Aircraft. The only way to determine or know real RCS of enemy aircraft is to see in the battle field or through other means (read spying). Alternately, one can take a guess at the RCS based on design characteristics, stealth, size of the aircraft. And when I meant guess it means that it will not always be the correct RCS value.

The Jf-17's radar is based on the KLJ-710 for the J-10.
http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/KLJ-710-Fire-Control-Radar-FCR-China.html
Does that prove anything? (no)
[/QUOTE]

Its not an advanced radar. If the radar was so good why would Pakistan look for other Radars from french/italian sources. This indicates that Radar is not up to the standards that PAF want. This is exactly where nothing is known about future radar of JF-17 as it is still not specified (Grifo S7 or RC400 or Vixen). It is not even sure if those Radars will be offered to them.
 

fulcrum

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
191
Likes
87
Thanks, you must know what it is =)
You like being called Narutard?
I Dropped that Anime years ago after little kids in Training kill seasoned akatsuki veterans, with little or no losses to their side. Not to mention Naruto's Sakuke obsession.

I don't give out my personal details to a paki or red-pandas.

No one's stupid enough to code the avionics in 10 different languages. I can understand if the Radar was coded in a different language, but everything else wouldn't be coded in multiple languages. Now tell me what language each component of this aircraft is coded in, since you want to be a smart ass and say the cockpit has nothing to do with the C++ architecture.

So, what'd they do here? Integrate C++ with Java, PHP, ADA, C?
Who the fuck cares what it's coded in. You can hire C++ programmers dime a dozen. That is not the argument. Processor is required to run C++. The same Processor can also run Ada if it has to. If the Pandas reverse engineering the processor then it does count as Pandas RE's Avionics. And as I've previously stated, the backlight of an LCD or even the liquid crystals has got nothing to do with a processor, but they are indeed Chinese RE'd/copied avionics with standard chinese quality. And the world knows what a standard chinese quality is.

Give me proof saying the PL-12 is not capable. If you want to say something, give me proof. I don't want your Indian blogs written by fanboys. Give me proof.
Unless you show proof that the some E.Ts are helping chinese to suddenly make their products superior to the Russians, your ramblings hold no logical ground. How can you conclude a country which is years behind in the field of Aeronautics suddenly upsurp Russia? Are you Brain damaged?

Given the obvious tendency to lie by Pak, as was given in my Article, which you have conveniently ignored, anything coming from Pakistan has to be taken with a bag of salt. Then there is the Chinese who go on to hide their J-10 crashes but only release info when a pilot manages to land, reeks of typical totalitarian behavior to censor or lie about unfavorable facts & incidents. No wonder these 2 are friends. God knows what the true specs of the PL-12 are. I bet the Paki Airforce are in for a shock if they get acquire & test the PL-12, if they haven't already.


He's not a professional critic is he? (no offense man). In that case, I praise the Jf-17.
Whether he is a professional critic or not, it demolishes your stupid argument that only Indians are the critics. His country is never going to face a JF-17, so he is pretty neutral. And who cares what a Paki or a red-panda thinks of their own junk fighter.

Your brain hasn't grown has it.
You're trying to tell me AGAIN, the Jf-17 was based off the J-7.
What is the LCA based on? Mig-21? They both have delta wings.
Except, we don't do around creating Reverse engineered copies of Mig-21s. If it was then it would be the first time we reverse engineered a Mig-21 breaking IPR. What are the odds of that? Compare this with that shitty pirate country's record of creating Mig-21's Bastards and naming it J-7 and what not, also basing it's designs on other fighters. Pathetic!

I will mark this quote "Saturn are already offered their AL-31's" For what? The Mig-21????
And you don't need air frame changes?
Do you have amnesia? We are talking about Mig-23s. The engine can easily fit into a R-29/35 slot. No air airframe widening required.

You need to stop making an idiot out of yourself and bringing in personal remarks into this discussion. I too can type your bla bla. I only refrain to do so as I have some sense.
Instead of Constructive criticism, you call my statements "stupid" "crap" & what not, and you expect to be treated with respect for the crap you've spewed till now?
 
Last edited:

BunBunCake

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
405
Likes
75
You like being called Narutard?
When a dog barks, I don't bark back.

Who the fuck cares what it's coded in.
You should care. Because otherwise, you can't integrate and make the damn systems function.

That is not the argument. Processor is required to run C++. The same Processor can also run Ada if it has to. If the Pandas reverse engineering the processor then it does count as Pandas RE's Avionics. And as I've previously stated, the backlight of an LCD or even the liquid crystals has got nothing to do with a processor, but they are indeed Chinese RE'd/copied avionics with standard chinese quality. And the world knows what a standard chinese quality is.
Firstly, watch your language. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. @Just so you know, China didn't reverse engineer the processor. Here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_88000
@Just so you know, in order for the displays to work, you need a processor. Smart ass.

Unless you show proof that the some E.Ts are helping chinese to suddenly make their products superior to the Russians, your ramblings hold no logical ground. How can you conclude a country which is years behind in the field of Aeronautics suddenly upsurp Russia? Are you Brain damaged?
I don't want to argue with your pointless about these generalizations. I've got many things to say about the LCA, AR*cough*JUN, INSAS. Compare to me the actual product, not your stupid generalizations about a country's capabilities.---In that case, go look at India first.

Given the obvious tendency to lie by Pak, as was given in my Article, which you have conveniently ignored, anything coming from Pakistan has to be taken with a bag of salt. Then there is the Chinese who go on to hide their J-10 crashes but only release info when a pilot manages to land, reeks of typical totalitarian behavior to censor or lie about unfavorable facts & incidents. No wonder these 2 are friends. God knows what the true specs of the PL-12 are. I bet the Paki Airforce are in for a shock if they get acquire & test the PL-12, if they haven't already.
If you can't control your hate towards Pakistan, and China, get out. This place isn't for that.
I'm done with you. Good bye.
Mods, i request you to review this post.

Thanks.
 

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,616
Likes
5,748
Guys, stop personal attacks on one another. You can make your point without transgressing boundaries of decency.
 

venkat

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
907
Likes
201
Given choice I will like to overestimate not underestimate enemy. Would like to hear expert from Pakistan. In places we have seen debate on JF17 Vs LCA I have not seen LCA as clear winner. I also saw article about LCA's drag. Would rather like to improve LCA then feel satisfied. If any anyone doubts my love for LCA check my avatar.
Indianrabbit!!! you are absolutely right. Never underestimate the enemy. look! what had happened to the CRPF in Dantewada !!! Pakistan has at its hand the best fighter aircraft made by USA ,the F-16!!! So its anybody's Guess, the level of pakistan's access to advanced avionics!!! Pakistan might have given full acess to the F-16 aircraft to the chinese designer's for study,copy and RE purposes as FC-1 AKA JF-17 is a joint effort!!! ofcourse as far as radar is concerned it may not have many choices other than KLJ-7,GRIFO series and the Thales RC400. The last one is made by Thales,France. France announced sometime ago that it will not be selling avionics for JF-17(openly!!!). so with lots of on hand flying experience,a/c handling and maintenance experience with one of the world's top class fighter a/c the F-16, its rather foolish to think pakistan will make a bundar !!!!
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
26,473
Likes
29,796
Country flag
What engine is going to be in JF-17?? WS-10 has been a flop for the last 30 years and now has been renamed ws-13 and 100 AL-31 Russia sold to China is a dead deal after chinese made sukhoi copies and RD-93 also maybe on hold or kept by China since no other engine will be available.
 
Last edited:

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,616
Likes
5,748
Pakistan might have given full acess to the F-16 aircraft to the chinese designer's for study,copy and RE purposes as FC-1 AKA JF-17 is a joint effort!!!
Venkat, US personnel are permanently stationed in Pakistan to monitor the use of F-16 and for their maintenance as well.. There are periodic checks of F-16 to see if any of the parts of F-16 are tampered with. Its highly unlikely that Chinese could have got their hands on F-16.
 

fulcrum

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
191
Likes
87
You should care. Because otherwise, you can't integrate and make the damn systems function.
I care 2 bits about the software used. That is not what this Argument is about.

Firstly, watch your language. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. @Just so you know, China didn't reverse engineer the processor. Here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_88000
@Just so you know, in order for the displays to work, you need a processor. Smart ass.
I'm perfectly aware those processors are used on the prototypes. What does the production model uses? Even if the production model uses the same, You said it yourself.. You need processors to work the LCDs. Those processors are built by the chinese company which Manufactures the LCDs/MFDs and are built into the unit. Those processor & chips have got nothing to do with motorola. Those are chinese built! And apart from processors, there are a lot of other things which are branded with China's superior quality, as previously stated.

Chinese avionics is good news for IAF who's going to face them in battle.

I don't want to argue with your pointless about these generalizations.
That is not generalizing, it's called logic and track record.

I'm done with you. Good bye.
Sayonara!
 

venkat

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
907
Likes
201
DD!!! If you give me that ,i will give you this!!! under this SINO-PAK deal anything can change hands.!!! when some Tomahawks crashed near baluchistan, in Pakistan on their way to Afghanistan from Karchi port based US ships,pakistan promptly collected them and dispatched them to china. Tomahawk took shape as BABUR,RAAD!!! what these American watch dogs were doing at that time?
 

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,616
Likes
5,748
DD!!! If you give me that ,i will give you this!!! under this SINO-PAK deal anything can change hands.!!! when some Tomahawks crashed near baluchistan, in Pakistan on their way to Afghanistan from Karchi port based US ships,pakistan promptly collected them and dispatched them to china. Tomahawk took shape as BABUR,RAAD!!! what these American watch dogs were doing at that time?
OT alert: True that Tomahawk fell into the hands of Pakistanis. Clinton didn't do enough to get back the unexploded Tomahawk and it eventually reached China. But the comparison between F-16s which are under surveillance and Tomahawk which didn't explode is naive.
 

fulcrum

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
191
Likes
87
What engine is going to be in JF-17?? WS-10 has been a flop for the last 30 years and now has been renamed ws-13 and 100 AL-31 Russia sold to China is a dead deal after chinese made sukhoi copies and RD-93 also maybe on hold or kept by China since no other engine will be available.
China has no interest with RD-93, LF. They are not going to induct this joke-fighter. And you cannot transfer RD-93 to a J-10. So Pakistan is the only recipient for this engine.
Ws-13 is the RE'd RD-93 IIRC. It'll take many years for that engine to make it's way to JF-17, if it is successful.. that is, has standards comparable to RD-93.
 

charlie

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
1,102
Likes
1,002
Country flag
Venkat, US personnel are permanently stationed in Pakistan to monitor the use of F-16 and for their maintenance as well.. There are periodic checks of F-16 to see if any of the parts of F-16 are tampered with. Its highly unlikely that Chinese could have got their hands on F-16.
well hope you know that the pakistani gave an F16 china to evaluate so that the tech can be used in J 10 and there are also rumours that pakistan got M11 missile in exchange of their F16 so, we never know what the real things is but ya an F16 some how ended up in china through pakistan i guess
 

Yatharth Singh

Knowledge is power.
Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
743
Likes
169
Country flag
Hey I found that the design of JF -17 matches a little with Mig-21 Bison from the side view. isnt it?
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
26,473
Likes
29,796
Country flag
well hope you know that the pakistani gave an F16 china to evaluate so that the tech can be used in J 10 and there are also rumours that pakistan got M11 missile in exchange of their F16 so, we never know what the real things is but ya an F16 some how ended up in china through pakistan i guess
here is an example of Chinese developed their new helicopter

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907496/

China illegally uses Canadian engine for attack helicopter

Analysis: China illegally uses Canadian engine for combat helicopter

HONG KONG, Oct. 5

ANDREI CHANG

Column: Military Might

China has officially released the photo of a mysterious Z-10 combat helicopter that was indigenously developed over a 15-year period. An official brochure on the helicopter shows that the Z-10 uses a PT6C-67C engine imported from Pratt &Whitney Canada.

Although some Western military observers had suspected that China might be attempting to use the PT6C-67C for its Z-10, this official announcement still comes as a surprise. As a military embargo against Beijing has been in place since the 1989 Tiananmen incident, this Canadian engine case may make Washington call for a tighter policy, especially regarding NATO countries.

A source from the P&W said the company did not know anything about the Z-10, claiming that the Chinese purchased its products only for use in civilian helicopters, according to the contract. Those engines were supposed to be used for the development of new 6-ton civilian helicopters and the assembly of AB-139 civilian helicopters. This indicates that China has illegally changed the purpose of the engines from a civilian to a military use.

Western military observers say that China could have manufactured more than eight Z-10s so far. The third one has just completed test flights. China has a plan to purchase more engines, allegedly for the development of new civilian 6-ton helicopters, which will allow them to build at least another seven Z-10s from now.

It is not known yet whether future Z-10s will be manufactured in large batches or will continue to use this imported engine. China may switch to an indigenously developed new engine or an upgraded version of the WZ-9 engine for mass production.

Who else has helped China to develop its Z-10 combat helicopter? An authoritative source from the South African Denel Company said that before 2001, Chinese representatives paid frequent visits to the company. They also invited company staff to visit the Chinese cities of Changhe and Harbin. The Chinese visitors were from the army, the air force and various military industrial enterprises.

"Every time, they requested to look at our Rooivalk combat helicopter. They took away all possible technical materials and took a large number of photos as well as videotapes," the source said. "They also asked so many questions. Their exchanges with us focused on the flight stability and performance features of airborne cannons. We learned from this that the Chinese were experiencing technical difficulties in the design of the Z-10, especially its maneuverability."

In 2001, the Chinese abruptly proposed to purchase one Rooivalk, but the company refused to sell it. "If they needed, they could have paid for formal technical consultation fees," the source said. "Why did they propose to buy only one helicopter? Wasn't it obvious that they intended to thoroughly study the structure of the Rooivalk? We rejected the proposal. After 2001, they never come back to us again."

Where did the Chinese go after 2001? With this question, the author visited Eurocopter Company, where a senior company official claimed, "We can say in a responsible manner that we did not have any contact with the Chinese on the design of the Z-10. The Chinese did not ask us to get involved in the project, and it would have been impossible for us to do so."

The author also visited AgustaWestland Italy. After persistent questioning, a company source acknowledged that they were involved in part of the Z-10 project, but did not reveal any details. In recent years, AgustaWestland has been considered China's closest partner among Western helicopter production enterprises. The two sides have even established a joint venture.

Under cover of jointly producing civilian helicopters, AgustaWestland has very likely given China technical information on the basic redesign of the Z-10. Accordingly, some of the configuration of the Z-10 is very close to AgustaWestland's A-129 combat helicopter. As for the weapon systems on the Z-10, most of them were manufactured in China, including the new HJ-10 anti tank missile and TY-90 air-to-air missile.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25245256/

Helicopter engines missing in Afghan region


Worth $13 million, they were being sent through Pakistan to U.S.

Advertisement | ad info
updated 6/18/2008 10:30:12 AM


KABUL, Afghanistan — Four U.S. military helicopter engines worth a combined $13.2 million are missing in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, the American military said Wednesday.

The engines were being shipped over land from the main U.S. base at Bagram and were destined for Fort Bragg, N.C., where the 82nd Airborne is based, said U.S. spokeswoman Lt. Col. Rumi Nielson-Green.

"The components went missing en route to port — the exact location is undetermined," Nielson-Green said.

The parts went missing sometime before the 101st Airborne arrived to replace the 82nd in early April, she said. They were being shipped by a Pakistani trucking company.

Militants in both countries frequently target convoys of goods destined for NATO bases.

In March, nearly 40 trucks carrying fuel to U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan were destroyed in two bomb attacks on the Pakistani border. The bombings wounded about 100 people.

Pakistan's top military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, said the reports of the missing helicopter parts were under investigation, but he said that U.S. forces had not contacted Pakistan officials about the matter.

The U.S. is not disclosing what kind of engines they were to prevent any criminals or insurgents from getting additional information.

http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2010/01/z-9we-light-attack-helicopter.html


Z-9WE Light Attack Helicopter

China Aviation Industry Corporation-owned Harbin Aircraft Industry Group Co. Ltd. has revealed that the Z-9WE light attack helicopter is available for export. (here)

The Z-9WE is a militarized variant of the H425 civilian helicopter platform. The H425 was, in turn, developed as a civilian variant of the Z-9 military utility helicopter. The H425 is powered by a pair of Arriel-II turboshaft engines whereas the Z-9 is powered by domestic WZ8C engines.

The two Z-9 attack helicopters recently exported to Kenya are likely the new Z-9WE variant instead of the domestic Z-9WA. (here)
 

venkat

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
907
Likes
201
[/URL][/IMG]

KLJ-7 pulse doppler radar specs.
 
Last edited:

Rahul Singh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,743
Country flag
Hey I found that the design of JF -17 matches a little with Mig-21 Bison from the side view. isnt it?
Externally JF-17 is a copy of Mig-33 or a cross breed between two cancelled fighter jets namely Mig-33 and IAR-95 and internally it is Mig-21.

Romanian IAR-95


Mig-33
 

EagleOne

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
886
Likes
87
Russia blocks sale of engines for Sino-Pak fighter jets

Russia has blocked the sale of 100 RD-93 engines to China for FC-1, the joint Sino-Pak fighter, which could emerge as a rival for its MiG-29 fighter in the global markets, according to a report today.

"The new contract with China for the sale of 100 RD-93 engines has not been signed," Kommersant reported quoting its sources in the military-industrial complex.

The deal for the supply of second batch of 100 RD-93 manufactured by Moscow-based Chernyshev Machine building Plant for FC-1 (Pakistani version JF-17) was to be signed with China back in May, however, CEO of RAC MiG and Sukhoi Aircraft Holding Mikhail Pogosyan has torpedoed it, Kommersant business daily reported.

"One of the sources confirmed that Pogosyan has virtually blocked the deal with China by writing to the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) and Rosoboronexport (ROE) state arms exporter that FC-1 is a direct rival of Russian MiG-29 fighters in several foreign markets," the daily writes noting that Russian and Chinese fighters are in the race for an Egyptian contract.

"I am not against the re-export of individual technologies, but it should be done in agreement with the producers of finished-product, so that this re-export does not damage their interests," Pogosyan told Kommersant.

"Re-export is allowed by the government decision and we don't have a practice of consulting producers of finished products.

Under the inter-governmental bilateral agreement in November 2007 China was allowed to re-export RD-93 as part of FC-1 fighter to Egypt, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia and Algeria," press service of state arms exporting monopoly ROE was quoted as saying by the daily.

The Kommersant reminds that Chernyshev Plant a part of United Engine Corporation has supplied 100 RD-93 engines to China under the USD 238 million deal signed in 2005.

A framework agreement for the sale of 500 such engines for the Sino-Pak joint fighter was also signed at that time and Beijing was ready to buy up to 1,000 engines in over USD 3 billion, if Russia agreed to offer its modernised version with greater thrust.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Russi...or-Sino-Pak-fighter-jets/Article1-567821.aspx
 

JAISWAL

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
1,512
Likes
1,027
Dont seems long term ban as previously also they had blocked engine & then opened it for big $$$$$.
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top