JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
Yes bro I realised it but it tested.build by heat absorbing composite alloys and somewhat streamlined and so somewhat decreased the friction and prevent it from toasting.
You don't want to absorb the heat, you want to deflect it. That is why AESA radars have heat syncs and liquid cooling. To do only air cooled means slots will be cut in the nose cone which decreases areodynamic flow and the friction build up at high speed will be more heat entering the array. This radar can only be operated at low speed and high altitude if it doesn't want to overheat which is a severe operational liability.
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
You don't want to absorb the heat, you want to deflect it. That is why AESA radars have heat syncs and liquid cooling. To do only air cooled means slots will be cut in the nose cone which decreases areodynamic flow and the friction build up at high speed will be more heat entering the array. This radar can only be operated at low speed and high altitude if it doesn't want to overheat which is a severe operational liability.
Yes Sir,
But I think Air cooled liquid Is used in here
KLJ series is the same one used in J-16
J-20 J-31 but this one can be operated without With cooling mechanically

Whats your suggestion here is a pic of one the 7 JFT given to PAF this year
downloadfile-2.jpg

6* missiles
4=BVR 2=WVR
Enough or not please comment?????
downloadfile-3.jpg

Sir also Also comment about new Air refueling Probe
proxy-3.jpg

And also new patch designed For a new squadren
full.jpg
 

lcafanboy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
3,929
Likes
15,625
Country flag
You don't want to absorb the heat, you want to deflect it. That is why AESA radars have heat syncs and liquid cooling. To do only air cooled means slots will be cut in the nose cone which decreases areodynamic flow and the friction build up at high speed will be more heat entering the array. This radar can only be operated at low speed and high altitude if it doesn't want to overheat which is a severe operational liability.
Are they planning to use fan like in scooter engine on the sides of nose cone for cooling..:rofl:

Or

But I think Air cooled liquid Is used in here
They're planning to use a car coolant radiator in front of the fighter to cool the radar..:rofl::crazy::crazy:
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
Are they planning to use fan like in scooter engine on the sides of nose cone for cooling..:rofl:

Or



They're planning to use a car coolant radiator in front of the fighter to cool the radar..:rofl::crazy::crazy:
Just like that chini hain sir je suna tu yahi hai
Ap yeh bataein
Air refueling probe kasi any better suggestion please comment???

6 missiles are enough or not?
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,018
@Sancho
Sir you can also comment in the above pictures is 4bvr and 2wvr are enough or not.
The importance of that configuration with a twin pylon is not the number of missiles, but the fact that it still allows to carry 2 fuel tanks for enough endurance in CAP missions. You can see the current config with 2 fuel tanks + 2 bvr missiles on the pics in the background, so of course doubling the amount of BVR missiles with the same amount of fuel is a good thing. The downside however, is higher weight and drag, which of course will effect it's manoeuvrability.
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
The importance of that configuration with a twin pylon is not the number of missiles, but the fact that it still allows to carry 2 fuel tanks for enough endurance in CAP missions. You can see the current config with 2 fuel tanks + 2 bvr missiles on the pics in the background, so of course doubling the amount of BVR missiles with the same amount of fuel is a good thing. The downside however, is higher weight and drag, which of course will effect it's manoeuvrability.
Sir,
v r also working on conformal fuel tanks
....this configuration is for blk 2
Sir,
You r right
But Weight effect is not having a great importance cuz it is tested by 100+ simulations under computer.....
Any solution of these.?????
 

rone

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2016
Messages
697
Likes
1,718
Country flag
guys guiys chill why u guys always trolling this jf17 guy,k its not modern as other 4th gen but look at them they able to pull this thing out..respective to their economy they build 100+ fighters and operational our babus in gov still sleeping regarding in taht area .. also it have the ability , sure it never can go toe to toe with su30mki but they don't want to they have f16 for that
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
guys guiys chill why u guys always trolling this jf17 guy,k its not modern as other 4th gen but look at them they able to pull this thing out..respective to their economy they build 100+ fighters and operational our babus in gov still sleeping regarding in taht area .. also it have the ability , sure it never can go toe to toe with su30mki but they don't want to they have f16 for that
Yes dude u r right but we developed jft acc to F-16 all its best features even the word "BINGO" written on the HMD of F-16 and job has been done nicely.....
 

lcafanboy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
3,929
Likes
15,625
Country flag
Just like that chini hain sir je suna tu yahi hai
Ap yeh bataein
Air refueling probe kasi any better suggestion please comment???

6 missiles are enough or not?
6 missiles are more than enough for a small fighter like jf17 but it also depends on the missiles in question and the adversary it faces.

Gripen E too will have 6 missiles but that includes meteor and other advance european bvrs and if necessary any nato missiles since all western fighters are interoperable. Take LCA Tejas now, it will have Derby, python, Astra mk1 and Mk2, SFDR(meteor equivalent) and Russian missiles. This changes the whole scenario.

Jf-17s will have only chinese air to air missiles which have questionable quality and that makes all the difference....

WRT air to air refueling probe, just look at LCA Tejas, Gripen, rafale, etc. probes they are completely aerodynamic and in future Tejas mk2 refueling probe will be retractable, while jf17 probes look like they are plonked randomly by a roadside plumber. Plus jf17 have not yet demonstrated hot refueling and pressure refueling (both of which have been demonstrated by Tejas) which is again questionable....
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
6 missiles are more than enough for a small fighter like jf17 but it also depends on the missiles in question and the adversary it faces.

Gripen E too will have 6 missiles but that includes meteor and other advance european bvrs and if necessary any nato missiles since all western fighters are interoperable. Take LCA Tejas now, it will have Derby, python, Astra mk1 and Mk2, SFDR(meteor equivalent) and Russian missiles. This changes the whole scenario.

Jf-17s will have only chinese air to air missiles which have questionable quality and that makes all the difference....

WRT air to air refueling probe, just look at LCA Tejas, Gripen, rafale, etc. probes they are completely aerodynamic and in future Tejas mk2 refueling probe will be retractable, while jf17 probes look like they are plonked randomly by a roadside plumber. Plus jf17 have not yet demonstrated hot refueling and pressure refueling (both of which have been demonstrated by Tejas) which is again questionable....
Sir SD-10 is Chinese variant of R-77
Also used in J-10 J-11 J-15 J-16 J-20 and J-,31 therefore its standard is not questionable If you still doubtful about it than It can also also integrated with Westren BVR like F-16s


Air refueling proble.....hmmmm.....I was not in its favor......I was asking F-16s like fuel inlet in its spine and there is a chance that blk3 will have it.

There is a official statement in 2017 that jft has done successful refueling



Which is better air refuelimg probe or

Inlets like F-16 F-22 ??????
 

lcafanboy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
3,929
Likes
15,625
Country flag
Sir SD-10 is Chinese variant of R-77
Also used in J-10 J-11 J-15 J-16 J-20 and J-,31 therefore its standard is not questionable If you still doubtful about it than It can also also integrated with Westren BVR like F-16s


Air refueling proble.....hmmmm.....I was not in its favor......I was asking F-16s like fuel inlet in its spine and there is a chance that blk3 will have it.

There is a official statement in 2017 that jft has done successful refueling



Which is better air refuelimg probe or

Inlets like F-16 F-22 ??????
SD10 may be copy of R77 just like every other things that come from China but it's the seekers that make all the difference. Israeli and western missiles have advance aesa or irst seekers and a few are even dual seeker missiles now aesa and irst both seekers on a single missile. Russians too have good seekers but not that advanced as western ones and their bvrs too are not that advanced as western ones but are good enough.

Chinese seekers are not even as advanced as Russian ones and missiles again are questionable.

Coming on to indian missiles, since we have exposure to the best of the best western bvr missiles like mica, Derby, python, meteor, R77, we don't have dearth of good quality missiles, also DRDO received seeker technology from Russia, Israel and now we have our own seekers including GaN aesa seeker which will be ready by 2024-25, which will help make india self sufficient in bvrs with Astra mk1 and mk2 and SFDR. We will also receive thrust vector technology from France which will help us in developing wvr too. All this is not accessible to China due to copycat habits and hegemonic and bully attitude...:biggrin2:
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
SD10 may be copy of R77 just like every other things that come from China but it's the seekers that make all the difference. Israeli and western missiles have advance aesa or irst seekers and a few are even dual seeker missiles now aesa and irst both seekers on a single missile. Russians too have good seekers but not that advanced as western ones and their bvrs too are not that advanced as western ones but are good enough.

Chinese seekers are not even as advanced as Russian ones and missiles again are questionable.

Coming on to indian missiles, since we have exposure to the best of the best western bvr missiles like mica, Derby, python, meteor, R77, we don't have dearth of good quality missiles, also DRDO received seeker technology from Russia, Israel and now we have our own seekers including GaN aesa seeker which will be ready by 2024-25, which will help make india self sufficient in bvrs with Astra mk1 and mk2 and SFDR. We will also receive thrust vector technology from France which will help us in developing wvr too. All this is not accessible to China due to copycat habits and hegemonic and bully attitude...:biggrin2:
I appreciate that Sir very informatic thank you so much Sir
But I have some Questions..
1.If SD-10 is a sub-standard missile than why Chinese are using it in its 5th gen
Fighter like J-20?
Although Chinese are very cunning people.

2.SD-10 is also a somewhat another level development of R-77 like your ASTRA missiles.

......
We considered it so long ago thats why we make our jft capable of integrating with USA AIM-120 AMRAAMs

You didn't tell about Air refueling probe ether it is out nozzle or intake on a spine like F-16 and F-22.Also tell something about
CFT(conformal fuel Tanks) .
Necessary or not ????

And when will our planes tejas and jft become comparable to Gripen E J-10C and F-16 block70 C/D??????
 

Vorschlaghammer

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
332
Likes
566
Country flag
I might be wrong here, but I think the spine port was developed by USAF for its bombers cause the receiving pilot doesn't have to maneuver too much, tanker boom operator guides the boom, and flow rate is higher. Hence AF projects like F16 F15 and F22 have spine ports. USN went with the probe and drogue, which is more demanding on the receiver pilot, but acceptable since USN aviators are better trained. The boom is more complex on the tanker, and easy on pilots. The drogue is simpler but harder on pilots.

Canadians were in a quandary cause the AF version F35A which they wanted wasn't compatible with their drogue only tankers. Not sure if they went with F35B or some modification.

You can have both though, boom and drogue both at the tail, or 2 drogues from pods in each wing.
 

jat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
244
Likes
198
New
guys guiys chill why u guys always trolling this jf17 guy,k its not modern as other 4th gen but look at them they able to pull this thing out..respective to their economy they build 100+ fighters and operational our babus in gov still sleeping regarding in taht area .. also it have the ability , sure it never can go toe to toe with su30mki but they don't want to they have f16 for that
Su-30MKI? I don't see flankers taking risks in Pakistan. This is what Artillery, ballistic missiles are for. How are PAF going to deal with the massive short range, accurate firepower of the IA?
The importance of that configuration with a twin pylon is not the number of missiles, but the fact that it still allows to carry 2 fuel tanks for enough endurance in CAP missions. You can see the current config with 2 fuel tanks + 2 bvr missiles on the pics in the background, so of course doubling the amount of BVR missiles with the same amount of fuel is a good thing. The downside however, is higher weight and drag, which of course will effect it's manoeuvrability.
Good point. I was also wondering why they would add on the weight of additional hardpoint on the wings when dual rail launchers achieve the same thing for less. If they are adding extra fuel tanks, which could happen, they will diffenitly benefit from Russias newer versions of RD-33 engines for the light stealth fighter. Looks like the lack of thrust could be dealt with over time as Russia is replacing the RD-33 engines with something new. However, this may not fix the reliability issue.
6 missiles are more than enough for a small fighter like jf17 but it also depends on the missiles in question and the adversary it faces.

Gripen E too will have 6 missiles but that includes meteor and other advance european bvrs and if necessary any nato missiles since all western fighters are interoperable. Take LCA Tejas now, it will have Derby, python, Astra mk1 and Mk2, SFDR(meteor equivalent) and Russian missiles. This changes the whole scenario.

Jf-17s will have only chinese air to air missiles which have questionable quality and that makes all the difference....
1, Chinese missiles were and could still be assisted by Russian seekers and even engines.
2. The difference in arsenals is an advantage for Tejas, not becuase the missiles are better which they are not compared to Gripen, but because it gives tactical intelligence something to think about on sorties. Varieties will help deter counters to these threats.
Coming on to indian missiles, since we have exposure to the best of the best western bvr missiles like mica, Derby, python, meteor, R77, we don't have dearth of good quality missiles, also DRDO received seeker technology from Russia, Israel and now we have our own seekers including GaN aesa seeker which will be ready by 2024-25, which will help make india self sufficient in bvrs with Astra mk1 and mk2 and SFDR. We will also receive thrust vector technology from France which will help us in developing wvr too. All this is not accessible to China due to copycat habits and hegemonic and bully attitude...:biggrin2:
Could should would, not here yet. The JF-17 though old beat Tejas in some regards, even though with questionable safety standards.

1.If SD-10 is a sub-standard missile than why Chinese are using it in its 5th gen
Fighter like J-20?
I have an answer. But for that you need ask another question. Why did China buy Su-35s from Russia and received them in 2016? when they had J-20s inducted in 2017? Does this sound like PLAAF has trust in the J-20 capabilities? All lot about China is hype. They are not so advanced as the average fanboy perceives.
2.SD-10 is also a somewhat another level development of R-77 like your ASTRA missiles.
Well then they should have made the missile smokeless.
You didn't tell about Air refueling probe ether it is out nozzle or intake on a spine like F-16 and F-22.Also tell something about
CFT(conformal fuel Tanks) .
Necessary or not ????

And when will our planes tejas and jft become comparable to Gripen E J-10C and F-16 block70 C/D??????
I know its not directed to me but who cares about CFT. JF-17 should not have a need for CFT, internal fuel capacity needs should have been met in early design and concept stages. Do you think the JF-17 is a copy of the F-16? Because its not. Its a mutilated version of the J-7 with concepts of the F-1 project hence the name JF-17. Like wise the J-10 is even more mutilated but at least the Chinese tried with J-10.

Chinese don't like to hear it, but the J-10 like J-8 and many others are a mutilation of the J-7. Internally the J-10 is drastically different, but from facts of construction of frames, they went with what was cheap, available, in abundance and most importantly, what they understood well. There should be no need for CFT. And I also don't know how it would effeect a cigar shaped design like J-17.
 

ThorTheRagnarok

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2018
Messages
91
Likes
15
Su-30MKI? I don't see flankers taking risks in Pakistan. This is what Artillery, ballistic missiles are for. How are PAF going to deal with the massive short range, accurate firepower of the IA?

Good point. I was also wondering why they would add on the weight of additional hardpoint on the wings when dual rail launchers achieve the same thing for less. If they are adding extra fuel tanks, which could happen, they will diffenitly benefit from Russias newer versions of RD-33 engines for the light stealth fighter. Looks like the lack of thrust could be dealt with over time as Russia is replacing the RD-33 engines with something new. However, this may not fix the reliability issue.

1, Chinese missiles were and could still be assisted by Russian seekers and even engines.
2. The difference in arsenals is an advantage for Tejas, not becuase the missiles are better which they are not compared to Gripen, but because it gives tactical intelligence something to think about on sorties. Varieties will help deter counters to these threats.

Could should would, not here yet. The JF-17 though old beat Tejas in some regards, even though with questionable safety standards.


I have an answer. But for that you need ask another question. Why did China buy Su-35s from Russia and received them in 2016? when they had J-20s inducted in 2017? Does this sound like PLAAF has trust in the J-20 capabilities? All lot about China is hype. They are not so advanced as the average fanboy perceives.

Well then they should have made the missile smokeless.

I know its not directed to me but who cares about CFT. JF-17 should not have a need for CFT, internal fuel capacity needs should have been met in early design and concept stages. Do you think the JF-17 is a copy of the F-16? Because its not. Its a mutilated version of the J-7 with concepts of the F-1 project hence the name JF-17. Like wise the J-10 is even more mutilated but at least the Chinese tried with J-10.

Chinese don't like to hear it, but the J-10 like J-8 and many others are a mutilation of the J-7. Internally the J-10 is drastically different, but from facts of construction of frames, they went with what was cheap, available, in abundance and most importantly, what they understood well. There should be no need for CFT. And I also don't know how it would effeect a cigar shaped design like J-17.

1.Chinese importes 1 sqdrn. Of SU-35 to . its Flankers Arsenal....Mainly due to sea role.To deal with the sea threats...
2.there Air Marshall consider J-20 as a crown of its all fleet So nothing too
serious in its import...
3.Yes so are So right thats our main Magic.The job has done For copying the features of F-16 is so nicely that no one can understand it .Otherwise If we simple Copy and paste the design of fighters.Like Iran has done with F-5 in the manufacturing of its homemade jet Kowsar...There will many industrial moral and illegally building issues...I assure you that jft is built by the Experience of our retired F-16 pilots....
We copy all the best features of F-16 in it.
Even.....the Word "BINGO" written on The HMD of F-16 is copied in the jft

Well as far as Conformal fuel tanks issue blk(3) three have also many structural changes....even I think the sides of the spine of jft can also be re shapped for this..
PAF requested Chengdu Aircraft corporation for thia......


SD-10 is not smoke less but having a more powerful sensors to distinguish between flares and jet.IR traking etc.
They are useing it in J-20 Chinese don't
Do any risky work on their defence .....
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top