JF-17 - Updates, News & Discussion

[Michael]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This is pointless speculation.
In addition to the JL-10/L-15, China also has many two-seat fighters. The Chinese Flanker series/J-10S...... For the PLA, the JF-17B is not worth purchasing.

This JF-17B fighter jet, spotted at the Changchun Air Show, has a new engine, unlike previous models.
This suggests that CAC is still refining this two-seater model. As for the specifics behind these improvements, we don't have many details at this time.
But one thing is clear: for China, the JF-17B is limited to export purposes.

Possible improvement directions?
1. A two-seat advanced trainer fighter?
This would be similar to the JL-10/L-15. It is more advanced than the earlier JF-17B, but its functional positioning remains largely unchanged.
2. A two-seat fighter? This would include both strike and dedicated EW missions.
This would be similar to the J-16 and J-16D.
3. Air frontline command aircraft?
This would be similar to the J-20S. This possibility is small, but possible. A scaled-down version of the J-20S would significantly enhance the PAF's combat capabilities.

But these are currently limited to speculation.

 

[gamaji]

This is pointless speculation.
In addition to the JL-10/L-15, China also has many two-seat fighters. The Chinese Flanker series/J-10S...... For the PLA, the JF-17B is not worth purchasing.

This JF-17B fighter jet, spotted at the Changchun Air Show, has a new engine, unlike previous models.
This suggests that CAC is still refining this two-seater model. As for the specifics behind these improvements, we don't have many details at this time.
But one thing is clear: for China, the JF-17B is limited to export purposes.

Possible improvement directions?
1. A two-seat advanced trainer fighter?
This would be similar to the JL-10/L-15. It is more advanced than the earlier JF-17B, but its functional positioning remains largely unchanged.
2. A two-seat fighter? This would include both strike and dedicated EW missions.
This would be similar to the J-16 and J-16D.
3. Air frontline command aircraft?
This would be similar to the J-20S. This possibility is small, but possible. A scaled-down version of the J-20S would significantly enhance the PAF's combat capabilities.

But these are currently limited to speculation.

Thanks for your detailed post.
While it's understandable that not many details of refinements are available at this time, but I'm wondering which new engine is being tested with JF-17B? Please reply only if it's not sensitive information at this point in time.

 

[Michael]

While it's understandable that not many details of refinements are available at this time, but I'm wondering which new engine is being tested with JF-17B? Please reply only if it's not sensitive information at this point in time.

The most likely option is the WS-21 engine(Special Edition).

But this isn't completely certain at this point.

I've tried to verify this, but to no avail. The reason for this is your last paragraph.

 

[Metal 0-1]

Don't they have L-15s, which are also dual-seat super sonic LIFTs?

They'd be better of just building more L-15s, or refurbishing their older fleet.

Seems like a redundant purchase, which tells me it's probably not true.

It's fake news, of course that purchase is going to be redundant.

 

[Fatman17]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Highly unlikely

 

[Ali_Baba]

This is pointless speculation.
In addition to the JL-10/L-15, China also has many two-seat fighters. The Chinese Flanker series/J-10S...... For the PLA, the JF-17B is not worth purchasing.

This JF-17B fighter jet, spotted at the Changchun Air Show, has a new engine, unlike previous models.
This suggests that CAC is still refining this two-seater model. As for the specifics behind these improvements, we don't have many details at this time.
But one thing is clear: for China, the JF-17B is limited to export purposes.

Possible improvement directions?
1. A two-seat advanced trainer fighter?
This would be similar to the JL-10/L-15. It is more advanced than the earlier JF-17B, but its functional positioning remains largely unchanged.
2. A two-seat fighter? This would include both strike and dedicated EW missions.
This would be similar to the J-16 and J-16D.
3. Air frontline command aircraft?
This would be similar to the J-20S. This possibility is small, but possible. A scaled-down version of the J-20S would significantly enhance the PAF's combat capabilities.

But these are currently limited to speculation.

How many jets in China use the WS-13 ? Other than being potentially "offered" for JF17/FC1, is it close to zero it seems ? Maybe the Burma FC-1 jets use WS-13 ?

The same applies to the WS-21, is anything being planned to use it given that the J-35 series will use the WS-19 for large scale deployment.

 

[Michael]

How many jets in China use the WS-13 ? Other than being potentially "offered" for JF17/FC1, is it close to zero it seems ? Maybe the Burma FC-1 jets use WS-13 ?

The same applies to the WS-21, is anything being planned to use it given that the J-35 series will use the WS-19 for large scale deployment.

I need to first clarify a basic principle.

China does indeed import or imitate advanced technologies from many industrially and technologically advanced countries, including Russia, the United States, Europe, Japan, and South Korea. This is true. However, we never simply copy these advanced technologies.​

The WS-13 engine is a direct copy of the RD-33 engine technology imported from China. We subsequently refined it until we launched the WS-13E. However, we were dissatisfied with the WS-13E's performance. Consequently, the Liyang plant never mass-produced the WS-13E. The WS-13 series engines underwent flight tests on the JF-17 and FC-31 fighter jets, as well as on other UAVs, but were never mass-produced on any aircraft.

The WS-21 engine. Its core engine technology originates from the WS-13 (or RD-33) engine. However, it has undergone fundamental changes. The latest official information shows that its core structure has changed from the RD-33's "4911" to "3711." This means that they are now two completely different engines with the same lineage.

=====================================

Regarding the use of the WS-21 engine.

The currently known early test versions of the J-35 fighter jet series all use the WS-21 engine, including the Air Force version, the Navy version, and the export version.
The Air Force version officially procured has since been upgraded to the WS-19 engine. The Navy version, currently an early transitional version, still uses the WS-21 engine. The export version is confirmed to use the WS-21 engine.

There are numerous reports indicating that several large and medium-sized Chinese UAVs are powered by the WS-21 engine. However, there has been no official confirmation.

 

[Ak01]

The most likely option is the WS-21 engine(Special Edition).

But this isn't completely certain at this point.

I've tried to verify this, but to no avail. The reason for this is your last paragraph.

its not a ws21- its got the same flame stabiliser as the rd93- thus its likely a ws13 variant being tested on the jf-17, not for paf use though.

 

[Ali_Baba]

I need to first clarify a basic principle.

China does indeed import or imitate advanced technologies from many industrially and technologically advanced countries, including Russia, the United States, Europe, Japan, and South Korea. This is true. However, we never simply copy these advanced technologies.​

The WS-13 engine is a direct copy of the RD-33 engine technology imported from China. We subsequently refined it until we launched the WS-13E. However, we were dissatisfied with the WS-13E's performance. Consequently, the Liyang plant never mass-produced the WS-13E. The WS-13 series engines underwent flight tests on the JF-17 and FC-31 fighter jets, as well as on other UAVs, but were never mass-produced on any aircraft.

The WS-21 engine. Its core engine technology originates from the WS-13 (or RD-33) engine. However, it has undergone fundamental changes. The latest official information shows that its core structure has changed from the RD-33's "4911" to "3711." This means that they are now two completely different engines with the same lineage.

=====================================

Regarding the use of the WS-21 engine.

The currently known early test versions of the J-35 fighter jet series all use the WS-21 engine, including the Air Force version, the Navy version, and the export version.
The Air Force version officially procured has since been upgraded to the WS-19 engine. The Navy version, currently an early transitional version, still uses the WS-21 engine. The export version is confirmed to use the WS-21 engine.

There are numerous reports indicating that several large and medium-sized Chinese UAVs are powered by the WS-21 engine. However, there has been no official confirmation.

Why would anyone want to commit to an engine that itself is not in use by China itself ? ie why would they want the risk of an unproven engine like the WS-21(/13) that is not in mass manufacturing or deployment by China or anyone else. A new engine carries a lot of risk as bugs will need to be ironed out over time, and that becomes very expensive if you are only one of a few operators.

The FC-31 was pitched to Pakistan for a long long time to fund its development and be the first customer, and Pakistan declined until China took it seriously itself. Now that it has, Pakistan is prepared to jump aboard.

It will be interesting to see which way Pakistan goes on the engine, given how risk averse Pakistan is to unproven equipment. The WS-13/21 both qualify as unproven and a significant long term risk in terms of maintenance/bugs/support. Pakistan never went for the WS-13/WS-21 for the Block III despite what may have been a lot of pressure to do so, so it would be interesting to see if it decides to go for the WS-21 for the J-35AE.

 

[hasssanali8998]

View attachment 147451

cant wait to see them flying in Azerbaijani colors

 

[Michael]

Why would anyone want to commit to an engine that itself is not in use by China itself ? ie why would they want the risk of an unproven engine like the WS-21(/13) that is not in mass manufacturing or deployment by China or anyone else. A new engine carries a lot of risk as bugs will need to be ironed out over time, and that becomes very expensive if you are only one a few operators.

It will be interesting to see which way Pakistan goes on the engine, given how risk averse Pakistan is to unproven equipment. The WS-13/21 both qualify as unproven and a significant long term risk in terms of maintenance/bugs/support. Pakistan never went for the WS-13/WS-21 for the Block III despite what may have been a lot of pressure to do so.

This is a choice. The choice is up to the customer.

You can choose the latest engine. This means you get the most advanced performance and the latest technology, but it also means you have to bear risks.

You can choose the most mature engine. The maturity of any product takes a very long time. Choosing this engine means the risk is minimal, but it also means you are choosing very outdated technology.

The PAF chose to purchase the J-10CE after the PLAAF had already stopped purchasing the J-10C. This means it is very mature, but it is also the PLAAF's most outdated main fighter in service. If the PAF had chosen to purchase the FC-31/J-35 fighter many years later, when the J-35A was nearing the end of production, it would also be very mature and without any technical risks. However, it would already be the PLAAF's most outdated fighter. If the PAF had purchased the J-35 when it was first introduced, it would have enjoyed the latest technological advances now, but it would also have meant it had to bear the risks.

The same is true in our daily lives.

 

[Ak01]

It will be interesting to see which way Pakistan goes on the engine, given how risk averse Pakistan is to unproven equipment. The WS-13/21 both qualify as unproven and a significant long term risk in terms of maintenance/bugs/support. Pakistan never went for the WS-13/WS-21 for the Block III despite what may have been a lot of pressure to do so, so it would be interesting to see if it decides to go for the WS-21 for the J-35AE.

paf rejected ws13 use on jf-17 after the chinese tried to pressure a switch. they have rd93 facilities and experience, they dont wish to ditch that

 

[Ali_Baba]

This is a choice. The choice is up to the customer.

You can choose the latest engine. This means you get the most advanced performance and the latest technology, but it also means you have to bear risks.

You can choose the most mature engine. The maturity of any product takes a very long time. Choosing this engine means the risk is minimal, but it also means you are choosing very outdated technology.

The PAF chose to purchase the J-10CE after the PLAAF had already stopped purchasing the J-10C. This means it is very mature, but it is also the PLAAF's most outdated main fighter in service. If the PAF had chosen to purchase the FC-31/J-35 fighter many years later, when the J-35A was nearing the end of production, it would also be very mature and without any technical risks. However, it would already be the PLAAF's most outdated fighter. If the PAF had purchased the J-35 when it was first introduced, it would have enjoyed the latest technological advances now, but it would also have meant it had to bear the risks.

The same is true in our daily lives.

True - but the risk is shared with China if it goes with the latest WS-19 engine. If it goes with the WS-13/21, then it is on its own to get issues fixed ( and WS-13/21 do not really qualify as mature engines anyway, you need 10's of thousands of hours of flying for that ).

While Pakistan has historically preferred mature solutions, there is the risk/reward equation where the need for J-35A capabilities may well change PAFs priorities.

I do think it comes down to the RD-93MA(with its increased thrust that is the same as the WS-21 ) for both the re-engine of the JF17 fleet when the engines run out of life and the J-35A, or it goes for the WS-19 for the J-35AE, and then uses it to re-engine the entire JF17 fleet when required to do so. I do think the JF17 fleets re-engine requirements(where the engine lifespan is half the lifespan of the airframe) is a factor in the decision for the J-35AE. PAF will want to optimise and keep maintenance costs as low as possible.

The J-31/35 were originally developed with the RD-93, so it is not an unknown for the programme as a whole.

 

[SABRE]

... but it is also the PLAAF's most outdated main fighter in service.

You still have some J-8 in service

 

[Yasser76]

This is a choice. The choice is up to the customer.

You can choose the latest engine. This means you get the most advanced performance and the latest technology, but it also means you have to bear risks.

You can choose the most mature engine. The maturity of any product takes a very long time. Choosing this engine means the risk is minimal, but it also means you are choosing very outdated technology.

The PAF chose to purchase the J-10CE after the PLAAF had already stopped purchasing the J-10C. This means it is very mature, but it is also the PLAAF's most outdated main fighter in service. If the PAF had chosen to purchase the FC-31/J-35 fighter many years later, when the J-35A was nearing the end of production, it would also be very mature and without any technical risks. However, it would already be the PLAAF's most outdated fighter. If the PAF had purchased the J-35 when it was first introduced, it would have enjoyed the latest technological advances now, but it would also have meant it had to bear the risks.

The same is true in our daily lives.

I think if the PAF jumps on board with the J-35 it will still be very cutting edge right (basically frontline PLAAF/PLAN equipment).

Only interesting thing is no one really knows just how capable the J-35 is compared with the F-35.

I really have no idea, it could just be a J-10C in a stealth airframe or it could way surpass the F-35.

Stuff like its actual stealth, it's data fusion, sensors, EW, cockpit etc are all relative unkowns right?