PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oscar said:
I can assure you - that just adding a second engine on a simple piston airplane take years of work and testing - let alone a complex fighter aircraft
Click to expand...
I think I got misunderstood. I meant that changing the structure and the aerodynamics of a fighter is much easier than designing a new fighter. With costs and time. Basically the cost and time of making new sensors and radar and electronic> changing the structure of the airframe to get more engines for a specific aircraft. But then again the JF-17 would need a new radar/sensors to go with the new power supply to make the operating cost justifiable compared to a single engine version. Which again means that it would very expensive, I only meant that airframe changes are cheaper than designing a new fighter from scratch.
 
I think we need to induct more J-10C and look for upgrade to various blocks of F-16. Also look for phasing out, in the next 5 years, of JFT Block I's and replace them with either III or further iteration of JFT given our resource restrictions.

Wait for J35 to prove itself and get familiar with the platform and technology. Wait for India to induct 5th Gen fighter and then decide on J35.
 
Is there any confirmation of receiving new Remaining J10 C on order after 20 /22 planes? Many social media sources are claiming of receiving new batch.
 
Metal 0-1 said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Didn't know fast food joint made jets
Click to expand...

For some people McDonalds burgers may fuel up their biological jet propulsion and twist the entire mental aerodynamics. Basic science.

Kind of disappointed @ImranKaDeewana786 got banned and his posts deleted. Don't know who was teaching him on Udemy but feels like he got scammed. For his benefit, if he is reading this, McDonnel* Douglas' (not McDonalds) MD-11 is based on DC-10, which had three engine design. The third engine was not introduced later. It was planned this way from the start.

Edit: DC-10 and MD-11 are wide body passenger aircraft. Aircraft of this weight and size class can incorporate third or fourth engine, and some do. This is not possible for fighter jets. None of the fighter jet has carried a third engine until now, i.e., J-36, which is also of different weight and size class. Overall the suggestion of three engine JF-17 is outright ludicrous and borderline lunatic.
 
Last edited:
meh_analysis said:
I think I got misunderstood. I meant that changing the structure and the aerodynamics of a fighter is much easier than designing a new fighter. With costs and time. Basically the cost and time of making new sensors and radar and electronic> changing the structure of the airframe to get more engines for a specific aircraft. But then again the JF-17 would need a new radar/sensors to go with the new power supply to make the operating cost justifiable compared to a single engine version. Which again means that it would very expensive, I only meant that airframe changes are cheaper than designing a new fighter from scratch.
Click to expand...
That also is a misnomer -
Unless the fighter has architecture that allows this or more so the change is “minimal” in terms of the focus only being on overall fuselage design for engine such ad F-5 to F-20 anything else becomes a completely different aircraft.

You should see what it took to design the Mirage 4000.
 
Oscar said:
That also is a misnomer -
Unless the fighter has architecture that allows this or more so the change is “minimal” in terms of the focus only being on overall fuselage design for engine such ad F-5 to F-20 anything else becomes a completely different aircraft.

You should see what it took to design the Mirage 4000.
Click to expand...
The F-5 to F-20 evolution is the ONE reason why I think PFX can have legs as a program. One can alter the JF-17 in some significant ways without necessarily busting the fundamental design. For ex., Northrop added new LEX, increased the size of the horizontal stabilizer, improved the flight control system, increased the proportion of composites relative to other parts, and so on.

So, the PFX can amount to a fairly significant update to the JF-17, albeit within the lightweight fighter class.

The issue is we haven't heard of NASTP engaging AVIC on further upgrading the JF-17. So, this doesn't sound great re: PFX, IMHO.
 
Aamir Hussain said:
I think we need to induct more J-10C and look for upgrade to various blocks of F-16. Also look for phasing out, in the next 5 years, of JFT Block I's and replace them with either III or further iteration of JFT given our resource restrictions.

Wait for J35 to prove itself and get familiar with the platform and technology. Wait for India to induct 5th Gen fighter and then decide on J35.
Click to expand...

Their are no Jf17 block 1s left

They have all been upgraded to block 2 now and their is no reason to phase them out

Mirages and PGs can go and be replaced with J10,s gradually

The JF35 won't come as quick as people think they will, Pakistan will wait a few years for the platform to mature and see where the project is heading in terms of support and sales and will carry out testing in Pakistani conditions

We will also keep a eye on India and unless we know they are heading towards a 5th gen purchase we won't make the jump ourselves



The Block 2s should carry the weight of day to day caps or patrol and can be used if needed in Afghanistan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 14 (members: 0, guests: 14)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top