ThoroughPro
Registered Member
Why don't you shove one engine up your blackhole, become a drone, and blow yourself on Taliban.yes sir, i have done aerodynamics course in respected college.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why don't you shove one engine up your blackhole, become a drone, and blow yourself on Taliban.yes sir, i have done aerodynamics course in respected college.
Come on, man. No need to hit below the belt. Let the man keep his dream alive, he's a visionary and lately there aren't many around.Why don't you shove one engine up your blackhole, become a drone, and blow yourself on Taliban.
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 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
Sorry new account, first time posting. I should've greeted and stuff first ikAlt account isn't it??
if he's a troll then, gotta give it to himYou need to chill. How long have you been on PDF? The number of delusional members is at a record low. And that guy is a troll.
Didn't know fast food joint made jets
He will be back sir, his blocking is temporary I thinkRIP Imran Khan ka deewana
He is indian pretending to be Pakistani.
Here we go againHe is indian pretending to be Pakistani.
That also is a misnomer -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.
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.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.
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.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.