JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 / Super-7 Discussions

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

4. (Max Takeoff weight - Operating weight empty) / Operating weight empty = 0.89
reference:
mig-23: 0.81
F-4E: 0.94
early type mig-29: 1.22
f-15 and F-16: above 1.4
Obviously, the FC-1 is constructed from a very low percentage of composite material. This will limit her max weapon load weight.

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

5.There were two blade props on the first prototype's wing. But after flight-testing, the test pilot found that it's unnecessary to add blade props on the wing. So this design has been canceled on the third prototype.

In flight-testing of the first prototype, we noticed that the empennage had been setted a big default angle when it took off. It seems like this prototype doesn't have the enough moment of a force to put up the nose.
So the empennage needs a big default angle to help the whole craft take off. We also noticed this default angle became smaller in the third prototype when he take off. I hope this problem which probably caused by design can be finally solved.

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

6.about weapon
air to air weapon can be used by FC-1:
short range: aim9L/9M, Python3/4, PL7/9, R73
mid range: aim7, R27, Derby, R77, V4, SD10

air to ground weapon:
57mm, 90mm rocket launcher, unguided bomb,AGM65(have doubt), laser guided bomb (have doubt)

FC-1 isn't a real multi-role fighter if it lacks better air to ground weapons.
Pak can buy advanced AtoG weapon from Russia and Israel. But both of them are not credible weapon provider. There has similar misgivings on the supply of engine(RD93).

In the last part, the writer give CAC some solving ways, including persuade(or attract) PLAA to purchase this aircraft in mass quantities.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

i don't think PLAAF will be buying FC-1s, it is no match for the lastest russian or western fighters lk JSF and EF2000. im thinking PLAAF will equip J-10A as low end fighter and J-XX(which JDW predicts will be in service b4 2015) as high end.

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

im thinking PLAAF will equip J-10A as low end fighter

J-10A is a mid end fighter in China(think about how many J6,J7 PLAAF has)
FC-1 can replace these very old aircraft.
It's too expensive to use J-10A to replace them in mass quantities.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

J-10A is a mid end fighter in China(think about how many J6,J7 PLAAF has) FC-1 can replace these very old aircraft. It's too expensive to use J-10A to replace them in mass quantities.

china is sliming down its airforce, so no need for a large force. J-10A cost about 30mil a piece from one of the article i read, which is about 6 mil cheaper than a JSF. with the economic growth now, china should be able to afford several hundred of these jets.

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

J-10A is a mid end fighter in China(think about how many J6,J7 PLAAF has) FC-1 can replace these very old aircraft. It's too expensive to use J-10A to replace them in mass quantities.

china is sliming down its airforce, so no need for a large force. J-10A cost about 30mil a piece from one of the article i read, which is about 6 mil cheaper than a JSF. with the economic growth now, china should be able to afford several hundred of these jets.

No, China is sliming down its (land)army ,enlarging Navy , maintaining the size of airforce and updating them

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

In flight-testing of the first prototype, we noticed that the empennage had been setted a big default angle when it took off. It seems like this prototype doesn't have the enough moment of a force to put up the nose.
So the empennage needs a big default angle to help the whole craft take off. We also noticed this default angle became smaller in the third prototype when he take off. I hope this problem which probably caused by design can be finally solved.

haha, I got some news about this paragraph. The writer said "Maybe they put too much in the nose " in the article. And someone confirmed this guess on writer's(Fangfang) website. They added a heavy thing(about 500kg) in first prototype's nose.

 

[adsH]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

In flight-testing of the first prototype, we noticed that the empennage had been setted a big default angle when it took off. It seems like this prototype doesn't have the enough moment of a force to put up the nose.
So the empennage needs a big default angle to help the whole craft take off. We also noticed this default angle became smaller in the third prototype when he take off. I hope this problem which probably caused by design can be finally solved.

haha, I got some news about this paragraph. The writer said "Maybe they put too much in the nose " in the article. And someone confirmed this guess on writer's(Fangfang) website. They added a heavy thing(about 500kg) in first prototype's nose.

One of those russian radars which are on the SU 30 !!! what are those called!!

Pak will use something Different they have Super griffo radar that has just finished development for the JF-17 so the JF-17 in service for PAF will be completely different !!! in-terms of Avionics radars and electronics.

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

adsH,if you think it's a rader, you misunderstand my meaning.
I will explain this later. But, at first ,who can translate two professional words in English for me? Thanks!!!
The first word means the aircraft's pneumatic center is behind the barycenter , so the aircraft is steady when it's flying. F-7 and other 2nd-generation fighters belong to this kind of aircraft.
The sencond word means the aircraft's barycenter is behind the pneumatic center , so the aircraft is unstable when it's flying and this aircraft need a Fly-by-wire Control System help itself to become steady. Su-27 and other 3rd-generation fighters belong to this kind of aircraft.

 

[adsH]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

adsH,if you think it's a rader, you misunderstand my meaning.
I will explain this later. But, at first ,who can translate two professional words in English for me? Thanks!!!
The first word means the aircraft's pneumatic center is behind the barycenter , so the aircraft is steady when it's flying. F-7 and other 2nd-generation fighters belong to this kind of aircraft.
The sencond word means the aircraft's barycenter is behind the pneumatic center , so the aircraft is unstable when it's flying and this aircraft need a Fly-by-wire Control System help itself to become steady. Su-27 and other 3rd-generation fighters belong to this kind of aircraft.

Ok lol i get, get yeah now i'm not an aeronautic person but i get the Fade picture now is that why they call these UNstable AirCrafts !!

 

[solid]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

They call these AirCrafts UNstable directly?
ok,FC-1 is a unstable AirCraft(I mean its barycenter is behind the pneumatic center). And the engineer need time to program the software of FC-1's Fly-by-wire Control System, otherwise he can't fly.
Someone of CAC wanted the prototype can take off as soon as possible, because this can give PAF more confidence in JF17 project.(you know PAF is the investor, so .... ) But the software of Fly-by-wire Control System can't be completed so quickly. So they added a definite weight on the first prototype's nose(foreside) and its barycenter moved forward. Then it became a stable AirCraft. But in the flight-testing, they found the head was too heavy, so they setted a big default angle on empennage to help FC1 to take off.
In the third prototype's flight-testing, maybe the software was completed. So there is no need to add unnecessary heavy things in the nose(foreside) and the empennage cameback to normal.

 

[adsH]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

They call these AirCrafts UNstable directly?
ok,FC-1 is a unstable AirCraft(I mean its barycenter is behind the pneumatic center). And the engineer need time to program the software of FC-1's Fly-by-wire Control System, otherwise he can't fly.
Someone of CAC wanted the prototype can take off as soon as possible, because this can give PAF more confidence in JF17 project.(you know PAF is the investor, so .... ) But the software of Fly-by-wire Control System can't be completed so quickly. So they added a definite weight on the first prototype's nose(foreside) and its barycenter moved forward. Then it became a stable AirCraft. But in the flight-testing, they find the head was too heavy, so they setted a big default angle on empennage to help FC1 to take off.
In the third prototype's flight-testing, maybe the software was completed. So there is no need to add unnecessary heavy things in the nose(foreside) and the empennage cameback to normal.

Great so every thing Turned out great !! thanx for all the details !!

Message to GF are yeah getting all this!!!

 

[SABRE]

Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

I dont think that EF-2000 is any way closer to F/A-22. But there is one Jet that comes very close to F/A-22 & thats Russian S-37. How can Russians relax with F/A-22 they ve to do some thing. S-37 is also stealth like F/A-22. Flies almost at the same speed.

I ve got the pics of the jet I just dont know how to past it on his link.

 

[adsH]

Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

I dont think that EF-2000 is any way closer to F/A-22. But there is one Jet that comes very close to F/A-22 & thats Russian S-37. How can Russians relax with F/A-22 they ve to do some thing. S-37 is also stealth like F/A-22. Flies almost at the same speed.

I ve got the pics of the jet I just dont know how to past it on his link.

THe EF 2000 might not be stealth but it was never intended to be Stealth the JSF was the main Stealth project the F 22 is not that much of a stealth it has aspects that are Stealthy but they are also ridiculously expensive. believe it or not the EF 2000 is better Value for money and i bet it would perform alot better than a Raptor. it is still the most Advance CFAC in production to date. I know the RAPTOR WHEN IT COMES into Production would push the EF2000 in its SHADow!!
BUt its a great effort with the BEst the UK and partners had.

EF2000 is Close to the Raptor (the ONly thing Raptor might have better is its deign apart from that our AC the EF2000 has better Avionics and radars i think!!) you must be referring to the JSF Joint Strike Fighter now thats a Gen ahead thats the Joint Venture were making the Wings COmponents and the some body parts and the Electrics and the Main Power plant for hovering around. this will be a Brillaint AC with Loads of suppliers from Different NAtions contributeing this will truely defeine the NEXT Gen of AC it will be CHeap and Brilliant.

 

[mysterious]

Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

Man!! I can see just how much we all have squeezed this thread off the subject matter, so much so, that there aint anything significant left to discuss; and I can see people around here now talking about almost anything but the JF-17.

 

[adsH]

Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

Man!! I can see just how much we all have squeezed this thread off the subject matter, so much so, that there aint anything significant left to discuss; and I can see people around here now talking about almost anything but the JF-17.

they have new thread where Solid is translating from the A chinese Mag article. you must of seen that post all the Problems that are and were on the JF-17.

I would recomend some ONe should Merge these two threads!!

 

[mysterious]

Re: an article about FC-1 scanned from a chinese magazine

With this new 'wierd' article coming out on JF-17 (the interpretation of which is, I guess, only as good as the interpretor. Not to offend solid but like he said, he hasnt been in touch with Chinese much in the last 19 years or so); we need some expert advice/comments from GF (gary). I wonder where he is nowadays. :smokingc:

 

[Bravo]

JF17 vs F16 can some body compair both aircrafts
over and out :help

 

[adsH]

JF17 vs F16 can some body compair both aircrafts
over and out :help

Which Variant of F-16