Redesigned JF-17 prototype revealed at Beijing Airshow

[corzair]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

This smoke was pointed out by few members here about a year ago. I think we were discussing pictures of JF-17 PT-2/3. Changes seemed predictable since than & have come pretty quickly.

How would changing the inlets effect the smoke problem?
I aint technical in engines so would genuinely like to know!

also how will the leading egdes changes help

the aircrat is looking more like the F20 tigershark too
a plane its be compared with.

Are the still going for the mod mig29 engines or anymore news on that front?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

How would changing the inlets effect the smoke problem?
I aint technical in engines so would genuinely like to know!

The shock ramps near the inlets have got nothing to do with an engine smoke problem - thats an engine design issue. It can be mitigated by using chemical injectors, but thats not the norm for your average front line fighter.

also how will the leading egdes changes help

Redesign of the leading edges means changes to things like lift, turn rate, changes to cruise level, even RCS.

 

[_saad_]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Has Pakistan ever mentioned that they are having problems with the jf-17's engine?

 

[Falcon-16]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

According to my information,No!
and as far as smokin problen is concern,it may be solved with DSI!

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

I Know It's a Big challenge to india Su-30MKI

new JF-17 looks like F/A-18E/F+JSF .

You know what, this "new" design sure looks like the long defunct F20 Tigershark that was being built by Northrop in the mid eighties. As far as being a challenge for any western fighter, or for that matter the SU-30MKI, well, lets see it fly first, then lets see if it has the legs and the agility to compete with the big boys! Also, JSF is STOVL., are you trying to imply that this design has vertical landing capabilty?

I don't think so, maybe it looks cute, but as far a capablilty..........

 

[gf0012-aust]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Also, JSF is STOVL., are you trying to imply that this design has vertical landing capabilty?

Only the JSF "B" model is VSTOL - the core model is CTOL

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Put some Cannards on this jet and it starts looking more like a JAS Gripen.

HAHAHAHA Yeah, sort of reminds me of most chinese military aircraft, either the idea is reverse engineered or just plain stolen, like when the Soviets were shipping MiG 21's to North Vietnam during the Vietnam War by train, they had to go through China, and when they were uncrated, the Russian Tech's found all the Electronics removed and replaced with Chinese electronics. Hey, you got a prototype that hasn't made the cut, simply sell it to China, they could use it no problem!

 

[Elite-Pilot]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

You know what, this "new" design sure looks like the long defunct F20 Tigershark that was being built by Northrop in the mid eighties. As far as being a challenge for any western fighter, or for that matter the SU-30MKI, well, lets see it fly first, then lets see if it has the legs and the agility to compete with the big boys! Also, JSF is STOVL., are you trying to imply that this design has vertical landing capabilty?

I don't think so, maybe it looks cute, but as far a capablilty..........

-F-20 does not have DSI intake

-avionics and radars are fully different

-looks might be similar to the proto 3, but does not compare to FC-1 simply cause of the F-18 look alike egdes that are bigger than the ones on F-20

-This air-craft is likely to have another Naval variant(the F-20 does not)

-Fc-1 is capable of carrying more missiles than the F-20

[ Admin: Leave moderating to mods. ]

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

How would changing the inlets effect the smoke problem?
I aint technical in engines so would genuinely like to know!

also how will the leading egdes changes help

the aircrat is looking more like the F20 tigershark too
a plane its be compared with.

Are the still going for the mod mig29 engines or anymore news on that front?

Inlets have nothing to do with engine smoke trouble. For example, for those of you familiar with the J79 engine series that powered the F4 and F104 and the RA5C, the engine smoke problem was done by modifying the way the engine burned fuel while in military power, not afterburner.

Inlet design has no effect at all on how much smoke an engine produces!

 

[Elite-Pilot]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

Put some Cannards on this jet and it starts looking more like a JAS Gripen.

If canards are put on this jet, they wouold interfere with the DSI system directly behind them...forcing the PAC,CAC to come up with a new design.


BREAKING NEWS!!

the WS-10A has finished its testing stage:gun :gun

Now we dont need those "PEOPLE" in Russia to give us permission! I think that proto 4 should be tested with WS-10A by Gen. Ehsan. Therefore.. if the enigine meets the standards of the PAF we can buy those and put them on the JF-17,agreed?

 

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

WS-10A is for J-10/J-11B, not JF-17. The indigenous JF-17 engine WS-13A is still under development.

 

[Elite-Pilot]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

whoopsy daisy...i forgot

what about the WS-13? any updates?

 

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

whoopsy daisy...i forgot

what about the WS-13? any updates?

still developing, probably should be ready by the time JF-17 is ready for production in 2007, if not, then 2008.
[ http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/rules.phpp - no external forum URLS ]
WS-13, dry thrust 5.5 kN, thrust afterburn 9 kN and T/W ratio 8.0

 

[SABRE]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

BREAKING NEWS!!

the WS-10A has finished its testing stage:gun :gun

Now we dont need those "PEOPLE" in Russia to give us permission! I think that proto 4 should be tested with WS-10A by Gen. Ehsan. Therefore.. if the enigine meets the standards of the PAF we can buy those and put them on the JF-17,agreed?

WS-10A is too big & too wide to fit into FC-1/JF-17 Thunder & has more thrust than JF-17 can handle.

WS-10A was mainly produced for J-10. Its TVC versions may be used for J-XX prototype.

You need RD-93/99 reverse engineered version for JF-17. Since China has 100 of them by the time 50-50 respective Thunders are produced CAC-PAC would probably reverse it.

 

[Elite-Pilot]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

RD-93= 45% of aquiring

RD-99=35% of aquiring

this is my view...we might have to go for another engine

 

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

o the range of the missile shows that thunder must have latest radar more then 150km range but now it only has limited options i.e.

KLJ-10: There is not much known about this Chinese Radar, it is a probably a variant of radar used on J-10. It has met PAF's requirements and therefore has been chosen for initial batch. One can get some idea of its capability by looking at other Radars, whose Manufacturers were/are competing for JF-17/FC-1 Radar Contract.

RC-400: This Radar is believed to have a range of around 100 KM and can track as many as 32 targets.

Griffo S7: Range is about 100KM, Simultaneous engagement of atleast 2 targets.

Kopyo-F: This Phased-Array Radar has range of about 75 KM. It can track 20 targets and engage 4 simulataneously.


Elta EL/M 2032: Air-to-Air detection and tracking range up to 80 NM.

If SD-10 has a range of 70 KM and AIM-120A/B even shorter than that, what makes you think 150KM is needed?

Anyhow, your numbers for the radars are overestimated too.
Kopyo can only track 10 targets and has detection range of 50KM or less against 5 M^2 for all directions. Don't believe me? Check the manufacturer's specs. I got a picture of Kopyo-F's specs, but it's from an external forum.

As for RC-400, even the official site hasn't posted the actual specs for it, it just stated that it can target more than one aircraft.
http://www.thalesgroup.com/all/pdf/rc400.pdf for RC-400 info. Think about it this way, RDY-2 can track 24 targets and it is for Mirage-2K5 and 2K9 aircraft, how would a RC-400 built for lower power consumption be able to track 32?

Grifo is the most likely one. Considering elta-2035 couldn't beat out KLJ-3 for J-10, I doubt elta-2032 can beat out KLJ-7.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

If SD-10 has a range of 70 KM and AIM-120A/B even shorter than that, what makes you think 150KM is needed?

Anyhow, your numbers for the radars are overestimated too.
Kopyo can only track 10 targets and has detection range of 50KM or less against 5 M^2 for all directions. Don't believe me? Check the manufacturer's specs. I got a picture of Kopyo-F's specs, but it's from an external forum.

As for RC-400, even the official site hasn't posted the actual specs for it, it just stated that it can target more than one aircraft.
http://www.thalesgroup.com/all/pdf/rc400.pdf for RC-400 info. Think about it this way, RDY-2 can track 24 targets and it is for Mirage-2K5 and 2K9 aircraft, how would a RC-400 built for lower power consumption be able to track 32?

tphuang, this sounds like the Radar that is currently on the MiG 31 Foxhound. I apologise if I cannot remember the actual radar name, but phased array, multile target engagement capablity..hmmm, sounds like that system exactly, but that system is rather large with a large antennae array.

And that of course dictates the fuselage width, systems etc.

But, the trouble is that that powerful a system will be detectable long before it detects! While western radars have been there and done that, as in the radar described, it will in no way give an advantage anymore in current modern air combat senarios, probably the best and most realistic will be hunting down and killing any cruise missiles that have penetrated chinese air defense, as far as having a BVR missile that can make use of such a radar, I would have to say that again the Ammramski will again be the likely candidate, but then again, as in all cases of speculation, that is anyones guess. A 150 KM range missile?

 

[tphuang]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

tphuang, this sounds like the Radar that is currently on the MiG 31 Foxhound. I apologise if I cannot remember the actual radar name, but phased array, multile target engagement capablity..hmmm, sounds like that system exactly, but that system is rather large with a large antennae array.

And that of course dictates the fuselage width, systems etc.

But, the trouble is that that powerful a system will be detectable long before it detects! While western radars have been there and done that, as in the radar described, it will in no way give an advantage anymore in current modern air combat senarios, probably the best and most realistic will be hunting down and killing any cruise missiles that have penetrated chinese air defense, as far as having a BVR missile that can make use of such a radar, I would have to say that again the Ammramski will again be the likely candidate, but then again, as in all cases of speculation, that is anyones guess. A 150 KM range missile?

you mean Zaslon? http://www.danshistory.com/foxhound.html
It has much greater range than Kopyo-F. Kopyo-F is for small planes like JF-17 and LCA and bisons.

As for the RR-77, the 150KM range is a little overrated like all other Russian specs. It's measured at a very hard to duplicate scenario where two planes are coming at each other at Mach 1.5 at 20KM altitude. Wheras American range are calculated at 10KM altitude with planes coming at Mach 1.2 at each other. Clearly, the air is more dense at 10KM altitude, so missile will travel shorter distance and also it helps to have that Mach 0.3 edge in initial velocity. Also, the standard RR-77's range is much less than that.

As for cruise missile vs China, they'd have to face the x number of S-300 variant SAMs.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

you mean Zaslon? http://www.danshistory.com/foxhound.html
It has much greater range than Kopyo-F. Kopyo-F is for small planes like JF-17 and LCA and bisons.

As for the RR-77, the 150KM range is a little overrated like all other Russian specs. It's measured at a very hard to duplicate scenario where two planes are coming at each other at Mach 1.5 at 20KM altitude. Wheras American range are calculated at 10KM altitude with planes coming at Mach 1.2 at each other. Clearly, the air is more dense at 10KM altitude, so missile will travel shorter distance and also it helps to have that Mach 0.3 edge in initial velocity. Also, the standard RR-77's range is much less than that.

As for cruise missile vs China, they'd have to face the x number of S-300 variant SAMs.

Yes, Missile specs are full of variables, The only effective Cruise Missile Defense is a layered defense involving not only SAM Missiles, but also aircraft, either the classic Point Defense types, or a longer ranged Interceptor that can attrite the missiles even before they are engaged by primary Defenses, hence the need for standing CAP of Interveptors that have the endurance to patrol for hours 200-300 miles outside the Airspace of China. Is the S-300 the equivilent of the SA 6?

 

[kashifshahzad]

Re: BeiJing news from show: New strong JF-17 alike JSF with "DSI"

If SD-10 has a range of 70 KM and AIM-120A/B even shorter than that, what makes you think 150KM is needed?

Anyhow, your numbers for the radars are overestimated too.
Kopyo can only track 10 targets and has detection range of 50KM or less against 5 M^2 for all directions. Don't believe me? Check the manufacturer's specs. I got a picture of Kopyo-F's specs, but it's from an external forum.

As for RC-400, even the official site hasn't posted the actual specs for it, it just stated that it can target more than one aircraft.
http://www.thalesgroup.com/all/pdf/rc400.pdf for RC-400 info. Think about it this way, RDY-2 can track 24 targets and it is for Mirage-2K5 and 2K9 aircraft, how would a RC-400 built for lower power consumption be able to track 32?

Grifo is the most likely one. Considering elta-2035 couldn't beat out KLJ-3 for J-10, I doubt elta-2032 can beat out KLJ-7.

I just wanted atleast thunder could see the there are threats comong form other side and in this way it can inform the other squardons that thunders cant handle this situation more and other types of planes are needed to handle the enemy aircrafts (i mean to say the MKIs )if a thunders come infront of a MKI there is no chance that thunder can escape.Firstly the MKI will be watching thunder form a distance of 300+KM and if MKI thinks that the thunder is alone or there are a few thunders there then it can know down all the thunders.
Atleast thunder must have a powerfull radar their Bisons have that then why we cant have that on thunders.
About the missiles there are two posibilities first is that the RR-77 doesnot have 170KM range and the second is that it does have.In first situation thunder can come infront of the MKI and there will be a fare battle and about the second posibility if it does have the range then all of PAFs plane have to run and they will not come infornt of MKIs.