Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 627

Thread: AVIC JF-17 Thunder versus SAAB JAS-39 Gripen

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,389
    Quote Originally Posted by JSLLL4 View Post
    Oh wow Japanese, US, S. Korean, German companies. Whatever do they make besides poisonous things like coke and TVs and automobiles and batteries and computers and internet and cellphones and paint and pesticides that they put in wood in houses, detergents, killing machines etc.? They have turned the world upside down in under 100 years. At this rate, the human race would be poisoned to death within another few hundred years. Did you know almost half of couples have incredible difficulty conceiving children due to poison? Yeah.
    And this is why the ignore button exists.

    I guess China knows something about poison, given all those recent toxic river spills and all.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,043
    How many TF-17 are built sofar or what is used as a lead-in trainer in the meanwhile?!

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,389
    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    Why is the RD 93 being used then?

    RD 93 is not even close to the F414-400 in terms of MTBO/Life span. Forget the EDE.
    Modern versions of RD-33 have life of 4000 hours. Now I am not sure what the life of the RD-93 is, but I don't think F-414 has THAT much more service life.

    RD-33 family is one of the most underrated engines IMO.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,043
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Modern versions of RD-33 have life of 4000 hours. Now I am not sure what the life of the RD-93 is, but I don't think F-414 has THAT much more service life.

    RD-33 family is one of the most underrated engines IMO.
    When it comes about the first real export-attempts later on we will learn more about that.
    When the info-board in Izmir is correct the new PAF J-17s are equipped with the higher rated RD-93 of 8800 kp?! That gains come seldom along with more service life at first.

    http://china-defense.blogspot.de/200...lets-here.html

    Just found and it shows the WS-13 development has still some way to go by that yardstick.
    4000 hours for the RD-33MK is ok if kept for the single engine use RD-93MK.
    Last edited by Sens; 19th March 2012 at 23:58.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,673
    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    I know most of the VW lineup ( Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Seat, Skoda, Porsche, Audi, VW) The entire tech is developed in Germany. The only time I see Chinese being involved is during localisation and in some cases because Chinese Government does not allow certification to be done outside or because some information is not allowed to be taken outside like Navteq maps etc. EA888, B6, B3 Bluemotion, PDK, DSG, EWB, ENSS, quattro, TSI, W16, blah blah blah every damn thing is developed in Germany. I hear test runs in Ehra Lessien every week. 0 tests done in China. Only road test for locally manufactured kits. VW outsources manufacturing, SW, Support, Financing. Everything else is designed in EU!!! Same with Apple, Sony, Samsung, Intel, Seagate and 100000 other companies. Have you seen the top 500 Patent applicants in EU and US??? Its dominated by Japanese, US, S. Korean, German companies.

    This kind of split up is typical right up to 300 or so

    China is a labour and manufacturing base.
    I can't speak for GM. I live there for a year only.
    Entire tech is developed in Germany?. There are alot of parts that are not developed in Germany.

    http://www.alpine.com/e/corporate/news/20040628/

    http://blogs.wsj.com/source/2012/03/...or-in-germany/
    China Is Leading Foreign Investor in Germany
    Japan Auto Market is half the size of 1990s. Japanese cannot afford there own manufactured goods. Inflation is artificially depressed by importing.
    They need Chinese labor to manufacture and consumers to remain profitable. That gap is increasing each year not just because of money and labor but higher energy prices. Chinese have access to shale gas/cheaper gas from Central Asia. Japan buys super expensive LNG. Its Nuclear reactors getting old and unsafe. lack of hard currency (they have to support Yen) give further edge to Chinese to lock raw materials at much lower prices. Make no doubt about it Japan/Germany cannot survive without China.

    some people here are making strange claim of diverting that limited capital, energy and skilled labor to manufacture 21st century weopon systmes

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,389
    Hmmm, never realized, both JF-17 and LCA use the same cannon, good old GSh-23-2.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Sens View Post
    How many TF-17 are built sofar or what is used as a lead-in trainer in the meanwhile?!
    AFAIK, 42 built so far operating in 3 squadrons. http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-jf-17-364763/

    Training is by means of simulators in the last post of page 5.

    Hmmm, never realized, both JF-17 and LCA use the same cannon, good old GSh-23-2.
    LOL cannon, such obsolete technology.
    Last edited by JSLLL4; 20th March 2012 at 00:29.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,043
    The first squadrons (26/16) are all from a tactical attack wing.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,559
    LOL cannon, such obsolete technology.
    The one thing that can never be countered. I reckon in future even the modern short range missiles will be defeated by DIRCMs, new Jammers may make the new AMRAAMs & Meteors fail.

    The gun will always kill.
    Love Planes, Live Planes

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by quadbike View Post
    The one thing that can never be countered. I reckon in future even the modern short range missiles will be defeated by DIRCMs, new Jammers may make the new AMRAAMs & Meteors fail.

    The gun will always kill.
    Good point. However, an AVIC PL-10 imaging infrared BVR air-to-air virtually cannot be countered.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-A...mozTocId299418

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JYC6Z2trGR...25283%2529.jpg

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kiu3Oh0T5h...25282%2529.jpg

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,462
    I asked the chap to look up the F-16 dsi test pilots comments and he answers with a wiki. Yes, that's the kind of people we need to comment about technical matters - not.

    In summary, the DSI was noted to give benefits across the flight profile, and generally felt like the (block 30) f-16 was powered with the more powerful GE engine.


    The new inlet showed slightly better subsonic specific excess power than a production inlet and that verified the overall system benefits of eliminating the diverter. Test pilots remarked that military power settings and thrust characteristics were very similar to standard production F-16 aircraft with the same General Electric F110-GE-129 engine. Considering the overall goal of the flight test program was to demonstrate the viability of this advanced inlet technology, the results were excellent.
    http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=58
    Last edited by PLA-MKII; 20th March 2012 at 03:07.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    891
    aha, F-16 quotes from codeonemagazine.
    HAL - one step ahead of IBM

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Boom View Post
    aha, F-16 quotes from codeonemagazine.
    Just take any magazine you like that discussed the performance of the DSI block 30 with the test pilot. This is well known and well documented.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by JSLLL4 View Post
    Chinese people lived in harmony with nature for thousands of years. Unlike Egypt, Babylon, and the Meso-American civilizations, Chinese farmers never degraded the soil. Westerners introduced poisons such as LCD radiation, batteries, nuclear power and waste, toxic automobile emissions, electromagnetic waves, pesticides, detergents etc. to China in the 20th century.
    I

    JUST

    PISSED MYSELF

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,237
    Quote Originally Posted by quadbike View Post
    The gun will always kill.
    Amen
    “Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!”

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,165
    Originally Posted by JSLLL4
    Chinese people lived in harmony with nature for thousands of years. Unlike Egypt, Babylon, and the Meso-American civilizations, Chinese farmers never degraded the soil. Westerners introduced poisons such as LCD radiation, batteries, nuclear power and waste, toxic automobile emissions, electromagnetic waves, pesticides, detergents etc. to China in the 20th century.



    OH, THE EVIL DETERGENTS AND THE ELECTROMAGNETIC PESTICIDES...
    But worse, much worse than that, Westerners (of the evil Anglo Saxonic westerner type) introduced the Monty Pyton´s to the world.

    And let me guess, you work in here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Min...of_Silly_Walks


    Silly Bunny...
    Last edited by Sintra; 20th March 2012 at 11:37.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    322
    I read this thread for its comedy value...

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    113
    Comedic value of the thread aside, to correct one misunderstanding, the wing operating JF-17s has been re-classified from the Tactical attack to the Multirole mission & both squadrons have achieved IOC with 26 sqdrn very close to FOC (within next 6-8 months if it goes to schedule).
    The weapons which have been integrated as of present are
    1) AAMs: Pl-5E, PL-9C, MAA-1A, MAA-1B, AIM-9L/M & SD-10 B.
    2) AGMs/ASHMs: C-802/3, C-802AKG, Raad & MAR-1
    3)Guided Bombs: PavewayII series, Chinese equivalent of JDAMS, H-2 & H-4 plus a chinese winged glide bomb
    Apart from above add the normal dumb munitions & integration for a few other weapons including 'special' is currently underway.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by redgriffin View Post
    Comedic value of the thread aside, to correct one misunderstanding, the wing operating JF-17s has been re-classified from the Tactical attack to the Multirole mission & both squadrons have achieved IOC with 26 sqdrn very close to FOC (within next 6-8 months if it goes to schedule).
    The weapons which have been integrated as of present are
    1) AAMs: Pl-5E, PL-9C, MAA-1A, MAA-1B, AIM-9L/M & SD-10 B.
    2) AGMs/ASHMs: C-802/3, C-802AKG, Raad & MAR-1
    3)Guided Bombs: PavewayII series, Chinese equivalent of JDAMS, H-2 & H-4 plus a chinese winged glide bomb
    Apart from above add the normal dumb munitions & integration for a few other weapons including 'special' is currently underway.
    so the JF-17 hasn't achieved FOC as yet? For some reason I thought that it had since it had been accepted into service.
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    ShangHai
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by PLA-MKII View Post
    No, actually it wouldn't, they are in different
    J-10: 9750
    May I ask where is the source for this 9750?
    Quote Originally Posted by JSR View Post
    is contract signed with manufacturing schedule. Meteor is best missile out there? and will it be best missile for ever. as so little is manufactured.
    for some reason Gripen Nose from side profile looks thinner.
    If my memory works well, the top speed for initial version of JF-17 was supposed to be M1.8, whereas the recent version was down to M.1.6 by DSI's contribution.
    The climb rate for JAS-39 is no less than 250m/s and any great data out of JF-17?
    The ITR and STR for JAS-39 officially claimed as 30d/s and 20d/s, what about JF-17?
    And there is an assurance for one who claimed advantage on JF-17's side lacking confidence of roll rate comparison between JF-17 and JAS-39.
    The truth usually between two extremes, the key is when and where.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Near Colombo, Sri Lanka
    Posts
    961

    Question

    Since this is a JAS-39 Vs. JF-17 *you know what* measuring contests...

    Has anyone seen the difference between airshow minimum radius turns of the 2 planes? Best for Gripen i've seen is 15-16s.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    113
    FOC is generally an incremental process (integration of weapons & logistics, tactics development & implementation, setting up of a training core/cadre for the system) in all airforces with new aircraft achieving it sometime after service acceptance.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,462

    Arrow

    no, you have it wrong, initially it was 1.6 M and now it is 1.8.
    ---


    Those weapon integration figures are a bit off, we don't have any information in Ra'ad integration yet. Also, no PL-9C has ever been seen with the JF-17s, nor even semi-official leaks related to it (IMHO).

    I just don't know why it is okay to crow on and on about the Eurofighter and Rafale (for an indiscriminate amount of threads) not to mention many other d$(# measuring contests but the one thread to be ridiculed is this one.
    ----

    I am actually going to report any further offtopic, useless posts on this thread, mind you its not fair and not gentlemanly.

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Modern versions of RD-33 have life of 4000 hours. Now I am not sure what the life of the RD-93 is, but I don't think F-414 has THAT much more service life.

    RD-33 family is one of the most underrated engines IMO.
    Very true, the PAF is very impressed although initially they were sceptical of this rugged Russian engine. Its advertising 98kN, which is very impressive IMHO. I just don't like slight smoke that's still lingering.

    About the JF-17 turn radius:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5aUGum2EiM

    And that is an LRIP plane if i recall right and it is probably not pulling all Gs - its her first ever public show on Pakistan's national day, no room for errors. This is meaningless though because its a lot about what altitude and what speed rather than just a turn radius on a screen.

    IMHO the JF-17 may have the edge upto 15k and then the gripen has the edge. Also, (again just guessing) the JF-17 may have the better instantaneous turn rates and the Gripen the better sustained turn rates. (possible but then the wing area says the opposite). Probably very closely matched although using different methods to get their sustained and instantaneous turn rates. Overall I think the Gripen has the edge.
    Last edited by PLA-MKII; 21st March 2012 at 10:38.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,043
    Quote Originally Posted by PLA-MKII View Post
    Very true, the PAF is very impressed although initially they were sceptical of this rugged Russian engine. Its advertising 98kN, which is very impressive IMHO. I just don't like slight smoke that's still lingering. ...
    88 kN or close to 9 tons is the present advertised value.

    "The terms of the contract signed by Rosoboronexport and China in 2005 for the delivery of 100 RD-93 engines for FC-1 fighters, along with parts and service, for $267 million is also under strain for a different reason. Russia was supposed to deliver 15 engines by September, but only ten have been delivered so far: the Chinese have refused to accept the remaining five because of technical problems, and delivery has now been pushed back to December. China is additionally suggesting that that RD-93 be modernized and its thrust increased from 8.3 to 9 tons in order to pump up the tactical-technical specifications of the FC-1. Rosoboronexport has yet to make a decision, since the modified RD-93 has not been completely developed yet in Russia." ... to reach a TBO close to 4000 hours in the end.

  26. #176
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,389
    So how many RD-93s has China/Pakistan bought in total? 100 initial batch, 100 second batch?
    Would also be nice to get confirmation on thrust levels of 2nd batch, and if they indeed RD-93MK.
    Last edited by TR1; 21st March 2012 at 16:18.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  27. #177
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by redgriffin View Post
    FOC is generally an incremental process (integration of weapons & logistics, tactics development & implementation, setting up of a training core/cadre for the system) in all airforces with new aircraft achieving it sometime after service acceptance.
    Yes I know that, but what surprised me is that already nearly 26 or more JF-17s have been inducted into service..that’s a large number for a fighter that hasn’t yet achieved FOC. But I guess it might have something to do with the A-5’s retirement and the need to induct a fighter to replace them in service.
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  28. #178
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by PLA-MKII View Post
    IMHO the JF-17 may have the edge upto 15k and then the gripen has the edge. Also, (again just guessing) the JF-17 may have the better instantaneous turn rates and the Gripen the better sustained turn rates. (possible but then the wing area says the opposite). Probably very closely matched although using different methods to get their sustained and instantaneous turn rates. Overall I think the Gripen has the edge.
    On what basis are you making these guesses? Does the JF-17 have a lower wing loading than the Gripen does? What would make the JF-17's ITR better than that of the Gripen?

    Please provide some solid evidence rather than just guessing that the JF-17 may be better than the Gripen that is advertised as having an ITR of 30 deg/sec, STR of 20 deg/sec and roll rate of 240 deg/sec.
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  29. #179
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,673
    Quote Originally Posted by emile View Post
    May I ask where is the source for this 9750?

    If my memory works well, the top speed for initial version of JF-17 was supposed to be M1.8, whereas the recent version was down to M.1.6 by DSI's contribution.
    The climb rate for JAS-39 is no less than 250m/s and any great data out of JF-17?
    The ITR and STR for JAS-39 officially claimed as 30d/s and 20d/s, what about JF-17?
    And there is an assurance for one who claimed advantage on JF-17's side lacking confidence of roll rate comparison between JF-17 and JAS-39.
    250m/sec is nothing special. Gripen is relative heavy weight fighter considering the amount of composite used. with small fuel capacity relative to its size (aka wing area) with small nose.
    see the slide at 4:20 seconds on.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7tuiaeS_kc

  30. #180
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by JSR View Post
    250m/sec is nothing special. Gripen is relative heavy weight fighter considering the amount of composite used. with small fuel capacity relative to its size (aka wing area) with small nose.
    see the slide at 4:20 seconds on.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7tuiaeS_kc
    8 G´s ? 750m landing run ? 15 years later ? Oh well , but its made in China so in it self THAT must make it superior like everything else with that stamp as we in the free western world know all to well

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES