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

L

Londo Molari

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

Nobody knows.

I think its pretty much complete as far as prototyping and testing goes. I think the radar still has to be finalized.

After the first public flight in September they announced that the first batch of 12 aircraft will be delivered to Pakistan in a year where they will under-go training. And serial production will begin in two years.

No more public flights I guess. We'll have to wait for delivery around next september.
 
Y

yutong chen

New Member
FC-1 is probably in service, Chinese covers their military very well. By the time it goes public, the equipment is already old news inside the government.
 
M

Munir

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

Latest rumour is that the wingarea is going to increased. 33%. I have posted some pics a few weeks ago after doing some research... Just shed your light on it... Thanks

actual design


my design...

[/url]
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

If they want to increase lift then it would be better to have vaned canards, easier to do structurally and would noticeably change dogfighting ability (turn issues) also it would reduce take off and landing length.

A larger wing area will increase lift and be useful for sub 40,000 ft, but not much help above that. (IMO)
 
M

Munir

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

Canards are not only handy... I have seen several tests and the final plane never got it... Just think about AFTI F16 or the Dreyden F15... The problem with the JF17 is the very small area... The wing loading is to high... And if you look at the location then the tailwings are small and placed forward compared to later model F16... Besides that the main wing is extremely small... Just look careful at most landing pics or even ground pics... The tail is allways in the pushing upward position... There is some reason for that...

Cheers.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

Munir said:
Canards are not only handy... I have seen several tests and the final plane never got it... Just think about AFTI F16 or the Dreyden F15... The problem with the JF17 is the very small area... The wing loading is to high... And if you look at the location then the tailwings are small and placed forward compared to later model F16... Besides that the main wing is extremely small... Just look careful at most landing pics or even ground pics... The tail is allways in the pushing upward position... There is some reason for that...

Cheers.
Click to expand...
thats true, but the main issue is that by increasing the main wing area you are going to end up with an impact on:

chord ratio
fuselage barrel
a main wing rebuild

you could try blending the main wings into more of a chine, or you could look at redesigning the rear edge (as opposed to adding to the leading edge)

but, adding canards, incresing the surface area of the rear wings, blending or adding a larger chine may be easier than a main wing rebuild.

a main wing rebuild by increasing surface area will load more stress on the centre barrel.
 
P

PAF GIRL

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

gf0012 said:
If they want to increase lift then it would be better to have vaned canards, easier to do structurally and would noticeably change dogfighting ability (turn issues) also it would reduce take off and landing length.

A larger wing area will increase lift and be useful for sub 40,000 ft, but not much help above that. (IMO)
Click to expand...
canards would be better plus they maybe easier to add and help the jet in intense dog fight manuveours.
 
S

shamsi

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

PAF GIRL said:
gf0012 said:
If they want to increase lift then it would be better to have vaned canards, easier to do structurally and would noticeably change dogfighting ability (turn issues) also it would reduce take off and landing length.

A larger wing area will increase lift and be useful for sub 40,000 ft, but not much help above that. (IMO)
Click to expand...
canards would be better plus they maybe easier to add and help the jet in intense dog fight manuveours.
Click to expand...
Easier to add? Oh how easy to assume! Perhaps duct tape and waxed string are used for riveting and FBW?
 
E

elkaboingo

New Member
depends which type of canard they are. if theyre the moving type (like eurofighter and other new planes) it will be expensive, but greatly increase the maneuvreablilty of the plane. if its the normal ones that cannot move, they are very easy to fit on.
 
R

Red aRRow

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

Just adding canards is a very difficult proposition. The whole aerodynamic structure of the plane will be completely altered. I think the canard thing should have been done in the design phase if ever. Just adding canards to a plane as an afterthought would be just that...an afterthought.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Re: FC-1 / Super 7 / JF-17

shamayel said:
Just adding canards is a very difficult proposition. The whole aerodynamic structure of the plane will be completely altered. I think the canard thing should have been done in the design phase if ever. Just adding canards to a plane as an afterthought would be just that...an afterthought.
Click to expand...

Agreed, there aren't too many that have been effectively retro fitted. The Israelis did it with the Nesher and Kfir Mirage derivatives, and that made a substantial performance difference.

Even the SU-34 looks like a retro fit that was hastily added. Awesome looking aircraft though.

Adding a conformal chine, or adding canards could be done, but the end cost/performance benefit ratio would have to make any govt accounting office get a little tense.
 
D

darklegent

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

I have to know one thing....plz reply to this query.
We all are aware that the Russians have denied the RD series of engine. What are the serial production version to fly with. Please friends I want the truth some kind of proof, not speculations.
 
U

umair

Peace Enforcer
Well legent, that Russian denial thing is a HOAX one mostly finds on Indian(no offence intended) forums.The serial version will be powered by an uprated RD-93 engine producing 20,500 lbs of afterburning thrust.( HowI know this don't ask(jk)) ;)
 
D

darklegent

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

Facts was what I wanted. The Russian denial is a fact brother. I was interested to know if The M-53 or the M-88 or a Chinese engine was in the next choice for the serial production.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top