Last edited by a moderator:
JF-17 ( Upgraded Design )
- Thread starter BasitS
- Start date
Air Marshal
Member
PAF JF-17 Thunder
New FC－1 ，NO.04
New FC－1 ，NO.04
uploaded here
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showgallery.php/cat/3231/page/1
New FC－1 ，NO.04
uploaded here
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showgallery.php/cat/3231/page/1
Last edited by a moderator:
machining titanium is very very tough and not many countries have that capability(usa and russia),machining titanium is very expensive and also much tougher than machining stainless steel,that is the reason why titanium is not used that much in aircrafts(it is mainly used for firewalls ,apu exhaust shrouds).its is however much more superior in almost every aspect to steel.Hussain said:
Difficulty of refining titanium come as a definite second compared to the cost factor.aaaditya said:machining titanium is very very tough and not many countries have that capability(usa and russia),machining titanium is very expensive and also much tougher than machining stainless steel,that is the reason why titanium is not used that much in aircrafts(it is mainly used for firewalls ,apu exhaust shrouds).its is however much more superior in almost every aspect to steel.
No, more than that. eg Australia, France and Germany machine titanium. The Collins Class submarine in the RAN has titanium as part of its build.aaaditya said:
The issue is not so much expense than it is skill in machining and manufacture. It's not always superior to steel. One of the great popular "selling points" of some the Russian nukes was that they were made out of titanium - however titanium can be more brittle than steel under certain conditions. The issue that they were stronger was a bit of a "con" in a sense.aaaditya said:machining titanium is very expensive and also much tougher than machining stainless steel,that is the reason why titanium is not used that much in aircrafts(it is mainly used for firewalls ,apu exhaust shrouds).its is however much more superior in almost every aspect to steel.
A plane made out of titanium more than steel is not necessarily going to be superior across the board.
aaaditya said:machining titanium is very very tough and not many countries have that capability(usa and russia),machining titanium is very expensive and also much tougher than machining stainless steel,that is the reason why titanium is not used that much in aircrafts(it is mainly used for firewalls ,apu exhaust shrouds).its is however much more superior in almost every aspect to steel.
Isnt the A-10 Warthog made of Titanium?? and its a much older Aircraft.. So yeah its slightly difficult to make a JF17 out of Titanium, but not entirely impossible!
No, only the tub is made of titaniumSATAN said:
As a piece of trivia - so are the tubs in the Swiss F/A-18 Hornets.
They were ordered with titanium tubs from inception. They're actually a multi-role platform with primary focus as ground attack. The swiss intent was to use them for an anti-armour role if the Russians ever moved across europeSATAN said:
No, they're not. They are a multi-role platform in the swiss air force.SATAN said:
When we were looking at low mileage Hornets to resolve our centre barrel problems we looked at the Swiss bugs as they were very low hours. We couldn't used them though as the titanium tubs means that they're stripped of some electronic warfare gear for the air attack role. Stripping the tubs and rebuilding the cockpit made them less attractive at an end cost perspective.
Doctrine in the swiss airforce moved away from dedicated air interception after the phasing out of the hunters and vampires. They've had a multi-role requirement for their fixed wing combat aircraft ever since then.
gf0012-aust said:
Not trying to dispute your knowledge on the Swiss Hornets....but i bought a book on Aircrafts, (Not Janes) but pretty comprehensive. Until about 2003 at least, the swiss F-18s were used as interceptors only, Air to Air.After that they might have been slated for a ground attack role , im not sure. Heres what it says
"To achieve this service life, design modifications included strengthening the airframe by constructing some of the frames out of titanium. This measure means that in wartime a software amendment permitting the maximum loading on the Swiss F-18s to be raised from +7.5g to +9g can be activated.
Other special features include adaptation of the electronic equipment to equipment already in service in Switzerland, such as the radio and IFF, together with another modification enabling existing stocks of Sidewinder missiles to be deployed.
A low drag pylon has been specially developed so as to accommodate one AIM-120B AMRAAM or one AIM-9P-5 Sidewinder guided missile. In a typical intercept mission profile, the time to climb to an altitude of 49,000ft at Mach 1.4 from release of the brakes is reduced by 25%.
For the time being the F-18s are to be used exclusively for air-to-air combat. In 1999 the Armaments Group did look into the question of whether additional aircraft could be procured as a replacement for the Mirage IIIRS reconnaissance aircraft. However, now that production of the C/D versions of the Hornet has ceased, only used aircraft could be considered for this role."
Well, I'd have to say that I place far more credibility on discussions we had with the Swiss than over what is published in a book or journal. I think the owner of the aircraft has a somewhat better idea of the "raison" for purchase than a journo.SATAN said:
We also wouldn't have wasted our time inspecting them for our needs.
Military procurement processes aren't driven by defence articles and books - if it was we'd all be in deep trouble as what you see in some of them that passes for fact is almost comical.
I say again, that the whole reason why the entire fleet was tubbed was for ground attack missions - it was a deliberate decision as it meant that some of the normal electronic gear used for air to air had to be removed pre-production to accomodate the Swiss Air Forces requirements. ie they were planned for a ground attack role from day 1. Interception was a secondary role otherwise they wouldn't have specified the tub changeover at order.
The reason why the Swiss bugs had to be modified for pre-existing weapons fits was because the titanium tubbing was rather expensive. They went for lightened pylons and lightened fitments to keep the weight down. Bear in mind that using titanium tubs also lightened the platform (classified on absolute weight savings) and that means that their climb rate was better. but in real terms, their primary role was defined by the build requirement.
Nobody tubs aircraft for air to air - it's a ground attack requirement for close quarter work. (eg A-10, Hind etc...)
New Look!!
isn't that AWSOME!!