With regard to the engine issue I wouldn’t worry too much GA, one of two options has happened, nobody can answer conclusively on which of the two is the case but both are good news for the JF-17.
Option 1 . Russia is indeed allowing supply of RD-93’s to Pakistan through one guise or another and the rumoured inlet design change is an amendment based on test results- not a great shock given that final design was targeted to be frozen by the end of 2005.
Option 2 . Russia put hurdles in the way of supplying the RD-93’s and so Pakistan has gone for a Chinese alternative which has warranted an inlet size change.
What is for sure is that the engine issue is not a problem – given the high profile inaugoration of the factory and restated details of delivery schedule this much should be obvious.
Pakistan has done a lot of high profile things. Musharraf announced in 2004 that after buying rights for a used satellite SUPARCO has a better space program than India. 😀 Bravado is not in short fall there is it?
Anyway, if changing engine isn’t a big deal then why are you, Boota and bunch of the regular PAF trolls denying it? 😀
And Boota, if you liked CAT1’s reply so much, you admit that the engine was likely changed? 😉
With regard to people accusing you of flaming – The problem is not that you ask questions – the problem is that all your questions are ready loaded to iether detract from the project or even better detract direct from Pakistan.
For example you spend an amazing amount of time trying to prove that Pakistan has contributed nothing to the project apart from paint – perhaps you can see how obsession with such points could be seen as flaming – The FC-1 is dubbed a ‘joint project’ by Pakistan, China and by independent sources and Pakistan will certanly be ‘co producing’ so why does some Pak guys saying the same hurt you so much?
Why does my questioning of Pakistani inputs hurt you so much? This is an aviation forum and people tend to ask questions.
Now, just because people call it a “joint” project doesn’t mean jack. I so far haven’t heard one specific technology or sub system or even design change made to FC-1 by Pakistan that was reported in Jane’s or Defense News or JED or Key publishing’s mags or for that matter in any place. If you know of one, please let me know.
Frankly I don’t think it matters squat who contributed what – what does matter are the facts – Pakistan will fly the type in numbers that it wants / can afford. The aircraft will be partly manufactured and assembled in Pakistan. This fighter has been designed to the specific requirements of Pakistan. The type will give Pakistan BVR capability.
This is a different issue altogether. If it doesn’t mater what Pakistan contributed, why are people running away (except you) when I asked the question about Pakistan’s contribution? And whether Pakistan contributed something or not does matter – in case the foreign component sources dry up. Remember 1991? Why go for an “indigenous” fighter at all in that case? You could have bought a foreign plane and got a license to make it locally.In fact, that may be closer to the FC-1 reality.
—
Arshad,
Read Air International’s feature on the LCA by Jon Lake. He gives detalied information on which subsystems in the LCA were imported and which ones were ADA designed and what the technological level is.
Can you point one technical article in Jane’s or Air Intl or any reputed defense publication that says exactly what Pakistani scientists contributed to the FC-1. Even one? Where’s the beef?
Sign In
