The most bizarre spectacle I have seen, wouldn’t have expected something like this from the Iranians, the North Koreans maybe, but I guess it’s one comical regime after another. I don’t quite know what’s going through the minds of the Iranians, it may seem ok for the political leadership, but any Iranian engineer working on this thing must surely be feeling quite sheepish!

That thing has faceted landing gear doors, so it must be a new fifth gen stealth fighter 🙂

I remember there was a thread some time ago as to which country would produce the next gen fighter aircraft after Russia and China…India? South Korea? Japan?…no, Iran! 🙂

If we are lucky, hopefully a detailed 1:8 model at Aero India like AMCA, otherwise a teeny weeny wind tunnel model.

There will be an FGFA model at aero india but dont expect anything different.

Its the same as PAK-FA with a few modified Indian avionics in it.

Ie, its like the MKI program.

If that’s the case, why is there any need for separate wind tunnel testing from the Indian side?

Why are the mods allowing such an off-topic thread to persist? There is very little ‘Modern Military Aviation’ being discussed in this thread, if any.

More importantly, why is everyone taking the bait of ‘J-31 Burrito’ (aka ‘J-31 Penguin’, aka ‘Italy’, aka ‘J-20 Hotdog’), who always starts these provocative topics that have little to do with military aviation. And why are the mods allowing this clown to troll and flame with multiple usernames?

Tail hooks are fitted to many land based aircraft (e.g. F-15, F-16) for emergency stops, e.g. if the brakes fail. The presences of a tail hook does not mean the aircraft is intended to land on carriers, or able to do so.

Yep, that is a fair point. But considering the bulkier main landing gear, twin wheel front gear, large fins for lower speed handling and the twin engines, combined, these suggest a carrier bird. I’m sure that if this was meant to complement the J-20 in a high-low mix, they would have kept it singe engine, possibly using the same engine as the J-20 for easier maintenance and lower costs. But considering the other features, it does appear to have the PLAN in mind. Of course, pure speculation on what we can see at the moment.

all aircraft are unstable and plummet to the ground upon lose of control 😀

So apparently no one can provide a source as to whether the JF-17 has relaxed stability or not?

Its a stable plane, not relaxed stability design.

Yes, i think it has analogue FBW in roll/yaw.

Since its such a simple stable plane (similar to 1950’s fighers), the pilot would still be able to fly it if the FBW fails.

Thanks. Do you have some sources which describe that it’s a stable design?

The achievement with regards to DSI from a functional PoV is not whether it is on a demonstrator or a production a/c, but rather how high speed it can handle, and how high AoA it can handle.
Donno bout AoA but the DSI installed on F-16 did make Mach 2,
something Thunder has yet to achieve.

Thunder has a designed speed limit of Mach 1.8, but I’m sure it can go faster than that given Mirage III could go Mach 2.2 with a much weaker engine and a much less aerodynamic airframe. And what makes you think Thunder’s DSI is a copy? :rolleyes:

The FC-1/JF-17 was designed from the outset to have a maximum speed of Mach 1.6-1.8, never exceeding Mach 2.0 in the first place. There may be some benefits from the DSI, but it is unlikely to ever exceed Mach 1.6-1.8, at least with its current powerplant.

There seems to be a long panel on the starboard side of the cockpit, just below the canopy and above the bort number 2001/2002, could that house a retractable IFR probe? Any idea where the cannon is housed, if at all? There’s an interesting article in the latest addition of Air International on the J-20, seems to support the view that, given its size and likely large internal fuel/weapon load, it is designed for long range missions to support China’s extended policy in South east Asian seas.