GoldenDragonIt would be more interesting if it were’nt surrounded by so much propoganda.
Janes is propaganda now :rolleyes:
This entire discussion stems from a Janes report.
I suggest that this person never read Google’s and others’ Janes posts again 😀
My question simply is if the pakistanis don’t consider dr.siddiqui to be reliable, why take anything seriously now?
The Pakistanis don’t consider Dr. Siddiqui to be reliable?
We saw a quote from one person and it’s “pakistanis don’t consider her reliable” like it’s a vast majority?
And that same person’s replied here in the thread that she is writing facts from the Lateef press conference.
“Dr. Agha wrote this piece for JDW not as her opinion but facts which she got when she attended the press conference of AVM Latif project manager of JF-17.”
Her opinions doesn’t even come into play in this report.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by vikasrehman
Couple of interesting points from the original article;To me at least this is very strange.
Could this mean that cannon on JF-17 will b optional? I remember reading Usman shabir (of pak def and also writes for AFM)’s account of his interview with the AVM, in which he quoted AVM saying that TWR of JF-17 will b 1 and that composites will b used to reduce the weight. If so, could the gun pod perhaps b a novel way to reduce JF-17’s empty weight to improve TWR?
Quite possible. The gun we see on ptype 01 with the new Lightning color scheme was not there in pictures taken during first flight in September when it was still in yellow primer.
They are still trying out gun configuration, most likely.
Now here is something which has always confused me…RD-93’s thrust with AB.
Unless im mistaken, RD-33 had a thrust of 18,300lbs. I remember coming across at least one artcle from janes which says that RD-93 is an upgraded version of RD-33K, which according to another article has a thrust of around 19,400lbs (and over 20,000lbs for very short periods of time) and itself is an upgraded version of original RD-33.
So wot is the AB thrust of RD-93? Is it really an upgraded version of RD-33 (but downgraded in thrust)?
An engine could be upgraded for both longer service life and also better T/W.
An engine with a little less thrust but is much lighter is a major upgrade. So is one that extends time between overhauls.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Manu
This is my last post on this topic.
Well, good. Since your interest is not even in the report or the plane.
Originally posted by GoldenDragon
I couldn’t find anyone saying anything about Ayesha Siddiqha that at ACIG.This story isn’t even posted there yet.
Read what you wrote above.
I have and I meant exactly that. The Janes story wasn’t even posted at ACIG and I couldn’t find neither story nor the remarks that people had of the author that SabreAce had implied in regards to the story.
Later you posted it was one person and not “pakistanis” as a whole. It’s like me saying that Americans don’t believe in Bob Woodward by pointing to a forum and saying you look up all the bad things people have said.
Idiotic.
The question is not whether there will be 100 or 10000 planes and how good or bad they will be.
Again, if that’s the case, you should never have bothered with the thread.
You implied that SabreAce is lying, I am pointing out that you are lazy and make off-the cuff remarks, and are thus, not fit to be moderator, something that I had proposed.
SabreAce had no interest in this thread other than to throw in a few digs.
Whom you propose is your business. I don’t see myself as moderator material and had begged off the list.
But the reason I’m addressing you is because I do appreciate the initial sentiment 🙂
PS: You can continue to fornicate with your P_aki and North Korean Girlfriends and pat yourself on the back all you like.
The racial slur is uncalled for.
You are not moderator material. That is my only point.
That’s good and well, but this is not quite the thread to make that point 😉
Go in peace, my friend 🙂
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by SD-10
The only message different from FC-1 Thread isNight Vision googles, IRST and POD.
Very true, SD-10, along with the bvr production in Pakistan and the reports of 1000 FC-1s for the PLAAF.
But the IRST and Pod is very interesting. Maybe a variant of the Blue Sky pod from the JH-7.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by vikasrehman
Various comments about Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, questioning her credibility or contacts within pakistani defence services.I personally dont know anything about the woman and hence cant comment…but lets not let things get out of perspective here.
1. First of all she writes for Janes, which is quite a reputable source of defence related news. I dont think such a publication would take on correspondents who are not good enough for them or lack any credibility.
Quite true. The Chinese community have a similar issue with Pinkov from Kanwa. But he is still a member of Janes and that holds weight.
2. Now take a look at the article itself. In first paragraph, it says according to the Chief Project Director (CPD), AVM Shahid Lateef.. She quotes him again in latter parts of the article. As Janes correspondent in Pakistan, she was likely to have been invited to the press briefing (about jF-17) held a few days ago and the overall style of the article suggests (to me at least) that she is conveying to us what was said in that briefing…and not trying to analyse anything herself. Now i, sure most of yous on this air forum with a half decent knowledge about air forces could have done the job equally well…and if so, the credibility doesnt come into equation here.
True. It seems mostly likely that the Lateef quotes are from her at the press briefing while the IRST and some of the other parts might have come from Michael J Gething (JDW Aerospace Consultant.)
3. Finally, pakistani media reported that china has placed an order for large number of FC-1, while this article is saying that plaaf plans to purcahse 1,000 fighter. Wotever the end result be (we’ll find out soon hopefully), i think pakistanis seem to b rather sure (and hence telling the media) that plaaf will buy the plane. If PLAAF is not interested, then i dont know wot they will be doing with those 8 planes from the intial batch???;)
Repeatedly it seems that Pakistani reports are dismissed out of hand by people and only accepted when they’re regurgitated by Janes.
At any rate, there was no need for someone to make an unneccessary dig at the report with an offhand remark that some poster made a year ago. You can tear down Janes, AFM or any other publication by pointing at a few internet posters who say they don’t trust the magazine.
It was a stupid and obvious attempt to throw in an insult “Guess that explains the IRST and stuff…..” :rolleyes:
But a very good post and response, Vikasrehman.
GoldenDragonIf Phrozenflame, Shamayel, Usman and others from PDF and Pakdef could tell me that this author is well-known in their community as an unreliable source, I’ll accept it,
GoldenDragon:rolleyes:
Some guy (from Sri Lanka) was talking in 2003 and they’re attempting to project this as “the pakistanis are saying that they and pakdef don’t consider Ayesha Siddiqui to be a credible source. Guess that explains the IRST and stuff…..”
SabrAce was trying to suggest there is a current backlash against this particular report by “pakistanis” which is patently false.
He never said he needed to go back one year to find one comment from one person who passed judgement one of the authors of the report.
If he was honest in his representation, he should have quoted that particular ACIG source in the first place instead of trying misrepresent it.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Srbin
No I am not in the PLA/PLAAF/PLAN office to know this but PLAAF has clearly said they didn’t want the FC-1
Oh really? :rolleyes:
Tell me where they’ve clearly said this. You actually read the People’s or PLA daily?
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by google
Neither could I. At any rate, Siddiqha is not one of the regular JDW articles, so it’s best to approach every article cum grano salis.
Agreed. Sort of makes one wonder about the person making such accusations.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Srbin
Dude, you can talk all you want about PLAAF wanting the FC-1 but the fact IS that they DON’T want it!!! It’s simple.
It’s simple?
I have no idea what you’re yelling about.
I’ve NEVER came across anything official or even satisfactory unofficial news in the Chinese forums that the PLAAF DON’T want the FC-1.
If you don’t think they want it then it’s your opinion. You have nothing that shows that they don’t want it.
The Chinese press is hyping this plane like none other in the history of Chinese aviation. And you don’t think the PLAAF won’t buy it?
Every sign points to it being bought by the PLAAF.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by google
well, do they have info to the contrary?
I couldn’t find anyone saying anything about Ayesha Siddiqha that at ACIG.
This story isn’t even posted there yet.
GoldenDragonOriginally posted by Srbin
FC-1 and J-10 are both designed by Chengdu? What are you guys talking about “satisfying both design bureaus”?
Same design bureau with overlapping design team. Many of the members involved in the J-10 project ended up on the FC-1, including one of the lead designer (in fact, it was in an Oct. 2003 FC-1 article that we found out that the J-10 two seater was ready for flight in Dec. 2003.)
The FC-1 is obviously the less expensive encapsulation of things learned during the J-10 project.
J-10 and FC-1 are pretty much in the same class, single engined, single seat medium weight multirole fighters, J-10 will be the one that will replace all those mentioned in PLAAF, where’s the space for FC-1?
Different class, weight and capability. Same difference as a F-15 and a F-16. The J-10 is far larger, with far more thrust, far more weight-saving through composites and greater range and carrying capacity.
All this cost money. It would be way too expensive to equip all of the PLAAF’s rank and file with the J-10.
There isn’t another low cost plane that is already flying and they need to replace planes in the hundreds.
There is also the sales component. The PLAAF will buy the FC-1 in a good sized order because it will facilitate sales.
I’ve never seen a Chinese aircraft with such press coverage and generating such high expectations. That alone will force the PLAAF’s hand.
GoldenDragonPeople forget how advanced South Africa was technically. It had a successful nuke project. It’s really a little piece of Western Europe situated on the southern tip of Africa (okay, their racial attitude back then was 18th century Europe).
Looking up older threads here at AFM on the Cava, this is what Thor, who brought the subject to me on October, 2002, said about the plane:
Project CAVA (sometimes “Carver”) was started in the ’80s to replace the Canberra , Buccaneer , and Mirage 111 in the South African fleet.The Cheetah was a total upgrade of the Mirage 111 and was always supposed to be an interim type to serve until the late 90’s until CAVA would come into service.The reasons for the project was that under Apartheid , South Africa was under an arms embargo.There was some speculation that a twin engined design would be produced , either as an upscaled attack variant with the single engined type . or possibly instead of it.This was done under the instigation of the SAAF chief , an ex buccaneer man and a firm advocate of twin engines.
This aircraft was NOT a modellers excercise.Pres. FW De Klerk mentioned its cancellation in parliament along with the 6 nuclear weapons in the early 90’s.Upwards of 10 billion Rand had been spent on the project already as well as a mock-up to test systems placement.Comprehensive wind tunnel tests and a host of related work had been completed.Apparently a prototype was either beginning to be constructed or was just about to commence.Towards the end of the research and test phase , quite a few Israeli engineers made redundant from the Lavi cancellation joined from 1987 onwards , leading to speculation that it would be a Lavi lookalike , ala the J-10
The design was to be a Fly by Wire (FBW) unstable design with a large percentage of composites in its construction.There is evidence that the Advanced Composite Evaluator (ACE) constructed by Atlas/Denel in the late 80’s early 90’s was part of the R&D into aircraft composites.The Ace was a turbo prop trainer in the class of the Pilatus PC-9 or Tucano.It had at the time the highest percentage of composites in a military type aircaft in the world at the time.
One of the most interesting aspects was to be the powerplant.It was said that it would be an engine “based on or using the Atar 9k50 as a starting point but considerably different.” The project was cancelled as the end of Apartheid did not justify its continued development.I think that this was a mistake as it would have been in the class of the Gripen and would have probably entered service possibly a little sooner.The aircraft was to incorporate a high degree of composites as well as it’s small size would have made it slightly “stealthy” in clean config.
I don’t think it is that similar to Indias ACA.It appears to have a different nose section , cockpit area , a different wing design and better wing/fuselage blending.It does appear to be in roughly the same weight class.I think it looks more like a single engined Rafael without the Canards.The funny thing is that it would be a very viable project today , given that the Eurofighter , Rafael , export Gripens and Indian ACA are some time off entering operational service.
GoldenDragonGreat post!
It is planned to establish a co-production facility for the avionics at the Kamra Avionics and Radar Factory. A similar strategy is planned for the BVR missile, which would be a major technological breakthrough for Pakistan.
If the SD-10 is allowed for export, I would bet that the PL-12 is a different missile.
Anyways, Pakistan building both avionics and an AAM (and not just any AAM but a BVR and an ARH one) is quantum leap. There are only a handful of countries that make them and none from the third world barring China and South Africa.
With reports that the PLA Air Force plans to acquire about 1,000 of these aircraft, the manufacturers hope it can be built for a quarter of the cost of a modern jet fighter. The JF-17/FC-1 is seen as a potential replacement for the Dassault Mirage III/5, Northrop F-5 series, Shenyang J-6, Chengdu J-7 and Nanchang Q-5 aircraft.
I wonder if they misquoted something. The FC-1 project leader in the long Chengdu Business News article I posted said he estimated 1,000 FC-1s in total. Most reports, including one from Pakistan said China would take 200. 1,000 for the PLAAF seems far too much.
GoldenDragonSay Google, any more on the FD-60 from Jane’s?
Sign In
