Sources for the JF-17

[Zius]

Maybe I'm being too skeptical and probably the question has already been answered, but I keep wondering: are there enough credible sources for accurate simulation of such a new aircraft? Surely the PAF would also like to keep some of the aircrafts capabilities secret?

 

 

It is, for instance, a couple of years newer than the Eurofighter. But of the Eurofighter I'm pretty sure that there is not enough solid information to build a module on.

 

 

 

Then how much is known about the JF-17? And what sources are publically available?

 

 

Sorry in advance for doubting, but I do have to ask the question.

[AeriaGloria]

They have said they have a 2007 manual, and there Facebook has pictures of them at Nanchang at the weapons factory to get data for the weapons, they verified the FM at Chengdu before QA, and they often report on answers they get from SMEs, so I don’t think you have anything to be afraid of

 

They have also done military contracts before

 

They just can’t officially state specifically where all their data comes from, but it’s clear Chengdu was involved at some level

 

Even for PAF, their top tier is F-16 and for the foreseeable future JF-17 is supporting F-16 and playing second fiddle to it, and it’s construction is very traditional with very small amount of composites, with mostly off the shelf parts for export

Edited March 22, 2020 by AeriaGloria

[shaHeen-1]

what exactly about the module is making you skeptical?

[foxwxl]

Sorry, no answer will be replied about the source or actual performance of any wpn/aircraft that still in service.

[Zius]

They have said they have a 2007 manual, and there Facebook has pictures of them at Nanchang at the weapons factory to get data for the weapons, they verified the FM at Chengdu before QA, and they often report on answers they get from SMEs, so I don’t think you have anything to be afraid of

 

They have also done military contracts before

 

They just can’t officially state specifically where all their data comes from, but it’s clear Chengdu was involved at some level

 

Even for PAF, their top tier is F-16 and for the foreseeable future JF-17 is supporting F-16 and playing second fiddle to it, and it’s construction is very traditional with very small amount of composites, with mostly off the shelf parts for export

Thanks, that helps.

 

 

 

what exactly about the module is making you skeptical?

 

 

Sorry, no answer will be replied about the source or actual performance of any wpn/aircraft that still in service.

Again, sorry if I am being a pain, but lack of sources means it is not really credible, is it? I mean that in a general sense, and not in particular directed against this specific module.

 

 

I understand that there barriers to releasing data pertaining to aircraft which are presently in service / in development. For some, older, aircraft, the data is in the public domain, either because they can be studied, e.g. in museums or because the government doesn't consider the data classified anymore.

 

 

The Viggen is a good example of this, and Heatblur has said that it would not be possible at this moment to simulate the Jaktviggen because certain components (IIRC the datalink) are being re-used in the Gripen which remains classified.

 

 

The modern US aircraft (F-16 / F-18 ) I suppose that the data / schemes / manuals are sufficiently available in the public domain to make simulation possible. Although also there I have some doubts that everything is actually public and not an "educated guess" by the developers, but I think that is, in those aircraft, limited to certain systems and not to the entire aircraft.

Edited March 23, 2020 by Zius

[shaHeen-1]

Iirc aim9X is pure fantasy atm but it's still on the hornet and viper.

[AeriaGloria]

No, operational since 2002 I believe. If there was a 9X Block II yeah that would be not correct for the time frames they are doing.

 

According to Deka their aim for the FM was to be within 3% of the information they have. I don’t know off the top of my head but I’ve heard things like 4% I think for some of the PFM. Yeah it’s “just their word,” but I certainly think they got all the required information needed.

 

The fact that there is so little information of it on the western internet, does not mean it can’t be accessed from somewhere. Also I believe part of EDs QA is to compare the EM chart with the flight model, so Deka and all parties would’ve had to accept that level of information.

[foxwxl]

Again, sorry if I am being a pain, but lack of sources means it is not really credible, is it? I mean that in a general sense, and not in particular directed against this specific module.

 

 

The modern US aircraft (F-16 / F-18 ) I suppose that the data / schemes / manuals are sufficiently available in the public domain to make simulation possible .

 

1."general sense" does not work well in military area. U can speculate anyway, but still no comments on the source.

 

2.F-18 does not have public performance data as the F16, so maybe U could trace back ED's source(just kidding);)

[AeriaGloria]

Yeah I was trying to find a way to say that data for the specific F-18, F-16 in DCS is also not exactly everywhere and can be hard to find publicly even if you are a US citizen. I think sometimes people think if something is well known around the world, there must be documents all over the place, and that becuase people don’t talk about JF-17 all the time, that there are no documents for Deka to use. I see so many people that seem to think since it’s not talked about that there is simply no data existing for JF-17, compared to something talked about all the time like F-18/16. You’re not going to find exact performance of weapons or sensors for any of those

[arneh]

To me it seems a bit suspicious that the radar display seems like work almost exactly the same as the F16 radar. The same modes, the same symbols and operation. Seems strange to me that a Chinese radar would work exactly the same as an F16 radar. Does it really work that way in real life, or did Deka just implement it based on another plane for lack of real information?

 

I guess since the plane is used by Pakistan, and they use the F16 too, they might have specified that they want to radar to work the same way, and the Chinese were good at copying it.

[WinterH]

To me it seems a bit suspicious that the radar display seems like work almost exactly the same as the F16 radar. The same modes, the same symbols and operation. Seems strange to me that a Chinese radar would work exactly the same as an F16 radar. Does it really work that way in real life, or did Deka just implement it based on another plane for lack of real information?

 

I guess since the plane is used by Pakistan, and they use the F16 too, they might have specified that they want to radar to work the same way, and the Chinese were good at copying it.

 

The aircraft was made for Pakistan, specifically to accompany F-16 in their airforce, and similarity of operation was desired as far as I know.

[AeriaGloria]

Not to mention China had access to APG-66, the F-16A radar, for J-8 Peace Pearl program. And it has been stated a lot that certain elements like HOTAS are similar so little training is needed to transfer from F-16 to JF-17. Only recently where new pilots allowed to pilot JF-17. For a while it was only F-16 pilots, then slowly replaced the A-5s and the F-6s squadrons transferred

Edited March 25, 2020 by AeriaGloria

[shaHeen-1]

Jf17 greatly improves the number of flight hours Pakistani pilots can accrue without stressing the f16s. In a way its a trainer aircraft for f16.

[AeriaGloria]

Jf17 greatly improves the number of flight hours Pakistani pilots can accrue without stressing the f16s. In a way its a trainer aircraft for f16.

 

Especially with the acquisition of B models for PAF

[shaHeen-1]

Not gna lie that B tail is sexy. Dunno why they didn't put it in Block 3? (do we call it the A version now?)

 

Haha maybe in case pilot accidentally takes f16 thinking it's a jf17 XD. Some differences necessary. XD

[AeriaGloria]

Well the B tail is the way it is becuase the larger cockpit for the second seat introduces a slight yaw instability. So the B tail has greater sweep to put more vertical stab area rearward to ring the stability back to around its previous level.

 

The Block 3 single seat goes back to the original fin. Which in my opinion is the superior choice, for the original fin all three surfaces, the wing and horizontal and verticals stabilizers are all at 42 degrees sweep. It looks nice, and who knows maybe helps reduce its signature. However I heard a rumor that JF-17B tail fin also has a small fuel tank

EDIT: dorsal fin fuel tank is real https://www.flightglobal.com/two-seat-variant-of-jf-17-to-fly-by-end-2016/120438.article

Edited March 25, 2020 by AeriaGloria

[foxwxl]

To me it seems a bit suspicious that the radar display seems like work almost exactly the same as the F16 radar. The same modes, the same symbols and operation. Seems strange to me that a Chinese radar would work exactly the same as an F16 radar. Does it really work that way in real life, or did Deka just implement it based on another plane for lack of real information?

 

I guess since the plane is used by Pakistan, and they use the F16 too, they might have specified that they want to radar to work the same way, and the Chinese were good at copying it.

 

Plz note that PAF order JF-17, and PAF is the main user of JF-17 which also participated in the aircraft development. F-16 is the core force of PAF, its very common that PAF wish the new plane have similarities of their favorite F-16.

 

Also China have access of APG-66 on the J-8 Peace Pearl project, so it's quite normal the radar's GUI looks like the APG68/66(in fact it's more like a combination of F16 F18 )