Can JF17 carry wingtip SD10?

[rocaf2003]

I got some information about the wingtip SD10 that I'm basically not sure is reliable. I saw a guy on the pdf who said one of his pilot friends said JF17 had the ability to carry BVR missiles on its wingtips (I can't be sure if he was telling the truth, I was just able to go through all of his statements and I found that he was basically telling the truth, to be precise, His predictions at that time about some of the things that would come true were also accurate. But I know this is still not proof of the authenticity of this article) I saw a CG image of JF17 on a website that also said JF17 has the capability of wingtip SD10. So I'd like to ask if anyone has any conclusive information that would confirm that?

I also found someone on DCS forums who claimed to have seen this in plaaf and paf documents. I asked him about it, but he did not reply, and he has not come to the forum for 2 months

[Wyvern]

The SD-10 is too heavy to be carried on the Wingtips, 

If it could Carry SD-10s, then the PL-8 would be there too
I believe this has been discussed here before, i dont know where exactly.
 

[rocaf2003]

8 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

The SD-10 is too heavy to be carried on the Wingtips, 

If it could Carry SD-10s, then the PL-8 would be there too
I believe this has been discussed here before, i dont know where exactly.
 

It can carry PL8,The wingtip tested for 120kg missiles and it's good.But the SD10 is 200kg!

[Wyvern]

yes, but PL-8 is 115kg, and while it can, it was chosen not to arm it with the PL-8, 
think of it this way, 
you can carry a 40kg sack of cement on your back, but if you do it too often, your back will suffer after a while.
And I assume that over a long time, it would simply cause too much stress, increase the need for maintainance, and therefore increase cost too.

Edited October 4, 2024 by Wyvern

[rocaf2003]

13 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

yes, but PL-8 is 115kg, and while it can, it was chosen not to arm it with the PL-8, 
think of it this way, 
you can carry a 40kg sack of cement on your back, but if you do it too often, your back will suffer after a while.
And I assume that over a long time, it would simply cause too much stress, increase the need for maintainance, and therefore increase cost too.

 

If we give up the time of the wingframe ,reduce it's lifetime for 4000 hours to 1000 hours,Like su27,I believe it has some possible...Because it can REDUCE RCS,It is VERY IMPORTANT,(BTW Don't need SHARS,GPS DATA IS ENOUGH)

[Wyvern]

yeah, but there is no point. The JF-17 Block 3 exists, and is carrying the PL-10
while pakistan also is not that rich to throw money away on uneccesairy maintainance
Also, the RCS Reduction wouldnt be that high, since the fuel tanks would already negate that.
And sure, you could send up an JF-17 without fuel tanks, and the two SD-10s, but that is like sending a soldier into battle with only a pistol and no extra ammo.

Edited October 4, 2024 by Wyvern

[rocaf2003]

11 hours ago, Wyvern said:

yeah, but there is no point. The JF-17 Block 3 exists, and is carrying the PL-10
while pakistan also is not that rich to throw money away on uneccesairy maintainance
Also, the RCS Reduction wouldnt be that high, since the fuel tanks would already negate that.
And sure, you could send up an JF-17 without fuel tanks, and the two SD-10s, but that is like sending a soldier into battle with only a pistol and no extra ammo.

 

I'm still willing to believe that it's technically possible, it's possible that the PAF didn't do it because it affected life/couldn't carry other equipment/too few weapons etc.