Fighter JF-17 / FC-1 and its weapons

Lightweight multipurpose Sino-Pakistani fighter JF-17 / FC-1 at the AIRSHOW CHINA 2014 exhibition. This car is actively promoted to the market in the niche previously occupied by the MiG-21, and has good prospects in Africa and Southeast Asia. While it is in service with only the Pakistan Air Force.

What is impressive is the composition of the JF-17 / FC-1 guided missile armament.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10


11


12


13


14


15


16
[/ Center]

Comments

[Orty]

By the way, why are we not creating a new, cheap and single-engine LFI? As an addition to Sushki and the future T-50? It feels like a bolt has been hammered into this niche.

[Roman 57 rus]

The twin-engine design has an advantage in combat survivability.

[Bongo]

Quote: Roman 57 rus

The twin-engine design has an advantage in combat survivability.

Only in case of engine failure is not in a combat situation. In the case of a missile with a TGS in the engine, in another, as a rule, a fire also begins.

[inkass_98]

Quote: Bongo

Only in case of engine failure is not in a combat situation.

You tell the Su-25 pilots who were returning from the battle on the same engine.

[Bongo]

Quote: inkass_98

You tell the Su-25 pilots who were returning from the battle on the same engine.

And what they tell, they themselves know. The last such case was in 2008.
Only I have a question for you, on which twin-engine fighter are the engines arranged in the same way as on the Su-25 attack aircraft?

[crazyrom]

Yes, at all, between them there is always something, some place, the fuselage. T-50 has a lot of space between them.

[Orty]

There is no special combat survivability there, two dvigla are important only to naval fighters, in case of failure over the sea, and attack aircraft. However, they are arranged differently on attack aircraft, since speed characteristics are not so important there, and for the most part they don’t need supersonic aircraft and supersonic. But the single-engine scheme provides a number of advantages at a price that, in turn, will significantly increase the number of aircraft.

[just exp]

The Mig-29 emnip was made twin-engine due to the fact that we did not have a sufficiently powerful engine under the LFI, that is, not from a good life, it was not without reason that all of our fighters were single-engine, from Mig-15 to 23, well, Mig-19 emnip 2 had an engine, but later received more powerful engines and on the Mig-21 and 23 there was already one engine.
but I don’t see the point of taking Mig-35 except to support the design bureau at all.
not much lighter, not much cheaper, and the radius and capabilities are inferior to "heavy" dryers.

[duke]

I wonder why we didn’t develop a niche for light fighters? Of course, MIG-21 has long been outdated, well, for example, make a modification of the Yak-130 at supersonic, or create a new hawk, as the Chinese did, after multiple modifications of the MIG-21. MiG-29/35 has already gone beyond 20 tons and can be called "light" rather tentatively, I mean something like "Grippen", F-16 (the Americans, by the way, do not refuse it), the same Chinese -FC-1 ... The Chinese then realized that a large country needs a lot of light, inexpensive fighters, modern technologies make it possible to make them quite combat-ready and effective in terms of price-efficiency ratio, and at the same time to occupy the export niche that previously belonged to the MIG-21 - there are enough buyers in the world , not everyone can afford expensive and heavy multipurpose aircraft at $ 100 million apiece. Look at the success of Grippen despite the high price tag. Interestingly, someone is engaged in marketing here? Or is the problem again related to the engines that were previously taken for this niche in Ukraine?

[Odysseus]

Quote: duke

curious why we did not begin to develop a niche for light fighters?

At the end of the 80, there was such a project, but then the well-known events — the collapse of the USSR, the destruction of the economy — were forgotten about the project.
And now it’s not a fact that we can do it. If only together.

[Orty]

Are you joking? Take the same AL-41F1S, the engine for the Su-35, it has a thrust of 8800 kgf, make a glider as a single-engine version of the Su-35, or otherwise, put a radar, it is better to use AFAR, but it is possible on the first versions and HEADLIGHT if AFAR immediately is not enough, and voila! If you start for example now, after three years you can already have a plane ready for the series. If we can create the T-50 and the Su-35, then I’m sure we can handle the LFI as well. Plus, to promote it in the arms market, the demand for LFI in the world will definitely grow.

[Odysseus]

Quote: Orty

Take the same AL-41F1S, the engine for the Su-35, it has a thrust of 8800 kgf, make a glider as a single-engine version of the Su-35, or otherwise, put a radar, it is better to use AFAR, but it is possible on the first versions and HEADLIGHT if AFAR immediately is not enough, and voila!

Rather, you're kidding. The Su-27 was undergone a deep modernization for 20 years. The Mig-29 did not have the same amount of modernization. For several years now, all the forces were thrown on the T-50.
And do you think so, that once and a new plane is ready? So far, even AFAR for the Mig-35 have not been done.
Of course, it would be tempting to make a light single-engine aircraft for export, but this is a very difficult and labor-intensive job. Moreover, our Air Force will not take it.

[Bersaglieri]

C-56, there was such a project.

[Bersaglieri]

C-56, there was such a project.

[Bongo]

Quote: Odyssey

At the end of the 80, there was such a project, but then the well-known events — the collapse of the USSR, the destruction of the economy — were forgotten about the project.

Under Simonov, the Sukhoi Design Bureau carried out work on the light fighter C-54, unfortunately, things did not advance beyond the construction of the models.

[reality]

The Yak 130 easily occupies this niche - although it is a combat training one, it surpasses this shortage in terms of characteristics.

[Orty]

You write garbage, Yak is inferior to Cheng in speed, it is generally up to sound, in terms of thrust-weight ratio in Yak 0,8 and Cheng 0,91, in combat load, on the ceiling, finally, the radar is not on it! And at the same time he has TWO engines! On the other hand, it’s still a training aircraft, so it's silly to compare them. The Russian Air Force needs cheap single-engine LFIs for combat stability. Where we buy one Su-35, you can buy 2-2,5 LFI. Of course, not as a replacement, but in addition. 200-300 aircraft of this class will come out approximately as 100-150 Su-35.

[duke]

Quote: reality

The Yak 130 easily occupies this niche - although it is a combat training one, it surpasses this shortage in terms of characteristics.

Unfortunately, our Yak-130 is not supersonic, and the Chinese modified it -JL-10 (Jiaolian-10) earlier- Hongdu
L-15 and made supersonic alas ... and, interestingly, with consulting support from OKB. Yakovleva.

[A1L9E4K9S]

The armament is impressive.

[Bongo]

Quote: A1L9E4K9S

The armament is impressive.

Especially compared to the progenitor MiG-21

[Hairy Siberian]

Armée de l'Air?

[Nayhas]

Even the Chinese have a hanging sighting container ...

[svp67]

I don’t understand, does this "hybrid" have a variable thrust vector?

[Odysseus]

Quote: svp67

I don’t understand, does this "hybrid" have a variable thrust vector?

No, the RD-93 is there. Which, in fact, is the main obstacle to the mass export of the aircraft.

[new communist]

The Chinese fellows, unlike us, are a very good aircraft for solving specific tasks, such as fighting drones, destroying cruise missiles over the ocean, fighting planes and helicopter PLOs and for other tasks, as well as improving the skills of young pilots. In principle, he will leave Raptor in a supersonic shaver.

[Dormidont2]

if the Chinese put AFAR on it, then the raptors will click

[Beiderlei]

Is it buying a baku?