Originally posted by Daedalus3
Can we please have a "current" - "this is how its going to be" type pic?
This is the closet thing your get to the current status. Models just give you a idea of what the engineers are working on and the way they see it in
development. Well number 4 is suppose to fly when Musharraf visits chengdu sometime this year. The pictures are of models Chengdu put out on display
for a airshow so its what they want it to look like and the technologies it will be impemented on
But believe me this was not planned out of th blue with a thought like "of lets add DSI". They weren't sitting down after 2003. This is probaly a
good expenation why it wasn't put inot low level production.
Did you know that even before the FC-1 was being pyhiscally flown it was being tested on simulators and wind tunnels or stability and air performace.
so when it was time to actually fly the plane it was not needed to fly thousands of man hours since most of the testing was done with computers
And about this DSI?..How much knowledge base does one need to implement it and what is its actual effectiveness?
Your've asked this question before
And heres a quote from cowlan to sum it up
"DSI stands for Divertless Supersonic Intakes. The bumps seen at the intakes are litterally called Bumps. At high aircraft speeds through supersonic,
the bumps work with forward-swept inlet cowls to redirect unwanted boundary layer airflow away from the inlets, essentially doing the job of heavier,
more complex, and more costly approaches used by current fighters. It proved to save significant weight, reduce RCS by concealing the engine's fans
which generate most of the RCS when searching from the front. It improves performances both when supersonic and subsonic. The DSI bump functions as a
compression surface and creates a pressure distribution that prevents the majority of the boundary layer air from entering the inlet at speeds up to
Mach 2. In essence, the DSI does away with complex and heavy mechanical systems."
Or code magzine
JSF Diverterless Supersonic Inlet
So the basic point is it reduces your RCS it decreases the parts in your fighter and makes it lighter, cost cheaper and the DSI with bigger airflow
will increase the speed of the FC-1. Efficiency etc etc
This is for the current prototypes of the FC-1 and it would be safe to assume that this new prototype will perform even better
Maximum Weapon Load: 3,600 kg
Maximum Speed: Mach 1.6
Range: Ferry range 3,000 km; Operational Radius 1,352 km
Seven storage places
The avionics suite onboard the FC-1/JF-17 is said to be Chinese design, comprising a head-up display (HUD), infra-red search-and-track system,
night-vision goggle capability and ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS input.
There is no actual package per say to go with the FC-1. Its a export fighter with different packages. There are serval radars which the FC-1 can use
and different avoincs packages it can use. Grifo, Kopyo some israeli radar and of course chinese radar. With each one price goes up. So theres a
difference in price. A all chinese model should cost 10million a piece thou not nessary less capable it is made in china and cost can be kept down
Pakistani version is pretty basic with chinese avonics and the possible
Grifo radar installed. But all this is speculative because its there
for one minute then its not. But since the FC-1 was oringally going to have a chinese platter array now it was moving towards a mechanical phassed
array radar in the 90s. It might be possible that the pakistanis might wait it out or already have planned a newer ESA radar installed. Stealth spy
posted a link about pakistan wanting british avonics or something alone those lines
Anyway the FC-1 is being designed so different systems can be fitted in so no definate answer yet
Cause IMO its not goign pose a threat to the Griffen, RAfale, F-16 in the interntional market
Well when the FC-1 enters the market which areas do you think the grippen and F-16 will be aiming at?.
Its the cheaper market and its not about capability but about price. WIth a F-16 your paying for a old airframe with upgrade technology. Just imagine
its potenial customer market the FC-1 will appeal to countries will a small budject but want the most aircraft with this budget. Those planes are all
better than the FC-1 in their current forms but with the DSI the FC-1 is getting it will get more cheaper to maintain and more simpler to maintain.
The possible planes it will replace are. F-5, Mig-21, Mig-19, Mig-17(all those older designs). And some aircraft which have been used in the ground
attack role. All these aircraft need replacing and some people dont want some expensive aircraft with cannot take off or land from a dirt airfield or
needs some speical attention
Chinas ability to make flexible payment choices. China will accept different types of payments and are flexible in what you pay them. Bartering and
such. I give you a some FC-1s you give some natural resources(oil LPG and such). This compared to the americans which nearly always want hard currency
which countries cant afford to give up. and a lesser extent the russians which are not really economicly confindent to barter goods. So the FC-1 can
be based on a flexible payment choice.
The FC-1 offers 70% of the performance of a F-16(maybe more). If you buuy two FC-1 aircraft you will get to platforms instead of one and will have the
aded benfit of low maintanice and you save money on the armnements.Can a F-16 carry more weapons than 3 aircraft?.
So basically the FC-1 is offering a brand new airframe with basic BVR capabilities for 10million dollars. Considering the potenial market is for
african and south american countries which by the way want planes which can fly longer are good choices and any second hand F-16 is going to have