Suggestion for JF-17 Block II update.

A pylon in the aircraft loadout would be ideal. Out of all the options, that would be the best for the AAR probe. It would please all parties involved

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

Lots of late block two without AAR

The first two pics show a jf 17 with AAR probe

Gesendet von meinem BLA-L29 mit Tapatalk

While convenient pylon route isn't very realistic since you probably can't just put it on or take it off for one sortie as required. It'd probably require the plane to be sent off back to the factory. AAR feels more like a peacetime/pre-war/anti-insurgent luxury which is probably why not all thunder squadrons have it.

The first two pics show a jf 17 with AAR probe

 

Gesendet von meinem BLA-L29 mit Tapatalk

Exactly, trying to show we can’t realistically simulate a late block two squadron without that amount of variety. All those production numbers are after 229

Here we go, 17-234 both with and without it’s AAR. Outside of mission editor option I don’t know how else it would be done on an individual plane basis

Here we go, 17-234 both with and without it’s AAR. Outside of mission editor option I don’t know how else it would be done on an individual plane basis

Ask the crew chief to add or remove it?

Can the Block 2 load 6xSD-10?

Can the Block 2 load 6xSD-10?

No, AFAIK. No hardpoint/pylon changes from blk 1 to 2.

And I think any weight clearances were universal between blk 1 and 2. So no other changes either AFAIK (Not entirely sure on this one)

Can the Block 2 load 6xSD-10?

There was this old poster for JF-17 indicated that at some point, at least it was planned to allow the inner pylons to carry SD-10. I don't know, but maybe we can do so with block II.

If we can’t carry C-701 on inner pylons because of smoke.....

There was this old poster for JF-17 indicated that at some point, at least it was planned to allow the inner pylons to carry SD-10. I don't know, but maybe we can do so with block II.

I believe that poster is really old. Looks like the original FC1 aircraft from the intakes. The final jet model probably needed some changes to what we have now.

OK, I have another idea.

Not only we get the block I and II, we also need to have the Chinese Variant.

I know some of you guys will be confused since JF-17 hasn't been accepted into the service of the Chinese military. Yes, true. But Chinese have some JF-17 as demonstrator. They use those aircraft to show the potential buyers how good JF-17 is. The Chinese variant has some advantage over the Pakistan version. For example: The Chinese JF-17 block II (FC-1) demonstrators have at least 3 advantages:

1: Helmet aiming sight for missiles.

2: WS-13 Engine

3: PL-8 and PL-9 missiles

Pakistan didn't purchase those due to budget constrains.

I think this will be good for Deka team if this is made, since it will be a good advertisement for JF-17.

That would be very nice indeed, I like the idea :-)

If it's real then bring it on

+1

OK, I have another idea.

Not only we get the block I and II, we also need to have the Chinese Variant.

I know some of you guys will be confused since JF-17 hasn't been accepted into the service of the Chinese military. Yes, true. But Chinese have some JF-17 as demonstrator. They use those aircraft to show the potential buyers how good JF-17 is. The Chinese variant has some advantage over the Pakistan version. For example: The Chinese JF-17 block II demonstrators have at least 3 advantages:

1: Helmet aiming sight for missiles.

2: WS-13 Engine

3: PL-8 and PL-9 missiles

 

Pakistan didn't purchase those due to budget constrains.

I think this will be good for Deka team if this is made, since it will be a good advertisement for JF-17.

Got any sources for those JF-17 using WS-13 which the chinese are showing off? I would love to see what changes they had to do to the airframe to fit that engine. I cannot imagine it was a simple slot in the back hole kind of a deal. Even the intakes would need to be changed for it.

The image you provided previously is a very early model.

Got any sources for those JF-17 using WS-13 which the chinese are showing off? I would love to see what changes they had to do to the airframe to fit that engine. I cannot imagine it was a simple slot in the back hole kind of a deal. Even the intakes would need to be changed for it.

 

The image you provided previously is a very early model.

you can see there are some slight difference between the Chinese FC-1 on the left and the Pakistan JF-17 to the right.

I couldn't see a single difference between the two jets. Maybe I'm getting old.

I couldn't see a single difference between the two jets. Maybe I'm getting old.

It appears that both are test aircraft.

And it seems the one on the right is actually the WS-13.

People were saying that RD-93 has full black muzzle while WS-13 has 2 coloured muzzles.

Since both aircraft are at the same distance and at the same angle. When use a ruler on them, the one on the right is 1mm longer. I know this kind of measurement isn't accurate. Maybe Deka knows more on the topic.

Also, there is this news

https://web.archive.org/web/20100815001719/http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/china-and-pakistan-push-chengdu-jf-17-fighter-for-export-25788/

well they are not the same distance and angle. there is guaranteed parallax between them as can be seen particularly if u focus on the spine region. and those kinda look like use marks to me. as in the engine on the right gets used more. the paint is scratching up.

well they are not the same distance and angle. there is guaranteed parallax between them as can be seen particularly if u focus on the spine region. and those kinda look like use marks to me. as in the engine on the right gets used more. the paint is scratching up.

That maybe the case. Deka team should have the info on this topic. As long as they have the info, they can make them. :)

Also on the wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guizhou_WS-13

The 4th reference indicates so

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder

And the 3rd reference here is from "Jane's", which is usually creditable.

But for some reason, I have hard time open those link. Give it a try, see if you have better luck.

 

It appears that both are test aircraft.

And it seems the one on the right is actually the WS-13.

People were saying that RD-93 has full black muzzle while WS-13 has 2 coloured muzzles.

Since both aircraft are at the same distance and at the same angle. When use a ruler on them, the one on the right is 1mm longer. I know this kind of measurement isn't accurate. Maybe Deka knows more on the topic.

 

Also, there is this news

https://web.archive.org/web/20100815001719/http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/china-and-pakistan-push-chengdu-jf-17-fighter-for-export-25788/

 

The two jets look like they are using the same engines. Same size and the colouring of the right one is what we have in DCS currently.

As for the news article, I suppose the WS-13 seem like a backup measure in case the Russians pull the plug on their engine supply, which does not seem like the case so far so no point in adapting Work in Progress engine this early.

Additionally, with you mentioning that Chinese advertising the jet, I see no claims of that anywhere since most (if not all) of the deals for this jet have gone through Pakistan representatives so far. But this is more off topic discussion so I won’t go into too much debate on it.

Finally you mentioning that Chinese have version with the WS-13, HMD and all the other features, it makes sense naturally since they are developing the jet in China so there are bound to be a few prototypes.

Since there is no official or solid proof of those jets with Chinese engine being in active service somewhere, there is no reason to bring it in DCS unless they now accept under development prototypes.

This is just my take on the topic. I would love to see advanced features but I doubt we will be getting the block 3 version into DCS since if the news are accurate, they carry a bit more advanced sensors and components that Chinese currently use in their jets and we all know how strict they are with their active service tech.