China-Pak in MoU to develop stealth variant of JF-17 Thunder

[babarawan]

Wy we not use bubble canopy in JF-17

 

[The SC]

My understanding of the article is for two separate projects, the one for a stealth fighter (can not be other than the J-31, with the latest images of it taking off from the Chinese AC), and the JF-17 project on its own. to make it stealthier will require nothing more than mainly an AESA radar and some minor modifications.

Wy we not use bubble canopy in JF-17

Very difficult to mold, and thus too expansive a technology.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

No doable , the JF17 thunder has no features of stealth plane it would mean complete redesign of plane

 

[Bad Wolf]

Could Pakistan/China be using the RAM acquired from the secret U.S. helicopter wreckage?

 

[Interceptor2014]

I think a new jet would be preffred and PAC can welcome others too.

 

[Munir]

My understanding of the article is for two separate projects, the one for a stealth fighter (can not be other than the J-31, with the latest images of it taking off from the Chinese AC), and the JF-17 project on its own. to make it stealthier will require nothing more than mainly an AESA radar and some minor modifications.


Very difficult to mold, and thus too expansive a technology.

Just to help you with your conclusions about bubble canopy... I disagree.

If you make something frameless it is needed to be a lot stronger to absorb a hit. So it is a lot heavier. With these agile smart weapons and lots of superb sensors one need to ask whether a bubble canopy is needed. Surely f22 has one. But many do not have it. Ef2000. Rafale. F35. PAkfa. and the list is very very long. So, back to PAC/China and JF17. Why would you put a very heavy canopy in it if it hardly contributes in the usage of the plane? And why would you think that making is so difficult? Are we that bad in making it? I do not think so. I am pretty sure about it.

We make Mushaq canopy's for decades. We will make JF17 canopy from 2015 on. The factory is right now being build. I am pretty sure we can produce F16 canopy. But it would be outright stupid to put weight on a plane which is in the light category and the sensors contribute a lot more then you think. Besides that... A bubble canopy has no frame where mirrors can be attached. One freaking thing for F16 pilots is that they keep turning their head back every few seconds. You can recognize them with huge muscles and super-sized neck. Not healthy I can tell you.

Hope this helps.

 

[Sinnerman108]

Just to help you with your conclusions about bubble canopy... I disagree.

If you make something frameless it is needed to be a lot stronger to absorb a hit. So it is a lot heavier. With these agile smart weapons and lots of superb sensors one need to ask whether a bubble canopy is needed. Surely f22 has one. But many do not have it. Ef2000. Rafale. F35. PAkfa. and the list is very very long. So, back to PAC/China and JF17. Why would you put a very heavy canopy in it if it hardly contributes in the usage of the plane? And why would you think that making is so difficult? Are we that bad in making it? I do not think so. I am pretty sure about it.

We make Mushaq canopy's for decades. We will make JF17 canopy from 2015 on. The factory is right now being build. I am pretty sure we can produce F16 canopy. But it would be outright stupid to put weight on a plane which is in the light category and the sensors contribute a lot more then you think. Besides that... A bubble canopy has no frame where mirrors can be attached. One freaking thing for F16 pilots is that they keep turning their head back every few seconds. You can recognize them with huge muscles and super-sized neck. Not healthy I can tell you.

Hope this helps.

What kind of Mashaq canopy do we make ? can you please provide some more details ?

UV filtering ?

 

[Munir]

What kind of Mashaq canopy do we make ? can you please provide some more details ?

UV filtering ?

Google.com...

 

[The SC]

Just to help you with your conclusions about bubble canopy... I disagree.

If you make something frameless it is needed to be a lot stronger to absorb a hit. So it is a lot heavier. With these agile smart weapons and lots of superb sensors one need to ask whether a bubble canopy is needed. Surely f22 has one. But many do not have it. Ef2000. Rafale. F35. PAkfa. and the list is very very long. So, back to PAC/China and JF17. Why would you put a very heavy canopy in it if it hardly contributes in the usage of the plane? And why would you think that making is so difficult? Are we that bad in making it? I do not think so. I am pretty sure about it.

We make Mushaq canopy's for decades. We will make JF17 canopy from 2015 on. The factory is right now being build. I am pretty sure we can produce F16 canopy. But it would be outright stupid to put weight on a plane which is in the light category and the sensors contribute a lot more then you think. Besides that... A bubble canopy has no frame where mirrors can be attached. One freaking thing for F16 pilots is that they keep turning their head back every few seconds. You can recognize them with huge muscles and super-sized neck. Not healthy I can tell you.

Hope this helps.

Typically, those frames are called "canopy rails". The largest reason most fighters are designed without bubble canopies is cost and ease of manufacture. Bubble canopies like the f-16's are made of single-piece polymers that are difficult to manufacture and require much more expensive materials than earlier aircraft. Making several smaller pieces joined by rails is easier, as it requires less complex shapes to mold and less costly because with multiple pieces, you can use materials that are less durable and usually less costly. This is possible because the smaller a piece of material is, the stronger it is in most situations. Bubble canopies have largely become standard in fighter aircraft due to further development of the necessary manufacturing techniques. For example, look at the SAAB JAS-39 Gripen or the Dassualt Rafale. However, it is still common to put a rail in front, because this allows for a stronger frontal structure to protect against bird strikes and small arms. Making a full one-piece canopy that is durable enough is still fairly difficult.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

It is not about making the bubble canopy---it is about what SIZE of the bubble canopy is. After a certain size the difficulty of manufacturing the canopy has a multiplier effect---on a scale of supposedly size 6----if the level of difficulty is 1000----then taking it to size 9 has a difficulty level of 100000----.

As the curvature grows---the distortion grows as well----the weakness becomes more evident----.

You have to remember the F16 was a plane jane fighter aircraft with no gismos and all the benefits it had was that the pilot could all around him.

With current electronics and sensors---you do not need a bubble canopy----when all the information and all the threats are visuals on the screen in front of you---the need of it diminishes.

Other than that----the bubble canopy on the F 16 is one of the marvels of technology that few possess.

 

[Munir]

Maybe interesting read...

Ron Jones and the F-16 Safety Canopy

 

[mughaljee]

stealth variant of JF-17 Thunder,
Will this be two Seater ?