LCA Tejas vs JF-17 Thunder

[LETHALFORCE]

I don't think Russians will export RD-33MKM they will export the old RD-93 unless they
want to kill their own markets.

 

[p2prada]

RD-33MKM is for MiG's use. PAF will get RD-93MA.

 

[The Fox]

I am not sleepy, so I will give you the link right now.

Take-off Magazine : RD-33: output on the rise


91KN. The engine going to MiG corp is 93KN.

ok thank you for that info i some where read that it was around 80 KN however thanks for the info but i would like to know is the RD 93 series a failure and hence the Russians upgraded to RD 33 series III engine
the defect being it left a dark smoke behind which is visible to naked eye can some one give more info about the same

 

[The Fox]

One general question which may be out of topic discussion but not trolling
we are getting the Russian RD33 series III and MK why cant india reverse engineer this engine and gain some knowledge and implement the same on Kaveri K9 and K10 engines any suggestions

 

[devil510]

RD-33MKM is for MiG's use. PAF will get RD-93MA.

so they going to give newest engine or old

 

[The Fox]

obviouslyits older version

 

[p2prada]

ok thank you for that info i some where read that it was around 80 KN however thanks for the info but i would like to know is the RD 93 series a failure and hence the Russians upgraded to RD 33 series III engine
the defect being it left a dark smoke behind which is visible to naked eye can some one give more info about the same

The RD-93 is acceptable for most air forces. It is not as good as the RD-33 Series III engine, but it has decent reliability considering the Chinese are happy to power a single engine fighter with this engine.

RD-33 is made of better materials and has higher quality standards. But it is not significantly different from RD-93.

Both engines no longer give out excess smoke.

One general question which may be out of topic discussion but not trolling
we are getting the Russian RD33 series III and MK why cant india reverse engineer this engine and gain some knowledge and implement the same on Kaveri K9 and K10 engines any suggestions

RD-33 is a 4th generation engine. Our current plan is to go for a 5th generation engine. Kaveri K-9 is not as advanced as the RD-33, but IAF is setting a higher standard for K-10 which will be used 10 years later.

IP rights stop blatant copying anyway.

so they going to give newest engine or old

Somewhere in between.

 

[The Fox]

The RD-93 is acceptable for most air forces. It is not as good as the RD-33 Series III engine, but it has decent reliability considering the Chinese are happy to power a single engine fighter with this engine.

RD-33 is made of better materials and has higher quality standards. But it is not significantly different from RD-93.

Both engines no longer give out excess smoke.

Fare enough and thanks......

RD-33 is a 4th generation engine. Our current plan is to go for a 5th generation engine. Kaveri K-9 is not as advanced as the RD-33, but IAF is setting a higher standard for K-10 which will be used 10 years later.

IP rights stop blatant copying anyway.

Somewhere in between.

well while the GTRE is trying to design a 5th Gen engine but they end up with a 3rd generation with less thrust ........ if Reverse Engineering helps in going one step closer to 5th generation engine then whats stopping them
IP rights is just BS if that was the case y did russia did not take any action against the chinies and they still do business with them and sell them their mil equipment and if you see it that way chinies govt is the one agency which has the highest IP violation in the world
however one should not fail to understand that the US did copy most of the German Tech and Reversed engineered them or simply copied them after WW2

 

[Hari Sud]

There is only one country in the world which would design a horrendously inferior fighter jet , get it built with Chinese assistance who love publicity more than building fighter planes, still go around publishing a million photographs on all possible forums and try to sell it undercost ($15 million) and include lowest possible grade electronics and avionics in the plane.

Do you know who that country is ..... Pakistan.

You know which fighter jet I am talking about .... JF- 17

Just because, India about ten times larger country economically next door has built it a LCA, Pakistan must build one.

Pakistan could have spent all that money to buy F-16 or Grippen. You would need half that number than JF-17s and still be ahead.

China is a master of reverse engineering. Hence the plane would look impressive. But when it comes to technology and metallurgy behind it, electronics to fly it into the battle and weapons it would fire to kill the enemy, Chinese have not stolen enough technology to master to build modern day combat worthy jet fighters. French are no fools to sell the Pakistanis the best electronics even if you buy just the shell from China and install French electronics. It still is a cheap copy. It is no different than $20 Rolex watch sold on the streets of Shanghai compare to $10,000 for the real stuff. A cheap copy is cheap anytime.

 

[venkat]

china not only rebuilt varyag ahead of vikramaditya and also landed their locally made plane J-15 on it !!!! So lets not undermine china and with the help of china ,pak will flourish!!!! lets put our house in order first!!!!

 

[Hari Sud]

Venkat..... Vikramaditya would be ready today and doing everything an aircraft carrier does except for the made in China firebricks.

Moreover mig 29 naval version landed on Vikramaditya months ago. Indians have been landing planes on aircraft carriers for the last 50 years. It is new things for the Chinese.

Moreover Chinese naval plane is a empty shell. It is to be armed and avionics are to be fitted into it. Chinese, it would seem are in a hurry to prove something. Sooner than later they would have major accident somewhere. It is their hurry which would have to be blamed.

 

[Decklander]

J-15 is a huge aircraft. Ever thought of the consequences if this aircraft crashes on deck which is very common on deck operations? One aircraft fire will engulf the entire flight deck and all aircraft/helicopters will go up in flames.

 

[farhan_9909]

No offence guys

bt HAL really need to do something with the material build quality of lca.which is already too below the standard level of any 4th gen fighter aircraft

while on one hand JFT in finishing quality surpass even the gripen.the LCA finishing quality is too dull

no offence once again
compare yourselves

 

[farhan_9909]

Quotingggg

JFT once again

i got another image

 

[farhan_9909]

Quoting again

Gripen

JFT
Damn JFT finishing quality is even superior to gripen made on european standard

 

[farhan_9909]

compared with gripen

nothing as such

i compared.posted one photo of gripen.dnt know why didnt you quoted that

anyway a few more when comparing
JFT

Gripen

 

[farhan_9909]

@p2prada

JFT within few months will have rd-93ma..pay a visit to JFT thread for more detail

with thrust upto 91.2kn.jft twr would be more than 1

 

[farhan_9909]

Compared with gripen again

JFT

Gripen

 

[Drona]

No offence guys

bt HAL really need to do something with the material build quality of lca.which is already too below the standard level of any 4th gen fighter aircraft

while on one hand JFT in finishing quality surpass even the gripen.the LCA finishing quality is too dull

no offence once again
compare yourselves

First , Provide the link which defines Finish Quality as one of the criteria to be 4th generation . its probably criteria in toy planes !
You think the people who can design and built fighter jet and RAM coating for it can not focus on finishing , if it is that important. Smoothness of surface is basic requirement in fluid dynamics.

The use of composites results in a 40 per cent reduction in the total number of parts (if the LCA were built using a metallic frame): For instance, 3,000 parts in a metallic design would come down to 1,800 parts in a composite design. The number of fasteners has been reduced to half in the composite structure from 10,000 in the metallic frame. The composite design helped to avoid about 2,000 holes being drilled into the airframe. Though the weight comes down by 21 per cent, the most interesting prediction is the time it will take to assemble the LCA -- the airframe that takes 11 months to build can be done in seven months using composites

Link

Now thats the skill ! Now compare this with your JF-17.

 

[p2prada]

@p2prada

JFT within few months will have rd-93ma..pay a visit to JFT thread for more detail

with thrust upto 91.2kn.jft twr would be more than 1

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...lca-tejas-vs-jf-17-thunder-19.html#post568143

Already posted.

91KN will make it equivalent (a little more for JF-17) in T/W to what's on the LCA Mk1 (85KN). The current LCA Mk1's empty weight is 6400Kg as of 4 or 5 months ago. To be further reduced by 100-200Kg before the first IAF version takes off.

Anyway, 91KN won't push JF-17 above 1, unless you discard weapons in your calculations.

The only comparison between JF-17 and LCA is between the Block 3 and Mk2. Both B1 and B2 are not as good as Mk1 today. Mk1 is more advanced, both in terms of avionics and build quality. For one, the service life of LCA is far greater than JF-17's 4000 hours.