Capabilities & sale of JF-17 fighter

[Armand2REP]

Unfortunately you lost all your credibility by including the ownership of cars in your argument to prove the progress of avionics industry.

Ownership of cars, decline of France... whatever he can think of to get OT. We knew the moment Pakistan came begging to Thales for avionics China was subpar. Now Chinese are still importing radars from Russia. Even the new Comac airliner is to be filled with Western avionics and engines. The domestic aviation of China is more like airframes than the actual high value items.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Compared to J10 yes, but compared with LCA (Last chance aircraft) definitely not.

Oh that means compared with J-10(IAI-LAVI) JF-17 is slower, shorter legged, less external load, less or no upgrade potential and when compared with LCA JF-17 is very slower, very shot legged, very less external load, very less or no upgrade potential. Thanks for the verdict.

 

[tony4562]

you cannot compare LCA with JF 17 one is not tested fully yet inducted into PAF and even offered to foreigners not to mention PLA AF dont find it worthwhile to even induct the same into its fleet.

Where as LCA is being tested to full potential, soon to get IOC and FOC may be next year. Induction only after IOC and weapons tests.

BTW some of the pakistani think that JF is better then J10 A or B. (dont know why)

You better read this (probably you already have) ...has not been able to attain include sustained turn rate, speed at low altitude, angle of attack and certain weapon delivery profiles...

 

[maomao]

Compared to J10 yes, but compared with LCA (Last chance aircraft) definitely not.

How can you say that when you can't even develop your own engine, avionics, radar, weapon systems? You induct first and develop latter? At-least LCA has an excellent IAI/HAL radar, French&Israeli avionics, excellent weapon systems and F414 Engine, which J10 surely lacks (lol)!! Yes this Last Chance Aircraft will be more than enough to eat your cheap Tin-Can (aka J10) alive :happy_2:

 

[Rahul Singh]

You better read this (probably you already have) ...has not been able to attain include sustained turn rate, speed at low altitude, angle of attack and certain weapon delivery profiles...

Yes because LCA has to live upto IAF ASR not to the other airforces which like MaoMao said believes in "Induct first-Develop later" concept.

You better start worrying about The coming muslim takeover of france:emot112:

Your better worry about your indirect helping hand to pakistani terrorists and their ever rising influence in Xinjiang(or i say east Turkestan)

East Turkestan independence movement

The Muslim of Xinjiang want an independent
Muslim state

 

[tony4562]

Ownership of cars, decline of France... whatever he can think of to get OT. We knew the moment Pakistan came begging to Thales for avionics China was subpar. Now Chinese are still importing radars from Russia. Even the new Comac airliner is to be filled with Western avionics and engines. The domestic aviation of China is more like airframes than the actual high value items.

China at least is not on a one-way ticket to become a mullah heaven. And you may want to pretend you were a blind man, but I have to tell you for the last time that J10 does not use russian radar or other aviaonics.

 

[tony4562]

Yes because LCA has to live upto IAF ASR not the other airforces which like MaoMao said believes in "Induct first-Develop later" concept.

But I read that LCA will be inducted regardless before the end of the year, is that not open contradiction? care to explain?

 

[badguy2000]

Ownership of cars, decline of France... whatever he can think of to get OT. We knew the moment Pakistan came begging to Thales for avionics China was subpar. Now Chinese are still importing radars from Russia. Even the new Comac airliner is to be filled with Western avionics and engines. The domestic aviation of China is more like airframes than the actual high value items.

imported avionics are fixed on commercial airliners because.costperformance is the king in commercial market..

two big plane projects are paralleled.One is commerical airliner,the other is military transport plane.

to build commerical airliner is not to chase costperformance while military transport is to chase indigenizaiton,

 

[Armand2REP]

imported avionics are fixed on commercial airliners because.costperformance is the king in commercial market..

Is that why the engines and even entertainment system are going to be French? More like to be competitive on the international market China needs equipment and avionics that meets international standards. Those made in China will never receive an FAA or EASA certification. Have no idea why China can't make an airliner entertainment centre but France won that too.

two big plane projects are paralleled.One is commerical airliner,the other is military transport plane. To build commerical airliner is not to chase costperformance while military transport is to chase indigenizaiton,

And the airlifter is being developed with Ukraine... so much for self sufficiency.

 

[Rahul Singh]

But I read that LCA will be inducted regardless before the end of the year, is that not open contradiction? care to explain?

ASR was changed in mid way, the requirements become relatively more demanding than one originally stated. During testing it was discovered that present engine can not fulfil the thrust requirements for meeting increased performance. So it was decided that new powerful engine will be procured to meet new requirements while in meantime ASR will be revised. Later IAF found that LCA-MKI is far superior to serving Mig-21Bisons even with revised ASR so they ordered 20 more LCA MK-1s. Interestingly, initially IAF had made their mind to order only Trainers of LCA MK-1 but when LSP-2 started flying with F-404IN20(earlier ones were flying with F-404F2J3 engine) they changed their mind and decided to buy one complete fighter squadron i.e 18 single seater + 2 duel seater instead.

 

[tony4562]

Any aircraft that can't meet the very basic design criteria like sustained turn rate, angle of attack, low level speed, and has only now achieved the ability to disperse flares, doesn't sound like it is ready for induction. For me it sounds like it probably has not even reached half-way mark in terms of development, yet the IAF is inducing this into service, is that funny or what?

BTW, 1500 flights is very little when you consider that LCA was only able to go supersonic after nearly 3 years of flying.

 

[icecoolben]

using WS-10 will make it J-10, for JF-17 they wanted to use WS-13. But I doubt they would since the chinese are no longer buying JF-17, they won't seriously invest in research to develop WS-13. Pakistan will have to make do with RD-93, if a war breaks out, Indian pilots can claim kills without even opening cannon fire in case of JF-17

 

[Rahul Singh]

Any aircraft that can't meet the very basic design criteria like sustained turn rate, angle of attack, low level speed, and has only now achieved the ability to disperse flares, doesn't sound like it is ready for induction. For me it sounds like it probably has not even reached half-way mark in terms of development, yet the IAF is inducing this into service, is that funny or what?

BTW, 1500 flights is very little when you consider that LCA was only able to go supersonic after nearly 3 years of flying.

This very basic looking sustained rate of turn, angle of attack and low level speed becomes demanding when jet is packed with all the goodies internally. Comparatively speaking, LCA and JF-17 belongs to same weight class and their engine provides almost same thrust yet LCA MK-1 flies with 4000Kg of weapon load and 3000Kg of internal fuel in contrast to JF-17's 3500Kg weapon load and 2300Kg of internal fuel. Even with this 1200Kg of relatively more weight LCA MK-1 is a 9g fighter in contrast to JF-17's 8.5g requirement. Now you tell me, is this 1200Kg of additional load any funny or what?

On side note. Even with it, let me assure you that the revised ASR still keeps LCA way above JF-17s otherwise IAF would have never gone for MK-1 version.

BTW, 1500 flights is very little when you consider that LCA was only able to go supersonic after nearly 3 years of flying.

The project LCA was sanctioned in two phases, first was 'Technology Demonstration' phase where GOI has asked designers to prove critical (first to be developed in India) technologies like digital FCS or fly-by wire and new all composite airframe, this phase lasted till 2003. It was only then the extended program was sanctioned and PVs started flying at supersonic speeds.

 

[tony4562]

This very basic looking sustained rate of turn, angle of attack and low level speed becomes demanding when jet is packed with all the goodies internally. Comparatively speaking, LCA and JF-17 belongs to same weight class and their engine provides almost same thrust yet LCA MK-1 flies with 4000Kg of weapon load and 3000Kg of internal fuel in contrast to JF-17's 3500Kg weapon load and 2300Kg of internal fuel. Even with this 1200Kg of relatively more weight LCA MK-1 is a 9g fighter in contrast to JF-17's 8.5g requirement. Now you tell me, is this 1200Kg of additional load any funny or what?

On side note. Even with it, let me assure you that the revised ASR still keeps LCA way above JF-17s otherwise IAF would have never gone for MK-1 version.

The project LCA was sanctioned in two phases, first was 'Technology Demonstration' phase where GOI has asked designers to prove critical (first to be developed in India) technologies like digital FCS or fly-by wire and new all composite airframe, this phase lasted till 2003. It was only then the extended program was sanctioned and PVs started flying at supersonic speeds.

LCA carries 3000 liter of internal fuel, not 3000 kg. 3000 liter fuel works out like 2100 kg fuel, less than the 2300 kg fuel carried by JF-17. Also, you can claim all you want to about LCA being 4.5+ gen, packed with high-tech, can do 9g, blah blah, but if the actual thing can not live to the design specs, all those numbers are just meaningless. A common excuse I've heard is that LCA is underpowered by F404, yet strangely few have said the same thing about Gripen despite the latter being slightly larger. I think all things indicate that LCA has severe aerodynamic design flaws.

It's my last post in this thread.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Also, you can claim all you want to about LCA being 4.5+ gen, packed with high-tech, can do 9g, blah blah, but if the actual thing can not live to the design specs, all those numbers are just meaningless.

LCA excels the original design specs, it only falls shot of increased performance requirement that was conveyed to the designers when they already had prototypes flying.

A common excuse I've heard is that LCA is underpowered by F404, yet strangely few have said the same thing about Gripen despite the latter being slightly larger. I think all things indicate that LCA has severe aerodynamic design flaws.

We don't compare apple to oranges yet we call them fruits. Gripen is canard coupled delta fighter, LCA is tail less cranked delta(with relatively larger wing). Theoretically they are same yet Gripen is different, Gripen is longer with relatively smaller main wing and due to different aerodynamics excels from LCA in some aspects and no body denies it. After all there is an extent to which we can compare apple to oranges.

Design flaws: Non man no, like i said Gripen is different from LCA and you can't blame a tail less delta because one canard coupled delta gives better performance. They are different designs and naturally have their advantage and disadvantages.

We take all these criticism in media with pinch of salt. LCA always had critics and many of them are working day and night for their own good but we will not believe until IAF says so officially. IAF ordering 20 more MK-1 gives very strong signal that LCA is not what critics like to project it like. e.g Some days ago some journalists were on rampage saying LCA is going to miss IOC deadline of 27th December quoting so-called 'unnamed sources' but what we know today is entirely opposite. Anyway we are waiting for 27 dec to know for sure the opinion of IAF on performance of LCA MK-1.

It's my last post in this thread.

Thanks for caring about the sanity!:emot100: