JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

[kamaal]

if jf17 is a capable one then why pakis denied to show it in Bahrain air show .....with tejas........

they know what they have ........but it really hurts when Indian s praise jf17 ..... without any fact

You can't just pick one issue to criticize JF17. PAF has some of very well trained pilots in the world, they'll never accept a fighter jet which does not fit in their requirement. JF satisfies their needs of defending their airspace from IAF, from the likes of SU30. They know F16 alone is not enough for IAF neither technically nor numerically they can compete with F16 against the likes of Mirage, Mig29 & MKIs.

JF offered them chance to have a small industry, which means they don't have to rely on foreign country for solving small snags. They are thinking about 250 JFs in their inventory, that should be more than enough to offer some deterrent against IAF. Even if JFs are sitting duck against MKIs but remember combined with the AWACS they can very well tackle MKIs threat, they just need proper planning, but the moment their AWACS are gone JFs will be target practice, but killing 250 of them during war will be tough task even for IAF.

So don't underestimate JFs they are serving their prupose in PAF , they have already flown in Paris and other airshows and have drawn some interest from foreign countries which is more than enough for any sane and neutral person to believe that, 'JFs are what they promise it to be'.

 

[kamaal]

all the LM pilots say about the F35 : "it's a marvellous plane, very agile".... even when a 40 years old F16 smashed it every day.
It means nothing.

Well without any doubt I can trust the statement of the test pilot. For 2 reason :
1). The software system development in of very high quality.
2). The control law developed for LCA is of 21 century tech and is result of experience/inputs from some of the best pilots in the world who have flown Migs, Mirages & Sukhoi.

Software wise it is one of the best jet available in IAF inventory, I can't claim the same about other features.

 

[Kalki_2018]

[QUOTE"]You can't just pick one issue to criticize JF17. PAF has some of very well trained pilots in the world, they'll never accept a fighter jet which does not fit in their requirement. JF satisfies their needs of defending their airspace from IAF, from the likes of SU30. They know F16 alone is not enough for IAF neither technically nor numerically they can compete with F16 against the likes of Mirage, Mig29 & MKIs.

JF offered them chance to have a small industry, which means they don't have to rely on foreign country for solving small snags. They are thinking about 250 JFs in their inventory, that should be more than enough to offer some deterrent against IAF. Even if JFs are sitting duck against MKIs but remember combined with the AWACS they can very well tackle MKIs threat, they just need proper planning, but the moment their AWACS are gone JFs will be target practice, but killing 250 of them during war will be tough task even for IAF.

So don't underestimate JFs they are serving their prupose in PAF , they have already flown in Paris and other airshows and have drawn some interest from foreign countries which is more than enough for any sane and neutral person to believe that, 'JFs are what they promise it to be'.[/QUOTE]


There is a reason why paf went for JF-17 blunder. Its called "money". USA refused to give them F-16's, French M2K-5's are beyond their means forget Rafale or Eurofighter and Russia will not selll them even Su-27's forget Su-35 or anything better. They cannot support a twin engined fighter and there were no single engined fighters available for cheap unless you go with chinese junk like F-7 or JF-17. JF-17 gave them the only hope of having any meaningful squadron strength. They had already exhausted all the second and third hand Mirage-3/5 supplies and did not want to go with F-7p's.

 

[jat]

You can't just pick one issue to criticize JF17. PAF has some of very well trained pilots in the world, they'll never accept a fighter jet which does not fit in their requirement. JF satisfies their needs of defending their airspace from IAF, from the likes of SU30. They know F16 alone is not enough for IAF neither technically nor numerically they can compete with F16 against the likes of Mirage, Mig29 & MKIs.

JF offered them chance to have a small industry, which means they don't have to rely on foreign country for solving small snags. They are thinking about 250 JFs in their inventory, that should be more than enough to offer some deterrent against IAF. Even if JFs are sitting duck against MKIs but remember combined with the AWACS they can very well tackle MKIs threat, they just need proper planning, but the moment their AWACS are gone JFs will be target practice, but killing 250 of them during war will be tough task even for IAF.

So don't underestimate JFs they are serving their prupose in PAF , they have already flown in Paris and other airshows and have drawn some interest from foreign countries which is more than enough for any sane and neutral person to believe that, 'JFs are what they promise it to be'.

ever heard of politics? politics is the reason why IAF has Su-30s instead of F-15 silent eagles. Politics is the reason IAF has both Mirage and Mig-29.
Politics is the reason PAF has JF-17 instead of ToT Gripen which is better at filling all the roles of the JF-17.
Politics. Technically, PAF would love to buy Gripen. It never happened because they are too poor and China pays their bills. Imagine ToT Gripen for PAF. Thats alot more capable, more sorties, hot refueling secure data link. But regardless, PAF exists for a moral boast. In reality PAF would loose against Indian army missiles. Which is why Pakistan has a lot of empty straight roads. PAF can be called professional, but they are only as good as their budget plus there is the corruption that goes unnoticed.

 

[BON PLAN]

Well without any doubt I can trust the statement of the test pilot. For 2 reason :
1). The software system development in of very high quality.
2). The control law developed for LCA is of 21 century tech and is result of experience/inputs from some of the best pilots in the world who have flown Migs, Mirages & Sukhoi.

Software wise it is one of the best jet available in IAF inventory, I can't claim the same about other features.

The FBW laws are maybe rafined by pilots, but the core is only mathematics rules.
All depend of the aerodynamic formula and the level of instability you choose at the beginning.
And I doubt India choose a too much risky instability level for it's first modern plane.

 

[Steven Rogers]

The FBW laws are maybe rafined by pilots, but the core is only mathematics rules.
All depend of the aerodynamic formula and the level of instability you choose at the beginning.
And I doubt India choose a too much risky instability level for it's first modern plane.

What pilots and designers say that aircraft is "Highly" unstable, the same say F16 a little unstable design and Pakistan Chinese plane highly stable, the making of highly unstable plane is proportional to how good your Flight controls and fly by wire is, highly unstable design actually means ease of doing maneuvers while the limits are guarded by FBW, and as far as I know from Bahrain, tejas did 8g pull with ease where Pakistanis struggled to do so in Paris and Saudia Arabia, tejas did 8g turn in 16 secs, while the same done by an F16 in 18sec, Jf17 by 20 and Mig29 by 16sec, tejas minimal radius turn was completed in 12 secs and vertical loop in 20 secs. Tejas more aggressive maneuvers were visible in the last year air force celebrations, and in recent combat exercise, Tejas showed despite at IOC stage, it was a decent performer for a multirole mission.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[Armand2REP]

What pilots and designers say that aircraft is "Highly" unstable, the same say F16 a little unstable design and Pakistan Chinese plane highly stable, the making of highly unstable plane is proportional to how good your Flight controls and fly by wire is, highly unstable design actually means ease of doing maneuvers while the limits are guarded by FBW, and as far as I know from Bahrain, tejas did 8g pull with ease where Pakistanis struggled to do so in Paris and Saudia Arabia, tejas did 8g turn in 16 secs, while the same done by an F16 in 18sec, Jf17 by 20 and Mig29 by 16sec, tejas minimal radius turn was completed in 12 secs and vertical loop in 20 secs. Tejas more aggressive maneuvers were visible in the last year air force celebrations, and in recent combat exercise, Tejas showed despite at IOC stage, it was a decent performer for a multirole mission.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

Chinese plane has to be stable because of rudimentary flight controls. If you ever watch flight demo of Rafale and J-10 you will see Rafale stops are precise while J-10 overshoots.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Chinese plane has to be stable because of rudimentary flight controls. If you ever watch flight demo of Rafale and J-10 you will see Rafale stops are precise while J-10 overshoots.

J10 sucks with its fly controls, crashes almost every year, 5 last year and more to crash in the coming days of service, 15 so far in a decade.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[BON PLAN]

What pilots and designers say that aircraft is "Highly" unstable, the same say F16 a little unstable design and Pakistan Chinese plane highly stable, the making of highly unstable plane is proportional to how good your Flight controls and fly by wire is, highly unstable design actually means ease of doing maneuvers while the limits are guarded by FBW, and as far as I know from Bahrain, tejas did 8g pull with ease where Pakistanis struggled to do so in Paris and Saudia Arabia, tejas did 8g turn in 16 secs, while the same done by an F16 in 18sec, Jf17 by 20 and Mig29 by 16sec, tejas minimal radius turn was completed in 12 secs and vertical loop in 20 secs. Tejas more aggressive maneuvers were visible in the last year air force celebrations, and in recent combat exercise, Tejas showed despite at IOC stage, it was a decent performer for a multirole mission.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

NO. The stability or instability depend of the respective position of center of gravity and lift center. It's a designer choice, not a pilot one.

 

[Steven Rogers]

NO. The stability or instability depend of the respective position of center of gravity and lift center. It's a designer choice, not a pilot one.

the design is based on ASQR by Airforce, FBW is also based on design. Pilot's input on FBW is also based on design and performance of the design.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[kamaal]

The FBW laws are maybe rafined by pilots, but the core is only mathematics rules.
All depend of the aerodynamic formula and the level of instability you choose at the beginning.
And I doubt India choose a too much risky instability level for it's first modern plane.

That is visible from the LCA flight at several events. It's limitations are clearly visible.

Mirage 200 still can out-maneuver LCA very easily, but it's OK. LCA is maturing and MK1A might see some improvement and MK2 will exploit everything the design has to offer. ADA/HAL needs little more confidence on this platform.

 

[Flame Thrower]

That is visible from the LCA flight at several events. It's limitations are clearly visible.

Mirage 200 still can out-maneuver LCA very easily, but it's OK. LCA is maturing and MK1A might see some improvement and MK2 will exploit everything the design has to offer. ADA/HAL needs little more confidence on this platform.

Any source to back your claims on Mirage out-manoeuvre LCA with ease!!??

 

[kamaal]

Any source to back your claims on Mirage out-manoeuvre LCA with ease!!??

You have many videos on youtube where LCA & Mirage 2000 are flying without any external loads i.e. best case scenario to show their maneuvering ability. I can see the clear difference, I hope you too could see the difference.

LCA is not able to perform extreme maneuver, somehow the manufacturers have imposed some kind of restriction on its ability to ensure safety. I hope once MK1A comes with reduced weight as promised by HAL, then I think HAL will allow the pilots to push the boundaries of LCA.

 

[Shashwat]

^^ Those are of IOC configuration, FOC s.w released early this year will increase envelope further both in Gs and AOA.

Moreover, this is JF17 thread please stick to it.

 

[Steven Rogers]

You have many videos on youtube where LCA & Mirage 2000 are flying without any external loads i.e. best case scenario to show their maneuvering ability. I can see the clear difference, I hope you too could see the difference.

LCA is not able to perform extreme maneuver, somehow the manufacturers have imposed some kind of restriction on its ability to ensure safety. I hope once MK1A comes with reduced weight as promised by HAL, then I think HAL will allow the pilots to push the boundaries of LCA.

Please post the videos.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[kamaal]

Please post the videos.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

Not the right thread to discuss LCA vs other jets.

It would be better if you could find some videos by yourself which shows LCA closer to Mirage 2000 and prove me wrong & post it in LCA related thread and do tag me there.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Not the right thread to discuss LCA vs other jets.

It would be better if you could find some videos by yourself which shows LCA closer to Mirage 2000 and prove me wrong & post it in LCA related thread and do tag me there.

I don't have videos which show LCA and Mirage side by side maneuvering in a formation. Kindly post if you have any.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[kamaal]

I don't have videos which show LCA and Mirage side by side maneuvering in a formation. Kindly post if you have any.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

'closer' in the sense 'same flight mode'. Not side by side.

Compare LCA in Bahrain/Aero India with Mirage 2000 during Paris or any other Air show with minimum load.

 

[Steven Rogers]

'closer' in the sense 'same flight mode'. Not side by side.

Compare LCA in Bahrain/Aero India with Mirage 2000 during Paris or any other Air show with minimum load.

Mirage 2000, did all maneuvers at relatively higher speed it did at instantaneous rate but not so perfect but mostly over shooting the maneuver. Pilot had to take care of every move.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[BON PLAN]

Mirage 2000, did all maneuvers at relatively higher speed it did at instantaneous rate but not so perfect but mostly over shooting the maneuver. Pilot had to take care of every move.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

?
Mirage 2000 is one of the safer jet of the world.
Some F16 gone to sea after a hard dog fight with M2000.