JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

[farhan_9909]

Where is the source for your LCA RCS claim? What makes you think that when JF-17 can fire 100 km missile , the LCA Tejas cannot integrate 100 km range BVR? Any structural deficiency?

because the design makes me thinks so.

where i said it cant?it can

what i meant is BVR are not launched at max range.

 

[Decklander]

because the design makes me thinks so.

where i said it cant?it can

what i meant is BVR are not launched at max range.

Based on sensors, A BVR launch can be done when the target is still out of range as long as it is maintaining its vector towards the launch platform. That will ensure that actual interception takes place at extreme range. Such intercepts can happen only with combination of ground controlled intercepts and onboard sensors.

 

[farhan_9909]

Based on sensors, A BVR launch can be done when the target is still out of range as long as it is maintaining its vector towards the launch platform. That will ensure that actual interception takes place at extreme range. Such intercepts can happen only with combination of ground controlled intercepts and onboard sensors.

yes indeed it can happen,,the awacs will guide the missile to the target??

but can a missile with 100km range be launched at a target 100km away?

i think it should be launched at around 70-80km max

 

[Decklander]

yes indeed it can happen,,the awacs will guide the missile to the target??

but can a missile with 100km range be launched at a target 100km away?

i think it should be launched at around 70-80km max

AWACS do not illuminate targets for strike aircraft. They provide vectors and position update thru Link-16 or similar stuff to pass on target data.
The launch of a BVR missile with 100km range will always occur when the target is more than that range provided target cordinates are available, it maintains its course and a clear lock can be achieved. The target will move within the kill zone of the missile while the missile is in flight to its target for a predetermined impact point. Pls remember we are talking about the target and missile both heading for eachother.

 

[ersakthivel]

because the design makes me thinks so.

where i said it cant?it can

what i meant is BVR are not launched at max range.

Which design spec made you think so?

And what made you think that Tejas with 120 km range detection and tracking radar cannot fire a BVR at max range?

When JF-17 with can fire a 100 km plus BVR , why can't Tejas which has the same radome dia as RAFALE can't fire it?

Other than radar range what limits the fighter from firing a BVR at max range? please explain.

Haven't you read the ADA chief's interview to AJAI SHUKLA in which he clearly says that Tejas will have the interface to fire the 120 km range Meteor misslie?

While tejas is designed with higher percentage of composites and RCs reduction from design phase itself to be among one of the most lesser RCS fighters among 4.5th gens , no such design effort is made on JF-17 as per any available material.

Your claim for Tejas RCS of 2 sq meters is wrong and the JF-17 having lesser RCS than tejas is equally wrong. Infact it is the 95 percent composite material skin Tejas which detects the all metal JF-17 first.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Which design spec made you think so?

And what made you think that Tejas with 120 km range detection and tracking radar cannot fire a BVR at max range?

When JF-17 with can fire a 100 km plus BVR , why can't Tejas which has the same radome dia as RAFALE can't fire it?

Other than radar range what limits the fighter from firing a BVR at max range? please explain.

Haven't you read the ADA chief's interview to AJAI SHUKLA in which he clearly says that Tejas will have the interface to fire the 120 km range Meteor misslie?

While tejas is designed with higher percentage of composites and RCs reduction from design phase itself to be among one of the most lesser RCS fighters among 4.5th gens , no such design effort is made on JF-17 as per any available material.

Your claim for Tejas RCS of 2 sq meters is wrong and the JF-17 having lesser RCS than tejas is equally wrong. Infact it is the 95 percent composite material skin Tejas which detects the all metal JF-17 first.

Actually, you very rarely, if ever, will want to fire a BVR missile at max range. The reason is very straightforward and has nothing to do with the superiority of the missile or the aircraft.

All BVRs are guided to the target by radars onboard the fighter/AWACS until the active/passive/semi-active seeker onboard the missile activates. Any combat AC has a passive mode in addition to active mode on their radars. The passive mode can detect a radar lock made by the hostile AC on its own AC. The moment the pilot becomes aware that he has been radar-locked, he will take evasive maunuevres and/or activate the EW/Jammer systems onboard.

Now if the radar lock is achieved at 130km and missile is launched from extreme range, say 120 km, at Mach 4, it gives the pilot about 90 seconds to survive, during which he can simply turn in a different direction and fire the afterburner (say to Mach 1.8) and get about 50km further away from his original distance. Now, due to the missile being launched already from an extreme range, it cannot overcome this additional distance and fails.

This is why the pilots are trained to never fire the BVRs at max ranges. The missile does not have enough fuel to challange the manuevre and distance the target AC can employ to escape. Then there is also the fact that at such extreme ranges, the enemy pilot also gains several extra valuable seconds to react, seconds which are very valuable in air-combat.

Actually a pilot will very rarely engage a radar lock until he is within the actual engagement radius of his BVR missiles. This further reduces the time available for the enemy pilot to set up CMs for the incoming missile.

However at what distance the pilot will launch his bvr missile is dependent on the skills & patience of the pilot, the performance and range of of the missile and the confidence of the pilot on making a kill.

You will find in several accounts that the actual engagement range of a bvr is far less than the max range.

As for Farhaan's comment about the RCS of JF-17 being less than the Tejas, well, the Tejas is reputed to have an RCS much more smaller than the MIG-21, which is indeed the AC with the smallest RCS in IAF's current inventory. Add to that the RAM coatings and a largely composite structure, I fail to see how the Thunder will actually even come close to the Tejas.

And btw, MIG-21, by several accounts has an RCS of 1.2m2.

 

[farhan_9909]

exactly i meant the same.bvr can be fired at max range.but its better to not fire them at max range.

Jft rcs are least in paf inventory.jft also has ram coating.ram tech is now mastered in Pakistan.engine blades are not visible.has composite material build body aswell
vis a vis lca which infect now is a dud design..

I will post the latest interview about jft tonight.

 

[farhan_9909]

initially jft 2 was suppose to have no structural changer except ifr

but now it is confirmed that it wont be possible to reupgrade the jft 1 to jft 2 due to big structural changes.

And jft 2 would be the standard jft and the one to be exported aswell

 

[DivineHeretic]

exactly i meant the same.bvr can be fired at max range.but its better to not fire them at max range.

Jft rcs are least in paf inventory.jft also has ram coating.ram tech is now mastered in Pakistan.engine blades are not visible.has composite material build body aswell
vis a vis lca which infect now is a dud design..

I will post the latest interview about jft tonight.

Atleast think before posting, it certainly wont hurt you much. Btw you only end up embaressing yourself with every post.

The JFT might have least RCS in PAF (I seriously doubt that wrt the F-16 C/D block 52), but that does not mean it compares to the LCA in RCS. And in any case RCS values are classified. No point comparing two unknowns.

And you do realise that RAM is not Burger paints or Asian paints or metallic paint. Its also not the green paint you import from China. And no its not an Islamic paint that you will master without any rudimentary material Science research capability. Even the Americans with 40-50 years of experience in RAM coatings is struggling with its efficiency, effectiveness and operational life. I think you confused it with your best skill, making suicide bombers and IEDs and the green paint you paint all NK missiles with.

Go read up on Wiki what RAM coatings are before commenting on your national mastery. And btw, even if you did master RAM coatings, there is still the problem of economics. The RAM coatings are fairly expensive, and have a very short life. In certain cases, the coatings may come off in a single sortie. And for a nation nearing bankruptcy such as yours, you cant afford to apply this on 150 JFTs, for every sortie.

And where did yu get the idea that JFT has a composite material body? Its an out and out metal body with a few token pieces of composites thrown around. How do you think you keep the price of that AC down? By putting the most expensive building material out there? Damn, you need a dose of common sense.

The LCA was designed as a composite body AC, and even though it is a light AC, the IAF isn't concerned about its price. It wants performance and is willing to spend as much as required. Why do you think a nation with $46 billion (actually upwards of $55 billion including Paramilitary and strategic weapins) will induct something inferior to a nation with $9 billion? The LCA has its destiny, it will be fulfilled regardless of the commentary of a nation buckling under misgovernance.

 

[sayareakd]

And you do realise that RAM is not Burger paints or Asian paints or metallic paint. Its also not the green paint you import from China. And no its not an Islamic paint that you will master without any rudimentary material Science research capability. Even the Americans with 40-50 years of experience in RAM coatings is struggling with its efficiency, effectiveness and operational life. I think you confused it with your best skill, making suicide bombers and IEDs and the green paint you paint all NK missiles with.

Divine at its best .....................................

 

[Decklander]

Each missile carried on extrenal pylons adds about 0.5msq RCS to the ac RCS. The value for MICA is a bit low as it is not a complete cylindrical missile like AMRAAM-120 or AIM-9x. Same is true about R-77s and R-73s. The cylindrical part of the missile gives rise to creeping waves which interfere with pylon and transmit in all directions. Indian ASTRA also suffers from same problem. In addition the pylon + missile interface can add to RCS and increase it manytimes. RAM coating on missiles do tend to solve this problem but adds more problems. All these figures of RCS of 1msq for Su-35 or other ac are for clean config only.
Even the RCS of J-20 has been highly overstated. I will be surprised if this ac can actually show the agility of even third gen fighters.

 

[ersakthivel]

There is no way a long sleek BVR missile will add 0.5 sq meter RCS at the front. May be sideways it will add some RCS considering the fin missile body interface. But at the front none that much.

In the old 4th gen planes pylons were plain rectangular blocks attached to the wing giving much bigger RCS, nowadays pylons are modern and aerodynamically designed to reduce drag and give least possible RCS.

Also the pylons are nowadays designed with stealth compliance from the front. At the sides it may not be(even here efforts are made to reduce 90 deg section planes.) So credible studies are needed before we make any conclusion.

Cylinder reflects Radar waves in all directions at scattering pattern, but not very much back to the source. So cylindrical shapes are not that horrible when we compare for the purpose of RCS reductions.

And especially when 4.5 th gens like LCA fly low the AWACS above won't get any RCS reflection from the misslies and fins , because the huge wings of Tejas cover more than 80 percent of the long BVR missiles. But having much smaller wings the JF-17 will have missiles sticking out of it's very small wings and will give emissions back to AWACS.

So if there are no bulky external fuel tanks and dumb bombs of second world war vintage modern 4.5th gen designed with RCS reduction in mind can have least radar reflection designed pylons and in air to air mode will have far lower RCS from the front ,because from the front misslie fins won't emit that much reflections.

 

[farhan_9909]

Atleast think before posting, it certainly wont hurt you much. Btw you only end up embaressing yourself with every post.

The JFT might have least RCS in PAF (I seriously doubt that wrt the F-16 C/D block 52), but that does not mean it compares to the LCA in RCS. And in any case RCS values are classified. No point comparing two unknowns.

Ah,JFT rcs are below Rafale and at the level of EFT..probably among the least in 4th generation fighters.

And LCA is a dud design.Its RCS even in clean configuration must be around 2m2

And you do realise that RAM is not Burger paints or Asian paints or metallic paint. Its also not the green paint you import from China. And no its not an Islamic paint that you will master without any rudimentary material Science research capability. Even the Americans with 40-50 years of experience in RAM coatings is struggling with its efficiency, effectiveness and operational life. I think you confused it with your best skill, making suicide bombers and IEDs and the green paint you paint all NK missiles with.

well its true.if you have any contact with pdf mod oscar you can also ask him.The project of Pakistani RAM exclusively was started for Babur cruise missile...beside this there is one private firm named CARE which has a JV with turkish firm

PEC has a capability of complete Composites of any quality.and the facility is Boeing and airbuss certified and exports parts for commercial jets to boeing and airbuss.

Go read up on Wiki what RAM coatings are before commenting on your national mastery. And btw, even if you did master RAM coatings, there is still the problem of economics. The RAM coatings are fairly expensive, and have a very short life. In certain cases, the coatings may come off in a single sortie. And for a nation nearing bankruptcy such as yours, you cant afford to apply this on 150 JFTs, for every sortie.

I dont know why are you acting like a indian and lying?.you rich and indian?buahahahahaha indian and rich..ghareeb log

And where did yu get the idea that JFT has a composite material body? Its an out and out metal body with a few token pieces of composites thrown around. How do you think you keep the price of that AC down? By putting the most expensive building material out there? Damn, you need a dose of common sense.

As i said in the past LCA composites are myth.please dont believe in the words of HAL and DRDO.
Meanwhile let me show you how a aircraft with 95% of its skin having composites looks like and how of JFT

sometime i think LCA is a projects of kids.(not kidding)

The LCA was designed as a composite body AC, and even though it is a light AC, the IAF isn't concerned about its price. It wants performance and is willing to spend as much as required. Why do you think a nation with $46 billion (actually upwards of $55 billion including Paramilitary and strategic weapins) will induct something inferior to a nation with $9 billion? The LCA has its destiny, it will be fulfilled regardless of the commentary of a nation buckling under misgovernance.

it is not lighter than JFT even though JFT is longer,wider and taller than LCA except the wing area.
indian defence budget include everything including the nuclear program budget..over here in pakistan the official defence budget doesnt include many after retirements rights of military officers and nuclear program budget into official defence budget..mushy excluded them off to show the budget smaller.

i repeat again mark my words LCA will never be inducted and would rather serve as a technology demonstrator for the AMCA to be inducted in 2036.

 

[ersakthivel]

Ah,JFT rcs are below Rafale and at the level of EFT..probably among the least in 4th generation fighters.

And LCA is a dud design.Its RCS even in clean configuration must be around 2m2


well its true.if you have any contact with pdf mod oscar you can also ask him.The project of Pakistani RAM exclusively was started for Babur cruise missile...beside this there is one private firm named CARE which has a JV with turkish firm

PEC has a capability of complete Composites of any quality.and the facility is Boeing and airbuss certified and exports parts for commercial jets to boeing and airbuss.


I dont know why are you acting like a indian and lying?.you rich and indian?buahahahahaha indian and rich..ghareeb log




As i said in the past LCA composites are myth.please dont believe in the words of HAL and DRDO.
Meanwhile let me show you how a aircraft with 95% of its skin having composites looks like and how of JFT

sometime i think LCA is a projects of kids.(not kidding)

it is not lighter than JFT even though JFT is longer,wider and taller than LCA except the wing area.
indian defence budget include everything including the nuclear program budget..over here in pakistan the official defence budget doesnt include many after retirements rights of military officers and nuclear program budget into official defence budget..mushy excluded them off to show the budget smaller.

i repeat again mark my words LCA will never be inducted and would rather serve as a technology demonstrator for the AMCA to be inducted in 2036.

you are creating a record of sorts for posting BullShit.
In any other froum this kind of bud headed trolling will invite a ban.
You are entitled to your wet dreams of JF-17 being 5th gen stealth and LCA being meant for kids, i have no problem with that.
But don't prattle about your infantile fantasies here.

 

[farhan_9909]

comparing the cockpits of F-22,JFT,LCA and f-7pg
F-22

JFT

LCA

F-7

 

[farhan_9909]

Interview about JFT with Yang.credits speeder 2

JF-17's Chief Designer Mr. Yang Wei has a short interview with People's Daily on 23th:


1. "I saw the pics of 6 Thunder flying yesterday...they were beautiful... we are very proud of Thunder."

2. What are the future improvements ? --- "(full?)Situation awareness, more weapon capabilities and further system intergration"

3. any plan for 2-seater? --- "yes. we have a plan to develop 2-seater...also have a plan to develop it into series".

4. any future improvment on stealth? --- "yes. It had a good advantage in designing... we'll deploy more economical measures of stealth."

5. what's the statue of engines development? --- "everything goes well according to the schedule."

6. any development on its air-refueling capabilities? --- "yes. we should see them in PAF within 1 or 2 years."

 

[farhan_9909]

you are creating a record of sorts for posting BullShit.
In any other froum this kind of bud headed trolling will invite a ban.
You are entitled to your wet dreams of JF-17 being 5th gen stealth and LCA being meant for kids, i have no problem with that.
But don't prattle about your infantile fantasies here.

better quote what is wrong with my post and i would try to prove myself right.
instead of such one liner reply

 

[ersakthivel]

better quote what is wrong with my post and i would try to prove myself right.
instead of such one liner reply

You don't have a single credible source for the LCA tejas RCS or the RCS of all metal JF-17.Yet you continue posting that JF-17 has lower RCS than Tejas. How?

 

[p2prada]

@farhan_9909

New LCA cockpit.

This is for the trainer version.

In a few years, the cockpit may change again for Mk2.

 

[shiphone]

@farhan_9909

New LCA cockpit.
.........
This is for the trainer version.
.........

This is a modernized PC-21 cockpit..

I'm afraid you might miss these discussion..

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/18521-ada-tejas-lca-iii-148.html

-------------
BTW, we can't easily judge the advancement of avionics by the screen size...the display system or the human machine interface is just an importand part ,but not all . the architecture design which we can't SEE in the pix should be the key...obviously the F22's avionics is not at the same level as the 4Gen(your standard) light fighters. at least I dare not compare FC1's avionics with the F22's even whose design was finalized before the madien flight of FC1...