LCA Tejas vs JF-17 Thunder

[Patriot]

@Patriot
My knowledge about this is very limited.
so far in PAF JFT has the least RCS(even less than the block 52 f-16)

JFT uses RAM coating in many parts of the airframe(RAM was exclusively developed by PEC and NESCOM for Babur cruise missile)

e.g


JF-17 Thunder's Aerodynamic Configuration - PAFwallpapers Blog

Beside this

JF-17 USES DSI which significantly reduces the RCS such as on F-35
apart from this is the small size of JFT

Diverterless supersonic inlet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

with the increase use of composites in block 2(30-35%) and the serial produced block 1(8-15%) the rcs might even decrease

Thank you Farhan for info. Is there any info about it's rcs value? Specs are impressive.

Which AESA radar is going to come up in it's IInd block. Furhther I would like to know whether you guys are also working on plasma stealth & flat nozzle technology for the JF-17s engines.

Thanks in advance.

 

[farhan_9909]

well, I quit. Simply I don't have the stomach for picking up another long fight at the end of the year.

why nt accept that fact that your afraid of yet another embarrassment

such as in the case of your query about JF-17 fbw

 

[farhan_9909]

Thank you Farhan for info. Is there any info about it's rcs value? Specs are impressive.

Which AESA radar is going to come up in it's IInd block. Furhther I would like to know whether you guys are also working on plasma stealth & flat nozzle technology for the JF-17s engines.

Thanks in advance.

Well AESA is expected in future.

No info neither heard plasma stealth for JF-17

As for as i know PEC will be in the line of expanding the use of composite in JFT II.
Precision Engineering Complex

 

[ersakthivel]

why nt accept that fact that your afraid of yet another embarrassment

such as in the case of your query about JF-17 fbw

Well only thing I want to state here is JF-17 is conventional stable layout flight profile plane which uses FBW software alone in this axis or that axis..

And TEJAS is relaxed static stability platform meaning unstable flight profile which relies on FBW to fly.

You can exploit the potential of fly by wire only in a fully unstable platform that always try to veer out of control like TEJAS not in stable flight profile with just one axis fly by wire tech.If you have any doubt you can refer to MIRAGE-2000 and F-16 sites,

If JF_17 too was designed from ground up as fully relaxed static stability unstable flight profile platform show it and I will accept it.

fully relaxed static stability unstable flight profile must be adapted when they design the airframe from scratch .It is not a radar or missile upgrade that can be slung on latter.

If you don't understand that or don't want to understand that is something upto you.You can google and find out about it yourself.

I never post stuff that I have to be ashamed of reading latter.So don't be excited.

 

[farhan_9909]

@ersakthivel

your reply to your this post posted in this thread

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/.../44983-sri-lanka-air-force-buy-fc-1-a-17.html

 

[ersakthivel]

@ersakthivel

your reply to your this post posted in this thread

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/.../44983-sri-lanka-air-force-buy-fc-1-a-17.html

After that we both made many posts and the conclusion AFAIK is Jf-17 has relaxed stability in yaw axis only.
Is that right? or Is there any other concrete link to the contrary?

 

[farhan_9909]

After that we both made many posts and the conclusion AFAIK is Jf-17 has relaxed stability in yaw axis only.
Is that right? or Is there any other concrete link to the contrary?

sorry bt the case is that your defination of relaxed stability is different

JFT use quadruplex fbw.and you said only in one yaw axis..pity on your blind patriotism

atleast you should known the meanining of "tri" and "QUAD"

 

[ersakthivel]

sorry bt the case is that your defination of relaxed stability is different

JFT use quadruplex fbw.and you said only in one yaw axis..pity on your blind patriotism

atleast you should known the meanining of "tri" and "QUAD"

Well nobody is blind with patriotism here.Why are you suddenly invoking sentiments?

World over fully relaxed stability unstable flight has only one definition.It is fully relaxed on all axes. Not just YAW axis.

The chinese might have done it to improve a certain spec for the fighter in one axis. Certainly it wont compare to all axes relaxed stability like on mirage or F-16 or LCA tejas.

Quad and TRi means 4 and 3 lines incase during combat one or two lines malfunction,they have no relation to all AXES.
guess you don't understand all axes fully relaxed stability as well.
Full relaxed stability platforms like tejas have long and complex developmental time and flight envelope is opened step by step with caution. Proof is 2000 incident free even emergency free flight.

That's how ell tejas was built as opposed to some rip and join method adopted on JF-17 with another stable conventional layout airframe modified for relaxed stability in one axes with intake redesign.Even that took 18 years for jf-17 means you can understand the timeframe and slow Limited series production rate for tejas.

 

[ersakthivel]

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...darin-iii-makes-maiden-flight.html#post625749
Even jaguar is going to be upgraded with fly by wire ,does that mean it is also fully relaxed static stability platform like tejas?No.
Fly by wire simply means computer controlling the electricals that's all.
Fully relaxed stability airframe will utilize fly by wire tech more purposefully for agility than conventional stable flight profile platforms like JAGs and JF-17s.
It should be built in by project definition phase ,not from PV-3 or 4 phase.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Russia has a no export clause for rd-93 engines no JF-17 with rd-93 engines will be
allowed to be exported.

Russians have delivered 40 total RD-93 engines and Chinese kept most of them
it will be many years before any squadron strength is reached by Pakistan.

 

[farhan_9909]

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...darin-iii-makes-maiden-flight.html#post625749
Even jaguar is going to be upgraded with fly by wire ,does that mean it is also fully relaxed static stability platform like tejas?No.
Fly by wire simply means computer controlling the electricals that's all.
Fully relaxed stability airframe will utilize fly by wire tech more purposefully for agility than conventional stable flight profile platforms like JAGs and JF-17s.
It should be built in by project definition phase ,not from PV-3 or 4 phase.

why nt tell this to the manufacturer?

JFT at present has Quadruplex digital fbw. such as in the lca,j-10,f-16c/d onwards,f-18sh,eft

 

[Sam2012]

Its like asking a Maruti 800 to go one on one with BMW. Technically superior ones always have a upper hand.

The dog fight argument doesnt work any more.If so lets compare F-22 with Mig-21.

boss i have not compared Maruti 800 & BMW it is LCA vs Jf-17 get it straight & never comes question of F22 and Mig-21

LCA & JF-17 are of same class ( light weight) Pak & china members can argue their aircraft is better mor agile,inducted powerful engine & high angle of attack etc

We argue our aircraft is more stleathy, powerful radar state of the art carbon composite airframe etc

so only IAF Vs PAF in coming days will answer , that is all that i mean

 

[p2prada]

Hmm, JF-17 has FBW only for yaw and roll, not for pitch. It's an early generation design. Pitch utilizes hydraulics.

Gripen is a Triplex but has electric controls for pitch, yaw and roll.

LCA is a quad and has electric controls for pitch, yaw and roll. That pushes JF-17 to the bottom when it comes to FBW.

Apart from that the PAF officer did not make a mistake when placing the JF-17 between a 3rd and 4th gen fighter, nothing to do with Chinese vs Rest of the world classification. It is the same for LCA Mk1. Both aircraft have low thrust and old radars. Neither will get the 4th gen tag without a better engine. Currently both aircraft are between latest gen Mirage-3 / Mig-21Bison and early model F-16A / Mirage-2000. Current plans for JF-17 in the block 2 version is to surpass the F-16A while the current plan for JF-17 B3 and LCA Mk2 is to surpass nearly all current 4th gen fighters in terms of technology.

Yeah, some electronics or most electronics on both JF-17 B1 / B2 and LCA Mk1 would be better than a F-16A, but that still doesn't guarantee it a 4th gen tag unless it cannot match it in flight characteristics. Lets not start getting unnecessarily patriotic in light of these simple facts.

 

[farhan_9909]

Hmm, JF-17 has FBW only for yaw and roll, not for pitch. It's an early generation design. Pitch utilizes hydraulics.

Gripen is a Triplex but has electric controls for pitch, yaw and roll.

LCA is a quad and has electric controls for pitch, yaw and roll. That pushes JF-17 to the bottom when it comes to FBW.

Apart from that the PAF officer did not make a mistake when placing the JF-17 between a 3rd and 4th gen fighter, nothing to do with Chinese vs Rest of the world classification. It is the same for LCA Mk1. Both aircraft have low thrust and old radars. Neither will get the 4th gen tag without a better engine. Currently both aircraft are between latest gen Mirage-3 / Mig-21Bison and early model F-16A / Mirage-2000. Current plans for JF-17 in the block 2 version is to surpass the F-16A while the current plan for JF-17 B3 and LCA Mk2 is to surpass nearly all current 4th gen fighters in terms of technology.

Yeah, some electronics or most electronics on both JF-17 B1 / B2 and LCA Mk1 would be better than a F-16A, but that still doesn't guarantee it a 4th gen tag unless it cannot match it in flight characteristics. Lets not start getting unnecessarily patriotic in light of these simple facts.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/.../44983-sri-lanka-air-force-buy-fc-1-a-21.html

Go through this

JFT serial produced variant has Quadruplex fbw.or onwards pt-04...hydraulics in pitch are only as back ups

rest of your post is indian.same can be said for IAF acm calling LCA as mig

 

[farhan_9909]

let me post for you as well.

though i agree the initial prototypes had limited

Some sources state that the system has been upgraded to provide fly-by-wire flight control in the roll and yaw axis also, the serial production aircraft having a digital quadruplex (quad-redundant) FBW system in the pitch axis and duplex (dual-redundant) FBW system in the roll and yaw axis

 

[ersakthivel]

boss i have not compared Maruti 800 & BMW it is LCA vs Jf-17 get it straight & never comes question of F22 and Mig-21

LCA & JF-17 are of same class ( light weight) Pak & china members can argue their aircraft is better mor agile,inducted powerful engine & high angle of attack etc

We argue our aircraft is more stleathy, powerful radar state of the art carbon composite airframe etc

so only IAF Vs PAF in coming days will answer , that is all that i mean

What I meant was the technology behind each aircraft,when FARHAN repeatedly argued that lca is late and JF-17 is in service already, so jf-17 is more mature and LCA is rejected by IAF, and only 2 is produced in two years like that.

LCA tejas has all the tech of any so called modern 4.5 the gen plane in it's design,
namely
1.Fully relaxed unstable flight configuration,meaning the plane tries to veer off control all the time and requires fly by wire to fly, that confers more maneuverability,

2.More use of composite to reduce it's weight,

3.RCS reduction methods employed from design phase,

4.Low wing loading cranked delta witha twist in wing root for IAF and levcons in NLCA,

And JF-17 has none of it .It is a copy of an existing soviet model with DSI intake and FBW with one axis relaxation, and stable flight configuration in all other axis, with high wing loading.

SO any future addition of hardware in jf-17 will increase the wing loading further worsening it's lift co efficient .

Lower wing loading in tejas means it can add more weight in future and still retain a reasonable lift to drag ratio in future with higher powered engine and more payload.


Tejas mk-2 is going to be at MRCA level with 5 ton weapon load and increased fuel fraction meaning increased range.and asea and interfaces for any long range bvr that will be in IAf armory including METEOR for rafale along with IRST and retractable refueling probe.

SO with higher power engine and suitably redesigned air intake in MLUit can reach closer to any 4.5 th gen plane even in mk-1.
As most part of the air intake lie outside the fuselage it wont disturb much internal equipment and add more weight.

TEJAS mk-2wont have this issue as it is alredy designed with bigger air intake and higher powered engine ,and it will debut at the level of tech of any 4.5th gen like NG ,

 

[p2prada]

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/.../44983-sri-lanka-air-force-buy-fc-1-a-21.html

Go through this

JFT serial produced variant has Quadruplex fbw.or onwards pt-04...hydraulics in pitch are only as back ups

rest of your post is indian.same can be said for IAF acm calling LCA as mig

The JF-17 B2 is expected to get a more advanced FBW. So, SL has opted for it.

I don't know what you mean by my post being Indian. Anyway, I said the same for LCA. It is between a Mig-21 Bison and an early model Mirage-2000. You can re-read that post again.

 

[Sam2012]

What I meant was the technology behind each aircraft,when FARHAN repeatedly argued that lca is late and JF-17 is in service already, so jf-17 is more mature and LCA is rejected by IAF, and only 2 is produced in two years like that.

LCA tejas has all the tech of any so called modern 4.5 the gen plane in it's design,
namely
1.Fully relaxed unstable flight configuration,meaning the plane tries to veer off control all the time and requires fly by wire to fly, that confers more maneuverability,

2.More use of composite to reduce it's weight,

3.RCS reduction methods employed from design phase,

4.Low wing loading cranked delta witha twist in wing root for IAF and levcons in NLCA,

And JF-17 has none of it .It is a copy of an existing soviet model with DSI intake and FBW with one axis relaxation, and stable flight configuration in all other axis, with high wing loading.

SO any future addition of hardware in jf-17 will increase the wing loading further worsening it's lift co efficient .

Lower wing loading in tejas means it can add more weight in future and still retain a reasonable lift to drag ratio in future with higher powered engine and more payload.


Tejas mk-2 is going to be at MRCA level with 5 ton weapon load and increased fuel fraction meaning increased range.and asea and interfaces for any long range bvr that will be in IAf armory including METEOR for rafale along with IRST and retractable refueling probe.

SO with higher power engine and suitably redesigned air intake in MLUit can reach closer to any 4.5 th gen plane even in mk-1.
As most part of the air intake lie outside the fuselage it wont disturb much internal equipment and add more weight.

TEJAS mk-2wont have this issue as it is alredy designed with bigger air intake and higher powered engine ,and it will debut at the level of tech of any 4.5th gen like NG ,

Sakthivel Farhan is zaid hamid II he will argue a paper plane from Pakistan ca shoot down LCA , no point in talking to him just ignore him

let us hope LCA & JF-17 go head to head & then we can put plaster to Mr.Zalil hamid II forever

just give a punch dialogue from tamil movie Yaru first poraan andradhu mukyon illey ,lastleh yaar first varaan andreh dhan mukyon

 

[ersakthivel]

Even jagur is to be upgraded with FBW ,does that mean it will become fully relaxed static stability plane on par with F16 and mirage-2000.The lsp-7 of tejas is sporting an aux intake to address the air intake issue.SO it will be resolved with full flight envelope opening.

 

[farhan_9909]

The JF-17 B2 is expected to get a more advanced FBW. So, SL has opted for it.

I don't know what you mean by my post being Indian. Anyway, I said the same for LCA. It is between a Mig-21 Bison and an early model Mirage-2000. You can re-read that post again.

Indeed.bt apart from prototypes the serial produced variant already has a quadruplex digital fbw.because addition like lerx and dsi/ventral fins does required a more complex fbw system..and one chinese firm had already experience developing one for j-10 few years before.

Well i really don't know about lca.bt certainly i put jft better than f-16A/b in avionics/fbw and radar while comparable in performance..inferior in payload and range