LCA Tejas vs JF-17 Thunder

[ash2win]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Gripen C has plateaued for its design and is at a different level. Something LCA can never hope to match. Meaning its sustained turn rate (STR) exceeds F-16 and has instantaneous turn rates (ITR) that exceeds Mirage-2000. STR is F-16s strength and ITR is Mirage-2000s strength. Gripen exceeds both, so you can only imagine. Canards help. Apart from that it has a very low drag airframe which allows higher acceleration even though the engine delivers the same power as LCA Mk1. As for NG, I don't know.

JF-17, I don't really know. Some sources say that the aircraft handles as good as the F-16 except in the vertical department. Meaning it should have very poor acceleration compared to Mk2. But JF-17 may show better STR and inferior ITR than Mk2. More or less, a F-16 with a weak engine.


.

Can you explain more about STR and ITR? how impotent? with respect to modern aircrafts ?

 

[roma]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

JF-17 is a useless design. It is basically an attempt to modernize Mig-21. It does not fit into any modern class of fighter aircrafts.
LCA Tejas is absolutely fine in its slot of small multi-role aircraft. It will have limitations in fighter role but it will be effective in strike role. A mixed package of LCA Tejas will be far more effective compared to a mixed package of JF-17........

As a pro-India person i hope you are right, but are you ?
i have seen youtube videos of JF17 in some of those middle-eastern eg Dubai air shows and the pilots
go on a vertical climb almost immediately after takeoff

compare that with what ive seen of LCA where after takeoff, the climb upwards was rather slow an gentle in
comparison ....seemed almost faltering in its climb and some LCA needed an upward-sloping ramp to help !
( i think those were simulations for aircraft carrier situations )

but i must say the JF17 in the dubai airshows were impressive in the vertical climb
( unless the vids were doctored ? ! )

@ersakthivel
Sir, most grateful for your comment as i feel you know the specs well
and have been following the technical matters of both closely.
on paper thrust to weight ratio of LCA is miniscule better than JF17
but it "seems " to me that in reality, JF17 "seems " substantially superior

 

[Kunal Biswas]

JF-17 is a marketing Aircraft more than a combat aircraft, Least said is better ..

 

[J20!]

JF-17 is a marketing Aircraft more than a combat aircraft, Least said is better ..

If someone where to say that about your LCA you'd probably delete their post and ban them for "flame bating".

How is what you've posted any different?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

As a pro-India person i hope you are right, but are you ?
i have seen youtube videos of JF17 in some of those middle-eastern eg Dubai air shows and the pilots
go on a vertical climb almost immediately after takeoff

compare that with what ive seen of LCA where after takeoff, the climb upwards was rather slow an gentle in
comparison ....seemed almost faltering in its climb and some LCA needed an upward-sloping ramp to help !
( i think those were simulations for aircraft carrier situations )

but i must say the JF17 in the dubai airshows were impressive in the vertical climb
( unless the vids were doctored ? ! )

@ersakthivel
Sir, most grateful for your comment as i feel you know the specs well
and have been following the technical matters of both closely.
on paper thrust to weight ratio of LCA is miniscule better than JF17
but it "seems " to me that in reality, JF17 "seems " substantially superior

People give thrust to weight ratio of JF-17 taking into account emergency thrust mode of Rd-93 engine , so the difference appears to me marginal. But in reality the difference is higher.

Also we need three factors to determine the agility of the fighter,
1. thrust to weight ratio,
2.wing loading(weight of the fighter/ wing surface area), which determines the available lift per KG for any fighter,
3. Whether the fighter is fully relaxed static stability design or not.

In thrust to weight ratio tejas leads ,

In the next two factors JF-17 fares even worse.

It has less than half the wing surface area per Kg compared to tejas indicating poor lift in transonic flight regime, and lesser ITR(instantaneous turn rate, which is critical to evade enemy BVR missiles and get a first lock on solution for one's own missile on enemy fighter.)

And it is not an RSS design in all three axis like tejas. It belongs to the Mig-21 era positive static stability flight regime, which means the fighter opposes the pilot's effort for agile turns and tries to come back to level flying position. but tejas has negative statci stability, which means the fighter goes with pilot's effort for agile turns and does not try to come to level flight.

SO if JF-17 belongs to mig-21 era in flight dynamics, tejas belongs to eurocanard era(rafale typhoon, gripen) in its basic design philosophy on the three crucial factors, TWR, fully digital four channel fly by wire based RSS aerodynamics, lowest possible wing loading among all the modern fighters.

And the airframe of tejas is composite and it has a clean config RCS of less than 0.3 sq meter like the eurocanards, but all metal JF-17 has more than 1 sq meter RCS in clean config.

Also tejas carries a 650 mm dia radar closer to f-16 size and 30 percent bigger radar than rafale and 10 percent bigger than gripen, only typhoon has bigger radar , 750 mm , I think.

SO the combination of low clean config RCS and bigger sized radar combined with its smaaler fighter size gives tejas significance advantage over JF-17 in all aspects.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Can you explain more about STR and ITR? how impotent? with respect to modern aircrafts ?

That guy's claims are all as usual wrong.

for proper comparison you should compare gripen c with tejas mk1
and gripen e with tejas mk2.
Comparing gripen e specs with tejas mk1 specs is plain wrong.

And gripens superior sustained turn rate is given for lower temp close to 20 ged as per international norms,

But tejas STR is for indian climatic condition that is close to 40 deg.

Indian climatic condition saps ten percent of engine thrust and 12 percent of wing lift for any fighter.

So real comparison can be made only when gripen shows its full STR india's hot and humid conditions.

toan is a credible source and you can get some perspective on gripen from the folowing link,

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1029&sid=0738d7c5d3de73991112b4b127f488bb&start=30

 

[Kunal Biswas]

My judging is based on its results at different airshows, Besides their is not much i have to speak about it as it is already been mention in this thread before ..

If someone where to say that about your LCA you'd probably delete their post and ban them for "flame bating".

How is what you've posted any different?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[Screambowl]

My judging is based on its results at different airshows, Besides their is not much i have to speak about it as it is already been mention in this thread before ..

it is a proven fighter for ground assaults now.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

That kind of proven is no better than no proven ..

it is a proven fighter for ground assaults now.

 

[Screambowl]

That kind of proven is no better than no proven ..

in which IAF used LCA?

 

[sob]

The biggest difference between the two aircraft is that one is flying regularly and will be ready with upgrades before we even launch our Mk 1.

Typical aircraft upgrades happen by sharing experiences between the user and the manufacturer, reviews of missions, flight ops. They happen over a period of time and the most important criterion is that sufficient number of them should be flying in service.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

IRON FIST 2013 was more challenging ..

in which IAF used LCA?

 

[Screambowl]

IRON FIST 2013 was more challenging ..

an exercise not a war sir I would rather suggest that they should deploy LCA to strike infiltrator hideouts in Kashmir valley , that will be challenging

 

[anupamsurey]

it is a proven fighter for ground assaults now.

proved against turban headed terrorists with AK's and a few RPG 7, we have tougher exercise criteria to validate our concepts than that.

 

[Screambowl]

proved against turban headed terrorists with AK's and a few RPG 7, we have tougher exercise criteria to validate our concepts than that.

It is not about knocking out mosquitoes it is about search and destroy at those altitude. We experienced these problems with Mirage during Kargil war where these hideouts were not reachable from air but with current technological acquisition we can do that. Engine failure is another issue at those heights while manoeuvring at very high speeds plus it will be close to LOC so we can also see the reaction coming from the other side.

 

[Armand2REP]

If someone where to say that about your LCA you'd probably delete their post and ban them for "flame bating".

How is what you've posted any different?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Let's look at the evidence... both Egypt and Qatar were front runners to purchase JF-17 but in the end they both chose Rafale. The tables have turned with Rafale being the most exported fighter of 2015 with the Thunder Blunder being defeated at every turn.

 

[Khagesh]

Let's look at the evidence... both Egypt and Qatar were front runners to purchase JF-17 but in the end they both chose Rafale. The tables have turned with Rafale being the most exported fighter of 2015 with the Thunder Blunder being defeated at every turn.

Welcome to the party.

We really really really hated it when Tejas was being compared with Bunder.

With you guys around perhaps we will get some respite.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

In Indian context use of Air-force is for-bitten against Insurgency ..

The simulated exercise was more challenging than the War they are fighting, Compare the challenges of both parties to understand the difference ..

an exercise not a war sir I would rather suggest that they should deploy LCA to strike infiltrator hideouts in Kashmir valley , that will be challenging

 

[anupamsurey]

what? i ewer heard that wajiristan is like kargil. afaik it is the only place where jf 17 was employed in bombing.

 

[Screambowl]

In Indian context use of Air-force is for-bitten against Insurgency ..

The simulated exercise was more challenging than the War they are fighting, Compare the challenges of both parties to understand the difference ..

Cost is the factor for IAF deployment. But they can use it for 2-3 operations, not an often modus operandi.