J-10 vs LCA Development Similar timeframe.

[Patriot]

J-11B
In mid-2002, SAC unveiled its intention to build an upgraded multirole version of the J-11 by revealing a mock-up aircraft carrying various types of air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles. Russian sources also confirmed that SAC was pursuing a multirole variant of the J-11 designated J-11B with much greater Chinese-made content. At least three examples (#523, #524, and #525) of the J-11B have been delivered to the China Flight Test Establishment (CFTE) for flight test and evaluation since 2006. The aircraft was based on the Su-27SK/J-11 airframe, but with the following modifications:

* An indigenous multifunctional pulse-Doppler fire-control radar reportedly capable of tracking 6~8 targets and engaging 4 of them simultaneously;
* An indigenous digital flight-control system;
* A Chinese copy of the Russian OEPS-27 electro-optic search and tracking system;
* A strapdown INS/GPS navigation system;
* A ‘glass’ cockpit featuring four colour multifunctional displays (MFD) and a wide-angle holographic head-up display (HUD);

The aircraft could carry the Chinese-made PL-8 IR-homing SRAAM and PL-12 active radar-homing MRAAM for air-to-air combat. While the PLAAF currently has the capability for two-target engagement using the Su-27/-30 and R-77 (AA-12 Adder) combination, successful integration of the PL-12 on the J-11B would likely provide a genuine multi-target engagement capability. The J-11B is also expected to have enhanced air-to-surface attack capabilities with the indigenous precision strike ammunitions such as LT-2 laser-guided bomb, the LS-6 precision-guided glide bomb, the YJ-91 (Kh-31P) anti-radiation missile, and the KD-88 air-to-surface missile.

During the 6th Zhuhai Air Show held between 31 October and 5 November 2006, China revealed first official details about the indigenously developed FWS-10A ‘TaiHang’ turbofan engine. The engine had already been successfully tested on a modified Su-27K fighter and possibly on some J-11 airframes too. The engine is understood to be similar to the Russian Lyulka-Saturn AL-31F turbofan engine in both technology and performance. However, it is unclear whether the FWS-10A has already been fitted on the 'indigenised' variant of the J-11.
-
The air frame is copy of SU-27 air frame.
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j11.asp

 

[Tejas-MkII]

J-11B
In mid-2002, SAC unveiled its intention to build an upgraded multirole version of the J-11 by revealing a mock-up aircraft carrying various types of air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles. Russian sources also confirmed that SAC was pursuing a multirole variant of the J-11 designated J-11B with much greater Chinese-made content. At least three examples (#523, #524, and #525) of the J-11B have been delivered to the China Flight Test Establishment (CFTE) for flight test and evaluation since 2006. The aircraft was based on the Su-27SK/J-11 airframe, but with the following modifications:

* An indigenous multifunctional pulse-Doppler fire-control radar reportedly capable of tracking 6~8 targets and engaging 4 of them simultaneously;
* An indigenous digital flight-control system;
* A Chinese copy of the Russian OEPS-27 electro-optic search and tracking system;
* A strapdown INS/GPS navigation system;
* A ‘glass’ cockpit featuring four colour multifunctional displays (MFD) and a wide-angle holographic head-up display (HUD);

The aircraft could carry the Chinese-made PL-8 IR-homing SRAAM and PL-12 active radar-homing MRAAM for air-to-air combat. While the PLAAF currently has the capability for two-target engagement using the Su-27/-30 and R-77 (AA-12 Adder) combination, successful integration of the PL-12 on the J-11B would likely provide a genuine multi-target engagement capability. The J-11B is also expected to have enhanced air-to-surface attack capabilities with the indigenous precision strike ammunitions such as LT-2 laser-guided bomb, the LS-6 precision-guided glide bomb, the YJ-91 (Kh-31P) anti-radiation missile, and the KD-88 air-to-surface missile.

During the 6th Zhuhai Air Show held between 31 October and 5 November 2006, China revealed first official details about the indigenously developed FWS-10A ‘TaiHang’ turbofan engine. The engine had already been successfully tested on a modified Su-27K fighter and possibly on some J-11 airframes too. The engine is understood to be similar to the Russian Lyulka-Saturn AL-31F turbofan engine in both technology and performance. However, it is unclear whether the FWS-10A has already been fitted on the 'indigenised' variant of the J-11.
-
The air frame is copy of SU-27 air frame.
Jian-11 (J-11, Flanker) Multirole Fighter Aircraft - SinoDefence.com

This is exactly what i am talking about that "with chinese past of copying, no country(including russia) willing to share their tech."

Otherwise engine of j-10B would be developed long time back.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Simple answer as to why J-10 is considered a success while LCA is not.

J-10 flies fully loaded with its own engine.

LCA doesn't.

 

[Tejas-MkII]

Simple answer as to why J-10 is considered a success while LCA is not.

J-10 flies fully loaded with its own engine.

LCA doesn't.

so LCA is flying without engine.................

by the way, we are not saying j-10 is failure.

we already discuss that j-10 might be miles ahead of LCA and also the reason behind this..... u can read in the previous post...

 

[PakShaheen79]

How you guys forget that J-10 went a complete redesign phase after crash of one of its prototype? That was one reason for delay in J-10 development.

 

[Tejas-MkII]

How you guys forget that J-10 went a complete redesign phase after crash of one of its prototype? That was one reason for delay in J-10 development.

Thats a very good point to note and clearly show that PLAAF active participation in j-10 project play major part in its success.

And IAF reluctance at the begining was one of the factor of its delay,but it seem like they learn from their past mistake and agree to go for the induction of LCA in tranches...

 

[gogbot]

Well You have provided a very good analysis , of the situation.

But many of you have failed to answer or discuss the question for which this thread has been posted.

Why is it that the J-10 development cycle of 18 years
is uncritical by the global community, and the J-10 it self sets a positive standard in the global community for Chinese jet development

Whilst The LCA with a development cycle of 19-20 years
is criticized and flogged to death for its delays.
AND the whole world views it as a negative standard for Indian jet development.

I am questioning the double standard in place hear.

 

[Patriot]

This is exactly what i am talking about that "with chinese past of copying, no country(including russia) willing to share their tech."

Otherwise engine of j-10B would be developed long time back.

Licensed Production rights by Russians..The aircraft is a licensed co-production of the Russian Sukhoi Su-27SK..

 

[grey boy 2]

Well You have provided a very good analysis , of the situation.

But many of you have failed to answer or discuss the question for which this thread has been posted.

Why is it that the J-10 development cycle of 18 years
is uncritical by the global community, and the J-10 it self sets a positive standard in the global community for Chinese jet development

Whilst The LCA with a development cycle of 19-20 years
is criticized and flogged to death for its delays.
AND the whole world views it as a negative standard for Indian jet development.

I am questioning the double standard in place hear.

Let me answer your so call double standard theory;

(1) Chinese don't talk about any military projects until we make it.

(2) Indians like to show the whole world what they PLAN to make in

the unknown future.

So at the end of the day, the LCA project caught up delays after

delays due to technical problem.

On the other hand, J10 was kept like a rumor until it was sucessful.

The conclusion to your so call double stardard was due to Indians

digging their own grave for over estimate their capability, showing off

too early, thats the real resons to all the negative response.

 

[Tejas-MkII]

Licensed Production rights by Russians..The aircraft is a licensed co-production of the Russian Sukhoi Su-27SK..

india have the licensed production rights of M2K,jaguar,su-30MKI...

so,is it mean india have the technology to develop aircraft like these calibre?....

 

[Tejas-MkII]

Well You have provided a very good analysis , of the situation.

But many of you have failed to answer or discuss the question for which this thread has been posted.

Why is it that the J-10 development cycle of 18 years
is uncritical by the global community, and the J-10 it self sets a positive standard in the global community for Chinese jet development

Whilst The LCA with a development cycle of 19-20 years
is criticized and flogged to death for its delays.
AND the whole world views it as a negative standard for Indian jet development.

I am questioning the double standard in place hear.

Its mainly because of :

Over-ambitiouness by DRDO
Over-hyped by media
Over-expectation by IAF

Otherwise, both the project have same fate , even they are facing same problem now, an indigenious engine,.

 

[sancho]

...The advantages that the LCA posessed over the J-10 is its more up to date radar, EW, cockpit instrumentation systems and its greater weapon choice. The advantage that the J-10 has is its marginally greater thrust to weight ratio and its high efficiency at low level flight.

LCA is not useing Kaveri engine, but GE 404 (19,100 lbf) which is better than Kaveri btw, but still clearly inferior to the AL 31 (27,557 lbf) that J10 uses. It is known that LCA is overweighted now and has an empty weight is over 1t above the aim, which reduces the payload and the t/w ratio of course. Combined with the delta canard design the J10 is clearly superior in speed and maneuverability.
The avionics could be an advantage, because we incorporated western techs in it, but the fact that not much is known about the Chinese avionics, don't make them necessarily inferior. Also I don't see an advantage of LCA in weapon choice, because Astra and PL 12 are pretty similar in ranges and the other weapons that LCA will use are Russian, which China has also access to.
Another advantage of J10 is the number of weapon stations, 11 vs 8 of LCA and the Chinese already have several multi pylons to use more weapons on a single station.
To be honest, I don't expect LCA mk1 even to be capable enough to compete JF17 and definitely not J10A. J10B which could have TVC, higher thrust engine, more payload and AESA radar will turn out even better, but I hope that LCA MK2 will also have some clear improvements till then (especially if MMRCA winner can share techs).
Indias main advantage against China and Pakistan is the great variety of Russian and western techs, that we have access to. So the more we can add to LCA (specially the more of MMRCA winner) the better the MK2 version can be.

 

[ISRO2]

Hi sir. What are avionics of LCA and J-10? which are better one? Is LCA using indian avionics? Or by other countries and which are better one? LCA avionics or J-10 avionics? Thank you.

 

[ISRO2]

LCA is not useing Kaveri engine, but GE 404 (19,100 lbf) which is better than Kaveri btw, but still clearly inferior to the AL 31 (27,557 lbf) that J10 uses. It is known that LCA is overweighted now and has an empty weight is over 1t above the aim, which reduces the payload and the t/w ratio of course. Combined with the delta canard design the J10 is clearly superior in speed and maneuverability.
The avionics could be an advantage, because we incorporated western techs in it, but the fact that not much is known about the Chinese avionics, don't make them necessarily inferior. Also I don't see an advantage of LCA in weapon choice, because Astra and PL 12 are pretty similar in ranges and the other weapons that LCA will use are Russian, which China has also access to.
Another advantage of J10 is the number of weapon stations, 11 vs 8 of LCA and the Chinese already have several multi pylons to use more weapons on a single station.
To be honest, I don't expect LCA mk1 even to be capable enough to compete JF17 and definitely not J10A. J10B which could have TVC, higher thrust engine, more payload and AESA radar will turn out even better, but I hope that LCA MK2 will also have some clear improvements till then (especially if MMRCA winner can share techs).
Indias main advantage against China and Pakistan is the great variety of Russian and western techs, that we have access to. So the more we can add to LCA (specially the more of MMRCA winner) the better the MK2 version can be.

Sir is it allways about the machines or avionics too do play role? Western countries behind russia in machines but western countries ahead in avionics and it seems western country have that adge due to avionics? Thank you.

 

[desimorty]

The Tejas CRANKED Delta provide lift at a small angle thus doing what canards would do. If the Canards pull the aircraft to fast, the aircraft loses speed. The cranked wings which are part of the main wings give constant lift, as in the Mig-29. However because of this the drag goes up, hence the lower speed. But greater lift. Expeically when wing area is increased. You will know the difference when you see the Tejas and Mirage aircraft. The Tejas' wings are higher, J-10 and Mirage they are located at the lower body. Cranked Delta wings are used on the space shuttle and most notably on the F-16XL. Provide lift while strenghening the wing. The Tejas has great wings and design. The problem with aircraft is the engine and thrust. Weight is another issue. THe IAF expects to have more in a small airframe thus sabatoging the development. The Gripen is the only other similar aircraft with similair capabilities, but costs twice as much. The gripen is unstable. The Tejas has RELAXED Unstability due to the Cranked Delta Wings. Needs a much better FBW. I think the J-10 has more room to grow but even the chinese seem to be adding additional gadgets out side of the airframe.
The goal of the LCA development was to start a new assembly line. Metal or compisote would cost the same. HAL is not continuing an old assembly line but created anew.
The J-10 uses F-7 and Su-27 assembly line. Even though the aircraft look nothing in common, the J-10 has its roots from the early mutiliated F-7 projects. China has mutilated designs before, the J-10 has a hint of F-7 and Su27. Build wise, its built like a F-7 and Su27 to keep costs down. Extensive metal airframe with many bolts. While the aircrafts performance suffers, its costs makes and time to manufacture make it worth. J-10 is instable due to its canards which provide drag and great lift. One problem with the aircraft is its engine. THe orginal J-10 project was supposed to be powered by F404 but due to sanctions the Chinese ended up with Snecma's. Now the problem with these engines, is that they take a while to warm up after ignition. Do you guys remember the Su-30MKI time before takeoff at redflag? It wasn't short even though the IAF tried, and thats with two engines! The AL-31 engines where designed for large aircraft. The goal was to provide endurance and power for long ranged missions of heavy aircraft. The J-10 doesn't have the response time to be a interceptor. PLAAF builds large airfields in bulk similair to Saddams super airbases. THe J-10 is find aircraft once its in the air, it can do strike, hence the hardpoints and air denial with BVR missiles. THe problem is as always, that it does not have a short take off time. PLAAF still needs a interceptor for quick reaction and action.
The FC-1 was desined around the F-7 airframe with extensive redseign. Its expensive to make changes, but with the same size and aiframe the cost was kept to a real minimal. The Airframe is cheap, avonics expensive. The RD-33 engine is used on a interceptor to provide thrust and short take off times. MiG-29 was the interceptor of the USSR. Short take off time on even bombarded airfields. Great engine. Which is why I believe the PLAAF will see use of FC-1 once the aircraft is proven. But their doctrine needs to change to bring in a actual reliable interceptor for quick reaction. Interception was usually left to F-7s and grownd defence.