Going by those figures, the JF-17 had completed over 10,000 flights by 2011.
And you want to watch the last line....some one got wrapped in a pink saree the other day for the same banter.
Once the Rafale gets inducted, then we can discuss it....as for the rest, we keenly awaited that movie back in 2002.
All you utter above is true for Gripen, F-16 and similarly for JF-17. Whats the problem then for you?
Everyone here is just saying that how good is the plane if its on paper then its just a "paper plane" a.k.a LCA. Got it??
And if you think that JF-17 has limitation to go advance then you really are stupid. Here we are just comparing JF-17 BLK-1. BLK-2, BLK-3 will be totally different birds. What do you say, should we compare blk-3 with your "paper plane"?
As the thread is about the comparison of development of LCA VS FC1
I will repost some of what said, i would like to know what are the break through technologies that were brought to pakistan by FC1
LCA has brought some key elements that will be greatly beneficial:
CFC composites, prepregs and wet lam, all materials developed though testing-modification cycles indigenously. Strength parameters exceed anything out there in the off the shelf market. CFC used extensively throughout bay panels, spars, skins, air brakes. Even the tailfin, rudder, elevons, are made from CFC- titanium combos. Fatigue life of the composite airframe outguns metal structures by miles. Crack propagation in the airframe due to rivet holes is eliminated.
Monolithic Tailfin is another achievement, matched by none other.
Indigenous development of landing gear, now it might seem like a simple thing to do, but every russian aircraft I have had the opportunity to work on has presented one big problem, huge disparity in the total life cycle of the airframe and the landing gear. Even in some cases the life of main landing gear and nose landing gear is different. Huge problem is posed in terms of overhauling and maintaining spares. LCA tejas landing gear is matched to the airframe, (apparently thats one of the big weight additions, requested to be changed for naval version )
I dont have a good understanding of avionics so someone else might be able to shed better light on this topic, but all imported components of the avionics and are specified by us and tailor made to IAF's test team requirements, similar to what I imagine was done on FC1 by Catic for PAF.
All hydraulics components for control system are optimized and designed in accordance and quite a few components are sourced from private parties as it doesn't really make sense to set up an entire machine shop for valves, actuators, etc.
Radar systems are a huge blessing in disguise, I am sure pakistani members will take a dig at the radar, but joint development with Elta has reaped huge benefits (green pine anyone?), and ARDE will get a huge head start compared to others. LRDE is already working on an AESA radar. Research in this field supplanted by LCA will have huge potentials.
RWR, SPS, and MAW systems all will be indigenous on the production models.
Irrespective of the delays, the achievements and capabilities LCA project has brought to NAL, LRDE, ADA, and ADE are astounding.