What's new

JF-17 has edge over LCA: Pak officials

Status
Not open for further replies.
If LCA is so good then why the need for India to buy 126 fighter aircrafts for a cost of $12B? Does not make sense.

Please read the MRCA & LCA thread in the Indian military section. This has been dicused in those sections before.
 
.
LCA is 4th generation Fighter which will Acheive IOC in 2010.
We'll see when it happens, until then your LCA prototypes are no match for an aircraft that is being operationalised by April THIS YEAR.
JF17 IS A 3RD Generation Fighter
Only in your dreams kid.
LCA is over 50% composites versis JF17 100% ALLOYS..
( All modern fighters are majority composite built) Composites are lighter in weight but much stronger in design.
BS. JF-17 has a TWR of 0.95, so it doesn't need composites for light weight. TWR of Dassault M2k is almost 1, M2k is a 4th gen fighter. That means JF-17's TWR of almost 1 makes JF-17 a 4th gen fighter.

LCA as Qudruplex digital FBW versis JF17 has single digital FBW.
( Again all 4 GENERATION fighters have either triplex or Quadruplex FBW)
Upgraded Mig-29s are 4th gen, they have NO FBW. JF-17 DOES have FBW, therefore 4th gen. FBW is supposed to give better maneuverability to a combat aircraft through better control of an unstable airframe, JF-17 has maneuverability on par with F-16A (several Pakistani test pilots have CONFIRMED this, as well as a Chinese test pilot who flew F-16 in the UK). F-16A is more maneuverable than it's 4th gen brothers F-16C and F-16E, therefore JF-17 = 4th gen.
LCA is powered by USA engine from GE404 eventually GE414 VERSIS JF17 powered by russian RD93 engine.
( I think we all know wat PDF members think of Russian hardware already)
USA engines are more reliable thats a fact that even pakistanis won,t deny
" Although JF17 engine has more power"
See above. JF-17 has 4th gen TWR, quit repeating the same old crap.

LCA will start with ELTA 320 radar from Israel ( This radar was picked by Israel AIR FORCE for its SUFI F16 fighters over the APG68)
Versis a Chinease Radar KLJ 7
KLJ-7 attacks two targets at BVR simultaneously, tracks at least 10 in track while scan mode, has robust anti-jamming, multi-modes including air to ground and sea, PAF accepted KLJ-7 over European Grifo S7, therefore radar is 4th gen.

Finally Weapons.
LCA will carry R73 & R77 as well as Python 4 in first tranche
Versis JF17 will carry PL9 & SD10
SD-10 is on par with R-77, PL-9C is on par with Python 4. JF-17 carries 4th gen weapons.

The JF17 is cheaper to buy and will acheive IOC 1 year before LCA.
It will come in larger nos far quicker then LCA Tejas...
JF-17 is MUCH cheaper to buy. JF-17 will have ioc OVER 1 year before LCA (end of next month). JF-17 is therefore BETTER than LCA prototypes.

If "LCA is a true 4 GENERATION fighter already then in current technical details" JF-17 "wins as above" because it is similar in technology (if not better in some areas) and is in service BY APRIL 2009.

But IAF will receive these in lower nos intially.
LONG TERM LCA will have FAR MORE $$$ MONEY invested in it simply because india,s budget is 5 times that of Pakistan at least.
So what?
I just PROVED JF-17 is 4th gen because it has:
4th gen maneuverability
4th gen weaponry
4th gen radar
4th gen performance (TWR)
The funniest thing is, I proved it by using YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS. By your own arguments, JF-17 is 4th gen because whatever specs LCA has to make it 4th gen, JF also has these specs. :lol: Quit repeating your biased crap, JF is 4th gen whether you InAF fanboys like it or not.

I wud swop neither for your KLJ7 chinease radar or your Russian engine.
Hmm, since when were you a fighter pilot who will fly JF-17? :lol: Fighter pilots HAVE accepted Chinese radar and Russian engine, so who cares what you would "swop"?
As for FRENCH radar and weapons " You won,t get those for many years cause they want serious dollars first"
JF17 with western tech is just speculation. AS YET . NOTHING MORE
WRONG. PAF Air Chief Marshal CONFIRMED in several interviews than European avionics and radar is being evaluated. RC-400 and MICA are CONFIRMED by the French to be cleared for installation on JF-17. Looks like whatever you kiddie trolls say is speculation, not PAF.

Bushwhacker I got your "technical response" right here:

YOU WILL NOT GET A TECHNICAL RESPONSE if you want to post bullsh*t from an INDIAN blogger who does not know what he is talking about:
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2007/04/pakistans-jf-17-thunder-analysis.html

If you want to quote from random blogs, I will do the same:
http://www.grandestrategy.com/2007/06/light-sabre-for-third-world-fc-1-jf-17.html
http://www.grandestrategy.com/2007/10/limited-superficial-comparison-of-air.html

How's that for your technical response?
 
Last edited:
.
this topic of supremacy of lca over jf17 or vice versa will go on, the fact is both these projects were designed for their air forces,
so huge nos of lca and jf17 required to replace mig variants in both airforces,but new versions of both these aircrafts are also in design process.
until they come out with new configurations ,it will be difficult to predict which is better
if lca was so good why mrca and if jf17 was so good then why j10 and f16?
other than decoration of modern equpments,like chinese majic weapons what a jet has to do is to serve its basic purpose.
 
.
On The hand HJ786 posts Chinease radar is equal to Israeli elta 320 & PAF is happy with Russian engine.

THEN

Next line he says PAF ACM confirmed we are looking at FRENCH RADAR & weapons.

THIS IS BEFORE A SINGLE J17 has passed IOC.

CONTRADICTION of his own argument.

Clearly PAF is NOT 100% happy with both radar & engine hence wants western upgrade to match LCA in the future.

No way is china equal to ISRAEL OR USA in engines & radar

 
.
J10 good post re upgrades of JF17.

French upgrades asre very expensive as i have highlighted in another post.

IAF mirage 2000 upgrade to dash 5 standard is costing $20 million per plane.

ie $1 billion to upgrade 51 planes.

I assume it includes alot of mica missles as well for that price.

" imagine wat they ,ll charge for a chinease fighter they know nothing about"
 
.
On The hand HJ786 posts Chinease radar is equal to Israeli elta 320 & PAF is happy with Russian engine.

THEN

Next line he says PAF ACM confirmed we are looking at FRENCH RADAR & weapons.

THIS IS BEFORE A SINGLE J17 has passed IOC.

CONTRADICTION of his own argument.

Clearly PAF is NOT 100% happy with both radar & engine hence wants western upgrade to match LCA in the future.

No way is china equal to ISRAEL OR USA in engines & radar


:tsk: hmmmm uffff.. indians..

PAF needs better systems for its next batch of JF-17 as it will be produced in mass numbers and its obvious that more capable versions will be build one after another and thus PAF is asking for western solution but it only takes a serious low IQ idiot not to comprehend this fact.
IAF MKI is infact a russian project and india selected alot of isreali french systems over russian, so does that mean that russian tech sucks?
RD-93 may be underpowerd but if you care to observe JF-17 performance, it is very close to F-16 and it completed a 360 degree turn with in 20 secs as compared to LCA, i have not heard of such thing because it can hardly pull 17 degree of AOA and 5g pull.
now before you even ask for link, the answer will be simple. "RESEARCH"!
 
.
On The hand HJ786 posts Chinease radar is equal to Israeli elta 320 & PAF is happy with Russian engine.
THEN
Next line he says PAF ACM confirmed we are looking at FRENCH RADAR & weapons.
THIS IS BEFORE A SINGLE J17 has passed IOC.
CONTRADICTION of his own argument.
Clearly PAF is NOT 100% happy with both radar & engine hence wants western upgrade to match LCA in the future.
No way is china equal to ISRAEL OR USA in engines & radar
Nope, that is not a contradiction. Why are you being so stupid? I said PAF is happy to accept JF-17 with Russian engine and Chinese radar FOR NOW, but is evaluating French radar and weapons for upgrades and new JF-17 versions. PAF is happy with radar and engine right now, that is why they accepted it you fool. They want upgrades (Western and Chinese) to make it better.
So what if China is not equal to USA in engines or radar? Neither is israel or india. PAF is happy with radar and engine for now, they will upgrade to better ones soon. Understand yet?
By the way, NOT A SINGLE LCA has even come close to IOC, but JF-17 will pass IOC in 2 months time, this news comes from PAF air chief. That means JF-17 beats LCA, so stop shouting LCA LCA LCA.


French upgrades asre very expensive as i have highlighted in another post.
IAF mirage 2000 upgrade to dash 5 standard is costing $20 million per plane.
ie $1 billion to upgrade 51 planes.
" imagine wat they ,ll charge for a chinease fighter they know nothing about"
All upgrades are expensive, not just French ones. So what if M2k costs 20 million per plane? They won't need to charge more for JF-17 because Pakistan Aeronautical Complex can do the integration.

PAC has ToT of JF-17's avionics and will build them in Pakistan, so they know exactly how the avionics work. The avionics are designed in a modular configuration with Western databus architecture - that means new Western avionics can be integrated easier. PAC already has experience upgrading old 1960s French Mirages with new 1990s Italian radar tech.
Who cares if French don't know anything about JF-17? PAC knows more than enough to do upgrades.

Why do you keep coming here trolling with this same old crap that has been proved wrong time and time again?
 
.
just a quick comparison of jf-17 with other contemporary jets
Name Fighting Falcon F-16 C
Manufacturer: LockheedMartin ( USA)
Length ----- 49.28 ft/15.02 M
Height ------ 16.70 ft. /5.09 M
Wing Area ------299.99Sq ft. /27.87 Sq. M
Aspect Ratio ---- 3.2
Weight Empty-- ----- 8,437.kg
Weight Takeoff --------------- 27500lb./12474 Kg
Powerplant 1xF100 P-129 Pratt & Whittney augmented Turbofan
Max Thrust --------- 29100lb. /13200Kg
Military Thrust ----------- 17800lb. /8074Kg
Internal Fuel ---------- 7162lb./3249Kg
Max. Thrust Loading ----------1.06
Max High Mach ---------Mach 2
Operational Ceiling------------- 50000ft. /15329M
Rate of Climb------------ 50000ft. /254M
Range Ferry---------- 3,890 km
Operational Reduce ---not known
Landing Run----- not known
Armament 1x20mm M61A cannon w/511 rounds, 6 AAMs AIM-120 AMRAAM and/or AIM-9 Sidewinder

Manufacturer Chengdu / PAC(China/Pakistan)
Name FC-1/ JF-17 Thunder
Length ---- 45.93 ft. /14.00 M
Height ----- 16.73 ft. /5.10 M
Wing Area ---- 0.00 ft./0.00 Sq M
Aspect Ratio Medium ----- (not confirmed)
Weight Empty ------ 6,411. kg
Weight Takeoff -----20062lb./9100 Kg
Powerplant(s 1 x Klimov RD-93 Turbofan
Max Thrust ---- 18300lb. /0Kg
Military Thrust Around ---- 8000 Kg
Internal Fuel ---- 2,268 kg
Max. Thrust Loading ----- Not Known
VMax High Mach ---- / 1.6 /
Operational Ceiling ---- 54140ft. /0M
Rate of Climb N/A +G Limit ---- 8.5
Range Ferry ---- 3,000 km
Operational Reduce ---- 1300 km
Landing Run ---- 700 Meters
Armament 1 x 23mm cannon, PL7, PL-10, ASMs

Chengdu J-10 (China)
General characteristics
* Crew: 1 (basic), 2 (trainer variant)[6]
* Length: 14.57 m (47.8 ft 10 in[2])
* Wingspan: 8.78 m (28 ft 10 in[2])
* Height: 4.78 m (15 ft 8 in[2])
* Wing area: 45.5 m² (490 ft²[citation needed])
* Empty weight: 8,000–9,730 kg (17,637–21,451 lb[24])
* Useful load: 5,500 kg (9,920 lb[citation needed])
* Max takeoff weight: 18,000 kg (39,683 lb[6])
* Powerplant: 1× Saturn-Lyulka AL-31FN or Woshan WS-10A "Taihang" turbofan
o Dry thrust: 89.43 kN / 89.17 kN (17,860 lbf / 20,050 lbf)
o Thrust with afterburner: 122.5 kN[6] / 129.4 kN (27,557 lbf / 29,101 lbf)
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.2 at altitude[6], Mach 1.2 at sea level[2]
* g-limits: +9/-3 g (+88/-29 m/s², +290/-97 ft/s²[2])
* Combat radius: 950 km (652 mi[2])
o Maximum range (without refueling): 3,000 km (1000 mi[6])
* Service ceiling 18,000 m (59 055 ft[2])
* Wing loading: 335 kg/m² (64 lb/ft²)
* Minimum thrust/weight:
o With afterburner: 0.98
.
Mitsubishi F-2 (Japan)
General characteristics
* Crew: One pilot
* Length: 15.52 m (50 ft 11 in)
* Wingspan: 11.13 m (36 ft 6 in)
* Height: 4.69 m (15 ft 5 in)
* Wing area: 34.84 m² (375 ft²)
* Empty weight: 9,527 kg (21,000 lb)
* Loaded weight: 15,000 kg (33,000 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 22,100 kg (48,700 lb)
* Powerplant: 1× General Electric F110-GE-129 turbofan, 76 kN military thrust, 131 kN with afterburner (17,000 lbf military thrust 29,500 lbf with afterburner)
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.0 at altitude
* Range: 834 km on anti-ship mission (520 miles)
* Service ceiling 18,000 m (59,000 ft)
* Rate of climb: m/s (ft/min)
* Wing loading: 430 kg/m² at weight of 15,000 kg (88 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 0.89


SAAB JAS-39 GRIPHEN
General characteristics
* Crew: 1–2
* Length: 14.1 m (46 ft 3 in)
* Wingspan: 8.4 m (27 ft 7 in)
* Height: 4.5 m (14 ft 9 in)
* Wing area: 25.54 m (274.9 ft)
* Empty weight: 6,620 kg (14,600 lb)
* Loaded weight: 8,720 kg (19,200 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 14,000 kg (31,000 lb)
* Powerplant: 1× Volvo Aero RM12 (GE F404) afterburning turbofan, 54 kN dry, 80 kN with afterburner (12,000 lbf / 18,100 lbf)
* Wheel track: 2.4 m (7 ft 10 in)
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2
* Range: Combat radius 800 km, (500 mi), (430 NM). ()
* Service ceiling 15,000 m (50,000 ft)
* Rate of climb: m/s (ft/min)
* Wing loading: 341 kg/m² (70,3 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 0.94
Armament:
1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon
6x AIM-9 Sidewinder
4x AIM-120 AMRAAM; or MICA
AGM-65 Maverick, KEPD 150, or various other laser-guided bombs, rocket pods.


jf-17 had a major design change midway the programme
1]proven technologies from different jets taken into consideration to reduce time of production and increase reliability
2]to make it more than an f7 upgrade..
3]rather something close to f16
4]even the ability to mass produce it..
5]cancel quantitative edge
6]gain market edge for countries wanting an f-7 replacement even closing to f-16
7]exporting indirectly translates to gaining money and experiance for upgrading further blocks
8]easy maintanence
9]minimum dependence on West

[on utube and search for a video f16 verse jf17....180degrees are coverd in 18 seconds by f16 and 19 sec by jf17].. just showing it is far from just an f7 or failed mig33 upgrade.
**
**
yes lca would be made up of composites from the start but jf-17 already has some composits.also PAF wanted to gain primary experience while quickly having a numerical deterent but the later blocks of jf-17 would be all composits and the design wouldve been already tested and refined and up and flying years before!..so in that respect jf17 does have edge over lca
***
***
as long as lca is on paper[hypothetical] and not in a testing squadron, we cant compare anyway furthermore one is a multirole, other is an interceptor
 
.
Hello,

Most young and older members on the board are not familiar as to how the aircraft elctronis are selected.

On the average---aircraft electronics technology is 4---6 years behind on what is available today on the plane---the technology has to be tested---put in a box that is bolted to the body / frame and has to go through the stresses that the plane has to take, extreme temperatures, extreme G forces, being shot at, electrical short circuits---these systems have to be tested a thousand and one times and then more.

While it is decided to go with a certain radar and electronics system for the first batch of aircraft---while the aircraft is still in its build and testing mode----there are already plans in force for the electronics--radar---power packs etc etc for the next batch of aircraft that maybe coming out in the next 2---to 3 years time.

There is so much going in with the first batch of aircraft deliveries---a nascent aircraft---there is so much to learn just from the aircraft itself---what it can do for the pilot---what the pilot can make this aircraft do---the elctronics package----does it meet or exceed its expectations or it needs some boost---. There will always be the case for the most BUCK FOR THE MONEY---and if the radar makers and producers of other gadgets find the aircraft a good prospect for future sales---a lot of high end designers would jump into the foray and offer their good and services.

JF 17 is a unique experience for pakistan, china and russia---for france and for italy as well.
 
.
How does it matter in the first place , which one is better in JF-17 and LCA . For one , in a future confrontation India will never send LCA's to carry out bombing missions , it'll be MKI's , the MRCA craft , Mirage 2000 and Jaguars and PAK will attack with F-16 and J-10.

They should be evaluated as aircraft's which are able to take on MKI and J-10 in numbers and defend air space , highly unlikely to come up against each other.
 
.
How does it matter in the first place , which one is better in JF-17 and LCA . For one , in a future confrontation India will never send LCA's to carry out bombing missions , it'll be MKI's , the MRCA craft , Mirage 2000 and Jaguars and PAK will attack with F-16 and J-10.

They should be evaluated as aircraft's which are able to take on MKI and J-10 in numbers and defend air space , highly unlikely to come up against each other.

Well unlike the LCA, the JF-17 has higher range and could be used for close to medium penetration into indian territory if needed.
 
.
How does it matter in the first place , which one is better in JF-17 and LCA . For one , in a future confrontation India will never send LCA's to carry out bombing missions , it'll be MKI's , the MRCA craft , Mirage 2000 and Jaguars and PAK will attack with F-16 and J-10.

They should be evaluated as aircraft's which are able to take on MKI and J-10 in numbers and defend air space , highly unlikely to come up against each other.

Do you know what MRCA means? LCA is suppose to be that!!! and if it does not do the job then i am sorry to say LCA will be just a upgraded Marut and even Mig-21 Bison has more MRCA capability then LCA. so thanks for admiting that LCA sucks.:)
 
.
Point is that we have much better aircraft than LCA to carry out varies missions , by striving to make LCA an MRCA , I believe that IAF has strived for too much . Since it's meant to replace Mig-21 , it is primarily a defence aircraft which , if forced to can carry out close range bombing missions.

I don't know what subsequent improvements might be there so not going to assume anything about AESA or a more powerful engine and JF-17 , I know very little about so will keep away from that topic.
 
.
Do you know what MRCA means? LCA is suppose to be that!!! and if it does not do the job then i am sorry to say LCA will be just a upgraded Marut and even Mig-21 Bison has more MRCA capability then LCA. so thanks for admiting that LCA sucks.:)

dude whats your problem LCA is supposed to be a point defence fighter with limited air to ground capabilities not an outright mrca but it is going to be good in both if not exceptional in either

04e98b0cc09da9915d2b2f6de171a9f4._.jpg

think this might fill some sense in you:pop:
 
.
in a future confrontation India will never send LCA's to carry out bombing missions , it'll be MKI's , the MRCA craft , Mirage 2000 and Jaguars and PAK will attack with F-16 and J-10.
PAF will definitely attack MKI, MMRCA, M2k and Jaguar with more than just F-16 and J-10. Anybody who thinks JF can't also attack these aircraft is simply foolish, with AWACS support JF-17 can take on any 4-4.5 gen fighter over home territory with BVRAAMs and have at least some success - this will especially be the case when JF undergoes radar upgrades.

Another point to note is that F-7PG and Mirage ROSE fighters with AWACS support, even armed with AIM-9M and/or PL-9C, will be very useful in supporting the BVRAAM platforms J-10, F-16 and JF against large numbers of less capable indian aircraft such as mig-21, jaguar and so on. Sources state F-7PG will stay in the fleet much longer than F-7P/A-5 and some 30-40 Mirage ROSE platforms are being fitted with aerial refuelling probes, indicating they also will stay in the fleet for some time longer.
 
Last edited:
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom