DANGER-ZONE
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 3,754
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
There are 3 possible station currently:
thanx alot,u made it.uv solvd my problem,thank u so much dear.
regards
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are 3 possible station currently:
Targeting POD is normally installed the middle
thank u sir,but Tempest II had done the whole job for me.
but just confirm that the pic is original,and jf-17 can load all these wepons in this way.
regards
Would help you if you did some research before posting.
I don't want to turn this into a vs thread. I have posted enough material on both on the JF-17 vs LCA thread.
Just a few facts
- LCA is heavier than JF-17
- LCA does NOT have an AESA radar
- LCA currently has limited weapons load (less than its intended)
- LCA hasn't been able to pull more than 5/6 g
- LCA has inferior range than JF-17
- LCA has fallen short of IAF AoA parameter.
- JF-17 uses far advanced MIL-STD 1760 databus for weapons that allows real time processed information for the pilot. Its SHUD and all glass cockpit provides the pilot with a much better situational awareness than even the Su-30MKI.
Prove to me LCA has better avionics. Does LCA has 360° MAWS coverage? Does it provide as much processed information on HUD? Does it uses 1760 bus? Does it have dedicated EW suite housing or will it be using up one of its hardpoints?
-dont use wikipedia, ada's site claims empty weight of 5500 kg for lca and pac site claims empty weight of 6400 kg
-look at the Stockholm peace research institute site which says 5 elta 2052 aesa's were delivered
-yes the weapons load is limited due to thrust shortfall, but that doesn't mean jf-17 can carry more since the lca weighs less and has the same thrust engine
-5 or 6g part i dont know but at the 09 airshow it did some pretty good maneuvers.
-again dont use wikipedia for range, i think its unknown for both planes but the lca has flown 1000 km nonstop so far idk about jf-17.
-again they have high standards for aoa and other things
-mil std 1760 is for weapons and is just an add on to the previous one nothing special.
-the mki has 2 people who man it each with 4 mfd's i doubt the jf-17 has as much awareness as the mki, its huge and can carry loads of stuff.
-dont use wikipedia, ada's site claims empty weight of 5500 kg for lca and pac site claims empty weight of 6400 kg
-look at the Stockholm peace research institute site which says 5 elta 2052 aesa's were delivered
-yes the weapons load is limited due to thrust shortfall, but that doesn't mean jf-17 can carry more since the lca weighs less and has the same thrust engine
-5 or 6g part i dont know but at the 09 airshow it did some pretty good maneuvers.
-again dont use wikipedia for range, i think its unknown for both planes but the lca has flown 1000 km nonstop so far idk about jf-17.
-again they have high standards for aoa and other things
-mil std 1760 is for weapons and is just an add on to the previous one nothing special.
-the mki has 2 people who man it each with 4 mfd's i doubt the jf-17 has as much awareness as the mki, its huge and can carry loads of stuff.
Danger zone it is "That" not "dat"
sir there r other people too using short form words n even different languages,i think it is not in the rules.people can understand word like u,im,ur,dat,r etc easily.
forgiv me if im rong and dont ban me
regards
sir there r other people too using short form words n even different languages,i think it is not in the rules.people can understand word like u,im,ur,dat,r etc easily.
forgiv me if im rong and dont ban me
regards
Man, I don't feeling like going over all again to explain everything. Your facts are wrong on almost all accounts. I have talked about this in greater detail with all the links in the JF-17 vs LCA thread.
Here's the thread : http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/21301-jf-17-has-edge-over-lca-pak-officials-10.html
Please read through it. Post 137 on page 10 is a good place to start and read through till the end.
It will help clear up all your misconceptions about LCA's weight and supposed IAF great standards.
And no I am not quoting wiki, lol.
Danger zone it is in the rules. And the reason for it is that it makes the fora look a little more professional and not just a bunch of teenagers. Frankly it would improve language skills as well.
Now you have been warned. So I would take it on board, and spend the few seconds extra to write a world correctly.