What's new

JF-17 vs Tejas at Dubai Airshow

ozranger

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
715
Reaction score
1
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
Tejas

JF-17

What are the aerodynamical differences you can notice between their demo flights?
 
.

May be cos of non stop trolling at air show ?

In the Tejas video in OP, the opening sequence gives away the poor inlet design of Tejas. This means it is unable to go into high Angle of Attack maneuvers when starting from slow speed.

Imagine first the aircraft moving at high speed. The very speed of the aircraft ensures abundant airflow. As the pilot pulls up into a high AoA maneuver, the airflow continues to provide the engine with enough thrust.

Now imagine the aircraft flying at low speed, then the pilot suddenly pulls up into high AoA and trys to increase thrust. Due to poor inlet geometry, the suction created by the engine blades cannot draw enough air into the inlet. The engine struggles, you can hear the high pitch in the video, and the aircraft seems to be flying through treacle as it fails to attain height or gain speed, until the pilot pulls back and allows the aircraft to go into a controlled stall from which he then recovers.

This shows both poor pilot training, but also poor design for dog fighting. If the pilot needs to worry about his horizontal speed when deciding to go into high AoA, he is out of the fight already.

Make no mistakes, the rules of aerodynamics apply to all aircraft. But good aircraft like the JF-17 Thunder manage the airflow in a wider range of speeds than the poorly designed Tejas. It is probably the reason why we don’t see Tejas performing a meaningful high alpha pass followed by muscle climb.


I never understood why Indian didn’t simply take the mirage 2000 as complete TOT as the French offered them

PAF would hands down taken it
 
Upvote 0
. . . .
AdamNLandau, whose comment on Tejas display was touted widely on few threads. He gave the verdict today. I hope that friends who considered him final authority till yesterday wouldn’t disown him now.

His views on display by JF and Tejas -

today I finally got a back-to-back comparison between JF-17 & Tejas. This is *not* a comment on operational capability. Both were decent displays but I think the Tejas narrowly takes the win, with a more cohesive, flowing sequence. The smokewinders helped, too.

https://x.com/adamnlandau/status/1725521737335324683?s=61
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
. .
Who the heck are these design and test engineers and their managers of this crap Tejas? Once major engineering design flows are made patch-ups rarely work! Couple it with "Indian-class" manufacturing ethics, philosophies and practices! Murphy's law*, especially in fields of GOD-made sciences, catches up with your shoddy work and beats you down every time....

Don't reinforce the failures, and that too for 40+ years....

*Anything that can go wrong will go wrong, and at the worst possible time.
**Sheyatin have no clues about science & engineering. No matter how much you practice black magic, voodoos, Kabala etc. it won't work here.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
.
In the Tejas video in OP, the opening sequence gives away the poor inlet design of Tejas. This means it is unable to go into high Angle of Attack maneuvers when starting from slow speed.

Imagine first the aircraft moving at high speed. The very speed of the aircraft ensures abundant airflow. As the pilot pulls up into a high AoA maneuver, the airflow continues to provide the engine with enough thrust.

Now imagine the aircraft flying at low speed, then the pilot suddenly pulls up into high AoA and trys to increase thrust. Due to poor inlet geometry, the suction created by the engine blades cannot draw enough air into the inlet. The engine struggles, you can hear the high pitch in the video, and the aircraft seems to be flying through treacle as it fails to attain height or gain speed, until the pilot pulls back and allows the aircraft to go into a controlled stall from which he then recovers.

This shows both poor pilot training, but also poor design for dog fighting. If the pilot needs to worry about his horizontal speed when deciding to go into high AoA, he is out of the fight already.

Make no mistakes, the rules of aerodynamics apply to all aircraft. But good aircraft like the JF-17 Thunder manage the airflow in a wider range of speeds than the poorly designed Tejas. It is probably the reason why we don’t see Tejas performing a meaningful high alpha pass followed by muscle climb.
The Indian NSA's principal Mantra is: Fight Pak till the Last Afgan. So, these military gadgets are all details.....
 
Upvote 0
.
Why the hell is every one comparing jf17 n tejas in the first place.
tejas as things stand today is at best a experimental dud of which a few copies has been shoved down the throat of iaf, for the feel good factor by dodo.

While jf 17 has been in opp for 10 plus years n has seen active combat.....it has more then 150 types flying in diff parts of the world.

N with the latest variant of jf 17....its in a very different league
 
Upvote 0
.
This is why the JF-17 needs the WS-19 engine once it’s available, a 42-44% increase in thrust will let the plane perform to the full possibility of its flight envelope. The JF-17 won’t be underpowered then. It will have nearly the same amount of thrust as the PAF’s F-16s!

The JF-17 with its current engine is akin for the F-16/79 (both planes have similar empty weight and similar thrust), but with the WS-19 it will make the JF-17 equal on many levels with a standard F-16.

As of this year, it is accepted that the WS-19 engine is ready but it will be time until it goes into mass production. After meeting the demand for the J-35 project, sparing a few engines to develop a JF-17 model with this engine will take some time. So perhaps we will see a JF-17D by the end of the decade. If the plane needs to be redesigned to fit the engine, perhaps the plane will get more enhancements to maximize the use of the new engine; especially in EW but also in being able to do heavier strike role as well as ability to supercruise in the way the Gripen can supercruise with its F414 engine.




View attachment 1029027

Any indication how the JF-17 compares to the following specs from the F-16/79?:
China offered WS-13 for JF-17 but Pakistan chose RD-93.

China is building WS-19 for J-35.

Why the hell is every one comparing jf17 n tejas in the first place.
tejas as things stand today is at best a experimental dud of which a few copies has been shoved down the throat of iaf, for the feel good factor by dodo.

While jf 17 has been in opp for 10 plus years n has seen active combat.....it has more then 150 types flying in diff parts of the world.

N with the latest variant of jf 17....its in a very different league
Pakistan have invested heavily in the JF-17 program and introduced new variants from time to time. These jets are more likely to be used in defensive capacity in our case (less stress). This works for us because WE have larger medium-weight class jets to use in demanding situations.

Some countries want to use jet fighters heavily in a conflict situation (more stress) so not sure if JF-17 can work as a mainstay for some countries. Myanmar is not satisfied with the product it has received for instance.

I do not find Tejas impressive either. It is surprising to see a country that have a capable space program to settle for a lemon like Tejas. Indians are a strange bunch. Surprisingly good in some areas and lacking in vision in other areas.
 
Upvote 0
. . .
Pakistan have invested heavily in the JF-17 program and introduced new variants from time to time. These jets are more likely to be used in defensive capacity in our case (less stress). This works for us because WE have larger medium-weight class jets to use in demanding situations.
JF program was indeed a well planned and managed program. The approach adopted by PAF to go for incremental updates in a situation when no other option was available, worked very well.

IAF, on the other hand couldn’t have the same approach because, HAL isn’t under them and once a product is accepted by the IAF, HAL had proven to be an unreliable supplier. Hence, IAF insisted on a fully developed product. It caused all the delays, which we all know about.

Tejas being inducted now is fully completed and meets the IAF requirements. It is matched with JF block 3 in almost all criteria available in public domain. Both jets have one odd feature better than the other.

If someone wants to get in trolling, then there is no end to arguing and calling names, but, it is a well put together machine and should hold its own against a similar class aircraft.
It’s modular architecture and many Indian homegrown technologies would allow it to be brought up to latest standards as time passes.

It is a case of delayed work but a work done well in the end.
 
Upvote 0
.
China offered WS-13 for JF-17 but Pakistan chose RD-93.
PAF has invested heavily in rd 93 n is very satisfied with the end product..... plus the cost to benefit ratio for switching to ws 13 at the moment is not much...so for the moment PAF does not feel the urge to switch
Myanmar is not satisfied with the product it has received for instance.
Thats bs is spread by indian sources n nothing wrong with the fc1 that Myanmar recieved .

Plus the Myanmar variant is the Chinese fc 1 n not Pakistani jf 17....they deal directly with catic n not Pakistan.

The Nigerian variant is the jf 17 n
Have not heard of any problems since induction.
 
Upvote 0
. .
Back
Top Bottom