PAC launches updated website: New info for JF-17

[Manticore]

after years of modification and improvment , the maximum the IAF mig-29 getting is 75-80kn...how jf-17 going to get 15-20% more , without compromising any degine perameters..
.

http://dc318.*******.com/download/mi3wj5Kk/tsid20110323-014710-20ca59da/rd93.JPGhttp://dc318.*******.com/img/mi3wj5Kk/rd93.JPG

 

[SAUD-404]

even chinese knows it better , so they are not inducting this fighter...

this engine not meant for such high thrust , it's a compromise...

First of all they don't need JFT and Secondly, What are you someone from Jet engines factory.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

this is because JF-17 is a 3rd generation fighter aircraft ( as claimed by the PAC website too) and LCA is 4th generation fighter aircraft...

Arguing over 'designations' is really pointless - at the end of the day it is about capabilities, performance and how well a particular system integrates into the overall capabilities of a military.

That is why I keep pointing out that comparisons between the LCA and JF-17 are pointless until the LCA is fully integrated into the IAF in its final configuration, and we have a good idea about how it will complement and work with other IAF assets.

 

[rcrmj]

this is because JF-17 is a 3rd generation fighter aircraft ( as claimed by the PAC website too) and LCA is 4th generation fighter aircraft...

what makes u think LCA is 4th generation fighter? ur media? lol

and can u enlighen me the differences between 3d and 4th gen (in rassian standard)?

 

[rcrmj]

it's a comman prectice to campare your product with the best in the same class....we did that too with our LCA to Gripen...
but yes it's seem strange to read it on official websites...

LCA to Gripen``lol u indians are hige, i mean very high`

 

[rcrmj]

Buying and fixing it costs less, While if you have invested on R&D Price goes up.... India had to develop various infrastructures to build this Aircraft, where from do you think the manufacturer can make profit if its not priced that high, and more over its reasonable for an Aircraft with better safety and endurance features than the contemporary... And answer me which part do you think India has bought other than the Engine??

of course u need to take the R&D into the final unit cost, the same applies to JF-17s, CAC is busy doing J-10 and J-20 they had to build news production lines and other stuff to develop JF-17. but what i was saying that taking the fact that indian's average income in 1/3 of the Chinese how come the price of LCA is 2x of JF-17s!?!

in terms of which part india bought from others other than engine, well do u need me to go in details (france, russia and isreal are the offical listed LCA development partner)? even i listed the parts u ll start denying them again like u guys always do.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Quality is always have an edge over cost effectiveness whoever can afford it. In quality products the servicing and maintenance is always less. A single high end fighter is better then five low end fighters. One F-35 is 2/3 times costlier than F-16 but it can effectively neutralist many F-16 at a time.

thanks for your post Kinetic
I think you didn’t understand my post. I agree with your comment about Quality don’t get me wrong. cost effectiveness doesn’t mean compromising quality either. They are not mutually excusive terms. Eastern products (military& non military) have always been traditionally cheaper than the west but Japanese & Koreans have earned the respect & confidence of the world, while still being cheaper.

Any new platform has to be cost effective to be put in production and fielded otherwise it will remain on paper. In theory quality can be increased to Nth degree but the question is, can that thing be fielded in reality? (hence Americans will still have hornets, F15s, F16s along with F22s for some time in the future).

I don’t want to teach anyone about the operational cost here because most of you know more than I do. But re JF-17 I must remind everyone to look at the main reason PAF went ahead with this project and what this plane was going to replace. As it happens, with the progression in design and production, the finished product met and in some cases exceeded the expectations of PAF which is a happy coincidence. What ever is public knowledge and whatever is not, the JF-17 is a success story and has earned the approval and satisfaction of the people who are going to use it. Our Pilots most of them have flown American aircrafts in PAF and Middle eastern countries. I am not sure about IAF pilots but trust me PAF pilots are very direct and open when they give their opinion about something. The whole life cycle of this plane went through changes as the requirements of PAF evolved over time and final product was good enough for PAF pilots to say that they would prefer it to their earlier F-16s.

Early availability has nothing to do with aircraft's capability.

it very much does my dear hehe. An air craft that is present “NOW” Can be scrambled to respond to a threat “NOW”. JF-17 has passed the test & approval of our designers & flyers so as far as we are concerned it is very capable for what we designed it for and the best part is, you know what? That’s correct, we have it “NOW”. Its available “NOW”.

You didn't tell how JF-17 has supportability edge over LCA? Every country's own fighter has supportability edge over foreign systems. India produces almost everything of MKI ie the radar as well as the engine doesn't it mean that it has supportability edge over JF-17?
LCA is not the first Indian aircraft and I don't think any Indian govt website will do that.

I agree with your comment but you read me wrong, the supportability comment was not vs. edge against any other plane. It appeared to me that you were dismissing this very important feature (like you are dismissing early availability) to be of any important feature of the plane. It’s been designed to be a multi-role for a reason that I already explained at length in my original post. re LCA as my apologies for confusion, ANTIBODY has clarified well what I said.

 

[AMCA]

1- Here is from official martin baker site

furthermore your favorite "research" destination i.e. thakkipedia also states

Now tell me wise guy, for how long an Aircraft is to stay in air? Flying aircraft in real world is not like that of a computer game where you can keep flying it for the whole day. 3 Hours is a hell lot of time when considered JFT's mission requirements It merely takes thirty to 40 minutes to complete a CAS mission and return for rearming or debriefing especially when seen in near Indo Pak Boarder. I dont know why DRDO has keen to spend extra money when it could achieve the object by not spending that much. OBGS does not give you any tactical advantage as its not a missile or engine or an avionics and sensor suit which would aid pilots situational awareness of lethality of the platform. Now i dont wonder why LCA costs increased. As regards to safety Pilot is breathing the same O2 in LOS as in OBGS and will have very good chance to get out of the AC thanks to 0-0 seats. Okey for a moment assume that both have same capabilities While IAF bleeds 32 Mio USD PAF only have tp spend around 10 odd USD. essentially at least double the powerpack in contrast to LCA.

Lol Wise man, Let me give you a Round Up check, LCA TD-1,TD-2 has been upgraded and tested with ARDE ejection seats with a CSS one of a kind, And The uses of ILSS is not just limited to giving more oxygen but helps the pilot serve in high altitudes, while the overall ILSS performs the task of protecting the pilots against the extremes of altitudes, severe gravitation (G) forces that they are subjected to during aerial combats. ILSS’ anti-G valve renders adequate G-suit inflation pressure to maintain the pilot’s blood circulation and prevent him losing consciousness..The ILSS ensures uninterrupted oxygen supply to the pilot even as it protects him from adverse effects of high altitude flying and extreme gravitational forces acting on his body during high-speed combat manoeuvres....

It keeps the Pilot Comfortable, well thats what is expected out of an Aircraft in the fist place, how comfortable is it for the Pilot to pull out extreme maneuvers... And About Costs, we can Afford it and Thats what it is made for, Indian Need, We dont have any Export in Mind as of now....

 

[AMCA]

of course u need to take the R&D into the final unit cost, the same applies to JF-17s, CAC is busy doing J-10 and J-20 they had to build news production lines and other stuff to develop JF-17. but what i was saying that taking the fact that indian's average income in 1/3 of the Chinese how come the price of LCA is 2x of JF-17s!?!

in terms of which part india bought from others other than engine, well do u need me to go in details (france, russia and isreal are the offical listed LCA development partner)? even i listed the parts u ll start denying them again like u guys always do.

You had the Infrastructure from very early stages, and You had an Industry available and also there were buyers for your aircrafts in the early 80's which makes you to cut the costs now, But what have we had?? And above all You shared the R&D price of JF-17 with Pakistan, its obvious its cheaper...

And Please mention the parts, I will tell you if its made in India or if not then why would I have a Problem in accepting it?? Go ahead mention

 

[Irfan Baloch]

You had the Infrastructure from very early stages, and You had an Industry available and also there were buyers for your aircrafts in the early 80's which makes you to cut the costs now, But what have we had??

And Please mention the parts, I will tell you if its made in India or if not then why would I have a Problem in accepting it?? Go ahead mention

No need because that will be off topic

 

[AMCA]

No need because that will be off topic

Well there aint any other than the engine which is the most important part although... And it will not be an offtopic, as there already is a Comparison with LCA in the Link given

 

[luckyyy]

of course u need to take the R&D into the final unit cost, the same applies to JF-17s, CAC is busy doing J-10 and J-20 they had to build news production lines and other stuff to develop JF-17. but what i was saying that taking the fact that indian's average income in 1/3 of the Chinese how come the price of LCA is 2x of JF-17s!?!

in terms of which part india bought from others other than engine, well do u need me to go in details (france, russia and isreal are the offical listed LCA development partner)? even i listed the parts u ll start denying them again like u guys always do.

you know it better , how come the price of J-10 is 2x of JF-17s!?!

 

[Manticore]

^^^because the basic avionics ,radar, missile r&d and integration was already done on j10a

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

Meanwhile in China...
³É¶¼·É»ú¹¤Òµ£¨¼¯ÍÅ£©ÓÐÏÞÔðÈι«Ë¾

Performance parameters

Empty weight 9072KG
normal takeoff weight 6411KG
Maximum takeoff weight 7802KG
Maximum landing weight 12474KG
Total quantity of oil inside 3629KG
the total external capacity 2268KG
Thrust-weight ratio ≥ 0.9
Service ceiling 15,240 meters
maximum range of 2037 km transition
Take-off roll distance 609 m 823 m landing run distance
The whole machine:
Long 14967.9mm
width 9464.6mm
high 4774.85mm

GOOD JOB MATE YOU HAVE DISCLOSED THE TRUTH which was last updated in 2008

Copyright (C) 2008 Chengdu Aircraft Industrial (Group) Co., Ltd. all rights reserved
Address: Chengdu Huang Tin Par-mail: Email Contact 95 in Chengdu, China E-mail: cacoa@mail.cac.com.cn Tel :028 -87,405,114

³É¶¼·É»ú¹¤Òµ£¨¼¯ÍÅ£©ÓÐÏÞÔðÈι«Ë¾

 

[satishkumarcsc]

after years of modification and improvment , the maximum the IAF mig-29 getting is 75-80kn...how jf-17 going to get 15-20% more ( claimed at 94kn ), without compromising any degine perameters..
infect in the RD-93 verient , they did made few degine changes .....

Well if Klimovclaims it who are we to refute it? It was on theirr poster in the Zuhai Air Show. So it is capable of reaching 90+ KN