Compare capabilities and data - LCA & JF-17

Which do u think is better, LCA(india) vs FC-1(pak)


  • Total voters
    31
Status
Not open for further replies.

ullu

New Member
The site has old old info about FC-1. I don't know where it got its info for LCA. Looks like an Indian website, note the wording:

FC-1 is based on the MiG-33 1.which was rejected by the Soviet Air Force. MiG-33 was a single engined version of MiG-29. Pakistan hopes to buy 150 of them to replace most of its existing air force 2.while the Chinese Air Force does not want to purchase it. Lastest reports say that FC-1 may never enter production - 3.Russia has refused to supply the 4.powerful RD-93 engine. Pakistan has given the FC-1 the 'Super-7' designation.

1. Sad attempt to portray that FC-1 is not liked by the world and "RUSSIA" rejecting their mig-33 - as if its an inferior airplane.

2. Latest reports say China WILL buy JF-17. It was decided AFTER the prototype was tested and with good results. So, another indication that website has outdated and inaccurate info.

3. Russia has refused to... what does that mean? It seems that author of this nonsense is trying to tell us that jf-17(fc1) is so inferior that countries don't even want to supply engines for it. Which brings us to the 4th point I bolded:

4. Again, russia refused and then trying to show us how big and powerful was the engine that russia refused-further emphasising that fc1 is a failure without such a powerful engine which russia "refused."

Very sad and ignorant stuff coming from an Indian website which does not surprise me.

We have seen how long LCA has been on the table and how many 'test' flights it flew - yet still another decade away from being inducted into IAF. Failures of LCA are no secret. It may be a good jet but its long from becoming part of IAF which makes it very irrelevant to compare it to JF-17 which is to enter service in about 3-4 years.

:cop
Also, your post shows Indian flag then a gun shooting at pakistani flag. If you come here with that kind of sick and defaming attitude, the posts will be locked/deleted and you will be thrown out. Show some respect to get some respect-edit your post. :cop

I will let others do the technical comparing with LATEST facts from non partial websites. Not some geocities hosted 5 year old full of indian ego website.
 

jatt2ooo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
i still see not point in the fc-1. If its defence've porposes its good. but if pak is planing to use it as a offensive weapon it will suck. sending the fc-1 against another country is sucide. Defensive proposes its good. And both need to show their advantages in battle STILL! The fc-1 is just not china's best. and china is good at avaiton and getting better. and one more thing... i heard pakistan has a air-air missile with bvr, is it true? guys visit this forum ok you'll like it. but u have to make a account!
http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/211833 :cop :cop :cop :cop
 

Oqaab

New Member
Re: LCA! Lets judge it!!!

Lets compare it. Thunder vs Tejas.

Range,

According to some ppl, LCAs range is less then JF-17. The Indian sources are quite about its ferry range. Jf-17 has a range of 3000 kms but its engine is also unconfirmed.

Engine Characteristics,

TWR of JF-17 is 95:100 and that oif LCA is 88:100. Fighter-planes.com says that even the Kaveri engines will not give enough TWR.

About thrust, LCA = 18,000 lbs and JF-17 = 18,300 lbs.

LCA has the speed advantage coz it uses lead composite materials over its surface whereas JF-17 uses aluminium.

Ceiling,

LCA = 16,400 m
JF-17 = 16,500 m

Payload,

LCA = 4000 kg
JF-17 = 3,600 (or 3,800) lbs.

Plzzz correct me if I m wrong somewhere. :D
 

jatt2ooo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
Re: LCA! Lets judge it!!!

Oqaab said:
Lets compare it. Thunder vs Tejas.

Range,

According to some ppl, LCAs range is less then JF-17. The Indian sources are quite about its ferry range. Jf-17 has a range of 3000 kms but its engine is also unconfirmed.

Engine Characteristics,

TWR of JF-17 is 95:100 and that oif LCA is 88:100. Fighter-planes.com says that even the Kaveri engines will not give enough TWR.

About thrust, LCA = 18,000 lbs and JF-17 = 18,300 lbs.

LCA has the speed advantage coz it uses lead composite materials over its surface whereas JF-17 uses aluminium.

Ceiling,

LCA = 16,400 m
JF-17 = 16,500 m

Payload,

LCA = 4000 kg
JF-17 = 3,600 (or 3,800) lbs.

Plzzz correct me if I m wrong somewhere. :D
what :cop :cop :cop u need to do is compare missle like astra and bvr for the lca and also understand the cost of the cheap lca as well as the inflight refueler! and the radar ohh and the fact its small, light and larger payload as well as its made out of lead so it won't show on radar that much! and the air inlets are really small on the lca. :D lca is just going to rule if we get isrealy radar, or do we have it. and ewacs. and the lca will also be a suport fighter. inducted in the navy. COMPLETELY ORGINAL!!!!!!!!!!! :alian
crap i almost forgot about the bhromos its gonna carry and the phlcon. hmmmmm mabe thats why india wants the lca. and than the lca is gonna have a better engine, hopefully.

and than we ave the fbw which has some american tech in it. srry but fbw in lca iz better my friend.
the lca will take a long time because its india's first supersonic jet ever.
fc-1 will replace the migs and most chinese admit that the fc-1 sucks compared to the lca. ask them, they know china isn't gonna put anything good in it. the lca will be a cheap small jsf. lca will have better stealth techology including flares and such as well as BVR witch is very important. Dont judge a book by its cover!
 

corsair7772

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
In certain aspects the LCA is inferior to the JF-17 such as range. Also the Jf-17 has more export potential meaning more money 4 pakistan off the bargain and we dont have 2 neccecarily buy the JF-17.

One more thing, The JF-17 can be bought in large enuff numbers and it is as the soviets said "numbers have their own qualities".
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
corsair7772 said:
One more thing, The JF-17 can be bought in large enuff numbers and it is as the soviets said "numbers have their own qualities".
I'd have to disagree with this. Even the VP of Sukhoi has made comment on the fact that the old paradigms are gone.

The use of volume to rush or saturate an enemy will work on a less sophisticated military power.

I would not like to be a country like China, and assume that 4000 jet fighters will carry the air battle for me.

There is overwhelming data on how a professional force will carry and win against a force less competent and relying on numerical superiority.

China would make an average military power feel inadequate, but against even the Germans, French and English I suspect that they would be contained. (without resorting to nukes)

Field armies are just juicy targets for FAE's. In fact there are reports criculating that 1 american FAE wiped out a Republican Guard division and its armoured brigade that was at target zero.

You don't defeat another airforce with pilots, you use anti-air systems. - cheaper to build, no training, faster than the fighter and capable of sending enemy aircraft into a killing box for other systems to do their work.
 

Londo Molari

New Member
i still see not point in the fc-1. If its defence've porposes its good. but if pak is planing to use it as a offensive weapon it will suck. sending the fc-1 against another country is sucide. Defensive proposes its good. And both need to show their advantages in battle STILL! The fc-1 is just not china's best. and china is good at avaiton and getting better. and one more thing... i heard pakistan has a air-air missile with bvr, is it true? guys visit this forum ok you'll like it. but u have to make a account!
http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/211833
Pakistan needs the JF-17 badly.

Pakistan air forces primary mission has always been air DEFENCE, not offence. So in that respect the JF-17 is great. And Pakistan's current fleet is a whole bunch of old fighters, which need to be replaced. No high tech fighters are available to Pakistan, and they don't want to replace old Mirages/F-7s with MORE Mirages and F-7s... so the JF-17 is the best fighter available to Pakistan right now

And since Pakistan will get ToT, it is a good deal indeed.
 

Oqaab

New Member
Re: LCA! Lets judge it!!!

jatt2ooo said:
what :cop :cop :cop u need to do is compare missle like astra and bvr for the lca and also understand the cost of the cheap lca as well as the inflight refueler! and the radar ohh and the fact its small, light and larger payload as well as its made out of lead so it won't show on radar that much! and the air inlets are really small on the lca. :D lca is just going to rule if we get isrealy radar, or do we have it. and ewacs. and the lca will also be a suport fighter. inducted in the navy. COMPLETELY ORGINAL!!!!!!!!!!! :alian
crap i almost forgot about the bhromos its gonna carry and the phlcon. hmmmmm mabe thats why india wants the lca. and than the lca is gonna have a better engine, hopefully.

and than we ave the fbw which has some american tech in it. srry but fbw in lca iz better my friend.
the lca will take a long time because its india's first supersonic jet ever.
fc-1 will replace the migs and most chinese admit that the fc-1 sucks compared to the lca. ask them, they know china isn't gonna put anything good in it. the lca will be a cheap small jsf. lca will have better stealth techology including flares and such as well as BVR witch is very important. Dont judge a book by its cover!
BVR missiles ... ok,

Astra = 80 km range
SD-10 = ~80 km range
And this is not a big difference.

Unit cost,
JF-17 = 15 million USD
LCA = 21 million USD
LCA is more costly. Also JF-17 will cost 10 million to Pakistan.

Other facts, if it uses lead composite materials, it doesnt mean that the RCS is reduced. It was just to increase speed. And JF-17 will also have inflight refueling probe and deck arrester hook installed. The radar is unconfirmed, PAF is trying to get a better radar for JF-17 then Griffo S-7. And why not compare its maneuverbility with JF-17 ??? Even PAF is worried about the maneuverbility of its delta winged Mirages.

Another thing, why arent u giving solid reasons about JF-17s bad performance ?? Plzzz dont say that ask Chinese or anyone. Just prove it. LCA could be a third generation JSF without stealth. And as I said before, JF-17 will use SD-10 and this missile is superior to R-77 which ur Su-30MKI uses.
 

jatt2ooo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Light Combat Aircraft (LCA)

The Indian Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) is the world's smallest, light weight, multi-role combat aircraft designed to meet the requirements of Indian Air Force as its frontline multi-mission single-seat tactical aircraft to replace the MiG-21 series of aircraft. The delta wing configuration , with no tailplanes or foreplanes, features a single vertical fin. The LCA is constructed of aluminium-lithium alloys, carbon-fibre composites, and titanium. LCA integrates modern design concepts and the state-of-art technologies such as relaxed static stability, flyby-wire Flight Control System, Advanced Digital Cockpit, Multi-Mode Radar, Integrated Digital Avionics System, Advanced Composite Material Structures and a Flat Rated Engine.

The LCA design has been configured to match the demands of modern combat scenario such as speed, acceleration, maneuverability and agility. Short takeoff and landing, excellent flight performance, safety, reliability and maintainability, are salient features of LCA design. The LCA integrates modern design concepts like static instability, digital fly-by-wire flight control system, integrated avionics, glass cockpit, primary composite structure, multi-mode radar, microprocessor based utility and brake management systems.
The avionics system enhances the role of Light Combat Aircraft as an effective weapon platform. The glass cockpit and hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) controls reduce pilot workload. Accurate navigation and weapon aiming information on the head up display helps the pilot achieve his mission effectively. The multifunction displays provide information on engine, hydraulics, electrical, flight control and environmental control system on a need-to-know basis along with basic flight and tactical information. Dual redundant display processors (DP) generate computer-generated imagery on these displays. The pilot interacts with the complex avionics systems through a simple multifunction keyboard, and function and sensor selection panels. A state-of-the-art multi-mode radar (MMR), laser designator pod (LDP), forward looking infra-red (FLIR) and other opto-electronic sensors provide accurate target information to enhance kill probabilities. A ring laser gyro (RLG)-based inertial navigation system (INS), provides accurate navigation guidance to the pilot. An advanced electronic warfare (EW) suite enhances the aircraft survivability during deep penetration and combat. Secure and jam-resistant communication systems, such as IFF, VHF/UHF and air-to-air/air-to-ground data link are provided as a part of the avionics suite. All these systems are integrated on three 1553B buses by a centralised 32-bit mission computer (MC) with high throughput which performs weapon computations and flight management, and reconfiguration/redundancy management. Reversionary mission functions are provided by a control and coding unit (CCU). Most of these subsystems have been developed indigenously.

The digital FBW system of the LCA is built around a quadruplex redundant architecture to give it a fail op-fail op-fail safe capability. It employs a powerful digital flight control computer (DFCC) comprising four computing channels, each powered by an independent power supply and all housed in a single line replaceable unit (LRU). The system is designed to meet a probability of loss of control of better than 1x10-7 per flight hour. The DFCC channels are built around 32-bit microprocessors and use a safe subset of Ada language for the implementation of software. The DFCC receives signals from quad rate, acceleration sensors, pilot control stick, rudder pedal, triplex air data system, dual air flow angle sensors, etc. The DFCC channels excite and control the elevon, rudder and leading edge slat hydraulic actuators. The computer interfaces with pilot display elements like multifunction displays through MIL-STD-1553B avionics bus and RS 422 serial link. The digital FBW system of the LCA is built around a quadruplex redundant architecture to give it a fail op-fail op-fail safe capability. It employs a powerful digital flight control computer (DFCC) comprising four computing channels, each powered by an independent power supply and all housed in a single line replaceable unit (LRU). The system is designed to meet a probability of loss of control of better than 1x107 per flight hour. The DFCC channels are built around 32-bit microprocessors and use a safe subset of Ada language for the implementation of software. The DFCC receives signals from quad rate, acceleration sensors, pilot control stick, rudder pedal, triplex air data system, dual air flow angle sensors, etc. The DFCC channels excite and control the elevon, rudder and leading edge slat hydraulic actuators. The computer interfaces with pilot display elements like multifunction displays through MIL-STD-1553B avionics bus and RS 422 serial link.

Multi-mode radar (MMR), the primary mission sensor of the LCA in its air defence role, will be a key determinant of the operational effectiveness of the fighter. This is an X-band, pulse Doppler radar with air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-sea modes. Its track-while-scan capability caters to radar functions under multiple target environment. The antenna is a light weight (<5 kg), low profile slotted waveguide array with a multilayer feed network for broad band operation. The salient technical features are: two plane monopulse signals, low side lobe levels and integrated IFF, and GUARD and BITE channels. The heart of MMR is the signal processor, which is built around VLSI-ASICs and i960 processors to meet the functional needs of MMR in different modes of its operation. Its role is to process the radar receiver output, detect and locate targets, create ground map, and provide contour map when selected. Post-detection processor resolves range and Doppler ambiguities and forms plots for subsequent data processor. The special feature of signal processor is its real-time configurability to adapt to requirements depending on selected mode of operation.


Seven weapon stations provided on LCA offer flexibility in the choice of weapons LCA can carry in various mission roles. Provision of drop tanks and inflight refueling probe ensure extended range and flight endurance of demanding missions. Provisions for the growth of hardware and software in the avionics and flight control system, available in LCA, ensure to maintain its effectiveness and advantages as a frontline fighter throughout its service life. For maintenance the aircraft has more than five hundred Line Replaceable Units (LRSs), each tested for performance and capability to meet the severe operational conditions to be encountered.

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is the Principal Partner in the design and fabrication of LCA and its integration leading to flight testing. The LCA has been designed and developed by a consortium of five aircraft research, design, production and product support organizations pooled by the Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), under Department of Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO). Various international aircraft and system manufacturers are also participating in the program with supply of specific equipment, design consultancy and support. For example, GE Aircraft Engines provides the propulsion.

The first prototype of LCA rolled out on 17 November 1995. Two aircraft technology demonstrators are powered by single GE F404/F2J3 augmented turbofan engines. Regular flights with the state-of-the-art "Kaveri" engine, being developed by the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) in Bangalore, are planned by 2002, although by mid-1999 the Kaveri engine had yet to achieve the required thrust-to-weight ratio.

The LCA is India's second attempt at an indigenous jet fighter design, following the somewhat unsatisfactory HF-24 Marut Ground Attack Fighter built in limited numbers by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited in the 1950s. Conceived in 1983, the LCA will serve as the Indian air force's frontline tactical plane through the year 2020. The LCA will go into service in the 2003-2005 timeframe.
Following India's nuclear weapons tests in early 1998, the United States placed an embargo on the sale of General Electric 404 jet engines which are to power the LCA. The US also denied the fly-by-wire system for the aircraft sold by the US firm Lockheed-Martin. As of June 1998 the first flight of the LCA had been delayed due to systems integration tests. The first flight awaits completion of the Digital Flight Control Systems, being developed by the Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE).


Specifications
Wing Span 8.20 m
Length 13.20 m
Empty Weight 5500 kg
Engine Prototype - GE F404-F2J3 turbofan rated at 18,097 lbst
Production - Kaveri GTX-35VS turbofan rated at 20,200 lbst
Fuel Capacity Internal fuel capacity - 3000 liters
Centerline and the two-inner hardpoints under each wing can carry five 800 liters fuel tanks
also has an in-flight refuelling probe
Maximum Range ?
Maximum Speed Mach 1.7
Service Ceiling 50,000 feet.
G Limits +9/-3.5
Armament internally mounted GSh-23mm twin barrel gun with 220 rounds of ammunition
Seven external hardpoints, can carry air-to-air missiles, air-to-surface missiles, anti-ship missiles, rocket launchers and ECM pods

Maximum External Stores Load 4000kg (8818 lbs.)
Self Defence RWR system, jammer and chaff & flare dispensers.
whow this is amazing. :laugh do i trust my source, yes i do! lca is a fourth generation jsf :lol . Its cheap and stealthy. the only thing not stealthy about it is the weapons bay are located out side.
this is the thing. the lca is gonna have far better isrealy radar and armament aswell as american fbw :dance3 . just because the project is daleyed dont mean squot. the lca will also be a navel virsion.
:india :cheers :israel :cheers :usa
:finger
 

webmaster

Troll Hunter
Staff member
The URL info was requested for users/members, not for my self. Any info you post make sure it has its source listed.
 

Oqaab

New Member
Maximum External Stores Load 4000kg (8818 lbs.)
Self Defence RWR system, jammer and chaff & flare dispensers.
whow this is amazing. do i trust my source, yes i do! lca is a fourth generation jsf . Its cheap and stealthy. the only thing not stealthy about it is the weapons bay are located out side.
About Self defence systems like RWR, jammers, chaff and flares, our upgraded ROSE mirages have all these systems installed, so there is no need of being too much happy. :lolol

I doubt that LCA is a fourth generation fighter coz it was just to replace Mig-21s and mig-23s.

About stealth crap, do u know internal weapons bay is not the only thing which makes an aircraft stealth. The main ingredients are carbon and ferrite materials which have the tendency to absorb radar rays. Also, u have to minimize the amount of heat comming from the engines which is extreamly difficult.

Now, how come LCA is stealthy ??? Plzzz care to explain.

this is the thing. the lca is gonna have far better isrealy radar and armament aswell as american fbw . just because the project is daleyed dont mean squot. the lca will also be a navel virsion.
And JF-17s avionics are not decided yet. Probably Italian or Franch. FBW is also there. And yes, JF-17 will also have a naval version coz as I said before, a deck arrester hook will be installed in the aircraft. There is not a big difference in both the aircraft.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Going on the current config of the LCA I'd argue that its not very stealthy.
(this is predicated on the fact that I have a picture of a tailless, blended wing twin engine fighter on my desk)

The design isn't what you'd expect of a plane that is trying to minimise its RCS. It's actually a "blended wing" in concept. That means that it will be rather aerodynamic, have an elevation advantage and nominally be long range. (Its nominally a high altitude cruise design). Its not a low signature low RCS design though.

Anyplane with external weapons points is "dirty". A dirty aircraft may as well hold up a sign telling everyone that it is coming.

The other give away is the engine ducts and the engine vectors. they are all "proud" of the design, thus they are sending large returns if the aircraft has been painted by Radar.

The other thing is that with no vertical or canted stabilisers, the closeness of the two engine ducts would indicate a very twitchy plane. I wouldn't like to be a pilot and lose an engine. It would be like a helicopter going into a rotor stall.

I suspect that the drawing is nothing like what will eventuate.

Plus, there are confusing contradictions in the data that bis released. The LCA is touted as a tailless compound delta wing, yet the majority of pictures show a single fin conventional aircraft.

It is in NO way similar to a Mig 33. So I don't know where some press areas got their info.

ADDENDUM

I have different and conflicting schematics for the LCA, one one hand I have a conventional supersonic aircraft, on the other hand I have a twin engine tailless blended wing/delta config.

IF the LCA is the latter, then I would argue that eventually it has the capcity to be a superior fighter. If it is the conventional single engine, single tail (Tejas) then the aircraft are very similar and really the difference will be determined by on board systems and weapons mix.
 

jatt2ooo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #18
The body of the LCA is mostly made of composite materials and lithium-aluminium alloys. Titanium was also used in the body and airframe of the LCA. The LCA due to its small size has proved to be having a low radar cross section which makes it difficult for enemy radars to detect it. [Admin Edit: I don't want to edit your post every time you reply, read and follow the rules next time you post otherwise your reply maybe deleted Do not disrespect others...

:finger http://www.totalairdominance.50megs.com/Fighters/LCA.htmThe LCA is one of the best the world can offer like the advanced stealth fighters which America and allies are making or the EF-2000. There is nothing that is not present in the LCA's cockpit. Equiped with the state of the art digital avionics the LCA is one of the most pilot friendly aircraft in the world. The pilot is placed in a glass cockpit with good visibility. The avionics of the LCA include MFDs (Multi Functional Displays), HOTAS and a Quadruplex fly-by-wire system. This system was designed by Indian scientists. The LCA also has a helmet mounted target designation system. The other systems onboard the LCA are LANTRIN, FLIR, MMR (Multi Mode Radar), INS (Internal Navigation System), advances electronic warfare suite and a Laser Designation pod.

The LCA first had the fly-by-wire system which was bought from the Lockheed Martin. But due to the nuclear tests in 1998 the Indian scientists wre denied sale of this system by the US's Clinton administration. But the scientists of various firms developed the fly-by-wire system within two years after the embargo was placed. This was truly a great achievement for the Indian aeronautical industry and a morale booster.
:cop :cop wasted!american avonics!ahahahahahahaha.
The LCA has one of the best MMR (Multi Mode Radar) in the world :rolling america! we love u! :D :D he LCA is likely to be marketed to countries like South Africa which has shown interest in this particular project.
yea, why do they want our stuff? maybe cause its good! :D :D :D
 

ullu

New Member
OH great! :roll Yet another Indian who is full of himself with "india is great" crap with no respect for others.

Another indian trying to sound like LCA is like f22 and the like. :lolol :lolol :lolol
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
jatt2ooo said:
The body of the LCA is mostly made of composite materials and lithium-aluminium alloys. Titanium was also used in the body and airframe of the LCA. The LCA due to its small size has proved to be having a low radar cross section which makes it difficult for enemy radars to detect it. [Admin Edit: I don't want to edit your post every time you reply, read and follow the rules next time you post otherwise your reply maybe deleted Do not disrespect others...

:finger http://www.totalairdominance.50megs.com/Fighters/LCA.htmThe LCA is one of the best the world can offer like the advanced stealth fighters which America and allies are making or the EF-2000. There is nothing that is not present in the LCA's cockpit. Equiped with the state of the art digital avionics the LCA is one of the most pilot friendly aircraft in the world. The pilot is placed in a glass cockpit with good visibility. The avionics of the LCA include MFDs (Multi Functional Displays), HOTAS and a Quadruplex fly-by-wire system. This system was designed by Indian scientists. The LCA also has a helmet mounted target designation system. The other systems onboard the LCA are LANTRIN, FLIR, MMR (Multi Mode Radar), INS (Internal Navigation System), advances electronic warfare suite and a Laser Designation pod.

The LCA first had the fly-by-wire system which was bought from the Lockheed Martin. But due to the nuclear tests in 1998 the Indian scientists wre denied sale of this system by the US's Clinton administration. But the scientists of various firms developed the fly-by-wire system within two years after the embargo was placed. This was truly a great achievement for the Indian aeronautical industry and a morale booster.
:cop :cop wasted!american avonics!ahahahahahahaha.
The LCA has one of the best MMR (Multi Mode Radar) in the world :rolling america! we love u! :D :D he LCA is likely to be marketed to countries like South Africa which has shown interest in this particular project.
yea, why do they want our stuff? maybe cause its good! :D :D :D

jatt2ooo, let me make one thing really clear before I post the rest of my comments. I have no political leanings towards Hindus or Muslims. I am fortunate to be able to count followers of both faiths as my friends. Most of my friends are in the military. I work in a military environment, my principle background is in aerospace and has been for the last 12 years. The last military project I worked on involved Indian scientists. having worked with people of their calibre, I can assure you that they would positively recoil at your dissertation of aerodynamics.

I have been involved in electronic warfare projects and electronic countermeasures projects, so I'm not a troll wasting space.

What you have written is unmitigated rubbish. It defies all of the current analysis of 4th and 5th generation aviation design. In fact that aircraft appears to be a bastardised Gnat. The design features are identical

Radar cross section has nothing to do with size. It is SHAPE that counts. There are enough angles and reflectors in that design to make any radar system think that the Empire State building has developed wings and is airborne. The air intakes alone are enough to send a signal back to a radar system that you nare about to enter an EADS zone.

That aircraft in its current guise is not in anyway flight competitive with a gripen, rafale, typhoon and I would argue a block 60 falcon. It's shape dictates what it is likely to be able to do. And that shape is not competitive.
(let alone slippery)

BTW, can you show me where the LANTIRN, FLIR, capability is in that platform? It does not exist. on that aircraft. I have actually seen a few generations of LANTIRN systems, none of them exist on that airframe. If you add them then the aircraft will then be "dirty" and will send alarm bells to any radar system that is turned on. It is a middle order fighter, and even though it demonstrates a technical ability, it is not, I REPEAT NOT, a 4th gen competitor.

"Fly by wire" also exists in the latest BMW and Mercedes Benz braking systems, so what???

By overpromoting the aircraft you do yourself and the Indian design team a disservice.

Anyone with a modicum of aviation experience and patience can sit down and write out all the problems that the aircraft will have in a hitech combat scenario.

The one thing that I despise in people is when they lie to promote their preferred point of view. There is no technical merit in any of your arguments, there is no supporting evidence so substantiate any of your claims.

Finally, if someone had written the same garbage about the JF-17 that you wrote about the LCA, I would have responded as well.

I can only assume that you are a patriotic kid who got carried away in defending his nations capability. All you've done is belittle their effort.

One other thing, all the drivel about op-fail-op-fail is just normal aeropsace technospeak to say that the aircraft is milspeced and has triple redundancy.

milspec triple redundancy has been the tool de rigeur of all western mil aircraft for about 40 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top