Can Israel develop its own stealth fighter jet

[Abraham Gubler]

To be frank, I'd never considered this.. can you expand upon it?

The first point in this favour is this is how the Chinese say they designed the J-10. In the 1960/70s the Chinese developed two MiG-21 derived fighters. The J-8 with twin engines and the J-9 with canards. They built the J-8 because they couldn't build a powerful enough engine for the single engine fighter. After the fall of the Soviet Union they got access to Russian engine tech so the J-9 was reborn as the J-10.

You can overlay a to scale image of the J-10 with a MiG-21 and see a lot of cardinal points align like cockpit to engine, wing attachments and so on. If you do the same with a J-10 and Lavi nothing aligns. The J-10 is an aluminium plane but the Lavi was almost all composite. There is no way you can just change the material selection. The J-10 is also about 1/3 heavier than the Lavi. Again you cannot change empty weight to such a regard and keep the same design base.

The only evidence that the J-10 is dervied from the Lavi is a lot of claims from the Russians. Plenty of ignorant journalists followed this line backing the Russian attempts to demean the Chinese. The Israelis acknowledge selling tech from the Lavi to China for the J-10 but this is avionics. The Israelis talk about Lavi tech whenever they refer to a range of radars and cockpit displays, EW, etc. Lavi tech this Lavi tech that. They have sold this for upgrades for MiG-21s, F-5s, F-16s, etc around the world.

 

[Gili]

LOL, that’s a popular myth but completely baseless. The J-10 shares a configuration similarity with the Lavi but is clearly derived from the MiG-21 and has no similarity to the Lavi’s aerostructure and engine. Also the design of the wings on the Lavi were subcontracted to Grumman which is NOT a French company.

The Lavi was designed in Israel with the US to pick up most of the bill. The costs escalated immensely which created a lot of disquiet in Israel which in the end killed it. The only reason it went so far was because a former IAI head was a Government Minister. They could have built it much, much cheaper but IAI is not exactly a lean company. Also the domestic engine builder was a shambles with no capacity to build an advanced turbofan which was going to cost hundreds of millions to bring up to speed.

Lavi was mostly domestic, particularly in the avionics side and in the all composite aerostructure. Avionics that live on today and are the cornerstone of much of the Israeli weapons export.

As to the Israeli capacity to build a stealth aircraft Adrian Wainer’s comment is on the money. I put this very question to the GM of IAI Malat in his office a few years ago and his response was rather sheepish…

Well I'm no expert, though served in the Israeli infantry brigade (well, didn't see many Lavis but much Black Hawks and CH-53ׁ-however, few things I can tell for sure: First, the Lavi was called off due to American pressure, foreign sources won't tell it but many, many many Israeli sources who familiar with all of those who were involved in this cabinet decision know well that it wasn't the money. Also, the present head of the IAI, son of the former prime minister Yitzhak Shamir and an IAF colonel for himself, told again-it wasn't the money, but American pressure-so I can't see how you contradict that...Also, heavy American pressure to limit Israel weapon industry is far too common-especially when democrats are at the oval office...

Maybe the all issue of the J10 is a myth, but it is heard too often and by reliable defense sources-also, don't forget that it was Clinton administration who put heavy pressure on Israel to cancel the billion dollar deal with Chinese in 1999 (Israel was supposed to sell China AWACS system of the IAI which was considered then worlds best ) the cancellation degraded the relationships between Israel and China dramatically-As I know through third person Ora Namir, who was Israel's ambassador in China -I know for sure that she saw it as a very bad mistake-but till then, Israel had extensive cooperation with the Chinese and aside for you dismissing it with a wave -You didn't tell why I'm wrong.

I admit that I made few mistakes, as for the delta wings-just because I wrongly remembered that once I read French company handled the manufacture and design of the delta wings.

As far as I know, Beit Shemsh factory still building turbofans, at very good quality (well, they serve very well the Israeli Air Force, and the IAF standards are very very high even when compare to other western air forces) if I'm not mistaken, the turbofans are being sold world wide-I didn't hear about the mess you are telling about-at least not during the last 20 years.

Just consider how much USA spent on each of its projects and you will find that the American companies do not enjoy any superiority of effectiveness in terms of developments costs-I wonder if their is any air craft it took the USA less than 10 billion dollars to develop-usually much more-the Lavi was very cheap even then, when compare to the development costs of the F-16 for instance. It was big relative to Israel whose economy was back then much smaller.

The THAAD is based heavily on the Arrow technology, so it said, the Arrow project cost between 1.5-2 billion dollars do you have idea how much the THAAD cost?

Finally, maybe the IAI CEO was bewildered when you asked him few years ago-but few years have passed and I also think that we now have new CEO and new PM and new military doctrines and we also passed the second Lebanon war which shacked few things here, not to mention that Iran is in Israel national new almost on daily basis-it wasn't like that few years ago. Also, consider that for instance, after Clinoton reject Israel request to buy Tomahawks -Israel developed cruise missiles with similar capabilities in less than a year though initially it had no such intend. (this claim is very well sourced, also by the US navy intelligence).

Israel UAVs program is so far, more advanced than those of French and UK-and now they develop stealth UAVs-I can't see why would Israel like to stay behind. It bought, in bad deal if you ask me, 25 F-35 recently-at the beginning the media told about 75 air crafts (25 in the first deal plus option to additional 50) so where did the 50 disappear? Well, Obama is not willing Israel will develop and install its own systems into it so maybe Israel decide not to buy 50 more, but to spend the money on local solutions -like highly advanced UAV which are cheaper to build, operate and develop than manned air craft -but also enjoy increasing communication saftyness , autonomy and their payload and speed are just increasing- who knows, but again, if French can build stealth UAV there is no reason to assume Israel can't.

 

[Gili]

The first point in this favour is this is how the Chinese say they designed the J-10. In the 1960/70s the Chinese developed two MiG-21 derived fighters. The J-8 with twin engines and the J-9 with canards. They built the J-8 because they couldn't build a powerful enough engine for the single engine fighter. After the fall of the Soviet Union they got access to Russian engine tech so the J-9 was reborn as the J-10.

You can overlay a to scale image of the J-10 with a MiG-21 and see a lot of cardinal points align like cockpit to engine, wing attachments and so on. If you do the same with a J-10 and Lavi nothing aligns. The J-10 is an aluminium plane but the Lavi was almost all composite. There is no way you can just change the material selection. The J-10 is also about 1/3 heavier than the Lavi. Again you cannot change empty weight to such a regard and keep the same design base.

The only evidence that the J-10 is dervied from the Lavi is a lot of claims from the Russians. Plenty of ignorant journalists followed this line backing the Russian attempts to demean the Chinese. The Israelis acknowledge selling tech from the Lavi to China for the J-10 but this is avionics. The Israelis talk about Lavi tech whenever they refer to a range of radars and cockpit displays, EW, etc. Lavi tech this Lavi tech that. They have sold this for upgrades for MiG-21s, F-5s, F-16s, etc around the world.

Well, that's an impressive explanation-but where did the Chinese came with the Delta wings? I truly asking. Can't you keep at least parts of the body design without keeping all of the materials? I'm sure performances are different when material are different, and indeed Lavi and J10 have somewhat different capabilities-but can't it be explained by the different material? Visually J10 have nothing in common with any MiG...

Also, when I want to make it clear that when I talk about American pressure I refer to pressure which the motives behind are meant to keep Israel too dependent on US products -something that many times Israel can't allow itself.

 

[swerve]

As far as I know, Beit Shemsh factory still building turbofans, at very good quality (well, they serve very well the Israeli Air Force, and the IAF standards are very very high even when compare to other western air forces) if I'm not mistaken, the turbofans are being sold world wide-I didn't hear about the mess you are telling about-at least not during the last 20 years..

Beit Shemsh makes parts for foreign-designed & built engines in Israel & Serbia, & its own range of three very small turbojets. They're basic models, low-cost & simple, suitable for powering small UAVs & the like or land-based applications - and that's all they claim. Their own sales literature stresses simplicity & low cost. The most powerful has a thrust of 367 kg.

It's never designed a turbofan, & if it's ever made any, they've been foreign designs, assembled from largely foreign-made parts. The only Beit Shemsh business in jet fighter engines is maintenance & reconditioning. Useful skills, but it's a huge jump from there to building its own designs, or even copying a foreign one.

 

[Gili]

Beit Shemsh makes parts for foreign-designed & built engines in Israel & Serbia, & its own range of three very small turbojets. They're basic models, low-cost & simple, suitable for powering small UAVs & the like or land-based applications - and that's all they claim. Their own sales literature stresses simplicity & low cost. The most powerful has a thrust of 367 kg.

It's never designed a turbofan, & if it's ever made any, they've been foreign designs, assembled from largely foreign-made parts. The only Beit Shemsh business in jet fighter engines is maintenance & reconditioning. Useful skills, but it's a huge jump from there to building its own designs, or even copying a foreign one.

I'm not sure you're correct about this ...In any case, even if you do, as I see it-developing an engine is a matter of decision and fund. If you can build satellite and design many very advanced military and civilian systems as IAI did and doing, it can also design an engine.

If we could have this discussion in 1979 before the Lavi project was launched you would probably telling that Israel have no experience with designing air crafts (though it did then, but not of multi role jet fighters) and it's impossible.

I do know that Beit Shemesh engines designed the engines of many Israeli missiles, from very short range to the Shavit space vehicle -while US sold Israel F-16 and F-15 engines it can't sell Israel any strategic missile like the Shavit (which is also assumed to be the Jericho II civilian version) so in these cases Israel have no other choice but to develop it for itself.

As like any other country with advanced weapon industry I believe Israel could develop an engine but maybe the cost-effectiveness ratio is too high ....However, developing stealth UAV would not ask Israel for a beginning to design its own engine (but maybe later yes) and it's already said that IAI is taking this line of R&D.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The Americans didn’t cancel Lavi the Israelis did. It was American law passed by Congress to fund the Lavi. OSD were obviously very unhappy with this situation and in response to cues from people in the IDF prepared a range of American built aircraft alternatives to the Lavi. These figures were decisive as well as the cost growth and schedule slippage in the Lavi program. So eventually – by one vote – the Israeli cabinet cancelled the project. Interesting that against the Lavi in the end was the Israeli Air Force. The Lavi would have been an excellent aircraft, much better than the F-16. But it would stifled a generation of economic growth in Israel and Israeli defence has not suffered from the supply of American aircraft.

The only other question that hasn’t been answered is where did China get delta wings from? Well the MiG-21 has a delta wing. The wings on the J-8, J-9 and J-10 are all developed from this base. Not that building deltas is hard they are the easiest swept wing to build.

Also you are misinterpreting what happened between me and the IAI Malat GM (not the CEO of IAI). When I asked about a stealthy, jet powered UAV his response was of course I can’t comment but in such a way as to imply that of course they have built such a thing.

 

[Gili]

The Americans didn’t cancel Lavi the Israelis did. It was American law passed by Congress to fund the Lavi. OSD were obviously very unhappy with this situation and in response to cues from people in the IDF prepared a range of American built aircraft alternatives to the Lavi. These figures were decisive as well as the cost growth and schedule slippage in the Lavi program. So eventually – by one vote – the Israeli cabinet cancelled the project. Interesting that against the Lavi in the end was the Israeli Air Force. The Lavi would have been an excellent aircraft, much better than the F-16. But it would stifled a generation of economic growth in Israel and Israeli defence has not suffered from the supply of American aircraft.

The only other question that hasn’t been answered is where did China get delta wings from? Well the MiG-21 has a delta wing. The wings on the J-8, J-9 and J-10 are all developed from this base. Not that building deltas is hard they are the easiest swept wing to build.

Also you are misinterpreting what happened between me and the IAI Malat GM (not the CEO of IAI). When I asked about a stealthy, jet powered UAV his response was of course I can’t comment but in such a way as to imply that of course they have built such a thing.

Maybe I phrased it wrongly-the MiG 21 didn't have forepart delta wings -and maybe the difference between rear part delta wings and forepart delta wings is not that big, I don't know-but why would the Russians deny they sold the Chinese the technology to built J10, after all Russia was or maybe still is the Chinese army largest foreign supplier.

In any case, it's not very important to the matter of the discussion and it's very possible that the J10 is not based on the LAVI as claimed in some sources.

But, as for the Lavi cancellation -there is still something unclear here - First, if the Lavi was better than the F-16 then, the US could turned it into a fully joint project such that American companies would enjoy most of the profits from the Jet, after all, in US terms then the project costs were peanuts. But it didn't and the next Israeli -US joint project the US (Clinton administration) funded were defensive-the Arrow, and then after the Nautilus laser gun project -it never funded any Israeli - US offensive project. Also, one or two years ago US rejected Israels' request to buy and add new Boeing 737 tankers to the more than 20 years old 737 squadron it already have in service. The reason behind this refusal is that Israel is more expected to strike in Iran when having a larger fleet of tankers in a case that it feel like it stand with its back to the wall and then without a green light from the white house than when its tankers fleet size is smaller and therefore the IAF ability to strike in Iran in this case is much more limited.

Additional note, after the Lavi project was called off, Israel bought F-16s and F-15s squadrons from the US, the administration then allowed Israel to install any avionics of its own design into these planes -without any limitation what so ever, after that, when Israel signed another deal to buy additional F-16s the administration put some restrictions on the avionics Israel could install into them, and now, with the F35-and after two years of negotiation Israel is virtually not allowed to have any of its own made avionics into them (which weaken Israel ability to keep superiority over its possible arrivals and possible arrivals who are expected for themselves to buy the F35 at some point (Saudi Arabia) or to buy aircraft with similar capabilities like the T-50 from the Russians (Syrians) ) it is said in Israel that the US administration allowed Israel to first install its own avionics into US made planes as compensation for the cancellation of the LAVI project. So, yes, it was Israeli cabinet who vote for the cancellation (some of those voted from totally political reason which were connected with their party standing in the government) but I think that US signaled Israel it don't like the project any more...

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Maybe I phrased it wrongly-the MiG 21 didn't have forepart delta wings -and maybe the difference between rear part delta wings and forepart delta wings is not that big, I don't know-but why would the Russians deny they sold the Chinese the technology to built J10, after all Russia was or maybe still is the Chinese army largest foreign supplier.

That configuration is called canard wings. And the Chinese were designing them in the late 1960s. The Soviets supplied China with the MiG-21 design 50 years ago and the gap between it and the J-10 is 30 years of Chinese effort. The Russians supplied the engine for the J-10 that is well known.

In any case, it's not very important to the matter of the discussion and it's very possible that the J10 is not based on the LAVI as claimed in some sources.

Of course and those sources are full of sh*t which is not a strange occurrence in the defence trade press.

But, as for the Lavi cancellation -there is still something unclear here -

Stop you here. It’s perfectly clear if you bother to find out about the project from primary and secondary sources rather than half remembered gossip. If you haven’t read Zakheim’s “Flight of the Lavi” or worked directly on the project at that time then you really shouldn’t be expressing an opinion about it.

First, if the Lavi was better than the F-16 then, the US could turned it into a fully joint project such that American companies would enjoy most of the profits from the Jet, after all, in US terms then the project costs were peanuts.

So? I am yet to notice the defence procurement of any state being interested solely in providing the best product for the users.

But it didn't and the next Israeli -US joint project the US (Clinton administration) funded were defensive-the Arrow, and then after the Nautilus laser gun project -it never funded any Israeli - US offensive project. Also, one or two years ago US rejected Israels' request to buy and add new Boeing 737 tankers to the more than 20 years old 737 squadron it already have in service. The reason behind this refusal is that Israel is more expected to strike in Iran when having a larger fleet of tankers in a case that it feel like it stand with its back to the wall and then without a green light from the white house than when its tankers fleet size is smaller and therefore the IAF ability to strike in Iran in this case is much more limited.

Arrow was a unique capability and like the F-15I acquisition came about as part of the US support for Israel after the 1991 Scud attacks. Anyway the US Congress was happy to fund Lavi it was just the Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Israeli Government that had a problem with it. As to buying 707 tankers (not 737) this story sounds a bit overblown. There is no shortage of 707 airframes on the open market and IAI has the world’s most established 707 to tanker conversion capability. If Israel wants more 707 tankers it hardly has to turn to the US for them.

Additional note, after the Lavi project was called off, Israel bought F-16s and F-15s squadrons from the US, the administration then allowed Israel to install any avionics of its own design into these planes -without any limitation what so ever, after that, when Israel signed another deal to buy additional F-16s the administration put some restrictions on the avionics Israel could install into them, and now, with the F35-and after two years of negotiation Israel is virtually not allowed to have any of its own made avionics into them (which weaken Israel ability to keep superiority over its possible arrivals and possible arrivals who are expected for themselves to buy the F35 at some point (Saudi Arabia) or to buy aircraft with similar capabilities like the T-50 from the Russians (Syrians) ) it is said in Israel that the US administration allowed Israel to first install its own avionics into US made planes as compensation for the cancellation of the LAVI project.

As part of the OSD effort to kill of the Lavi they funded GDFW, McAir, Northrop etc to come up with a range of different aircraft options including lots of Israeli avionics. The IDFchose the GDFW option for the F-16 with Israeli avionics turning down all sorts of mixes including the AV-8B, F/A018 and F-20. The purchase of F-15Is was unrelated to Lavi and as an aside the IDF considered but rejected the Lockheed option for 50 more F-16s and 25 second hand F-111Fs for the 25 F-15Is.

So, yes, it was Israeli cabinet who vote for the cancellation (some of those voted from totally political reason which were connected with their party standing in the government) but I think that US signaled Israel it don't like the project any more...

Again like I’ve said it was the US executive who didn’t like the Lavi but the Congress had passed the law to pay for it and Congress spends on what Congress wants. As to the Israeli decision it was in hindsight and clearly obvious to anyone at the time the right decision. The cost of Lavi even with Congress paying for most would have bankrupted Israel.

 

[Gili]

That configuration is called canard wings. And the Chinese were designing them in the late 1960s. The Soviets supplied China with the MiG-21 design 50 years ago and the gap between it and the J-10 is 30 years of Chinese effort. The Russians supplied the engine for the J-10 that is well known.



Of course and those sources are full of sh*t which is not a strange occurrence in the defence trade press.



Stop you here. It’s perfectly clear if you bother to find out about the project from primary and secondary sources rather than half remembered gossip. If you haven’t read Zakheim’s “Flight of the Lavi” or worked directly on the project at that time then you really shouldn’t be expressing an opinion about it.



So? I am yet to notice the defence procurement of any state being interested solely in providing the best product for the users.



Arrow was a unique capability and like the F-15I acquisition came about as part of the US support for Israel after the 1991 Scud attacks. Anyway the US Congress was happy to fund Lavi it was just the Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Israeli Government that had a problem with it. As to buying 707 tankers (not 737) this story sounds a bit overblown. There is no shortage of 707 airframes on the open market and IAI has the world’s most established 707 to tanker conversion capability. If Israel wants more 707 tankers it hardly has to turn to the US for them.



As part of the OSD effort to kill of the Lavi they funded GDFW, McAir, Northrop etc to come up with a range of different aircraft options including lots of Israeli avionics. The IDFchose the GDFW option for the F-16 with Israeli avionics turning down all sorts of mixes including the AV-8B, F/A018 and F-20. The purchase of F-15Is was unrelated to Lavi and as an aside the IDF considered but rejected the Lockheed option for 50 more F-16s and 25 second hand F-111Fs for the 25 F-15Is.



Again like I’ve said it was the US executive who didn’t like the Lavi but the Congress had passed the law to pay for it and Congress spends on what Congress wants. As to the Israeli decision it was in hindsight and clearly obvious to anyone at the time the right decision. The cost of Lavi even with Congress paying for most would have bankrupted Israel.

Well, you got it-I'm speechless. Also, I will go to "the flight of the Lavi"-and oh, I'm too young to be among those who worked on the Lavi...

 

[swerve]

I'm not sure you're correct about this ...

My source is Beit Shemsh.

In any case, even if you do, as I see it-developing an engine is a matter of decision and fund. If you can build satellite and design many very advanced military and civilian systems as IAI did and doing, it can also design an engine. .

The skills aren't necessarily transferable.

Beit Shemsh can certainly design & build engines (it does!), but not anything suitable for a modern fighter, unless they spend many years & billions of dollars (which someone else would have to provide) developing the technology, & their own skills. Right now, they don't have the ability. The same applies to some of the other technologies needed for a stealthy fighter.

Your attitude seems to be "Israelis are clever, we can design & build anything.". I'd say that's true of most countries - given the time & money.

Israel doesn't have enough people or money to compete in everything. Concentrate on a few areas, & Israel can be (as it is) world class in them. Try to do everything, & it'll fail.

Maybe I phrased it wrongly-the MiG 21 didn't have forepart delta wings -

No, but plenty of other aircraft did before the Lavi. Dassault was experimenting with retractable mini-canards in the 1960s, Sweden had the Viggen in service in 1972, with studies (including of the canard-delta configuration) having begun in the 1950s, & first flight in 1967.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Well, you got it-I'm speechless. Also, I will go to "the flight of the Lavi"-and oh, I'm too young to be among those who worked on the Lavi...

The Lavi was a very sweet plane. It achieved this by using what was at that time unparalleled levels of composites in the aerostructure. This is part was because of the IDF experience in ’73 and they wanted a “bulletproof” fighter. It also meant it was very light for its size. Combined with the efficient wing and the compact F100 (PW 1120 which from memory Sun only built one and it was years behind schedule) it was a real hot rod with long legs.

But the build plan was way too ambitious. If Lavi was driven less by IAI feather nesting then perhaps it could have been built as a joint venture with Grumman? With most of the vehicle system side being built in the US for final assembly in Israel it would have been far more affordable. It would also have made for a competitive alternative to the F-16CJ/CJ and a great replacement for the A-10? The Grumman A-11A Puma…

 

[Gili]

My source is Beit Shemsh.


The skills aren't necessarily transferable.

Beit Shemsh can certainly design & build engines (it does!), but not anything suitable for a modern fighter, unless they spend many years & billions of dollars (which someone else would have to provide) developing the technology, & their own skills. Right now, they don't have the ability. The same applies to some of the other technologies needed for a stealthy fighter.

I don't think developing an engine would cost billions of dollars-do you have any sources that indicate that? (truly asking). Also, I was mistaken back then, Beit Shemesh assembles F-16s engines and not manufacture them -In any case, if Israel decide it have to design its own engine it wouldn't need to start from 0, after all it have much knowledge that came from outside- and also, another surprising factor is the immigration of more than million people to Israel from former USSR since 1989-many key people in the soviet weapon industry have immigrated to Israel, it includes one of the heads of Russian strategic missiles program and many others with ample experience -I bet that in designing engine jets as well.

Building stealth abilities is not comparable to developing an engine from what I understand. First, it is almost always cheaper to develop something after someone else did it. Second, Russia developed stealth abilities, UK and French did the same. I'm not sure developing such capabilities for UAVs is as complicated as to develop it for manned aircraft (which is more salient). Third, Israel is already developing such capabilities as reported in some sources. Also, the IAI CEO told that Israel spent 600 million$ in R&D of UAVs during the last decade (I think) -and I guess that if there is a real need Israel will not hesitate to spill more money to get its own indigenous stealth technology-sincerely I don't see it as such impassable challenge.

Your attitude seems to be "Israelis are clever, we can design & build anything.". I'd say that's true of most countries - given the time & money.

Well, you didn't miss here- and maybe I exaggerated here, but it was because of the dismissing tone. I do think Israel has special capabilities but I didn't tell and don't think other countries, though not most, don't have such. I think the Russians for example, have great skills, though they have problem with organizing big projects (sure, they made huge projects-I compare them to countries with somewhat equivalent weapon industries like these of the US and China ) . Israel has never tried, for instance, to build a submarine-nor that it seem it will sometime soon because this kind of industry demand many years of experience and a LOT of money-that's why Israel buy its subs from Germany (well, not only that-US can't sell Israel nuclear submarines and it doesn't manufacture diesel ones) -Germany have experience with submarines from WWI and during WWII it manufactured around 1000 submarines -of which if I'm not wrong there are still some active in few navy's or at least were until lately.

Israel doesn't have enough people or money to compete in everything. Concentrate on a few areas, & Israel can be (as it is) world class in them. Try to do everything, & it'll fail.

Sure, that's apply maybe to all countries with population size of less than 40-50 million people. The UK for instance, is one of the smallest countries that manufacture everything -it's true that Israel don't have enough man power and certainly is not in position for expensive adventures.

Small size also have advantages, for instance, the Israeli satellites are among smallest -why? Because the Israeli launch vehicles can't carry heavy ones into LEO. Also, when your budget is limited you take only the best people and doing your best-it sounds corny maybe, but that's how it works.


No, but plenty of other aircraft did before the Lavi. Dassault was experimenting with retractable mini-canards in the 1960s, Sweden had the Viggen in service in 1972, with studies (including of the canard-delta configuration) having begun in the 1950s, & first flight in 1967.

Yes I know that, I'm also familiar with the Kfir and Nesher being copies of the Mirage -but no one argued the J10 was inspired from them -in any case I'm not saying the J10 is the Lavi now.

 

[Gili]

The skills aren't necessarily transferable.

Beit Shemsh can certainly design & build engines (it does!), but not anything suitable for a modern fighter, unless they spend many years & billions of dollars (which someone else would have to provide) developing the technology, & their own skills. Right now, they don't have the ability. The same applies to some of the other technologies needed for a stealthy fighter.

I don't think developing an engine would cost billions of dollars-do you have any sources that indicate that? (truly asking). Also, I was mistaken back then, Beit Shemesh assembles F-16s engines and not manufacture them -In any case, if Israel decide it have to design its own engine it wouldn't need to start from 0, after all it have much knowledge that came from outside- and also, another surprising factor is the immigration of more than million people to Israel from former USSR since 1989-many key people in the soviet weapon industry have immigrated to Israel, it includes one of the heads of Russian strategic missiles program and many others with ample experience -I bet that in designing engine jets as well.

Building stealth abilities is not comparable to developing an engine from what I understand. First, it is almost always cheaper to develop something after someone else did it. Second, Russia developed stealth abilities, UK and French did the same. I'm not sure developing such capabilities for UAVs is as complicated as to develop it for manned aircraft (which is more salient). Third, Israel is already developing such capabilities as reported in some sources. Also, the IAI CEO told that Israel spent 600 million$ in R&D of UAVs during the last decade (I think) -and I guess that if there is a real need Israel will not hesitate to spill more money to get its own indigenous stealth technology-sincerely I don't see it as such impassable challenge.

Your attitude seems to be "Israelis are clever, we can design & build anything.". I'd say that's true of most countries - given the time & money.

Well, you didn't miss here- and maybe I exaggerated here, but it was because of the dismissing tone. I do think Israel has special capabilities but I didn't tell and don't think other countries, though not most, don't have such. I think the Russians for example, have great skills, though they have problem with organizing big projects (sure, they made huge projects-I compare them to countries with somewhat equivalent weapon industries like these of the US and China ) . Israel has never tried, for instance, to build a submarine-nor that it seem it will sometime soon because this kind of industry demand many years of experience and a LOT of money-that's why Israel buy its subs from Germany (well, not only that-US can't sell Israel nuclear submarines and it doesn't manufacture diesel ones) -Germany have experience with submarines from WWI and during WWII it manufactured around 1000 submarines -of which if I'm not wrong there are still some active in few navy's or at least were until lately.

Israel doesn't have enough people or money to compete in everything. Concentrate on a few areas, & Israel can be (as it is) world class in them. Try to do everything, & it'll fail.

Sure, that's apply maybe to all countries with population size of less than 40-50 million people. The UK for instance, is one of the smallest countries that manufacture everything -it's true that Israel don't have enough man power and certainly is not in position for expensive adventures.

Small size also have advantages, for instance, the Israeli satellites are among smallest -why? Because the Israeli launch vehicles can't carry heavy ones into LEO. Also, when your budget is limited you take only the best people and doing your best-it sounds corny maybe, but that's how it works.

Also, I must tell that in though I emphasized the Israeli weapon industry (naturally) I'm far from underestimating the US one, which is world's biggest and most advanced in most fields. I do have some grievances about the US administration but no worries, I have much more about the Israeli one.

 

[swerve]

I don't think developing an engine would cost billions of dollars-do you have any sources that indicate that? (truly asking)..

It isn't just a case of developing one engine. First, you have to build the skills base, & technologies, needed to build an engine of sufficient sophistication & power. A firm like Rolls-Royce, for example, has several families of engines to build on, & can re-use technology from them in any new engine it develops. It has thousands of skilled people, billions of pounds worth of machinery & other equipment.

Think about that, then go away & look up how much has been spent on developing the F135 & F136 engines. F135 is estimated as over $7 billion. That's unusually expensive, but even so, it wasn't starting almost from scratch, as Israel would be.

This isn't like building a nice simple UAV, where the clever stuff is all in the control systems, & the airframe is very basic, the engine off the shelf, etc.

 

[deepsight]

Mod edit: one-liner deleted. Read the rules, contribute to the discussion. Thanks mate.

 

[fltworthy]

The J-10 shares a configuration similarity with the Lavi but is clearly derived from the MiG-21 and has no similarity to the Lavi’s aerostructure and engine.

This one really needs to be put to rest. Russian sources - who supplied the Chinese with the engine for the J-10 - have acknowledged Israeli assistance in the development of the J-10 from day one:
Chinese J-10 'benefited from the Lavi project' - Jane's Defence Systems News
Even the Chinese now admit that Israelis acted as consultants in the development of the airplane. In 2008, for example, there was a Chinese-language interview published with the J-10's chief test pilot Col Lei Qiang - who acknowledged the Israeli contribution to the program, including the trips that he made to Israel to undergo test pilot training in preparation for the J-10's first flight.

Let's make this clear: the J-10 is not a copy of the Lavi. It is a much larger airplane, built out of Israel's experience with the Lavi, and built around the Russian engine and local manufacturing capabilities available to the Chinese. It is in no way an outgrowth or derivative of the MiG-21 or any other Russian fighter. The design similarities between the J-10 and Lavi should be obvious:

Both the J-10 and the Lavi feature a blended-wing design, with area ruling - features not seen on the MiG-21, nor even on the Eurocanards.

Both the J-10 and the Lavi feature a close-coupled canard-delta design - features not seen on the MiG-21, and which both share with such aircraft as the Rafale, Gripen and Kfir (although not with the Eurofighter Typhoon - which features a long-coupled canard-delta design).

Both the J-10 and Lavi feature twin ventral strakes, which increase lateral stability and also protect the engine from tail-strike during over-rotation - features not seen on either the MiG-21 or the Eurocanards.

Both the J-10 and Lavi feature a single engine with a ventral inlet, another combination not seen on either the MiG-21 or the Eurocanards.

Anyone who has studied the arrangement of access panels on the center fuselage fuel tank should have noticed the obvious design similarities between the J-10 and Lavi. This same structural arrangement can also be seen on the F-16 - but will not be found on any of the Eurocanards, and certainly not on the MiG-21 (for which maintenance panels were a distant afterthought).​

The history of Israel's involvement with China's defense development has been well documented. There was a period of time when the United States encouraged Western assistance to China (within certain limitations), as a means for providing additional pressure on the Soviets (and later the Russians). All of that changed in 1998, however, when the US reversed its policy on this issue, and began to pressure the Israelis and Europeans to halt defense cooperation with China.

 

[fltworthy]

If you haven’t read Zakheim’s “Flight of the Lavi” or worked directly on the project at that time then you really shouldn’t be expressing an opinion about it.

Zakheim's book is about the last source that anyone should read if they really want to understand the story behind the Lavi. Zakheim was an accountant - not a defense analyst - employed by the Defense Department of Caspar Weinberger who was expressly charged with the job to "terminate" the Lavi. Not to provide Israel with the best bang-for-buck, not to assess what Israel's air force needs were and how to arrive at the best match for those needs, but to "terminate" the Lavi. Those of us who are old enough to remember know quite well Defense Secretary Weinberger's personal animosity towards Israel. Zakheim was merely the yes-man who carried out his boss' bidding - without any understanding of the subject matter at hand.

To quote from Zakheim's own book, Zakheim believed that "A fighter was a fighter was a fighter." To him, no one fighter was better than any other fighter. If we all believed in that, we would still be flying Sopwith Camels into combat. Only his extreme ignorance of everthing aerospace could explain how Zakheim could propose the short-legged F-20 and the AV-8B as "alternatives" for cancelling the Lavi. Only someone with no clue as to how these aircraft operate and the different roles that they were designed to perform could have believed that all of these aircraft were equivalent "alternatives".

As was confirmed by the US General Accounting Office at the time, the unit cost of the Lavi - as originally envisioned - would indeed have been competitive with purchasing the F-16, F-15E, or other aircraft offered at the time. The problem was that the Lavi had been launched on the basis of a 300 aircraft purchase, something that became impossible after the deep defense cuts made to the Israeli budget during the mid-1980s. With half as many aircraft produced, the Lavi became unaffordable - much like France's Rafale. If the Israelis had wanted to continue the Lavi program, they needed to find a partner for production who could afford at least another 150 aircraft to offset the reduced buying power of the IDF. Absent that, the Lavi was no longer cost competitive.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

This one really needs to be put to rest. Russian sources - who supplied the Chinese with the engine for the J-10 - have acknowledged Israeli assistance in the development of the J-10 from day one:
Chinese J-10 'benefited from the Lavi project' - Jane's Defence Systems News
Even the Chinese now admit that Israelis acted as consultants in the development of the airplane. In 2008, for example, there was a Chinese-language interview published with the J-10's chief test pilot Col Lei Qiang - who acknowledged the Israeli contribution to the program, including the trips that he made to Israel to undergo test pilot training in preparation for the J-10's first flight.

Where in any of that is a suggestion that the J-10 is based on the Lavi? No where. No one is refuting that there was Israeli input into the J-10 just that the design is based on the Lavi or derived from it in any significant manner. It is an assumption based on the Israeli input and a rough configuration similarity that one follows the other.

It is in no way an outgrowth or derivative of the MiG-21 or any other Russian fighter.

J-7 (MiG-21) – J-9 – J-10. The design history is quite clear, announced by the Chinese and obvious to anyone with an aero structure engineering eye.

The design similarities between the J-10 and Lavi should be obvious:

Both the J-10 and the Lavi feature a blended-wing design, with area ruling - features not seen on the MiG-21, nor even on the Eurocanards.​

LOL. There is no blended wing on the Lavi or the J-10. Aerodynamic smoothing is not blending of the wing into the fuselage. Both wings are basically thin deltas but completely different in detail, structural design and size.

None of the design features and structural arrangement of the Lavi is found in the J-10. They both have close coupled canards and a chin intake, single tail, single engine. But none of these items are structured the same, made from the same stuff, the same size, positioned the same (in detail), work the same and of course are the same.

Both the J-10 and the Lavi feature a close-coupled canard-delta design - features not seen on the MiG-21,

Ahh ever heard of the J-9? Paying attention are you?

Anyone who has studied the arrangement of access panels on the center fuselage fuel tank should have noticed the obvious design similarities between the J-10 and Lavi. This same structural arrangement can also be seen on the F-16 -

LOL. So you’ve found the one significant aero structure similarity between the Lavi and the J-10. They both copied the F-16’s wrapping of a fuel tank around the duct from the chin intake to the engine face.​

 

[fltworthy]

It isn't just a case of developing one engine. First, you have to build the skills base, & technologies, needed to build an engine of sufficient sophistication & power. A firm like Rolls-Royce, for example, has several families of engines to build on, & can re-use technology from them in any new engine it develops. It has thousands of skilled people, billions of pounds worth of machinery & other equipment.

Swerve is spot-on on this point. The development costs for a modern jet engine will typically far exceed the cost of the airframe, and the design cycle is typically much longer. In today's world, only the avionics package can compete with the engine in terms of the development and procurement cost.

Think about it this way. For a supersonic aiframe, "high temperature" materials will be designed to withstand temperatures on the order of 600 F (350 C) - at most. For a typical gas turbine engine today - at max take-off power - the cooling air that is fed to the turbine will easily exceed 1050 F (600 C). The technology that goes into making components that can survive at these conditions is of a different order from that applied to building the airframe.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Zakheim's book is about the last source that anyone should read if they really want to understand the story behind the Lavi. Zakheim was an accountant - not a defense analyst - employed by the Defense Department of Caspar Weinberger who was expressly charged with the job to "terminate" the Lavi. Not to provide Israel with the best bang-for-buck, not to assess what Israel's air force needs were and how to arrive at the best match for those needs, but to "terminate" the Lavi. Those of us who are old enough to remember know quite well Defense Secretary Weinberger's personal animosity towards Israel. Zakheim was merely the yes-man who carried out his boss' bidding - without any understanding of the subject matter at hand.

Zakheim never sets out to pass himself of as anything other than the accountant given the job of convincing Israel that the Lavi was against its own economic interest. He doesn’t try and provide differing assessments of capability just the numbers and a detailed and balanced history of the program.

Constant attempts to denigrate him based on the impact of his work are of low moral standing. Play the ball not the man.

Only his extreme ignorance of everthing aerospace could explain how Zakheim could propose the short-legged F-20 and the AV-8B as "alternatives" for cancelling the Lavi. Only someone with no clue as to how these aircraft operate and the different roles that they were designed to perform could have believed that all of these aircraft were equivalent "alternatives".

Total BS. Zakheim never proposed these aircraft but Northrop and McAir in consultation with the IDF as part of various force structure mixes.

As was confirmed by the US General Accounting Office at the time, the unit cost of the Lavi - as originally envisioned - would indeed have been competitive with purchasing the F-16, F-15E, or other aircraft offered at the time.

LOL, the GAO. You’re happy to denigrate and insult a Dept. of Defense accountant but not those who don’t even work in and around defence. The GAO’s figures were grossly off because they assumed the Israeli estimates for development were not pie in the sky. IAI significantly underestimate the cost of developing and building the Lavi in Israel which is why it failed to meet all of its milestones and was grossly over budget up until its cancellation point.

If you are going to so blatantly misrepresent someone and the basic facts in such a way I can see we are really going to get on…