Export bids for JF-17 Thunder Multirole Lightweight Fighter Aircraft

[MastanKhan]

Although I had no intention of bringing in LCA as a comparison platform, I will still answer your post. The basic flaw in your reasoning is the assumtion that the LCA mk2 structure has to change just becaue of a different engine. The airforce outlined the new requirement with additional external stores from 4000 to 5000, along wit additional length with a stretched nosecone. If LCA was a aluminium body fighter tooling would have been easy, but due to extensive kevlar and CFRP composite, the entire molds need to be retooled and re tested.

Apart from that this is our first self designed aircraft hence teething problems are inevitable, a far as other "joint production" lines are concerned, they have worked satisfactorily since 1978, right?

Sir,

I am hardly ever disrespectful----but please allow me to say---it is out of sheer stupidity the Lca is where it is---. Just because it is the first aircraft---does not mean that the things need to be changed every time an air marshall of the indian air force takes a sneeze.

The world's engineering technology and development for futuristic systems will be doomed if it moved with the speed at which Lca has moved---and please no fighting over these comments. Thank you.

 

[MilSpec]

Sir,

I am hardly ever disrespectful----but please allow me to say---it is out of sheer stupidity the Lca is where it is---. Just because it is the first aircraft---does not mean that the things need to be changed every time an air marshall of the indian air force takes a sneeze.

The world's engineering technology and development for futuristic systems will be doomed if it moved with the speed at which Lca has moved---and please no fighting over these comments. Thank you.

sir,

level of dissatisfaction depends on what timeline you perceive it was developed from, If you want the traditional Indian media rhetoric, which loves to endorse foreign maal, the timeline publicized is of 1983, till 91, India was almost bankrupt economy, not a single dime came for LCA or a machine for ADA was bought. The timeline that I am aware of started on Jan of 1994; and even by that date of inception I closely agree to what you say.

 

[manofwar]

Sir,

I am hardly ever disrespectful----but please allow me to say---it is out of sheer stupidity the Lca is where it is---. Just because it is the first aircraft---does not mean that the things need to be changed every time an air marshall of the indian air force takes a sneeze.

The world's engineering technology and development for futuristic systems will be doomed if it moved with the speed at which Lca has moved---and please no fighting over these comments. Thank you.

I am sure that being a Jr. Think tank, you would have researched extensively on the topic, but it seems that your researches did not reveal a crucial fact that until much into the 1990's no or very little actual R and D had been done, due to delays in IAF finalising requirements.........Later many of the techs that ADA had hoped to aquire were after much efforts found be unavailable on the market, most prominent of which is the fly-by-wire system. BAe and Lockheed Martin were brought in, and most of the crucial research were done with their partnership, on the test aircraft F 16 VISTA from 1993 to 1998, but Indian nuclear tests caused all this research and info to be lost, and ADA had to start again from a scratch, without the availablity of existing facilities.On top of this was the changed requirements of IAF in the 2000's, which called for a more powerful engine, than the now developed Kaveri...........

 

[MilSpec]

I am sure that being a Jr. Think tank, you would have researched extensively on the topic, but it seems that your researches did not reveal a crucial fact that until much into the 1990's no or very little actual R and D had been done, due to delays in IAF finalising requirements.........Later many of the techs that ADA had hoped to aquire were after much efforts found be unavailable on the market, most prominent of which is the fly-by-wire system. BAe and Lockheed Martin were brought in, and most of the crucial research were done with their partnership, on the test aircraft F 16 VISTA from 1993 to 1998, but Indian nuclear tests caused all this research and info to be lost, and ADA had to start again from a scratch, without the availablity of existing facilities.On top of this was the changed requirements of IAF in the 2000's, which called for a more powerful engine, than the now developed Kaveri...........

Every topic on LCA has been beaten to death... this is 2012, its been almost 20 years since funding began, In the end we still dont have a single squadron, irrespective of the aircraft and the technological benefit, the project is almost dismal.

 

[Tempest II]

Nigeria and Azerbaijan would be my guess.

Concerning Nigeria, they have had bad experience with the F-7NIs with three already crashed. Anybody with access to the Kanwa article?

 

[Arsalan]

I am sure that being a Jr. Think tank, you would have researched extensively on the topic, but it seems that your researches did not reveal a crucial fact that until much into the 1990's no or very little actual R and D had been done, due to delays in IAF finalising requirements.........Later many of the techs that ADA had hoped to aquire were after much efforts found be unavailable on the market, most prominent of which is the fly-by-wire system. BAe and Lockheed Martin were brought in, and most of the crucial research were done with their partnership, on the test aircraft F 16 VISTA from 1993 to 1998, but Indian nuclear tests caused all this research and info to be lost, and ADA had to start again from a scratch, without the availablity of existing facilities.On top of this was the changed requirements of IAF in the 2000's, which called for a more powerful engine, than the now developed Kaveri...........

Brother, even from 1993 it is now 20 years!

Anyways, i hope to see LCA finalized and inducted soon and it will be good to see what it is capable of. However, i wont like to see or discuss LCA on this thread. Please, this is JF-17 thread, can we ALL get back on topic?

 

[MastanKhan]

I am sure that being a Jr. Think tank, you would have researched extensively on the topic, but it seems that your researches did not reveal a crucial fact that until much into the 1990's no or very little actual R and D had been done, due to delays in IAF finalising requirements.........Later many of the techs that ADA had hoped to aquire were after much efforts found be unavailable on the market, most prominent of which is the fly-by-wire system. BAe and Lockheed Martin were brought in, and most of the crucial research were done with their partnership, on the test aircraft F 16 VISTA from 1993 to 1998, but Indian nuclear tests caused all this research and info to be lost, and ADA had to start again from a scratch, without the availablity of existing facilities.On top of this was the changed requirements of IAF in the 2000's, which called for a more powerful engine, than the now developed Kaveri...........

Hi,

Thank you for your post---you are new over here---there is more to me being a Jr think tank member----.

You don't have to put your head in a bull's ar-se every time you want to buy a quality steak---you have to take the butcher's word for it.

Same with LCA---regardless of what the shortcomings were in the project---looking at the time it has taken to be where it is----and so many changes in the air craft---. That is not aircraft engineering----.

It reminds me of two commodity brokers living across the street from my uncles house---they started making money and they started putting money in their houses---and up and up they went senselessly---.

In any engineering project---there are the parameters and guidelines of what the item will do and the time frame---when the project is 15 years behind the clock---there is no pride left in the work---it is just the program milking the system to have jobs and work for the employees.

And next time----keep this stupid jr tt rank out of the discussion---I don't want it---I did not ask for it---I care less for it.

 

[Mani2020]

Hi,

Thank you for your post---you are new over here---there is more to me being a Jr think tank member----.

You don't have to put your head in a bull's ar-se every time you want to buy a quality steak---you have to take the butcher's word for it.

Same with LCA---regardless of what the shortcomings were in the project---looking at the time it has taken to be where it is----and so many changes in the air craft---. That is not aircraft engineering----.

It reminds me of two commodity brokers living across the street from my uncles house---they started making money and they started putting money in their houses---and up and up they went senselessly---.

In any engineering project---there are the parameters and guidelines of what the item will do and the time frame---when the project is 15 years behind the clock---there is no pride left in the work---it is just the program milking the system to have jobs and work for the employees.

And next time----keep this stupid jr tt rank out of the discussion---I don't want it---I did not ask for it---I care less for it.

Not to forget there are lot of egos associated with the program specially when the hostile countries have progressed in that particular aspect, it all comes down to the "i will do it even if i have to get my a$$ kicked" stuff then you do it purposelessly just to satisfy your ego rather than leaving a real impact .

The thing has lost its true impact even if it comes out now its like a dead rubber ,

 

[Anony]

Coming out of the useless argument going on LCA between members from both sides, I like to put a different view that if Pakistan can put on their JF-17 for sales which actually is not what the PAF wanted rather JF-17 blk-2 will be close to the requirement of PAF, then why can't India put on their LCA for sales. Any how it is still far betterr than any of those 3rd or 3.5 gen fighters.

 

[SBD-3]

Coming out of the useless argument going on LCA between members from both sides, I like to put a different view that if Pakistan can put on their JF-17 for sales which actually is not what the PAF wanted rather JF-17 blk-2 will be close to the requirement of PAF, then why can't India put on their LCA for sales. Any how it is still far betterr than any of those 3rd or 3.5 gen fighters.

I wonder how do you guys come up with such definitive statements? Even at the recent Zhuhai Air Show the project direct said it Again that JFT (Block 1, not block 2 which didnt exist at that time) not only met but exceeded the PAF requirement leading to its induction in parallel to testing program. Next time do take some pain to read the stuff that some of the members bring from various print sources around the globe.

 

[Manticore]

You don't have to put your head in a bull's ar-se every time you want to buy a quality steak---you have to take the butcher's word for it.

EPIC


sorry, could'nt help posting



However lets keep lca out of the thread , gents

 

[SBD-3]

Concerning Nigeria, they have had bad experience with the F-7NIs with three already crashed. Anybody with access to the Kanwa article?

You will have to wait for a while, KANWA defence review for November still awaits where this news might be discussed in detail.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Nigerian air force has an extremely poor record of maintenance and flight---blaming chinese for the F7NI is just an excuse of their own shortcomings---.

As for the sale of JF17---pakistan has to seek similar guarantees as the us has for its F16's based in pakistan----jf17 supposedly sold to egypt, nigeria, zimbabwe etc---will have to provide similar guarantees to pakistan as pakistan did to the u s---. There will be pakistani and chinese personale on the base.

In selling air craft to any country---pakistan has to keep in focus the current capability of that country's air force---what they want to gain---what they want to achieve---how flexible are they in taking directions---and last but not the least---what would the product do for the country. Just like a purchase---a sale is also a long drawn process---a very long drawn---in this case---there are fours sides that need to be satisfied---3 from the seller's side and one from the buyers side---. The seller's side being pakistan, china, russia---the buyer---whosoever it may be.

 

[Najam Khan]

Hi,

Nigerian air force has an extremely poor record of maintenance and flight---blaming chinese for the F7NI is just an excuse of their own shortcomings---.

As for the sale of JF17---pakistan has to seek similar guarantees as the us has for its F16's based in pakistan----jf17 supposedly sold to egypt, nigeria, zimbabwe etc---will have to provide similar guarantees to pakistan as pakistan did to the u s---. There will be pakistani and chinese personale on the base.

In selling air craft to any country---pakistan has to keep in focus the current capability of that country's air force---what they want to gain---what they want to achieve---how flexible are they in taking directions---and last but not the least---what would the product do for the country. Just like a purchase---a sale is also a long drawn process---a very long drawn---in this case---there are fours sides that need to be satisfied---3 from the seller's side and one from the buyers side---. The seller's side being pakistan, china, russia---the buyer---whosoever it may be.

Thats a good point sir, will PAC/CATIC going for customers that keep the name of their fighter or will they prefer 'hot money' over that?

Presence of Pak/Chinese personnel and development of related infrastructure for training and maintenance seems a good requirement. Countries like Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Azerbaijan etc would need alot of help in development of related infrastructure.

One another thing required is that how these countries adopt such changes, how many of them restructure their training methods and overall curriculum of their air force. When Pakistan bought F16s, they changed the shape of PAF. Training standards among other squadrons were improved, average pilots switch among A-5s, F-6s and F-7s (which arrived later in 1988), fewer of them move to Mirages and the very fewer ones moved to F-16s.

In overall training, PAF adopted two categories to assess fighter squadrons, one for Tactical Attack (TA) and other for Air Superiority (which was later changed to 3 categories TA, AS and Multirole in early 1990s). That is how PAF keep the show running with competition among various fighter types, they bought one aircraft type and change the shape of the air force with that...can these small African air forces do the same with FC-1?

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Thank you Najam---including the egyptian air force---it will be a game changer for all these nations---egyptians will get the much needed true BVR capability and a plethora of stand off weapons systems+smart weapons---for the other 3 nations mentioned---it will be a new begining---.

For nigeria---I have some doubts about their true professionalism in managing and maintaining a 20th century air force---let alone the jf17---pakistan made some bad mistakes by selling some stuff to iraq---. They don't have a true enemy plus they have no experience in handling technology---.

Azerbaijan---they will have the desire to make it a success---. Egyptians---if they go for it---will have a 110% committment to this aircraft---this aircraft will do for egypt what f16 did for pakistan---.