JF-17 and LCA development comparison

[Areesh]

Is this statement right or wrong???? secur, areesh.. anyone?? simple yes or no

We are not having a quiz show here. First do tell us whether the project was cancelled or not. Then we might be able to have reasonable discussion. Enough said.

LCA Tejas to be inducted in Air Force in 2012: DRDO chief | Deccan Chronicle[

Rs 25k cr Tejas won?t be ready before 2015 - Times Of India

rediff.com: Admiral J G Nadkarni (retd) on the sad tale of the Light Combat Aircraft

Everywhere? Actually it is nowhere.

 

[SpArK]

Wrong ! Since both Project Sabre II and Super 7 were the names for the same project ... What is meant by " it led to " here ? FC-1 was developed under completely different circumstances and requirements , the Chinese however retained the name " Super 7 " shortly for the JFT project which doesn't have any similarity with F-7 ... Comprehendo ?

We are not having a quiz show here. First do tell us whether the project was cancelled or not. Then we might be able to have reasonable discussion. Enough said.

Thanks.. that was all i was asking for.. A simple answer ...

I just want to cross check what Taimi said sometime back.

Nobody contests the origin of the program. Sabre II, let to Super-7 which became FC-1.

So this phases are not being contested.


" So, "The basic design of the airframe is a further development from the remains of the joint Sabre 2 project." is almost right. "

We don't need statements, support it with facts and evidence.

.

And let me conclude Taimi was wrong ............Secur and Areesh is right. Astala vista.. see ya later.


PS: dont quote me... im out of this thread and is not going to reply.

 

[Secur]

Super-7 project was instrumental in development of the JF-17. Like the wing shape for example. If Super-7 project didn't exist, then JF-17 would have never taken to the skies with the meagre funds PAF gave to jump start the project again.

Kid , didn't I teach you a couple of pages ago how an aircraft always inherits some things from a former one ? ... Pakistan left that project in '89 and rejoined the FC - 1 in ' 95 ...

 

[Areesh]

And let me conclude Taimi was wrong ............Secur and Areesh is right. Astala vista.. see ya later.

What you want to say about this part by Taimi?

The initial plan was somewhat modified design of a J-7, but what came out of it, was totally a new design, which has no similarity structure wise or design wise with J-7 or Mig-21.

Weren't you and other Indians bragging about Super 7 just to disapprove what Taimi said in bold and I quoted.

 

[Su-11]

Kid , didn't I teach you a couple of pages ago how an aircraft always inherits some things from a former one ? ... Pakistan left that project in '89 and rejoined the FC - 1 in ' 95 ...

I know. Fact is JF-17 would have never existed without Super-7 project, and Super-7 would not have existed if MiG-21 didn't exist. Super-7 is the father and MiG-21 is the grand father of JF-17. They are too closely knit and part of the same evolutionary tree as you can see below.

 

[Secur]

I know. Fact is JF-17 would have never existed without Super-7 project, and Super-7 would not have existed if MiG-21 didn't exist. Super-7 is the father and MiG-21 is the grand father of JF-17. They are too closely knit and part of the same evolutionary tree as you can see below.

Or basically there would have been no Agni missiles if the V-2's weren't there , right ? ... There's no such thing like father and grand father for defense equipment , so keep it with yourself ...

What you want to say about this part by Taimi?

This is the complete post by Taimi which was quoted only in the parts that suited his argument ...

Nobody contests the origin of the program. Sabre II, let to Super-7 which became FC-1.

So this phases are not being contested.


" So, "The basic design of the airframe is a further development from the remains of the joint Sabre 2 project." is almost right. "

The initial plan was somewhat modified design of a J-7, but what came out of it, was totally a new design, which has no similarity structure wise or design wise with J-7 or Mig-21.
If the basic design of the airframe of JF-17 is a further development of the F-7, then plzzz give us facts supporting it.
I stated above, just point out one single thing in the design of the JF-17 airframe, which has anything remotely similar with the
F-7 airframe. If it is, we will accept the JF-17 is a modified design of the F-7.
So how us the pictures of both airframes and the stuff in them which are similar.
If nothing comes out to be similar between the both designs, then this statement is absurd and has no credibility.
During the design phase, things may have changed and both parties may have agreed to go with something totally different then the earlier agreement of having something of a modified F-7. Thus we saw so many drastic changes and a completely new design, which has nothing in common with the F-7.

Except for the Project Sabre II leading to Super-7 , everything else was right ... He made a typo thinking them both to be different projects ...

 

[notsuperstitious]

This from China Daily in 2003

The picture shows the SUPER-7 fighter jet, which is the first fighter jet completely designed and manufactured by China. The third-generation fighter plane, which can carry 3.8 tons of missiles, also has improved systems for attacking ground targets. Its advanced radar positioning and operating systems give the plane greater flexibility and better close-range manoeuvrability. [sina.com.cn]

 

[Secur]

This from China Daily in 2003

The point being ? Did I not mention that the Chinese retained the name " Super 7 " shortly for the prototype of FC-1 project ?

 

[Su-11]

Or basically there would have been no Agni missiles if the V-2's weren't there , right ?

Yea, the same way ALL missiles own their existance to the V2, not just Agni.

However on the other hand, ALL fighters are not derived from MiG-21 project. Only your JF-17 is derived from a 60 year old jet.

 

[Secur]

The LCA programme was initiated in 1983 by the Defence Research and Development Organisation, with three widely publicised assertions. One, that it would be an indigenous project catapulting India into the rarefied ranks of global aviation powers. Two, the aircraft would enter frontline squadron service by 1995. And three, the project would only cost Rs 700 crores (Rs 7 billion).

What actually happened between 1983 and 2000? First, let us take the promise of indigenous development. In 1986 an agreement was quietly signed with the United States that permitted DRDO to work with four US Air force laboratories. The to-be-indigenously-developed engine for the LCA -- Kaveri -- was forgotten and the US made General Electric F-404 engine was substituted. Radar was sourced from Erricson Ferranti, carbon-fibre composite panels for wings from Alenia and fly-by-wire controls from Lockheed Martin. Design help was sought from British Aerospace, Avion Marcel Dassault and Deutsche Aerospace. Wind tunnel testing was done in the US, Russia and France. As for armaments -- missiles, guns, rockets and bombs -- every last item was to be imported.


rediff.com: Admiral J G Nadkarni (retd) on the sad tale of the Light Combat Aircraft

Explains a lot regarding the start of LCA project contrary to what Indian members like to parrot

 

[alimobin memon]

WORST ..................................... TOPIC .............................................. EVER

 

[Secur]

However on the other hand, ALL fighters are not derived from MiG-21 project. Only your JF-17 is derived from a 60 year old jet.

All fighters have always inherited something from a previous air craft just like Mig 21 ... JFT bears no resemblance both in design or avionics to the Mig - 21 in its present form hence the " derivation " assumption is flawed ... Rest assured , the laws governing aerodynamics and design of an aircraft will remain the same ... The continuous developments of many fighter have always yielded a new one , completely unrelated to the previous ones , the point being ?

 

[Su-11]

JFT bears no resemblance both in design or avionics to the Mig - 21 ... Rest assured , the laws governing aerodynamics and design of an aircraft will remain the same ... The continuous developments of many fighter have yield a new one , completely unrelated to the previous ones , the point being ?

Yea, it bears resemblance to the Super-7, which in turn bears resemblance to the MiG-21.

 

[Windjammer]

Sabre-2 was a feasibility study carried out by Grumman, basically to give the F-7 a hard nose with side intakes with some avionics upgrades and other modifications.....the project was later dropped for not being potential.
The FC-1/JF-17 was a brand new concept, where the aircraft was mainly designed by PAF engineers in collaboration with CATIC , hence the prototype carried both designations on either side of the fuselage.

 

[Su-11]

The LCA programme was initiated in 1983 by the Defence Research and Development Organisation, with three widely publicised assertions. One, that it would be an indigenous project catapulting India into the rarefied ranks of global aviation powers. Two, the aircraft would enter frontline squadron service by 1995. And three, the project would only cost Rs 700 crores (Rs 7 billion).

What actually happened between 1983 and 2000? First, let us take the promise of indigenous development. In 1986 an agreement was quietly signed with the United States that permitted DRDO to work with four US Air force laboratories. The to-be-indigenously-developed engine for the LCA -- Kaveri -- was forgotten and the US made General Electric F-404 engine was substituted. Radar was sourced from Erricson Ferranti, carbon-fibre composite panels for wings from Alenia and fly-by-wire controls from Lockheed Martin. Design help was sought from British Aerospace, Avion Marcel Dassault and Deutsche Aerospace. Wind tunnel testing was done in the US, Russia and France. As for armaments -- missiles, guns, rockets and bombs -- every last item was to be imported.


rediff.com: Admiral J G Nadkarni (retd) on the sad tale of the Light Combat Aircraft

Explains a lot regarding the start of LCA project contrary to what Indian members like to parrot

Yup, we did take external help. Your point being? If you are trying to equate Pakistan's contribution to the JF-17, and Indian contribution to the Tejas, then give up.