jf-17 vs LCA

[omerhhh]

Is the jf-17 really better than the lca?

 

[Skywalker]

None of them are war proven, yes the only difference is JF17 is in massive production while LCA , no idea.

 

[spurdozer]

I also started this discussion in a thread LCA vs JF-17 which was ultimately closed. What i gathered from that discussion was that JF-17 is in production line whereas LCA is in developmental phase. If you take a look at LCA's specifications, it initially was an inferior jet to JF-17. But due to IAF's further demands it is being equipped with AESA radar and engine like the ej-200 and israeli avionics which are one of the best in the world. So after these improvements it would be a better jet than JF-17. BUt then we would also be inducting JF-17 Block II and III's by that time. And we would be alot familiar with JF-17 than the indians with LCA. LONG LIVE PAKISTAN

 

[satishkumarcsc]

I also started this discussion in a thread LCA vs JF-17 which was ultimately closed. What i gathered from that discussion was that JF-17 is in production line whereas LCA is in developmental phase. If you take a look at LCA's specifications, it initially was an inferior jet to JF-17. But due to IAF's further demands it is being equipped with AESA radar and engine like the ej-200 and israeli avionics which are one of the best in the world. So after these improvements it would be a better jet than JF-17. BUt then we would also be inducting JF-17 Block II and III's by that time. And we would be alot familiar with JF-17 than the indians with LCA. LONG LIVE PAKISTAN

LCA also has entered the LSP phase just like the JF 17....

 

[satishkumarcsc]

And I think this thread also probably will be closed as these 'VERSUS' threads leads to flame wars only.

 

[duhastmish]

sir

first of all its a tough call cause- one is in full service other one is under development.
secondly : you haven't defined better in what sense.
thirdly: none of them is involved in a war.
fourthly: these versus battle mostly are oriented by patriotic judgment.
fifth: pragmatic value of these aircraft will only be known to their. pilots.
thank you

 

[Moscow]

both the aircrafts should be viewed independently rather than VS .
still if you should compare both to all the aircrafts of its generation to find a proper comparison .

as per my personal opinion both the countries pakistan and india needs to be congratulated for building a fighter plane of standard.
thanx

 

[Chanakyaa]

both the aircrafts should be viewed independently rather than VS .
still if you should compare both to all the aircrafts of its generation to find a proper comparison .

as per my personal opinion both the countries pakistan and india needs to be congratulated for building a fighter plane of standard.
thanx

JF 17 :

JF Pros :

+ Tested and Reliable Platform
+ In production Lines
+ Costs $15-$20 Million a Piece.
+ Has Larger range than LCA 2000 KM Plus ( To be used as strike Air Craft )
+ The JF-17 has demonstrated itself doing all kinds of things like loops during its test flights.

JF Cons :
- Has an Old Air Frame , MiG 21
- Has Conventional Design No use or Composites
- Only equiped with SD 10s , Means Limited BVR capability
- It cannot be really regarded as a 4+ gen Aircraft , Though it has latest Avionics.

MiG 21 :

LCA :



+ True Gen 4 Aircraft based on a totally new Design [ This also justifies the Delay ]
+ Has Excellent use of CC Composites , which make its maintenace very Low.
+ Can carry Good Arms comparable to MKI along with BVRs AA-10 Alamo, AA-12 Adder, MICA and maybe even Derby
+ LCA has delta wings and no tailplane; considering this fact LCA is more agile and maneuverable.
+ FC 1 will be equipped with AIM-9x and Sidewinder missiles. On the contrary LCA will be equipped AA-11 Archer, AIM-9p and with the extremely lethal Israeli Python 4 and 5.
+ LCA is Comparable to Gripen

Avionics :

We clearly have winner in Avionics;

LCA. From Globalsecurity:

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.
lca.jpg

Avionic info on the JF 17 is very vague. From Globalsecurity:

The aircraft has the ability to engage targets at all speeds and altitudes within the conventional flying envelope. In the surface attack and interdiction role, the aircraft can strike at long distances. The combat jet has been installed with an advanced flight control system, which is a mix of conventional and fly-by-wire controls, making it highly agile and maneuverable.

Navel LCA Version


LCA Cons :

- Definitely More expensive , atleast $10 Million Difference.
- Has less range , 900 Km. , Will be used as an Interceptor NOT for Strikes.
- Will have delays compared to JF 17 but Every Project has been Delayed .

If a capable US can face a delay of 20 Years to create F22 With all the Rich Tech and Infra in Place , The LCA Programme cannot be an exception.



In conclusion it is very hard to say which fighter plane has the edge but we can clearly see that LCA has better avionics (some sources may argue) and BVR making it a better futuristic thus a 4.5 Generation aircraft while the JF 17 is still considered a 3rd Generation, but has greater close combat capabilty. But both aircrafts ae good start for both the countries .





IMO , LCA has One Great factor that People supporting JF 17 forget.
LCA is a 100% Indian Effort. It has 80% Indian Components. This is Important as :

+ It Gives the Indian Companies More Exposure to develop Advanced Tech. , Creating Reliability
+ It Creates Employment.
+ Its Gives India an Edge to Now Design Their own Gen 5 Plane with indigenous Effort .
+ Removes Dependence on a 2nd Country , even if its a Frined as told my DM , AK Antony.



A very Detailed Info and data about LCA :

Radiance of the Tejas : By B. Harry

 

[Chanakyaa]

Some Pics added.

 

[qsaark]

IMO , LCA has One Great factor that People supporting JF 17 forget. LCA is a 100% Indian Effort. It has 80% Indian Components.

LCA is not 100% Indian effort. FBW has british components, Radar is from Israel, Engine is from USA. All these foreign elements may only be for interim use, however, at present, LCA is far from 100% Indian effort.

BTW, if JF-17s airframe looks likes a Mig-21s, than LCA's airframe can be argued to looks like a Mirages'. I dont know if adding more composites qualifies an aircraft for 4.5 generation.

 

[Manticore]

Name Fighting Falcon F-16 C
Manufacturer: LockheedMartin ( USA)
Length ----- 49.28 ft/15.02 M
Height ------ 16.70 ft. /5.09 M
Wing Area ------299.99Sq ft. /27.87 Sq. M
Aspect Ratio ---- 3.2
Weight Empty-- ----- 8,437.kg
Weight Takeoff --------------- 27500lb./12474 Kg
Powerplant 1xF100 P-129 Pratt & Whittney augmented Turbofan
Max Thrust --------- 29100lb. /13200Kg
Military Thrust ----------- 17800lb. /8074Kg
Internal Fuel ---------- 7162lb./3249Kg
Max. Thrust Loading ----------1.06
Max High Mach ---------Mach 2
Operational Ceiling------------- 50000ft. /15329M
Rate of Climb------------ 50000ft. /254M
Range Ferry---------- 3,890 km
Operational Reduce ---not known
Landing Run----- not known
Armament 1x20mm M61A cannon w/511 rounds, 6 AAMs AIM-120 AMRAAM and/or AIM-9 Sidewinder

Manufacturer Chengdu / PAC(China/Pakistan)
Name FC-1/ JF-17 Thunder
Length ---- 45.93 ft. /14.00 M
Height ----- 16.73 ft. /5.10 M
Wing Area ---- 0.00 ft./0.00 Sq M
Aspect Ratio Medium ----- (not confirmed)
Weight Empty ------ 6,411. kg
Weight Takeoff -----20062lb./9100 Kg
Powerplant(s 1 x Klimov RD-93 Turbofan
Max Thrust ---- 18300lb. /0Kg
Military Thrust Around ---- 8000 Kg
Internal Fuel ---- 2,268 kg
Max. Thrust Loading ----- Not Known
VMax High Mach ---- / 1.6 /
Operational Ceiling ---- 54140ft. /0M
Rate of Climb N/A +G Limit ---- 8.5
Range Ferry ---- 3,000 km
Operational Reduce ---- 1300 km
Landing Run ---- 700 Meters
Armament 1 x 23mm cannon, PL7, PL-10, ASMs

Chengdu J-10 (China)
General characteristics
* Crew: 1 (basic), 2 (trainer variant)[6]
* Length: 14.57 m (47.8 ft 10 in[2])
* Wingspan: 8.78 m (28 ft 10 in[2])
* Height: 4.78 m (15 ft 8 in[2])
* Wing area: 45.5 m² (490 ft²[citation needed])
* Empty weight: 8,000–9,730 kg (17,637–21,451 lb[24])
* Useful load: 5,500 kg (9,920 lb[citation needed])
* Max takeoff weight: 18,000 kg (39,683 lb[6])
* Powerplant: 1× Saturn-Lyulka AL-31FN or Woshan WS-10A "Taihang" turbofan
o Dry thrust: 89.43 kN / 89.17 kN (17,860 lbf / 20,050 lbf)
o Thrust with afterburner: 122.5 kN[6] / 129.4 kN (27,557 lbf / 29,101 lbf)
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.2 at altitude[6], Mach 1.2 at sea level[2]
* g-limits: +9/-3 g (+88/-29 m/s², +290/-97 ft/s²[2])
* Combat radius: 950 km (652 mi[2])
o Maximum range (without refueling): 3,000 km (1000 mi[6])
* Service ceiling 18,000 m (59 055 ft[2])
* Wing loading: 335 kg/m² (64 lb/ft&#178
* Minimum thrust/weight:
o With afterburner: 0.98
.
Mitsubishi F-2 (Japan)
General characteristics
* Crew: One pilot
* Length: 15.52 m (50 ft 11 in)
* Wingspan: 11.13 m (36 ft 6 in)
* Height: 4.69 m (15 ft 5 in)
* Wing area: 34.84 m² (375 ft&#178
* Empty weight: 9,527 kg (21,000 lb)
* Loaded weight: 15,000 kg (33,000 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 22,100 kg (48,700 lb)
* Powerplant: 1× General Electric F110-GE-129 turbofan, 76 kN military thrust, 131 kN with afterburner (17,000 lbf military thrust 29,500 lbf with afterburner)
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.0 at altitude
* Range: 834 km on anti-ship mission (520 miles)
* Service ceiling 18,000 m (59,000 ft)
* Rate of climb: m/s (ft/min)
* Wing loading: 430 kg/m² at weight of 15,000 kg (88 lb/ft&#178
* Thrust/weight: 0.89


SAAB JAS-39 GRIPHEN
General characteristics
* Crew: 1–2
* Length: 14.1 m (46 ft 3 in)
* Wingspan: 8.4 m (27 ft 7 in)
* Height: 4.5 m (14 ft 9 in)
* Wing area: 25.54 m (274.9 ft)
* Empty weight: 6,620 kg (14,600 lb)
* Loaded weight: 8,720 kg (19,200 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 14,000 kg (31,000 lb)
* Powerplant: 1× Volvo Aero RM12 (GE F404) afterburning turbofan, 54 kN dry, 80 kN with afterburner (12,000 lbf / 18,100 lbf)
* Wheel track: 2.4 m (7 ft 10 in)
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2
* Range: Combat radius 800 km, (500 mi), (430 NM). ()
* Service ceiling 15,000 m (50,000 ft)
* Rate of climb: m/s (ft/min)
* Wing loading: 341 kg/m² (70,3 lb/ft&#178
* Thrust/weight: 0.94
Armament:
1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon
6x AIM-9 Sidewinder
4x AIM-120 AMRAAM; or MICA
AGM-65 Maverick, KEPD 150, or various other laser-guided bombs, rocket pods.

 

[Manticore]

jf-17 had a major design change midway the programme
1]proven technologies from different jets taken into consideration to reduce time of production and increase reliability
2]to make it more than an f7 upgrade..
3]rather something close to f16
4]even the ability to mass produce it..
5]cancel quantitative edge
6]gain market edge for countries wanting an f-7 replacement even closing to f-16
7]exporting indirectly translates to gaining money and experiance for upgrading further blocks
8]easy maintanence
9]minimum dependence on West

[on utube and search for a video f16 verse jf17....180degrees are coverd in 18 seconds by f16 and 19 sec by jf17].. just showing it is far from just an f7 or failed mig33 upgrade.
**
**
yes lca would be made up of composites from the start but jf-17 already has some composits.also PAF wanted to gain primary experience while quickly having a numerical deterent but the later blocks of jf-17 would be all composits and the design wouldve been already tested and refined and up and flying years before!..
***
***
as long as lca is on paper[hypothetical] and not in a testing squadron, we cant compare anyway furthermore one is a multirole, other is an interceptor

 

[Tempest II]

• I agree the JF-17 airframe is closer to an F-16 than a J-7/Mig-21. Photos are available on the internet for all to see. The wing is very F-16. The tail is different from a Mig-21.
• The fact that it design not have compisite materials is less of a design issue than a process option. Many aircraft (F-16 and F-18 can be noted) have the same basic design from 20 or 30 years ago, but manufactures have gone in and substituted lighter material when the manufacturing processes have advanced enough.
• As mention above and a valid point, LCA has had delays partly to meet changing requirements. An equally valid route is that taken by PAF, which is accepta the plane at is now, with plans for ongoing improvemnts. This I support because with the way technology moves these days, it is never possible to have all the latest gadgets. loo at the Typhoon, the European air forces are receiving one Tranche while the next one is already on the table and under development. They will go back and upgrade earlier versions. I am sure by the time LCA enters service, JL-17 will have more that one version (avionics and weapon systems) available.

 

[Chanakyaa]

LCA is not 100% Indian effort. FBW has british components, Radar is from Israel, Engine is from USA. All these foreign elements may only be for interim use, however, at present, LCA is far from 100% Indian effort.

I said "100% Indian Effort with 80% Indian Components". 100% indicates the fact that its completely developed by India and NOT like China developing for PAK. Its NOT a joint venture like JF-17 or the PAK-FA deal bet. India and russia.

If Tomorrow Pakistan is left alone and said to build a simple flying machine u will have to begin from scratch. Right ?
Yes, There are foreign Components but in JF 17 the components are also foreign including the Engine. Most importantly India have designed and Testing to Quickly put the Indian "Kaveri" but leave PAK , even China is Incapable on the Engine Front and getting it from Russsia ! at least for JF 17

Just Think if India somehow makes a deal with Russia We Buy Mig 35 and in return Stop RD-33 Supply ... Then ????? You got the Point ?

Just Think ! This is the importance of indegenious effort.

BTW, if JF-17s airframe looks likes a Mig-21s, than LCA's airframe can be argued to looks like a Mirages'. I dont know if adding more composites qualifies an aircraft for 4.5 generation.

Oh Man ! why do u guys talk childish ?
Suppose we design a look alike of F-16 does that mean its "derived" from F-16 ?
Mirage is Much larger and there is No comparision to the Smaller LCA.
But Search the Net, every where you will find the mention that JF 17 is a MiG variant or "Glorified Mig 21".. Just search "JF 17+Glorified MiG 21" and see. on Google.

I am not talking about similar look , but i the Fundation itslelf is MiG 21 for JF 17.

 

[Patriot]

Just Think if India somehow makes a deal with Russia We Buy Mig 35 and in return Stop RD-33 Supply ... Then ????? You got the Point ?

HAHAHAH
Do you know we can buy Chinese Engine WS-13 or European Engine instead of RD-33 if supply is stopped?In any case, well over 100 engines are already in China so i don't think it will be a problem.