LCA-Tejas inherits ” Stealth features ” due to its small size : Chinese media

[ravi gupta]

irst?AFAIK LCA doesn't have irst,even for future variants.

Thanks for correction,will take note

Lol 33 years and a no flying machine.impotent aircraft of no use.our jf17 is 1000 times better than your tejas,sukhoi and Rafael.

We surely agree,however sukhoi is russion and rafael is french.

 

[SDS1]

Oh that is why we still didn't see LCA in real picture. Keep the good work going. Propaganda at its best and at least make one sqdn.

If you would have send your plane in gulf air show , would have seen that time, plane n performance

 

[The Accountant]

If you would have send your plane in gulf air show , would have seen that time, plane n performance

Thunder was never planned forbahrain show ...

If aerobatics decides which plan is better then suerly f22 is a sitting duck against flankers ...

Tejas all major weapon system yet to get foc and you are claiming it better then thunder which is doing percision strikes ... has anti ship role ... bvr capABLE... grow up

 

[SDS1]

Thunder was never planned forbahrain show ...

If aerobatics decides which plan is better then suerly f22 is a sitting duck against flankers ...

Tejas all major weapon system yet to get foc and you are claiming it better then thunder which is doing percision strikes ... has anti ship role ... bvr capABLE... grow up

bhai , you got major chance to show your superior plane in front of Tejas... have a slot vacant.....and you shy away....

Well aerobatics shows the plane aerodynamics capability/ performance. very few people about Aero technology.

we didnt wanted half baked plane when your JFT induced it dont have laser guided bombing etc.. IAF goes will full plane and not for the name sake.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I doubt the rcs of grippen e and jf17 are so different ... you are saying that fighters in same weight class and having same technology has a difference of 15 times ... impossible ...

Sir check your facts ... tejas is only tested with bvr ... thunder is flying with bvr since many years ... overkill ... have you even checked the armament in arsenal of thunder ? all you talking about planned version of tejas ... operational version is not even capable to fight ...




Useless thread ... i think fanboys needs reality check ... if small size is stealth feature then mig21 and f7 are stealth so all the countries are stupid investing billions in 5th generation ...

Furthermore about ram coating on tejas ... i coild not have absurd claim then this ... do you know a real ram quoting maintenance requirement and cost ?

You can prepare any paint and name it ram coating thats stupid ...

The RCS of modern aircraft is not about size, it is about form, design and materials.
The Gripen EW suite is also used to reduce RCS.
The F-22 is larger than the JF-17, yet I doubt You claim the JF-17 RCS is lower.

If You think the JF-17 is equivalent to Gripen, just show its RCS to be about 0,1 sq meter...

 

[4GTejasBVR]

DRDO says it will take 2028 to complete this 83 MK1A

 

[Surya 1]

Thunder was never planned forbahrain show ...

If aerobatics decides which plan is better then suerly f22 is a sitting duck against flankers ...

Tejas all major weapon system yet to get foc and you are claiming it better then thunder which is doing percision strikes ... has anti ship role ... bvr capABLE... grow up

By the way when did Thunder get FOC?

 

[4GTejasBVR]

Which is 10 Tejas per year from 2018. Hey wait how long will it take to complete 40 IOC FOC standard. . He told the truth. May be after 2020/22 16 per years?

 

[The Accountant]

The RCS of modern aircraft is not about size, it is about form, design and materials.
The Gripen EW suite is also used to reduce RCS.
The F-22 is larger than the JF-17, yet I doubt You claim the JF-17 RCS is lower.

If You think the JF-17 is equivalent to Gripen, just show its RCS to be about 0,1 sq meter...

Man ew suit to define rcs ... what are you smoking man ... do you even know what rcs stands for ? rcs means radar cross section ... so how does ew suit reduce the radar cross section ...

Regarding f22 rcs ... it is a different tech all togather ... you cant compare its tech with 4th generation i.e. grippen ...

Can you tell me besides composite and size what resulted in reduction of grippen rcs to 0.1 ?

You cannot compare jf17 with f22 as the have different tech altogather ...

Whereas like grippen theunded is small size ... have composites .. may be less co.posites in comparison .. dsi is in thunder ... so the hell on earth there rcs are 15 times different .. i can agree to a difference of 30 to 50 percent due to composites ... but 1500% ... you must be smooking something really good to make such claim ...

By the way when did Thunder get FOC?

Way back ... it is not officially announced by paf ... but atleast since last three years it is performing combat operations so at minimum three years back ...

 

[SDS1]

The RCS of modern aircraft is not about size, it is about form, design and materials.
The Gripen EW suite is also used to reduce RCS.
The F-22 is larger than the JF-17, yet I doubt You claim the JF-17 RCS is lower.

If You think the JF-17 is equivalent to Gripen, just show its RCS to be about 0,1 sq meter...

they dont have any technical data only unclaimed sources for eveything.

 

[The Accountant]

they dont have any technical data only unclaimed sources for eveything.

And grippen has quoted its rcs ... last i checked rcs happen to confidential and no official source quote them ...

Ok we dont have official figures for rcs of thunder but then from where the hell are you quoting it ...

Furthermore i have not rejected any rcs ... i am merly saying that two aircrafts having same size .. same tech ... same generation are supposed to have rcs in close ranges ... how can you defy this logic ...

For example rcs of rafael and typhoon can be different within range of 50% at max but how it could be 15 times different ???

 

[SDS1]

And grippen has quoted its rcs ... last i checked rcs happen to confidential and no official source quote them ...

Ok we dont have official figures for rcs of thunder but then from where the hell are you quoting it ...

Furthermore i have not rejected any rcs ... i am merly saying that two aircrafts having same size .. same tech ... same generation are supposed to have rcs in close ranges ... how can you defy this logic ...

For example rcs of rafael and typhoon can be different within range of 50% at max but how it could be 15 times different ???

actual RCS is not know but approx RCS can be know throw using various software / Applications (structural) ....

RCS depend on many factors ... structure / metal / coating / EW / etc effects all...

 

[The Accountant]

actual RCS is not know but approx RCS can be know throw using various software / Applications (structural) ....

RCS depend on many factors ... structure / metal / coating / EW / etc effects all...

I agree ... lets analyze grippen and thunder

1 what structural difference are there resulting in reduce rcs ?

2 both of composites however i agree thunder has less ... but what is effect of particuar composites used by grippen ? if composites are the deciding factor then all 4 generaion fighter are stealth ... no need for 5th generation

3 coating ... ram is a very specific coating ... there could be other paints which have slight effect lik ram ... but effect of.these ram paints are minimal .. furthermore such paints are nowadays used by all fighters .. however true ram coatings are for 5th generation only ...
So both aircraft are even here

4 ew suite .. kindly show link bw ew suit and rcs ...

Based on above 4 criteria explain 15 times difference or take your words back

 

[#hydra#]

Stealth on any gen 4 is just a propaganda by its makers at most,any aircraft carrying weapons outside its belly will negate the low RCS things.

 

[SDS1]

I agree ... lets analyze grippen and thunder

1 what structural difference are there resulting in reduce rcs ?

2 both of composites however i agree thunder has less ... but what is effect of particuar composites used by grippen ? if composites are the deciding factor then all 4 generaion fighter are stealth ... no need for 5th generation


3 coating ... ram is a very specific coating ... there could be other paints which have slight effect lik ram ... but effect of.these ram paints are minimal .. furthermore such paints are nowadays used by all fighters .. however true ram coatings are for 5th generation only ...
So both aircraft are even here

4 ew suite .. kindly show link bw ew suit and rcs ...

Based on above 4 criteria explain 15 times difference or take your words back

Thunder dont have any Composite , its full metal plane and with full of rivets ... So even in structure u have rivets.

RAM coating is very hard to achieve , check if your have technology of RAM coating?