F-16 versus Indian LCA

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Griffen

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 08:22

Unread post27 Aug 2006, 08:44

I think it unfair to compare LCA and JF-17. LCA is modern and fairly indigenous design. There are bound to be teething problems which will delay its production but whenever it gets operational Indian aviation industry will be recognized at par with Chinese aviation industry.
Offline

Viper786

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2005, 03:23

Unread post30 Aug 2006, 06:48

How can you say it's on going to be on parwith Chinese aviation? That's like saying Bangladash aviation par with USA, just because india makes one small aircraft they can't be par with chinese aviationn they makeing J-10, J-17. And many other aircraft what experience does India have, I really think this site is bias.
i need speed
Offline

Yugandhar

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006, 13:28

Unread post30 Aug 2006, 08:33

pafpilot wrote:AIM-9 sidewinder and AIM-7 sparrow are US made weapons . AIM-9 is a typical AAM which PAF aircrafts carry. It is a short-range , heat guided missile.


Has US sanctioned the integration of American weapons on Chinese/Pakistani aircraft ? If the answer is yes, then its quite surprising.

LCA wont have any US missiles or bombs because India does not have any US-made missiles.

Viper786 wrote:just because india makes one small aircraft they can't be par with chinese aviationn they makeing J-10, J-17. And many other aircraft what experience does India have, I really think this site is bias.


Well if China has made J-10, J-17 then India has made LCA, Dhruv and Saras.
I dont think there is any gap at all much less than Bangladesh and USA.

The original topic of discussion was LCA vs. F-16. My view is that in A2A atleast, the LCA must approach Blk 52 F-15 level. It has Tarang RWR (same as on MKI), HMDS, FLIR, Israeli Litening pod, and (probable) weapons like R-77, R-73, R-27, Kh bombs and A2G missiles.
Offline

Viper786

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2005, 03:23

Unread post23 Sep 2006, 01:44

OK, you have no US made missles but more then half your airforce consistes of Russian made equipment... so I dont see that as being any diffrent....

Also if you said it approachs block 52 F-15. That's complety wrong im pretty sre you ment F-16 but if you mean F-15 you really really must ahve lost it... but its not near block 52 thats pushin it maybe your lucky if you say something like F-16 block 15 if anything and im being generous...

Soes anyone agree or do they think this man is right with block 52 and LCA... it doesn't even look right in the same sentence.
i need speed
Offline

Aks_20

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 11 May 2006, 05:49

Unread post18 Oct 2006, 07:16

Viper786 wrote:alight i would say there is no match up because theirs never gonna be a LCA, its been so many years and over a billion USD wasted on this project and still has so many defects. DRDO ( Indian defense organization) says every year that " next year serial production will start " but it never does :roll:. loll similarity between LCA and UFO's is we heard alot about it but never in real life. and by the time LCA does come into play Pakistans JF-17 will be phased out already. to think about how smart India acutely is instead of spending 1 billion on LCA they could have bought 50 mirages. the JF-17 took 15 years to the initial plan to active service and serial production. it took 20 years for F/A-22 to be built but LCA being a 8th generation fighter took 26 years and counting. i know there will never be a battle between a F-16 and LCA because LCA will come in when F-35 if phased out


Care to look up when the Super7 project was launched? The same one which got "converted" into the JF-17?

India is making its own aircraft from the ground up, please do tell us when Pakistan can do the same.

License manufacturing a Chinese plane, mocking the LCA does not make it Pakistani & the LCA a failure.
Last edited by Aks_20 on 18 Oct 2006, 07:24, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Aks_20

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 11 May 2006, 05:49

Unread post18 Oct 2006, 07:19

Viper786 wrote:How can you say it's on going to be on parwith Chinese aviation? That's like saying Bangladash aviation par with USA, just because india makes one small aircraft they can't be par with chinese aviationn they makeing J-10, J-17. And many other aircraft what experience does India have, I really think this site is bias.


India currently is proceeding with the LCA, has the IJT in test phase, has the CAT (AJT) being designed & will be cooperating with Russia for a fifth gen fighter project.

Fact is that you cannot digest the fact that India is going for the LCA, or even attempting a project of this magnitude & succeeding at it, despite all the umpteen delays and problems- hence the bile & brimstone.

Griffen, thanks for that gracious post.
Offline

Aks_20

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 11 May 2006, 05:49

Unread post18 Oct 2006, 07:23

Viper786 wrote:OK all that good and well said but the thing is where is the LCA, if its as good as you say it is then where is it, Indian air officials have said them selves that LCA has taken to long and will be expecting to come out in 2015 when alot of modern day aircraft are retired, and i don't know ABOUT THE HANDLING BEING COMPARED TO MIRAGE -2000 and A2A being as good as F-16 Block 52 i think thats expatriating the point lets let it start production to even say anything and Pakistan is getting there first JF-17 in march of this year AND PLEASE BACK YOUR CLIAMS UP ABOUT THINGS LIKE HOW LCA IS A GENERATION AHEAD OF JF-17 and if it is why is it taking about 25 years to come out with and why dont they do manuvers on the test flights are they scared parts might fall off, seriously get links and ligitamate links to back this up then ill belive every word you say ok and please please dont compare it to F-16 because thats like saying a ferrari VS a honda civic



Really want to take this forward, eh?

- LCA has upto 45% composite by weight, and 90% by surface area composite construction, care to point out the JF-17s proportion? Fact is LCA airframe alone is a generation ahead in terms of complexity and manufacturing material.

- LCA has a quadraplex Digital FBW, with an all digital brake by wire, and health monitoring system. The JF-17 has single channel FBW in one axis.

- Avionics, do we even want to go here? The LCA is getting arguably one of the best EW suites in the world, codeveloped with Israels ELISRA. It already has a DASH HMD for instance.

The LCA may be delayed, but it is entirely because India aimed so high with its specifications & attributes.
Last edited by Aks_20 on 18 Oct 2006, 07:29, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Aks_20

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 11 May 2006, 05:49

Unread post18 Oct 2006, 07:28

pafpilot wrote:Another thing... is IAF only going for 20 LCAs ?

I don't understand!! LCA was built to replace MiG-21s.You have hundreads of MiG-21s and IAF orders only 20?


There are currently 37 LCAs on order already. Nine prototypes, plus 8 LSP, plus 20 series production to get the LCA through IOC. Then series production orders from the IAF and Navy will come:

- IAF add 150 more minimum
- Navy add 40

So the current orders are quite sufficient to keep the LCA program progressing nicely towards IOC.
Offline

Yugandhar

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006, 13:28

Unread post30 Oct 2006, 13:13

Look Viper, the 28 (not 37) order for LCA is an initial order which shall be used to get Final Operational Clearance (FoC). After this, 200 or so LCA's will be ordered.

This is the standard procedure in any air-force. As soon as the F-16 was evaluated and selected in 1975-76, the USAF ordered only 20 F-16s in the first batch (F-16A). Bulk orders came only in the late 1970s and early 80s.

I'm sure that when JF-17 Pt-06 is completed, PAF or PLAAF will order about 15-20 or so JF-17s to give it FoC, and then after 2-3 years only they will give a bulk order of say 200 JF-17s.
Offline

JanBei

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 20:40

Unread post19 Nov 2006, 11:18

It's amusing to watch this argument cause every side (Pakistani or Indian) truly believe that "his" jet fighter is so advanced and that the "other" jet fighter is worth nothing.
In Pakistan the JF-17 is comparable to the F-16 while the LCA is going to be the next Arjun project, The Indians considering the LCA as an advanced fighter while the JF-17 is a"Chinese crap", so..it's not amusing?

About the JF-17's engine, according to a Pakistani forum, the Russian are going to offer Pakistan an improved RD-93 engine.
Offline

chinawhite

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 09:19

Unread post10 Dec 2006, 10:46

Yugandhar wrote:Russia has clearly stated that it wont allow China to give RD-93 engine to Pakistan.


Russia has never stated it would never give the engine to pakistan, that was media speculation about indian-russian relations being affected. The Russians have now publically stated that they will give pakistan rights to the RD-93 as well as plans for a improved version with increased thrust to 89kN thrust and TVC. Pakistan has already been gearing up for production for a while now and the plans are for 8 production aircraft to be ready by 2007

So JF-17 has no composites, and T/W < 1 (sinodefence.com). LCA has 45% composites, T/W=1.17.


The JF-17 DOES have composites at its DSI intakes as well as the fact thats its incorpation of many of the advanced features of other advanced aircraft likes is LEXs while the LCA is basically a wingless delta and nothing much more than that.

T/W has nothing to do with how advanced the airframe design. A B-52 with 20 F-119 can get a T/W of over 1 yet its still a older generation airframe. The LCA has an actual T/W of 1.07 with the Kavari engine which is PROJECTED and not the actual engine it is using, if it was a T/W of 1.17 it would match the F-22 in supercruise which is impossible

JF-17's weapon-load is 3600 kg. LCA's weapon load is 4000 kg. Number of hardpoints do not matter nuch.


The JF-17 actual take-off weight is 3800kg and should be more since it has lost 200kg with the newest 04 prototype it should be roughly 4000kg
Offline

Corous

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 43
  • Joined: 03 May 2006, 19:41

Unread post11 Dec 2006, 22:43

Hmmm, I see you guys have turned this into a LCA v. JF-17 thing. So it's pretty much hands down that the latest Viper is better than the LCA?
Offline

Yugandhar

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006, 13:28

Unread post12 Mar 2007, 15:25

chinawhite wrote:Russia has never stated it would never give the engine to pakistan, that was media speculation about indian-russian relations being affected. The Russians have now publically stated that they will give pakistan rights to the RD-93 as well as plans for a improved version with increased thrust to 89kN thrust and TVC. Pakistan has already been gearing up for production for a while now and the plans are for 8 production aircraft to be ready by 2007

The Russian defence minister, on a state visit to India in January 2007 stated that the RD-93 engines will not be allowed to be re-exported to Pakistan.

I know that some officials of Klimov made statements to the contrary at Zhuhai and so time will tell whether the Russians acqueise to Indian demands or not.
chinawhite wrote:The JF-17 DOES have composites at its DSI intakes as well as the fact thats its incorpation of many of the advanced features of other advanced aircraft likes is LEXs while the LCA is basically a wingless delta and nothing much more than that.

LCA has composites ALL over it, not just the intakes (95% by surface area to be precise). That assists a long way in the reduction of weight and the reduction of RCS.

LEXs are not "advanced features". According to this site F-5, F-16, MiG-29, Su-27 and F-18 all have LEXs. LCA has got a cranked & compound-delta wing, which is a design combination not found in many fighters (in fact I can't think of one). Most of them are only compounded or have canards, but not both.
chinawhite wrote:T/W has nothing to do with how advanced the airframe design. A B-52 with 20 F-119 can get a T/W of over 1 yet its still a older generation airframe. The LCA has an actual T/W of 1.07 with the Kavari engine which is PROJECTED and not the actual engine it is using, if it was a T/W of 1.17 it would match the F-22 in supercruise which is impossible

The LCA's T/W ratio is calculated with respect to the currently used GE-F-404 engine. With the Kaveri, its T/W will be even higher.
chinawhite wrote:The JF-17 actual take-off weight is 3800kg and should be more since it has lost 200kg with the newest 04 prototype it should be roughly 4000kg

The latest official website of Pak Aeronautical Complex says that JF-17's max. load is somewhere around 3,720 kg.
Offline

blain2

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2005, 16:52

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 21:52

Courus, yes you are right. The blk52 is definetly better than the LCA since LCA's final configuration has not even been confirmed yet. Anyone claiming to the contrary is deluded.

Yugandhar, RD-93 engine is not a problem for the JF-17 program. Russians have communicated nothing to the Chinese on this issue.
Offline

blain2

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2005, 16:52

Unread post29 Mar 2007, 21:54

Griffen wrote:I think it unfair to compare LCA and JF-17. LCA is modern and fairly indigenous design. There are bound to be teething problems which will delay its production but whenever it gets operational Indian aviation industry will be recognized at par with Chinese aviation industry.


Hmm really? Last I checked, both aircraft had been designed for and slated to replace 3rd gen aircraft in service. Looking at avionics and weapons, I just do not see why the two can't be compared?
PreviousNext

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest