JF-17

Ahh yes, thats what I meant, the JF-17 is not really anything much, just another 3rd generation fighter, maybe slightly better than the J-8, I don't know. If you are looking for a match against the LCA, the J-10 would be a closer match, since both represent the first time the countries are trying to make a 4th generation plane on their own.

Originally posted by Taishyou
FC-1 is not that big of a deal really. It's a 3rd gen fighter mainly aimed at export to third world countries. It's probably not going to make too much noise in the PLAAF, since they don't seem too interested. IMO neither the FC-1 or the LCA are worth the hype really, since neither represent any leap in technology of any kind. However, I would say the LCA is a bit more sophisticated than the FC-1 in electronics.

hell yes!!!.. I KNEW the Mig21 bison is a counter to the FC-1.. and plus its an interceptor..
Mach 2.1
The FC-1 is only mach 1.6

The J-10 should be better than the LCA, though not much is known about either.. I've been trying to compare stats for ages now.. but everything's inconclusive!!

Project Super Seven, Formally FC-1


Official Name: "FC-1" (Fighter China-1) Code Name: "Super-7"
Pakistani Name: "JF-17" (Joint Fighter-17) Code Name: "Thunder"
Type: Single Seat Multirole Day/Night Fighter

Over View:

Project Super Seven, which is formally known as FC-1 is designed to further meet Pakistan Air Forces tactical and strategic needs with the least reliance on imports from other countries. In addition to that to design a plane that meets its on requirements with lots of room for upgrades and with export options. Super Seven is considered to be Medium-tech or possibly low-high-tech class.

History:

The project was initiated in February 1992, by China Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC) who officially invited the PAF to invest in the Super-7 program. In return for full participation in design and development phase, with exclusive co-production rights. After careful consideration Pakistan Air Force (PAF) decided to go ahead with is project and got the Government approval in October 1994.

Joint Venture:

This project is a joint venture between Pakistan Air Force and China Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation along with Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAC). Research and Development cost of this project is between 450 to 500 million US dollars This multi-million dollar project is financed up to 50%-59% by government of Pakistan. Estimated cost per air craft will be around 15-20 million US dollars which makes it excellent option for export market.

Technical Details:

Super Seven is a light weight, multi-role day-night, all weather fighter with max TO weight 12,700kg, max speed 1.6M, ceiling 16,500m, max weapon load 3,900kg, range 3,000km. It uses Russian RD-93 turbofan engine, which is an upgrade of RD-33, this RD-93 turbofan engine is also used in Russian MiG-29 it is claimed to 80-85% as capable as American F-16 and highly aerial maneuverability as its key features. RD-93 engine used in FC-1 is build in China with Russian license. The aircraft can also be fitted with an in-flight refueling probe and a deck arrester hook. This will increase its striking range beyond 3,000km.

Avionics:
FC-1 will be fitted with Italian Grifo S-7 fire-control radar. The Grifo S-7 radar system is specially designed for the FC-1 it has 25 working modes and a non-break-down time of 200 hours. Grifo S-7 radar system is capable of look-down, shoot-down, as well as for ground strike abilities. Pakistani sources also suggest that Pakistan is mostly looking into western avionics to further improve FC-1's capabilities. In addition to that it includes new digital dual fly-by-wire (FBW) system and a true Beyond Visual Range (BVR) attack capability.

FC-1 include a 25° field of view HUD, two multi-functional displays and INS/GPS (Global Positioning System).

Weapon Systems:

Super Seven is designed to be fitted with vast array of weaponry. It has a total of seven store stations, one under the fuselage and six under the wing with a maximum weapon load of 3,800kg.

FC-1s primary air to air weapon is a medium range SD-10 Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missile. Other weapons it can carry are short and medium range AAMs (Anti-Air Missiles) like AIM-9P/PL-9/Magic 2 and PL-11/Aspide/AIM-7E etc. In addition to that it can carry wide array of high and low drag bombs, laser guided bombs, runway penetration bombs and cluster bombs for air strikes.

Status Update:

FC-1/JF-17 prototype (serial number "01") conducted its first official test flight on September 3rd, 2003. The plane took off from Wenjiang Airport in Chengdu and stayed in air for about eight minutes. This prototype rolled out from the assembly line on 31 May 2003. On 1 July the it completed its first taxi run test at the test airfield in CAC.

Pakistan Air Force is going to receive ten of these in coming months to complete its own testing. Prototype "02" and "03" are in there final stages and PAF is expected to receive them soon. FC-1/JF-17 is to go under serial production by January 2006.

Pakistan Air Force has announced that it will include 150 of these planes at the same time China announcing that it will induct 200 of these planes into its Air Force. Once the work is completed on this deadly plane, it will create a new dimension in air combat standards. It will not only allow Pakistan to build this plane with its own recourses within the country but at the same time opening a huge export market.

Specifications:

Crew One
Wingspan 9.00 m
Height 5.10 m
Length 14 m
Weight Empty 6,321 kg, Normal take-off 9,100 kg, Max take-off 12,700 kg, Max weapon payload 3,800 kg
Max. Weapon Load 3,600 kg
Max. Speed Mach 1.6
Range Ferry range 3,000 km; Operational Radius 1,355 km
Service Ceiling 16,500 m
G Limit 8.5

FC-1 cockpit




My opinion of the FC-1.

i think that this fighter will be inducted in the PLAAF in limited numbers just to beef up the PLAAF so they can retire the obsolete j-6s and early j-7

good BVR
Not very expensive

why did you post all the stats again when I'd done so before?
wasting bandwidth and server memory!! not good..

What "edge" does the FC-1 have over the bison according to you??
The bison has the R-73/77 adder edge over the FC-1 IMO..
Plus its faster being an interceptor Mach 2.1 compared to Mach 1.6 of the FC-1

Also because of this obv it will have a lesser range.. and probably no air refuelling.. but after all its an interceptor and not a strike aircraft..

Also note that though the FC-1 and the MiG29 use the same RD93 engine, the Mig29 uses two of them(twin engine) as compared to one of the FC-1

Are you sure the chinese are geting the grifo radar? That can only be possible if the euro ban is lifted and with tthe reprisal of Israel, its doubtful that these US minion states will venture sales to china..


and btw.. that FC-1 joystick looks quite sad.. even the MiG 21 FL joystick that was shown in chinawhite's cockpit view looked better..

[edit on 13-5-2005 by Daedalus3]

[edit on 13-5-2005 by Daedalus3]

One engine? You have to be kidding...look at this picture...unless they are flying it with one engine on one side, they are using two.



And yes, the stick does look quite sad... reminds me of those Korean war MiG-15s' sticks... Luckily I can see 2 displays, not very big, but satisfying anyway.

oh sorry single thrust .. Or is it single engine twin-intakes and single O/P thrust??
Because as far as I know twin intake single nozzle/jet wakes aircraft have one engine..Check it up..
The Mirage 2000, Hawker hunter, LCA have twin intakes single engine single nozzle/wake..

The cockpit is an early stage model of how FC-1's cockpit would look like. Look at the glue on the bottom and the wires hanging out, come on, just look at the picture more clearly.

The new radars on the Bisons cost more than the airframe itself and it can't put the R-77s to their full range. FC-1 would be equipped with SD-10s and they WOULD be able to use it to the intended range.

MIG-29s use RD-33s, not RD-93s. RD-93 is the improved RD-33 with more thrust and higher efficiency. All MIG-29s use RD-33s, two of them.

[edit on 13-5-2005 by COWlan]

Originally posted by Daedalus3
oh sorry single thrust .. Or is it single engine twin-intakes and single O/P thrust??
Because as far as I know twin intake single nozzle/jet wakes aircraft have one engine..Check it up..
The Mirage 2000, Hawker hunter, LCA have twin intakes single engine single nozzle/wake..

Whoops, I was wrong, it was a twin intake single nozzle with one engine... Sorry for the mistake . Well, lets hope they decided to use those MiG-29s' ejection seats as well...good enough to cover up for the lack of another engine

Originally posted by Daedalus3
why did you post all the stats again when I'd done so before?

wasting bandwidth and server memory!! not good..

What "edge" does the FC-1 have over the bison according to you??
The bison has the R-73/77 adder edge over the FC-1 IMO..
Plus its faster being an interceptor Mach 2.1 compared to Mach 1.6 of the FC-1

Also because of this obv it will have a lesser range.. and probably no air refuelling.. but after all its an interceptor and not a strike aircraft..

Also note that though the FC-1 and the MiG29 use the same RD93 engine, the Mig29 uses two of them(twin engine) as compared to one of the FC-1

Are you sure the chinese are geting the grifo radar? That can only be possible if the euro ban is lifted and with tthe reprisal of Israel, its doubtful that these US minion states will venture sales to china..


and btw.. that FC-1 joystick looks quite sad.. even the MiG 21 FL joystick that was shown in chinawhite's cockpit view looked better..

[edit on 13-5-2005 by Daedalus3]

[edit on 13-5-2005 by Daedalus3]

i never said it have a edge over the mig-21 bison i said it had a edge over the LCA with indian avonics

the FC-1 will use one engine. but this engine has better thrust than the LCA engine.

the chinese one wouldn't use the grifo radar they probaly israeli one or a new chinese one

what about the joystick??? does it make the plane less of a fighter

Originally posted by COWlan

The new radars on the Bisons cost more than the airframe itself and it can't put the R-77s to their full range. FC-1 would be equipped with SD-10s and they WOULD be able to use it to the intended range.


[edit on 13-5-2005 by COWlan]

Sorry.. wrong there..The bison airframe DOES NOT exceed the radar pricing..
ITs just a X-doppler kopyo phazotron for chrissakes!!
And check the range of the phazotron kopy COWlan.. its defeinitely more than that of the R-77 adder..
You think Indian technicians and designers (along with russian ones since the
upgrade prototype was constructed in Russia) to be buffoons!!
Fitting missiles with ranges MORE than that of the radr!!
Then the Israelis (avionics onboard the bison) are a bunch of nuts too!!
What rubbish..I know I'm probably bordering on the mods' tolerance limits with such aggressive retort... but guys!! you got to post legit stuff!!

Chinawhite..
The Bison is an interceptor , the FC-1 is not..
So obv the bison will have a shorter range..
What "avionics" onboard the FC-1 make it better than the bison?
Or are you just taking Global security's word for it..
They conviniently have not given the reasons for their LCA -FC-1 comparision too..

I've posted BOTH planes' avionics in BOLD in my posts above..
Point out to me please what makes the FC-1 stuff superior..

The LCA is a LIGHT combat a/c. Obv. its engine thrust is lesser than that of the FC-1..
compare the takeoff weights and then comment..

[edit on 14-5-2005 by Daedalus3]

This site gives the comparision pretty evenly in terms of all aspects

The FC-1 has a higher ceiling (4000ft more)
The LCA has a higher speed (at least 0.2 mach better)

most of the other important stas are left out..

www.airtoaircombat.com...

The FC-1 is yet another Chinese copy of the Mig-33 concept.

Its based on the Mig-21 airframe

Its radar from Italy is not even capable of effective multitracking

India are lobbying in Russia to ensure the RD-93 engines are unavailable to Pakistan.

The plane cant even tolerate 9G's

All the BVR missiles it can fire are incompetant missiles

Pakistan only funded a part of the programme. They never developed anything for the plane whatsoever.All that pakistan did was to name the Chinese junk JF-17.

China might never buy crap like this, only the PAF will. If China do buy any of these, the Indian Airforce will be the happiest bunch of aviators.


This thing cant even stand upto India's upgraded bisons >> read www.abovetopsecret.com...'

India is replacing its Mig-21's with F-16's or Mirage-2000-V's or Mig-29 M2's and LCA which are all atleast a generation ahead of this cheap junk.

Here's a video of the crap >> www.pakistanidefence.com... but the text is in some islamic language.

IMO even Indian Hawk AJT's fitted with missiles will have the better of the Sucker-7

Even india's indegenous CAT trainer has a better cockpit than the FC-1

www.protonriver.com...

All the Pakistani defence forums are going ga-ga over this worthless and incompetant load of scrap.To claim that it uses "State of the art technologies" is emodiment of ignorance.

Some pakistanis also believe its better than the F-16, 'cause its named JF-17 (17>16).


Cant really blame them you know...

[edit on 14-5-2005 by Stealth Spy]

stop it you twit or you'll close this thread too...
calm down..
go see the III WW thread in weaponry...
You can get your point across and debunk those you know are wrong by civilised
LOGICAL arguement representation..
Really all you post gulf war products are not mature enough to discuss something constructively..
damn you all!!

Please,I beg you to shut up and read this:

www.sinodefence.com...

and this:

www.fas.org...

You blistering idiot,tell me if this looks like the MiG-21






About not being able to stand 9Gs, the FC-1 can stand up to 8.5Gs, and with modern day BVR combat 6Gs is often the max that a pilot does. Why don't you say the FC-1 is not able to stand up to 8.51Gs?

Its BVR capabilities are lousy? look at these:

Armament

23 mm GSh-23-2 twin-barrel cannon
6 - PL-7 AAM
6 - PL-10 AAMs
ASMs, bombs

The PL-10 AAMs are roughly the equavalent of the Russian R-27s. Tell me if thats lousy. Also, the italian radar is the one on those fitted to the Pakistani's version. The Chinese version will have either an Israeli one or a Chinese one.

Edit : Sorry mods!

[edit on 14/5/05 by W4rl0rD]

Alright, let's tone this thread down immediately.

Do you know a thing about the mig-33 have you got any pictures.
stealth spy do you even know the delevopment history

whats the LCA based on ??? the airframe is difiniatly not new..

the FC-1 already has 100 RD-93 engines already

well it looks like they solved the problem already because pakistan going to start producing the FC-1 next year

The BVR missiles are imcompete but the rival of the LCA is also imcomplete

Pakistan funded 50% 75million (the FC-1 cost $150million development)
LCA already $515 million development.

IF production goes past 400 planes then it will cost $10mil a planes while the LCA cost $21mil


If this is cheap junk then the LCA is even cheaper
they even advistise it as cheap

The bison might have around the same stats but then is superior to LCA..

Again, another decent topic taken off track by unneeded and unwarrented inciteful rhetoric.
Referencing this topic thread that's strike two, Stealth Spy.

Note: Chinawhite, this is for you, as well.

Both of you were warned about this early am last night.
This one is going to be stopped, one way or the other.

Thread closed




seekerof

[edit on 14-5-2005 by Seekerof]