HAL finds no takers for LCA

Sure the FC-1/JF-17 is compact and cost-effective and has orders form the countries responsible for its development (although pakistan did nothing but name this chinese development of a russian design thundaaar) but if another 3rd country may not buy it because it may will into the USA's bad books for buying stuff from china.

Aslo, pakistan getting it is doubtful, as Russia have alredy said that they will not let the RD-93 engine to arm pakistani planes. But i guess china will reproduce it and name it differently and give it to pak

[edit on 30-6-2005 by Stealth Spy]

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Sure the FC-1/JF-17 is compact and cost-effective and has orders form the countries responsible for its development (although pakistan did nothing but name this chinese development of a russian design thundaaar) but if another 3rd country may not buy it because it may will into the USA's bad books for buying stuff from china.

Aslo, pakistan getting it is doubtful, as Russia have alredy said that they will not let the RD-93 engine to arm pakistani planes. But i guess china will reproduce it and name it differently and give it to pak

[edit on 30-6-2005 by Stealth Spy]

do you kow how many countries buy chinese weapons?

we are selling weapons for the new iragi police/army. getting in their bad books






external image

Chinese made weapons and body armors in use by the new Iraqi police and troops
The new Type 56-2 assault rifles and body armors must be from the recent 40 million USD orders placed by new Iraqi government for its police and troops. Noticing the brand new Type 56-2 rifles with its short folding stocks and cheap orange colored plastic parts. Can't complaint too much when they only paid around $100 each and got them delivered almost rightaway. ---

That is baffling to say the least.

But small arms and aircrafts are different, and besides the FC-1 dose'nt offer that great performance too :

The MiG-27 -- the standard to which the FC-1 aspires.
www.navlog.org...

The aircraft is based off the design of the MiG-33 which was rejected by the Soviet Air Force.

link

The FC-1 (also known as Super-7) is the single-seat, single-engine multi-role fighter aircraft developed by Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAC) for export market. Derived from the airframe of the MiG-21/F-7 Fishbed with some radical changes, the aircraft provides an affordable choice for many developing countries who are eager to replace their obsolete MiG-21/J-7 fleets.

link

As a substitute for the Super-7, China is developing the FC-1 (Fighter China 1) lightweight multipurpose fighter based on the design for the MiG-33, which was rejected by the Soviet Air Force.

Chengdu Aircraft Industry Company [CAIC], based in Sichuan Province, is China's second-largest fighter production base, and the enterprise is cooperating with Pakistan's Aviation Integrated Company and Russia's Mikoyan Aero-Science Production Group [MASPG] in the development of the FC-1.

But with the participation of MASPG, the Russians are using the FC-1 as a continuation of the MiG-33 [R33] program developed in the 1980s. With Russian technical assitance the redesigned FC-11 has improved climbout performance and steering capabilities along with a stronger fuselage. However, the most apparent modifications to the MiG-33 design is the repositioning of the ventral fins from the engine compartment to the added tail edgings, providing aerial maneuverability that is claimed to match that of the American F16.

link


and its cost too is inconsistant in several sources :

The development of this fighter, the improved copy of Soviet MIG-33 (which R&D was terminated due to absence of money at the beginning of 1990s), started at Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corp., in 1994-95.

More exactly, MIG-33 designers resumed this terminated project in Moscow under supervision of experts from Chengdu city and with financing from PLA. In 1995, Chengdu Corp. purchased 100 units advanced RD-93 jet engines, for the future FC-1, at Klimov Aircraft Corp. in St. Petersburg.

In 1997-98, Pakistani Air Forces joined this project; Pakistan provided significant part of R&D financing and is obliged to purchase one half of the future FC-1 production. Despite all the efforts, the project dealt with a lot of problems, and only at the beginning of 2001 did it enter the last stage.


It was emphasized that Pakistan, and probably some other developing countries, would pay $25 million for each FC-1, characterized by high combat capacities at low altitude and combat range (with the return to the same airdrome after mission accomplished) of 1,500 km.

link

Developmental delays have dogged the project and the FC-1 is unlikely to be operational for a number of years. It is uncertain whether the PLAAF will buy the FC-1.

link


Not a hate post, but it too had its share of problems and slow development like the LCA, and like the LCA may not inspire confidence of 3rd countries to buy it , atleast for now. and an order of 300 is only suggestive and tentitive and not concrete. Only an LSP looks confirmed

.... initial production of 16 aircraft in 2006. ....

link(dated april 2005)

but the SD-10(PL-12)appears to be a good missile, but some of these quotes take away credit for it .

The PL-12 was said to be derived from the Italian Aspide technology and integrated with active radar-homing seeker technology obtained from Russia.

The missile was developed indigenously, but also with helps from foreign manufacturers. Several Russian missile and subsystem developers are reportedly supporting the program, with much of the missile utilizing components from the R-77 (AA-12 Adder).

In 1996 China revealed an active radar-homing seeker AMR-1, which is possibly based on Russian technology. Claimed to be developed for the new generation active radar-homing MRAAM, the AMR-1 seeker or its developed variant could be used to guide the SD-10.

link

Originally posted by russiankid
... im 2 slow when im tired thanks for the info

have you ever lived in russia ??
you would know about indian airforce if you lived in russia

double post corrected.

enjoy pic
external image

more.....




[edit on 30-6-2005 by Stealth Spy]

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
BTW : How old are you ??

I figured this out myself from your bio : September 15, 1990

That would make you ~15. I am around about the same age too and i request you to research a bit more before posting.

the aircraft projects forum might intrest you as well : www.abovetopsecret.com...

hey chinawhite man how old are you??

Originally posted by siddarthpanditv
have you ever lived in russia ??
you would know about indian airforce if you lived in russia

i was born in Russia in khaborovsk 1990 spet 15th
i left Russia when i was 3...
but ive been keeping up with what Russia is doing... (just some stuff)
and nope... heavent heard much about India or its air force or their LCA
am i sepost to konw
is the F-16 anything like the LCA???

Originally posted by siddarthpanditv
hey chinawhite man how old are you??

from the new member intro thread, i figured out he's 18 and his name is Jim and he lives in Australia and i presume he's a citizen there

[edit on 30-6-2005 by Stealth Spy]

Originally posted by russiankid
i was born in Russia

is the F-16 anything like the LCA???

Please, read the links i posted on the previous pages and take a look at the pics. You'll know it yourself. That's the least you can do

Originally posted by siddarthpanditv
hey chinawhite man how old are you??

im 15

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
That is baffling to say the least.

But small arms and aircrafts are different, and besides the FC-1 dose'nt offer that great performance too :

heres the problem with that claim.

the FC-1 is going to be armed with a better missile than the LCA. the FC-1 is cheaper and expected longer range.

For a BVR capable that is 10million dollars this offers better performance than a LCA. it wouldn't matter how many of those fly-by-wire things you got theres no way to out manuver a AAM

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

and its cost too is inconsistant in several sources :

It was emphasized that Pakistan, and probably some other developing countries, would pay $25 million for each FC-1, characterized by high combat capacities at low altitude and combat range (with the return to the same airdrome after mission accomplished) of 1,500 km.

Please provide your several sources. do you want to know why?

because you have a habit of changing articles to fit your needs

Developmental delays have dogged the project and the FC-1 is unlikely to be operational for a number of years. It is uncertain whether the PLAAF will buy the FC-1.

yeah a number of years in 2000....

I have already posting a article saying the PLA will buy the plane

Originally posted by chinawhite

It was emphasized that Pakistan, and probably some other developing countries, would pay $25 million for each FC-1, characterized by high combat capacities at low altitude and combat range (with the return to the same airdrome after mission accomplished) of 1,500 km.

Please provide your several sources. do you want to know why?

because you have a habit of changing articles to fit your needs

here look link says 25 million; FAS says 15 million; some other's say 18 million.
Now which one of these do you suppose i must believe. ?

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Originally posted by chinawhite

It was emphasized that Pakistan, and probably some other developing countries, would pay $25 million for each FC-1, characterized by high combat capacities at low altitude and combat range (with the return to the same airdrome after mission accomplished) of 1,500 km.

Please provide your several sources. do you want to know why?

because you have a habit of changing articles to fit your needs

here look link says 25 million; FAS says 15 million; some other's say 18 million.
Now which one of these do you suppose i must believe. ?

you said several sources. please provide them....

These improvement in performance have affected the program's costs, and if the final production order if fewer than 300 aircraft the unit price will rise from the original $10 million to $15 million.

the price is going to be 10million. because there is going to be more than 300built. 350 planes already ordered

Originally posted by chinawhite

the FC-1 is going to be armed with a better missile than the LCA. the FC-1 is cheaper and expected longer range.

The LCA will be armed with R-77, R-73, R-27, Meteor, Mica-2, Magic-2 and R-60MK

Now imo it is wishful thinking to presume that the SD-10 is better than these.

For a BVR capable that is 10million dollars this offers better performance than a LCA. it wouldn't matter how many of those fly-by-wire things you got theres no way to out manuver a AAM

Sure there is no way the LCA could out manuver an AAM, like any other airplane;The chances of the LCA outmanuvering an AAM is higher than an F-22 and J-10.

And 10 million for the FC-1 is simply untrue.

Better performance? You gotta be kidding dude.

Originally posted by Stealth Spy



The LCA will be armed with R-77, R-73, R-27, Meteor, Mica-2, Magic-2 and R-60MK

Now imo it is wishful thinking to presume that the SD-10 is better than these.

the SD-10/PL-12 has a longer range than a R-77

Sure there is no way the LCA could out manuver an AAM, like any other airplane;The chances of the LCA outmanuvering an AAM is higher than an F-22 and J-10.

And 10 million for the FC-1 is simply untrue.

Better performance? You gotta be kidding dude.

How is the LCA chances of out-manuvering a AAM better than a F-22 or J-10?


It is going to cost 10million...

please post your sources. i would like to have a laugh


WHats so advanced about a LCA. fly-by-wire???

the LCA only needs fly-by-wire so it doesn't fall out of the sky because of its unstable airframe. the FC-1 was built to be stable so doesn't need that much fly-by-wire systems.

the LCA is more manuverable but it wouldn't matter.

A PL-12 active radar homing AAM was carried underneath the wing of a J-10 among various types of AAMs, including PL-8 (left) and PL-11 (center). Its export version is called SD-10 and was first revealed to the public during the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow. PL-12 has been under development at LETRI/607 Institute since early 90s. It is expected to be in the same class as AIM-120A and the missile may have evolved from the earlier AMR-1 design. Its tailfins appear to have fin tips as well as the leading edges of the fin root cropped. These specially designed tailfins are believed to possess lower drag for greater speed and higher torque for better maneuverability. Two datalink antennas can be seen next to the nozzle for mid-course correction. PL-12 completed its development test in December 2004 and was expected to enter the service in 2005 to be carried by J-8F, FC-1, J-10 and J-11B. Some specifications of SD-10: length 3,850mm, diameter 203mm, wing span 674mm, weight 180kg, max g-load 38g, max speed 4M, max range 70km.

J-10 fitted with the PL-12

Originally posted by chinawhite
How is the LCA chances of out-manuvering a AAM better than a F-22 or J-10?

> Samller size
> High manuverability
> Low infrared signature (it uses the F-117A's engine)

It is going to cost 10million...

please post your sources. i would like to have a laugh

Its me who'll have a laugh. 10 million is untrue :

Figures of 15 to 20 million Dollars were mentioned .

link

..also steered the unit price of the aircraft up by 50%, from the original US$10 million to US$15 million.

chinese link

It was emphasized that Pakistan, and probably some other developing countries, would pay $25 million for each FC-1

link

Estimated cost per air craft will be around 15-20 million US dollars

pakistani link

WHats so advanced about a LCA. fly-by-wire???

yes and :
- latest aveonics/mission computer
- high manuverability
- low observeable and very low RCS(perhaps the least after the F-22, F-35 and F-117)
- latest weapons fit
- latest Electronic countermasures, etc


what do you think will make the J-10 advanced ?

the LCA is more manuverable but it wouldn't matter.

says who ?

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

> Samller size
> High manuverability
> Low infrared signature (it uses the F-117A's engine)

size doesn't matter.
Nearly every aircraft has high manuverability. its delta wing doesn't make it in the class of russian fighters.

i cant believe you think that the LCA has low infared signature.

Estimated cost per air craft will be around 15-20 million US dollars

pakistani link

LoL. my site even gave the reason why its going to cost 10million

WHats so advanced about a LCA. fly-by-wire???

yes and :
- latest aveonics/mission computer
- high manuverability
- low observeable and very low RCS(perhaps the least after the F-22, F-35 and F-117)
- latest weapons fit
- latest Electronic countermasures, etc


lastest avonics?? you must be kidding.

What about LCA RCS??????

are you kidding me. with the LCAs external fuel tanks weapons makes it stand out equal or even more than the FC-1

you makes this Electronic countermasures?? india