since the arrival of S300V4 gave more confidence to no fly zone area coverage. neither turks or Israelis talk about strike.
http://www.dailysabah.com/diplomacy/2016/10/31/erdogan-says-turkey-in-contact-with-russia-over-syrian-airspace-dispute

The Israelis had a strategy for dealing with the U.S. veto threat, the same strategy that has seen over a thousand of Rafael’s LITENING targeting pods produced for delivery worldwide: they had a U.S. partner. Export orders for the Lavi would have been fulfilled by a U.S.-based assembly line to be set up by Grumman Corp.

Grumman produced the composite wings and vertical tail for the Lavi, and had no jet fighter of its own in this same size class. The contract between IAI and Grumman, calling for a parallel U.S. assembly line was signed only months before the program was cancelled.

Forget about export orders to smaller air forces around the world. A Grumman/IAI Lavi would have been a threat to F-16 sales to the U.S. Air Force. The Lavi was intended from the beginning for the strike role. The F-16 was not. It would have made far more sense for the U.S. Air Force to procure a U.S.-made Lavi for the Wild Weasel role than to develop the F-16CJ.

Lavi had barely two protoypes by 1987 and you think it can compete with 300 aircraft per year F-16 built rate. there is huge difference between making a components of a pod and an aircraft. a lot of countries make car components but very few can design modern car transmission/engines.

My best guess would be that the Izd.170-1 was only hastily introduced into VKS service with few Su-35S squadrons due to Syrian deployment and that the Su-34/Su-30SM jocks were never trained for this type.. (???)

how many pilots have actually fired a BVR AAMs. these all computer simulator tests. there is no such thing as hastily introduction.

if your spending way too much money and time to bring product into operation than it mean research is ineffective.

Israel is called start up nation or research lab. its industrial and engineering skills are vastly exaggerated. you cant expect them to built a production line for fighter aircraft. it need thousands of skilled workers for barely making 10 to 15 fighters a year with imported components. I don’t think this Lavi is competive design. drag of bubble canopy and external loads on underpowered engine with small nose.

“Its good that (as reported in media) that almost every single refueling station was denied to the Russian fleet. That was badly needed and came at the right time. Russia need to learn some hard lessons for neglecting the basic support sytems. ”

i dont know why you guys make it sound so vital to refuel or portray them to be desperate… as if they went to mars and need oxygen to continue the journey. If every single country denies entry for refueling it will take max 2-3 days for a russian tanker to swing by. 2-3 days is nothing… denial of port of entry is not a big deal either the only one who really looses out on the $$$ is the stupid country that caved in under NATOS pressure…

Russia deliberately highlights these refueling requests denials. once the Middleastern countries see that smaller EU area countries are mere puppets of the larger countries influence they are treated accordingly. see how Saudi treated Sweden last year or with Spanish rail contract or Egypt did to Italian student.

what can spain do with already signed contracts?. .

https://www.intelligenceonline.com/government-intelligence_grey-areas/2016/07/27/saudi-spanish-rail-deal-soon-under-arbitration,108176214-ART
Saudi-Spanish rail deal soon under arbitration
Growing disagreement between the partners in the Mecca-Medina high speed rail line project threaten to expose all of the behind-the-scenes players involved in the 2011 deal

China makes drones and weopons . It is treated differently.

You don’t need to make aircraft to make several passes. that’s the work of small UAVs to track. it’s all part of netcentric warfare.you have rocket pods and 30mm gun in combat helicopter. Atgm only for armour. use high altitude UAV to find vehicles and than surprise low altitude helicopter attack. mapad has very short range at low altitude.

The US had to cut the Lavi program, the Lavi would have wiped out F-16 sales as no one wants to buy from the embargo-happy US and Israel will sell to anybody including their own enemies. To answer the main question, I think that Chinese fighters would be close to equal to the Lavi or any other 4th gen FBW fighter. People here seem to assume that the eurocanards and F-16 are far in advance aerodynamically, but I dont see it, I think its easier to make a good FBW fighter than most people here are willing to admit.

first Israel cant make engine and Israel capabilities in heavy engineering like airframe life are questionable. those F-16s have 8000hrs or more airframe life with stressed loads. Israel niches are light airframes like UAVs or electronics made from foreign components but these fields China/Korea are now entering. you have to think how come Israel could not find money or support for Lavi but Korea can fund its fighter programmes with US engines. even India is using US engines.