The first single-seat FC-20 prototype was rolled out by CAC last December
By Prasun K. Sengupta
…The FC-20 has a wingspan of 8.78 metres, overall length of 14.57 metres, height of 4.78 metres, and a gross wing area of 33.1 square metres.[/B] …
To be honest !!! That’s completely BS ! …. There are – at least as I know – n no official statements that this is the FC-20, even if it can be assumed that Pakistan might get this model (but I can’t think that this is a model only build and developed for the PAF !)
Also, these dimensions are still completely wrong. From a report early this year, we now know the reat dimensions of the reagular J-10 … and even after some changes, the new model won’t be that “small”
IMO … just some guesswork and nothing important !
Deino
… and besides that !
Su-50 …. Su-50MKI …. Su-35BM Flanker-E …. It smells like Dr. Carlo Kopp’s http://www.ausairpower.net/ 😡
Deino
48 + 2 that are already there = 50
—
Where’s Scooter and the rest of the wanks that kept saying the RuAF wasn’t getting anything 😉
O.k. … but I don’t think the RuAF will get 901 and 902 !
Anyway good news;
Deino
Hey … that’s realy good new’s for Sukhoi !
But just to note: 48 isn’t 50 !?? :diablo:
Deino
The EJ200 or F-414 are temporary solution to meet operational and thrust needs of Tejas Mk2 , the Kaveri is the definitive variant that the IAF is waiting for.
….
And as far as I know (maybe I misunderstod the news) has beed abandonded for the Tejas.
Ravi Sharma
‘Kaveri’ under development at the GTRE for 20 years
Snecma offer did not meet IAF requirements
BANGALORE: It’s final: the indigenous Kaveri aero engine, under development at the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) for 20 years with the specific objective of powering the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, will now not fulfil that task.
The LCA will not be operationalised with the Kaveri, since GTRE will not be able to satisfy the Indian Air Force’s requirement for a low altitude, high speed engine with a thrust of at least 90 kilo Newton (kN) within the extended timeframe, weight or volume.
GTRE officials told The Hindu that they hoped a Kaveri engine co-developed by the GTRE and the French aero engine house Snecma could at least become, in the distant future, the power for the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) that is still to be designed. “The IAF agrees that the MCA should be designed around a 90 kN thrust Snecma-GTRE Kaveri engine. The Kaveri could be tested on the LCA, but the aircraft won’t be operationalised.”
Conditions not metThe final blow for the Kaveri engine project, which was launched in 1989 as “the engine for the LCA,” and which has cost the exchequer over Rs. 2,000 crore in development, comes after the IAF rejected the offer from Snecma to co-develop the Kaveri along with the GTRE.
In 2005, after GTRE indicated that it would not be able to develop the core technology (hot end parts) for the Kaveri on its own, help was sought: France’s Snecma and Russia’s NPO Saturn made offers to collaborate with the GTRE, the former being pre-selected as the technical partner.
The IAF’s rejection of the French offer comes after a committee, headed by Air Vice-Marshal M. Matheswaran, pointed out that the Snecma offer did not meet the Air Force’s performance (air staff) requirements, did not give the GTRE the core engine technology it was looking for, and did not help eliminate deficiencies in the Kaveri’s design.
“Assimilate” technologyBoth Snecma and the GTRE contested the IAF’s stand, saying that the relevant design technology would, in stages, be assimilated to the Indian defence laboratories.
According to Snecma’s chairman and chief executive officer Philippe Petitcolin, his company could pass on the design and manufacturing technology to Indian entities as soon as it “could assimilate it.” Mr. Petitcolin told The Hindu that collaboration could save the GTRE at least 20 years in developing an aero engine.
The IAF committee, which also has members from other key constituents of the LCA programme, suggested restructuring of the GTRE, with research and development being made the area of focus. “GTRE had unrealistically promised to make the Kaveri operational in seven years,” an IAF official said.:mad:
see: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1428725&postcount=10
IMO it is more than reasonable that the Tejas should be put into service with a foreign engine …
Deino :confused:
Just wanted to post two interesting links …
Mirage Low-level bombing:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1246306617/last-1246349594/PAF+low+AGL+practice..
and some from the JF-17 testings:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1246046197/last-1246115726/THUNDER%21
What I then noticed just kept my interest … isn’t the blade-antenna on to of the JF-17S and Mirage’s spine identical ??? Any idea if it’s Chinese on the Mirage or a Western one on the JF-17 ??
Deino :confused:
The Chine drawing is seemingly much better than the previous one and accord with the photo which snaged from that PDF file.
Hey … once again !!! That’s pure and simpkle fan-art … and not even a good one and the one depicted in that pdf is a CG !!! Maybe we should rename that tread.
I really don’t undestand You, … if that would be a Chinese drawing for the XXJ everybody would laugth … here You are discussing about one or two guns, turreted or not, if, if if … it’s rudiculous.
Again … let’s sit and wait, sooner (I hope very soon) or later we will se that bird … and I’m sure, we all will be surprised and impressed, but discussing these things is plain stupid.
Deino 😮
Sorry guys, … but why on earth do You make such a fuss and discussions forth and back about some data given at wikipedia !????! :confused:
Does anyone know who has written these “Specifications (projected)” … ???
I think when I have some time I could do the same for some specifications on the Chinese XXJ and everyone would laugth about me … and all of You would be right in doing so.
So … let’s sit and wait, sooner (I hope very soon) or later we will se that bird …
Deino
I agree with Xinhui … only in one point he is wrong; the type shown is not the more modern JH-7A, but the older JH-7.
Deino
As QuantumFX said, so far nobody knows it exactly.
I’m still curious why they are nearly right in between the other two pylons – and very close to both, as so they would prevent the huge fuel-tanks with its very shallow pylons to be carried and if they are ECM-pods they are also too close for other heavy loads on the middle pylon. Another possibility of being “only” a pod carrying telemetry systems during testing is IMO not plausible, esp with its dielectric front and rear ends. Besides that it seems to be a fixed “device” and not removable.
IMO now I’m no longer sure that this “huge” pod/pylon is actually a pylon as for a real pylon it lacks the attachment point un the bottom.
Therefore I tend to assume a combined ECM/EW-chaff & flare system within that “pylon” or pod …. maybe it’s a multirole pod with space for several options like chaff & flares, possibly a emitter/locater device for SEAD-missions !?
Deino
PS: one interesting side note is are the new “green” surfaces on the bottom-side of the wing – similar to the colour of the centre-section; maybe a hint for the additional useage of composite materials !??!
You seemed to ASSume that Farnborough must mean the place in the UK eh? :rolleyes:
Any Farnborough associated event could reveal more information on the PAK-FA, whether it flies in August this year, or not.
Yes … especially in 2010 !
But Ohhh that’s exactly the way I like it !! 😡 Writing dumb BS … getting a correction and then becoming rude …
And even after all of us see their fails … no, no need to say o.k. I made a mistake, maybe I’ve learned a bit and You were right !! … that’s what I call “code of conduct”.
Deino
http://www.bahraininternationalairshow.com/Site/Content/bahrain/
The first Farnborough associated event is in Jan 2010.
Do you understand?
I believe the “official” event is in July? Which one Pogosyan was referring to it is hard to say.
If that’s the way You read and understand a text, then I understand, why You only understand, what You want to read. So it’s also clear, why You don’t like my assumption on Mr. Pogosyan’s text, as You don’t like to read and underrstand its content.
But let me help You out:
It seems as You mixed “FARNBOROUGH INTERNATIONAL Ltd.”, an organiser, which helps to organise the “Bahrain International Airshow” with the “FARNBOROUGH INTERNATIONAL AIRSHOW” itself.
Only a tiny mistake like …
… Asked about that prediction today, he told reporters that Sukhoi would have more information about first flight at the Farnborough air show next July.
and that will be in July 2010 if You like to understand or not !!!
http://www.1st4londontheatre.co.uk/tickets-1122474047.shtml
Deino 😀
“the PAK-FA will fly in 2009”
“
Are you purposely being an pain in the rear or are you really that bad?
The Farnborough Airshow is in Bahrain.
And what is your evidence that that’s not what Pogosyan meant? Read the article that Otaku posted.
ÄÄÄhhmmm I don’t know what’s wrong with You to be that rude in Your postings, esp. You are completely wrong !
Since when is Farnborough Airshow in Bahrain ????? That’s the most stupid thing I’ve ever heard and that wont be true by calling names or getting rude.
Deino 😡
The Stephen Pope article is correct.
Pogosyan said that Farnborough will reveal INFORMATION on the PAK-FA – but we’ll see the bird this year likely.
That’s Your assumption … but not the meaning of Mr. Pogosyan’s words.
Farnborough is in Bahrain – in Jan 2010, so that’s I guess when they plan to reveal information on the jet. I wonder if the first flight will get any technical specs out.
I think now You are wrong ?!!!!
Farnborough in Hampshire, UK: http://maps.google.de/maps?sourceid=navclient&rlz=1T4IRFA_enDE286DE286&q=Farnborough&um=1&ie=UTF-8&split=0&gl=de&ei=zfY4SuC0MtTb-QbjvKHYAw&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1
Deino 😉