LCA was intended to incorporate a level of RCS reduction

The requirment for composites were due to the fact the LCA was underpowered and to heavy. Using composites lowered the takeoff weight since there was no alternative engine to use.

Large platforms by their very SIZE have more surface area to reflect radar waves by.

Yet that does not mean the LCA has a lower RCS because it is “an extremely small aircraft”

You were claiming the LCA has a smaller RCS signiture. Burden of proof is on you my dear.

And the LCA we must remember is an extremely small aircraft, plus is designed to have a low RCS

The plane was designed to be small and utilize composite materials. It wasn’t designed from the on set to have reduced RCS features.

And about the smaller aircraft having a smaller RCS, this might be true, but the RCS is mostle determinded by the shaping of the airframe instead of its actual size. So to claim it has a smaller RCS because of its size is ludacris.

We are comparing two different fighters, they were designed for different missions and have different capabilities, the J-10 being the better mud mover

For what its worth, the Russian SIBNIA institute

I’m still trying to find that article. The only reference i have of it is from BR forum and its only that little bit of information.

We need the whole article to see what his actually refering and motive

SOC,

I’m almost in total agreement with your post, BUT one member at this forum who worked on the LAVI project claimed it was american and british engineers which formed the majority of the design group. This version would make more sense considering israel had never designed a airplane before. What most reports state is israel’s help with avonics which was israels strong department considering all the EW and avonics for their own planes they developed

I just happened to come across this forum by chance, but you may be interested to know that I was one of the design engineers working on the Lavi project in 1983 thru 1986. I am not Israeli, I am a British aerospace structural designer, and there were nothing like 1,500 engineers on the project. There were about 500 in total, mostly British, with very few Israelis.

The Israelis mostly headed up groups, but relied heavily on British and American design expertise. Since the Lavi was cancelled some time ago, and most Israelis were made redundant, I cannot see how China would need any input from Israel.

Key forum Aviation. member goof
Key forum aviation

you think that 10 years ago they would not do the same for a more complex aircraft like is the J-10?

This my friend is called a smoke screen. I asked for PROOF, i got nothing.

When you suggest something, you must have some proof instead of speculation.

you have a Russian engine in the J-10, radar proposals for the J-10 weaponry proposals

The only thing you can come up with is engine and two proposals :rolleyes: . Is that all the russian help?

How again are proposals somehow helping the development?. Considering that NONE of them were furfilled, how can you claim these fields as russian help?

And ukrainian technology not Russian technology

Russia`s involvement goes beyond the engine and that is a know fact but you still denied what russian reports say.

Can you name some then? :rolleyes: