Should china go for more J-8 or concerate on new desings like FC-1??

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
trkl said:
I wouldn't call FC-1 a third generation aircraft. It uses a lot of technologies that only appear starting with the fourth generation. The reason why it is not as capable as most other fourth generation aircraft is because of it's small size and desire to keep the cost low.

thts why its called three plus. it still lacks the advanced radars, design, and ecm of fourth generation.
 

Sea Dog

Junior Member
VIP Professional
MIGleader said:
thts why its called three plus. it still lacks the advanced radars, design, and ecm of fourth generation.

That's very true. I believe it would be possible to retro-fit some airframes with newer equipment. If China went that way, the cost savings from not having the new design might pay for the upgrades.
 

trkl

New Member
MIGleader said:
thts why its called three plus. it still lacks the advanced radars, design, and ecm of fourth generation.

The radar that it uses is just a smaller version of the radar on the J-10, and radars are easy to upgrade.

In terms of design, the latest models of FC-1 look like an F-16 with the LERX of an F/A-18E/F and the intakes of an F-35 JSF. Looks like a 4th generation fighter to me.

In terms of ECM, does anyone even know what kind of ecm it will have? And how hard is it to upgrade ecm anyway?
 

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
trkl said:
The radar that it uses is just a smaller version of the radar on the J-10, and radars are easy to upgrade.

In terms of design, the latest models of FC-1 look like an F-16 with the LERX of an F/A-18E/F and the intakes of an F-35 JSF. Looks like a 4th generation fighter to me.

In terms of ECM, does anyone even know what kind of ecm it will have? And how hard is it to upgrade ecm anyway?

please do some reaserch. the fc-1 currently uses the italien grifo radar. the
j-10 is fitted with the kjl-3 radar designed by the nanjing research institute of technology. the kjl-3 is not a particularly advanced radar anyways. the fc-1 does have root edges, but no where near the use of edges on the su-27 or mig-29. the fc-1 is a fifteen million dollar fighter designed for export. do not expect it to compare with a 30 million dollar front line fighter. in every scenarion that has fc-1 vs. fourth gen, the fc-1 loses.

the fc-1s intakes look nothing liek a jsfs. they are both simply side mounted.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
actually, sinodefense is wrong here. It's pretty clear that KLJ-7 or KLJ-10 which is equipped on JF-17 has mutli-engagement capability. This was confirmed by PAF officials recently. The reason that Grifo S7 was chosen by PAF was due to its claim that it can track 16 and engage 6 (I doubt it has ever achieved that), since it still haven't passed PAF standard (I read on PDF).

In my opinion, if J-8F actually costs 20 million to build, why are we still building it? What a waste of money.
 

trkl

New Member
MIGleader said:
please do some reaserch. the fc-1 currently uses the italien grifo radar. the
j-10 is fitted with the kjl-3 radar designed by the nanjing research institute of technology. the kjl-3 is not a particularly advanced radar anyways. the fc-1 does have root edges, but no where near the use of edges on the su-27 or mig-29. the fc-1 is a fifteen million dollar fighter designed for export. do not expect it to compare with a 30 million dollar front line fighter. in every scenarion that has fc-1 vs. fourth gen, the fc-1 loses.

the fc-1s intakes look nothing liek a jsfs. they are both simply side mounted.

The current prototypes don't have the DSI or the big LERX, but the next one (number 4) will. It should look something like this:
F2005092106150707338.jpg


The FC-1's radar might not be as advanced as the latest US radars, but it is far more advanced than the radars that aircraft like F-15 and F-16 started out with.
 

vincelee

Junior Member
where the hell did you get the figure that a J-8F costs 20 mil? That's the projected FC-1 per unit price, assuming the No 4 prototype is fairly close to the production model.
 
Top