Thanks alot, Israel...

[Bort]

Israel likely has no greater friend than the United States, yet they were more than willing to export the design of the Lavi, a cancelled Israeli fighter funded by US bucks to the Chinese. Their new J-10 looks and performs an awful lot like the Lavi. Oh, Israel...
The story:http://atimes.com/atimes/China/DL04Ad01.html

The Lavi

The J-10

[Ducimus]

Looks like an F16.

[TteFAboB]

I hope there's a secret transponder built-in, so well hidden not even Israelis would be able to find it if they wanted to, and a remote satellite pilot ejection device, besides from the usual self-destruction system, just in case the ejector seat fails.

Because that's what the Chinese put inside the industrial goods they export to us, you know.

[bradclark1]

Clinton gives them missile technology, Israel gives them Jet Fighters. Gee, nothing like shooting yourself in the head!!!!

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Looks like an F16.

Doesn't look like any F-16 I've ever seen.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by scandium

Doesn't look like any F-16 I've ever seen.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

I guess China got tired of copying Russian technology.

[JSLTIGER]

There is actually a distinct, major difference between the two planes, that being the placement of the wing. The F-16 is of a mid-mounted wing design, while the Lavi features a low mounted wing. This is actually a very significant aerodynamic difference.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by JSLTIGER

There is actually a distinct, major difference between the two planes, that being the placement of the wing. The F-16 is of a mid-mounted wing design, while the Lavi features a low mounted wing. This is actually a very significant aerodynamic difference.

The Lavi/J10 turns better?

[Chock]

I think the old argument of Chinese stuff being inferior to US and European aircraft is wearing a bit thin these days, in actual fact the Chinese are proving very go ahead in these areas and one has to consider that many of their military aircraft programmes are not merely aimed at arming themselves, but aimed at the lucrative cheap mid range fighter market which has a big gap in it, that they are intending to fill.

It is wrong to assume that these Chinese aircraft are reliant on Russian technology too. The Chinese know that sales of their aircraft would of course be hurt by a reliance on Russian materiel, and as such then have not created either the J-10 or the J-17 to be hindered by such reliance. This also removes many of the strings that come with purchases in the nature of either the US or the Russians, and the Chinese are well aware that such attachments are a major turn off for buyers if they mean sanctions can interfere with maintenance. This is one of the reasons why the Pakistanis are a major partner, as (notwithstanding their fragile war on terror alliance with the US) their military is not limited by being in bed with the US, or the Russians (as their longstanding enemy, India is).

In addition to the J-10, the FC-1 Xiaolong (J-17 to the West) is intended to fill the gap left by any other aircraft suitable as a viable more modern replacement for the 'second line' fighters of Western and (former) Eastern Bloc origin, namely the MiG-21/Shenyang J-7 and the Northrop F20 Tigershark/F-5 Freedom Fighter.

Aerobatic capabilities aside, success with a combat aircraft these days tends to be more about avionics and missile capabilities than maneueverability. That assuming this capability would succeed was certainly a mistake in Vietnam, with unreliable Sparrows and early Sidewinders, but the technology these days can now (more often than not) live up to what the brochure claims it can do. As such, sustained turn rate is probably not as important as instantaneous turn rate for aerial combat in localised conflicts, that and a combination of helmet-mounted sighting systems and all-aspect missiles with a fast rate of turn can prove a winner, with (more than ever) the aircraft merely being the means to put these in a halfway decent firing position.

Cheap as it is, the FC-1 is capable of launching the AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM and the much more capable French MBDA Mica BVR missiles, with the Mica also offering a close-in capabilty too. And even if these are not available, the Sino SD-10/PL-12, is another option, all of these missiles can integrate with the FC-1's Nanjing K-7 radar (which the PAF claim is a lot better than the APG-66 fitted in most export versions of the F-16). And all this technology is cheap too, with an FC-1 costing just 15 million bucks, which is peanuts for a fighter with that capability, so expect this to sell like hot cakes.

And the widespread use of these aircraft will doubtless lead to more upgraded capability. It is already planned to add ground-attack capabilities to the cheaper FC-1, including the ability to launch the Denel Raptor II stand off weapon, so GPS-style accuracy is in the bag for even this bargain-basement aircraft. One can imagine that the more expensive and far more capable J-10 is going to do a lot better than that too.

Being a joint Sino/Pakistan project, the FC-1 will also equip the fifth generation AIM-9 Sidewinder, and the Boeing Helmet mounted sighting system, which the Pakistanis got when they ordered the F-16 means that this technology is available too, so blaming Israel for a technology drain (as this thread originally did) is only half the story, and it is clear that the PAF purchase has something to do with the F-16 looks of several Chinese projects, including the J-10 and J-17.

All the sales revenue for the FC-1 will of course help fund the much more capable J-10, and it is likely that China and Pakistan (at the very least) will use this method.

Don't underestimate your (potential) enemies. The days of cannon-fodder export MiG-21s with a shaky tube-filled High Lark radar, are long gone.

Chock

[lesrae]

Originally Posted by scandium

Doesn't look like any F-16 I've ever seen.

From that angle I agree with Ducimus, it has strong similarities in the radome, intake and cockpit areas.

http://www.afterburnerseminars.com/r...hi_res/F16.jpg

Edit: Started writing this before Ducimus reply showed up

[Ducimus]

Im not saying it IS an F16, only it looks like one, obviously VERY closely related to one,and derived from F16 technology aquired from the US. THey may as well have given china an F16 for all intents and purposes.

The only MAJOR visible difference between the two planes from the pics above is the front winglet on isreals version.

[Happy Times]

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j10.asp

[TLAM Strike]

No worries we got the 100 mile range AIM-54 Phoenixes to deal with them before they are even in our area... Oh wait... Sh!t!

[Bort]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

No worries we got the 100 mile range AIM-54 Phoenixes to deal with them before they are even in our area... Oh wait... Sh!t!

:rotfl: