1.Comparison of HAL Tejas LCA (Light Combat Aircraft) and PAC JF-17 Thunder
Is Tejas Mark-1A Better Than Chinese-Pakistani JF-17 Fighter?How does Tejas Mk 1A compare with JF 17 block 3 in terms of combat abilities and technology?
Instagram-[ Ссылка ]
Tejas Mark 1A Can Outperform Entire Pakistani Fleet, Most of Chinese.
JF-17 Thunder is a decent enough fighter aircraft with good agility, radar, sensors & diverse ordnance. It is cheap & is made in huge numbers. On the other hand, the LCA Tejas is India’s first real attempt to make a fighter aircraft but still, it is not less menacing by any means. When the JF-17 is pitted against the LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A on practical parameters that decide which aircraft is better, things become much clear:
Radar: JF-17’s radar is KLJ-7 which has a detection range of 105 km for a 5 m2 target against 150 km for the Israeli radar of Tejas, the ELM-2032. This is a huge advantage in a face to face scenario as the Tejas can detect & lock the JF-17 before the JF-17 comes to know about the presence of Tejas in the region.
Thrust to weight ratio: Though both aircraft have identical empty weight (~6,500 kg) & maximum take-off weight (13,500 kg), but JF-17 has an 85 kN engine whereas the Tejas has a 90 kN engine. This gives the JF-17 a maximum T/W ratio of 0.84 to 0.95. The Tejas has a maximum thrust to weight ratio of 1.00 to 1.07 depending on the fuel & missile load. LCA’s better thrust to weight ratio means it can maneuver more aggressively.
JF-17 uses Chinese missiles which include PL-5, PL-8 in short range. The LCA Tejas uses the proven but old R-73 & will be using the ASRAAM or MICA-IR in the future. As of now, in the short-range, both the aircraft have equal capabilities but after the integration of ASRAAM or the MICA-IR, LCA’s capability would be much better.
In the medium to long-range, the JF-17 uses the PL-12 missile which is a single pulse missile. The Tejas uses the Israeli I-Derby-ER missile which uses a dual pulse missile with a longer range of 100+ km. In the future, the Tejas will use the Astra Mk1 & Mk2 too. Though the range is just one of the many parameters to determine which missile is better, Tejas still has an upper edge in BVR combat.
Materials & Service life: The JF-17 has an all-metal construction. This leads to early metal fatigue with a life of only 4,000 flying flight hours (20–25 years service life). The Tejas is majorly made up of composites with 45% by weight & 95% by surface area. Hence the Tejas has an in-service life of 9,000 flying hours which might be extended to 12,000 hours (40 years). This is twice the life of the JF-17.
JF-17 has an RCS of 3.5 m2 since it has an all-metal construction. The Tejas has an RCS of 0.5 m2 thanks to the composites which don’t reflect the radar waves back to the source. With a more powerful radar, the Tejas can hence detect & lock the JF-17 from significantly longer ranges & fire a BVR missile even before it appears on the JF-17 radar screen.
Engines: The JF-17 uses the Russian RD-93 engine which are derivatives of the RD-33 engine used in MiG-29. These engines are very cheap but have a poor reputation for requiring heavy maintenance. The mean time between overhaul (MTBO) is only 300 hours & the engine life is 1,000 – 2,000 hours. The LCA Tejas uses the western GE F404 engine which is the benchmark of reliability for turbine engines worldwide. The mean time between overhaul (MTBO) is 2,000 hours & the engine life is 6,000 hours. This means lesser depot visits for engine servicing.
#tejasjetvsjf17 #tejasmark1avsjf17block3deatils
