Indeed, we found in the Thales documentation a RDY400, which is exactly the same than the RC400.
So there is : RDY, RDY2 and the same product (for me) called or RC400, or RDY3, or RDY400. Maybe with different software adjustments.
Pakistan AirForce : Updates & Discussions
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
So there is : RDY, RDY2 and the same product (for me) called or RC400, or RDY3, or RDY400. Maybe with different software adjustments.
Then Pakistan is getting 30 second hand RC400 which India bought for mirage 2005 ?
The sale of these radars can be stopped if France objects to it .
Permission of country of origin is required for military items to be resold to a 3rd country
It's a old history these famous RC400 (or RDY400) for pakistan...
For me they were never cleared because France chose India (mainly after the Karachi bomb attack against french tech and ingeneers working there for Agosta deal). It's a dead affair.
same for Mica.
True. Pakistanis make very good mechanics. Excellent for overhauling. Back in the day when I was in the Gulf, they'd take apart an open type reciprocating compressor and inevitably after overhauling, they used to leave behind 2-3 parts. Especially the Pashtuns amongst them. The Indians, on an average left behind 1-2 parts. The Irish were the best. Except sometimes they fit in a square peg in a round hole. Using mallets. "Aye, it's forced fit, inn'it guvernor? "
PAC Kamra has today rolled out the first JF-17 to be overhauled locally by the Aircraft Rebuild Factory.
The single-seat fighter and Chinese mono-jet J-10C is finally offered for export under the reference of J-10CE, E for Export. His model is presented at Dubai Airshow 2019.
I have no idea why PAF do not go for it. At least in small numbers.
Added cost and no extra capability versus the JF-17. Even the J-10C is inferior to the F-16. The Pakistanis are better off sticking with the JF-17.
The J-10C is no different from the LCA Mk1A. And this is not even considering electronics.
J-10 is far better than JF-17 in almost every way!. It is the only eastern fighter single engine that can match the versatility of F-16. Don't mix LCA here it will get depressing.
J-10 is far better than JF-17 in almost every way!. It is the only eastern fighter single engine that can match the versatility of F-16. Don't mix LCA here it will get depressing.
Nah, man. With the exception of higher TWR and maybe more space for avionics, the J-10 and LCA Mk1 are practically the same. Both have the same limitations.
And no, it's impossible for the J-10 in its current state to even compare with the F-16. If you bring the J-10 into MMRCA evaluations, it wouldn't even have crossed the first phase paper evaluations. The reason is as simple as it has only 3 underwing hardpoints, the same as LCA and JF-17. This is the biggest drawback of the J-10. Although the J-10 has a few extra hardpoints on the fuselage, it can't carry AAMs there.
Don't matter which J-10 it is, all have the same problem.
There really is not much of a difference. Both have 2 tanks, 2 A2S and 2 WVR. The JF-17 is the same as well.
Apart from that, the range on internal fuel is also not much different between the two, 50Km difference. Once the Mk1A comes into the picture, the difference is practically gone.
Now look at the F-16.
This is what you need to qualify for MMRCA at the very minimum. Basically, 2 tanks, 2 A2S, 2 BVR, 2WVR. It's impossible for LCA and J-10 to achieve this without severe performance degradation.
Yes.
Both LCA Mk1/Mk1A and J-10 can carry only 4 AAMs with 2 tanks.
Apart from that, both aircraft have been designed for air defence with limited strike capability (J-10B and C), so the avionics reflect that. Neither aircraft have an internal SPJ, both have to carry pods. At least Mk1A will carry an advanced Israeli AESA radar and EW suite.
The J-10's payload is higher, but it's worthless because it doesn't have enough hardpoints. Range is pretty much the same both with and without tanks. LCA's performance is similar to M-2000 and F-16, so the J-10 should also be the same.
A major advantage the LCA has over J-10 (and even M-2000 and F-16) is that it has a very low RCS in comparison. With I-Derby ER and ASRAAM, LCA's weapons are also better.
J-10 has atleast 11 hardpoints while Tejas has 7 hardpoints.
Dual racks will further increase the J-10's hardpoint to 13. The J-10C also features an AESA radar and also integrated asvanced EW Suite. So I think it is too early to say Tejas better than J-10.
Also Derby and ASRAAM missiles are pretty new. Same goes for competing Chinese PL-15 and PL-10. None of the missiles are battle tested so we can't assume the real capability only with stats.
Few American patriots proudly boasts a lot about the AIM-9 missiles. But in 2017, an AIM-9X failed to hit a Syrian Su-22 during live combat. Really embarrassing for US and the boys.
That image has been photoshopped. There are no wingtip hardpoints.
Actual plane.
So there are only 2 usable hardpoints under each wing, no different from JF-17 and LCA Mk1.
Derby is a very old missile, and ASRAAM is far more modern than anything the Chinese have.