If it had been built, how would it have performed against the godking that is the F-16?
>>65397405Worse, unlike the f-20 tigershark.
>>65397405But I did have breakfast.
>>65397417>f-20 tigershark
>>65397418The claim the J10 came from tech transfer of the shuttered Lavi was a Russian claim that has yet to actually be corroborated. It's possible it happened, but pretty unlikely.
The F-18L would have been awesome.
>>65397429Nigga, there are photos of Chinese engineers crawling around the Lavi.
>>65397883If you're talking about the Chinese delegation visit, I would argue it was just China indigenously copying the canard design they saw, which was already prototyped by the J9. The actual J10 and Lavi have badically nothing else in common. J10 is stupid heavy, completely different engine system, trash systems integration, etc. Seeing as the entire selling point of the Lavi was its next gen (at the time) systems, if a tech transfer would have happened, it would have been the actual good part of the design.
>>65397405>>65397418implessive Ravi
>>65397883Okay, and?
>>65397985>>65398175Adding that intial US reactions to the J10 were basically nothing. They thought it was a joke (it was), which for the US stategic analysts who tend to be extremely cautious, meant that the plane was simply not a threat. Comapred to the Lavi, which worried the US primarily because they thought it could be a legitimately performant F-16 alternative at a fraction of the cost. It wasn't as good as the F-16 of course (few things are), but it was "good enough" to the point where the admin threatened to pull funding if the project wasn't cancelled. Israel cancelled it, the rest is history.A takeaway from this is that the J10 has nothing in common with the Lavi outside of basic design philosophy. You can absolutely make the argument that the chinese delegation got these ideas while inspecting the Lavi, but that's not what a tech transfer is. Also keep in mind that the Lavi was an early Gen 4 prototype. Access to its canard dedign was basically a nothingburger compared to getting access to stealth or today's next gen airframes.
>>65397985Come the fuck on, now, Ping Wing. You and I both know the J-10 is an almost 1:1 copy of the Lavi Israel allowed the CCP to copy. Even the cockpit is a 1:1 copy. The only difference between the Lavi and J-10 is the chinks had to stretch it to allow room for the shitty Russian engine they had to use as it had to be bigger than the P&W engine the Lavi used to keep a similar thrust to weight ratio.
>>65398234>Comapred to the Lavi, which worried the US primarily because they thought it could be a legitimately performant F-16 alternative at a fraction of the cost.If the US was worried about the Lavi they wouldn't have provided funding, industrial experts, and components for Israel to build the Lavi. The Lavi was more expensive to build than an F-16, and the only way Israel could've built them is if the US continued to fund them. The reason Israel cancelled the Lavi is because the US cancelled the continued funding of it. Just stop, Ping Pong Wei.
>>65398243>>65398253You think I'm a chinkshill because what, I'm not starting every reply with death to china? Pretty much every post I mention how dogshit the J10 is, not sure why you think I'm simping for china. To your points, my argument is that the chinese literally just copied a bunch of external shit. Pretty common behavior in military design, even more so with china. The Lavi was explictly cancelled because of concerns over competition, not funding. The funding issue was Israel's concern, which is why they chose to cancel it, but from the US' standpoint, the entire process was completely political from the get go. The US and Israel both ultimately came to the conclusion that purchase of F-16s would be more effective and better for everyone, which I think is generally true, but it doesn't mean the US wasn't worried about competition. Lots of "cost" baked into aircraft is based on how much you can sell to other countries, so from the US' perspective, it wasn't cost of the Lavi that was the issue, it was the potential missed sales on their own systems.Also you mention the only difference being the engine but that's literally not true lol. The J10 is packed full of chinkware that barely functuons vs. the Lavi using actual legitimate EW and sensors systems. Again, that was the entire selling point of the Lavi.
>>65398285>The J10 is packed full of chinkware that barely functuons vs. the Lavi using actual legitimate EW and sensors systems. Again, that was the entire selling point of the Lavi.pic relatedReminder:>Israel sold Python-3's to the chinks, enabling them to self-start PL-8 and PL-9 development.>The Type 1473 Pulse Doppler radar on the J-10A is a modified copy of the E/LM-2035 originally designed by Elbit for the Lavi, which was offered for sale to the PRC.>Song Wencong, the fucking chief designer under Chengdu for the J-10A, traveled to Israel and met with the designers of the Lavi and is reported to have received significant amounts of data from IAI during this time period in which Israel had just canceled the Lavi and was initiating diplomatic relations with China.>The State Department had internal reports at the time that stated they believed that technology transfer had occurred.>The Office of Naval Intelligence stated in an internal report that "United States technology has been acquired by China through Israel in the form of the Lavi fighter and possibly surface-to-air missile technology">The cockpit layout of the J-10A is clearly heavily inspired/copied from the Lavi and likely utilizes some copies of Jew components. (Same MFDs, same up front control panel, same location for stores jettison, engine readouts, G-meter, cautions, 6-pack, etc...)>David Lari, director general of Israel's Ministry of Defense, acknowledged in an Associated Press interview that "some technology on aircraft" had been sold to China and that some Israeli companies may not have "clean hands".>The Russians from the Siberian Aeronautical Research Institute sent to assist the chinks with understanding ground-up aircraft design, stated, "The aircraft is more or less a version of the Lavi".The J-10 is the production version of the Lavi. It is the chink F-22 to their kike YF-22. You are a dumb gorilla nigger
>>65398243Aerodynamically (see canards placement) J-10 is Eurofighter, not Lavi.
>>65398234>>65398285>inspecting the LaviTell me about any other military project by anyone else that Ching Ping Pong was allowed to ''inspect''>nothingburgerThat's not the word anyone would call the unfettered access to a prototype weapon system>The J10 is packed full of chinkware that barely functuons vs. the Lavi using actual legitimate EW and sensors systemsSo the juden didn't completely sell out. Most moral partner y'all.
>>65398234>t. Ching chong ping pongNice try Zhang
>>65400617Nein, nein, nein, nein, nein.Still close coupled canard. Above and slightly ahead of the main wing.EF canards are very obviously much farther ahead and not interfering with the flow over the main wing.
>>65400617>Aerodynamically (see canards placement) J-10 is Eurofighter, not Lavi.
>>65400545These bad boys pre-data NASA. A thousand tons to orbit would have been quite useful.
>>65400545
>>65401046Nuke, nuke, nuke and the thing was to be the size of a tower block.The nuke dispenser was mindboggling because you needed to adjust the size of the next nuke on the fly.
Dassault Mirage G, my beloved, you were too good for this world. We were so close to getting a Frogcat.
>>65397405>cancelled projectsAlready a thread:>>65390197
