Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

[[--Leo--]]

Is J10B likely to get the naval role in PAF ? i.e. replacing current Mirages !!!

Sorry to say but i don,t think so PAF is looking for J-11 H Which is naval version but not finalized

 

[SBD-3]

that is one serious statement bro,however i would like to know that how do u rate AESA's like AESA A is better than AESA B....just on the basis of the amount of T/R modules used in the AESA or are there other factors involved,if other factors are involved please discuss them considering J-10B's AESA against JSF's AESA

Of course other factors are also important I am not downplaying them, yet the number of TR modules do give a fair hint of sophistication of AESA since these modules serve as the core of AESA operations, transmit and receive signals. The greater the TRMs, the greater the capability (not necessarily range) and effectiveness of AESA

 

[Mani2020]

Of course other factors are also important I am not downplaying them, yet the number of TR modules do give a fair hint of sophistication of AESA since these modules serve as the core of AESA operations, transmit and receive signals. The greater the TRMs, the greater the capability (not necessarily range) and effectiveness of AESA

AESA effectiveness also depends upon

The extent to which and AESA radar has the ability to form multiple beams to scan without mechanical steering
To use each TRM for different roles concurrently
The extent to which an AESA's multiple wave and scanning frequencies can create multiple difficulties for traditional, correlation-type radar detectors.

Also the more the modules of an AESA radar the more advantage it has since each module operates independently of the others, single failures have little effect on the operation of the system as a whole

 

[siegecrossbow]

Pretty neat J-10B video:

 

[TaimiKhan]

1- SC, not sure......
2-TVC, Likely, but not a necessity amid growing weapons sophistication
3-Stealthy nozzels? do you mean heat signature reduction? if you do then no, but with advanced HMS and irfa-optical seekers being in use, this advantage is of no use, if it exists.
J-10B has AESA while none of these fighters till date (except block 60 or may be su-35) has operational AESA in place. J-10B's AESA is more potent than Block 60's containing 1000TRMs and equal to JSF's AESA. Secondly J-10B is expected to come with serious sensor fusion, much more than on any of its contenders.

F-22, some F-15s & F/A-18 E/F are also operational with AESA radars.

 

[fatman17]

based on this extract from a defence paper, dont see how the J-10A/B will be in PAF service anytime soon...

Power problems

Engines are among the selective technologies that China must, for now, continue to import. While AVIC intends to invest CNY10 billion (USD1.55 billion) over the next five years in high-performance engine development and to restructure its research and development (R&D) operations, self-sufficiency in this area could still be five to 10 years away.

The Chinese Ministry of Defence is certainly still hedging its bets, having signed a USD500 million deal with Russia for 123 AL-31FN turbofan engines (which already power much of the PLAAF) in June despite Chinese media reports in late 2010 that the domestically developed WS-10 turbofan engine had entered series production and was now powering the J-11B. Indeed, early production of the WS-10 is reported to have been encountering problems and nobody knows when more advanced Chinese-designed engines like the WS-15 - which could power high-performance aircraft like the J-20 - might be ready for use in the field.

A shortage of engines may be one factor that accounts for China's unusually slow rate of aircraft production. Cliff pointed out that only around 12 J-10s have been coming off the production line per year so far, compared with the 100 more complex F-35s that will be built annually once that programme is fully up and running. "What this means is that China either still has technical constraints on the production side or that it has very high production costs," he said. This has potentially important consequences for the PLAAF's hopes of replacing the large numbers of legacy aircraft in its inventory. Hundreds of these older aircraft, such as the MiG-19/Q-5, the MiG-21/J-7 and the Chinese-designed J-8, still make up two-thirds of the PLAAF's strength and slow production rates suggest that this state of affairs will not change any time soon.

Slow production rates and high costs would also inhibit the export potential of the J-10 and the FC-1/JF-17, both of which have attracted only one foreign customer so far: Pakistan. China has generally been able to compensate for the inefficiency of its uncompetitive aviation sector by effectively handing blank cheques to aircraft manufacturers like Chengdu and Shenyang. However, this level of funding will not continue indefinitely and Beijing will be unwilling to export aircraft at a significant loss, even if the sales have strategic value.

High costs and slow production rates could also eventually tip the balance in favour of acquiring new Russian aircraft. If AVIC succeeds in getting on top of these problems within the next five years and also succeeds in mastering the development of core systems such as engines and avionics, then the PLAAF should be inducting the J-20 - or one of the other fifth-generation designs that AVIC subsidiaries are working on - by the 2020s. If not, then acquiring the Su-35 or the T-50 could become necessary.

Even then, the PLAAF faces major hurdles if it is to become a force capable of more than simply defending the homeland, possessing as yet only a negligible air-to-air refuelling capability, for example. As long as these key enabling capabilities remain only nominal, the theory that impressive-looking programmes like the J-20 are more about grabbing headlines than about military contingency will continue to sound plausible

 

[SBD-3]

F-22, some F-15s & F/A-18 E/F are also operational with AESA radars.

Taimi i am referring to 4.5th Gens. F-15s and F-18s have recently been introduced, but these are American platforms, I any European platform is flying with operational AESA, Fulcurm Ns are also flying with AESA, but i dont know whether SU-35 has an operational aesa and it has a foriegn active service..

 

[SBD-3]

based on this extract from a defence paper, dont see how the J-10A/B will be in PAF service anytime soon...

Power problems

Engines are among the selective technologies that China must, for now, continue to import. While AVIC intends to invest CNY10 billion (USD1.55 billion) over the next five years in high-performance engine development and to restructure its research and development (R&D) operations, self-sufficiency in this area could still be five to 10 years away.

The Chinese Ministry of Defence is certainly still hedging its bets, having signed a USD500 million deal with Russia for 123 AL-31FN turbofan engines (which already power much of the PLAAF) in June despite Chinese media reports in late 2010 that the domestically developed WS-10 turbofan engine had entered series production and was now powering the J-11B. Indeed, early production of the WS-10 is reported to have been encountering problems and nobody knows when more advanced Chinese-designed engines like the WS-15 - which could power high-performance aircraft like the J-20 - might be ready for use in the field.

A shortage of engines may be one factor that accounts for China's unusually slow rate of aircraft production. Cliff pointed out that only around 12 J-10s have been coming off the production line per year so far, compared with the 100 more complex F-35s that will be built annually once that programme is fully up and running. "What this means is that China either still has technical constraints on the production side or that it has very high production costs," he said. This has potentially important consequences for the PLAAF's hopes of replacing the large numbers of legacy aircraft in its inventory. Hundreds of these older aircraft, such as the MiG-19/Q-5, the MiG-21/J-7 and the Chinese-designed J-8, still make up two-thirds of the PLAAF's strength and slow production rates suggest that this state of affairs will not change any time soon.

Slow production rates and high costs would also inhibit the export potential of the J-10 and the FC-1/JF-17, both of which have attracted only one foreign customer so far: Pakistan. China has generally been able to compensate for the inefficiency of its uncompetitive aviation sector by effectively handing blank cheques to aircraft manufacturers like Chengdu and Shenyang. However, this level of funding will not continue indefinitely and Beijing will be unwilling to export aircraft at a significant loss, even if the sales have strategic value.

High costs and slow production rates could also eventually tip the balance in favour of acquiring new Russian aircraft. If AVIC succeeds in getting on top of these problems within the next five years and also succeeds in mastering the development of core systems such as engines and avionics, then the PLAAF should be inducting the J-20 - or one of the other fifth-generation designs that AVIC subsidiaries are working on - by the 2020s. If not, then acquiring the Su-35 or the T-50 could become necessary.

Even then, the PLAAF faces major hurdles if it is to become a force capable of more than simply defending the homeland, possessing as yet only a negligible air-to-air refuelling capability, for example. As long as these key enabling capabilities remain only nominal, the theory that impressive-looking programmes like the J-20 are more about grabbing headlines than about military contingency will continue to sound plausible

Interesting article, but there are certainly a few questions I would like to raise.
1-Had WS-10 series been facing the same problems, it would not have seen itself in tail of a J-10B, installation of WS-10 on J-10B is an active signal that WS-10 is not the same WS-10 which we saw couple of years ago powering J-11Bs. Even at that time i thought it was a smart move to put a new engine into twin engine platform and there would have been a lot of tweaking makeing it acceptable to critical single engine platform. WS-13 has been more promising since it has been powering FC-1 ab initio, as Far as i know WS-13 has FDEC and more thrust but response time was high, but I think it would have been maturing by now. Considering the recent development do you think that Chinese are standing at the same place where they were lets say 2 years ago given now they are fully aware of the critical nature of issue?
2-Had there been a case of induction of Russian platform, the first sign we would have witnessed would have been a development on J-15 Issue. I can still remeber huge amount of J-11s parked at SAC waiting for their engine. After having prmoising developments by CAC and SAC do you think Chinese would be inclined towards Russian platforms?

 

[S10]

WICHe ONE BRO?

Designation was never specified, but I speculate they will graft sub-systems from J-20 on to J-10.

 

[fatman17]

Interesting article, but there are certainly a few questions I would like to raise.
1-Had WS-10 series been facing the same problems, it would not have seen itself in tail of a J-10B, installation of WS-10 on J-10B is an active signal that WS-10 is not the same WS-10 which we saw couple of years ago powering J-11Bs. Even at that time i thought it was a smart move to put a new engine into twin engine platform and there would have been a lot of tweaking makeing it acceptable to critical single engine platform. WS-13 has been more promising since it has been powering FC-1 ab initio, as Far as i know WS-13 has FDEC and more thrust but response time was high, but I think it would have been maturing by now. Considering the recent development do you think that Chinese are standing at the same place where they were lets say 2 years ago given now they are fully aware of the critical nature of issue?
2-Had there been a case of induction of Russian platform, the first sign we would have witnessed would have been a development on J-15 Issue. I can still remeber huge amount of J-11s parked at SAC waiting for their engine. After having prmoising developments by CAC and SAC do you think Chinese would be inclined towards Russian platforms?

the conventional wisdom is that china is making progress in their engine production from a reliability standpoint but are still 5 to 10 years away from mass production (like in the west). till then russian engines or aircraft will form a significant part of the PLAAF.

 

[Beast]

I dont know why people keep recycling old outdated western news about Chinese engine development. First of all Mass production of WS-10 has already began. 123 engines are ordered from a last year deal. Probably as replacement engines for J-10A or finished the remaining kit for j-10a.

The fact they test WS-10 on a single J-10B aircraft show the engine has matured and no problem being mass produced. Have you seen new J-11B running with AL-31 engine? No right? That mean WS-10 are running well to keep J-11B production line running.

 

[fatman17]

I dont know why people keep recycling old outdated western news about Chinese engine development. First of all Mass production of WS-10 has already began. 123 engines are ordered from a last year deal. Probably as replacement engines for J-10A or finished the remaining kit for j-10a.

The fact they test WS-10 on a single J-10B aircraft show the engine has matured and no problem being mass produced. Have you seen new J-11B running with AL-31 engine? No right? That mean WS-10 are running well to keep J-11B production line running.

like you we all hope you are right !!!

 

[Mani2020]

1- SC, not sure......
2-TVC, Likely, but not a necessity amid growing weapons sophistication
3-Stealthy nozzels? do you mean heat signature reduction? if you do then no, but with advanced HMS and irfa-optical seekers being in use, this advantage is of no use, if it exists.
J-10B has AESA while none of these fighters till date (except block 60 or may be su-35) has operational AESA in place. J-10B's AESA is more potent than Block 60's containing 1000TRMs and equal to JSF's AESA. Secondly J-10B is expected to come with serious sensor fusion, much more than on any of its contenders.

Taimi i am referring to 4.5th Gens. F-15s and F-18s have recently been introduced, but these are American platforms, I any European platform is flying with operational AESA, Fulcurm Ns are also flying with AESA, but i dont know whether SU-35 has an operational aesa and it has a foriegn active service..

Husnain don't mind but your statement is bit exaggerated one,Isarel latest developed AESA radar is known to have some 1400 TR modules compared to the rumored 1200 TR modules of J-10B radar ,so if you are comparing them on TR modules basis then certainly Isareli radar is more capable than what we will see on J-10B ,

Also Isarel is known to have incorporated many indigenous systems on their US origin aircrafts and their policy of hiding their stuff is not different to PAF rather i would say more strict so i will not be amazed if they have already incorporated that AESA radar on their F-16's and F-15's.

And as far as JSF is concerned we don't know the number of modules JSF AESA has , you cant judge that on the basis of F-16 block 60's radar , coz there are three things to be kept in mind

1) Block-60 is an export aircarft so don't expect US to incorporate their best radar in that aircraft
2) There have been many developments of AESA radar in US and some examples of F-15's and F-18's are flying with way more capable AESA radar than what we see on F-16's , so F-35 radar will be easily considered as a better than f-15 and f-18 and either on par with f-22's or slight variation.
3) The AN/APG-81 used on F-35 is a successor radar to the F-22's AN/APG-77 , so one can think of it to be more capable than AN/APG-77, where as AN/APG-77 AESA radar used on
F-22 has 1500 TR modules

As far as sensor fusion is concerned what we know is that sensor fusion on j-10b will be some what hybrid form of sensors found on su-30 series and some european ones , but after su-30 Russia has come up with new and more advanced aircrafts like mig-35 and su-35 (although a su-30 variant but more advance then any existing variant of su-30 series) so i will not wonder that these aircrafts will be having better sensor fusion compared to su-30 variants , so no one cant judge from the looks which aircraft has more advance sensor fusion.

Above all we know that all the info of j-10B is hypothetical or based on rumors so jumping to conclusion will be too early

 

[Black Widow]

Husnain don't mind but your statement is bit exaggerated one,Isarel latest developed AESA radar is known to have some 1400 TR modules compared to the rumored 1200 TR modules of J-10B radar ,so if you are comparing them on TR modules basis then certainly Isareli radar is more capable than what we will see on J-10B ,

Also Isarel is known to have incorporated many indigenous systems on their US origin aircrafts and their policy of hiding their stuff is not different to PAF rather i would say more strict so i will not be amazed if they have already incorporated that AESA radar on their F-16's and F-15's.

And as far as JSF is concerned we don't know the number of modules JSF AESA has , you cant judge that on the basis of F-16 block 60's radar , coz there are three things to be kept in mind

1) Block-60 is an export aircarft so don't expect US to incorporate their best radar in that aircraft
2) There have been many developments of AESA radar in US and some examples of F-15's and F-18's are flying with way more capable AESA radar than what we see on F-16's , so F-35 radar will be easily considered as a better than f-15 and f-18 and either on par with f-22's or slight variation.
3) The AN/APG-81 used on F-35 is a successor radar to the F-22's AN/APG-77 , so one can think of it to be more capable than AN/APG-77, where as AN/APG-77 AESA radar used on
F-22 has 1500 TR modules

As far as sensor fusion is concerned what we know is that sensor fusion on j-10b will be some what hybrid form of sensors found on su-30 series and some european ones , but after su-30 Russia has come up with new and more advanced aircrafts like mig-35 and su-35 (although a su-30 variant but more advance then any existing variant of su-30 series) so i will not wonder that these aircrafts will be having better sensor fusion compared to su-30 variants , so no one cant judge from the looks which aircraft has more advance sensor fusion.

Above all we know that all the info of j-10B is hypothetical or based on rumors so jumping to conclusion will be too early

Balanced and sensible post... I totally Agree with you...

 

[cw2005]

The hot topic now in Chinese forums is mainly on how the newer version's performance of WS10, not whether it is usable or not. They opined that the reason to import more Russian engines is due to production of the Chinese engine could not meet the demands of J10, J11, J15 and possibly other figther program (SF jX??).

However, so far, newer versions of J11, J15 and J10 pictures indicate WS10s are being used except the first 50 J10B to be produced shortly.

This engine is being used in testing single-engined J10B shows that PLAA is having confidence to accept the fighter with local engine.