Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

[IrbiS]

ofcourse,,,contribute,,,,we want proof

For February issue 2014 AIRFORCES MONTHLY's Georg Mader interviewed Deputy Chief Project Director JF-17 for PAF HQ and PAC KAMRA Air Commodore Mahmood Khalid at Dubai Air Show.

I'm just quoting our question of interest here:
"

AFM: Is there a possibility of an FC-20 export version of the J-10 to Pakistan? Do you imagine that this could happen, maybe at the cost of Thunder programme?

Air Cdre Khalid: My personal thoughts? Wishful thinking. But while this would be decided at a higher level than mine, from what I know or can see, an FC-20 or whatever will not be introduced into the PAF, at least not in the near or mid-term future. Why? The PAF is amidst the build-up of JF-17 squadrons - just last March, President Zardari honoured and awarded more than 30 air
commodores, wing commanders, group captains and squadron leaders for the successful launch of the Thunder into the PAF
fleet.
No other 'plane gives us this much capability at this cost. It's already carried out well over 10,000 sorties, and with towards 50 delivered, a third squadron is forming. In-flight refuelling from an IL-78 has been done. In parallel, the introduction of the Block 52 F-16s is happening, with systems like Goodrich recce pod(meaning Goodrich DB-110) to master. So this means we are well served by fast jet assets and there in no real need to add a third platform, especially when the J-10 is also a fourth-plus generation jet we already have, and our planners and analysts should be focusing on the future fifth generation!
But, as said, all this is beyond my daily business and responsibility.

"

 

[SBD-3]

PAF need something like J-11B or better with AESA and advance EW systems to take care of IN & IAF ambitions combined.

J-10's natural arena is high altitude....Its design is made for high altitude-high speed combat. It can easily overwhelm anybody given playing in its field. F-4s being technologically superior were advised not to tangle the the delta wing mig-21s at high altitude despite having ample twin thrust vis a vis mig-21's single engine. to defeat Mig-21s, F-4 crews first took the dogfight at lower altitudes where mig's wing design made it inefficient. J-10's design is a better performing design at high altitude engagements (More frequent phenomenon in BVR era). AESA and EW have their benefits but often a trade off is required in balancing performance.

 

[Basel]

J-10's natural arena is high altitude....Its design is made for high altitude-high speed combat. It can easily overwhelm anybody given playing in its field. F-4s being technologically superior were advised not to tangle the the delta wing mig-21s at high altitude despite having ample twin thrust vis a vis mig-21's single engine. to defeat Mig-21s, F-4 crews first took the dogfight at lower altitudes where mig's wing design made it inefficient. J-10's design is a better performing design at high altitude engagements (More frequent phenomenon in BVR era). AESA and EW have their benefits but often a trade off is required in balancing performance.

Dear I know that but it does not fit in current needs / requirements of PAF. PAF need a long range plane now (in class of J-11B) if they want to induct a 4.5+ gen plane because IN is getting very powerful, they will also have robust support from IAF and IN will not come close to our shore for blockade this time as they know how long we can hit them so they will keep enough distance where they have advantage, PN have P-3 to go after IN but they will need support and J-1Xs can do more than just support as they can carry YJ-12 supersonic missiles which have ASM, ARM versions available with range upto 400 kms with those they can easily carry BVR & WVR missiles for escorting MPAs or any other package if needed with out need of extra fuel tank.

 

[Bratva]

J-10's natural arena is high altitude....Its design is made for high altitude-high speed combat. It can easily overwhelm anybody given playing in its field. F-4s being technologically superior were advised not to tangle the the delta wing mig-21s at high altitude despite having ample twin thrust vis a vis mig-21's single engine. to defeat Mig-21s, F-4 crews first took the dogfight at lower altitudes where mig's wing design made it inefficient. J-10's design is a better performing design at high altitude engagements (More frequent phenomenon in BVR era). AESA and EW have their benefits but often a trade off is required in balancing performance.

you need to leave politics for a while and contribute more in defence sections. You are better off with those petty political arguments

Eurofighter being delta like Mig-21 is covering it's shortcoming in WVR combat at lower altitudes by introducing LERX and thrust vectoring

Eurofighter: new aerodynamics set for 2014 test flight - 6/25/2014 - Flight Global

Eurofighter will by year-end make is final proof-of-concept test flight on an aerodynamic modification kit that promises to improve the combat aircraft’s subsonic turn rate by 15%.

Adding leading edge root extensions and extended trailing edge flaps, and reshaping the side-of-cockpit ILS antennae covers as 70° delta strakes should improve the aircraft’s agility for close-quarters combat.

Laurie Hilditch, head of future capabilities at Eurofighter, says the modification kit should give the aircraft the sort of “knife-fight in a phone box” turning capability enjoyed by rivals such as Boeing’s F/A-18E/F or the Lockheed Martin F-16, without sacrificing the transonic and supersonic high-energy agility inherent to its delta wing-canard configuration.



Hopefully if J-10 is modified with such surface controls, J-10 could become a formidable in lower altitude dogfights as well

 

[MastanKhan]

you need to leave politics for a while and contribute more in defence sections. You are better off with those petty political arguments

Eurofighter being delta like Mig-21 is covering it's shortcoming in WVR combat at lower altitudes by introducing LERX and thrust vectoring

Eurofighter: new aerodynamics set for 2014 test flight - 6/25/2014 - Flight Global

Eurofighter will by year-end make is final proof-of-concept test flight on an aerodynamic modification kit that promises to improve the combat aircraft’s subsonic turn rate by 15%.

Adding leading edge root extensions and extended trailing edge flaps, and reshaping the side-of-cockpit ILS antennae covers as 70° delta strakes should improve the aircraft’s agility for close-quarters combat.

Laurie Hilditch, head of future capabilities at Eurofighter, says the modification kit should give the aircraft the sort of “knife-fight in a phone box” turning capability enjoyed by rivals such as Boeing’s F/A-18E/F or the Lockheed Martin F-16, without sacrificing the transonic and supersonic high-energy agility inherent to its delta wing-canard configuration.



Hopefully if J-10 is modified with such surface controls, J-10 could become a formidable in lower altitude dogfights as well

Sir,

The poster is correct in what he stated---. He gave examples of two planes and he is right----.

 

[Bratva]

Sir,

The poster is correct in what he stated---. He gave examples of two planes and he is right----.

Those were examples of yester year. In coming era, Delta shortcomings would be compensated with other control surfaces like what EF team is doing with it.

Let's see how behaviour of delta changes when LERX and extended flaps plus TVR comes in to play.

 

[Donatello]

you need to leave politics for a while and contribute more in defence sections. You are better off with those petty political arguments

Eurofighter being delta like Mig-21 is covering it's shortcoming in WVR combat at lower altitudes by introducing LERX and thrust vectoring

Eurofighter: new aerodynamics set for 2014 test flight - 6/25/2014 - Flight Global

Eurofighter will by year-end make is final proof-of-concept test flight on an aerodynamic modification kit that promises to improve the combat aircraft’s subsonic turn rate by 15%.

Adding leading edge root extensions and extended trailing edge flaps, and reshaping the side-of-cockpit ILS antennae covers as 70° delta strakes should improve the aircraft’s agility for close-quarters combat.

Laurie Hilditch, head of future capabilities at Eurofighter, says the modification kit should give the aircraft the sort of “knife-fight in a phone box” turning capability enjoyed by rivals such as Boeing’s F/A-18E/F or the Lockheed Martin F-16, without sacrificing the transonic and supersonic high-energy agility inherent to its delta wing-canard configuration.



Hopefully if J-10 is modified with such surface controls, J-10 could become a formidable in lower altitude dogfights as well

The strength of J-10 lies in it's ability to carry more weapons on lot more hard points along with a bigger nose section to allow for a bigger radar and it's associated cooling (that is in comparison to the JF-17). It is an excellent strike platform for stand off weapons whether air to ground or air to sea. However, comparing it with Typhoon is a bit unfair, since the Euro consortium knew that delta comes with it's inherent design deficiency, such as bleeding too much energy in a turn. You want to gain that energy as soon as possible for a WVR scenario, and so as such it was given two powerful EJ200s.

Total thrust with burners for Typhoon is 90KNx2 = 180KN, wheras the AL31 on the J-10 offers 125KN. That is 44% more thrust for about 22% more MTOW of Typhoon. Typhoon also offer a more better useful load of 7,500 Kgs as compared to the 6,000Kgs of J-10.

You may not always need that extra thrust, but it is ALWAYs useful in a tight, dogfight scenario. I believe there is a famous Typhoon vs F-16 video. Typhoon points its nose where it wants and when it wants, meaning you better not let Typhoon on your tail.

 

[Beast]

The strength of J-10 lies in it's ability to carry more weapons on lot more hard points along with a bigger nose section to allow for a bigger radar and it's associated cooling (that is in comparison to the JF-17). It is an excellent strike platform for stand off weapons whether air to ground or air to sea. However, comparing it with Typhoon is a bit unfair, since the Euro consortium knew that delta comes with it's inherent design deficiency, such as bleeding too much energy in a turn. You want to gain that energy as soon as possible for a WVR scenario, and so as such it was given two powerful EJ200s.

Total thrust with burners for Typhoon is 90KNx2 = 180KN, wheras the AL31 on the J-10 offers 125KN. That is 44% more thrust for about 22% more MTOW of Typhoon. Typhoon also offer a more better useful load of 7,500 Kgs as compared to the 6,000Kgs of J-10.

You may not always need that extra thrust, but it is ALWAYs useful in a tight, dogfight scenario. I believe there is a famous Typhoon vs F-16 video. Typhoon points its nose where it wants and when it wants, meaning you better not let Typhoon on your tail.

Typhoon is much heavier at 11tons. While J-10B at 9tons and fitted with WS-10A offer 132KN. J-10B also has much smaller wingspan compare to Typhoon. So it efficiency in thrust to weight ratio is not that far from Typhoon.

 

[Donatello]

Typhoon is much heavier at 11tons. While J-10B at 9tons and fitted with WS-10A offer 132KN. J-10B also has much smaller wingspan compare to Typhoon. So it efficiency in thrust to weight ratio is not that far from Typhoon.

I compared the MTOW figures which provide a more realistic dynamics. Typhoon or J-10, would obviously weigh more than 11 tons even in a standard, two/four missile CAP configuration. But their real utility lies in their multi-role capability. Even with WS10A at 132KN, Typhoon still retains more thrust. Plus improved versions of EJ200 are also in development/testing.

 

[Beast]

I compared the MTOW figures which provide a more realistic dynamics. Typhoon or J-10, would obviously weigh more than 11 tons even in a standard, two/four missile CAP configuration. But their real utility lies in their multi-role capability. Even with WS10A at 132KN, Typhoon still retains more thrust. Plus improved versions of EJ200 are also in development/testing.

I am comparing empty weight. If both fitted weapon and drop tanks. Typhoon will always be heavier than J-10B. But there is no denying of the 180Kn thrust Typhoon offer.

 

[Donatello]

I am comparing empty weight. If both fitted weapon and drop tanks. Typhoon will always be heavier than J-10B. But there is no denying of the 180Kn thrust Typhoon offer.

Well, such capable jets would be rarely seen flying in a clean configuration. That's not what they are for.

 

[aliaselin]

J10B has entered service
中航成飞9架批产飞机交付 6种机型同场试飞(图)-中新网

 

[IrbiS]

The K/JDC01 laser designator pod used for the LS-500J/LT-2 laser guided bombs carried by J-10, seen here is CAC-owned test aircraft CAC 95613.

 

[IrbiS]

Possibility is, that J-10B entering PLAAF service 'll be powered by AL-31FN Series III engine with 137kN thrust(from 127kN from earlier AL-31FN).

 

[Bratva]

J-10 B crashed today due to engine failure.

https://defence.pk/attachments/j-10-crashed-jpg.152103/

https://defence.pk/attachments/j-10-1crashed-jpg.152104/

https://defence.pk/attachments/173250kr9ost9try99zkk9_zps35045a3a-png-original-png.152106/