What's new

Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

.
J-10C
img-560744009db86b5cbee57dfe83edef1f.jpg
img-1805831c4db60556e6632a008a0e2e75.jpg
 
. . .
Since J-10C is said to be simply J-10Bs with enhanced avionic suites, is there any discernible visual differences between J-10B and J-10C?

Also are the J-10Cs newly-built or upgrades of existing J-10B airframes?
 
.
Since J-10C is said to be simply J-10Bs with enhanced avionic suites, is there any discernible visual differences between J-10B and J-10C?

Also are the J-10Cs newly-built or upgrades of existing J-10B airframes?
The J-10C has an AESA radar while the J-10B has a PESA. The most distinguishing characteristic between the B and C are the antennas along the aircraft's spine. The B has one while the C has two.

All J-10Cs are new airframes.
 
. .
Any indication the J-10 will get the WS-15 when it becomes available?

Current engines have a max thrust around 130 kn (please correct me if I’m wrong) but the WS-15 is expected to have a max thrust of 198 kn or about 44,000 lb at max thrust. Even it’s dry thrust maybe more then the current thrust at its max. The Ws-15 is also expected to allow supercrusing, and cut back on fuel consumption even further. This would allow the J-10 to our perform the Eurofighters in nearly every way; high TWR, able to carry more weight, longer range, etc.

With Chinese Electronics industry advancing so quickly, the Radar, ew suite, and avionics will be second to none in no time if they haven’t already gotten there.

The plane will be able to sell in the hundreds if not thousands, especially if price remains around $55-60 million.

Also Pakistan was interest in this jet, and the higher thrust domestic Chinese engine maybe the key to clinch the sale. If equipped with a WS-15 if the unit price can be sold at ~$55 million each or $1 Billion per squadron (18 jets) the PAF maybe able to agree to a sale (they didn’t want to pay more than $40 million for the J-10a whe. It was considered and the Chinese side wanted $60 million each).

If the Economy picks up, going for (committing to) 5 Squadrons (90 planes) for $5 billion should e planned for to counter the nearly 300 Su-30s and probably hundreds of Rafales eventually procured. Coupled with the 188 currently planned JF-17 and 76 F-16s it would still be a potent force at a budget price.

(With a stable economy and the savings by committing to the J-10ce with Ws-15, the PAF could also then make commitments to the TFX program for 5 squadrons (90 planes) of stealth fighters, and get in on the technology and work share of the development of that plane)
 
Last edited:
.
Any indication the J-10 will get the WS-15 when it becomes available?

Current engines have a max thrust around 130 kn (please correct me if I’m wrong) but the WS-15 is expected to have a max thrust of 198 kn or about 44,000 lb at max thrust. Even it’s dry thrust maybe more then the current thrust at its max. The Ws-15 is also expected to allow supercrusing, and cut back on fuel consumption even further. This would allow the J-10 to our perform the Eurofighters in nearly every way; high TWR, able to carry more weight, longer range, etc.

With Chinese Electronics industry advancing so quickly, the Radar, ew suite, and avionics will be second to none in no time if they haven’t already gotten there.

The plane will be able to sell in the hundreds if not thousands, especially if price remains around $55-60 million.

Also Pakistan was interest in this jet, and the higher thrust domestic Chinese engine maybe the key to clinch the sale. If equipped with a WS-15 if the unit price can be sold at ~$55 million each or $1 Billion per squadron (18 jets) the PAF maybe able to agree to a sale (they didn’t want to pay more than $40 million for the J-10a whe. It was considered and the Chinese side wanted $60 million each).

If the Economy picks up, going for (committing to) 5 Squadrons (90 planes) for $5 billion should e planned for to counter the nearly 300 Su-30s and probably hundreds of Rafales eventually procured. Coupled with the 188 currently planned JF-17 and 76 F-16s it would still be a potent force at a budget price.

(With a stable economy and the savings by committing to the J-10ce with Ws-15, the PAF could also then make commitments to the TFX program for 5 squadrons (90 planes) of stealth fighters, and get in on the technology and work share of the development of that plane)
adapting the WS-15 will mean adapting a new air intake, if you ever have seen the DSI on JF-17 you will see it has boundary layer suction holes in the intake but you will also see its intake lips and cowl have those holes, on J-10B the bump is higher

full


in order to install a much more powerful engine they need a proper intake throat size, while this is possible to make an increase in the intake size and bump means higher drag, the most logic step is WS-15 is for J-20 and lesser powerful engines will be used on J-10, F-16 has during the years bee fitted with different size intakes cowls in order to adapt it to different engines, J-10 is not going to be different

kbAg-fysnevk4399390.jpg

different types of intakes for different engines of F-16 to increase air mass flow capture area
Capturesd.PNG.jpg


https://glomilstrat.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-two-types-of-intakes-on-f-16.html
 
Last edited:
.
adapting the WS-15 will mean adapting a new air intake, if you ever have seen the DSI on JF-17 you will see it has boundary layer suction holes in the intake but you will also see its intake lips and cowl have those holes, on J-10B the bump is higher

full


in order to install a much more powerful engine they need a proper intake throat size, while this is possible to make an increase in the intake size and bump means higher drag, the most logic step is WS-15 is for J-20 and lesser powerful engines will be used on J-10, F-16 has during the years bee fitted with different size intakes cowls in order to adapted to different engines, J-10 is not going to be different

kbAg-fysnevk4399390.jpg

different types of intakes for different engines of F-16 to increase air mass flow capture area
Capturesd.PNG.jpg


https://glomilstrat.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-two-types-of-intakes-on-f-16.html

Thanks for explaining it. The idea behind adapting the WS-15 to the J-10 came from a hope that if the could be adapted to the higher thrust engine, then plane could be made to carry a higher payload and feature conformal fuel tanks without sacrificing performance. Also if the J-10 could supercruise it would be able to use less fuel and therefore have an extended range.

considering the same company that makes the J-10 also makes the J-20, it all comes down to if it is really nessecary for the desired outcome. The WS-10 engine could be improved with features from the WS-15, to allow for some improvement in thrust and give supercruise capability.

Maybe I got it all wrong and this was already thought of. The ws-10 was superceded by the ws-10g. Does anyone know what actual max thrust of the ws-10g is?
 
. .
Thanks for explaining it. The idea behind adapting the WS-15 to the J-10 came from a hope that if the could be adapted to the higher thrust engine, then plane could be made to carry a higher payload and feature conformal fuel tanks without sacrificing performance. Also if the J-10 could supercruise it would be able to use less fuel and therefore have an extended range.

considering the same company that makes the J-10 also makes the J-20, it all comes down to if it is really nessecary for the desired outcome. The WS-10 engine could be improved with features from the WS-15, to allow for some improvement in thrust and give supercruise capability.

Maybe I got it all wrong and this was already thought of. The ws-10 was superceded by the ws-10g. Does anyone know what actual max thrust of the ws-10g is?
it is not impossible, they can modify the intake, there is no technical limitation, they can do that, the only point is if you ever have seen F-35 you will see it has not bleeding system, in few words has not porous holes in the intake bump or intake cowl, you can compare F-35 to JF-17, those holes are part of the bleeding system of boundary layer, the other option is the size of the bump too, F-35 has no bleeding system, JF-17 has one

p1633172_main.jpg



full


what i am trying to say is the porous holes are to improve the intake but they can adopt too a different intake cowl and bump geometry and size this can increase Drag and the capture area of air mass flow; a bigger and higher bump also will translate in higher drag because the intake cowl will increase size too, JF-17 uses those holes to keep relatively small the intake bump.

It is not an impossibility, but i would say there are some disadvantages too, DSI intakes are not new in reality are from the 1950s, F-11F-1 had one but due to computer limitations they were called Ferri type and you can see it had porous holes for the bleeding system, the current intake of the J-10 seems so well designed that lacks a bleeding system like F-35, when i mean well designed i am not saying JF-17 is not well designed, what i meant it is the right size and shape in order to get rid of the bleeding system


155403-d58c96f06f48f9fc6f300c2f4b474276.jpg



they are called now DSI and not Ferri because now computer power allows for a better design but in reality are old, from 1954, they were used in several american aircraft program of the 1950s and 1960s, in fact the early F-16 concept was studied with one ferri type intake
155402-8cb64e7691c3e16467051d496517abd5.jpg

155407-acb5e09511d212d4a6c0d64d025e3df4.jpg



images
 
Last edited:
. . . .
Back
Top Bottom