Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

[BATMAN]

If the J-20 is any evidence of a much maligned rumor.. perhaps there is no harm in having faith in a few more rumors.

Ok.....So shall we not expect technologies of J-20 being shared by J-10?

 

[pshamim]

If the J-20 is any evidence of a much maligned rumor.. perhaps there is no harm in having faith in a few more rumors.

than Bhai! what is your reason for being skeptical. your earlier post is contradisctory. If China has delivered on almost every rumor, why will you be skeptical.

I am skeptical because of the source of this rumor-the Japanese.

 

[SQ8]

than Bhai! what is your reason for being skeptical. your earlier post is contradisctory. If China has delivered on almost every rumor, why will you be skeptical.

I am skeptical because of the source of this rumor-the Japanese.

That should answer the question... the heard from the japs about the chinese thing.

---------- Post added at 02:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:06 PM ----------

Ok.....So shall we not expect technologies of J-20 being shared by J-10?

Never said anything supporting or not supporting it.

 

[Jango]

than Bhai! what is your reason for being skeptical. your earlier post is contradisctory. If China has delivered on almost every rumor, why will you be skeptical.

I am skeptical because of the source of this rumor-the Japanese.

But this rumor, even from the Japanese sources, seems a bit baffling. China is a bit behind the other players in this industry aka US and Russia. Or is the US just keeping it a secret.??

 

[pshamim]

The news/rumors about this type of radar is not new. They have been appearing consistently in Chinese pressfor for the last two years. last i saw was a news item from Chinese press that this radar was being tested on a Chinese UAV. This time, this rumor was eyectaching because it mentioned for the first time that radar was being tested on a J-10B

There have been reports that USA is also developing this capability as well if they have not done so already.

 

[SQ8]

The news/rumors about this type of radar is not new. They have been appearing consistently in Chinese pressfor for the last two years. last i saw was a news item from Chinese press that this radar was being tested on a Chinese UAV. This time, this rumor was eyectaching because it mentioned for the first time that radar was being tested on a J-10B

Ah.. then it deserves more attention..
Perhaps there is something in the works..
but anti-stealth?? high resolution AESA perhaps??
Or some sort of airborne bi-static? with the emitter and receiver offset in the aircraft.. or perhaps like the F-22.. a large section of the fuselage serves as an antenna.

 

[Pfpilot]

I may be deviating from the topic a little bit, but here again is why I feel the PAF should have gone with the j-10 instead of the jf-17 altogether. I understand the inherent advantages of a smaller single engine fighter but they would have been more relevant had we had the technological know how to improve the platform on our own. The Chinese seem completely focused on the j-10 and j-20 and all new tech is tested on the j-10, resulting in a further delay for the same tech to be modified or miniaturized to fit on the jf-17. J-10 is a far superior aircraft due its place as a technology demonstrator of sorts and isnt all that expensive, relative to euro canards. Had we invested in this platform instead, we may already have had a significant number of j-10s, which would have actually affected the air power balance in the region, instead of the status quo we are stuck with. Just my highly inexpert opinion.

 

[Jango]

I may be deviating from the topic a little bit, but here again is why I feel the PAF should have gone with the j-10 instead of the jf-17 altogether. I understand the inherent advantages of a smaller single engine fighter but they would have been more relevant had we had the technological know how to improve the platform on our own. The Chinese seem completely focused on the j-10 and j-20 and all new tech is tested on the j-10, resulting in a further delay for the same tech to be modified or miniaturized to fit on the jf-17. J-10 is a far superior aircraft due its place as a technology demonstrator of sorts and isnt all that expensive, relative to euro canards. Had we invested in this platform instead, we may already have had a significant number of j-10s, which would have actually affected the air power balance in the region, instead of the status quo we are stuck with. Just my highly inexpert opinion.

Both fighters present different needs and options for the PAF. J-10 was originally a Chinese aircraft, while the PAF wanted a aircraft which had much more of an input and design features by Pakistanis. Otherwise, with J-10 being a Chinese concept, we would have been just buying another aircraft from another country. J-10 is a F-16 kind of plane for Pakistan, not in mass numbers. While the JF-17 is being produced in house (will be), in numbers around the 250 mark if i am correct.

 

[Pfpilot]

Your point is noted, but again, we are hardly responsible for the tech or the airframe design of the jf-17. What differentiates the two aircraft is that we invested directly into the development of the jf-17s and now our producing it in house. We could have done the same with the j-10, had we invested in that platform instead. In that case, we would be claiming the j-10 as a joint production. Lets face it, neither aircraft is exactly Pakistani, most of jf-17s important subsystems are Chinese, its latest tech is tested in China and the armaments it carries are Chinese.
I do understand the low cost factor is huge for the PAF, but I wonder if a smaller, but more potent force of j-10 and f-16s would suffice over a land area that is quite small.

 

[Jango]

Your point is noted, but again, we are hardly responsible for the tech or the airframe design of the jf-17. What differentiates the two aircraft is that we invested directly into the development of the jf-17s and now our producing it in house. We could have done the same with the j-10, had we invested in that platform instead. In that case, we would be claiming the j-10 as a joint production. Lets face it, neither aircraft is exactly Pakistani, most of jf-17s important subsystems are Chinese, its latest tech is tested in China and the armaments it carries are Chinese.
I do understand the low cost factor is huge for the PAF, but I wonder if a smaller, but more potent force of j-10 and f-16s would suffice over a land area that is quite small.

Agreed that the JF-17 is not totally 100% is produced in house, and not all the systems were of Pakistani origin, but in a couple of years PAC will be doing mass production of these jets. Hence, the aircraft will have been built by PAC reasonably independently. Not the case with J-10 though. It was made with Chinese requirements in mind, not Pakistani. FC-20 might incorporate a Pakistani mindset system applications, but only very little. The JF-17 was made for PAF exclusively as a low cost, but effective 4 generation A/C to replace the A-5, F-7 and Mirage III/V. J-10 on the other hand is not a replacement, rather an addition, along with the F-16, around 150 are expected to be procured, so not mass numbers, but Hi-Tech in par with the F-16. JF-17 Block II will pack a punch mind you though.

 

[pshamim]

Ah.. then it deserves more attention..
Perhaps there is something in the works..
but anti-stealth?? high resolution AESA perhaps??
Or some sort of airborne bi-static? with the emitter and receiver offset in the aircraft.. or perhaps like the F-22.. a large section of the fuselage serves as an antenna.

This article is from Strategy Page dated 2004 and it talks about China's anti-stealth capabilities. It clearly shows that China has been working on this for at least 7 years. So rumor/news from Japanese press seems to hold water. I can provide several links on this subject:




Subject: China's anti-stealth capability
EastWind_81 4/21/2004 10:33:26 AM



This is from a while back: link THE CIA and Pentagon fear that China may be on of perfecting a new anti-aircraft technology that can locate and track the stealth fighters and bombers that form a central plank of US air power. The US defence establishment is so concerned that China may be forging a PCL, or ?passive coherent location? system, that America?s military planners have been summoned to a meeting in Washington next month to examine the strategic implications of such a breakthrough

http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/69-5369.aspx

 

[Arsalan]

The news/rumors about this type of radar is not new. They have been appearing consistently in Chinese pressfor for the last two years. last i saw was a news item from Chinese press that this radar was being tested on a Chinese UAV. This time, this rumor was eyectaching because it mentioned for the first time that radar was being tested on a J-10B

There have been reports that USA is also developing this capability as well if they have not done so already.

exactly, there have been reports that China are developing a new Anti-stealth radar to counter the US legacy in stealth fighters. the news is not new and there are rumors existing. as you suggest, patience is the name of the game at present!
anti-stealth capability have been successfully integrated in land based systems so if there is a radar for fighter aircraft in development with anti stealth capabilities, it wont be a surprise:

This is from a while back: link THE CIA and Pentagon fear that China may be on the verge of perfecting a new anti-aircraft technology that can locate and track the stealth fighters and bombers that form a central plank of US air power. The US defence establishment is so concerned that China may be forging a PCL, or ?passive coherent location? system, that America?s military planners have been summoned to a meeting in Washington next month to examine the strategic implications of such a breakthrough, Newsweek reported yesterday. Existing anti-aircraft early-warning systems rely on conventional radar, which the bat- shaped Stealth fighters are designed to evade. Such radars are also vulnerable to jamming and attack by missiles which follow the path of radar beams to transmitters. The new Chinese system, by contrast, simply monitors civilian radio and television broadcasts and analyses the minute fluctuations caused by the passage of an aircraft through commercial wavelengths. Relying on a network of receivers similar to television aerials, the ?silent? PCL system does not emit a tell- tale radar signal and is therefore much harder to locate and destroy. US military strategy could be dramatically undermined if US stealth aircraft, including the F117 fighter and the F22 fighter now in development, become vulnerable to Chinese interception, particularly given China?s more aggressive recent stance over Taiwan. ?Everyone is wondering about the cost of defending Taiwan,? one senior intelligence official was quoted as saying. The US is developing a similar system, the ?silent sentry?, which monitors energy reflected from commercial TV and radio signals to track aircraft. The shooting down of a US Air Force F117 fighter in March during the Kosovo conflict has added to US fears that the stealth technology, developed amid intense secrecy during the 1970s, may no longer be the asset that it was. Yugoslavia is believed to have sold on the wreckage of the F117, probably to China or Russia, and defence experts say that while the stealth technology used in that aircraft is now out of date, the wreck may still be useful for perfecting a means to track it. The Pentagon has refused to discuss how the aircraft was brought down, but defence officials say that the F117 was probably shot down by a Serb SA3 surface-to-air missile. The B2 bomber, first deployed during the Kosovo conflict, uses a more advanced type of stealth technology than the F117, but it could still leave a ?signature? detectable by a Chinese PCL system. The US is the only country with stealth technology in use, and both Russia and China have been researching a means of tracking the ?invisible? aircraft since the early 1970s. On conventional radar, if the technology is working correctly, a stealth aircaft is impossible to detect, but a PCL system may be able not only to ?see? the incoming aircraft, but identify the make by its disruption of television and radio signals permanently in the atmosphere.

that would be great. instead on spending millions of stealth, turn the JF or J-10 into stealth killers.
PAF will probable get access when IAF get the Stealth aircraft! China will put this in as a counter weight!

 

[pshamim]

By the way, China has already unveiled at one of their airshows the ground based Anti-stealth radar which interestingley resembles the Czech Vara radar. China tried to acquire the Vera but US put tremendous pressure on Czechs to not oblige . Pakistan was in possession of Vera when it leased one from the czecks but before it could obtain it, US bought the technology and the factory. Chinese have claimed that the radar is able to detect a F-22 at 1800 km.

But news of an airborne anti-stealth radar is baffling. if true, it has the potential of destroying any advantages that some will enjoy with their Stealth aircrafts.

 

[Silk]

I do not believe the (1800) range but it is indeed pretty amazing and passive. The concept is probably background noise and the receivers are maybe comparable with those GSM antenna's you all see...

 

[IceCold]

To have a anti stealth radar, don't you first need something stealth. I mean for now the only country to successfully employ a stealth aircraft is the US of A. So we can safely assume that US might have developed something Anti stealth as well since they have what they call as low observable aircraft's. There is no such thing as stealth. The concept of stealth was in movies only. So how exactly did Chinese develop something anti for which they have yet to achieve the technology of being low observable.
And even if we assume that China indeed has developed something that could detect the likes of F-22, question arises how successful the interception be?